The chat needs to provide value to your audience to be successful. Don’t make it just about your company; tailor it to how you can help your community. For example, if you’re in the photography industry, invite guests to discuss photo editing tips, black-and-white photography, photography inspiration, etc.
An added benefit is that you can repurpose all of the chat contributions into a future blog post. Those who participated in the chat will appreciate having a summary of it, and readers who missed it will enjoy the insight.
#2: Identify Similar Chats
Once you’ve established an objective for your chat, find at least five Twitter chats similar to yours to gather ideas. You can find Twitter chats with tools like TweetReports and Gnosisarts.
TweetReports shows the scheduled times for chats on various topics.
Learn how these chats work. Observe how the host controls the flow of conversation and directs topics. Also find out which guests are invited, how many questions are posed, what times the chats are held and how they’re promoted.
Be sure to participate as well. Answer questions and engage with others. This allows you to build your expertise and gives you insight into what it’s like to participate in a Twitter chat.
#3: Set the Date and Time
#4: Choose a Hashtag
Now comes the fun part: naming your Twitter chat. Typically every chat hashtag ends with “chat” (for example, #mediachat, #influencerchat and #blogchat). Adding the word “chat” signals to people that it’s a Twitter chat instead of a regular hashtag or an event.
When choosing a hashtag, make sure it fits your brand. Also, check that it’s not a Twitter username and hasn’t been used as a hashtag previously.
Use Twitter search to see if your chat hashtag has been used before.
Brainstorm at least 15 chat names and then pick the best one. You might want to seek input from your co-workers.
After you select a hashtag, make sure that you register the Twitter username. You can use this account to hold your chats.
#5: Invite Guests
Next, make a list of at least 20 guests you want to invite.
Ideally, you want someone who has experience being a guest and is interested in holding Twitter chats. If you have an influential user who loves your company, consider inviting that person to be a guest, too.
#6: Prepare Questions
Once you have everything in place and have secured at least four guests in advance, start preparing questions. You’ll need about 7 to 10 questions for your guests. Send these questions to them at least 72 hours prior to the chat so they can prepare their responses.
During the chat, spread out the questions about 6 to 8 minutes apart. Ask your last question about 10 minutes before the end of the chat to allow time for the community to discuss it.
#7: Promote the Chat
The key to making your Twitter chat stand out is to promote it. Here are some ways to do that:
Partner With Other Chats
Partner with other chats to co-promote your chats.
Invite Fans
Promote your chat 12 to 24 hours prior to the event.
Send a Facebook event invite as another way to ask people to join your chat. This is a great way to make sure people will come and remember the date. You can also get word out by sending an email blast through your newsletter.
#8: Run the Chat
On the big day, you’ll need an outline to work from. Here’s a basic script for a Twitter chat.
Five Minutes Before the Chat
Our chat will start in a few minutes. In the meantime, please introduce yourself and what you do [#chatname].
Start of the Chat
It’s time for our [#chatname]! Tonight’s guest is @_____ from _____ who will share _____ with us.
Everyone, please welcome our guest _____ from @_____ to our [#chatname] tonight!
Two to Three Minutes Before the Chat Ends
Everyone, please thank @_____ from _____ for adding so much value to our [#chatname].
Next week we’ll have @_____ from _____, who will be discussing _____. See you next week!
Don’t forget to join (other Twitter chat that you partnered with) now! They have @_____ as their guest.
The easiest way to manage your chat is to use a tool like TweetChat. You can hide retweets so you see mentions only from people, which enables you to respond quickly. TweetChat also automatically adds the chat hashtag to your responses.
Experience explore expand. Adventure based how to collaborate in ways we have not collaborated before pedagogical guidelines internet driven
Instructor – content – design
Today: first think is design, content, instructor. So how do we design learning environments is the most important one
Guide learners as designers. Constructivism. Design for meaning. Through the power of the story.
Geotetic design a learning environment learn geography using GIS
Situated movies (student-centered learning)
Grant Earthducation go to the most remote parts of the world to align their education with their culture, instead of what the government is downing as culture
Use of phone: whoever answers instructor’s question first, gets to pose the next question to the rest of the audience.
Design based research
Self-narrative, referencing the experience real world issues in real time
the U Media Lab.
The Changing Earth. App GoX (instagram on steroids. tell their story through the app). How is this different from Google Earth
Raptor Lab (rehabilitate a raptor).
podcast pontification (audio version of blog self reflections)
Greg Steinke The U
A Digital Story Assignment using WeVideo
WeVideo is the Google response to iMovie cloud
The U is on Google email and thus google drive and all other google tools
The Center for Digital Storytelling. short videos, 3-5 min incorporate photographs with the author narration, reflection
Assignment (verbal directions). process (write a 2 page script, every page is about a minute of video), gather images that support the story; edit the script (rewrite); record audio to the script (use an app on the phone instead of WeVideo), WeVideo can edit the audio recording; edit the story, edit the photos to match the story; YourTube and/or Google+
working with faculty: is the digital story a good fit for your course? two questions: does the course have many writing assignments? does everyone have to do the same type of assignment? do you want to offer choices? do you want your students to share their work outside of the class? to you want to explore opportunities for students to develop 21 century skills?
google communities for sharing
wewideo has a tutorial at Center for Digital Storytelling
students can use the digital story for their eportfolio
the entire exercise is entirely based on mobile devices
time frame: scaffolding options
3d printing products were the tangible result of the project and the digital storytelling just the format to present
Google Drive master folder for the phone images and video; iOS apps: MoviePro, FiLMc Pro, VoiceRecord Pro (including mp3); Android: WeVideo
Storyboard template
Faculty Development Programs: Digital Storytelling Community of Practice
chemistry professor. 3D printing with different materials.
what else can be made (e.g. reaction vessel)
printing of atoms
crystalography dbase
Karen: pre-service teachers professor: how to use 3d printers and be comfortable with them. Steve Hoover. Thinkercad and Autodesk123D>
3D academy http://www.team3dacademy.com/index2.html. Pinterest board for3d Printing with resources
Lisa: graphic design. not intuitive. Rhinoceros (not free anymore). 123D strong learning curve. 3d printing will be incorporated in the curriculum. sculpture students and others don’t like fudging on the computer, but Adobe people love it. Some items takes up to 4 hours to print out. when working on the computer is difficult for some students to visualize the dimensionality.
collaborative learning opportunities.
no makerspace or fab lab. additional interest from the theater and business dept. 3d printing is connected to future work skills. new media ecology or media literacy set of skills.
the main presenter: build excitement and interest and gradually step back. how much material goes through and should we charge back. clean and maintenance involved; not too bad. better then a copier. plastic inexpensive. sizes with plastic – $25 and $50. how many project of a spool: depending on the size of the projects but considerable amount. two printers one art dept and one in the faculty dev area.
non profit visually impaired students. how 3d can make difference in special ed.
3d printing lab with access for everybody. ownership brings policy. where housed: neutral place.
only one printer is barely sufficient for faculty to figure out how to use it. purchasing two more if students and curricula to be involved.
The Balancing Act: Team-Creating an eBook as an Alternative Method for Content Delivery Tom Nechodomu, University of Minnesota
Susan Andre uses a slide titled “trust” to elucidate how the entire project was enabled. “trust” and “transparency” are sparse currency in the environment I work in. if she is right an ebook ain’t happening anytime soon at my place.
inclining habitat.
students involvement. use stipends. student artists. food for the video interviews. create a community, student centered.
people able to change the book.
copyright process; did you find it cumbersome. copyright permission center.
time span and amount of hours spent: 3-4 months per chapter.
Main speaker
David Wiley. Making Teaching and Learning Awesome with Open
MN Learning Commons
open educational resources
LUMEN
education – sharing feedback, encouragement with students passion about the discipline, yourself
open is not the same as free. free + permissions + copyright permission: 5 r = retain (make and own copies), reuse (use in a wide range of ways), revise (adapt, modify, and improve), remix (combine two or more), redistribute (share with others)
open:
free and unfettered access
perpetual, irrevocable copyright permissions
(look but don’t touch is not open)
tech enables OER permits
traditionally copyright materials on the Internet – not so good ; jet on the road
openly copyright materials on the internet _ yes: jet in the air
permission-less innovation. relatively inexpensive and broad permissions.
intellectual infrastructure of education: learning outcomes/objectives; assessments; textbooks. they are relatively expensive and narrow permissions.
so what?
open education infrastructure: open outcomes, objectives, activities, educational resources
the culture of glued legos must be eradicated. open pedagogy. open credentialing model
Crompton, Muilenburg and Berge’s definition for m-learning is “learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices.”
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?
99-100. Traxler (2011) described five ways in which m-learning offers new learning opportunities: 1. Contingent learning, allowing learners to respond and react to the environment and changing experiences; 2. Situated learning, in which learning takes place in the surroundings applicable to the learning; 3. Authentic learning;
Diel, W. (2013). M-Learning as a subfield of open and distance education. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
15) Historical context in relation to the field of distance education (embedded librarian)
16 definition of independent study (workshop on mlearning and distance education
17. Theory of transactional distance (Moore)
Cochrane, T. (2013). A Summary and Critique of M-Learning Research and Practice. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
( Galin class, workshop)
P 24
According to Cook and Sharples (2010) the development of M learning research has been characterized by three general faces a focus upon Devices Focus on learning outside the classroom He focus on the mobility of the learner
25
Baby I am learning studies focus upon content delivery for small screen devices and the PDA capabilities of mobile devices rather than leveraging the potential of mobile devices for collaborative learning as recommended by hope Joyner Mill Road and sharp P. 26 Large scale am learning project Several larger am learning projects have tended to focus on specific groups of learners rather than developing pedagogical strategies for the integration of am mlearning with him tertiary education in general
27
m learning research funding
In comparison am learning research projects in countries with smaller population sizes such as Australia and New Zealand are typiclly funded on a shoe string budget
28
M-learning research methodologies
I am learning research has been predominantly characterized by short term case studies focused upon The implementation of rapidly changing technologies with early adopters but with little evaluation reflection or emphasis on mainstream tertiary-education integration
p. 29 identifying the gaps in M learning research
lack of explicit underlying pedagogical theory Lack of transferable design frameworks
Pachler, N., Bachmair, B., and Cook, J. (2013). A Sociocultural Ecological Frame for Mobile Learning. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
(Tom video studio)
35 a line of argumentation that defines mobile devices such as mobile phones as cultural resources. Mobile cultural resources emerge within what we call a “bile complex‘, which consist of specifics structures, agency and cultural practices.
36 pedagogy looks for learning in the context of identify formation of learners within a wider societal context However at the beginning of the twentieth first century and economy oriented service function of learning driven by targets and international comparisons has started to occupy education systems and schools within them Dunning 2000 describes the lengthy transformation process from natural assets Land unskilled labor to tangible assets machinery to intangible created assets such as knowledge and information of all kinds Araya and Peters 2010 describe the development of the last 20 years in terms of faces from the post industrial economy to d information economy to the digital economy to the knowledge economy to the creative economy Cultural ecology can refer to the debate about natural resources we argue for a critical debate about the new cultural resources namely mobile devices and the services for us the focus must not be on the exploitation of mobile devices and services for learning but instead on the assimilation of learning with mobiles in informal contacts of everyday life into formal education
37
Ecology comes into being is there exists a reciprocity between perceiver and environment translated to M learning processes this means that there is a reciprocity between the mobile devices in the activity context of everyday life and the formal learning
45
Rather than focusing on the acquisition of knowledge in relation to externally defined notions of relevance increasingly in a market-oriented system individual faces the challenge of shape his/her knowledge out of his/her own sense of his/her world information is material which is selected by individuals to be transformed by them into knowledge to solve a problem in the life world
Crompton, H. (2013). A Sociocultural Ecological Frame for Mobile Learning. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
p. 47 As philosophies and practice move toward learner-centered pedagogies, technology in a parallel move, is now able to provide new affordances to the learner, such as learning that is personalized, contextualized, and unrestricted by temporal and spatial constrains.
The necessity for m-learning to have a theory of its own, describing exactly what makes m-learning unique from conventional, tethered electronic learning and traditional learning.
48 . Definition and devices. Four central constructs. Learning pedagogies, technological devices, context and social interactions.
“learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices.”
It is difficult, and ill advisable, to determine specifically which devices should be included in a definition of m-learning, as technologies are constantly being invented or redesigned. (my note against the notion that since D2L is a MnSCU mandated tool, it must be the one and only). One should consider m-learning as the utilization of electronic devices that are easily transported and used anytime and anywhere.
49 e-learning does not have to be networked learning: therefore, e-learnng activities could be used in the classroom setting, as the often are.
Why m-learning needs a different theory beyond e-learning. Conventional e-learning is tethered, in that students are anchored to one place while learning. What sets m-learning apart from conventional e-learning is the very lack of those special and temporal constrains; learning has portability, ubiquitous access and social connectivity.
50 dominant terms for m-learning should include spontaneous, intimate, situated, connected, informal, and personal, whereas conventional e-learning should include the terms computer, multimedia, interactive, hyperlinked, and media-rich environment.
51 Criteria for M-Learning
second consideration is that one must be cognizant of the substantial amount of learning taking place beyond the academic and workplace setting.
52 proposed theories
Activity theory: Vygotsky and Engestroem
Conversation theory: Pask 1975, cybernetic and dialectic framework for how knowledge is constructed. Laurillard (2007) although conversation is common for all forms of learning, m-learning can build in more opportunities for students to have ownership and control over what they are learning through digitally facilitated, location-specific activities.
53 multiple theories;
54 Context is central construct of mobile learning. Traxler (2011) described the role of context in m-learning as “context in the wider context”, as the notion of context becomes progressively richer. This theme fits with Nasimith et al situated theory, which describes the m-learning activities promoting authentic context and culture.
55. Connectivity
unlike e-learning, the learner is not anchored to a set place. it links to Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach.
Learning happens within various social groups and locations, providing a diverse range of connected learning experiences. furthermore, connectivity is without temporal restraints, such as the schedules of educators.
55. Time
m-larning as “learning dispersed in time”
55. personalization
my note student-centered learning
Moura, A., Carvalho, A. (2013). Framework For Mobile Learning Integration Into Educational Contexts. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
Use LinkedIn Groups not only as a way to distribute content, but also as a way tolisten to our audience.
Any LinkedIn user cancreate a groupin a matter of minutes. But it is crucial to lay a solid foundation to help ensure the group’s success. Some things to consider:
Develop a mission statement that distinctly outlines why the group exists to give a clear vision to both potential members and your brand.
Use targeted keywords in its title and to identify its category so the group can be found in organic search rankings.
Tumbleson, B. E., & Burke, J. (. J. (2013). Embedding librarianship in learning management systems: A how-to-do-it manual for librarians. Neal-Schuman, an imprint of the American Library Association.
Kvenild, C., & Calkins, K. (2011). Embedded Librarians: Moving Beyond One-Shot Instruction – Books / Professional Development – Books for Academic Librarians – ALA Store. ACRL. Retrieved from http://www.alastore.ala.org/detail.aspx?ID=3413
xi. the authors are convinced that LMS embedded librarianship is becoming he primary and most productive method for connecting with college and university students, who are increasingly mobile.
xii. reference librarians engage the individual, listen, discover what is wanted and seek to point the stakeholder in profitable directions.
Instruction librarians, in contrast, step into the classroom and attempt to lead a group of students in new ways of searching wanted information.
Sometimes that instruction librarian even designs curriculum and teaches their own credit course to guide information seekers in the ways of finding, evaluating, and using information published in various formats.
Librarians also work in systems, emerging technologies, and digital initiatives in order to provide infrastructure or improve access to collections and services for tend users through the library website, discovery layers, etc. Although these arenas seemingly differ, librarians work as one.
xiii. working as an LMS embedded librarian is both a proactive approach to library instruction using available technologies and enabling a 24/7 presence.
1. Embeddedness involves more that just gaining perspective. It also allows the outsider to become part of the group through shared learning experiences and goals. 3. Embedded librarianship in the LMS is all about being as close as possible to where students are receiving their assignments and gaining instruction and advice from faculty members. p. 6 When embedded librarians provide ready access to scholarly electronic collections, research databases, and Web 2.0 tools and tutorials, the research experience becomes less frustrating and more focused for students. Undergraduate associate this familiar online environment with the academic world.
p. 7 describes embedding a reference librarian, which LRS reference librarians do, “partnership with the professor.” However, there is room for “Research Consultations” (p. 8). While “One-Shot Library Instruction Sessions” and “Information Literacy Credit Courses” are addressed (p. 809), the content of these sessions remains in the old-fashioned lecturing type of delivering the information.
p. 10-11. The manuscript points out clearly the weaknesses of using a Library Web site. The authors fail to see that the efforts of the academic librarians must go beyond Web page and seek how to easy the information access by integrating the power of social media with the static information residing on the library web page.
p. 12 what becomes disturbingly clear is that faculty focus on the mechanics of the research paper over the research process. Although students are using libraries, 70 % avoid librarians. Urging academic librarians to “take an active role and initiate the dialogue with faculty to close a divide that may be growing between them and faculty and between them and students.”
Four research context with which undergraduates struggle: big picture, language, situational context and information gathering.
p. 15 ACRL standards One and Three: librarians might engage students who rely on their smartphones, while keeping in mind that “[s]tudents who retrieve information on their smartphones may also have trouble understanding or evaluating how the information on their phone is ‘produced, organized, and disseminated’ (Standard One). Standard One by its definition seems obsolete. If information is formatted for desktops, it will be confusing when on smart phones, And by that, it is not mean to adjust the screen size, but change the information delivery from old fashioned lecturing to more constructivist forms. e.g. http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/
p. 15 As for Standard Two, which deals with effective search strategies, the LMS embedded librarian must go beyond Boolean operators and controlled vocabulary, since emerging technologies incorporate new means of searching. As unsuccessfully explained to me for about two years now at LRS: hashtag search, LinkedIn groups etc, QR codes, voice recognition etc.
p. 16. Standard Five. ethical and legal use of information.
p. 23 Person announced in 2011 OpenClass compete with BB, Moodle, Angel, D2L, WebCT, Sakai and other
p. 24 Common Features: content, email, discussion board, , synchronous chat and conferencing tools (Wimba and Elluminate for BB)
p. 31 information and resources which librarians could share via LMS
– post links to dbases and other resources within the course. LIB web site, LibGuides or other subject-related course guidelines
– information on research concepts can be placed in a similar fashion. brief explanation of key information literacy topics (e.g difference between scholarly and popular periodical articles, choosing or narrowing research topics, avoiding plagiarism, citing sources properly whining required citations style, understanding the merits of different types of sources (Articles book’s website etc)
– Pertinent advice the students on approaching the assignment and got to rheank needed information
– Tutorials on using databases or planning searches step-by-step screencast navigating in search and Candida bass video search of the library did you a tour of the library
p. 33 embedded librarian being copied on the blanked emails from instructor to students.
librarian monitors the discussion board
p. 35 examples: students place specific questions on the discussion board and are assured librarian to reply by a certain time
instead of F2F instruction, created a D2L module, which can be placed in any course. videos, docls, links to dbases, links to citation tools etc. Quiz, which faculty can use to asses the the students
p. 36 discussion forum just for the embedded librarian. for the students, but faculty are encouraged to monitor it and provide content- or assignment-specific input
video tutorials and searching tips
Contact information email phone active IM chat information on the library’s open hours
p. 37 questions to consider
what is the status of the embedded librarian: T2, grad assistant
p. 41 pilot program. small scale trial which is run to discover and correct potential problems before
One or two faculty members, with faculty from a single department
Pilot at Valdosta State U = a drop-in informatil session with the hope of serving the information literacy needs of distance and online students, whereas at George Washington U, librarian contacted a distance education faculty member to request embedding in his upcoming online Mater’s course
p. 43 when librarians sense that current public services are not being fully utilized, it may signal that a new approach is needed.
pilots permit tinkering. they are all about risk-taking to enhance delivery
p. 57 markeing LMS ebedded Librarianship
library collections, services and facilities because faculty may be uncertain how the service benefits their classroom teaching and learning outcomes. my note per
“it is incumbent upon librarians to promote this new mode of information literacy instruction.” it is so passe. in the times when digital humanities is discussed and faculty across campus delves into digital humanities, which de facto absorbs digital literacy, it is shortsighted for academic librarians to still limit themselves into “information literacy,” considering that lip service is paid for for librarians being the leaders in the digital humanities movement. If academic librarians want to market themselves, they have to think broad and start with topics, which ARE of interest for the campus faculty (digital humanities included) and then “push” their agenda (information literacy). One of the reasons why academic libraries are sinking into oblivion is because they are sunk already in 1990-ish practices (information literacy) and miss the “hip” trends, which are of interest for faculty and students. The authors (also paying lip services to the 21st century necessities), remain imprisoned to archaic content. In the times, when multi (meta) literacies are discussed as the goal for library instruction, they push for more arduous marketing of limited content. Indeed, marketing is needed, but the best marketing is by delivering modern and user-sought content.
the stigma of “academic librarians keep doing what they know well, just do it better.” Lip-services to change, and life-long learning. But the truth is that the commitment to “information literacy” versus the necessity to provide multi (meta) literacites instruction (Reframing Information Literacy as a metaliteracy) is minimizing the entire idea of academic librarians reninventing themselves in the 21st century.
Here is more: NRNT-New Roles for New Times
p. 58 According to the Burke and Tumbleson national LMS embedded librarianship survey, 280 participants yielded the following data regarding embedded librarianship:
traditional F2F LMS courses – 69%
online courses – 70%
hybrid courses – 54%
undergraduate LMS courses 61%
graduate LMS courses 42%
of those respondents in 2011, 18% had the imitative started for four or more years, which place the program in 2007. Thus, SCSU is almost a decade behind.
my note:
library blog was offered numerous times to the LRS librarians and, consequently to the LRS dean, but it was brushed away, as were brushed away the proposals for modern institutional social media approach (social media at LRS does not favor proficiency in social media but rather sees social media as learning ground for novices, as per 11:45 AM visit to LRS social media meeting of May 6, 2015). The idea of the blog advantages to static HTML page was explained in length, but it was visible that the advantages are not understood, as it is not understood the difference of Web 2.0 tools (such as social media) and Web 1.0 tools (such as static web page). The consensus among LRS staff and faculty is to keep projecting Web 1.0 ideas on Web 2.0 tools (e.g. using Facebook as a replacement of Adobe Dreamweaver: instead of learning how to create static HTML pages to broadcast static information, use Facebook for fast and dirty announcement of static information). It is flabbergasting to be rejected offering a blog to replace Web 1.0 in times when the corporate world promotes live-streaming (http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/live-streaming-video-for-business/) as a way to promote services (academic librarians can deliver live their content)
p. 59 Marketing 2.0 in the information age is consumer-oriented. Marketing 3.0 in the values-driven era, which touches the human spirit (Kotler, Katajaya, and Setiawan 2010, 6).
The four Ps: products and services, place, price and promotion. Libraries should consider two more P’s: positioning and politics.
Mathews (2009) “library advertising should focus on the lifestyle of students. the academic library advertising to students today needs to be: “tangible, experiential, relatebale, measurable, sharable and surprising.” Leboff (2011, p. 400 agrees with Mathews: the battle in the marketplace is not longer for transaction, it is for attention. Formerly: billboards, magazines, newspapers, radio, tv, direct calls. Today: emphasize conversation, authenticity, values, establishing credibility and demonstrating expertise and knowledge by supplying good content, to enhance reputation (Leboff, 2011, 134). translated for the embedded librarians: Google goes that far; students want answers to their personal research dillemas and questions. Being a credentialed information specialist with years of experience is no longer enough to win over an admiring following. the embedded librarian must be seen as open and honest in his interaction with students.
p. 60 becoming attractive to end-users is the essential message in advertising LMS embedded librarianship. That attractivness relies upon two elements: being noticed and imparting values (Leboff, 2011, 99)
p. 61 connecting with faculty
p. 62 reaching students
attending a synchronous chat sessions
watching a digital tutorial
posting a question in a discussion board
using an instant messaging widget
be careful not to overload students with too much information. don’t make contact too frequently and be perceived as an annoyance and intruder.
p. 65. contemporary publicity and advertising is incorporating storytelling. testimonials differ from stories
p. 66 no-cost marketing. social media
low-cost marketing – print materials, fliers, bookmarks, posters, floor plans, newsletters, giveaways (pens, magnets, USB drives), events (orientations, workshops, contests, film viewings), campus media, digital media (lib web page, blogs, podcasts, social networking cites
p. 69 Instructional Content and Instructional Design
p. 70 ADDIE Model
Analysis: the requirements for the given course, assignments.
Ask instructors expectations from students vis-a-vis research or information literacy activities
students knowledge about the library already related to their assignments
which are the essential resources for this course
is this a hybrid or online course and what are the options for the librarian to interact with the students.
due date for the research assignment. what is the timeline for completing the assignment
when research tips or any other librarian help can be inserted
copy of the syllabus or any other assignment document
p. 72 discuss the course with faculty member. Analyze the instructional needs of a course. Analyze students needs. Create list of goals. E.g.: how to find navigate and use the PschInfo dbase; how to create citations in APA format; be able to identify scholarly sources and differentiate them from popular sources; know other subject-related dbases to search; be able to create a bibliography and use in-text citations in APA format
p. 74 Design (Addie)
the embedded component is a course within a course. Add pre-developed IL components to the broader content of the course. multiple means of contact information for the librarians and /or other library staff. link to dbases. link to citation guidance and or tutorial on APA citations. information on how to distinguish scholarly and popular sources. links to other dbases. information and guidance on bibliographic and in-text citations n APA either through link, content written within the course a tutorial or combination. forum or a discussion board topic to take questions. f2f lib instruction session with students
p. 76 decide which resources to focus on and which skills to teach and reinforce. focus on key resources
p. 77 development (Addie).
-building content;the “landing” page at LRS is the subject guides page. resources integrated into the assignment pages. video tutorials and screencasts
-finding existing content; google search of e.g.: “library handout narrowing topic” or “library quiz evaluating sources,” “avoiding plagiarism,” scholarly vs popular periodicals etc
-writing narrative content. p. 85
p. 87 Evaluation (Addie)
formative: to change what the embedded librarian offers to improve h/er services to students for the reminder of the course
summative at the end of the course:
p. 89 Online, F2F and Hybrid Courses
p. 97 assessment impact of embedded librarian.
what is the purpose of the assessment; who is the audience; what will focus on; what resources are available
p. 98 surveys of faculty; of students; analysis of student research assignments; focus groups of students and faculty
Faculty request to lay voice over a presentation with pictures. Solutions:
PowerPoint:
Windows / PC
ppt voice over
Apple/Mac
voice over PPT on Apple
advantages:
– unfortunately, faculty are way too familiar with PPT. Familiar to the point that they don’t want to try something better.
– FERPA complient
disadvantages:
– too old. PPT is pre-Internet. It does not matter how much Microsoft is trying to adapt it, the concept is old. There is a myriad of cloud-based solutions, which do better job: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2013/09/30/the-5-best-free-slideshow-presentation-and-creation-tools-for-teachers/
– too many files, too many variations
– PPT posted in D2L displays in the D2L Viewer. The visuals are there, but the voice is not. In order to hear the voice, students must download the presentation. Faculty must reflect this in the syllabus.
– faculty need to know how to upload on their web space and figure out URL, if PPT is not place in LMS (D2L)- if faculty places PPT in LMS (D2L), then it is behind password; nearly impossible to share (can share only with SCSU and/or MnSCU members.
– faculty must remember to indicate in the syllabus and/or D2L / Content that “in order to hear the voice over, user must download presentation.”
SlideShare
slideshare
advantages:
– it is a “social” app, like LinkedIn and Twitter. Tagged correctly, the presentation is a platform for “same-minded” people to discuss mutual interests.
– excellent for sharing: conferences, MOOCs etc.
– it has discussion group in LinkedIn.
disadvantages:
– voice over presentation: way to cumbersome compared to PPT. Watch their presentation
– by FERPA regulations, if the presentation contains personal data about students, it cannot be shared on SlideShare
– it is a “social” app, like LinkedIn and Twitter. Tagged correctly, the presentation is a platform for “same-minded” people to discuss mutual interests.
– excellent for sharing: conferences, MOOCs etc.
– like PPT, very easy upload of pix and voice over. Better the PPT, since it is online and easy to distribute.
– easy to upload PPT and easy to voice over each slide
disadvantages:
– does not embed in D2L (it is D2L issue, not the app), but works perfectly as a link
– faculty must remember to indicate in the syllabus and/or D2L / Content that when clicking on the URL to the PPT, user must simultaneously press “Ctrl” key to open PPT in a separate browser window or tab
– by FERPA regulations, if the presentation contains personal data about students, it cannot be shared on SlideShare
– consistently voted through last 5 years by K12 educators as great interactive tool.
– video, images, audio and text.
– “constructivist” premiss: teacher and students can exchange asynchronously ideas by using images, video, text and audio.
disadvantages:
– free option has limited features.
– by FERPA regulations, if the presentation contains personal data about students, it cannot be shared on on this site.
– voice over too complex (very much the same as with SlideShare)
SoftChalk
advantages:
– FERPA compliant; endorsed by MnSCU
disadvantages:
–
others
I have not included TechSmit’s Jing https://www.techsmith.com/jing.html, because their video output (Flash file) is obsolete and impossible to convert for free. While it still can be played, shall faculty want to upload the video file on Youtube or similar social media, it will be impossible.
LinkedIn: your college portfolio for future employment
April 28, 1:30 – 2:30PM at Miller Center 205
April 30, 3 – 4PM at Miller Center 205
Right before students graduate from SCSU, Andrew Ditlevson (apditlevson@stcloudstate.edu) from Career Services (https://www.stcloudstate.edu/careerservices/) will offer an excellent workshop on how to use LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/) to network and search for a job.However, your work on building a robust electronic portfolio can start much earlier. LinkedIn is famous for its networking and job search, but it can help you orient yourself in your future profession.
Come to our informal discussion on what LinkedIn is and what LinkedIn does to share knowledge and experience about LinkedIn and similar social media (e.g. Coffee, Twitter), which can help you with your college studies and future profession.Further information available on the IMS blog: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=linkedin
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.
