Searching for "online education"

Privacy & Security in Today’s Library

Privacy & Security in Today’s Library by Amigos Library Services

The virtuality of privacy and security on the from Plamen Miltenoff

From: Jodie Borgerding [mailto:Borgerding@amigos.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 3:07 PM
To: Miltenoff, Plamen <pmiltenoff@stcloudstate.edu>
Cc: Nicole Walsh <WALSH@AMIGOS.ORG>
Subject: Proposal Submission for Privacy & Security Conference

Hi Plamen,

Thank you for your recent presentation proposal for the online conference, Privacy & Security in Today’s Library, presented by Amigos Library Services. Your proposal, The role of the library in teaching with technology unsupported by campus IT: the privacy and security issues of the “third-party,” has been accepted. I just wanted to confirm that you are still available to present on September 21, 2017 and if you have a time preference for your presentation (11 am, 12 pm, or 2 pm Central). If you are no longer able to participate, please let me know.

Nicole will be touch with you shortly with additional details and a speaker’s agreement.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks!
___________________

Jodie Borgerding Consulting & Education Services Manager Amigos Library Services 1190 Meramec Station Road, Suite 207 | Ballwin, MO  63021-6902 800-843-8482 x2897 | 972-340-2897(direct) http://www.amigos.org | borgerding@amigos.org

+++++++++++++++++

Bio

Dr. Plamen Miltenoff is an Information Specialist and Professor at St. Cloud State University. His education includes several graduate degrees in history and Library and Information Science and terminal degrees in education and psychology.

His professional interests encompass social media, multimedia, Web development and design, gaming and gamification, and learning environments (LEs).

Dr. Miltenoff organized and taught classes such as LIB 290 “Social Media in Global Context” (http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/lib290/) and LIB 490/590 “Digital Storytelling” (http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/lib490/) where issues of privacy and security are discussed.

Twitter handle @SCSUtechinstruc

Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/InforMediaServices/

The virtuality of privacy and security on the modern campus:

The role of the library in teaching with technology unsupported by campus IT: the privacy and security issues of the “third-party software” teaching and learning

Abstract/Summary of Your Proposed Session

The virtualization reality changes rapidly all aspects of learning and teaching: from equipment to methodology, just when faculty have finalized their syllabus, they have to start a new, if they want to keep abreast with content changes and upgrades and engagement of a very different student fabric – Millennials.

Mainframes are replaced by microcomputers, microcomputers by smart phones and tablets, hard drives by cloud storage and wearables by IoT. The pace of hardware, software and application upgrade is becoming unbearable for students and faculty. Content creation and methodology becomes useless by the speed of becoming obsolete. In such environment, faculty students and IT staff barely can devote time and energy to deal with the rapidly increasing vulnerability connected with privacy and security.

In an effort to streamline ever-becoming-scarce resources, campus IT “standardizes” campus use of applications. Those are the applications, which IT chooses to troubleshoot campus-wide. Those are the applications recommended to faculty and students to use.

In an unprecedented burgeoning amount of applications, specifically for mobile devices, it is difficult to constraint faculty and students to use campus IT sanctioned applications, especially considering the rapid pace of such applications becoming obsolete. Faculty and students often “stray” away and go with their own choice. Such decision exposes faculty and students, personally, and the campus, institutionally, at risk. In a recent post by THE Journal, attention on campuses is drown to the fact that cyberattacks shift now from mobile devices to IoT and campus often are struggling even with their capability to guarantee cybersecurity of mobile devices on campus. Further, the use of third-party application might be in conflict with the FERPA campus-mandated policies. Such policies are lengthy and complex to absorb, both by faculty and students and often are excessively restrictive in terms of innovative ways to improve methodology and pedagogy of teaching and learning. The current procedure of faculty and students proposing new applications is a lengthy and cumbersome bureaucratic process, which often render the end-users’ proposals obsolete by the time the process is vetted.

Where/what is the balance between safeguarding privacy on campus and fostering security without stifling innovation and creativity? Can the library be the campus hub for education about privacy and security, the sandbox for testing and innovation and the body to expedite decision-making?

Abstract

The pace of changes in teaching and learning is becoming impossible to sustain: equipment evolves in accelerated pace, the methodology of teaching and learning cannot catch up with the equipment changes and atop, there are constant content updates. In an even-shrinking budget, faculty, students and IT staff barely can address the issues above, less time and energy left to address the increasing concerns about privacy and security.

In an unprecedented burgeoning amount of applications, specifically for mobile devices, it is difficult to constraint faculty and students to use campus IT sanctioned applications, especially considering the rapid pace of such applications becoming obsolete. Faculty and students often “stray” away and go with their own choice. Such decision exposes faculty and students, personally, and the campus, institutionally, at risk. In a recent post by THE Journal (https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/06/cybersecurity-and-students/), attention on campuses is drawn to the fact of cyberattacks shifting from mobile devices to IoT but campus still struggling to guarantee cybersecurity of mobile devices on campus. Further, the use of third-party applications might be in conflict with the FERPA campus-mandated policies. Such policies are lengthy and complex to absorb, both by faculty and students and often are excessively restrictive in terms of innovative ways to improve methodology and pedagogy of teaching and learning. The current procedure of faculty and students proposing new applications is a lengthy and cumbersome bureaucratic process, which often render the end-users’ proposals obsolete by the time the process is vetted.

Where/what is the balance between safeguarding privacy on campus and fostering security without stifling innovation and creativity? Can the library be the campus hub for education about privacy and security, the sandbox for testing and innovation and the body to expedite decision-making?

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/06/cybersecurity-and-students/

Anything else you would like to add

3 take-aways from this session:

  • Discuss and form an opinion about the education-pertinent issues of privacy and security from the broad campus perspective, versus the narrow library one
  • Discuss and form an opinion about the role of the library on campus in terms of the greater issues of privacy and security

Re-examine the thin red line of the balance between standardization and innovation; between the need for security and privacy protection a

++++++++++++++
presentation:
https://www.slideshare.net/aidemoreto/the-virtuality-of-privacy-and-security-on-the 

chat – slide 4, privacy. please take 2 min and share your definition of privacy on campus. Does it differ between faculty and students?  what are the main characteristics to determine privacy

chat – slide 5, security. please take 2 min and share your definition of security on campus regarding electronic activities. Who’s responsibility is security? IT issue [only]?

poles: slide 6, technology unsupported by campus IT, is it worth considering? 1. i am a great believer in my freedom of choice 2. I firmly follow rules and this applies to the use of computer tools and applications 3. Whatever…

chat –  slide 6, why third party applications? pros and cons. E.g. pros – familiarity with third party versus campus-required

pole, slide 6, appsmashing. App smashing is the ability to combine mobile apps in your teaching process. How do you feel about it? 1. The force is with us 2. Nonsense…

pole slide 7 third party apps and the comfort of faculty. How do you see the freedom of using third party apps? 1. All I want, thank you 2. I would rather follow the rules 3. Indifference is my middle name

pole slide 8 Technology standardization? 1. yes, 2. no, 3. indifferent

chat slide 9 if the two major issues colliding in this instance are: standardization versus third party and they have impact on privacy and security, how would you argue for the one or the other?

++++++++++++++++
notes from the conference

 

 

Measuring Library Vendor Cyber Security: Seven Easy Questions Every Librarian Can Ask

http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/11413

Bill Walker: http://www.amigos.org/innovating_metadata

 

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

more on privacy in education in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy

blended learning implementation

Critical Factors for Implementing Blended Learning in Higher Education.

Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318191000_Critical_Factors_for_Implementing_Blended_Learning_in_Higher_Education [accessed Jul 6, 2017].

Definition of Blended learning

Blended learning is in one dimension broadly defined as “The convergence of online and face-to-face Education” as in the study by Watson (2008). At the same time it is important to also include the dimension of technology and media use as it has been depicted in the multimodal conceptual model in Figure 1 below. This conceptual model was proposed and presented in an article published by Picciano (2009). Critical Factors for Implementing Blended Learning in Higher Education.

 

online face to face hybrid

 

 

 

Several studies that argue for the need to focus on pedagogy and learning objectives and not solely on technology (Hoffinan, 2006; Garrison & Vaughan, 2008; Al amm ary et al., 2014; McGee & Reis, 2012; Shand, Glassett Farrelly & Costa, 2016). Other findings in this study are that technology still is a critical issue (So & Brush, 2008; Fleming, Becker & Newton, 2017), not least in developing regions (AI Busaidi & Al-Shihi, 2012; Raphae1 & Mtebe, 2016), and also the more positive idea of technology as a supporting factor for innovative didactics and instructional design to satisfy the needs in heterogeneous student groups (Picciano, 2009). Critical Factors for Implementing Blended Learning in Higher Education.

Critical factors:

  1. technology
  2. didactics –  pedagogy, instructional design and the teacher role
  3. Course outcomes – learning outcomes and learner satisfaction
  4. collaboration and social presence
  5. course design
  6. the heritage from technology enhanced distance courses
  7. multimodal overload
  8. trends and hypes
  9. economy

Blended learning perspectives

  1. the university perspective
  2. the Learner perspective
  3. the Teacher perspective
  4. the Global perspective

 

++++++++++++++++++++
more on blended learning in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=blended+learning

deans on university future

Survey: University Deans Predict Significant Change in the Next Decade

By Rhea Kelly  06/28/17

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2017/06/28/survey-university-deans-predict-significant-change-in-the-next-decade.aspx

new study, “The State of Innovation in Higher Education,” in which 2U and the Academy for Innovative Higher Education (a partnership between Arizona State University and Georgetown University) polled 109 deans across the country about their views on innovation in higher ed. Sixty-one percent of respondents come from public universities and 60 percent have at least five years of tenure in their jobs.

The survey findings reveal a mix of confidence and concern about an uncertain future for U.S. higher education:

  • 83 percent of respondents believe that the higher education system today is the best or one of the best in the world;
  • 61 percent think the higher education system will still be the best or one of the best in the world in 10 years;
  • 91 percent expect the number of online programs at their institution to increase in the next decade;
  • 78 percent said colleges and universities are doing a good, very good or excellent job of fostering academic innovation;
  • A quarter of respondents think the higher education system is heading in the right direction; and
  • A third of respondents said the pace of change at their own institutions is “too slow,” citing lack of money as the biggest hurdle to change.

“We also found that, amid rising tuition prices and student debt, most deans still believe that higher education is a good return on the investment,” added Selingo.

The full report is available here.

++++++++++++++
more on administration about university future in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/10/20/university-presidents-about-the-university-future/

disruptive technologies higher ed

The top 5 disruptive technologies in higher ed

By Leigh M. and Thomas Goldrick June 5th, 2017
The Internet of Things (IoT), augmented reality, and advancements in online learning have changed the way universities reach prospective students, engage with their current student body, and provide them the resources they need.
Online Learning
Despite online learning’s successes, many still believe that it lacks the interaction of its in-person counterpart. However, innovations in pedagogical strategy and technology are helping make it much more engaging.

Competency-based Education

Competency-based education (CBE) recognizes that all students enter a program with different skills and proficiencies and that each moves at a different rate. We now possess the technology to better measure these differences and design adaptive learning programs accordingly. These programs aim to increase student engagement, as time is spent expanding on what the students already know rather than having them relearn familiar material.

The Internet of Things

The Internet of Things has opened up a whole new world of possibilities in higher education. The increased connectivity between devices and “everyday things” means better data tracking and analytics, and improved communication between student, professor, and institution, often without ever saying a word. IoT is making it easier for students to learn when, how, and where they want, while providing professors support to create a more flexible and connected learning environment.

Virtual/Augmented Reality

Virtual and augmented reality technologies have begun to take Higher Ed into the realm of what used to be considered science fiction.

More often than not, they require significant planning and investment into the infrastructure needed to support them.

Artificial Intelligence

an A.I. professor’s assistant or an online learning platform that adapts to each student’s specific needs. Having artificial intelligence that learns and improves as it aids in the learning process could have a far-reaching effect on higher education both online and in-person.

+++++++++++++++++++++
more on disruptive technologies in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=disruptive+technologies

future blended learning

Dr. Baiyun Chen, OLC Institute faculty for the Blended Learning Mastery Series: Research into Practice, joins us to discuss the future  of blended learning in higher education

Insights from the Field: The Future of Blended Learning

The design of blended learning curriculum will be more diversified and personalized with the integration of creative in-class active learning strategies and innovative educational technologies, such as adaptive learning, virtual reality, mobile technologies

Quality assurance is the biggest challenge with implementing blended learning in the higher education environment today. I would propose institutions to adopt evidence-based standards for course evaluations. For instance, the OLC Quality Scorecard for Blended Learning Programs

+++++++++++++++++++
more on blended learning in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=blended+learning

anxiety and academia

Surprising ways to beat anxiety and become mentally strong – according to science

http://theconversation.com/surprising-ways-to-beat-anxiety-and-become-mentally-strong-according-to-science-77978

Anxiety can present as fear, restlessness, an inability to focus at work or school, finding it hard to fall or stay asleep at night, or getting easily irritated. In social situations, it can make it hard to talk to others; you might feel like you’re constantly being judged, or have symptoms such as stuttering, sweating, blushing or an upset stomach.

Research shows that if it’s left untreated, anxiety can lead to depression, early death and suicide. And while it can indeed lead to such serious health consequences, the medication that is prescribed to treat anxiety doesn’t often work in the long-term. Symptoms often return and you’re back where you started.

People often want to do something “perfectly” or to wait for the “perfect time” before starting. But this can lead to procrastination, long delays or even prevent us from doing it at all. And that causes stress – and anxiety.

Are you particularly critical of yourself and the blunders you make? people with anxiety often do this to themselves so frequently that they don’t even realize it anymore. They’re just not kind to themselves.

Another effective strategy is to “wait to worry”. If something went wrong and you feel compelled to worry (because you think you screwed up), don’t do this immediately. Instead, postpone your worry – set aside 10 minutes each day during which you can worry about anything.

Find purpose in life by helping others

Being connected to people has regularly been shown to be one of the most potent buffers against poor mental health.
=+++++++++++++++++++++
more on anxiety in education
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=anxiety

textbook model

Fixing the Textbook Model

Indiana University’s Brad Wheeler explains how his institution is ditching the college textbook and replacing it with digital alternatives that are accessible to students from day one.

By Dian Schaffhauser 06/21/17

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2017/06/21/fixing-the-textbook-model.aspx

Brad Wheeler, the vice president for IT and CIO of Indiana University

it’s taken a long time for textbook publishers to own up to the “fundamental flaw” of their industry: “They are obsessed with counting their gross margins on the things they actually do sell.” And, he added, they ignore the enormous amounts they lose through the other 75 percent of the market made up of used and rented books and other kinds of substitutes. Because of those blinders, the publishers have “long pursued a model that has been failing, year over year.”

Starting in the mid-1990s, the price of educational books rose faster than just about any other measure, including healthcare. Something had to give. Wheeler has seen a “constellation of things” forming to bring about change. First, the e-reader software has matured, he said. “It works on your phone, your tablet, your laptop.”

Second, students are “increasingly digital.” They’re “comfortable with interacting with digital information [and] electronically marking it up.” After all, he noted, “some of them went through high school with digital books and materials.”

Third, familiarity is growing among faculty too. “They see e-texts not just as a substitute for paper, but as a teaching and pedagogical tool. They can go in and annotate that paragraph in the textbook and point to classroom materials or go online and correct something,

Fourth, the printed textbook-first philosophy has stopped paying off for publishers.

The three biggies — Pearson, McGraw-Hill and Cengage — weren’t first in line to sign on, even as additional universities piled onto Indiana U’s project. As a result, their reticence to promote textbook alternatives hit their bottom lines. Eventually, Pearson’s shares took a hit, hovering currently around $8; McGraw-Hill’s education division was peeled off and sold to Apollo Global Management in 2013; and just months later Cengage filed for bankruptcy, emerging a year later with $4 billion less debt.

the College Board decreased the undergraduate student budget for books and supplies in its “Trends in College Pricing” report.

Indiana U has seen nothing but growth for its IU eTexts digital initiative:

Unizin. This is the organization created by Indiana U and other large institutional partners to develop services that could replace major paid third-party applications, such as learning management, digital textbook and data warehouse platforms. The goal: to enable higher ed to own its data.

++++++++++++++++++
more on open text book in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/04/06/e-textbook-ad-hoc-team/

microcredentials

What You Need to Know About Microcredentials

ELI Online Event | July 12, 2017 | Noon–4:00 p.m. (ET)

One in five colleges have issued digital badges, according to a recent survey.* Today, all kinds of organizations, from higher education institutions to professional associations to employers, are issuing digital microcredentials. Are you?

Join us for “Microcredentials and Digital Badging in Higher Education,” where expert presenters from various higher education, industry, and government fields will explore today’s issues. Here are just a few highlights:

Join us for an introductory webinar, “Alternative Credentialing in Higher Education,” on July 10. Both events are free and open to all EDUCAUSE members (available to purchase for nonmembers).

Register Now →

++++++++++++++++++++
more about badges and microcredentials
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=badges

big data in ed

New Report Examines Use of Big Data in Ed

By Dian Schaffhauser  05/17/17

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2017/05/17/new-report-examines-use-of-big-data-in-ed.aspx

new report from the National Academy of Education “Big Data in Education,” summarizes the findings of a recent workshop held by the academy

three federal laws: Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA).

over the last four years, 49 states and the District of Columbia have introduced 410 bills related to student data privacy, and 36 states have passed 85 new education data privacy laws. Also, since 2014, 19 states have passed laws that in some way address the work done by researchers.

researchers need to get better at communicating about their projects, especially with non-researchers.

One approach to follow in gaining trust “from parents, advocates and teachers” uses the acronym CUPS:

  • Collection: What data is collected by whom and from whom;
  • Use: How the data will be used and what the purpose of the research is;
  • Protection: What forms of data security protection are in place and how access will be limited; and
  • Sharing: How and with whom the results of the data work will be shared.

Second, researchers must pin down how to share data without making it vulnerable to theft.

Third, researchers should build partnerships of trust and “mutual interest” pertaining to their work with data. Those alliances may involve education technology developers, education agencies both local and state, and data privacy stakeholders.

Along with the summary report, the results of the workshop are being maintained on a page within the Academy’s website here.

+++++++++++++++++
more on big data in education in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=big+data

Blended Synchronous Learning Environment

Wang, Q., Quek, C., & Hu, H. (2017). Designing and Improving a Blended Synchronous Learning Environment : An Educational Design Research. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(3), 99-118

http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/3034/4142

Definition: blended synchronous learning has attracted much attention and it is often labelled with synchronous hybrid learning (Cain & Henriksen 2013); synchronous blended learning (Okita, 201 3 ); multi – access learning (Irvine, Code, & Richards, 2013); or simultaneous delivery of course s to on – campus and off – campus students (White et al ., 2010). Adapted from the definition given by Bower , Dalgarno, Kennedy, Lee, and Kenney (2015), blended synchronous learning in this paper is defined as a learning method that enables online students to participate in classroom learning activities simultaneously via comput er – mediated communication technologies such as video conferencing . By following this approach , on – campus students attend F2F le ssons in the physical classroom. M eanwhile, online students who are situated at multiple sites participate in the identical class room learning activities via two – way video conferencing in real time .

With regard to  educational benefits , blended synchronous learning can help to establish rich teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence ( Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 200 0 ; Szeto, 2015 ). A BSLE provides a mimic classroom environment (White et al. , 2010) , where teachers ’ direct instruction and facilitation can be easily carried out a nd the teaching presence is hence naturally established.

1 34 35 36 37 38 50