In 2013, the librarians at a small academic health sciences library reevaluated their mission, vision, and strategic plan to expand their roles. The school was transitioning to a new pedagogical culture and a new building designed to emphasize interprofessional education and active learning methodologies. Subsequent efforts to implement the new strategic plan resulted in the librarians joining curriculum committees and other institutional initiatives, such as an Active Learning Task Force, and participating in faculty development workshops. This participation has increased visibility and led to new roles and opportunities for librarians.
+++++++++++++
Reflections on an Embedded Librarianship Approach: The Challenge of Developing Disciplinary Expertise in a New Subject Area
Embedded librarianship has emerged as a user-centred approach to academic library services, requiring an in-depth understanding of the education and research priorities of students and staff. User-centred approaches require the development of disciplinary expertise and engagement with the research culture of a particular subject area. This paper details the author’s experiences in situating his practice within the discipline of pharmacy and discusses some of the challenges around the scale and sustainability of such specialised support. Regardless of the extent to which a librarian is ‘embedded’, they must see themselves as learners, too, as they develop their understanding of the disciplines they support through an ongoing process of experiencing, reflecting, conceptualising and testing in their practice.
definition: Embedded librarianship differs from traditional librarian roles in its focus on working in partnership with clients, rather than simply providing a support service (Carlson & Kneale, 2011). In this sense, embedded librarianship is user-centred rather than library-centred and requires the librarian to develop a holistic understanding of the environment in which their client groups operate.
most training materials followed a one-size-fits-all approach, where students would be taken from locating background information and textbook chapters all the way to searching for primary evidence in a bibliographic database within the same hour. Most sessions ran over time and were overloaded with content. In some instances, students complained that they had already covered this content in their previous year.
While information literacy as a construct is valued by librarians, the term’s use remains
largely restricted to the library and information science (LIS) field and might even be labelled
undiscovered country for academics (McGuinness, 2006, p. 580). Academics often consider
IL instruction as a service provided by the library and do not see librarians as partners, nor
do they see the value in integrating course-specific IL training (Derakhshan & Singh, 2010).
a spectrum of embeddedness with 5 levels (2008, p. 442), from ‘entry level’, where the librarian might collaborate on assignment development and deliver a standalone IL session, to ‘co-teaching’, where the librarian co-teaches and develops discipline-specific course materials, lectures, assessment designs and grading in collaboration with academic staff. Their findings suggest that student performance is positively related to the level of librarian involvement
phenomenographic interview methodology, where the librarian is positioned as a ‘curricular
consultant’
My note (sarcastic): whoa, what a novelty; it is repeated for two decades at SCSU, but “hot water still not invented” and the ATT still does not have neither a faculty, nor ID, but the only Ph.D. in ID just got laid off.
Hallam, Thomas and Beach illustrate that the library is not singularly responsible for developing information and digital literacies, and therefore, a collaborative approach involving a range of stakeholders including academic staff, learning designers, educational technologists and others is required
Covid-19 is being described as both a crisis and an opportunity for higher education. But how “opportunity” is defined depends on where one stands in the academic hierarchy. While some hope the pandemic provides a chance to reverse troubling trends toward the adjunctification and casualization of academic labor, administrators may see it as a different sort of opportunity, to realign institutional priorities or exert greater authority over their faculties.
A statement by the Tenure for the Common Good group offers 20 recommendations for administrators, including that they “resist using the current crisis as an opportunity to exploit contingency further by hiring more contingent faculty into precarious positions.”
As faculty members are asked to take on greater teaching, advising, and administrative responsibilities, faculty development and retention “will be more important to institutional resilience — survival — than ever before,” Kiernan Mathews, executive director and principal investigator of the Harvard Graduate School of Education’s Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education, wrote on Twitter.
To DePaola, the pandemic doesn’t pose new problems to academe as much as it magnifies existing ones. “Everything was held together with gum and paper clips, and coronavirus came and just sort of knocked it all down at once,” DePaola said. “I think none of the crises that this virus is causing are new. They’re just accelerated greatly. And the contradictions of the system are heightened all at once for people to see.”
++++++++++++++++
The Small World Network of College Classes: Implications for Epidemic Spread on a University Campus
Beginning in March 2020, many universities shifted to on-line instruction to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus, and many now face the difficult decision of whether and how to resume in-person instruction. This article uses complete transcript data from a medium-sized residential American university to map the two-node network that connects students and classes through course enrollments. We show that the enrollment networks of the university and its liberal arts college are “small-world” networks, characterized by high clustering and short average path lengths. In both networks, at least 98% of students are in the main component, and most students can reach each other in two steps. Removing very large courses slightly elongates path lengths, but does not disconnect these networks or eliminate all alternative paths between students. Although students from different majors tend to be clustered together, gateway courses and distributional requirements create cross-major integration. We close by discussing the implications of course networks for understanding potential epidemic spread of infection on university campuses.
Device ownership alone doesn’t make people digitally literate; rather, digital literacy is about how and why they use devices to achieve particular goals and outcomes.
Definitions of digital literacy can include the ability to use and access digital devices, but studies from the past decade tend to deepen this definition. A commonly cited definition from Colin Lankshear and Michele Knobel asserts that digital literacy is “shorthand for the myriad social practices and conceptions of engaging in meaning making mediated by texts that are produced, received, distributed, exchanged etc., via digital codification.”
More recently, scholars including Jennifer Sparrow have suggested even adopting the term digital fluency instead of literacy in order to capture how students may need the “ability to leverage technology to create new knowledge, new challenges, and new problems and to complement these with critical thinking, complex problem solving, and social intelligence to solve the new challenges.”
instructional designers are key players who could take a more visible role in higher education to support educators in bringing explicit instruction on digital literacy engagement into their classes. University staff in instructional design and educational/faculty development spaces consult with instructors, lead workshops, and develop support documentation on a regular basis. People in these roles could be more empowered to have conversations with the instructors they support around building in particular lessons
Douglas Belshaw can be a source of inspiration for understanding how his essential elements of digital literacy may contribute to the development of students’ digital fluencies. In particular, some practices may include:
Integrating the use of different applications and platforms so that students obtain practice in navigating these spaces, learning how to locate relevant and reliable information. For example, guiding students to specific databases that provide articles, books, etc., for your discipline may improve information and digital literacy. This is critical because most students default to Google search and Wikipedia, which may not be where you want them to explore topics.
Developing student’s ability to curate content and how to follow academic integrity guidelines for citations and references.
Establishing the norms and purpose for effective communication in a digital academic space.
Tuesday, October 30 from 9:00am-3:00pm at the System Office, Wells Fargo Place (Saint Paul, MN).
Team 3 is charged with developing a process for prioritizing and selecting collaborative curriculum development and course offering projects that require the use of enterprise instructional design and technology services.
Have expertise in online education that you are willing to share?
The Online Strategy Workgroup needs subject matter experts to participate on one of the three teams below.
Team 1 (Access) – Team 1 is charged with reviewing the existing services provided by the Minnesota State Info Hub and aligning the services they provide with the needs outlined in the corresponding action steps of the Online Strategy report. This team will utilize the existing levels of funding allocated to the Minnesota State Info Hub without seeking additional financial compensation from campuses. See what subject matter experts are needed for this team.
Team 2 (Quality) – Team 2 is charged with reviewing the existing services provided by the Minnesota Online Quality Initiative (MOQI) and aligning these services with the needs outlined in the corresponding action steps of this report. In addition to evaluating faculty development programming options available through MOQI, this team will be responsibility for developing the tools intended to support the quality improvement processes used by campuses. See what subject matter experts are needed for this team.
Team 3 (Collaboration) -Team 3 is charged with developing a process for prioritizing and selecting online collaborative curriculum development and online course offering projects that require the use of enterprise instructional design and technology services. See what subject matter experts are needed for this team.
program level course mapping.
course level modules and learning objectives.
RCE reasonable credit equivalency
IAA inter-agency agreement
RFP request for proposal
Collaborate on Curriculum and Course Offerings (Action A)
Adopting Open Educational Resources (OER) (Action A)
Revenue Sharing Model (Action D) Instructional Design and Technology Services (Action C)
Open Textbook Webinar — a 90-minute online meeting to learn about open textbooks.
Peer review of open textbooks is a critical component of assessing quality and supporting faculty looking for resources to use in their own classes. After the workshop, you’ll be eligible to earn a $200 stipend if you provide a short review of an open textbook from the OpenTextbook Library. Reviews are due 6-8 weeks following the workshop.
To prepare for the webinar, please take a few minutes and visit the Open Textbook Library (http://open.umn.edu/opentextbooks/). Glance through the Open Textbook Library and look for textbooks in your discipline that may be appropriate for you to review. In order to receive the $200 stipend, you must 1) participate in the webinar and 2) complete a textbook review. (Please note: There may not be texts available for review in your areas of expertise.)
When:Wednesday, November 14, 2018; 2:30 pm – 4:00 pm
Note that additional Open Textbook Webinars are scheduled throughout the academic year. Please contact Karen Pikula, OER Faculty Development Coordinator, at Karen.Pikula@minnstate.edu if you cannot attend the meeting on Monday.
Respondents on the 2016 POD Membership Survey indicated a strong need for learning center management and leadership skills. This session, facilitated by four center directors from very different institutions, responds to this need. Session participants will examine: 1) management and leadership responsibilities, especially in the context of continual change; 2) strategic alignment of the center’s work with institutional mission; and 3) evaluation of center work and demonstration of impact. Participants will leave with an individualized professional development plan, practical tools, and guiding questions that enable them to seek out relevant sessions and colleagues during the conference.
In this workshop, we explore powerful model (Symposium) for engaging faculty in campus initiatives and supporting them to take a more active role in leading during times of change. We have successfully used symposium to broaden faculty participation in change initiatives, connecting this work to what matters most to faculty and providing avenues for more inclusive collaboration across disciplines and divisions. Much of the workshop will be devoted to helping participants (1) identify areas where they can lead change on their campuses and (2) develop a draft plan for using symposium to increase faculty engagement in these efforts.
Faculty are often unable to complete a proper learner analysis because they know little about the students that comprise their classlist. At our university, we have been surveying incoming students for five years to collect enhanced demographic data and for the past two years have been sharing aggregate, anonymous data with faculty. Resources have been provided on how to make sense of the data for teaching purposes. In this study, we conducted focus groups with faculty to learn how they have used the data and resources and also to find out what additional data would further support their teaching. (My note: big data in education, as discussed by Nancy Sims keynote at LITA Nov, 2018)
Summative peer review of teaching (SPRT) is used in many higher education institutions. Unfortunately, the evaluative “power” of SPRT for making high-stakes career decisions can be limited due to lack of meaningful criteria and faculty resistance (Chism, 2008). To address this situation, our teaching and learning centre engaged in a collaborative culture-change initiative to develop a rubric for SPRT that would serve the University-wide committee with responsibility for final recommendation on matters of promotion and tenure. In this session, we discuss our collaborative process, debrief challenges and how we addressed and/or anticipated these, and share the SPRT rubric. (My Note: CETL)
This session will introduce participants to the gamification of faculty development through an interactive small group design scenario that asks participants to take a traditional faculty development experience and then gamify it using the gamification design framework [1]. Gamification involves the use of game design elements and experiences in non-gaming environments. When applied in faculty development settings, gamification has the potential to encourage faculty engagement and motivation and can lead to behavioral change that can impact their teaching. (My note: ask me; i have been trying to educate CETL directors for the past four years on this opportunity)
Digital Fluency: Preparing Learners for 21st Century Digital Citizenship Eighty-five percent of the jobs available in 2030 do not yet exist. How does higher education prepare our learners for careers that don’t yet exist? One opportunity is to provide our students with opportunities to grow their skills in creative problem solving, critical thinking, resiliency, novel thinking, social intelligence, and excellent communication skills. Instructional designers and faculty can leverage the framework of digital fluency to create opportunities for learners to practice and hone the skills that will prepare them to be 21st-century digital citizens. In this session, join a discussion about several fluencies that comprise the overarching framework for digital fluency and help to define some of your own.
Dr. Jennifer Sparrow, Senior Director for Teaching and Learning with Technology and Affiliate Assistant Professor of Learning, Design, and Technology at Penn State. The webinar will take place on Friday, November 9th at 11am EST/4pm UTC (login details below)
how DF is different from DLiteracy? enable students define how new knowledge can be created through technology. Not only read and write, but create poems, stories, if analogous w learning a language. slide 4 in https://www.slideshare.net/aidemoreto/vr-library
communication fluency. be able to choose the correct media. curiosity/failure fluency; creation fluency (makerspace: create without soldering, programming, 3Dprinting. PLA filament-corn-based plastic; Makers-in-residence)
immersive fluency: video 360, VR and AR. enable student to create new knowledge through environments beyond reality. Immersive Experiences Lab (IMEX). Design: physical vs virtual spaces.
Data fluency: b.book. how to create my own textbook
rubrics and sample projects to assess digital fluency.
What is Instructional Design 2.0 or 3.0? deep knowledge and understanding of faculty development. second, once faculty understands the new technology, how does this translate into rework of curriculum? third, the research piece; how to improve to be ready for the next cycle. a partnership between ID and faculty.
United States digital literacy frameworks tend to focus on educational policy details and personal empowerment, the latter encouraging learners to become more effective students, better creators, smarter information consumers, and more influential members of their community.
National policies are vitally important in European digital literacy work, unsurprising for a continent well populated with nation-states and struggling to redefine itself, while still trying to grow economies in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent financial pressures
African digital literacy is more business-oriented.
Middle Eastern nations offer yet another variation, with a strong focus on media literacy. As with other regions, this can be a response to countries with strong state influence or control over local media. It can also represent a drive to produce more locally-sourced content, as opposed to consuming material from abroad, which may elicit criticism of neocolonialism or religious challenges.
p. 14 Digital literacy for Humanities: What does it mean to be digitally literate in history, literature, or philosophy? Creativity in these disciplines often involves textuality, given the large role writing plays in them, as, for example, in the Folger Shakespeare Library’s instructor’s guide. In the digital realm, this can include web-based writing through social media, along with the creation of multimedia projects through posters, presentations, and video. Information literacy remains a key part of digital literacy in the humanities. The digital humanities movement has not seen much connection with digital literacy, unfortunately, but their alignment seems likely, given the turn toward using digital technologies to explore humanities questions. That development could then foster a spread of other technologies and approaches to the rest of the humanities, including mapping, data visualization, text mining, web-based digital archives, and “distant reading” (working with very large bodies of texts). The digital humanities’ emphasis on making projects may also increase
Digital Literacy for Business: Digital literacy in this world is focused on manipulation of data, from spreadsheets to more advanced modeling software, leading up to degrees in management information systems. Management classes unsurprisingly focus on how to organize people working on and with digital tools.
Digital Literacy for Computer Science: Naturally, coding appears as a central competency within this discipline. Other aspects of the digital world feature prominently, including hardware and network architecture. Some courses housed within the computer science discipline offer a deeper examination of the impact of computing on society and politics, along with how to use digital tools. Media production plays a minor role here, beyond publications (posters, videos), as many institutions assign multimedia to other departments. Looking forward to a future when automation has become both more widespread and powerful, developing artificial intelligence projects will potentially play a role in computer science literacy.
In traditional instruction, students’ first contact with new ideas happens in class, usually through direct instruction from the professor; after exposure to the basics, students are turned out of the classroom to tackle the most difficult tasks in learning — those that involve application, analysis, synthesis, and creativity — in their individual spaces. Flipped learning reverses this, by moving first contact with new concepts to the individual space and using the newly-expanded time in class for students to pursue difficult, higher-level tasks together, with the instructor as a guide.
Let’s take a look at some of the myths about flipped learning and try to find the facts.
Myth: Flipped learning is predicated on recording videos for students to watch before class.
Fact: Flipped learning does not require video. Although many real-life implementations of flipped learning use video, there’s nothing that says video must be used. In fact, one of the earliest instances of flipped learning — Eric Mazur’s peer instruction concept, used in Harvard physics classes — uses no video but rather an online text outfitted with social annotation software. And one of the most successful public instances of flipped learning, an edX course on numerical methods designed by Lorena Barba of George Washington University, uses precisely one video. Video is simply not necessary for flipped learning, and many alternatives to video can lead to effective flipped learning environments [http://rtalbert.org/flipped-learning-without-video/].
Fact: Flipped learning optimizes face-to-face teaching. Flipped learning may (but does not always) replace lectures in class, but this is not to say that it replaces teaching. Teaching and “telling” are not the same thing.
Myth: Flipped learning has no evidence to back up its effectiveness.
Fact: Flipped learning research is growing at an exponential pace and has been since at least 2014. That research — 131 peer-reviewed articles in the first half of 2017 alone — includes results from primary, secondary, and postsecondary education in nearly every discipline, most showing significant improvements in student learning, motivation, and critical thinking skills.
Myth: Flipped learning is a fad.
Fact: Flipped learning has been with us in the form defined here for nearly 20 years.
Myth: People have been doing flipped learning for centuries.
Fact: Flipped learning is not just a rebranding of old techniques. The basic concept of students doing individually active work to encounter new ideas that are then built upon in class is almost as old as the university itself. So flipped learning is, in a real sense, a modern means of returning higher education to its roots. Even so, flipped learning is different from these time-honored techniques.
Myth: Students and professors prefer lecture over flipped learning.
Fact: Students and professors embrace flipped learning once they understand the benefits. It’s true that professors often enjoy their lectures, and students often enjoy being lectured to. But the question is not who “enjoys” what, but rather what helps students learn the best.They know what the research says about the effectiveness of active learning
Assertion: Flipped learning provides a platform for implementing active learning in a way that works powerfully for students.
The Exposure Approach: we don’t provide a way for participants to determine if they learned anything new or now have the confidence or competence to apply what they learned.
The Exemplar Approach: from ‘show and tell’ for adults to show, tell, do and learn.
The Tutorial Approach: Getting a group that can meet at the same time and place can be challenging. That is why many faculty report a preference for self-paced professional development.build in simple self-assessment checks. We can add prompts that invite people to engage in some sort of follow up activity with a colleague. We can also add an elective option for faculty in a tutorial to actually create or do something with what they learned and then submit it for direct or narrative feedback.
The Course Approach: a non-credit format, these have the benefits of a more structured and lengthy learning experience, even if they are just three to five-week short courses that meet online or in-person once every week or two.involve badges, portfolios, peer assessment, self-assessment, or one-on-one feedback from a facilitator
The Academy Approach: like the course approach, is one that tends to be a deeper and more extended experience. People might gather in a cohort over a year or longer.Assessment through coaching and mentoring, the use of portfolios, peer feedback and much more can be easily incorporated to add a rich assessment element to such longer-term professional development programs.
The Mentoring Approach: The mentors often don’t set specific learning goals with the mentee. Instead, it is often a set of structured meetings, but also someone to whom mentees can turn with questions and tips along the way.
The Coaching Approach: A mentor tends to be a broader type of relationship with a person.A coaching relationship tends to be more focused upon specific goals, tasks or outcomes.
The Peer Approach:This can be done on a 1:1 basis or in small groups, where those who are teaching the same courses are able to compare notes on curricula and teaching models. They might give each other feedback on how to teach certain concepts, how to write syllabi, how to handle certain teaching and learning challenges, and much more. Faculty might sit in on each other’s courses, observe, and give feedback afterward.
The Self-Directed Approach:a self-assessment strategy such as setting goals and creating simple checklists and rubrics to monitor our progress. Or, we invite feedback from colleagues, often in a narrative and/or informal format. We might also create a portfolio of our work, or engage in some sort of learning journal that documents our thoughts, experiments, experiences, and learning along the way.
In 2014, administrators at Central Piedmont Community College (CPCC) in Charlotte, North Carolina, began talks with members of the North Carolina State Board of Community Colleges and North Carolina Community College System (NCCCS) leadership about starting a CBE program.
Building on an existing project at CPCC for identifying the elements of a digital learning environment (DLE), which was itself influenced by the EDUCAUSE publication The Next Generation Digital Learning Environment: A Report on Research,1 the committee reached consensus on a DLE concept and a shared lexicon: the “Digital Learning Environment Operational Definitions,
