Searching for "leader"
New assignment this fall in Minnesota schools: deal with ‘Pokémon Go’
1. School administrator John Wetter took on an odd assignment over summer break at the request of one of his principals: Track down any PokéStops or gyms lurking on Hopkins school grounds. He asked game developer Niantic Labs to remove it from the game.
So far the game has only been blocked at sites such as the
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C.
2. Some educators are embracing the interest in “Pokémon Go” as a potential teaching tool. “Any time something becomes a big pop culture sensation, as a teacher I try to just kind of ride the coattails,”
At St. Paul’s Washington Technology Magnet School, educator Eric Gunderson made a spinoff of “Pokémon Go” that students can play on their district-issued iPads. He created it using an augmented reality app called Aurasma. He printed pictures of eggs on sheets of paper. Get the printed egg in view of the iPad’s camera, and an animated animal appears onscreen, a knockoff Pokémon.
The Minnesota Department of Education said it hasn’t gotten inquiries from school districts concerned about “Pokémon Go.” A spokesperson for the Osseo Area School District noted that students face many distractions. “Our leaders are very skilled in dealing with whatever the distraction of the day is,” the spokesperson wrote in an email.
Education and School Leadership Symposium 2017(September 6th to 8 th, 2017 in Zug, Switzerland):
- Education and School Leadership Symposium 2017
1.1 Theme of the Plenary Program
The theme of the plenary program will be:
Building/Education 5.0? The Future of Learning, the Future of Schools
1.2 Themes of the Parallel Program
Thursday features a parallel program with four workshop sessions and four presentation sessions, grouped according to the following themes which will be further modified in the CfP in September:
– Participation and Democracy in Education
– Learning Strategies and Instruction
– Human Resource Management / Professionalization of Educational Actors
– Health
– Leadership Development
– Migration and Education
– School Turnaround
– Governance and Educational Policy
– Collaboration, Networked Systems and System Leadership
1.4 Pre-Conference: International Seminar
As a pre-conference, the «International Seminar» takes place September 5-6, 2017. It mainly addresses international guests and those who want to network internationally in a more intimate atmosphere. Emphasis is put on the exchange of knowledge and experiences across countries and the discussion of challenges.
Groups of school leaders who participate in professional development programs are particularly welcome. As last time, we already have a few groups who signed up for 2017.
Besides a presentation of the Swiss school system(s), participants will have the opportunity to visit local schools in the canton of Zug.
You can find more information at:
http://www.EducationSymposium.net/program/pre-conference/
Additional information at:
http://www.EduLead.net
http://www.Bildungsmanagement.net
http://www.EducationSysmposium.net
http://www.SchoolLeadershipSymposium.net
Follow us on Twitter: @HuberEduLead http://www.twitter.com/huberedulead
REPORT
Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), AKA drones
August 15, 2016
Sources:
- This report is based on a DVD “Drones on Campus. UAS Issues for the Higher Education Community” of February 2, 2016. The DVD contains a PDF file and flattened media file with a voice-narrated PPT based on the information from the PDF.
- The report takes into consideration the opulence of materials gathered during the last 4-5 years in the IMS blog: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=drones
Narrative / synopsis:
The DVD is a commercial product for sale for the Higher Ed. It is the recoding of a commercial seminar for Higher Ed, led by a lawyer (Lisa Ellman, lisa.ellman@hoganlovells.com, Twitter handle @leelellman) from the legal practice Hogan Lovells and by employee from FAA.
The information below represents the main points from the PDF / PPT presentation, as well as additional information with clarifications, which I added while working with the PDF and PPT files.
Discussion topics:
- How and when UAS can be approved for flying at SCSU
- The effect on SCSU of the domestic UAS legal framework
- Protection against rogue drones on campus
- Policymaking around UAS
FAA Modernization and Reform Act (P.L. 112-095) Reports and Plans Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) Roadmap https://www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/modernization/media/Sec.332(a).pdf
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Comprehensive Plan (Section 332 (a)(5))
https://www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/modernization/media/Sec.332(a)(5)2.pdf
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Privacy Requirements (Section 332 (a)(5))
https://www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/modernization/media/Sec.332(a)(5).pdf
section 333 exemptions
http://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/fly_for_work_business/beyond_the_basics/section_333/333_authorizations/
Small UAS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/media/021515_suas_summary.pdf
The term “unmanned aircraft system” means an unmanned aircraft and associated elements (including communication links and components that control the unmanned aircraft) that are required for the pilot in command to operate safely and efficiently in the national airspace system.
Federal Gov’t UAS Policymaking. FAA Reauthorization Act of 2012, FAA Rulemaking process, Federal Interagency Process, Agency-Specific Processes
UAS categorization:
- Model aircraft
- Public – UAS owned and operated by government agencies and organizations, such as public university
a public COA (certificate of waiver of authorization) is issued by the FAA to a public agency/organization for public aircraft operations
most aspects of public aircraft operations are not subject to FAA oversight
If we are a public university… can we operate UAS under a public COA?
in order to operate under a public COA< the UAS must be operated by the university for a “core governmental function, which is defined as:
“… and activity undertaken by a government, such as national defense, intelligence missions, firefighting, search and rescue, law enforcement (including transport of prisoners, detainees, and illegal aliens), aeronautical research, or biological or geological resource management.
In an FAA Office, it was clarified that “aeronautical research” must be focused on the development and testing of the UAS itself, rather than the thing being observed and monitored using the UAS.
- Civil
- Any private sector (non-governmental) operation of a drone for purposes other than recreation or hobby is considered a “civil” operation
- This category covers all commercial use of UAS, including use by private universities and colleges
Summary Grant Exemption / Blanket COA conditions and COA conditions and limitations:
- Below 200 feet
- Within visual line-of-sight of the pilot and visual observer
- At least 500 feet from nonparticipating persons, vessels, vehicles, or structures, unless certain conditions met
- Over private or controlled access property with consent
- Visual observer required
- Pilot must have an FAA issues pilot certificate and a medical certificate or DL
- Mussed give a way to all manned aircraft
SCSU must apply for section 333 exemption – FAA has granted 3.129 out of 4500 applications. FAA current goal: 50+ exemption grants per week
QA regarding exemption / blanket COA requirements
Small UAS Rule: June 2016 (IMS blog)
- Must be < 55 lbs
- Max altitude speed 500 feet / 100 mph
- Minimum visibility 3 miles
- UAS always yield right-of-way to other aircraft
- UAS cannot be operated recklessly
- Registration and marking required
- Hobbyist operators: December 21, 2015
- All UAS >.55 pounds and less than 55 pounds must be registered either using the new online system or the FAAs existing paper-based registration system before the UAS can be operated outdoors
- UAS within that right range purchased prior to December 21, 2015 must be registered by February 19, 2016
- Hobbies required to submit basic contact info, such as name, address email. Costs $5 to register hobbyist owner’s entire fleet of UAS. The FAA will issue a single CAR (certificate of aircraft registration) with one registration number that can be used for and should be put on each UAS. Every 3 years, renewal.
Boggs v Meredith. How high do airspace rights extend over private property
- Up to 83 feet in the air
- Other legal liability issues:
Mitigating UAS Legal Liabilities
- When hiring a UAS server provider
- Seek to shift and limit liability through contract
- Vendors operating UAS on university property should sing a written agreement
- Ensure the UAS service provider has adequate insurance
- When selecting a UAS model:
Who is in charge
- University should have a UAS operations manual with policies and procedures
- Permission to fly on campus (who, how and when)
- UAS operation, maintenance and inspection procedures
- Emergency procedures, accident / incident notification, reporting
- FAA recordkeeping requirements
- UAS flight activity (when, where, duration)
- Incidents/accidents involving personal injury or property damage
- Lost-link events (AKA fly-aways)
- UAS maintenance and inspection
- UAS flight crew training / qualifications
- Participant / property owner consent
- Faculty/staff/student qualifications and training
- Privacy policies, data management, retention
- Consent and notification requirements for operating near people and structures
Outline of immediate tasks:
Based on the information above:
- SCSU, LRS in particular, must decide what drone’s certificate to apply for: a. model; b. public; c.civil; or d. hobbies
- After selection of certificate type, SCSU, LRS in particular, must register the drone[s].
- SCSU, LRS in particular, must develop policies for service, operation and maintenance.
- SCSU, LRS in particular, must assign person[s] in charge of the training, maintenance and operation.
Suggestions and recommendations:
- Hosting a drone in the library.
If to adhere to the ALA call for the librarians to be the forefront of technology on campus, LRS can use the drone purchased in April 2014 to train and lend the drone for research on campus.
If LRS continues the policy of the previous dean, further suggestions below can be waved off.
- Training, maintenance and operation
Shall LRS keep the drone, the best person to conduct the training and service of the drone will be an IMS faculty. As per email correspondence attached below, please have again the rational:
– hosting the drone with Circulation (staff) does not provide the adequate academic/research services. It is expected that the foremost users will be faculty, students and then staff and the foremost use will be academic and then leisure activities. While IMS faculty can meet the “leisure activities” for all three constituency, as it has been provided by the Circulation staff until this point, the IMS faculty can also provide the research and academic service, which Circulation staff is not educated neither trained for. With that said, the point made is not against staff not participating in the effort to train and service campus with the drone; it just makes the point that charging staff with that task is limited and against the best interest of the faculty and students on campus.
– blocking the effort of IMS faculty to lead technology-oriented services on campus, LRS in particular.
Upon hiring of a “technology” librarian, previous dean Mark Vargas blocked any technology-related activities by IMS faculty: e.g. 3d printer AKA makerspace, gaming and gamification, drones, etc.
If I am to understand well, the “technology” librarian’s charge must be toward automated library systems and similar, rather than educational use of multimedia and interactivity. Blocking IMS faculty to do what they do best by freezing any of their efforts and reserving “technology” for [unknown] future leadership of the “technology” librarian is a waste of IMS faculty expertise and knowledge.
Gaming and Gamification (https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/03/19/recommendations-for-games-and-gaming-at-lrs/) charge by previous dean Mark Vargas to the first-year “technology” librarian revealed as obvious that giving the preference to junior faculty to “lead” an effort can become a dangerous tool in the hands of the administration to manipulate and slow down efforts of educational trends of time-sensitive character. While, as from the beginning, the collaboration of the “technology” librarian has been welcomed and appreciated, it does not make sense from any cultural or institutional perspective, to put in charge a new faculty, who does not have the knowledge and networking of the campus, less the experience and knowledge with multimedia and interactive tools as the rest of the seasoned IMS faculty. Decision and consequent refusal of the “technology” librarian to work with the IMS faculty did not contribute to improvement of the situation.
A very important point, which goes against the “consensus” efforts of the previous dean, is the fact that now the library faculty is using the newly-hired “technology” librarian to hinder further the integration of the IMS faculty as part of LRS by using her as a focal point for any technology initiative in LRS, thus further excluding the IMS faculty from LRS activities. It will help: 1. delineate the expertise parameters of the “technology” librarian and 2. have the librarian faculty think about their work with the IMS faculty, which has been a thorny issue for more than 10 years now (pretty much since the hire of the bulk of the reference librarians).
If there are questions, or the need of more information, please do not hesitate to request.
Plamen Miltenoff, Ph.D., MLIS
Professor
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: Miltenoff, Plamen
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 9:44 AM
To: Banaian, King <kbanaian@stcloudstate.edu>
Subject: request to release the library drone
Dr. Banaian,
My name is Plamen Miltenoff and I am faculty with the InforMedia Services of the SCSU Library. I have worked in the last 15+ years with faculty, students and staff on educational technology and instructional design. I hold two doctoral degrees in education and four master’s degrees in history and Library and Information Science.
I have extensive background in new educational technologies, which is amply reflected in the following blog: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/. Shall more proof of my abilities is needed, here is detailed information about publications, presentations and projects, which I have accomplished: http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/faculty/
In the spring of 2014, Mark Vargas purchased a drone. As per my job description and long experience working with faculty across campus with other technologies, I immediately alerted SCSU faculty who have strong interest in applying drone’s technology in their studies, research and teaching, assuming that the newly-appointed library director (Mark Vargas) will support my years-long efforts.
Due to complications with FAA regulations the drones across the country were grounded.
Mark Vargas “stationed” it with the library Access Services, a unit, which is comprised of staff only. When I approached the library staff from Access Services, they chose to not collaborate with me, but rather deflect me to Mark Vargas.
As per my email to Mark Vargas of July 21, 2015 (attachment 1), I requested an explanation and shared my feeling that SCSU faculty are being left in disadvantage after I witness the drone being used. I also asked my immediate supervisor Mark Vargas about the policies and release conditions. Unfortunately, my repeated requests remained unanswered.
As of yesterday, FAA has finally released the last version of the regulations:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/06/22/faa-final-rules-drones/
Here is extensive information on how drones can be used in education, which I collected through the years: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=drones
I am turning to you as the appointed administrator-in-charge of the library (attachment 2), with the request that you share the amounted paperwork regarding the drone. Mark Vargas did not share that information, despite numerous requests, e.g., if the drone is registered, etc.
I am seeking your administrative approval to pursue the completion of the paperwork and secure immediate usability of the drone, so it is available also to all interested SCSU faculty with or without my participation (as per regulations). The request is timely, since such technologies are aging quickly. Besides the depreciation of the technology, SCSU students and faculty deserves being kept with the times and explore a technology, which is rapidly becoming a mainstream, rather than novelty.
Please consider that I am the only library member with terminal degrees in education as well as extensive experience with technologies in general and educational technologies in particular. I am also the only library member with extensive network among faculty across campus. I am perceived by colleagues across campus more often as a peer, collaborator and research partner, then merely a service provider, as most of the library staff and faculty consider themselves. I am the only library member, who sits on theses and doctoral committees and the invitations to these committees are greatly based on my experience in educational technologies and my research and publishing skills. Leaving the drone in the Access Services, as appointed by the previous administrator, will result in a dormancy of technology as it has happened with numerous other technologies on this campus. It is a waste of equipment, which this university cannot afford in the respective financial times. Letting me take the lead of the drone project will secure active promotion and better application of this technology and possibly other venues (e.g. grants) to pursue further endeavors.
Thank you and looking forward to your approval.
Plamen Miltenoff, Ph.D., MLIS
Professor
320-308-3072
pmiltenoff@stcloudstate.edu
http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/faculty/
Attachment 1
From: Miltenoff, Plamen
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:09 PM
To: Vargas, Mark A. <mavargas@stcloudstate.edu>
Cc: Quinlan, Jennifer M. <jmquinlan@stcloudstate.edu>; Prescott, Melissa K. <mkprescott@stcloudstate.edu>; Hergert, Thomas R. <trhergert@stcloudstate.edu>
Subject: LRS drones
Mark,
Last week LRS staff was handling the LRS drones.
Did I miss email correspondence informing about the change in regulations? If so, I would like to have a copy of it.
If not, I would like to know your rational for your selective choice releasing this technology.
Per the IMS blog:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=drones&submit=Search
and direct oral and written communication with you, I have expressed strong academic interest in research of this technology for educational purposes. I have the educational background and experience for the aforementioned request.
I am asking you for access to this technology since early summer of 2014.
I would like to be informed what your plan for this technology is and when it will be open to the LRS faculty. I also would like to know when preference to LRS staff is given when technology is concerned, so I can plan accordingly.
Thank you and looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Plamen
—————-
Plamen Miltenoff, Ph.D., MLIS
Attachment 2
From: lrs_l-bounces@lists.stcloudstate.edu [mailto:lrs_l-bounces@lists.stcloudstate.edu] On Behalf Of Vaidya, Ashish K.
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 2:08 PM
To: lrs_l@stcloudstate.edu <lrs_l@lists.stcloudstate.edu>
Subject: [LRS_l] Interim Leadership for LRS
Dear LRS Faculty and Staff,
As you are aware, Mark Vargas has submitted his resignation as Dean of Learning Resources Services. Mark’s last day on campus was Friday, June 10, 2016.
I want to assure you that any decision about interim leadership will be made after careful consideration of the needs of the Library and the University. I will continue conversations with various individuals, including the President, to ensure we have strategic alignment in both support and oversight for LRS. LRS is committed to providing excellent services to our students, faculty, and staff, creating opportunities for knowledge, and serving the public good. I look forward to working together with you to accomplish these goals.
I expect to identify an interim dean shortly and to begin a national search this fall with an appointment to begin July 1, 2017. I have asked Greta to schedule a time for me to visit with faculty and staff in Learning Resource Service next week. In the meantime, Dean King Banaian will serve as the administrator-in-charge of LRS until June 30, 2016.
Sincerely yours,
Ashish
7 Best Practices for Deploying Lecture Capture Campuswide
Technology leaders from universities with large lecture capture implementations share their advice for rolling out the technology at scale.
By Leila Meyer 08/03/16
https://campustechnology.com/articles/2016/08/03/7-best-practices-for-deploying-lecture-capture-campuswide.aspx
1) Automate the Recording Process to Make It Effortless
The Department of Instructional Technology
Echo360 lecture capture appliances and some Sonic Foundry Mediasite appliances. While lecture capture appliances are “not cheap,” according to Lucas, they reduce the complexity for faculty and staff.
Sonic Foundry Mediasite appliances with CollegeNET 25Live scheduling software to automate the lecture capture process.
2) Focus on Implementation in Large-Capacity Classrooms
installing lecture capture appliances and high-definition cameras in the large lecture halls at UMass Lowell has helped reduce DFWs (drop, fail, withdrawal rate) in high-enrollment classes such as Calculus 1.
3) Establish Relationships with Leadership and Early Adopters
4) Ensure High-Quality Audio Recording
“You might be able to get by if you don’t see the instructor, of if they step outside the viewing angle of the camera, but if you can’t hear them, the capture is wasted. It’s critical that they pay attention to audio.”
5) Offer Flexibility for Instructors to Record Lectures Anywhere/Anytime
6) Ensure Adequate Storage and Processing on Servers
7) Engage with Other Colleges and Universities
++++++++++++++++++++
more on lecture capture in this blog:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=lecture+capture
CALL FOR PROPOSALS
IOLUG Fall 2016 Conference – Let Our Powers Combine: Engage. Partner. Inspire
Friday, October 21, 2016
Indiana Wesleyan University North Campus
3777 Priority Way, Indianapolis, IN 46240
How can we join together to increase awareness of the value, impact and services provided by libraries and library professionals in the academic, public and online settings? The IOLUG Program Committee is inviting proposals around the theme of proving the value and worth of the library. Specifically, how are you demonstrating the value of your library? What emerging technologies are you using to display your contribution to your institution or community either online or in person? How can we work together to inspire a spirit of advocacy?
We encourage presentations that are practical, hands-on, and include take-awayable tools, techniques, and/or strategies that librarians can implement to improve their resources and services for students, patrons, faculty, etc. Consider the following topics:
- Promoting open educational resources (OER) and affordable learning materials
- Analytics and metrics
- Supporting diversity
- Improved service delivery and job performance
- Digital media implementation
- New library initiatives
- Innovation and community engagement
- Leadership
Please specify in your proposal whether users will be expected to bring their own devices, or if you will need the use of a computer lab.
Submit your proposal today!
Deadline is Friday, September 2
Get ideas from previous conferences at the IOLUG site.
Free Webinar for K–12 Educators and Administrators to Cover Best Tech Practices
https://thejournal.com/articles/2016/07/19/free-webinar-for-k12-educators-and-administrators-to-cover-best-tech-practices.aspx
Best Practices for Effective Curriculum Management (Vimeo)
PowerPoint Slides (PDF)
Attention: sponsored by itslearning (take information with a grain of salt)
The cloud-based learning platform itslearning will host a free tech webinar for K–12 educators and administrators at 1 p.m. EST (10 a.m. PST) Wednesday, July 27. The webinar, available on the itslearning website, will examine best practices in selecting and implementing learning technologies.
Implementation consultant Libby Lawrie will direct the webinar. She’s a former teacher and school administrator, and she frequently presents nationally on instructional technology and virtual education. She’s also a founding member of the International Association for K–12 Online Learning (iNACOL).
The webinar is designed to give education leaders the insight and tools they need to select the right tools for their tech situations. There are many products and choices out there, and Lawrie will provide strategies for choosing the best products and partners, as well as details about the discovery and implementation process. She will share insights and best practices from U.S. districts large and small.
While not mandatory, registration is recommended. Visit itslearning’s webinar site to sign up.
doctoral cohort student’s request for literature: “I am looking for some more resources around the historical context of teacher evaluation.”
pre-existing bibliography:
Allen, J., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. I., Lun, J., Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2013). Observations of Effective Teacher-Student Interactions in Secondary School Classrooms: Predicting Student Achievement With the Classroom Assessment Scoring System—Secondary. School Psychology Review, 42(1), 76–98.
Alonzo, A. C. (2011). COMMENTARIES Learning Progressions That Support Formative Assessment Practices. Measurement, 9, 124–129. http://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2011.599629
Baker, B. D., Oluwole, J. O., & Green, P. C. (2013). The Legal Consequences of Mandating High Stakes Decisions Based on Low Quality Information: Teacher Evaluation in the Race-to-the-Top Era. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(5), 1–71. http://doi.org/http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1298
Benedict, A. E., Thomas, R. a., Kimerling, J., & Leko, C. (2013). Trends in Teacher Evaluation. Teaching Exceptional Children. May/Jun2013, 45(5), 60–68.
Bonavitacola, A. C., Guerrazzi, E., & Hanfelt, P. (2014). TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE IMPACT OF THE McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM ON PROFESSIONAL GROWTH.
Charlotte Danielson. (2016). Creating Communities of Practice. Educational Leadership, (May), 18 – 23.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A. E., & Pease, S. R. (1983). Teacher Evaluation in the Organizational Context: A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 53(3), 285–328. http://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053003285
Darling-Hammond, L., Jaquith, A., & Hamilton, M. (n.d.). Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting Effective Teaching.
Derrington, M. L. (n.d.). Changes in Teacher Evaluation: Implications for the Principal’s Work.
Gallagher, H. A. (2004). Vaughn Elementary’s Innovative Teacher Evaluation System: Are Teacher Evaluation Scores Related to Growth in Student Achievement? Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 79–107. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327930pje7904_5
Hallgren, K., James-Burdumy, S., & Perez-Johnson, I. (2014). STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHER EVALUATION POLICIES PROMOTED BY RACE TO THE TOP.
Hattie Helen E-Mail Address, J. T., Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. [References]. Review of Educational Research, .77(1), 16–7. http://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hazi, H. M. (n.d.). Legal Challenges to Teacher Evaluation: Pitfalls and Possibilities in the States. http://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2014.891898
Ingle, W. K., Willis, C., & Fritz, J. (2014). Collective Bargaining Agreement Provisions in the Wake of Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Legislation. Educational Policy. http://doi.org/10.1177/0895904814559249
Marzano, R. J. (2012). The Two Purposes of Teacher Evaluation. Educational Leadership, 70(3), 14–19. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=83173912&site=ehost-live
Moskal, A. C. M., Stein, S. J., & Golding, C. (2016). Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Can you increase teacher engagement with evaluation simply by improving the evaluation system? Can you increase teacher engagement with evaluation simply by improving the evaluation system? http://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1007838
Quinn, A. E. (n.d.). The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin Looking a t th e B igger Picture w ith Dr. R o b ert M arzan o : Teacher E valuation and D e v e lo p m e n t fo r Im p ro ved S tu d en t Learning.
Riordan, J., Lacireno-Paquet, Shakman, N., Bocala, K., & Chang, C. (2015). Redesigning teacher evaluation: Lessons from a pilot implementation. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/
Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (n.d.). Evidence of systematic growth in the effectiveness of midcareer teachers Can Teacher Evaluation Improve Teaching?
Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (n.d.). The problematic implementation of teacher evaluation policy: School failure or governmental pitfall? http://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213502188
Wong, W. Y., & Moni, K. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions of and responses to student evaluation of teaching: purposes and uses in clinical education. http://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.844222
my list of literature:
Avalos, B., & Assael, J. (2006). Moving from resistance to agreement: The case of the Chilean teacher performance evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(4-5), 254-266.
Cowen, J. M., & Fowles, J. (2013). Same contract, different day? an analysis of teacher bargaining agreements in Louisville since 1979. Teachers College Record, 115(5)
Flippo, R. F. (2002). Repeating history: Teacher licensure testing in Massachusetts. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 16(3), 211-29.
Griffin, G. (1997). Teaching as a gendered experience. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(1), 7-18.
Hellawell, D. E. (1992). Structural changes in education in England. International Journal of Educational Reform, 1(4), 356-65.
Hibler, D. W., & Snyder, J. A. (2015). Teaching matters: Observations on teacher evaluations. Schools: Studies in Education, 12(1), 33-47.
Hill, H. C., & Grossman, P. (2013). Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 371-384.
Hines, L. M. (2007). Return of the thought police?: The history of teacher attitude adjustment. Education Next, 7(2), 58-65.
Kersten, T. A. (2006). Teacher tenure: Illinois school board presidents’ perspectives and suggestions for improvement. Planning and Changing, 37(3-4), 234-257.
Kersten, T. A., & Israel, M. S. (2005). Teacher evaluation: Principals’ insights and suggestions for improvement. Planning and Changing, 36(1-2), 47-67.
Korkmaz, I. (2008). Evaluation of teachers for restructured elementary curriculum (grades 1 to 5). Education, 129(2), 250-258.
Lamb, M. L., & Swick, K. J. (1975). Historical overview of teacher observation Educational Forum.
Maharaj, S. (2014). Administrators’ views on teacher evaluation: Examining Ontario’s teacher performance appraisal. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (152)
Naba’h, A. A., Al-Omari, H., Ihmeideh, F., & Al-Wa’ily, S. (2009). Teacher education programs in Jordan: A reform plan. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 30(3), 272-284.
Ornstein, A. C. (1977). Critics and criticism of education Educational Forum.
Pajak, E., & Arrington, A. (2004). Empowering a profession: Rethinking the roles of administrative evaluation and instructional supervision in improving teacher quality. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 103(1), 228-252.
Stamelos, G., & Bartzakli, M. (2013). The effect of a primary school teachers, trade union on the formation and realisation of policy in Greece: The case of teacher evaluation policy. Policy Futures in Education, 11(5), 575-588.
Stamelos, G., Vassilopoulos, A., & Bartzakli, M. (2012). Understanding the difficulties of implementation of a teachers’ evaluation system in greek primary education: From national past to european influences. European Educational Research Journal, 11(4), 545-557.
Sullivan, J. P. (2012). A collaborative effort: Peer review and the history of teacher evaluations in Montgomery county, Maryland. Harvard Educational Review, 82(1), 142-152.
Tierney, W. G., & Lechuga, V. M. (2005). Academic freedom in the 21st century. Thought & Action, , 7-22.
Turri, M. (2014). The new italian agency for the evaluation of the university system (ANVUR): A need for governance or legitimacy? Quality in Higher Education, 20(1), 64-82.
VanPatten, J. J. (1972). Some reflections on accountability Journal of Thought.
Vijaysimha, I. (2013). Teachers as professionals: Accountable and autonomous? review of the report of the justice Verma commission on teacher education. august 2012. department of school education and literacy, ministry of human resource development, government of India. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 10(2), 293-299.
Vold, D. J. (1985). The roots of teacher testing in America. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 4(3), 5-7.
Wermke, W., & Höstfält, G. (2014). Contextualizing teacher autonomy in time and space: A model for comparing various forms of governing the teaching profession. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(1), 58-80.
Ydesen, C., & Andreasen, K. E. (2014). Accountability practices in the history of Danish primary public education from the 1660s to the present. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(120)
Tenure Track Position in Gamification Tampere University of Technology
http://www.computeroxy.com/announcement,a2945.html
Tampere University of Technology (TUT) is an active scientific community of 2,000 employees and more than 10,000 students. The University operates in the form of a foundation and has a long-standing tradition of collaboration with other research institutions and business life. Many of the fields of research and study represented at the University play a key role in addressing global challenges. Internationality is an inherent part of all the University’s activities. Welcome to join us at TUT!
The University of Turku is a world-class multidisciplinary research university which offers interesting challenges and a unique vantage point to national and international research and education.
Tenure track (Gamification)
The tenure track position is shared between Tampere University of Technology and the University of Turku. It supports the co-operation in teaching and research in the area of gamification between the two universities.
The professorship is especially associated with the TUT Game Lab (Pori Department, TUT) and the Digital Culture research group of the Cultural Production and Landscape Studies degree programme (School of History, Culture and Arts Studies, UTU). These research groups currently have five on-going research projects related to games and playing.
The TUT Game Lab brings together learning scientists, developers and humanists to conduct research and develop new ways of utilizing games in learning. The aim is to develop and study high-impact digital games that address real world challenges.
The main research objectives of TUT Game Lab are:
– Developing scientifically justified games to demonstrate and conduct research
– Studying the impact of educational games
– Exploring ways to combine learning and assessment in games
– Studying and modelling the playing experience
The Digital Culture research group (UTU) has three research focuses:
– cultural appropriation of technologies
– social media
– game cultures.
The Digital Culture research group specializes in the study of the cultural history of digital games and the uses of digital game histories in contemporary culture (so-called “history culture”). Furthermore, the research group has participated in various digital game exhibition projects as well as practical game design and gamification projects combining digital and non-digital elements. Digital Culture is a part of the Cultural Production and Landscape Studies degree programme which also incorporates two other major subjects: Cultural Heritage Studies and Landscape Studies.
Job description:
We invite applications for one (1) tenure track position in the area of Gamification.
The area of gamification covers:
– research of games and gamification
– games and playing as a cultural phenomenon
– game mechanisms, edugames and pervasive playing
– utilization of games in business, e.g. in new products and services
The emphasis of the position can be tailored according to the specific expertise of the candidate. Suitable educational and research backgrounds for the position include e.g. media studies, cultural studies, information technology and business and management.
The successful candidate is expected to:
– pursue and supervise scientific research in the field
– lead, conduct and develop education in the field
– participate in the activities of the national and international scientific communities
– acquire external funding
– interact with society
– commit to the strategies of TUT and UTU.
The successful candidate will participate in teaching both in the master’s degree programme in Management and Information Technology (TUT) as well as the subject of Digital Culture (UTU) by integrating the gamification theme into the existing course selection, in particular. Supervising theses and conducting doctoral seminars are also essential areas of responsibility.
The position will be filled at the level of Associate Professor.
The successful candidate will be employed by TUT. For more information on TUT’s tenure track career system, please refer to tut.fi/openpositions – Tenure track.
Requirements:
All candidates considered for a tenure track position are expected to:
– hold an applicable doctoral degree
– demonstrate a record of achievement in research that meets high international standards in the field of gamification
– demonstrate the capacity for independent scholarly activity
– possess the teaching skills required for the successful performance of their duties and
– have the ability to co-operate in a multidisciplinary university environment and with industry.
We appreciate experience and a track record in acquiring research funding, along with collaboration and leadership positions in research networks and industry.
For more information on the criteria for each level of TUT’s tenure track, please refer to tut.fi/openpositions – Tenure track.
We offer:
Both TUT and UTU have ambitious and challenging goals in effective, high-quality research, education and social influence. We offer an active research community with a good team spirit, intense cooperation with industry and business, public organizations and students, and opportunities for growth and advancement in academia. Our international cooperation is active and recognized, both in research and education.
We offer the successful candidate an opportunity to contribute to the creation of a new research area that combines gamification with areas such as cultural studies, information technology and business.
TUT offers a wide range of staff benefits, such as occupational health care. Since 2014, TUT has held the European Commission HR Excellence in Research recognition.
For more information, please visit tut.fi/en – About TUT – Careers at TUT
(http://www.tut.fi/en/about-tut/careers-at-tut/index.htm)
(http://www.tut.fi/en/about-tut/quality-assurance/hr-excellence-in-research)
Salary:
The salary will be based on both the job demands and the employee’s personal performance in accordance with the Finnish University Salary System (YPJ).
The advertised position is typically placed on the job demand level 7 (Associate Professor). In addition, the employees receive performance-based salary and they are covered by TUT’s bonus system.
Trial period:
The appointment is subject to the satisfactory completion of a trial period of four months.
Other:
The position will be filled for a fixed-term period of four years. The appointment is expected to begin on 1 December 2016 or as mutually agreed.
The duties are mainly located on the Pori campus in close co-operation with the main campuses in Tampere and Turku.
For the candidates with the most potential for the position, the selection process will involve an external assessment, individual interviews, aptitude assessments and a trial lecture.
For more information, please contact:
Director of University Consortium of Pori, Professor Jari Multisilta, e-mail: jari.multisilta@tut.fi, tel. +358 40 826 2910. Best availability for enquiries: 7 July–15 July and 1 August- 10 August.
In questions concerning the recruitment process, please contact HR Specialist
Eveliina Nurmi, e-mail. eveliina.nurmi@tut.fi, tel. +358 50 3015253. Best availability for enquiries: 15 June – 8 July and 8 August-10 August.
How to apply:
Applications must be submitted through TUT’s online employment system. The closing date for applications is 10 August 2016 (10:00 pm UTC). All applications and supporting documents must be submitted in English.
The applications must include the following documents prepared according to TUT’s instructions:
1. Curriculum Vitae (.doc or .pdf)
2. Research plan
3. List of publications
4. Teaching portfolio
5. References
Additional information on TUT’s tenure track system and attachments to applications.
Link to the archived session:
http://www.nrocnetwork.org/professional-development/webinar
“Colorado’s Digital Badging Initiative: A New Model of Credentialing Technical Math Skills and More”.
Educators and innovative industry leaders agree that digital badges are evolving into a key credential that can be used to meet current education and workforce needs. As part of its TAACCCT grant, the Colorado Community College System is leading a collaborative effort to develop micro-credentials or digital badges to serve post-secondary and workforce in partnership. Learn about early pilot uses of digital badges in technical math and advanced manufacturing, as well as plans for the future. The presenter will also share perspectives garnered from her participation in the Badge Alliance/OPEN badges workgroup that is shaping the national conversation on this emerging topic.
Presenter: Brenda Perea, Instructional Design Project Manager, Colorado Community College System
Plan to log on 15 MINUTES BEFORE THE HOUR so you will be up and running before the webinar begins. (It may take a few minutes to download the software to your computer.)
We will begin the webinar promptly at 2:00 PM ET (1 CT/12 MT/11 PT) on Thursday, June 23.
Please send your questions, comments and feedback to: memberservices@theNROCproject.org
How To Join The Webinar
Thu, Jun 23, 2016 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM CDT
Add to Calendar: Outlook® Calendar | Google Calendar™ | iCal®
1. Click the link to join the webinar at the specified time and date:
https://global.gotowebinar.com/join/7204276536935317252/397462206
Before joining, be sure to check system requirements to avoid any connection issues.
Note: This link should not be shared with others; it is unique to you.
2. Choose one of the following audio options:
TO USE YOUR COMPUTER’S AUDIO:
When the webinar begins, you will be connected to audio using your computer’s microphone and speakers (VoIP). A headset is recommended.
–OR–
TO USE YOUR TELEPHONE:
If you prefer to use your phone, you must select “Use Telephone” after joining the webinar and call in using the numbers below.
United States: +1 (914) 614-3221
Access Code: 330-025-475
Audio PIN: Shown after joining the webinar
Webinar ID: 148-791-923
If you are new to GoToWebinar, we suggest that you click the link below and run the GoToWebinar configuration test to ensure your computer is ready to access this online meeting environment.
http://tinyurl.com/GTWtest
If you are using older operating systems, you may need to use GTW web access rather than the desktop application and possibly phone in for audio. See http://bit.ly/1VVCeno for more info.
If you experience problems entering the GoToWebinar room, or with the online tools during the session, please send an email to memberservices@thenrocproject.org.
This webinar will be archived in the “Professional Development” area of the NROC Network at http://www.nrocnetwork.org/professional-development/webinar.
We look forward to your participation.
Sincerely
The NROC Team
webinar
http://www.nrocnetwork.org/colorados-digital-badging-initiative-new-model-credentialing-technical-math-skills-and-more
badges are integrated with the industry partners of the educational institution
how to determine the value of a badge.
Faculty writing a competencies, online and blended environment. All agree that this means competency. Need to faculty buy in, if issuing badges. Objective versus subjective measures. Faculty member is the one who tells students how to earn badges. Not punitive, but a reward.
building the eco system in Colorado. But it can be taken on a national level. Employers in other states to accept. MS, Sisco are issuing badges, which will be internationally.
how does it fit in the bigger picture of credentials. Lumina Foundations. Next project. https://www.luminafoundation.org/
MOOC (Canvas)
Microsoft badging system. https://education.microsoft.com/ViewAll/Badges
brenda.perea@cccs.edu
NROCnetwork.org http://nrocnetwork.org/
badges are transferable. not person to person, but repository
of 200 issues badges, they were shared 6K+ times over social media: LinkedIn, FB etc. by employers.
backpack, or stored in Mozilla backpack. Most of LMS developing badging capabilities.
some LMS want to create their own badging, gatekeep in LMS, but losing
Canvas allows any badging
LCI in any LMS. LMS allow the vehicle to be issued, but does not create it.
Webinar: Text and Data Mining: The Way Forward, June 30, 10am (EDT)
LITA announcement. Date: Thursday, June 30, 2016, Time: 10am-11:30am (EDT), Platform: WebEx. Registration required.
a critically important means of uncovering patterns of intellectual practice and usage that have the potential for illuminating facets and perspectives in research and scholarship that might otherwise not be noted. At the same time, challenges exist in terms of project management and support, licensing and other necessary protections.
Confirmed speakers include: Audrey McCulloch, Executive Director, ALPSP; Michael Levine-Clark, Dean of Libraries, University of Denver; Ellen Finnie, Head, Scholarly Communications and Collections Strategies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and Jeremy Frey, Professor of Physical Chemistry, Head of Computational Systems Chemistry, University of Southampton, UK.
Audrey McCulloch, Chief Executive, Association of Learned Professional and Society Publishers (ALPSP) and Director of the Publishers Licensing Society
Text and Data Mining: Library Opportunities and Challenges
Michael Levine-Clark, Dean and Director of Libraries, University of Denver
As scholars engage with text and data mining (TDM), libraries have struggled to provide support for projects that are unpredictable and tremendously varied. While TDM can be considered a fair use, in many cases contracts need to be renegotiated and special data sets created by the vendor. The unique nature of TDM projects makes it difficult to plan for them, and often the library and scholar have to figure them out as they go along. This session will explore strategies for libraries to effectively manage TDM, often in partnership with other units on campus and will offer suggestions to improve the process for all.
Michael Levine-Clark, the Dean and Director of the University of Denver Libraries, is the recipient of the 2015 HARRASOWITZ Leadership in Library Acquisitions Award. He writes and speaks regularly on strategies for improving academic library collection development practices, including the use of e-books in academic libraries, the development of demand-driven acquisition models, and implications of discovery tool implementation.
Library licensing approaches in text and data mining access for researchers at MIT
Ellen Finnie, Head, Scholarly Communications & Collections Strategy, MIT Libraries
This talk will address the challenges and successes that the MIT libraries have experienced in providing enabling services that deliver TDM access to MIT researchers, including:
· emphasizing TDM in negotiating contracts for scholarly resources
· defining requirements for licenses for TDM access
· working with information providers to negotiate licenses that work for our researchers
· addressing challenges and retooling to address barriers to success
· offering educational guides and workshops
· managing current needs v. the long-term goal– TDM as a reader’s right
Ellen Finnie is Head, Scholarly Communications & Collections Strategy in the MIT Libraries. She leads the MIT Libraries’ scholarly communications and collections strategy in support of the Libraries’ and MIT’s objectives, including in particular efforts to influence models of scholarly publishing and communication in ways that increase the impact and reach of MIT’s research and scholarship and which promote open, sustainable publishing and access models. She leads outreach efforts to faculty in support of scholarly publication reform and open access activities at MIT, and acts as the Libraries’ chief resource for copyright issues and for content licensing policy and negotiations. In that role, she is involved in negotiating licenses to include text/data mining rights and coordinating researcher access to TDM services for licensed scholarly resources. She has written and spoken widely on digital acquisitions, repositories, licensing, and open access.
Jeremy Frey, Professor of Physical Chemistry, Head of Computational Systems Chemistry, University of Southampton, UK
Text and Data Mining (TDM) facilitates the discovery, selection, structuring, and analysis of large numbers of documents/sets of data, enabling the visualization of results in new ways to support innovation and the development of new knowledge. In both academia and commercial contexts, TDM is increasingly recognized as a means to extract, re-use and leverage additional value from published information, by linking concepts, addressing specific questions, and creating efficiencies. But TDM in practice is not straightforward. TDM methodology and use are fast changing but are not yet matched by the development of enabling policies.
This webinar provides a review of where we are today with TDM, as seen from the perspective of the researcher, library, and licensing-publisher communities.
