2018 Special Focus: Education in a Time of Austerity and Social Turbulence 21–23 June 2018 University of Athens, Athens, Greece http://thelearner.com/2018-conference
Theme 8: Technologies in Learning
Technology and human values: learning through and about technology
Crossing the digital divide: access to learning in, and about, the digital world
New tools for learning: online digitally mediated learning
Virtual worlds, virtual classrooms: interactive, self-paced and autonomous learning
Ubiquitous learning: using the affordances of the new mediaDistance learning: reducing the distance
Theme 9: Literacies Learning
Defining new literacies
Languages of power: literacy’s role in social access
Instructional responses to individual differences in literacy learning
The visual and the verbal: Multiliteracies and multimodal communications
Literacy in learning: language in learning across the subject areas
The changing role of libraries in literacies learning
Languages education and second language learning
Multilingual learning for a multicultural world
The arts and design in multimodal learning
The computer, internet, and digital media: educational challenges and responses
++++++++++
PROPOSAL: Paper presentation in a Themed Session
Title
Virtual Reality and Gamification in the Educational Process: The Experience from an Academic Library
short description
VR, AR and Mixed Reality, as well as gaming and gamification are proposed as sandbox opportunity to transition from a lecture-type instruction to constructivist-based methods.
long description
The NMC New Horizon Report 2017 predicts a rapid application of Video360 in K12. Millennials are leaving college, Gen Z students are our next patrons. Higher Education needs to meet its new students on “their playground.” A collaboration by a librarian and VR specialist is testing the opportunities to apply 360 degree movies and VR in academic library orientation. The team seeks to bank on the inheriting interest of young patrons toward these technologies and their inextricable part of a rapidly becoming traditional gaming environment. A “low-end,” inexpensive and more mobile Google Cardboard solution was preferred to HTC Vive, Microsoft HoloLens or comparable hi-end VR, AR and mixed reality products.
The team relies on the constructivist theory of assisting students in building their knowledge in their own pace and on their own terms, rather than being lectured and/or being guided by a librarian during a traditional library orientation tour. Using inexpensive Google Cardboard goggles, students can explore a realistic set up of the actual library and familiarize themselves with its services. Students were polled on the effectiveness of such approach as well as on their inclination to entertain more comprehensive version of library orientation. Based on the lessons from this experiment, the team intends to pursue also a standardized approach to introducing VR to other campus services, thus bringing down further the cost of VR projects on campus. The project is considered a sandbox for academic instruction across campus. The same concept can be applied for [e.g., Chemistry, Physics, Biology) lab tours; for classes, which anticipate preliminary orientation process.
Following the VR orientation, the traditional students’ library instruction, usually conducted in a room, is replaced by a dynamic gamified library instruction. Students are split in groups of three and conduct a “scavenger hunt”; students use a jQuery-generated Web site on their mobile devices to advance through “hoops” of standard information literacy test. E.g., they need to walk to the Reference Desk, collect specific information and log their findings in the Web site. The idea follows the strong interest in the educational world toward gaming and gamification of the educational process. This library orientation approach applies the three principles for gamification: empowers learners; teaches problem solving and increases understanding.
Similarly to the experience with VR for library orientation, this library instruction process is used as a sandbox and has been successfully replicated by other instructors in their classes.
Applications for the 2018 Institute will be accepted between December 1, 2017 and January 27, 2018. Scholars accepted to the program will be notified in early March 2018.
Title:
Learning to Harness Big Data in an Academic Library
Abstract (200)
Research on Big Data per se, as well as on the importance and organization of the process of Big Data collection and analysis, is well underway. The complexity of the process comprising “Big Data,” however, deprives organizations of ubiquitous “blue print.” The planning, structuring, administration and execution of the process of adopting Big Data in an organization, being that a corporate one or an educational one, remains an elusive one. No less elusive is the adoption of the Big Data practices among libraries themselves. Seeking the commonalities and differences in the adoption of Big Data practices among libraries may be a suitable start to help libraries transition to the adoption of Big Data and restructuring organizational and daily activities based on Big Data decisions. Introduction to the problem. Limitations
The redefinition of humanities scholarship has received major attention in higher education. The advent of digital humanities challenges aspects of academic librarianship. Data literacy is a critical need for digital humanities in academia. The March 2016 Library Juice Academy Webinar led by John Russel exemplifies the efforts to help librarians become versed in obtaining programming skills, and respectively, handling data. Those are first steps on a rather long path of building a robust infrastructure to collect, analyze, and interpret data intelligently, so it can be utilized to restructure daily and strategic activities. Since the phenomenon of Big Data is young, there is a lack of blueprints on the organization of such infrastructure. A collection and sharing of best practices is an efficient approach to establishing a feasible plan for setting a library infrastructure for collection, analysis, and implementation of Big Data.
Limitations. This research can only organize the results from the responses of librarians and research into how libraries present themselves to the world in this arena. It may be able to make some rudimentary recommendations. However, based on each library’s specific goals and tasks, further research and work will be needed.
Big Data is becoming an omnipresent term. It is widespread among different disciplines in academia (De Mauro, Greco, & Grimaldi, 2016). This leads to “inconsistency in meanings and necessity for formal definitions” (De Mauro et al, 2016, p. 122). Similarly, to De Mauro et al (2016), Hashem, Yaqoob, Anuar, Mokhtar, Gani and Ullah Khan (2015) seek standardization of definitions. The main connected “themes” of this phenomenon must be identified and the connections to Library Science must be sought. A prerequisite for a comprehensive definition is the identification of Big Data methods. Bughin, Chui, Manyika (2011), Chen et al. (2012) and De Mauro et al (2015) single out the methods to complete the process of building a comprehensive definition.
In conjunction with identifying the methods, volume, velocity, and variety, as defined by Laney (2001), are the three properties of Big Data accepted across the literature. Daniel (2015) defines three stages in big data: collection, analysis, and visualization. According to Daniel, (2015), Big Data in higher education “connotes the interpretation of a wide range of administrative and operational data” (p. 910) and according to Hilbert (2013), as cited in Daniel (2015), Big Data “delivers a cost-effective prospect to improve decision making” (p. 911).
The importance of understanding the process of Big Data analytics is well understood in academic libraries. An example of such “administrative and operational” use for cost-effective improvement of decision making are the Finch & Flenner (2016) and Eaton (2017) case studies of the use of data visualization to assess an academic library collection and restructure the acquisition process. Sugimoto, Ding & Thelwall (2012) call for the discussion of Big Data for libraries. According to the 2017 NMC Horizon Report “Big Data has become a major focus of academic and research libraries due to the rapid evolution of data mining technologies and the proliferation of data sources like mobile devices and social media” (Adams, Becker, et al., 2017, p. 38).
Power (2014) elaborates on the complexity of Big Data in regard to decision-making and offers ideas for organizations on building a system to deal with Big Data. As explained by Boyd and Crawford (2012) and cited in De Mauro et al (2016), there is a danger of a new digital divide among organizations with different access and ability to process data. Moreover, Big Data impacts current organizational entities in their ability to reconsider their structure and organization. The complexity of institutions’ performance under the impact of Big Data is further complicated by the change of human behavior, because, arguably, Big Data affects human behavior itself (Schroeder, 2014).
De Mauro et al (2015) touch on the impact of Dig Data on libraries. The reorganization of academic libraries considering Big Data and the handling of Big Data by libraries is in a close conjunction with the reorganization of the entire campus and the handling of Big Data by the educational institution. In additional to the disruption posed by the Big Data phenomenon, higher education is facing global changes of economic, technological, social, and educational character. Daniel (2015) uses a chart to illustrate the complexity of these global trends. Parallel to the Big Data developments in America and Asia, the European Union is offering access to an EU open data portal (https://data.europa.eu/euodp/home ). Moreover, the Association of European Research Libraries expects under the H2020 program to increase “the digitization of cultural heritage, digital preservation, research data sharing, open access policies and the interoperability of research infrastructures” (Reilly, 2013).
The challenges posed by Big Data to human and social behavior (Schroeder, 2014) are no less significant to the impact of Big Data on learning. Cohen, Dolan, Dunlap, Hellerstein, & Welton (2009) propose a road map for “more conservative organizations” (p. 1492) to overcome their reservations and/or inability to handle Big Data and adopt a practical approach to the complexity of Big Data. Two Chinese researchers assert deep learning as the “set of machine learning techniques that learn multiple levels of representation in deep architectures (Chen & Lin, 2014, p. 515). Deep learning requires “new ways of thinking and transformative solutions (Chen & Lin, 2014, p. 523). Another pair of researchers from China present a broad overview of the various societal, business and administrative applications of Big Data, including a detailed account and definitions of the processes and tools accompanying Big Data analytics. The American counterparts of these Chinese researchers are of the same opinion when it comes to “think about the core principles and concepts that underline the techniques, and also the systematic thinking” (Provost and Fawcett, 2013, p. 58). De Mauro, Greco, and Grimaldi (2016), similarly to Provost and Fawcett (2013) draw attention to the urgent necessity to train new types of specialists to work with such data. As early as 2012, Davenport and Patil (2012), as cited in Mauro et al (2016), envisioned hybrid specialists able to manage both technological knowledge and academic research. Similarly, Provost and Fawcett (2013) mention the efforts of “academic institutions scrambling to put together programs to train data scientists” (p. 51). Further, Asomoah, Sharda, Zadeh & Kalgotra (2017) share a specific plan on the design and delivery of a big data analytics course. At the same time, librarians working with data acknowledge the shortcomings in the profession, since librarians “are practitioners first and generally do not view usability as a primary job responsibility, usually lack the depth of research skills needed to carry out a fully valid” data-based research (Emanuel, 2013, p. 207).
Borgman (2015) devotes an entire book to data and scholarly research and goes beyond the already well-established facts regarding the importance of Big Data, the implications of Big Data and the technical, societal, and educational impact and complications posed by Big Data. Borgman elucidates the importance of knowledge infrastructure and the necessity to understand the importance and complexity of building such infrastructure, in order to be able to take advantage of Big Data. In a similar fashion, a team of Chinese scholars draws attention to the complexity of data mining and Big Data and the necessity to approach the issue in an organized fashion (Wu, Xhu, Wu, Ding, 2014).
Bruns (2013) shifts the conversation from the “macro” architecture of Big Data, as focused by Borgman (2015) and Wu et al (2014) and ponders over the influx and unprecedented opportunities for humanities in academia with the advent of Big Data. Does the seemingly ubiquitous omnipresence of Big Data mean for humanities a “railroading” into “scientificity”? How will research and publishing change with the advent of Big Data across academic disciplines?
Reyes (2015) shares her “skinny” approach to Big Data in education. She presents a comprehensive structure for educational institutions to shift “traditional” analytics to “learner-centered” analytics (p. 75) and identifies the participants in the Big Data process in the organization. The model is applicable for library use.
Being a new and unchartered territory, Big Data and Big Data analytics can pose ethical issues. Willis (2013) focusses on Big Data application in education, namely the ethical questions for higher education administrators and the expectations of Big Data analytics to predict students’ success. Daries, Reich, Waldo, Young, and Whittinghill (2014) discuss rather similar issues regarding the balance between data and student privacy regulations. The privacy issues accompanying data are also discussed by Tene and Polonetsky, (2013).
Privacy issues are habitually connected to security and surveillance issues. Andrejevic and Gates (2014) point out in a decision making “generated by data mining, the focus is not on particular individuals but on aggregate outcomes” (p. 195). Van Dijck (2014) goes into further details regarding the perils posed by metadata and data to the society, in particular to the privacy of citizens. Bail (2014) addresses the same issue regarding the impact of Big Data on societal issues, but underlines the leading roles of cultural sociologists and their theories for the correct application of Big Data.
Library organizations have been traditional proponents of core democratic values such as protection of privacy and elucidation of related ethical questions (Miltenoff & Hauptman, 2005). In recent books about Big Data and libraries, ethical issues are important part of the discussion (Weiss, 2018). Library blogs also discuss these issues (Harper & Oltmann, 2017). An academic library’s role is to educate its patrons about those values. Sugimoto et al (2012) reflect on the need for discussion about Big Data in Library and Information Science. They clearly draw attention to the library “tradition of organizing, managing, retrieving, collecting, describing, and preserving information” (p.1) as well as library and information science being “a historically interdisciplinary and collaborative field, absorbing the knowledge of multiple domains and bringing the tools, techniques, and theories” (p. 1). Sugimoto et al (2012) sought a wide discussion among the library profession regarding the implications of Big Data on the profession, no differently from the activities in other fields (e.g., Wixom, Ariyachandra, Douglas, Goul, Gupta, Iyer, Kulkami, Mooney, Phillips-Wren, Turetken, 2014). A current Andrew Mellon Foundation grant for Visualizing Digital Scholarship in Libraries seeks an opportunity to view “both macro and micro perspectives, multi-user collaboration and real-time data interaction, and a limitless number of visualization possibilities – critical capabilities for rapidly understanding today’s large data sets (Hwangbo, 2014).
The importance of the library with its traditional roles, as described by Sugimoto et al (2012) may continue, considering the Big Data platform proposed by Wu, Wu, Khabsa, Williams, Chen, Huang, Tuarob, Choudhury, Ororbia, Mitra, & Giles (2014). Such platforms will continue to emerge and be improved, with librarians as the ultimate drivers of such platforms and as the mediators between the patrons and the data generated by such platforms.
Every library needs to find its place in the large organization and in society in regard to this very new and very powerful phenomenon called Big Data. Libraries might not have the trained staff to become a leader in the process of organizing and building the complex mechanism of this new knowledge architecture, but librarians must educate and train themselves to be worthy participants in this new establishment.
Method
The study will be cleared by the SCSU IRB.
The survey will collect responses from library population and it readiness to use and use of Big Data. Send survey URL to (academic?) libraries around the world.
Data will be processed through SPSS. Open ended results will be processed manually. The preliminary research design presupposes a mixed method approach.
The study will include the use of closed-ended survey response questions and open-ended questions. The first part of the study (close ended, quantitative questions) will be completed online through online survey. Participants will be asked to complete the survey using a link they receive through e-mail.
Mixed methods research was defined by Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004) as “the class of research where the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, concepts, or language into a single study” (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004 , p. 17). Quantitative and qualitative methods can be combined, if used to complement each other because the methods can measure different aspects of the research questions (Sale, Lohfeld, & Brazil, 2002).
Sampling design
Online survey of 10-15 question, with 3-5 demographic and the rest regarding the use of tools.
1-2 open-ended questions at the end of the survey to probe for follow-up mixed method approach (an opportunity for qualitative study)
data analysis techniques: survey results will be exported to SPSS and analyzed accordingly. The final survey design will determine the appropriate statistical approach.
Project Schedule
Complete literature review and identify areas of interest – two months
Prepare and test instrument (survey) – month
IRB and other details – month
Generate a list of potential libraries to distribute survey – month
Contact libraries. Follow up and contact again, if necessary (low turnaround) – month
Collect, analyze data – two months
Write out data findings – month
Complete manuscript – month
Proofreading and other details – month
Significance of the work
While it has been widely acknowledged that Big Data (and its handling) is changing higher education (https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=big+data) as well as academic libraries (https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/03/29/analytics-in-education/), it remains nebulous how Big Data is handled in the academic library and, respectively, how it is related to the handling of Big Data on campus. Moreover, the visualization of Big Data between units on campus remains in progress, along with any policymaking based on the analysis of such data (hence the need for comprehensive visualization).
This research will aim to gain an understanding on: a. how librarians are handling Big Data; b. how are they relating their Big Data output to the campus output of Big Data and c. how librarians in particular and campus administration in general are tuning their practices based on the analysis.
Based on the survey returns (if there is a statistically significant return), this research might consider juxtaposing the practices from academic libraries, to practices from special libraries (especially corporate libraries), public and school libraries.
References:
Adams Becker, S., Cummins M, Davis, A., Freeman, A., Giesinger Hall, C., Ananthanarayanan, V., … Wolfson, N. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Library Edition.
Andrejevic, M., & Gates, K. (2014). Big Data Surveillance: Introduction. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 185–196.
Asamoah, D. A., Sharda, R., Hassan Zadeh, A., & Kalgotra, P. (2017). Preparing a Data Scientist: A Pedagogic Experience in Designing a Big Data Analytics Course. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 15(2), 161–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12125
Bughin, J., Chui, M., & Manyika, J. (2010). Clouds, big data, and smart assets: Ten tech-enabled business trends to watch. McKinsey Quarterly, 56(1), 75–86.
Cohen, J., Dolan, B., Dunlap, M., Hellerstein, J. M., & Welton, C. (2009). MAD Skills: New Analysis Practices for Big Data. Proc. VLDB Endow., 2(2), 1481–1492. https://doi.org/10.14778/1687553.1687576
Daniel, B. (2015). Big Data and analytics in higher education: Opportunities and challenges. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(5), 904–920. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12230
Daries, J. P., Reich, J., Waldo, J., Young, E. M., Whittinghill, J., Ho, A. D., … Chuang, I. (2014). Privacy, Anonymity, and Big Data in the Social Sciences. Commun. ACM, 57(9), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1145/2643132
De Mauro, A. D., Greco, M., & Grimaldi, M. (2016). A formal definition of Big Data based on its essential features. Library Review, 65(3), 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1108/LR-06-2015-0061
De Mauro, A., Greco, M., & Grimaldi, M. (2015). What is big data? A consensual definition and a review of key research topics. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1644(1), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4907823
Eaton, M. (2017). Seeing Library Data: A Prototype Data Visualization Application for Librarians. Publications and Research. Retrieved from http://academicworks.cuny.edu/kb_pubs/115
Emanuel, J. (2013). Usability testing in libraries: methods, limitations, and implications. OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, 29(4), 204–217. https://doi.org/10.1108/OCLC-02-2013-0009
Graham, M., & Shelton, T. (2013). Geography and the future of big data, big data and the future of geography. Dialogues in Human Geography, 3(3), 255–261. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820613513121
Hashem, I. A. T., Yaqoob, I., Anuar, N. B., Mokhtar, S., Gani, A., & Ullah Khan, S. (2015). The rise of “big data” on cloud computing: Review and open research issues. Information Systems, 47(Supplement C), 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2014.07.006
Laney, D. (2001, February 6). 3D Data Management: Controlling Data Volume, Velocity, and Variety.
Miltenoff, P., & Hauptman, R. (2005). Ethical dilemmas in libraries: an international perspective. The Electronic Library, 23(6), 664–670. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640470510635746
Philip Chen, C. L., & Zhang, C.-Y. (2014). Data-intensive applications, challenges, techniques and technologies: A survey on Big Data. Information Sciences, 275(Supplement C), 314–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2014.01.015
Provost, F., & Fawcett, T. (2013). Data Science and its Relationship to Big Data and Data-Driven Decision Making. Big Data, 1(1), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1089/big.2013.1508
Reyes, J. (2015). The skinny on big data in education: Learning analytics simplified. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 59(2), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-015-0842-1
Schroeder, R. (2014). Big Data and the brave new world of social media research. Big Data & Society, 1(2), 2053951714563194. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951714563194
Sugimoto, C. R., Ding, Y., & Thelwall, M. (2012). Library and information science in the big data era: Funding, projects, and future [a panel proposal]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 49(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14504901187
Tene, O., & Polonetsky, J. (2012). Big Data for All: Privacy and User Control in the Age of Analytics. Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, 11, [xxvii]-274.
van Dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance & Society; Newcastle upon Tyne, 12(2), 197–208.
Waller, M. A., & Fawcett, S. E. (2013). Data Science, Predictive Analytics, and Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform Supply Chain Design and Management. Journal of Business Logistics, 34(2), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12010
West, D. M. (2012). Big data for education: Data mining, data analytics, and web dashboards. Governance Studies at Brookings, 4, 1–0.
Willis, J. (2013). Ethics, Big Data, and Analytics: A Model for Application. Educause Review Online. Retrieved from https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/idcpubs/1
Wixom, B., Ariyachandra, T., Douglas, D. E., Goul, M., Gupta, B., Iyer, L. S., … Turetken, O. (2014). The current state of business intelligence in academia: The arrival of big data. CAIS, 34, 1.
Wu, X., Zhu, X., Wu, G. Q., & Ding, W. (2014). Data mining with big data. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 26(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2013.109
Wu, Z., Wu, J., Khabsa, M., Williams, K., Chen, H. H., Huang, W., … Giles, C. L. (2014). Towards building a scholarly big data platform: Challenges, lessons and opportunities. In IEEE/ACM Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 117–126). https://doi.org/10.1109/JCDL.2014.6970157
The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative has just launched its 2018 Key Issues in Teaching and Learning Survey, so vote today: http://www.tinyurl.com/ki2018.
Each year, the ELI surveys the teaching and learning community in order to discover the key issues and themes in teaching and learning. These top issues provide the thematic foundation or basis for all of our conversations, courses, and publications for the coming year. Longitudinally they also provide the way to track the evolving discourse in the teaching and learning space. More information about this annual survey can be found at https://www.educause.edu/eli/initiatives/key-issues-in-teaching-and-learning.
ACADEMIC TRANSFORMATION (Holistic models supporting student success, leadership competencies for academic transformation, partnerships and collaborations across campus, IT transformation, academic transformation that is broad, strategic, and institutional in scope)
ACCESSIBILITY AND UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNING (Supporting and educating the academic community in effective practice; intersections with instructional delivery modes; compliance issues)
ADAPTIVE TEACHING AND LEARNING (Digital courseware; adaptive technology; implications for course design and the instructor’s role; adaptive approaches that are not technology-based; integration with LMS; use of data to improve learner outcomes)
COMPETENCY-BASED EDUCATION AND NEW METHODS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING (Developing collaborative cultures of assessment that bring together faculty, instructional designers, accreditation coordinators, and technical support personnel, real world experience credit)
DIGITAL AND INFORMATION LITERACIES (Student and faculty literacies; research skills; data discovery, management, and analysis skills; information visualization skills; partnerships for literacy programs; evaluation of student digital competencies; information evaluation)
EVALUATING TECHNOLOGY-BASED INSTRUCTIONAL INNOVATIONS (Tools and methods to gather data;data analysis techniques; qualitative vs. quantitative data; evaluation project design; using findings to change curricular practice; scholarship of teaching and learning; articulating results to stakeholders; just-in-time evaluation of innovations). here is my bibliographical overview on Big Data (scroll down to “Research literature”: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/11/07/irdl-proposal/ )
EVOLUTION OF THE TEACHING AND LEARNING SUPPORT PROFESSION (Professional skills for T&L support; increasing emphasis on instructional design; delineating the skills, knowledge, business acumen, and political savvy for success; role of inter-institutional communities of practices and consortia; career-oriented professional development planning)
FACULTY DEVELOPMENT (Incentivizing faculty innovation; new roles for faculty and those who support them; evidence of impact on student learning/engagement of faculty development programs; faculty development intersections with learning analytics; engagement with student success)
GAMIFICATION OF LEARNING (Gamification designs for course activities; adaptive approaches to gamification; alternate reality games; simulations; technological implementation options for faculty)
INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN (Skills and competencies for designers; integration of technology into the profession; role of data in design; evolution of the design profession (here previous blog postings on this issue: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/10/04/instructional-design-3/); effective leadership and collaboration with faculty)
INTEGRATED PLANNING AND ADVISING FOR STUDENT SUCCESS (Change management and campus leadership; collaboration across units; integration of technology systems and data; dashboard design; data visualization (here previous blog postings on this issue: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=data+visualization); counseling and coaching advising transformation; student success analytics)
LEARNING ANALYTICS (Leveraging open data standards; privacy and ethics; both faculty and student facing reports; implementing; learning analytics to transform other services; course design implications)
LEARNING SPACE DESIGNS (Makerspaces; funding; faculty development; learning designs across disciplines; supporting integrated campus planning; ROI; accessibility/UDL; rating of classroom designs)
MICRO-CREDENTIALING AND DIGITAL BADGING (Design of badging hierarchies; stackable credentials; certificates; role of open standards; ways to publish digital badges; approaches to meta-data; implications for the transcript; Personalized learning transcripts and blockchain technology (here previous blog postings on this issue: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=blockchain)
MOBILE LEARNING (Curricular use of mobile devices (here previous blog postings on this issue:
MULTI-DIMENSIONAL TECHNOLOGIES (Virtual, augmented, mixed, and immersive reality; video walls; integration with learning spaces; scalability, affordability, and accessibility; use of mobile devices; multi-dimensional printing and artifact creation)
NEXT-GENERATION DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS AND LMS SERVICES (Open standards; learning environments architectures (here previous blog postings on this issue: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/03/28/digital-learning/; social learning environments; customization and personalization; OER integration; intersections with learning modalities such as adaptive, online, etc.; LMS evaluation, integration and support)
ONLINE AND BLENDED TEACHING AND LEARNING (Flipped course models; leveraging MOOCs in online learning; course development models; intersections with analytics; humanization of online courses; student engagement)
OPEN EDUCATION (Resources, textbooks, content; quality and editorial issues; faculty development; intersections with student success/access; analytics; licensing; affordability; business models; accessibility and sustainability)
PRIVACY AND SECURITY (Formulation of policies on privacy and data protection; increased sharing of data via open standards for internal and external purposes; increased use of cloud-based and third party options; education of faculty, students, and administrators)
WORKING WITH EMERGING LEARNING TECHNOLOGY (Scalability and diffusion; effective piloting practices; investments; faculty development; funding; evaluation methods and rubrics; interoperability; data-driven decision-making)
According to the email below, library faculty are asked to provide their feedback regarding the qualifications for a possible faculty line at the library.
In the fall of 2013 during a faculty meeting attended by the back than library dean and during a discussion of an article provided by the dean, it was established that leading academic libraries in this country are seeking to break the mold of “library degree” and seek fresh ideas for the reinvention of the academic library by hiring faculty with more diverse (degree-wise) background.
Is this still the case at the SCSU library? The “democratic” search for the answer of this question does not yield productive results, considering that the majority of the library faculty are “reference” and they “democratically” overturn votes, who see this library to be put on 21st century standards and rather seek more “reference” bodies for duties, which were recognized even by the same reference librarians as obsolete.
It seems that the majority of the SCSU library are “purists” in the sense of seeking professionals with broader background (other than library, even “reference” skills).
In addition, most of the current SCSU librarians are opposed to a second degree, as in acquiring more qualification, versus seeking just another diploma. There is a certain attitude of stagnation / intellectual incest, where new ideas are not generated and old ideas are prepped in “new attire” to look as innovative and/or 21st
Last but not least, a consistent complain about workforce shortages (the attrition politics of the university’s reorganization contribute to the power of such complain) fuels the requests for reference librarians and, instead of looking for new ideas, new approaches and new work responsibilities, the library reorganization conversation deteriorates into squabbles for positions among different department.
Most importantly, the narrow sightedness of being stuck in traditional work description impairs most of the librarians to see potential allies and disruptors. E.g., the insistence on the supremacy of “information literacy” leads SCSU librarians to the erroneous conclusion of the exceptionality of information literacy and the disregard of multi[meta] literacies, thus depriving the entire campus of necessary 21st century skills such as visual literacy, media literacy, technology literacy, etc.
Simultaneously, as mentioned above about potential allies and disruptors, the SCSU librarians insist on their “domain” and if they are not capable of leading meta-literacies instructions, they would also not allow and/or support others to do so.
Considering the observations above, the following qualifications must be considered:
According to the information in this blog post: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/06/14/technology-requirements-samples/
for the past year and ½, academic libraries are hiring specialists with the following qualifications and for the following positions (bolded and / or in red). Here are some highlights: Positions
digital humanities
Librarian and Instructional Technology Liaison
library Specialist: Data Visualization & Collections Analytics
Qualifications
Advanced degree required, preferably in education, educational technology, instructional design, or MLS with an emphasis in instruction and assessment.
Programming skills – Demonstrated experience with one or more metadata and scripting languages (e.g.Dublin Core, XSLT, Java, JavaScript, Python, or PHP)
Data visualization skills
multi [ meta] literacy skills
Data curation, helping students working with data
Experience with website creation and design in a CMS environment and accessibility and compliance issues
Demonstrated a high degree of facility with technologies and systems germane to the 21st century library, and be well versed in the issues surrounding scholarly communications and compliance issues (e.g. author identifiers, data sharing software, repositories, among others)
Bilingual
Provides and develops awareness and knowledge related to digital scholarship and research lifecycle for librarians and staff.
Experience developing for, and supporting, common open-source library applications such as Omeka, ArchiveSpace, Dspace,
Responsibilities Establishing best practices for digital humanities labs, networks, and services
Assessing, evaluating, and peer reviewing DH projects and librarians
Actively promote TIGER or GRIC related activities through social networks and other platforms as needed.
Coordinates the transmission of online workshops through Google HangoutsScript metadata transformations and digital object processing using BASH, Python, and XSLT
liaison consults with faculty and students in a wide range of disciplines on best practices for teaching and using data/statistical software tools such as R, SPSS, Stata, and MatLab.
In response to the form attached to the Friday, September 29, email regarding St. Cloud State University Library Position Request Form:
Title
Digital Initiatives Librarian
Responsibilities:
TBD, but generally:
– works with faculty across campus on promoting digital projects and other 21st century projects. Works with the English Department faculty on positioning the SCSU library as an equal participants in the digital humanities initiatives on campus
Works with the Visualization lab to establish the library as the leading unit on campus in interpretation of big data
Works with academic technology services on promoting library faculty as the leading force in the pedagogical use of academic technologies.
Quantitative data justification
this is a mute requirement for an innovative and useful library position. It can apply for a traditional request, such as another “reference” librarian. There cannot be a quantitative data justification for an innovative position, as explained to Keith Ewing in 2015. In order to accumulate such data, the position must be functioning at least for six months.
Qualitative justification: Please provide qualitative explanation that supports need for this position.
Numerous 21st century academic tendencies right now are scattered across campus and are a subject of political/power battles rather than a venue for campus collaboration and cooperation. Such position can seek the establishment of the library as the natural hub for “sandbox” activities across campus. It can seek a redirection of using digital initiatives on this campus for political gains by administrators and move the generation and accomplishment of such initiatives to the rightful owner and primary stakeholders: faculty and students.
Currently, there are no additional facilities and resources required. Existing facilities and resources, such as the visualization lab, open source and free application can be used to generate the momentum of faculty working together toward a common goal, such as, e.g. digital humanities.
Does not come to discussions prepared. As a result, fails to support statements with evidence from texts and other research.
Few attempts to ask questions or build on ideas shared.
Frequently violates the “dos and don’ts of online communication.”
Limited participation in discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with various partners.
Does not consistently come to discussions prepared. Limited preparation and inability to support statements with evidence from texts and other research reflects lack of preparation.
Limited attempts to ask questions, build on ideas shared, or invite quieter voices into the conversation.
Hesitant to respond to other perspectives and fails to summarize points or make connections.
Occasionally violates the “dos and don’ts of online communication.”
Participates in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners.
Comes to discussions prepared, having read and researched material. Draws on that preparation by referring to evidence from texts and other research on the topic.
Attempts to drive conversations forward by asking questions, building on ideas shared, and inviting quieter voices into the conversation.
Responds to diverse perspectives, summarizes points, and makes connections.
Respects the “dos and don’ts for online communication.”
Initiates and participates effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners.
Comes to discussions prepared with a unique perspective, having read and researched material; explicitly draws on that preparation by referring to evidence from texts and other research on the topic.
Propels conversations by posing and responding to questions that relate to the current discussion. (Adds depth by providing a new, unique perspective to the discussion.)
Responds thoughtfully to diverse perspectives, summarizes points of agreement and disagreement, and makes new connections. Leans in and actively listens.
Makes eye contact, speaks loud enough to be heard, and body language is strong.
Respects the “dos and don’ts for online communication.”
Reflects surface level understanding of information.
Unable or unwilling to evaluate quality of information or draw conclusions about information found.
Does not try to solve problems or help others solve problems. Lets others do the work.
Does not actively seek answers to questions or attempt to find information. Does not seek out peers or ask teacher for guidance or support.
Attempts to dive below the surface when analyzing information but work lacks depth.
Struggles to evaluate the quality of information and does not draw insightful conclusions about information found.
Does not suggest or refine solutions, but is willing to try out solutions suggested by others.
Asks teachers or other students for answers but does not use online tools, like Google and YouTube, to attempt to answer questions or find information.
Demonstrates a solid understanding of the information.
Evaluates the quality of information and makes inferences/draws conclusions.
Refines solutions suggested by others.
Attempts to use online tools, like Google and YouTube, to seek answers and find information.
Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the information.
Effectively evaluates the quality of information and makes inferences/draws conclusion that are insightful.
Actively looks for and suggests solutions to problems.
Uses online tools, like Google and YouTube, to proactively seek answers and find information.
Does not use resources to support the team’s work.
Attempts to listen to, share with, and support the efforts of team members are limited or inconsistent.
Does not always listen when team members talk and requires redirection by team members and/or teacher.
Body language does not reflect engagement in the process. Focus on leaning in, asking questions, actively listening (e.g. make eye contact).
Occasionally offers feedback. At times, becomes impatient or frustrated with the process making teamwork more challenging.
Limited attempts to move between roles.
Does not consistently use resources to support the team’s work.
Listens to, shares with, and supports the efforts of team members.
Listens when team members talk.
Attempts to engage in group tasks; however, body language does not consistently communicate interest or attention. Body language reflects engagement in the process, but there is room for improvement.
Offers feedback and treats team members with respect. At times, becomes impatient or frustrated with the process making teamwork more challenging.
Attempts to be flexible and move between roles; at times dominates a particular role. This is an area of potential growth.
Uses resources to support the team’s work.
Consistently listens to, shares with, and supports the efforts of team members.
Leans in and actively listens when team members talk.
Body language communicates interest in team tasks and engagement in the process.
Offers constructive feedback, treats team members with respect, and is patient with the process.
Creates balance on the team moving between responsibilities without dominating any one role.
Uses resources effectively to support the team’s work.
The 21st Century Skills of the Academic Librarian in Bulgaria
Applicant:
Plamen Miltenoff, PhD, MLIS, http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/faculty/
My experience and connections with the library organizations and professionals from Moldova, Bulgaria and Austria, as well as my 17+ years working at the St. Cloud State University library provides me with an opportunity for comparison and, consequently, proposal for collaborative practices with Bulgarian academic librarians.
Project Duration: one year
Problem Identification: Through the years, my work with faculty and librarians from Shoumen University (http://shu-bg.net/ ), Plovdiv University (https://uni-plovdiv.bg/), New Bulgarian University (https://nbu.bg/), the American University (https://www.aubg.edu/) and Sofia University (https://www.uni-sofia.bg/) helped me identify differences and similarities in the work of the Bulgarian educational institutions and academia from abroad.
The role of the academic librarian in the educational process is different/limited in Bulgaria compared to the United States. During a collaboration on gamifying library instruction (http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/), the NBU librarians demonstrated their propensity to shift their campus role close to the campus role of American librarians, yet in general the Bulgarian library guild remains traditional in their view of their responsibilities toward the educational process on campus.
Project Objectives:
This proposal aims regular discussions among professionals from Bulgarian and American (possibly other nations) librarians to determine the framework regarding librarian’s responsibilities. Are academic librarians faculty members or staff? Do they have teaching or service (or both) responsibilities? What are 20th century academic librarians’ responsibilities are to be preserved? Updated? What are the 21st century responsibilities to be gained? What is the relationship between academic librarians and faculty? What is expected from an academic librarians to ensure learning happens? To benefit faculty’s teaching?
A comparison of academic library structures, job descriptions, models and discourses can lead to deep[er] analysis of existing structures and possible reorganizations to improve the role of the library in particular and the efficiency of the educational institution in general.
Comparisons of topics and syllabi: multiliteraices as successor of information literacy? Is the academic library the hub for technological innovations (e.g makerspaces, 3D printing, virtual reality/augmented reality) and if not, what is the academic library role in the process?
Other relevant topics / issues are expected to transpire during such discourse.
Project Description:
The project is organized in collaboration of synchronous and asynchronous character during the span of one academic year. Three synchronous sessions each semester (six sessions for the entire semester) will provide a forum through e-conferencing tools (e.g. Adobe Connect, WebEx, Skype, Google Hangout etc.) for live discussions and planning. Weekly asynchronous dialog through social media (e.g. blog, Facebook Group, Google Group etc.) will provide the platform/ hub/ forum daily/detailed preparation for the monthly synchronous meetings.
Most valuable feedback through the weekly asynchronous discussions will be voted by participants and three best weekly contributions will be awarded badges. At the end of the academic year, the three contributors with largest collection of badges will be awarded cost for registration fee, travel and lodging to an important European conference regarding libraries and education.
The experience and lessons from the process will be summed up, published and presented at local (Bulgarian), regional (Balkans) and international (European, U.S.) educational conferences and events. Similar cross-cultural experiences and studies will be research and comparison and future collaboration will be sought.
Impact:
The use of synchronous tools will provide technological and didactical practice for academic librarians; an experience they later can apply in their service to the campus community.
Same with the asynchronous tools / social media
The practice and experience of using social media for institutional purposes can help librarians figure out pertinent outreach to the recent and incoming students (Millennials and Gen Y)
The use of social media will provide transparency and participatory governing of the process.
Sustainability:
The lessons from such endeavor aim to bring closer collaboration and understanding between academic librarians and campus faculty. Such collaboration can be measured, as well as impact of improved teaching and improved learning. The measurements should convince university administration to further support the continues process of cross-cultural collaboration between academic librarians.
qualifications of the embedded librarian: is there any known case for an academic library to employ as embedded librarian a specialist who has both MLIS and terminal degree in a discipline, where he works as embedded librarian.
“I also think that we need to be more welcoming to people who may not have come through a traditional education program (i.e., the M.L.S.) but who bring critical skills and new perspectives into the library.”
The Changing Roles of Academic and Research Libraries – Higher Ed Careers – HigherEdJobs. (2013). Retrieved from https://www.higheredjobs.com/HigherEdCareers/interviews.cfm?ID=632
“Their engagement can be over two or more class sessions, even co-teaching the class in some cases. This model provides in-depth knowledge of student research projects during the research and revision process.” This is for first-year experience students.
Embedding with project teams in Business and STEM programs involves: “in – depth participation in short – term projects, aiding the team in their searches, literature review, grant preparation, data curation, or other specialized information aspects of the project. This level of embedment requires a heavy time commitment during the length of the project, as well as subject expertise and established trust with the research team.”
embedding in departments as a liaison.
“They are usually closely affiliated with the departme nt (maybe even more so than with the libraries) and might be paid out of departmental funds. These librarians learn the ways and needs of their patrons in their natural environment. They often work as finders of information, organizers of information, and taxonomy creators. Embedding within departments provides in – depth knowledge of the users of library services, along with potential isolation from other librarians. It involves a high degree of specialization, co – location and shared responsibility”
best practices, new opptunities (video, screencasts, social media. Adobe Connect) , Assessment
here is Kvenild 2016 article also
Kvenild, C., Tumbleson, B. E., Burke, J. J., & Calkins, K. (2016). Embedded librarianship: questions and answers from librarians in the trenches. Library Hi Tech, 34(2), 8-11.
utilizing technology tools; and providing information literacy and assessment. Technology tools continue to evolve and change, and most librarians can anticipate using multiple learning management systems over time. There is an ongoing need for professional development in online library instruction and assessment
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Tumbleson, B. E., & Burke, J. (. J. (2013). Embedding librarianship in learning management systems: A how-to-do-it manual for librarians. Neal-Schuman, an imprint of the American Library Association.
emphasis is on undergraduate. “a tremendous amount of literature published addressing library/faculty partnerships.”
“There will never be one golden rule when it comes to way in which a librarian networks with faculty on campus.”
++++++++++++++++
Bobish, G. (2011). Participation and Pedagogy: Connecting the Social Web to ACRL Learning Outcomes. Journal Of Academic Librarianship, 37(1), 54-63.
Cahoy, E. S., & Schroeder, R. (2012). EMBEDDING AFFECTIVE LEARNING OUTCOMES IN LIBRARY INSTRUCTION. Communications In Information Literacy, 6(1), 73-90.
attention must be paid to students’ affective, emotional needs throughout the research
process. My note: And this is exactly what comprise half of my service of. The relatively small amount of research into affective learning, as opposed to cognition, remains true to this day.
p. 78 As the 50-minute one-shot session is still the norm for library research sessions on the
majority of campuses, behavioral assessment can be problematic.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Cha, T., & Hsieh, P. (2009). A Case Study of Faculty Attitudes toward Collaboration with Librarians to Integrate Information Literacy into the Curriculum. (Chinese). Journal Of Educational Media & Library Sciences, 46(4), 441-467.
Meanwhile, different attitudes were revealed between teaching higher order thinking skills and lower order thinking skills. Librarian Domain Knowledge, Librarian Professionalism, Curriculum Strategies, and Student Learning were identified as factorial dimensions influencing faculty-librarian collaboration.
two major concerns of “Students Learning” and “Librarian Professionalism” from faculty provide insights that understanding pedagogy, enhancing instructional skills and continuing progress in librarian professionalism will contribute to consolidating partnerships when developing course-specific IL programs.
COVONE, N., & LAMM, M. (2010). Just Be There: Campus, Department, Classroom…and Kitchen?. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), 198-207. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.498768
p. 199 There is also the concept of the ‘‘blended librarian’’ as described by Bell and Shank (2004) to merge the assets and abilities of a librarian with those of one versed in technology. Academic librarians are obligated and privileged to merge several strengths to meet the needs of their user population. No longer is the traditional passive role acceptable. Bell and Shank (2004) implore academic librarians ‘‘to proactively advance their integration into the teaching and learning process’’ (p. 373).
p. 200 first year experience
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dewey, B. I. (2004). The Embedded Librarian: Strategic Campus Collaborations. Resource Sharing & Information Networks, 17(1-2), 5-17.
p. 6 the imperative for academic librarians to become embedded in the priorities of teaching, learning, and research in truly relevant ways. Embedding as an effective mode of collaboration will be explored through examples relating to the physical and virtual environment. An analysis of current approaches and next steps for the future will be addressed, with the goal of providing food for thought as librarians assess programs and activities in terms of positive collaboration and effectiveness
p. 9 new academic salon,
p. 10 the pervasive campus librarian
The fact that we are generalists and devoted to all disciplines and all sectors of the academic user community gives us a special insight on ways to advance the university and achieve its mission
this contradicts Shumaker and Talley, who assert that the embedded librarian is NOT a generalist, but specialist
p. 11 Central administrators, along with the chief academic officer, make critical funding and policy decisions affecting the library
p. 11 librarians and teaching. In 2011, interim dean Ruth Zietlow “gave up” classes after the messy divorce with CIM. the library faculty poled itself to reveal that a significant number of the faculty does NOT want to teach.
p. 14 influencing campus virtual space this library’s social media is imploded in its image.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DREWES, K., & HOFFMAN, N. (2010). Academic Embedded Librarianship: An Introduction. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), 75-82. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.498773
p. 75 Literature about embedded librarianship is so diverse that the definition of this term, as well as related goals and methods when embedding services and programs, can be difficult to define. What are some characteristics of an embedded program? Is embedding only achieved through an online classroom? How did embedded librarianship first begin in academic libraries?
p. 76 adopted as a term because it is a similar concept to embedded journalism.
Embedded librarian programs often locate librarians involved in the spaces of their users and colleagues, either physically or through technology, in order to become a part of their users’ culture. A librarian’s physical and metaphorical location is often what defines them as embedded.
David Shumaker and Mary Talley (see bottom of this blog entry)
Highly technical tasks, such as creating information architecture, using analytical software, and computer and network systems management were performed by less than 20% of the survey respondents. Shumaker and Talley also report embedded services are often found in tandem with specialized funding. This study also confirms embedded services are not new.
p. 77 history and evolution of the role
p. 79 methods of embedding
In North America, one would be hard-pressed to find a library that does not already electronically embed services into online reference chat, make use of Web 2.0 communication applications such as Twitter and blogs, and embed librarians and collaborators within online classrooms. These are all examples of the embedding process (Ramsay & Kinnie, 2006). The name embedded librarian in this context is a double entendre, as the insertion of widgets and multimedia files into HTML code when designing Web sites is usually called the embedding of the file. My note: is this library actually is one that does not use Twitter and blogs in the hard-core meaning of library service
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Essinger, C. c., & Ke, I. i. (2013). Outreach: What Works?. Collaborative Librarianship, 5(1), 52-58.
Recommendations:
The authors distributed their findings at a half day workshop attended by nearly all liaisons. They made the following recommendations:
• Personalize outreach.
• Spend more time marketing and reaching out to departments, even though it might mean having less time for other activities.
• Find an alternative advocate who can build your reputation through word-ofmouth if your relationship with your assigned department liaison is not fruitful.
• Seek opportunities to meet department staff in person.
• As much as possible, administrators should commit to keeping liaisons assignments static.
p. 57 that faculty outreach is similar to other types of relationship building: it requires time to establish trust, respect and appreciation on both sides. Even a liaison’s challenging first two years can, therefore, be viewed as productive because the relationship is developing in the background. This phenomenon also signals to library administrators the benefits of maintaining a stable workforce. Frequent changes in academic assignments and staff changes can lead to a less engaged user population, and also make the outreach assignment much more frustrating.
+++++++++++++++++
Heider, K. L. (2010). Ten Tips for Implementing a Successful Embedded Librarian Program. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2-3), 110-121.
embedded librarian program in the university’s College of Education and Educational Technology
p. 112 Make Sure You Have Buy-in from All Stakeholders
Include College=Department Faculty in the Interview Process
Look for the Following Qualities=Qualifications in an Embedded Librarian
Have a Physical Presence in the College=Department a Few Days Each Week
Serve as Bibliographer to College=Department
Offer Bibliographic Instruction Sessions and Guest Lectures at Main Campus, Branch Campuses, and Centers
Develop Collaborative Programs that Utilize the Library’s Resources for College=Department Improvement
#9 Offer to Teach Credit Courses for the College=Department When Department Faculty Are Not Available
#10: Publish Scholarly Works and Present at Professional Conferences with College=Department Faculty. again, Martin Lo, John Hoover,
+++++++++++++++++++
Hollister, C. V. (2008). Meeting Them where They Are: Library Instruction for Today’s Students in the World Civilizations Course. Public Services Quarterly, 4(1), 15-27.
Faculty come to the world civilizations enterprise from a broad range of academic disciplines and world experiences, which has a significant impact on their interpretations of world history, their selections of course materials, their teaching styles, and their expectations for students. Moreover, faculty teach the course on a rotating basis. So, there is no single model of faculty-librarian collaboration that can be applied from section to section, or even from semester to semester. Faculty have widely differing views on the role of library instruction in their sections of the course, and the extent to which library research is required for coursework. They also differ in terms of their ability or willingness to collaborate with the libraries. As a result, student access to library instruction varies from section to section.
+++++++++++++++++
Kesselman, M. A., & Watstein, S. B. (2009). Creating Opportunities: Embedded Librarians. Journal Of Library Administration, 49(3), 383-400.
p. 384 embedded librarians in the blogosphere.
not even close to the local idea how blog must be used for library use.
p. 387 definitions
p. 389 clinical librarianship – term from the 1970s.
p. 390 Special librarians and particularly those in corporate settings tend to be more integrated within the company they serve and are often instrumental in cost-related services such as competitive intelligence, scientific, and patent research.
p. 391 Librarians Collaborating With Faculty in Scholarly Communication Activities
My note: this is what I am doing with Martin Lo and used to do with John Hoover. Attempts with the sociology department, IS department
p. 392 Role of Librarians With Multidisciplinary Collaborations
my note : my work with Mark Gill and Mark Petzhold
p. 393 social media
again, this library cannot be farther from the true meaning of Web 2.0 collaboration.
p. 396 organizational structures
Three different types of organizational structures are generally recognized—hierarchical, matrix, and flat. We suggest that each of these conventional structures promotes, to some extent, its own brand of silos—silos that inherently pose obstacles to the assumption of new roles and responsibilities. For example, we question whether the hierarchical organization structures that define many of our libraries, with their emphasis on line, lateral staff and functional relationships and the relative ranks of parts and positions or jobs, are flexible enough to support new roles and responsibilities. In contrast, matrix management offers a different type of organizational management model in which people with similar skills are pooled for work assignments. We suggest that, in contrast to hierarchical structures, matrix management allows team members to share information more readily across task boundaries and allows for specialization that can increase depth of knowledge and allow professional development and career progression to be managed. The third organizational structure mentioned—flat or horizontal organizations, refers to an organizational structure with few or no levels of intervening management between staff and managers
+++++++++++++++++
Kobzina, N. G. (2010). A Faculty—Librarian Partnership: A Unique Opportunity for Course Integration. Journal Of Library Administration, 50(4), 293-314.
my LIB 290 is such class. and I am the only one who is teaching it online by QM standards.
Can the administration encourage Global Studies to combine efforts with my LIB 290 and offer a campus-wide class?
++++++++++++++++++++
Lange, J. j., Canuel, R. r., & Fitzgibbons, M. m. (2011). Tailoring information literacy instruction and library services for continuing education. Journal Of Information Literacy, 5(2), 66-80.
McGill. p. 77 The McGill University Library’s system-wide liaison model emphasises a disciplinary approach, placing the impetus for outreach and service on individual librarians responsible for particular departments and user groups.
+++++++++++++++++
MCMILLEN, P., & FABBI, J. (2010). How to Be an E3 Librarian. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), 174-186. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.497454
Meyer, N. J., & Miller, I. R. (2008). The Library as Service-Learning Partner: A Win-Win Collaboration with Students and Faculty. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 15(4), 399-413.
millennials. p. 48 my note: the losing battle of telling the millennials the value of books
librarians need to emphasize that not all information
is found on the Web and that the information found there might not be
reliable, depending on its source
p. 49 The latest technology can be used for communication. Two examples of this modernization process are making podcasts of library lectures and using instant messaging to answer reference queries. Students need Reference Librarians to assist them in focusing their research, showing them appropriate sources and how to use those sources. The change is not how the librarians serve the students but how the service is delivered. Instead of coming to the reference desk Millennial students may choose to use e-mail, cell phones to send a text message or use a chat reference service to communicate with the librarian. Students want to have 24/7 access to library resources and librarians.
my note: and yet this library still uses 90ish communication – the facebook page is just an easy to edit web page and the concept of Web 2.0 has not arrived or shaped the current communication.
p. 50 Librarians should examine how they present library instruction and ensure that students know why it is important. Further, Lancaster and Stillman state that librarians need to “incorporate some computer-based instruction for Millennials as it allows them to go at their own speed and acknowledges their ability to manage information” (2003, 231).
and, once again, talking about inducing library instruction with technology: http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/
+++++++++++++++++++
Oakleaf, M., & VanScoy, A. (2010). Instructional Strategies for Digital Reference: Methods to Facilitate Student Learning. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49(4), 380-390.
In the current climate of educational accountability, reference librarians should embrace the opportunity to align reference service with the teaching and learning missions of their libraries and overarching institutions
+++++++++++++++++
Rao, S., Cameron, A., & Gaskin-Noel, S. (2009). Embedding General Education Competencies into an Online Information Literacy Course. Journal Of Library Administration, 49(1/2), 59-73.
online programs a 3-credit junior seminar course (JRSM 301) to assess general education competencies
p. 60 The 3-credit course titled LISC 260—Using Electronic Resources for Research has existed as a required course for this overseas cohort of students since the fall of 1999. The course was initially developed as a required course to introduce the Mercy College Libraries’ resources to this cohort of overseas students. Full-time librarians teach this course as an overload.
The course lasts for 8 weeks during fall and spring semesters and is divided into eight modules with five quizzes. Summer sessions are shorter; the summer version of the course runs for 6 weeks. There is no midterm exam, final exam, project, or term paper for this course. Sixty percent of the grade is based on the quizzes and assignments and 40% on discussion and class participation.
Each quiz addresses a specific competency. We identified the modules where the five competencies would fit best. A document containing the five general education competencies (critical thinking, information literacy, quantitative reasoning, critical reading, and writing) statements
Critical Thinking Competency This competency was placed in the second module covering the topic “Developing Search Strategies” in the second week of the course. In this module, students are required to select a topic and develop logical terminologies and search strings. This task requires a great deal of critical and analytical thinking and therefore lays the groundwork for the other competencies. The quizzes and assignments for this competency involve breaking or narrowing down the topic into subtopics, comparing two topics or ideas, and similar skills. It is hoped that students will be able to adopt Boolean and other search logic in clear and precise ways in their analyses and interpretations of their topic and use the search strategies they develop for continued assignments throughout the rest of the course.
p. 61. Information Literacy Competency The information literacy competency is introduced in the fourth module in the fourth week of the course. As part of the course, students are required to learn about the Mercy College Libraries’ indexes and databases, which this module addresses (“Information Literacy,” n.d.).
Quantitative Reasoning Competency
This seminar course is a library research course with no statistics or mathematics component. Many students enrolled in the course are not mathematics or statistics majors, hence some creativity was needed to evaluate their mathematical and computational skills. Students are given this competency in the fifth module during the fifth week of the course, which deals with subject-specific sources. It was decided that, to assess this competency, a quiz analyzing data obtained in a tabular format from one of the databases subscribed to by the library would fulfill the requirement. Students are given a choice of various countries and related data, and are asked to create some comparative demographic profiles. This approach has worked well because it gives students the opportunity to focus on countries and data that interest them.
++++++++++++++++++
Abrizah, A., Inuwa, S., & Afiqah-Izzati, N. (2016). Systematic Literature Review Informing LIS Professionals on Embedding Librarianship Roles. Journal Of Academic Librarianship, 42(6), 636-643. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2016.08.010
+++++++++++++++++++
Summey, T. P., & Kane, C. A. (2017). Going Where They Are: Intentionally Embedding Librarians in Courses and Measuring the Impact on Student Learning. Journal Of Library & Information Services In Distance Learning, 11(1/2), 158-174. doi:10.1080/1533290X.2016.1229429
p. 158 The concept of embedded librarians is not new, as it has antecedents in branch librarians of the seventies and academic departmental liaisons of the 1980s and 1990s. However, it is a way to proactively reach out to the campus community (Drewes & Hoffman, 2010).
There is not a one-size-fits-all definition for embedded librarianship. As a result, librarians in academic libraries may be embedded in their communities in a variety of ways and at varying levels from course integrated instruction to being fully embedded as a member of an academic department
p. 160 my note: the authors describe the standard use of LMS for embedded librarianship.
p. 163 they managed to fight out and ensure their efforts are “credited.” Assigning credits to embedded librarian activities can be a very tough process.
p. 165 assessment
the authors utilized a pre-module and post-module survey to assess the students’ performance using library resources. The survey also helped to determine the students’ perceived self-efficacy and confidence in using the library, its resources, and services. In addition, the researchers analyzed student responses to discussion questions, studied feedback at the end of the course in the course discussion forum, and conducted interviews with the faculty members teaching the courses (
In another study, researchers analyzed bibliographies of students in the course to identify what resources they cited in their research projects. More specifically, they analyzed the type and appropriateness of sources used by the students, their currency, and noting how deeply the students delved into their topics. They also looked at the number of references cited. The authors believed that examining the bibliographies provided an incomplete picture because it provided data on the sources selected by the students but not information on how they retrieved those sources.
p. 171 survey sample
+++++++++++++++++
Wu, L., & Thornton, J. (2017). Experience, Challenges, and Opportunities of Being Fully Embedded in a User Group. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 36(2), 138-149. doi:10.1080/02763869.2017.1293978
Texas A&M University academic health sciences library integrating a librarian into the College of Pharmacy, approximately 250 miles away from the main library. preembedded and postembedded activities demonstrated the effectiveness and impact of
For this study, the fully embedded librarian is defined as one who is out of the traditional library and into an onsite setting to provide a full range of library services that enable collaboration with researchers or teaching faculty and support student learning. In this model, the embedded librarian is a team member of the RCOP rather than a service provider standing apart. The lines are not blurred as to the kind of services that should be embedded because the embedded librarian is 100% onsite. Very few reports in the literature describe fully embedded librarian models such as this. However, one similar model exists at the Arizona Health Sciences Library (AHSL), which is affiliated with the University of Arizona, where librarians relocated their permanent offices to the colleges of Nursing, Public Health, and Pharmacy. AHSL librarians spent close to 100% of their time in the colleges.
p. 144 The embedded librarian has gained recognition in the college and was appointed by the dean to serve on the Instructional Venues Ad Hoc Committee (IVC).
My note: This is what Tom Hergert and I have been advocating for years: the role of the librarian is not to find info and teach how to find info ONLY. The role of the librarian is to bring 21st century to School of Education: information literacy is only a fragment of metaliteracies. Information literacy is a 1990s priority. While it is still an important part of librarians goals, digital literacy, visual and media literacy, as well as technology literacy and pedagogical application of technology is imposed as integral part of the work of the embedded librarian.
p. 145 Challenges and Opportunities
Another challenge involved the librarian’s decision-making and effective communications skills, especially when deciding to implement library services or programs. Other challenges included speaking the client group’s language and knowing the information needs of each group—faculty, students, staff, postdocs, research assistants, and research scientists—to deliver the right information at the point of need. The following strategies were practiced to overcome these challenges: .
A positive attitude can increase connectivity, networking, and collaboration beyond a limited space. Proactively seeking opportunities to participate and get involved in library events, instructional programs, training workshops, or committee work shortened the distance between the remote librarian and those in main campus. .
As video conferencing tools or programs (e.g., Adobe Connnect, Webex, Skype, Google Hangout, Zoom) were the primary means for the remote at 18:19 24 August 2017 librarian to attend library meetings and teach in library instructional programs, spending some time learning to use these tools and embracing them greatly increased the librarian’s capacity to overcome the feelings of disconnection.
The willingness to travel several times a year to the main campus to meet librarians face-to-face helped in understanding the system and in getting help that seemed complicated and difficult via remote resources (e.g., computer issues). .
Actively listening to the faculty and students during the conversations helped understand their information needs. This served as the basis to initiate any targeted library services and programs.
Despite the challenges, the embedded librarian was presented with numerous opportunities that a traditional librarian might think impossible or difficult to experience, for example, attending RCOP department meetings or RCOP executive committee meetings to present library resources and services, serving on RCOP committees, co-teaching with faculty in RCOP credit courses, creating and grading assignments counting toward total course credits, and being given access to all RCOP course syllabi in eCampus. (the last is in essence what I am doing right now)
p. 147 Marketing Embedded Library Services
The “What’s in It for Me” (WIIFM) principle1 was a powerful technique to promote embedded library services. The essentials of WIIFM are understanding patron needs and ensuring the marketing effort or communications addressing those needs15—in other words, always telling patrons what is in it for them when promoting library services and resources. Different venues were used to practice WIIFM: .
RCOP faculty email list was an effective way to reach out to all the faculty. An email message at the beginning of a semester to the faculty highlighted the embedded librarian’s services. During the semester, the librarian communicated with the faculty on specific resources and services addressing their needs, such as measuring their research impact at the time of their annual evaluation, sharing grant funding resources, and promoting MSL’s resources related to reuse of images. .
Library orientations to new students and new faculty allowed the librarian to focus on who to contact for questions and help, available resources, and ways to access them. . Being a guest speaker for the monthly RCOP departmental faculty meetings provided another opportunity for the librarian to promote services and resources.
Casual conversations with faculty, students, researchers, and postdocs in the hallway, at staff luncheons, and at RCOP events helped understand their information needs, which helped the librarian initiate MSL service projects and programs.
The Facebook private group, created by Instructional Technology & MSL Resources @ Rangel COP, was used to announce MSL resources and services. The group currently has 256 members. The librarian is one of the group administrators who answers student questions related to library and MSL resources. (social media is my forte)
p. 148 This model would not have been successful without the strong support from MSL leadership team and the RCOP administration.
the next step would be to conduct a systematic assessment to get feedback from RCOP administrators, faculty, students, staff, postdocs, and research assistants. The integration of the library instructional program into the RCOP curriculum should be included in RCOP final course evaluations. Another future direction might be to conduct a curriculum map to get a better idea about the learning objectives of each course and to identity information literacy instruction needs across the curriculum. The curriculum mapping might also help better structure library instruction delivery to RCOP. Teaching content might be structured more purposefully and logically sequenced across the curriculum to ensure that what students have learned in one course prepares them for the next ones.
+++++++++++++++++++
Blake, L., Ballance, D., Davies, K., Gaines, J. K., Mears, K., Shipman, P., & … Burchfield, V. (2016). Patron perception and utilization of an embedded librarian program. Journal Of The Medical Library Association, 104(3), 226-230. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.008
The overall satisfaction with services was encouraging, but awareness of the embedded program was low, suggesting an overall need for marketing of services.
+++++++++++++++++++
Tumbleson, B. E. (2016). Collaborating in Research: Embedded Librarianship in the Learning Management System. Reference Librarian, 57(3), 224-234. doi:10.1080/02763877.2015.1134376
O’Toole, E., Barham, R., & Monahan, J. (2016). The Impact of Physically Embedded Librarianship on Academic Departments. Portal: Libraries & The Academy, 16(3), 529-556.
Agrawal, P. p., & Kumar, A. (2016). Embedded Librarianship and Academic Setup: Going beyond the library stockades. International Journal Of Information Dissemination & Technology, 6(3), 170-173.
India. p. 173 as of today, most of the users are not able to differentiate the library professional who have a bachelor degree, Masters degree and who are doctorate of the subject. My note: not in my case and this is my great advantage.
+++++++++++++++++
Madden, H., & Rasmussen, A. M. (2016). Embedded Librarianship: Einbindung von Wissenschafts- und Informationskompetenz in Schreibkurse / Ein US-amerikanisches Konzept. Bub: Forum Bibliothek Und Information, 68(4), 202-205.
+++++++++++++++++
Delaney, G., & Bates, J. (2015). Envisioning the Academic Library: A Reflection on Roles, Relevancy and Relationships. New Review Of Academic Librarianship, 21(1), 30-51. doi:10.1080/13614533.2014.911194
overview of the literature on embedded librarianship
+++++++++++++++++++
Freiburger, G., Martin, J. R., & Nuñez, A. V. (2016). An Embedded Librarian Program: Eight Years On. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 35(4), 388-396. doi:10.1080/02763869.2016.1220756
Wilson, G. (2015). The Process of Becoming an Embedded Curriculum Librarian in Multiple Health Sciences Programs. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 34(4), 490-497. doi:10.1080/02763869.2015.1082386
Milbourn, A. a. (2013). A Big Picture Approach: Using Embedded Librarianship to Proactively Address the Need for Visual Literacy Instruction in Higher Education. Art Documentation: Bulletin Of The Art Libraries Society Of North America, 32(2), 274-283.
slide 8: vision of embedded librarianship:
customer centric not library centric; located in their workplace not our workplace; focused on small groups not entire populations; composed of specialists, not generalists; dependent on domain knowledge not only library skills; aming an analysis and synthesis not simply delivery; in context, not out of context; built on trusted advice not service delivery
all of the above is embodied in my work with the doctoral cohorts
slide 9: why study? because traditional library service model is in decline
slide 11: broad analytical research on successful implementation is lacking slide 20: large institutions more likely to offer specialized services
slide 21: domain knowledge through continuous learning, not always through formal degrees.
slide 39: what matters most
slide 40: strong leadership by library managers is critical (I will add here “by deans of other colleges)
+++++++++++++++++++++
bibliography:
Abrizah, A., Inuwa, S., & Afiqah-Izzati, N. (2016). Systematic Literature Review Informing LIS Professionals on Embedding Librarianship Roles. Journal Of Academic Librarianship, 42(6), 636-643. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2016.08.010
Agrawal, P. p., & Kumar, A. (2016). Embedded Librarianship and Academic Setup: Going beyond the library stockades. International Journal Of Information Dissemination & Technology, 6(3), 170-173.
Andrews, C. R. (2014). CUNY Academic Works An Examination of Embedded Librarian Ideas and Practices: A Critical Bibliography. An Examination of Embedded Librarian Ideas and Practices: A Critical Bibliography. Codex, 3(1), 2150–86. Retrieved from http://academicworks.cuny.edu/bx_pubs
Blake, L., Ballance, D., Davies, K., Gaines, J. K., Mears, K., Shipman, P., & … Burchfield, V. (2016). Patron perception and utilization of an embedded librarian program. Journal Of The Medical Library Association, 104(3), 226-230. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.008
Bobish, G. (2011). Participation and Pedagogy: Connecting the Social Web to ACRL Learning Outcomes. Journal Of Academic Librarianship, 37(1), 54-63.
Cahoy, E. S., & Schroeder, R. (2012). EMBEDDING AFFECTIVE LEARNING OUTCOMES IN LIBRARY INSTRUCTION. Communications In Information Literacy, 6(1), 73-90.
Cha, T., & Hsieh, P. (2009). A Case Study of Faculty Attitudes toward Collaboration with Librarians to Integrate Information Literacy into the Curriculum. (Chinese). Journal Of Educational Media & Library Sciences, 46(4), 441-467.
COVONE, N., & LAMM, M. (2010). Just Be There: Campus, Department, Classroom…and Kitchen?. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), 198-207. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.498768
Delaney, G., & Bates, J. (2015). Envisioning the Academic Library: A Reflection on Roles, Relevancy and Relationships. New Review Of Academic Librarianship, 21(1), 30-51. doi:10.1080/13614533.2014.911194
Dewey, B. I. (2004). The Embedded Librarian: Strategic Campus Collaborations. Resource Sharing & Information Networks, 17(1-2), 5-17.
DREWES, K., & HOFFMAN, N. (2010). Academic Embedded Librarianship: An Introduction. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), 75-82. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.498773
Essinger, C. c., & Ke, I. i. (2013). Outreach: What Works?. Collaborative Librarianship, 5(1), 52-58.
Freiburger, G., Martin, J. R., & Nuñez, A. V. (2016). An Embedded Librarian Program: Eight Years On. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 35(4), 388-396. doi:10.1080/02763869.2016.1220756
Heider, K. L. (2010). Ten Tips for Implementing a Successful Embedded Librarian Program. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2-3), 110-121.
Hollister, C. V. (2008). Meeting Them where They Are: Library Instruction for Today’s Students in the World Civilizations Course. Public Services Quarterly, 4(1), 15-27.
Kesselman, M. A., & Watstein, S. B. (2009). Creating Opportunities: Embedded Librarians. Journal Of Library Administration, 49(3), 383-400.
Kobzina, N. G. (2010). A Faculty—Librarian Partnership: A Unique Opportunity for Course Integration. Journal Of Library Administration, 50(4), 293-314.
Lange, J. j., Canuel, R. r., & Fitzgibbons, M. m. (2011). Tailoring information literacy instruction and library services for continuing education. Journal Of Information Literacy, 5(2), 66-80.
Madden, H., & Rasmussen, A. M. (2016). Embedded Librarianship: Einbindung von Wissenschafts- und Informationskompetenz in Schreibkurse / Ein US-amerikanisches Konzept. Bub: Forum Bibliothek Und Information, 68(4), 202-205.
MCMILLEN, P., & FABBI, J. (2010). How to Be an E3 Librarian. Public Services Quarterly, 6(2/3), 174-186. doi:10.1080/15228959.2010.497454
Meyer, N. J., & Miller, I. R. (2008). The Library as Service-Learning Partner: A Win-Win Collaboration with Students and Faculty. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 15(4), 399-413.
Milbourn, A. (2013). A Big Picture Approach: Using Embedded Librarianship to Proactively Address the Need for Visual Literacy Instruction in Higher Education. Art Documentation: Bulletin Of The Art Libraries Society Of North America, 32(2), 274-283.
Niles, P. (2011). Meeting the Needs of the 21st Century Student. Community & Junior College Libraries, 17(2), 47-51.
Oakleaf, M., & VanScoy, A. (2010). Instructional Strategies for Digital Reference: Methods to Facilitate Student Learning. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49(4), 380-390.
O’Toole, E., Barham, R., & Monahan, J. (2016). The Impact of Physically Embedded Librarianship on Academic Departments. Portal: Libraries & The Academy, 16(3), 529-556.
Rao, S., Cameron, A., & Gaskin-Noel, S. (2009). Embedding General Education Competencies into an Online Information Literacy Course. Journal Of Library Administration, 49(1/2), 59-73.
Summey, T. P., & Kane, C. A. (2017). Going Where They Are: Intentionally Embedding Librarians in Courses and Measuring the Impact on Student Learning. Journal Of Library & Information Services In Distance Learning, 11(1/2), 158-174. doi:10.1080/1533290X.2016.1229429
Tumbleson, B. E. (2016). Collaborating in Research: Embedded Librarianship in the Learning Management System. Reference Librarian, 57(3), 224-234. doi:10.1080/02763877.2015.1134376
Wilson, G. (2015). The Process of Becoming an Embedded Curriculum Librarian in Multiple Health Sciences Programs. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 34(4), 490-497. doi:10.1080/02763869.2015.1082386
Wu, L., & Thornton, J. (2017). Experience, Challenges, and Opportunities of Being Fully Embedded in a User Group. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 36(2), 138-149. doi:10.1080/02763869.2017.1293978
More data doesn’t automatically lead to better decisions. A shortage of skilled data scientists has hindered progress towards translation of information into actionable business insights. In addition, traditionally dense spreadsheets and linear slideshows are ineffective to present discoveries when dealing with Big Data’s dynamic nature. We need to evolve how we capture, analyze and communicate data.
Large-scale visualization platforms have several advantages over traditional presentation methods. They blur the line between the presenter and audience to increase the level of interactivity and collaboration. They also offer simultaneous views of both macro and micro perspectives, multi-user collaboration and real-time data interaction, and a limitless number of visualization possibilities – critical capabilities for rapidly understanding today’s large data sets.
Visualization walls enable presenters to target people’s preferred learning methods, thus creating a more effective communication tool. The human brain has an amazing ability to quickly glean insights from patterns – and great visualizations make for more efficient storytellers.
Grant: Visualizing Digital Scholarship in Libraries and Learning Spaces
Award amount: $40,000
Funder: Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
Lead institution: North Carolina State University Libraries
Due date: 13 August 2017
Notification date: 15 September 2017
Website: https://immersivescholar.org
Contact: immersivescholar@ncsu.edu
Project Description
NC State University, funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, invites proposals from institutions interested in participating in a new project for Visualizing Digital Scholarship in Libraries and Learning Spaces. The grant aims to 1) build a community of practice of scholars and librarians who work in large-scale multimedia to help visually immersive scholarly work enter the research lifecycle; and 2) overcome technical and resource barriers that limit the number of scholars and libraries who may produce digital scholarship for visualization environments and the impact of generated knowledge. Libraries and museums have made significant strides in pioneering the use of large-scale visualization technologies for research and learning. However, the utilization, scale, and impact of visualization environments and the scholarship created within them have not reached their fullest potential. A logical next step in the provision of technology-rich, visual academic spaces is to develop best practices and collaborative frameworks that can benefit individual institutions by building economies of scale among collaborators.
The project contains four major elements:
An initial meeting and priority setting workshop that brings together librarians, scholars, and technologists working in large-scale, library and museum-based visualization environments.
Scholars-in-residence at NC State over a multi-year period who pursue open source creative projects, working in collaboration with our librarians and faculty, with the potential to address the articulated limitations.
Funding for modest, competitive block grants to other institutions working on similar challenges for creating, disseminating, validating, and preserving digital scholarship created in and for large-scale visual environments.
A culminating symposium that brings together representatives from the scholars-in-residence and block grant recipient institutions to share and assess results, organize ways of preserving and disseminating digital products produced, and build on the methods, templates, and tools developed for future projects.
Work Summary
This call solicits proposals for block grants from library or museum systems that have visualization installations. Block grant recipients can utilize funds for ideas ranging from creating open source scholarly content for visualization environments to developing tools and templates to enhance sharing of visualization work. An advisory panel will select four institutions to receive awards of up to $40,000. Block grant recipients will also participate in the initial priority setting workshop and the culminating symposium. Participating in a block grant proposal does not disqualify an individual from later applying for one of the grant-supported scholar-in-residence appointments.
Applicants will provide a statement of work that describes the contributions that their organization will make toward the goals of the grant. Applicants will also provide a budget and budget justification.
Activities that can be funded through block grants include, but are not limited to:
Commissioning work by a visualization expert
Hosting a visiting scholar, artist, or technologist residency
Software development or adaptation
Development of templates and methodologies for sharing and scaling content utilizing open source software
Student or staff labor for content or software development or adaptation
Curricula and reusable learning objects for digital scholarship and visualization courses
Travel (if necessary) to the initial project meeting and culminating workshop
User research on universal design for visualization spaces
Funding for operational expenditures, such as equipment, is not allowed for any grant participant.
Application
Send an application to immersivescholar@ncsu.edu by the end of the day on 13 August 2017 that includes the following:
Statement of work (no more than 1000 words) of the project idea your organization plans to develop, its relationship to the overall goals of the grant, and the challenges to be addressed.
List the names and contact information for each of the participants in the funded project, including a brief description of their current role, background, expertise, interests, and what they can contribute.
Project timeline.
Budget table with projected expenditures.
Budget narrative detailing the proposed expenditures
Selection and Notification Process
An advisory panel made up of scholars, librarians, and technologists with experience and expertise in large-scale visualization and/or visual scholarship will review and rank proposals. The project leaders are especially keen to receive proposals that develop best practices and collaborative frameworks that can benefit individual institutions by building a community of practice and economies of scale among collaborators.
Awardees will be selected based on:
the ability of their proposal to successfully address one or both of the identified problems;
the creativity of the proposed activities;
relevant demonstrated experience partnering with scholars or students on visualization projects;
whether the proposal is extensible;
feasibility of the work within the proposed time-frame and budget;
whether the project work improves or expands access to large-scale visual environments for users; and
the participant’s ability to expand content development and sharing among the network of institutions with large-scale visual environments.
Awardees will be required to send a representative to an initial meeting of the project cohort in Fall 2017.
These are the top 10 workforce skills students will need by 2020
By Laura Ascione, Managing Editor, Content Services, @eSN_Laura
June 20th, 2017
a recent McGraw-Hill Education survey, just 40 percent of college seniors said they felt their college experience was helpful in preparing for a career. Alarmingly, that percentage plummeted to 19 percent for women answering the same question.
1. Extreme longevity: People are living longer–by 2025 the number of Americans older than 60 will increase by 70 percent 2. The rise of smart machines and systems: Technology can augment and extend our own capabilities, and workplace automation is killing repetitive jobs 3. Computational world: Increases in sensors and processing makes the world a programmable system; data will give us the ability to see things on a scale that has never been possible 4. New media ecology: New communication tools require media literacies beyond text; visual communication media is becoming a new vernacular 5. Superstructured organizations: Social technologies drive new forms of production and value creation, and social tools are allowing organizations to work at extreme scales 6. Globally connected world: Diversity and adaptability are at the center of operations–the U.S. and Europe no longer hold a monopoly on job creation, innovation, and political power
The top 10 workforce skills of 2020 include:
1. Sense making: The ability to determine the deeper meaning or significance of what is being expressed. The Drivers: Rise of smart machines and systems
2. Social intelligence: The ability to connect to others in a deep and direct way, to sense and stimulate reactions and desired interactions. The Drivers: Rise of smart machines and systems, globally connected world
3. Novel and adaptive thinking: Proficiency at thinking and coming up with solutions and responses beyond that which is rote or rule-based. The Drivers: Rise of smart machines and systems, globally connected world
4. Cross cultural competency: The ability to operate in different cultural settings. The Drivers: Superstructured organizations, globally connected world
5. Computational thinking: The ability to translate vast amounts of data into abstract concepts and to understand data based reasoning. The Drivers: New media ecology, computational world
6. New media literacy: The ability to critically assess and develop content that uses new media forms, and to leverage these media for persuasive communication. The Drivers: Extreme longevity, new media ecology, Superstructured organizations
7. Transdisciplinary: Literacy in and ability to understand concepts across multiple disciplines. The Drivers: Extreme longevity, computational world
8. Design mindset: The ability to represent and develop tasks and work processes for desired outcomes. The Drivers: Superstructured organizations, computational world
9. Cognitive load management: The ability to discriminate and filter information for importance, and to understand how to maximize cognitive functions. The Drivers: Superstructured organizations, computational world, new media ecology
10. Virtual collaboration: The ability to work productively, drive engagement, and demonstrate presence as a member of a virtual team. The Drivers: Superstructured organizations, globally connected world
After participating in this course, you will be able to:
incorporate ever-evolving definitions of digital literacy into learning opportunities
draw upon a variety of digital resources to create digital-learning opportunities
seek additional resources that you can use in your continuing efforts to keep up with new developments in digital literacy in libraries and other learning organizations
What is digital literacy? Do you know how you can foster digital literacy through formal and informal learning opportunities for your library staff and users?
Supporting digital literacy still remains an important part of library staff members’ work, but sometimes we struggle to agree on a simple, meaningful definition of the term. In this four-week eCourse, training/learning specialist Paul Signorelli will begin by exploring a variety of definitions, focusing on work by a few leading proponents of the need to foster digital literacy among people of all ages and backgrounds. He will explore a variety of digital-literacy resources – including case studies of how we creatively approach digital-literacy learning opportunities for library staff and users, and will explore a variety of digital tools that will help to encourage further understanding of this topic.
Now, who is ready to build their digital-literacy skills and help their users become digitally literate as well?
eCourse Outline
Part 1: Digital Literacy: Initial Definitions and Explorations
An overview of various definitions of digital literacy