Searching for "information technology"

Use of Academic Library Information Technology Lending Programs

Primary Research Group has published the: Survey of American College Students:
Use of Academic Library Information Technology Lending Programs, ISBN 978-
157440-510-1
This study looks at which devices and technologies students check out for loan
from college libraries, presenting detailed statistics on their use of
laptops, tablets, smartphones, cameras and camcorders, mics and audio
recorders, tripods, external hard drives, calculators, headphones and
headsets, student response systems or “clickers”, mobile device chargers,
presentation technology and other devices and technologies.
The study also presents results of an open-ended question through which
students make known their wish lists for technologies and devices that they
would like to see available, or more available, from their academic libraries.
Data in the report is presented in the aggregate and then broken out
separately for fifteen different variables including but not limited to:
college grades, gender, income level, year of college standing, SAT/ACT
scores, regional origin, age, sexual orientation, race & ethnicity, college
major and other personal variables, and by Carnegie class, enrollment size and
public/private status of the survey participants institutions of higher
education.
Just a few of this 110-page report’s many findings are that:
By a ratio of nearly 2:1 females were much more ardent borrowers than men of
student response systems or “tickers” technology: 3.46% of women vs. 1.72% of
men had borrowed them.  Gay students were also more than twice as likely as
straight students to borrow this technology; 6.93% vs. 2.35%. Use also tends
to correlate with high ACT or SAT scores, the higher the score, the greater
the likelihood that a student has borrowed a clicker from their college
library.
The tendency to borrow calculators was lowest among students specializing in
mathematics, computer science, statistics and engineering.
Private college students were four times more likely than those at public
colleges to borrow tripods.
For a table of contents and an excerpt view the product page for this report
on our website at:  https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.primaryresearch.com%2FAddCart.aspx%3FReportID%3D493&data=01%7C01%7Cpmiltenoff%40stcloudstate.edu%7C441e49daa0414c423d7f08d5ab861e17%7C5e40e2ed600b4eeaa9851d0c9dcca629%7C0&sdata=QEdbJmUmy%2BPvdEZYXOZU82a16bZXF52Peo%2BBuIumMT4%3D&reserved=0

ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2017

ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2017

  • Students would like their instructors to use more technology in their classes.Technologies that provide students with something (e.g., lecture capture, early-alert systems, LMS, search tools) are more desired than those that require students to give something (e.g., social media, use of their own devices, in-class polling tools). We speculate that sound pedagogy and technology use tied to specific learning outcomes and goals may improve the desirability of the latter.
  • Students reported that faculty are banning or discouraging the use of laptops, tablets, and (especially) smartphones more often than in previous years. Some students reported using their devices (especially their smartphones) for nonclass activities, which might explain the instructor policies they are experiencing. However, they also reported using their devices for productive classroom activities (e.g., taking notes, researching additional sources of information, and instructor-directed activities).

++++++++++++++
more on ECAR studies in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=ecar

academic library teaching information technology

Does your library have exciting, innovative ways to train your patrons about
information technology?
The ALA/Information Today, Inc. Library of the Future Award honors an
individual library, library consortium, group of librarians, or support
organization for innovative planning for, applications of, or development of
patron training programs about information technology in a library setting.
The annual award consists of $1,500 and a 24k gold-framed citation of
achievement.  All types of libraries are welcome to apply!
The 2017 award winner was the Muncie Public Library for their innovative
“Digital Climbers” program that motivates and inspires children ages eight and
up to experiment with technology and master skills that contribute to learning
in science, technology, engineering, art and math.
ALA is currently accepting nominations for the 2018 Library of the Future
Award: http://www.ala.org/awardsgrants/awards/213/apply.  The online
application is to be submitted to ALA by February 1, 2018.  For additional
information, contact Rene Erlandson, Award Jury Chair,
rene.erlandson@gmail.com or Cheryl Malden, ALA Governance Office,
cmalden@ala.org.
My note: where I work, such effort will be dismissed as “this belongs to public libraries.”
Does it? What does your academic library do to excel patrons in information technology.
where I work – not much. All is “information literacy” in its 90ish encapsulation.

++++++++++++++
more on information technology in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=information+technology

Information Technology and Teacher Education conference

SITE 2017 CALL FOR PAPERS

Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education site.aace.org
March 5 – 9, 2017 Austin, Texas, USA

Proposals Due: October 21, 2016

SITE 2017 is the 28th annual conference of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education. This society represents individual teacher educators and affiliated organizations of teacher educators in all disciplines, who are interested in the creation and dissemination of knowledge about the use of information technology in teacher education and faculty/staff development.

SITE is unique as the only organization which has as its sole focus the integration of instructional technologies into teacher education programs. SITE promotes the development and dissemination of theoretical knowledge, conceptual research, and professional practice knowledge through conferences, books, projects, and the Journal of Technology and Teacher Education (JTATE).

You are invited to attend and participate in this annual international forum which offer numerous opportunities to share your ideas, explore the research, development, and applications, and to network with the leaders in this important field of teacher education and technology.

There are over 800 presentations in 25 major topic areas! http://site.aace.org/sigs/

The Conference Review Policy requires that each proposal will be peer- reviewed by three reviewers for inclusion in the conference program, and conference proceedings.

Enquiries: conf@aace.org
Hosted By: AACE.org – The Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education
Sponsored by: LearnTechLib.org – The Learning and Technology Library

Top Tech Trends – 2013 Annual | Library Information Technology Association (LITA)

Top Tech Trends – 2013 Annual

http://www.ala.org/lita/node/723

Trends

  • DIY Library eBook Platforms
  • Digital Rights Management
  • Discovery and rights determination
  • MOOCs, flipped classrooms, and gamification fatigue
  • Linked data
  • Makerspaces
  • Data collection and data mining

ECAR STUDY OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, 2013

Key Findings

See the 2013 report for a full list of key messages, findings, and supporting data.

  • Students recognize the value of technology but still need guidance when it comes to better using it for academics.
  • Students prefer blended learning environments while beginning to experiment with MOOCs.
  • Students are ready to use their mobile devices more for academics, and they look to institutions and instructors for opportunities and encouragement to do so.
  • Students value their privacy, and using technology to connect with them has its limits.
p. 10 students are generally confident in their prepraredness to use technology for course work, but those who are interested in more tech training favor “in calss” guidance over separate training options.

Educause’s ECAR Study, 2013

http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/ecar-study-undergraduate-students-and-information-technology-2013

Infographic:

http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERS1302/Eig1302.pdf

ICT information and communication technology literacy

The Role of Librarians in Supporting ICT Literacy

May 9, 2019,

https://er.educause.edu/blogs/2019/5/the-role-of-librarians-in-supporting-ict-literacy

Academic librarians increasingly provide guidance to faculty and students for the integration of digital information into the learning experience.

TPACK: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge

Many librarians have shied away from ICT literacy, concerned that they may be asked how to format a digital document or show students how to create a formula in a spreadsheet. These technical skills focus more on a specific tool than on the underlying nature of information.

librarians have begun to use an embedded model as a way to deepen their connection with instructors and offer more systematic collection development and instruction. That is, librarians focus more on their partnerships with course instructors than on a separate library entity.

If TPACK is applied to instruction within a course, theoretically several people could be contributing this knowledge to the course. A good exercise is for librarians to map their knowledge onto TPACK.

Large dotted line circle labelled Contexts. Inside large circle are three smaller circles overlapping to create a Venn diagram. Pink Circle: Technological Knowledge (TK). Blue Circle: Content Knowledge (CK). Yellow Circle: Pedagogical Knowledge (PK). Pink/Blue overlap: Technological Content Knowledge (TCK). Blue/Yellow Overlap: Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). Yellow/Pink Overlap: Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK). Center where all 3 overlap: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK).

ICT reflects the learner side of a course. However, ICT literacy can be difficult to integrate because it does not constitute a core element of any academic domain. Whereas many academic disciplines deal with key resources in their field, such as vocabulary, critical thinking, and research methodologies, they tend not to address issues of information seeking or collaboration strategies, let alone technological tools for organizing and managing information.

Instructional design for online education provides an optimal opportunity for librarians to fully collaborate with instructors.

The outcomes can include identifying the level of ICT literacy needed to achieve those learning outcomes, a task that typically requires collaboration between the librarian and the program’s faculty member. Librarians can also help faculty identify appropriate resources that students need to build their knowledge and skills. As education administrators encourage faculty to use open educational resources (OERs) to save students money, librarians can facilitate locating and evaluating relevant resources. These OERs not only include digital textbooks but also learning objects such as simulations, case studies, tutorials, and videos.

Reading online text differs from reading print both physically and cognitively. For example, students scroll down rather than turn online pages. And online text often includes hyperlinks, which can lead to deeper coverage—as well as distraction or loss of continuity of thought. Also, most online text does not allow for marginalia that can help students reflect on the content. Teachers and students often do not realize that these differences can impact learning and retention. To address this issue, librarians can suggest resources to include in the course that provide guidance on reading online.

My note – why specialist like Tom Hergert and the entire IMS is crucial for the SCSU library and librarians and how neglecting the IMS role hurts the SCSU library
Similarly, other types of media need to be evaluated, comprehended, and interpreted in light of their critical features or “grammar.” For example, camera angles can suggest a person’s status (as in looking up to someone), music can set the metaphorical tone of a movie, and color choices can be associated with specific genres (e.g., pastels for romances or children’s literature, dark hues for thrillers). Librarians can explain these media literacy concepts to students (and even faculty) or at least suggest including resources that describe these features

My note – on years-long repetition of the disconnect between SCSU ATT, SCSU library and IMS
instructors need to make sure that students have the technical skills to produce these products. Although librarians might understand how media impacts the representation of knowledge, they aren’t necessarily technology specialists. However, instructors and librarians can collaborate with technology specialists to provide that expertise. While librarians can locate online resources—general ones such as Lynda.com or tool-specific guidance—technology specialists can quickly identify digital resources that teach technical skills (my note: in this case IMS). My note: we do not have IDs, another years-long reminder to middle and upper management. Many instructors and librarians have not had formal courses on instructional design, so collaborations can provide an authentic means to gain competency in this process.

My note: Tom and I for years have tried to make aware SCSU about this combo –
Instructors likely have high content knowledge (CK) and satisfactory technological content knowledge (TCK) and technological knowledge (TK) for personal use. But even though newer instructors acquire pedagogical knowledge (PK), pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) early in their careers, veteran instructors may not have received this training. The same limitations can apply to librarians, but technology has become more central in their professional lives. Librarians usually have strong one-to-one instruction skills (an aspect of PK), but until recently they were less likely to have instructional design knowledge. ICT literacy constitutes part of their CK, at least for newly minted professionals. Instructional designers are strong in TK, PK, and TPK, and the level of their CK (and TCK and TPK) will depend on their academic background. And technology specialists have the corner on TK and TCK (and hopefully TPK if they are working in educational settings), but they may not have deep knowledge about ICT literacy.

Therefore, an ideal team for ICT literacy integration consists of the instructor, the librarian, the instructional designer, and the technology specialist. Each member can contribute expertise and cross-train the teammates. Eventually, the instructor can carry the load of ICT literacy, with the benefit of specific just-in-time support from the librarian and instructional designer.

My note: I have been working for more then six years as embedded librarian in the doctoral cohort and had made aware the current library administrator (without any response) about my work, as well as providing lengthy bibliography (e.g. http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/08/24/embedded-librarian-qualifications/ and have had meeting with the current SOE administrator and the library administrator (without any response).
I also have delivered discussions to other institutions (http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/04/12/embedded-librarian-and-gamification-in-libraries/)
Librarians should seriously consider TPACK as a way to embed themselves into the classroom to incorporate information and ICT literacy.

+++++++++++++
more about academic library in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=academic+library

more on SAMR and TRACK models in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/05/17/transform-education-digital-tools/

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/07/29/mn-esummit-2015/

feedback w technology

How to Give Your Students Better Feedback With Technology ADVICE GUIDE

y Holly Fiock and Heather Garcia

https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/20191108-Advice-Feedback

students continue to report dissatisfaction with the feedback they get on assignments and tests — calling it vague, discouraging, and/or late.

The use of technology in the classroom (both in face-to-face and online environments)

  • Rubrics: online scoring guides to evaluate students’ work.
  • Annotations: notes or comments added digitally to essays and other assignments.
  • Audio: a sound file of your voice giving feedback on students’ work.
  • Video: a recorded file of you offering feedback either as a “talking head,” a screencast, or a mix of both.
  • Peer review: online systems in which students review one another’s work.

Two main types of feedback — formative and summative — work together in that process but have different purposes. Formative feedback occurs during the learning process and is used to monitor progress. Summative feedback happens at the end of a lesson or a unit and is used to evaluate the achievement of the learning outcomes.

Good feedback should be: Frequent, Specific, Balanced, Timely

guide on inclusive teaching, frequent, low-stakes assessments are an inclusive teaching practice.

Time-Saving Approaches: rubrics and peer-reviews.

When to Use Audio or Video Tools for Feedback: personalize your feedback, convey nuance, demonstrate a process, avoid miscommunication

Faculty interest in classroom innovation is on the rise. Professors are trying all sorts of new techniques to improve the first few minutes of class, to make their teaching more engaging, to hold better class discussions. Buzzwords like active learningauthentic assessmenttechnology integration, and case-based learning are more and more a part of faculty discussions.

Don’t assume technology will solve every problem.

Avoid making long videos

Video and audio feedback doesn’t have to be perfect.

There is such a thing as too much information.

Have a plan.

++++++++++
more on feedback in education in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=feedback

surveillance technology and education

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2019-06-10-is-school-surveillance-going-too-far-privacy-leaders-urge-a-slow-down

New York’s Lockport City School District, which is using public funds from a Smart Schools bond to help pay for a reported $3.8 million security system that uses facial recognition technology to identify individuals who don’t belong on campus

The Lockport case has drawn the attention of national media, ire of many parents and criticism from the New York Civil Liberties Union, among other privacy groups.

the Future of Privacy Forum (FPF), a nonprofit think tank based in Washington, D.C., published an animated video that illustrates the possible harm that surveillance technology can cause to children and the steps schools should take before making any decisions, such as identifying specific goals for the technology and establishing who will have access to the data and for how long.

A few days later, the nonprofit Center for Democracy and Technology, in partnership with New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, released a brief examining the same topic.

My note: same considerations were relayed to the SCSU SOE dean in regard of the purchase of Premethean and its installation in SOE building without discussion with faculty, who work with technology. This information was also shared with the dean: http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/10/31/students-data-privacy/

++++++++++++
more on surveillance in education in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=surveillance+education

Role of the Chief Academic Technology Officer

What’s the Role of the Chief Academic Technology Officer?

Research from the Center for Higher Education CIO Studies (CHECS) has been transferred to EDUCAUSE, including a report on the role of the Chief Academic Technology Officer and its differences and similarities to other higher ed IT tech executives.

https://library.educause.edu/resources/2019/1/the-center-for-higher-education-cio-studies-reports-2003-2018 Friday, January 18, 2019

The Center for Higher Education CIO Studies (CHECS) was a nonprofit organization founded by Dr. Wayne A. Brown, dedicated to the education and development of technology leaders in higher education. CHECS produced the CIO Study, the Technology Leadership (TL) Study, the Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) Study and the Higher Education Chief Academic Technology Officer Study.

The Chief Information Officer (CIO) study provides information about higher education CIOs’ attributes, education, experience and effectiveness. The CIO study was conducted from 2003 to 2018. Find all the CIO reports here.

The Technology Leadership (TL) study surveyed those in the next organizational layer down from the CIO.  The TL study examines the demographics of the TL, where they have worked, and the activities they are undertaking to prepare themselves to become CIOs.  The TL study was study was conducted from 2009 to 2018. Find all the TL reports here.

The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) study examines the demographics of the higher education CISO, the career route they have taken to their role, and the activities and attributes needed for a CISO according to the CISO and the CIO. The CISO study was study was conducted from 2014 to 2017. Find all the CISO reports here.

The Higher Education Chief Academic Technology Officer Study, 2018 canvassed CIOs, known CATOs and academic technology leaders, as well as deans and provosts to understand changes happening across institutions of higher education in academic technology.

1 2 3 34