there are two type of universities: the ones that are in control of change and the ones, which are pressed to change.
what kind of education is needed at this moment of history.
Assumptions: 5-10 years will be for a first time outcompeted in terms of delivering information and degrees. What is that the university can do distinctively well that WWW cannot do: mentored learning and the arc of learning (beyond collection of granular separate learning)
book: The New Division of Labor. http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Division-Labor-Computers/dp/0691124027
External forces of potential disruption: 1. MOOCs, nearly free education, 2. skilled-based learning (Codeacademy, Udacity), 3. data analytic 4. public pressure on access, metrics of impact.
Gartner group (http://www.gartner.com/technology/home.jsp) hype cycle : overvalued in a short term and undervalued in a long term. MOOC is excellent example.
NMC: competing models of education.
learning analytics. adaptive learning, intelligent tutoring etc. Open Learning Initative. http://oli.cmu.edu/
In the 19th century, railroads companies which were in the business of railroad companies went under; the ones which were in the business of transportation survived. Parallel, universities, which are in the business of delivering information will die out; the ones, which will survive must look to a very different picture.
ALA’s GameRT is looking to organize preconferences at next year’s Midwinter and Annual ALA conferences. Last year at Annual we had Dr. Scott Nicholson run a preconference called Using Meaningful Gamification to Motivate Library Users. It was a great success and people enjoyed it a lot!
What we’re interested in hearing from you is what sorts of topics you’d like to see covered at a preconference. Once we get those ideas we’ll be able to find people capable of creating preconferences that you’ll find interesting and educational! So please, let us know any ideas that you have!
Creating a Library App: Things to Know Before You Go Mobile
Tuesday, April 28, 2015 11AM-12PM PDT
Registration link: http://www.cla-net.org/?861
Mobile apps are a popular topic in libraries. But what does it take to create one and what kind of programming can you do with apps? Is an app the right solution, or should you create a responsive website? What is the process like, and what resources are needed? How do you manage privacy, security, and legal concerns? Who do you need to get the job done, and what skills should they have?
These are all important questions that should be asked (and answered) before you think about creating a mobile app. Learn from expert panelists from libraries and nonprofits who have created, developed, and managed mobile apps for their organizations. Panelists will share practical advice and information based on experience, as well as helpful tools and resources.
Zeth Lietzau is the Manager of Digital User Experience and the Community Technology Center at the Denver Public Library. He’s the leader of their Virtual Services initiative, which defines the direction of DPL’s online services, mobile & otherwise, including the Volume Denver project which is available as a mobile-responsive site. A303_LietzauMakers, Hackers, and Badges at the Denver Public Library
Anna Jaeger and her team at Caravan Studios create mobile apps that are designed in partnership with nonprofit and community-focused organizations to meet the needs of their constituents. Anna has been a frequent speaker on nonprofit and environmental technology since 2007. Prior to her work with Caravan Studios, Ms. Jaeger was a founder and co-director of TechSoup Global’s GreenTech initiative and the director of TechSoup Global’s IT Engineering department. https://cc.readytalk.com/cc/s/meetingArchive?eventId=li2t1jz4hoy6
Ani Boyadjian has been a working librarian since 1990. An LAPL staffer since 1996, she is now Research & Special Collections Manager at the Los Angeles Public Library, where she also oversees the Library’s Digitization efforts. She most recently spearheaded the development of the ARchive LAPL app in a partnership with USC and app developers Neon Roots, to use augmented reality to tell stories about the historic Central Library.
I am not an expert on door counters, but I think that it would be pretty simple — no, really — to make your own system using a small, inexpensive computer like a Raspberry Pi with a wifi adapter and connect it to your current counter. It would take a little programming, but the result could be something that the community could share.
If you are interested in this, we could create a project on GitHub. I would be happy to help.
We have a old door counter which can only be checked manually. We are looking for a new door counter system which can help us to find out how many patrons come in during certain hours. I found a couple systems online and would like know if some libraries recently installed any door counter systems and what’s your experience with them. I made a short list of questions below. If you can take a few minutes to answer those questions or just drop a line or two of your comments to reply to this email, I will really appreciate it.
Thanks in advance for your time and inputs!
what’s the model and the brand of the door counter system?
Wired to your network or wireless connected to the internet?
Does the system count the number of entries/exists hourly?
Dose the system generate reports,if any, automatically?
the intersection of computing and the disciplines of the humanities. five concepts: web design; digital exhibits; GIS geographical information systems; text mining; text encoding
Based on the literature regarding games, gaming, gamification, game-based learning, and serious games, several clear trends emerge:
Gaming and gamification in the sense of game-based learning is about using games and game-like tactics in the education process, for greater engagement and better learning outcomes. However, this is only the first level of such initiative. The second and higher level is about involving students in the game-building and gamification of the learning process (as per Vygotsky’s Zone of…) thus achieving student-centered and experiential learning.
When hosting games and gaming in any library, “in-person” or electronic/online games are welcome but not sufficient to fulfill their promise, especially in an academic library. Per (1), an academic library has the responsibility to involve students and guide them in learning how to engage in the building process required in true game-based learning.
Game-based learning, gaming and gamification in particular, in educational (academic library) settings must consider mobile devices and the BYOD movement in particular as intrinsic parts of the entire process. Approaching the initiative primarily by acquiring online “in-person” games, or game consoles has the same limited educational potential as only hosting games, rather than elevating the students to full guided engagement with game-based learning. If public relations and raised profile are the main goals for the academic library, such an approach is justified. If the academic library seeks to maximize the value of game-based learning, then the library must consider: a. gaming consoles, b. mobile devices as part of a BYOD initiative and c. cloud-based / social games, such as MineCraft, SimCity etc.
Design for game-based learning, gaming and gamification in educational (academic library) settings must include multiple forms of assessment and reward, e.g. badges, leaderboards and/or certificates as an intrinsic part of the entire process. Merely hosting games in the academic library cannot guarantee true game-based learning. The academic library, as the forefront of a game-based learning initiative on campus, must work with faculty on understanding and fine tuning badges and similar new forms of assessment and reward, as they effectively implement large scale game-based learning, focused on the students’ learning gains.
Recommendations for LRS
In regard to LRS, the gaming and gamification process must be organized and led by faculty, including housing and distributing the hardware, software and applications, when needed.
The attached paper and the respective conclusions summarized in four points demand educational and experiential background, which is above the limits of the LRS staff. In addition, the LRS staff has clearly admitted that the pedagogical value of gaming and gamification is beyond their interest. This recommendation is not contradicting to the fact and opportunity for LRS staff to participate in the process and contribute to the process; it just negates the possibility of staff mandating and leading the process, since it will keep the gaming and gamification process on a very rudimentary level.
The process must be further led by faculty with a terminal degree in education (Ph.D.) and experience in the educational field, since, as proved by the attached paper and 4 point conclusion, the goal is not a public-library type of hosting activities, but rather involving students in a pedagogically-sound creative process, with the respective opportunity for assessment and future collaboration with instructors across campus. This recommendation is not contradicting the fact and opportunity for LRS library faculty to participate actively in the process and contribute to the process. It just safeguards from restricting the process to the realm of “public-library” type of hosting activities, but failing to elevate them to the needs of an academic campus and connecting with instructors across campus.
This conclusions adhere to and are derived from the document recommended by the LRS dean, discussed and accepted by LRS faculty in 2013 about new trends and directions in academic libraries, namely diversification of LRS faculty; breaking from the traditional library mold of including faculty from different disciplines with different opinions and ideas.
partners across campus for IT/AV: CETL
What is the most important key for creating active learning spaces (ALS).
Mathew shared his work with CETL and his understanding of the importance of faculty being brought to the table. Faculty as equal stakeholder in the process.
In a conversation with him after the presentation, he agreed that faculty must be the leading force in in generating ideas what new technology and how to implement technology in the classroom. He agreed that at the present IT/AV staff is the leading force and this is a corrupt statuquo
key partnerships:
faculty and academic affairs, students, facilities, architects, engineers, contractors, furniture vendors, IT (networking, support instructional design)
challanges: ITS mindset (conservative), Administration must be on board (money), Funding.
MnSCU is not Google friendly. 60% of the staff is not doing the same tasks as 3 years ago.
Open about challenges, sharing more with faculty. Nice to hear this, but the communication must be much larger, to the point when faculty are equal partners in a relationship, which is not far from equal decision making.
If faculty is not considered a REAL stakeholder (versus intimated body in a meeting which is controlled by IT people), the entire technology use goes down the drain. Faculty is much stronger relationship with students then IT is with students. The presentation put weight on IT staff and its connection with students’ needs. It is questionable how IT staff can make stronger connection then faculty, who are in a daily contact with students.
The issue is how to assist faculty to catch up with the technology, not how IT staff to rival faculty in their connection with students. What faculty lacks in understanding of technology cannot be replaced by IT staff increasing interaction with students, but rather assisting faculty with coming to terms with technology.
maintaining innovation: fail fast and fail forward; keep up to date with technology (blank statement); always look for new furniture; focus on space design instead of just A/V; Challenge yourself with new ideas; always learn from your mistakes; always get feedback from students and faculty (again, the PERIPHERAL role of faculty. Is feedback all expected from faculty? It faculty and IT staff must be equal partners at the decision table. not faculty being consulted at decision made by IT staff)
Google Glass mentioned, Pebble watches. supposedly to understand students habits. Big data used to profiling students is very fashionable, but is it the egg in the basket?
they have 3d printer, Inoculus. Makerspace mentioned
examples how to use 3d printing for education (LRS archive collections, MN digital library).
the presenter kept asking if there are questions. it makes me wonder how far back (pedagogically or androgogically) IT staff must be to NOT consider backchanneling. Social media is not a novelty and harvesting opinions and questions using social media should not be neglected
digital classroom breakdown session
Break down session: Digital Classroom
technical, very IT. I am not versed enough to draw impression on how it projects over real faculty work. HDMI cables.
relating to the previous presentation: I really appreciate the IT / AV staff handling all this information, which is complex and important; but during my 15 years tenure at SCSU I learned to be suspicious of when the complexity and the importance of the techy matter starts asserting itself as leading when the pedagogy in the classroom is determined.
HD flow and other hardware and software solutions
VLAN 3. lecture capture.
BYOD support in the classroom: about half of the room raised their hands.
library approach to information literacy. or WHAT IS information literacy?
is it the 90-ish notion of standing up in front of bored class and lecturing them how important is to use the online databases, which the university subscribe for
52% of teens use YouTube or other Social Media sites for a typical research assignment in school:
“Academic libraries are concerned about the digital literacy of their users but their programs continue to be focused on the information components defined by the President’s Commission on Information Literacy.” (p. 45)
Cordell, R. (2013). Library Instruction in the 21st Century. In: Rosanne, M (Ed.) Library Reference Services and Information Literacy: Models for Academic Institutions: Models for Academic Institutions. IGI Global.
How do you present the idea of your research and intertwine it with data in a cohesive, interesting way? Join us in a short session to learn effective communication through infographics using data visualization and design.
Location: Miller Center 205
Wednesday, February 18 2-2:45pm
Thursday, March 19 11-11:45am
Tuesday, April 14, 10-10:45am
Thursday, April 30, 10-10:45am
