Additional question related: why not use already existing solutions, as used across the world. Alex response: open source. Tim: content available across institutions. text banks and other data can be grouped by disciplines. Follow up q/n: MLNC, OER Commons. Solution already exists and why don’t we use existing accumulated work. Answer by Karen: pulling many resources, promoting collaboration btw 2 and 4 year institutions. Bigger then just having a repository, collaborative effort on different levels
Access to a “sandbox” to test Islandora: who to contact when and how.
Alex response to “estimated date for faculty upload” – August 2018 approximately
Transferability/ compatible: how east it is to migrate Islandora content to a different platform (e.g. the Minnesota Library Publishing Project) shall other platform is chosen as MN OER platform?
How will this structure ensure that the OER initiative (Islandora in particular) is not “owned” by one branch on campus (e.g. librarians) but it is a mutual effort by faculty and staff (e.g. ATT) in terms of access, e.g. access to different admin levels in Islandora?
From the Adobe COnnect online attendees:
Barbara Sandarin: Regarding “Admin. Rights,” does this restrict who may upload items?
Maintenance: weeding out old materials
the history of Islandora: who when developed. 2009, U of Rhode Island
Branding (Tim)
Stephen Kelly: how does Inslandora integrate video. microsite solutions
+++++++++++++
structure of repository:
Islandora only stores, but the actual creation is outside of Islandora adoption scope
how do the individual teams are built, communicate with
open pedagogy: students creating open textbooks. creating of D2L courseroom. Karen: learning circles. Gary Hunter’s form regarding copyright issues etc.
storage: unlimited yet, but might be if file size are big.
Robert Bilyk: Look at OpenStax on how they handle derivative content
Tim: what do we want to be able to search for: 1. Title 2. subject 3. Format 4. type 5. permission to modify or not 6. keywords 7. author 8. home institution of author 9. peer revieewd 10. author info (advanced feature) 11. Robert Bilyk: Assurance of accessibility — tables, images, etc. 12. course 13. hashtags
Robert Bilyk: Curriki allows any submission — but their editorial board eventually gets around to review — and then this is indicated
Course title: IM 554 Developing Skills for Online Teaching and Learning
Topic for this week: Game-based learning, Virtual Reliability, and Augmented Reality
Audience: IM Graduate students working for K12 schools or in business
7:20 to 8:20 PM, Thursday, March 29. Instructor: Yun Claire Park
definitions and delineation of gaming and gamification
the connection to BYOD
What do we want to learn this year/today?
more on gaming and gamification
more on realities
what is VR – virtual reality
Virtual reality (VR) is “a computer technology that uses virtual reality headsets or multi- projected environments, sometimes in combination with physical environments or props, to generate realistic images, sounds and other sensations that simulate a user's physical presence in a virtual or imaginary environment” (“Virtual Reality” n.d.) VR is accomplished by using headsets, such as HTC Vive, Oculus Rift, PlayStation VR, and Samsung Gear VR. The use of the headsets creates (and enhances) digitally constructed “reality,” thus providing excellent opportunities for simulations and learning through training and practice. Among a myriad of other definitions, Noor (2016, 34) describes Virtual Reality (VR) as “a computer-generated environment that can simulate physical presence in places in the real world or imagined worlds. The user wears a headset and through specialized software and sensors is immersed in 360- degree views of simulated worlds.”
from our book chapter: Video 360: The new type of visualization to help patrons enter the era of VR, AR and Mixed Reality (under review).
what is AR – augmented reality
“Augmented Reality (AR) supplements the physical environment with computer-generated sensory input such as sound, video, graphics, or other useful information – essentially overlaying the digital information on top of the physical world. Some consider the smartphone popular game “Pokemon Go” a form of consumer AR.”
from my book Chapter 12: VR, AR and Video 360: A Case Study Towards New Realities in Education by Plamen Miltenoff (under review)
The key campus tech issues are no longer about IT (in the past e.g.: MS versus Apple). IT is the “easy part” of technology on campus. The challenges: people, planning policy, programs, priorities, silos, egos, and IT entitlements
How do we make Digital Learning compelling and safe for the faculty? provide evidence of impact, support, recognition and reward for faculty; communicate about effectiveness of and need for IT resources.
technology is not capital cost, it is operational cost. reoccurring.
Visualization:
underlying issues; can i do this? why should i do this? evidence of benefit?
the more things change, the more things stay the same. new equilibrium.
change: from what did you do wrong to how do we do better. Use data as a resources, not as a weapon. there is a fear of trying, because there is no recognition or reward
Machiavelli: 1. concentrate your efforts 2. pick your issues carefully, know when to fight 3. know the history 4. build coalitions 5. set modest goals – and realistic 6. leverage the value of data (use it as resource not weapon) 7. anticipate personnel turnover 8. set deadlines for decisions
Colleagues,
We apologize for the short notice, but wanted to make you aware of the following opportunity: provide
From Ken Graetz at Winona State University:
As part of our Digital Faculty Fellows Program at WSU, Dr. Kenneth C. Green will be speaking this Thursday, March 22nd in Stark 103 Miller Auditorium from 11:30 to 12:30 on “Innovation, Infrastructure, and Digital Learning.” We will be streaming Casey’s talk using Skype Meeting Broadcast and you can join as a guest using the following link: Join the presentation. This will allow you to see and hear his presentation, as well as post moderated questions. By way of a teaser, here is a recent quote from Dr. Green’s blog, DigitalTweed, published by Inside Higher Ed:
“If trustees, presidents, provosts, deans, and department chairs really want to address the fear of trying and foster innovation in instruction, then they have to recognize that infrastructure fosters innovation. And infrastructure, in the context of technology and instruction, involves more than just computer hardware, software, digital projectors in classrooms, learning management systems, and campus web sites. The technology is actually the easy part. The real challenges involve a commitment to research about the impact of innovation in instruction, and recognition and reward for those faculty who would like to pursue innovation in their instructional activities.”
Dr. Green is the founding director of The Campus Computing Project, the largest continuing study of the role of digital learning and information technology in American colleges and universities. Campus Computing is widely cited as a definitive source for data, information, and insight about IT planning and policy issues affecting higher education. Dr. Green also serves as the director, moderator, and co-producer of TO A DEGREE, the postsecondary success podcast of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He is the author or editor of some 20 books and published research reports and more than 100 articles and commentaries that have appeared in academic journals and professional publications. In 2002, Dr. Green received the first EDUCAUSE Award for Leadership in Public Policy and Practice. The EDUCAUSE award cites his work in creating The Campus Computing Project and recognizes his, “prominence in the arena of national and international technology agendas, and the linking of higher education to those agendas.”
Definition:
The HyFlex model gives students the choice to attend class in person or via synchronous remote stream and to make that choice on a daily basis. In other words, unlike online and hybrid models which typically have a fixed course structure for the entire semester, the HyFlex model does not require students to make a choice at the beginning of term and then stick with it whether their choice works for them or not; rather students are able to make different choices each day depending on what works best for them on that day (hence the format is “flexible”) (Miller and Baham, 2018, to be published in the Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Teaching Statistics).
Definition from Horizon Report, HIgher Ed edition, 2014. p. 10 integration of Online Hybrid and Collaborative Learning
Definition from U of Arizona (https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/itet/article/view/16464/16485)
Beatty (2010) defines HyFlex courses to be those that “enable a flexible participation policy for students whereby students may choose to attend face-to-face synchronous class sessions or complete course learning activities online without physically attending class”
Online courses
Definition
Goette, W. F., Delello, J. A., Schmitt, A. L., Sullivan, J. R., & Rangel, A. (2017). Comparing Delivery Approaches to Teaching Abnormal Psychology: Investigating Student Perceptions and Learning Outcomes. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 16(3), 336–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725717716624
p.2.Online classes are a form of distance learning available completely over the Internet with no F2F interaction between an instructor and students (Helms, 2014).
https://www.oswego.edu/human-resources/section-6-instructional-policies-and-procedures
An online class is a class that is offered 100% through the Internet. Asynchronous courses require no time in a classroom. All assignments, exams, and communication are delivered using a learning management system (LMS). At Oswego, the campus is transitioning from ANGEL to Blackboard, which will be completed by the Fall 2015 semester. Fully online courses may also be synchronous. Synchronous online courses require student participation at a specified time using audio/visual software such as Blackboard Collaborate along with the LMS.
Web-enhanced courses
Web enhanced learning occurs in a traditional face-to-face (f2f) course when the instructor incorporates web resources into the design and delivery of the course to support student learning. The key difference between Web Enhanced Learning versus other forms of e-learning (online or hybrid courses) is that the internet is used to supplement and support the instruction occurring in the classroom rather than replace it. Web Enhanced Learning may include activities such as: accessing course materials, submitting assignments, participating in discussions, taking quizzes and exams, and/or accessing grades and feedback.”
Blended/Hybrid Learning
Definition
Goette, W. F., Delello, J. A., Schmitt, A. L., Sullivan, J. R., & Rangel, A. (2017). Comparing Delivery Approaches to Teaching Abnormal Psychology: Investigating Student Perceptions and Learning Outcomes. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 16(3), 336–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725717716624
p.3.
Helms (2014) described blended education as incorporating both online and F2F character- istics into a single course. This definition captures an important confound to comparing course administration formats because otherwise traditional F2F courses may also incorp- orate aspects of online curriculum. Blended learning may thus encompass F2F classes in which any course content is available online (e.g., recorded lectures or PowerPoints) as well as more traditionally blended courses. Helms recommended the use of ‘‘blended’’ over ‘‘hybrid’’ because these courses combine different but complementary approaches rather than layer opposing methods and formats.
Blended learning can merge the relative strengths of F2F and online education within a flexible course delivery format. As such, this delivery form has a similar potential of online courses to reduce the cost of administration (Bowen et al., 2014) while addressing concerns of quality and achievement gaps that may come from online education. Advantages of blended courses include: convenience and efficiency for the student; promotion of active learning; more effective use of classroom space; and increased class time to spend on higher- level learning activities such as cooperative learning, working with case studies, and discuss- ing big picture concepts and ideas (Ahmed, 2010; Al-Qahtani & Higgins, 2013; Lewis & Harrison, 2012).
Although many definitions of hybrid and blended learning exist, there is a convergence upon three key points: (1) Web-based learning activities are introduced to complement face-to-face work; (2) “seat time” is reduced, though not eliminated altogether; (3) the Web-based and face-to-face components of the course are designed to interact pedagogically to take advantage of the best features of each.
The amount of in class time varies in hybrids from school to school. Some require more than 50% must be in class, others say more than 50% must be online. Others indicate that 20% – 80% must be in class (or online). There is consensus that generally the time is split 50-50, but it depends on the best pedagogy for what the instructor wants to achieve.
definition
“Backchannel” is a mode of communication created by audience members to connect with other observers both inside and outside of the presentation space, with or without the speaker’s awareness (Atkinson, 2009).
ARS (or CRS) are[audience] response systems are instructional technologies that allow instructors to rapidly collect and analyze student responses to questions posed during class” (Bruff, 2009, p. 1)
Distance learning courses are indicated in the schedule of classes on BU Brain with an Instructional Method of Online Asynchronous (OA), Online Synchronous (OS), Online Combined (OC), or Online Hybrid (OH). Online Asynchronous courses are those in which the instruction is recorded/stored and then accessed by the students at another time. Online Synchronous courses are those in which students are at locations remote from the instructor and viewing the instruction as it occurs. Online Combined courses are those in which there is a combination of asynchronous and synchronous instruction that occurs over the length of the course. Online Hybrid courses are those in which there is both in-person and online (asynchronous and/or synchronous) instruction that occurs over the length of the course.
Howard, H. A. (2018). Academic Libraries on Social Media: Finding the Students and the Information They Want. Information Technology and Libraries, 37(1), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v37i1.10160
In his book Tell Everyone: Why We Share and Why It Matters, Alfred Hermida states, “People are not hooked on YouTube, Twitter or Facebook but on each other. Tools and services come and go; what is constant is our human urge to share.”1 Libraries are places of connection, where people connect with information, technologies, ideas, and each other. As such, libraries look for ways to increase this connection through communication.
Academic libraries have been slow to accept social media as a venue for either promoting their services or academic purposes. A 2007 study of 126 academic librarians found that only 12 percent of those surveyed “identified academic potential or possible benefits” of Facebook while 54 percent saw absolutely no value in social media.2 However, the mission of academic libraries has shifted in the last decade from being a repository of knowledge to being a conduit for information literacy; new roles include being a catalyst for on-campus collaboration and a facilitator for scholarly publication within contemporary academic librarianship.3 Academic librarians have responded to this change, with many now believing that “social media, which empowers libraries to connect with and engage its diverse stakeholder groups, has a vital role to play in moving academic libraries beyond their traditional borders and helping them engage new stakeholder groups.”4
The project focused on three research questions: 1. What social media platforms are students using? 2. What social media platforms do students want the library to use? 3. What kind of content do students want from the library on each of these platforms?
survey using the web-based Qualtrics
The social media platforms included were Facebook, Flickr, G+, Instagram, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Qzone, Renren, Snapchat, Tumblr, Twitter, YouTube, and Yik Yak
The second survey also lasted for three weeks starting in mid-April of the spring 2017 semester. As a participation incentive, students who completed the initial survey and the second survey had an opportunity to enter a drawing for a $25 Visa gift card.
we intend to develop better communication channels, a clear social media presence, and a more cohesive message across the Purdue libraries. Under the direction of our new director of strategic communication, a social media committee was formed with representatives from each of the libraries to contribute content for social media. The committee will consider expanding the Purdue Libraries’ social media presence to communication channels where students have said they are and would like us to be.
Constructivism.
Student-centered learning theory and practice are based on the constructivist learning theory that emphasizes the learner’s critical role in constructing meaning from new information and prior experience.
The “context”in this definition encompasses m-learnng that is formalself-directed, and spontaneous learning, as well as learning that is context aware and context neutral.
therefore, m-learning can occur inside or outside the classroom, participating in a formal lesson on a mobile device; it can be self-directed, as a person determines his or her own approach to satisfy a learning goal; or spontaneous learning, as a person can use the devices to look up something that has just prompted an interest (Crompton, 2013, p. 83). (Gaming article Tallinn)Constructivist Learnings in the 1980s – Following Piage’s (1929), Brunner’s (1996) and Jonassen’s (1999) educational philosophies, constructivists proffer that knowledge acquisition develops through interactions with the environment. (p. 85). The computer was no longer a conduit for the presentation of information: it was a tool for the active manipulation of that information” (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula, & Sharples, 2004, p. 12)Constructionist Learning in the 1980s – Constructionism differed from constructivism as Papert (1980) posited an additional component to constructivism: students learned best when they were actively involved in constructing social objects. The tutee position. Teaching the computer to perform tasks.Problem-Based learning in the 1990s – In the PBL, students often worked in small groups of five or six to pool knowledge and resources to solve problems. Launched the sociocultural revolution, focusing on learning in out of school contexts and the acquisition of knowledge through social interaction
Socio-Constructivist Learning in the 1990s. SCL believe that social and individual processes are independent in the co-construction of knowledge (Sullivan-Palinscar, 1998; Vygotsky, 1978).
96-97). Keegan (2002) believed that e-learning was distance learning, which has been converted to e-learning through the use of technologies such as the WWW. Which electronic media and tools constituted e-learning: e.g., did it matter if the learning took place through a networked technology, or was it simply learning with an electronic device?
Discussion
Share with us practical examples of applying constructivist approach in your class
Would one hour workshop on turning existing class assignments into constructivist-based class assignments be of interest for you?
Blockchain technology has the potential to enhance the role played by libraries within their communities, however, there are many questions yet to be answered about how specifically blockchain technology might be used and how much value it would add to library services and the communities they serve. Ideas from within the information profession are needed as we formulate recommendations for the profession.
The San José State University School of Information (iSchool) received an IMLS grant to investigate ways that blockchain technology can be used by libraries as a community anchor to partner with other organizations and to support city/community goals. Some suggestions for blockchain applications in libraries include building an enhanced metadata center, protecting Digital First Sale rights, supporting community-based collections, facilitating partnerships across organizations, and more.
The year-long project will provide three opportunities for a national dialog among technical experts in libraries, blockchain technology, and urban planning and members of the information professions to discuss ways that blockchain technology can advance library services to support city/community goals.
The project website and blog includes information and resources about blockchain technology, potential uses of blockchain technology by libraries, and project updates along with a blog to foster open dialog. Seehttps://ischoolblogs.sjsu.edu/blockchains/
The National Forumscheduled for August 6, 2018 in San Jose, CA will be comprised of 20-30 technical experts in libraries, blockchain technology, and urban planning to identify and discuss key opportunities for libraries to serve as community anchors using blockchain technology.
The Library 2.018 conference, Blockchain Applied: Impact on the Information Profession, is designed for presentations and discussion on the uses of blockchain technology in libraries. Registration in this open online conference is free to the profession and public. Scheduled on June 7, 2018 from 12:00 – 3:00 pm PDT. The call for proposals is located on the conference website.
We are seeking nominations of individuals to represent the professional associations (e.g. LITA, PLA, ULC, CLIR, ARL) and information organizations by participating in the National Forum in San Jose, CA (August 6, 2018). Funding provided by IMLS is available to support most of the expenses (travel, lodging, meals) for the National Forum for invited participants.
Nominations (including self-nominations) are due by February 15, 2018. Nominees should be knowledgeable about blockchain technology and libraries in order to have an impact on the recommendations that will be made and discussed during the Library 2.018 conference and National Forum.
Nominations to participate in the Blockchain National Forum should be submitted by February 15 using this Google Form.
The Next 10 Years: Helping STEM Students Thrive series, on January 10th, from 12-1:30 PM ET. The topic will be learning spaces with the following guest speakers:
Jeanne L. Narum, Principal, Learning Spaces Collaboratory
Jeanne will discuss what she has learned about what works, why and how it works in achieving sustainable institutional transformation in the world of planning spaces for learning in the undergraduate setting.
Lisa Stephens, Sr. Strategist- SUNY Academic Innovation – University at Buffalo
Rebecca Rotundo, Instructional Technology Specialist, University at Buffalo
Lisa and Rebecca will share their experience in FLEXspace (Flexible Learning Environments eXchange) an open education repository project which has expanded to over 2,600+ users from 1,200+ educational institutions across 42 countries.
Xin Li, Associate University Librarian, Cornell
Xin will share information about the Library’s initiative to install a Portal on the Cornell campus in Sept. 2018, with the goal to engage faculty, students, and the community in live conversations with Portal users in different countries, cultures, or life circumstances, such as what others do for STEM education.
This collaboration between Cornell University and the University at Buffalo featuring the perspectives of national thought leaders and institutional representatives about expanding the participation of women in undergraduate STEM education at different scales.
This interactive, online series features a different topic per month. Each session kicks off with an introduction by our distinguished thought leaders followed by institutional representatives from Cornell University and the University at Buffalo who will share insights from their campuses. Participants may join the conversation, ask questions, share experiences, build networks and learn more about:
· Innovations that can expand female or underrepresented minority student participation and success in STEM undergraduate education.
· Effective evidence-based STEM teaching practices commonly adopted at research universities.
· Unique institutional and cultural challenges to achieving STEM diversity.
2018 Special Focus: Education in a Time of Austerity and Social Turbulence 21–23 June 2018 University of Athens, Athens, Greece http://thelearner.com/2018-conference
Theme 8: Technologies in Learning
Technology and human values: learning through and about technology
Crossing the digital divide: access to learning in, and about, the digital world
New tools for learning: online digitally mediated learning
Virtual worlds, virtual classrooms: interactive, self-paced and autonomous learning
Ubiquitous learning: using the affordances of the new mediaDistance learning: reducing the distance
Theme 9: Literacies Learning
Defining new literacies
Languages of power: literacy’s role in social access
Instructional responses to individual differences in literacy learning
The visual and the verbal: Multiliteracies and multimodal communications
Literacy in learning: language in learning across the subject areas
The changing role of libraries in literacies learning
Languages education and second language learning
Multilingual learning for a multicultural world
The arts and design in multimodal learning
The computer, internet, and digital media: educational challenges and responses
++++++++++
PROPOSAL: Paper presentation in a Themed Session
Title
Virtual Reality and Gamification in the Educational Process: The Experience from an Academic Library
short description
VR, AR and Mixed Reality, as well as gaming and gamification are proposed as sandbox opportunity to transition from a lecture-type instruction to constructivist-based methods.
long description
The NMC New Horizon Report 2017 predicts a rapid application of Video360 in K12. Millennials are leaving college, Gen Z students are our next patrons. Higher Education needs to meet its new students on “their playground.” A collaboration by a librarian and VR specialist is testing the opportunities to apply 360 degree movies and VR in academic library orientation. The team seeks to bank on the inheriting interest of young patrons toward these technologies and their inextricable part of a rapidly becoming traditional gaming environment. A “low-end,” inexpensive and more mobile Google Cardboard solution was preferred to HTC Vive, Microsoft HoloLens or comparable hi-end VR, AR and mixed reality products.
The team relies on the constructivist theory of assisting students in building their knowledge in their own pace and on their own terms, rather than being lectured and/or being guided by a librarian during a traditional library orientation tour. Using inexpensive Google Cardboard goggles, students can explore a realistic set up of the actual library and familiarize themselves with its services. Students were polled on the effectiveness of such approach as well as on their inclination to entertain more comprehensive version of library orientation. Based on the lessons from this experiment, the team intends to pursue also a standardized approach to introducing VR to other campus services, thus bringing down further the cost of VR projects on campus. The project is considered a sandbox for academic instruction across campus. The same concept can be applied for [e.g., Chemistry, Physics, Biology) lab tours; for classes, which anticipate preliminary orientation process.
Following the VR orientation, the traditional students’ library instruction, usually conducted in a room, is replaced by a dynamic gamified library instruction. Students are split in groups of three and conduct a “scavenger hunt”; students use a jQuery-generated Web site on their mobile devices to advance through “hoops” of standard information literacy test. E.g., they need to walk to the Reference Desk, collect specific information and log their findings in the Web site. The idea follows the strong interest in the educational world toward gaming and gamification of the educational process. This library orientation approach applies the three principles for gamification: empowers learners; teaches problem solving and increases understanding.
Similarly to the experience with VR for library orientation, this library instruction process is used as a sandbox and has been successfully replicated by other instructors in their classes.
The term “digital humanities” can refer to research and instruction that is about information technology or that uses IT. By applying technologies in new ways, the tools and methodologies of digital humanities open new avenues of inquiry and scholarly production. Digital humanities applies computational capabilities to humanistic questions, offering new pathways for scholars to conduct research and to create and publish scholarship. Digital humanities provides promising new channels for learners and will continue to influence the ways in which we think about and evolve technology toward better and more humanistic ends.
As defined by Johanna Drucker and colleagues at UCLA, the digital humanities is “work at the intersection of digital technology and humanities disciplines.” An EDUCAUSE/CNI working group framed the digital humanities as “the application and/or development of digital tools and resources to enable researchers to address questions and perform new types of analyses in the humanities disciplines,” and the NEH Office of Digital Humanities says digital humanities “explore how to harness new technology for thumanities research as well as those that study digital culture from a humanistic perspective.” Beyond blending the digital with the humanities, there is an intentionality about combining the two that defines it.
digital humanities can include
creating digital texts or data sets;
cleaning, organizing, and tagging those data sets;
applying computer-based methodologies to analyze them;
and making claims and creating visualizations that explain new findings from those analyses.
Scholars might reflect on
how the digital form of the data is organized,
how analysis is conducted/reproduced, and
how claims visualized in digital form may embody assumptions or biases.
Digital humanities can enrich pedagogy as well, such as when a student uses visualized data to study voter patterns or conducts data-driven analyses of works of literature.
Digital humanities usually involves work by teams in collaborative spaces or centers. Team members might include
researchers and faculty from multiple disciplines,
graduate students,
librarians,
instructional technologists,
data scientists and preservation experts,
technologists with expertise in critical computing and computing methods, and undergraduates
some disciplinary associations, including the Modern Language Association and the American HistoricalAssociation, have developed guidelines for evaluating digital proj- ects, many institutions have yet to define how work in digital humanities fits into considerations for tenure and promotion
Because large projects are often developed with external funding that is not readily replaced by institutional funds when the grant ends sustainability is a concern. Doing digital humanities well requires access to expertise in methodologies and tools such as GIS, mod- eling, programming, and data visualization that can be expensive for a single institution to obtain
Resistance to learning new tech- nologies can be another roadblock, as can the propensity of many humanists to resist working in teams. While some institutions have recognized the need for institutional infrastructure (computation and storage, equipment, software, and expertise), many have not yet incorporated such support into ongoing budgets.
Opportunities for undergraduate involvement in research, provid ing students with workplace skills such as data management, visualization, coding, and modeling. Digital humanities provides new insights into policy-making in areas such as social media, demo- graphics, and new means of engaging with popular culture and understanding past cultures. Evolution in this area will continue to build connections between the humanities and other disci- plines, cross-pollinating research and education in areas like med- icine and environmental studies. Insights about digital humanities itself will drive innovation in pedagogy and expand our conceptualization of classrooms and labs
