Searching for "student inquiry"

Future of Libraries with Instructional Design

Library 2.019 virtual mini-conference, “Shaping the Future of Libraries with Instructional Design

Wednesday, March 13th, from 12:00 – 3:00 pm US Pacific Daylight Time (click https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Library+2.019+ID&iso=20190313T12&p1=283&ah=3 to see in your local time zone).

Here are the links to the recordings of the sessions:
https://www.library20.com/page/recordings-id (you must be logged in)

This is a free event, thanks to our founding conference sponsor: School of Information at San José State University.

ATTENDING: We will send links for attending the conference a day or two before the event.

If you have friends or colleagues that wish to attend, this is a free event and we encourage you to share our information widely. However, please send them to the conference registration page (https://www.library20.com/instructionaldesign) rather than giving them the above link directly as it will allow us to track participation.

https://www.library20.com/instructionaldesign

https://www.library20.com/forum/categories/library-2-019-instructional-design-accepted-submissions/listForCategory

#library2019 #libraryid

Dana Bryant

Sandy Hirsch, SJSU School of Information.

Steven Bell, John Shank – integrating ID into practice. blended librarianship.

critical mass of librarians doing ID and libraries hiring IDs.

Michael Flierl
Assistant Professor of Library Science, Purdue University

Dana Bryant
Lead Instructional Technologist for Academic Technology Services, Woodruff Library, at Emory University

Lindsay O’Neill
Faculty, California State University, Fullerton’s Master of Science in Instructional Design and Technology Program

Steven J. Bell (moderator)

Associate University Librarian for Research and Instructional Services at Temple University

https://www.library20.com/page/library-2-0-schedule-gmt-4

What is ID: ID create an environment conductive to students’ success. Thoughtful and applied design. Making faculty and instructors’ life easier. Allow faculty to do what they do best.

Lindsey: solving the instructional problem with the tools at hand.

go-to ed tech? What is the hot tech right now?

Lindsey: H5P (open source) CC – licensed, Moodle, WordPress, build online tutorials for free (Isolde), Norway, well based, VR tours. Will H5P become paid? Michael: cell phones Dana: Emory VoiceThread. From the chat: Articulate365 (pricy), Kahoot, Peardeck, Yellowdig, vidgrid, Adobe Spark, Adobe POst, padlet, Groupme instead of Canvas, Vyond, Coggle, wakelet, Phinx

Suggestions for librarians who want to build ID skills. Dana: connect with the regional community if no ID on campus. Community of practice. Using ID tools, speakers outside of campus. Lindsey: teaching myself what is most interesting to me. what technologies are important. Find a learning community. Michael: repeat the others

keep up to date on ID theory and practices: Dana – ELI, OLC (Online Learning Consortium). ELearning Heroes. Lindsay: corporate word. Michael: POD

the one-shot instruction: what is the approach (q/n from the chat); Dana – ID as a services. person dedicated following up with people requested either ID class or training, open the line of communication. summative evaluation type of activity since we are failing to evaluate how well students absorbed the information. LIndsey: one-shot for basics (e.g. freshman), build scaffold program, reserved the one shot for meeting with librarians, for hands-on. Michael: work with faculty member and rewrite a program, build assessment rather then only deliver

areas of impact: subject matter librarians, working with faculty to use of the library resources, new faculty drawn in info and if not follow up, Canvas support.  Michael: librarians and ID working directly with faculty rewriting their curricula, measure it, demonstrating library need, 3000 students – correlation. document the lib contribution to student learning directly, the teaching-learning culture change. using info and data in more authentic ways. Lindsey: disconnect the way librarian teach vs faculty teach. Coordination scaffolding.

q/n from the chat. easily. how can non ID librarian can easily implement ID type:
Lindsey: new to ID? Google. Jargon and Acronyms. re framing how you see ed technology. technology as something to get the job done. no need to get fancy.
Dana: same as Lindsey. But also learning theories and learning outcomes. From ID perspective: what they will come out with by the end of the session. action words.
Michael: mindset. what students want to learn, before what I will teach. backward design – understanding by design. UDL. Grab a friend and talk through.
Tara

ed tech is not getting job done:
clickers for attendance is horrible idea.

 

from the chat:

Dee Fink’s Taxonomy of Significant Learning1

https://www.byui.edu/outcomes-and-assessment-old/the-basics/step-1-articulate-outcomes/dee-finks-taxonomy-of-significant-learning

https://www.alt.ac.uk/

Association of Talent Development

Christy Tucker’s blog – Experiencing E-Learning

https://www.issotl.com/2019

https://e-learning.zeef.com/tracy.parish

https://www.lib.umich.edu/blogs/tiny-studies/using-pilot-study-test-and-assess-new-instruction-model

http://suny.edu/emtech

I had a really interesting role in grad school where we lived in the land between tech support and pedagogical / design support.

From Rajesh Kumar Das to All panelists and other attendees: (02:38 PM)
Good to hear from mike about affective learning. In this case, could you please focus what kind of technique is approprite for what, i.e. Didactic instruction, a low-complexity teaching technique such as a “Quiz Bowl”, or Jigsaw Method as high-complexity strategy, or both.

From Hailey W. to All panelists and other attendees: (02:36 PM)
As an ID librarian and the campus LMS administrator I struggle with getting them to see that other side of my role. That I’m not just “tech support”. Anyone else? Een jsut not being tech support?

From Vickie Kline to All panelists and other attendees: (02:44 PM)
As a librarian not formally trained in ID, I think a good entry point for exploring is Universal Design for Learning. We also need to pay attention to creating accessibility materials…

From Heather Quintero to All panelists and other attendees: (02:45 PM)
I always start with ADDIE… I am formally trained in ID and am an IT trainer for librarians. ADDIE is a framework for every class I make for both live and online classes. Don’t disregard ADDIE.

From Allison Rand to All panelists and other attendees: (02:47 PM)
The Wiggins and McTighe is a great book!

ADDIE Model

From Shane to All panelists and other attendees: (02:48 PM)
++SLIS open-source course on Instructional Design for Library Instruction

From Wendy to All panelists and other attendees: (02:49 PM)
Char Booth’s USER is also a very good model

http://www.modernlearning.com

https://web.mit.edu/jbelcher/www/TEALref/Crouch_Mazur.pdf

From Roberta (Robin) Sullivan to All panelists and other attendees: (02:53 PM)
@Rachel, Peggy, Shane – an open source course is available. Check out the SUNY’s Quality by Design (QbD): Strategies for Effective Teaching and Quality Course Design at: http://suny.edu/qbd This course is available as a facilitated version at least once each semester and as a self-paced non-facilitated version in Blackboard’s CourseSites. After completing the course requirements you can earn a Digital Badge to show your accomplishment.

From Naomi Toftness to All panelists and other attendees: (02:55 PM)
Just heard the terms “deliberate innovation” vs. “desperate innovation” that totally speaks to my situation with wanting to adopt the new cool tech

++++++++++++++++++++++
BB screenshotSESSION LINK – https://sas.elluminate.com/d.jnlp?sid=2008350&password=LIB2019IDPart7 — If the session link doesn’t work for you, please copy and paste into your browser.

Session Title: Gamifying Instruction: Breakouts and Badges!

Your Name and Title: Dr. Brenda Boyer, Librarian & Instructor

Your Library, School, or Organization Name: Kutztown Sr. High School, Rutgers University

Your Twitter Handle (@name): @bsboyer

Name(s) of Co-Presenter(s): Brenda Boyer

Area of the World from Which You Will Present: Kutztown, PA

Language in Which You Will Present: English

Target Audience: Instructional Design Librarians

Short Session Description: Build engagement for your online library instruction using LMS features, Breakout boxes, and digital badges.

Session Strand (use the “tag”): {Session Strand (use the “tag”):}

Full Session Description: It’s time to amp up your library instruction! Gamifying instruction in research skills such as database usage, advanced searching, & more can increase engagement and drive independent learning for students of all ages. This session will describe how learning management system (LMS) features can be combined with digital microcredentials (i.e. badges) and breakout boxes to gamify instruction that can be otherwise deemed boring (for both the learners and the librarian!).

Link to Conference Site Session Proposal (full URL with http://): https://www.library20.com/forum/topics/gamifying-instruction-breakouts-and-badges

Other Websites / URLs Associated with Your Session:

Your Bio: Dr. Brenda Boyer is a librarian and instructional designer. She has developed online instruction for secondary learners in the Kutztown (PA) School District, as well as for graduate and professional development learners at Wilson College and Rutgers University. She designed and instructs the Rutgers graduate course, Learning Theory, Inquiry, & Instructional Design, and is a frequent presenter at AASL, Internet@Schools. She has published articles in School Library Journal, Teacher Librarian, and School Library Connection.

Email: boyer.brenda@gmail.com

notes from Brenda’s session:

are we getting the job done, is our instruction sticking, what evidence we do have?

differentiate: who is ready to do what” at what skill level? how to bring everybody up to speed?

3 elements of Digital Gamification: leverage LMS (set game levels); how digital badges are paired 3. using digital breakout boxes to push challenge, skills

each chat as prerequisite for the next. prerequisite in LMS. Each game level is module. completed with a quizz. if they pass the quiz, opens challenge.1. what is page (facts about a tool to learn about[ what the tool does, feature, etc.) 2. suppe rshort video tour (3 min max), talk about something unique 3. quick quiz (max 5 q/s from the intro page and video). pass the quiz (100 %) to unlock the challenge level. 4. challenge level. digital breakout box embedded in the LMS. breakout using Google Forms. various locks (words, letter, numbers)

Badges why?

Badgr, Credly, iDoceo

Breakout Boxes

 

 

++++++++++++++++++++++
SESSION LINK – https://sas.elluminate.com/d.jnlp?sid=2008350&password=LIB2019IDPart8 — If the session link doesn’t work for you, please copy and paste into your browser.

Session Title: Improving Library Tutorials: The Multimedia Design Principles

Your Name and Title: Darlene Aguilar, Instructional Design Librarian

Your Library, School, or Organization Name: Loyola Marymount University

Your Twitter Handle (@name): @DarleneA_ID

Name(s) of Co-Presenter(s):

Area of the World from Which You Will Present: Los Angeles, CA

Language in Which You Will Present: English

Target Audience: Reference and Instruction Librarians, Instructional Designers, Tutorial developers, Academic Librarians

Short Session Description: This session will review Mayer’s (2001) Multimedia Design Principles to help improve instructional modules, tutorials, and videos.

Session Strand (use the “tag”): {Session Strand (use the “tag”):}

Full Session Description: Librarians are creating more online modules, videos, and tutorials to teach information literacy skills. Whether designing instruction online or in-person, research-based instructional methods are required and learning Mayer’s Multimedia Design Principles is the best place to start. In this session, I will review essential prior-knowledge on image types and working memory. I will then show learners how to minimize cognitive overload using these 12 principles: multimedia, spatial contiguity, temporal contiguity, coherence, modality, redundancy, individual differences, signaling, pacing, concepts first, personalization, and human voice.

Link to Conference Site Session Proposal (full URL with http://): https://www.library20.com/forum/topics/improving-library-tutorials-the-multimedia-design-principles

Other Websites / URLs Associated with Your Session: https://linkedin.com/in/darlene-aguilar/

Your Bio: Darlene Aguilar is an Instructional Design Librarian at Loyola Marymount University where she designs and develops video tutorials and online modules on information literacy and library related topics. Additionally, she provides “best practices” training in instructional design to other LMU librarians. She graduated from the University of Southern California with a Master’s in Education for Learning Design and Technology and previously worked at LAUSD for 7 years. She strives to remove learning barriers that are embedded in instruction and curriculum and make learning accessible to all learners.

Email: darlene.aguilar@lmu.edu

notes from Darlene Aguilar session: spacial contiguity, temporal contiguity. Modality: animation + narration better then animation + text, redundancy: animation and narration then animation + narration + text

boolean operators

 

 

instructional design books

Reimagining the Academic Library

Reimagining the Academic Library: A Peek Inside Payson Library

Daniel Fusch https://www.academicimpressions.com/reimagining-the-academic-library-a-peek-inside-payson-library/

three drivers for the renovation:

  1. We needed to create more study, learning, and research space in the library. Put simply, our library space was cramped. It was a nice-looking building but not terribly “user-friendly.”
  2. Additionally, the building itself was one of the oldest on campus…
  3. Finally, we wanted to create a more visionary learning space. We wanted to define what impactful spaces for our students would be, and examine how the academic library can support both emerging academic trends and social formation on campus.

We’ve created “living rooms” in the library: spaces with couches, softer seating, fireplaces—where students can go and plop down. That “plopping down” is important. The library has become a place where students go with some intentionality to rest, to check their phone, to read.

We’ve tried to create interesting “spots.” We have nicely appointed, contemporary-in-feel study spaces, with glass whiteboards and glassed walls. People can see in, people can see out; today’s students like to be seen, and they like to see in. This was very important in our focus groups. Also, on a practical level, students like to be able to see into study spaces to see if they’re occupied.

Special Collections used to be intimidating for a first or second-year student. We wanted an experience in which from the moment the student arrives, there are no barriers to exploration. We wanted to send the message that this is a place for inquiry and discovery, a place to learn more. There are no doors—just an open entrance to the wing.

the key with the Great Books Room is that it is glassed. Students can look in and see others deliberating about great books around an oval table, or participating in mentor-led discussions.  And they see that this is a part of the experience they can have at college.

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

Overselling of Education Technology

The Overselling of Education Technology

By Alfie Kohn     Mar 16, 2016

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2016-03-16-the-overselling-of-education-technology

Basically, my response to ed tech is “It depends.” And one key consideration on which it depends is the reason given for supporting it.

ads in education periodicals, booths at conferences, and advocacy organizations are selling not only specific kinds of software but the whole idea that ed tech is de rigueur for any school that doesn’t want to risk being tagged as “twentieth century.”

Other people, particularly politicians, defend technology on the grounds that it will keep our students “competitive in the global economy.” This catch-all justification has been invoked to support other dubious policies, including highly prescriptive, one-size-fits-all national curriculum standards. It’s based on two premises: that decisions about children’s learning should be driven by economic considerations, and that people in other countries should be seen primarily as rivals to be defeated.

But the rationale that I find most disturbing—despite, or perhaps because of, the fact that it’s rarely made explicit—is the idea that technology will increase our efficiency…at teaching the same way that children have been taught for a very long time.

a deeper question: “What kinds of learning should be taking place in those schools?” If we favor an approach by which students actively construct meaning, an interactive process that involves a deep understanding of ideas and emerges from the interests and questions of the learners themselves, well, then we’d be open to the kinds of technology that truly support this kind of inquiry. Show me something that helps kids create, design, produce, construct—and I’m on board. Show me something that helps them make things collaboratively (rather than just on their own), and I’m even more interested—although it’s important to keep in mind that meaningful learning never requires technology, so even here we should object whenever we’re told that software (or a device with a screen) is essential.

more worrisome are the variants of ed tech that deal with grades and tests, making them even more destructive than they already are: putting grades online (thereby increasing their salience and their damaging effects), using computers to administer tests and score essays, and setting up “embedded” assessment that’s marketed as “competency-based.”

we shouldn’t confuse personalized learning with personal learning. The first involves adjusting the difficulty level of prefabricated skills-based exercises based on students’ test scores, and it requires the purchase of software. The second involves working with each student to create projects of intellectual discovery that reflect his or her unique needs and interests, and it requires the presence of a caring teacher who knows each child well.

a recent review found that studies of tech-based personalized instruction “show mixed results ranging from modest impacts to no impact” – despite the fact that it’s remarkably expensive. In fact, ed tech of various kinds has made headlines lately for reasons that can’t be welcome to its proponents. According to an article in Education Week, “a host of national and regional surveys suggest that teachers are far more likely to use tech to make their own jobs easier and to supplement traditional instructional strategies than to put students in control of their own learning.” Last fall, meanwhile, OECD reportednegative outcomes when students spent a lot of time using computers, while Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes

Ed tech is increasingly making its way even into classrooms for young children. And the federal government is pushing this stuff unreservedly: Check out the U.S. Office of Education Technology’s 2016 plan recommending greater use of “embedded” assessment, which “includes ongoing gathering and sharing of data,” plus, in a development that seems inevitable in retrospect, a tech-based program to foster a “growth mindset” in children. There’s much more in that plan, too—virtually all of it, as blogger Emily Talmage points out, uncannily aligned with the wish list of the Digital Learning Council, a group consisting largely of conservative advocacy groups and foundations, and corporations with a financial interest in promoting ed tech.

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

distance education theories

Transactional Distance

online learning is most effective when the perceived pedagogical distance between the instructor and students in the course is minimized with increased interaction; Interaction occurs through learner-instructor communication, learner-learner collaboration, and learner-content engagement. All three levels of interaction have important implications for effective online learning

popular:

8 Tips To Minimize Transactional Distance In eLearning

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_distance

dissertations:

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss/51

https://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/5764/Dissertation_lebeck.pdf

http://faculty.jou.ufl.edu/mleslie/spring96/moore.html

Classes:

https://ci484-learning-technologies.wikispaces.com/Transactional+Distance+Theory

By M. Moore:

Moore, M. (1972). Learner autonomy: The second dimension of independent learning.Convergence, 5, 76-88.

Moore, M. (1973). Toward a theory of independent learning and teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 44, 661-679.

Moore, M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp.22-38).New York: Routledge.

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3 (2), 1-6.

Moore, M. G. (2007). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of  distance education (2nd ed.), (pp.89-105). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Moore, M. G., (2013). Handbook of distance education (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge

Community of Inquiry (CoI)

The Community of Inquiry theoretical framework focuses on the degree of presence in the online learning environment. Presence is vital to student success in online courses. There are three types of presence that must be maintained: 1. Social presence to increase learners’ sense of community in the online environment, 2. Cognitive presence to enable learners to construct meaning from the online experience, and 3. Teaching presence to increase learner perception of the instructor’s ability to provide structure and direction in the online environment

popular:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_inquiry

https://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Community_of_inquiry_model

https://coi.athabascau.ca/coi-model/

Community of Inquiry from Phil Ice

peer reviewed:
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/18714/INTHIG%20369%20INTRO.pdf

https://www.academia.edu/398997/A_Constructivist_Approach_to_Online_Learning_The_Community_of_Inquiry_Framework

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED387454

By Garrison:

Garrison,  D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2013).  The community of inquiry theoretical framework. In M. Moore, Handbook of Distance Education (3 ed.) (pp. 104-119). New York: Routledge.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based

environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2/3), 87-105.

Garrison, D.R. and Arbaugh, J.B. (2007). Researching the Community of Inquiry framework:

Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education 10(3): 157–172 (2007).

Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 133-148.

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

challenges ed leaders technology

The Greatest Challenge Facing School Leaders in a Digital World

By Scott McLeod     Oct 29, 2017

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-10-29-the-greatest-challenge-facing-school-leaders-in-a-digital-world

the Center for the Advanced Study of Tech­nology Leadership in Education – CASTLE

Vision

If a school’s reputation and pride are built on decades or centuries of “this is how we’ve always done things here,” resistance from staff, parents, and alumni to significant changes may be fierce. In such institutions, heads of school may have to steer carefully between deeply ingrained habits and the need to modernize the information tools with which students and faculty work

Too often, when navigating faculty or parental resistance, school leaders and technology staff make reassurances that things will not have to change much in the classroom or that slow baby steps are OK. Unfortunately, this results in a different problem, which is that schools have now invested significant money, time, and energy into digital technologies but are using them sparingly and seeing little impact. In such schools, replicative uses of technology are quite common, but transformative uses that leverage the unique affordances of technology are quite rare.

many schools fail to proceed further because they don’t have a collective vision of what more transformative uses of technology might look like, nor do they have a shared understanding of and commitment to what it will take to get to such a place. As a result, faculty instruction and the learning experiences of students change little or not at all.

These schools have taken the time to involve all stakeholders—including students—in substantive conversations about what digital tools will allow them to do differently compared with previous analog practices. Their visions promote the potential of computing devices to facilitate all of those elements we now think of as essential 21st-century capacities: confidence, curiosity, enthusiasm, passion, critical thinking, problem-solving, and self-direction. Technology doesn’t simply support traditional teaching—it transforms it for deeper thinking and gives students more agency over their own learning.

Fear

Another prevalent issue preventing technology change in schools is fear—fear of change, of the unknown, of letting go of what we know best, of being learners again. But it’s also a fear of letting kids have wide access to the Internet with the possibility of cyberbullying, access to inappropriate material, and exposure to online predators or even excessive advertising. Fears, of course, need to be surfaced and addressed.

The fear drives some schools to ban cellphones, disallow students and faculty from using Facebook, and lock down Internet filters so tightly that useful websites are inaccessible. They prohibit the use of Twitter and YouTube, and they block blogs. Some educators see these types of responses as principled stands against the shortcomings and hassles of digital technologies. Others see them as rejections of the dehumanization of the education process by soulless machines. Often, however, it’s just schools clinging to the past and elevating what is comfortable or familiar over the potential of technology to help them better deliver on their school missions.

Heads of school don’t have to be skilled users themselves to be effective technology leaders, but they do have to exercise appropriate oversight and convey the message—repeatedly—that frequent, meaningful technology use in school is both important and expected. Nostalgia aside, there is no foreseeable future in which the primacy of printed text is not superseded by electronic text and multimedia. When nearly all information is digital or online, multi-modal and multi­media, accessed by mobile devices that fit in our pockets, the question should not be whether schools prepare students for a digital learning landscape, but rather how.

Control

Many educators aren’t necessarily afraid of technology, but they are so accustomed to heavily teacher-directed classrooms that they are leery about giving up control—and can’t see the value in doing so.

Although most of us recognize that mobile computers connected to the Internet may be the most powerful learning devices yet invented—and that youth are learning in powerful ways at home with these technologies—allowing students to have greater autonomy and ownership of the learning process can still seem daunting and questionable.

The “beyond” is particularly important. When we give students some voice in and choice about what and how they learn, we honor basic human needs for autonomy, we enhance students’ interest and engagement, and we truly actualize our missions of preparing lifelong learners.

The goal of instructional transformation is to empower students, not to disempower teachers. While instructor unfamiliarity with digital technologies, inquiry- or problem-based teaching techniques, or deeper learning strategies may result in some initial discomfort, these challenges can be overcome with robust support.

Support

A few workshops here and there rarely result in large-scale changes in implementation.

teacher-driven “unconferences” or “edcamps,” at which educators propose and facilitate discussion topics, can be powerful mechanisms for fostering professional dialogue and learning. Similarly, some schools offer voluntary “Tech Tuesdays” or “appy hours” to foster digital learning among interested faculty.

In addition to existing IT support, technology integration staff, or librarians/media specialists, some schools have student technology teams that are on call for assistance when needed.

A few middle schools and high schools go even further and assign teachers their own individual student technology mentors. These student-teacher pairings last all school year and comprise the first line of support for educators’ technology questions.

As teachers, heads of school, counselors, coaches, and librarians, we all now have the ability to participate in ongoing, virtual, global communities of practice.

Whether formal or informal, the focus of technology-related professional learning should be on student learning, not on the tools or devices. Independent school educators should always ask, “Technology for the purpose of what?” when considering the inclusion of digital technologies into learning activities. Technology never should be implemented just for technology’s sake.

++++++++++++
more on digital literacy for EDAD in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=digital+literacy+edad

digital humanities

7 Things You Should Know About Digital Humanities

Published:   Briefs, Case Studies, Papers, Reports  

https://library.educause.edu/resources/2017/11/7-things-you-should-know-about-digital-humanities

Lippincott, J., Spiro, L., Rugg, A., Sipher, J., & Well, C. (2017). Seven Things You Should Know About Digital Humanities (ELI 7 Things You Should Know). Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/~/media/files/library/2017/11/eli7150.pdf

definition

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

projects:

downsides

  • some disciplinary associations, including the Modern Language Association and the American Historical Association, 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

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

Cohort 8 research and write dissertation

When writing your dissertation…

Please have an FAQ-kind of list of the Google Group postings regarding resources and information on research and writing of Chapter 2

digital resource sets available through MnPALS Plus

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/10/21/digital-resource-sets-available-through-mnpals-plus/ 

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

[how to] write chapter 2

You were reminded to look at dissertations of your peers from previous cohorts and use their dissertations as a “template”: http://repository.stcloudstate.edu/do/discipline_browser/articles?discipline_key=1230

You also were reminded to use the documents in Google Drive: e.g. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7IvS0UYhpxFVTNyRUFtNl93blE

Please have also materials, which might help you organize our thoughts and expedite your Chapter 2 writing….

Do you agree with (did you use) the following observations:

The purpose of the review of the literature is to prove that no one has studied the gap in the knowledge outlined in Chapter 1. The subjects in the Review of Literature should have been introduced in the Background of the Problem in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 is not a textbook of subject matter loosely related to the subject of the study.  Every research study that is mentioned should in some way bear upon the gap in the knowledge, and each study that is mentioned should end with the comment that the study did not collect data about the specific gap in the knowledge of the study as outlined in Chapter 1.

The review should be laid out in major sections introduced by organizational generalizations. An organizational generalization can be a subheading so long as the last sentence of the previous section introduces the reader to what the next section will contain.  The purpose of this chapter is to cite major conclusions, findings, and methodological issues related to the gap in the knowledge from Chapter 1. It is written for knowledgeable peers from easily retrievable sources of the most recent issue possible.

Empirical literature published within the previous 5 years or less is reviewed to prove no mention of the specific gap in the knowledge that is the subject of the dissertation is in the body of knowledge. Common sense should prevail. Often, to provide a history of the research, it is necessary to cite studies older than 5 years. The object is to acquaint the reader with existing studies relative to the gap in the knowledge and describe who has done the work, when and where the research was completed, and what approaches were used for the methodology, instrumentation, statistical analyses, or all of these subjects.

If very little literature exists, the wise student will write, in effect, a several-paragraph book report by citing the purpose of the study, the methodology, the findings, and the conclusions.  If there is an abundance of studies, cite only the most recent studies.  Firmly establish the need for the study.  Defend the methods and procedures by pointing out other relevant studies that implemented similar methodologies. It should be frequently pointed out to the reader why a particular study did not match the exact purpose of the dissertation.

The Review of Literature ends with a Conclusion that clearly states that, based on the review of the literature, the gap in the knowledge that is the subject of the study has not been studied.  Remember that a “summary” is different from a “conclusion.”  A Summary, the final main section, introduces the next chapter.

from http://dissertationwriting.com/wp/writing-literature-review/

Here is the template from a different school (then SCSU)

http://semo.edu/education/images/EduLead_DissertGuide_2007.pdf 

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

When conducting qualitative data, how many people should be interviewed? Is there a minimum or a max

Here is my take on it:

Simple question, not so simple answer.

It depends.

Generally, the number of respondents depends on the type of qualitative inquiry: case study methodology, phenomenological study, ethnographic study, or ethnomethodology. However, a rule of thumb is for scholars to achieve saturation point–that is the point in which no fresh information is uncovered in response to an issue that is of interest to the researcher.

If your qualitative method is designed to meet rigor and trustworthiness, thick, rich data is important. To achieve these principles you would need at least 12 interviews, ensuring your participants are the holders of knowledge in the area you intend to investigate. In grounded theory you could start with 12 and interview more if your data is not rich enough.

In IPA the norm tends to be 6 interviews.

You may check the sample size in peer reviewed qualitative publications in your field to find out about popular practice. In all depends on the research problem, choice of specific qualitative approach and theoretical framework, so the answer to your question will vary from few to few dozens.

How many interviews are needed in a qualitative research?

There are different views in literature and no one agreed to the exact number. Here I reviewed some mostly cited references. Based Creswell (2014), it is estimated that 16 participants will provide rich and detailed data. There are a couple of researchers agreed ‎on 10–15 in-depth interviews ‎are ‎sufficient ‎‎ (Guest, Bunce & Johnson 2006; Baker & ‎Edwards 2012).

your methodological choices need to reflect your ontological position and understanding of knowledge production, and that’s also where you can argue a strong case for smaller qualitative studies, as you say. This is not only a problem for certain subjects, I think it’s a problem in certain departments or journals across the board of social science research, as it’s a question of academic culture.

here more serious literature and research (in case you need to cite in Chapter 3)

Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews

http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1428/3027

https://researcholic.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/sample_size_interviews/

Gaskell, George (2000). Individual and Group Interviewing. In Martin W. Bauer & George Gaskell (Eds.), Qualitative Researching With Text, Image and Sound. A Practical Handbook (pp. 38-56). London: SAGE Publications.

Lieberson, Stanley 1991: “Small N’s and Big Conclusions.” Social Forces 70:307-20. (http://www.jstor.org/pss/2580241)

Savolainen, Jukka 1994: “The Rationality of Drawing Big Conclusions Based on Small Samples.” Social Forces 72:1217-24. (http://www.jstor.org/pss/2580299).

Small, M.(2009) ‘How many cases do I need ? On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research’ Ethnography 10(1) 5-38

Williams,M. (2000) ‘Interpretivism and generalisation ‘ Sociology 34(2) 209-224

http://james-ramsden.com/semi-structured-interviews-how-many-interviews-is-enough/

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

how to start your writing process

If you are a Pinterest user, you are welcome to just sbuscribe to the board:

https://www.pinterest.com/aidedza/doctoral-cohort/

otherwise, I am mirroring the information also in the IMS blog:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/08/13/analytical-essay/ 

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

APA citing of “unusual” resources

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/08/06/apa-citation/

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

statistical modeling: your guide to Chapter 3

working on your dissertation, namely Chapter 3, you probably are consulting with the materials in this shared folder:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B7IvS0UYhpxFVTNyRUFtNl93blE?usp=sharing

In it, there is a subfolder, called “stats related materials”
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7IvS0UYhpxFcVg3aWxCX0RVams

where you have several documents from the Graduate school and myself to start building your understanding and vocabulary regarding your quantitative, qualitative or mixed method research.

It has been agreed that before you go to the Statistical Center (Randy Kolb), it is wise to be prepared and understand the terminology as well as the basics of the research methods.

Please have an additional list of materials available through the SCSU library and the Internet. They can help you further with building a robust foundation to lead your research:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/07/10/intro-to-stat-modeling/

In this blog entry, I shared with you:

  1. Books on intro to stat modeling available at the library. I understand the major pain borrowing books from the SCSU library can constitute, but you can use the titles and the authors and see if you can borrow them from your local public library
  2. I also sought and shared with you “visual” explanations of the basics terms and concepts. Once you start looking at those, you should be able to further research (e.g. YouTube) and find suitable sources for your learning style.

I (and the future cohorts) will deeply appreciate if you remember to share those “suitable sources for your learning style” either by sharing in this Google Group thread and/or sharing in the comments section of the blog entry: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/07/10/intro-to-stat-modeling.  Your Facebook group page is also a good place to discuss among ourselves best practices to learn and use research methods for your chapter 3.

++++++++++++++++
search for sources

Google just posted on their Facebook profile a nifty short video on Google Search
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/26/google-search/

Watching the video, you may remember the same #BooleanSearch techniques from our BI (bibliography instruction) session of last semester.

Considering the fact of preponderance of information in 2017: your Chapter 2 is NOT ONLY about finding information regrading your topic.
Your Chapter 2 is about proving your extensive research of the existing literature.

The techniques presented in the short video will arm you with methods to dig deeper and look further.

If you would like to do a decent job exploring all corners of the vast area called Internet, please consider other search engines similar to Google Scholar:

Microsoft Semantic Scholar (Semantic Scholar); Microsoft Academic Search; Academicindex.net; Proquest Dialog; Quetzal; arXiv;

https://www.google.com/; https://scholar.google.com/ (3 min); http://academic.research.microsoft.com/http://www.dialog.com/http://www.quetzal-search.infohttp://www.arXiv.orghttp://www.journalogy.com/
More about such search engines in the following blog entries:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/01/19/digital-literacy-for-glst-495/

and

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/05/01/history-becker/

Let me know, if more info needed and/or you need help embarking on the “deep” search

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

tips for writing and proofreading

please have several infographics to help you with your writing habits (organization) and proofreading, posted in the IMS blog:

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/11/writing-first-draft/
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/11/prewriting-strategies/ 

https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/11/essay-checklist/

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

letter – request copyright permission

Here are several samples on mastering such letter:

https://registrar.stanford.edu/students/dissertation-and-thesis-submission/preparing-engineer-theses-paper-submission/sample-3

http://www.iup.edu/graduatestudies/resources-for-current-students/research/thesis-dissertation-information/before-starting-your-research/copyright-permission-instructions-and-sample-letter/

https://brocku.ca/webfm_send/25032

 

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

 

 

 

interactivity for the library

In 2015, former library dean purchased two large touch-screen monitors (I believe paid $3000 each). Shortly before that, I had offered to the campus fitting applications for touch screens (being that large screens or mobiles):

Both applications fit perfect the idea of interactivity in teaching (and learning) – https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=interactivity

With the large touch screens, I proposed to have one of the large screens, positioned outside in the Miller Center lobby and used as a dummy terminal (50” + screens run around $700) to mount educational material (e.g. Guenter Grass’s celebration of his work: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/04/15/gunter-grass-1927-2015/ ) and have students explore by actively engaging, rather than just passively absorbing information. The bus-awaiting students are excellent potential users and they visibly are NOT engaged by by the currently broadcasted information on these screens, but can be potentially engaged if such information is restructured in interactive content.

The initial library administration approval was stalled by a concern with students “opening porno sites” while the library is closed which, indeed, would have been a problem.

My 2015 inquiry with the IT technicians about freezing a browser and a specific tab, which could prevent such issues, but it did not go far (pls see solution below). Failing to secure relatively frigid environment on the touch screen, the project was quietly left to rot.

I am renewing my proposal to consider the rather expensive touch screen monitors, which have been not utilized to their potential, and test my idea to engage students in a meaningful knowledge-building by using these applications to either create content or engage with content created by others.

Further, I am proposing that I investigate with campus faculty the possibility to bring the endeavor a step further by having a regularly-meeting group to develop engaging content using these and similar apps; for their own classes or any other [campus-related] activities. The incentive can be some reward, after users and creators “vote” the best (semester? Academic year?) project. The less conspicuous benefit will be the exposure of faculty to modern technology; some of the faculty are still abiding by lecturing style, other faculty, who seek interactivity are engulfed in the “smart board” fiction. Engaging the faculty in the touch screen creation of teaching materials will allow them to expand the practice to their and their students’ mobile devices. The benefit for the library will be the “hub” of activities, where faculty can learn from each other experience[s] in the library, rather than in their own departments/school only. The reward will be an incentive from the upper administration (document to attach in PDR?). I will need both your involvement/support. Tom Hergert by helping me rally faculty interest and the administrators incentivizing faculty to participate in the initial project, until it gains momentum and recognition.

In the same fashion, as part of the aforementioned group or separate, I would like to host a regularly-meeting group of students, who besides play and entertainment, aim the same process of creating interactive learning materials for their classes/projects. Same “best voted” process by peers. My preferable reward: upper administration is leaving recommendation in the students’ Linkedin account for future employers. I will need both your involvement/support. The student union can be decisive in bringing students to this endeavor.  Both of you have more cloud with the student union then only a regular faculty such as me.

In regard to the security (porn alert, see above) I have the agreement of Dr. Tirthankar Ghos with the IS Department. Dr. Ghosh will be most pleased to announce as a class project the provision of a secure environment for the touch screen monitor to be left after the group meetings for “use” by students in the library. Dr. Ghosh is, however, concerned/uncertain with the level of cooperation from IT, considering that for his students to enable such environment, they have to have the “right” access; namely behind firewalls, administrative privileges etc. Each of you will definitely be more persuasive with Phil Thorson convincing him in the merit of having IS student work with SCSU IT technician, since it is a win-win situation: the IT technician does not have to “waste time” (as in 2015) and resolve an issue and the IS student will be having a project-based, real-life learning experience by enabling the project under the supervision of the IT technician. Besides: a. student-centered, project-based learning; b. IT technician time saved, we also aim c. no silos / collaborative SCSU working environment, as promised by the reorganization process.

NMC digital literacy

NMC Releases Second Horizon Project Strategic Brief on Digital Literacy

NMC Releases Second Horizon Project Strategic Brief on Digital Literacy

The New Media Consortium (NMC) has released Digital Literacy in Higher Education, Part II: An NMC Horizon Project Strategic Brief, a follow-up to its 2016 strategic brief on digital literacy.

PDF available here.
2017-nmc-strategic-brief-digital-literacy-in-higher-education-II-ycykt3

But what does it really mean to be digitally literate, and which standards do we use?” said Dr. Eden Dahlstrom, NMC Executive Director. “This report sheds light on the meaning and impact of digital literacy using cross-cultural and multi-disciplinary approaches, highlighting frameworks and exemplars in practice.

NMC’s report has identified a need for institutions and thought leaders to consider the ways in which content creation is unequally expressed throughout the world. In an examination of digital literacy within European, Middle Eastern, and African nations (EMEA), research has surfaced unequal access to information technology based on inequalities of economics, gender, race, and political divides.

2020 2015
1. Complex Problem Solving 1. Complex Problem Solving
2. Critical Thinking 2. Coordinating with Others
3. Creativity 3. People  Management
4. People  Management 4. Critical Thinking
5. Coordinating with Others 5. Negotiation
6. Emotional  Intelligence 6. Quality Control
7. Judgment and Decision Making 7. Service  Orientation
8. Service  Orientation 8. Judgment and Decision Making
9. Negotiation 9. Active Listening
10. Cognitive  Flexibility 10. Creativity

Digital tools themselves are merely enablers, pushing the envelope of  what learners can create. No longer is it acceptable for students to be passive consumers of content; they can contribute to the local and global knowledge ecosystem, learning through the act of producing and discussing rich media, applications, and objects. In the words of many institutional mission statements, students do not have to wait until they graduate to change the world.

Using readily available  digital  content  creation tools (e.g., video production and editing, web and graphic tools), students are evolving into digital storytellers,

digital literacy now encompasses the important skills of being able to coordinate with others to create something truly original that neither mind would fathom independently.

The ability to discern credible from inaccurate resources is foundational to digital literacy. my note: #Fakenews

A lack of broad consensus on the meaning of digital literacy still hinders its uptake, although a growing  body  of research is helping higher education professionals better navigate the continuous adjustments to the field brought about by emerging pedagogies and technologies.

Information literacy is a nearly universal component within these digital literacy frameworks. Critically finding, assessing, and using digital content within the vast and sometimes chaotic internet appears as a vital skill in almost every account, including those published beyond libraries. In contrast, media literacy is less widely included in digital literacy publications,  possibly  due  to  a  focus  on  scholarly, rather than popular, materials. Digital literacies ultimately combine information and media literacy.

United States digital literacy frameworks tend to  focus  on  educational  policy details and personal empowerment,  the  latter  encouraging  learners  to  become  more  effective students, better creators, smarter information consumers, and more influential members of their community.

National policies are vitally important in European digital literacy work, unsurprising for a continent well populated with nation-states and struggling to redefine itself… this recommendation for Balkan digital strategy: “Media and information education (with an emphasis on critical thinking and switching from consumption to action) should start at early ages, but address all ages.”

African digital literacy is more business-oriented. Frameworks often speak to job skills and digital entrepreneurship. New skills and professions are emphasized, symbolized by the call for “new collar” positions.

Middle Eastern nations offer yet another variation, with a strong focus on media literacy. As with other regions, this can be a response to countries with strong state influence or control over local media. It can  also  represent  a  drive  to  produce  more  locally-sourced  content,  as  opposed  to  consuming

Digital literacy is a complex phenomenon in 2017, when considered internationally. Nations  and regions are creating ways to help their populations grapple with the digital revolution that are shaped by their local situations. In doing so, they cut across the genealogy of digital literacies, touching on its historical components: information literacy, digital skills, and media literacy.

2017-nmc-strategic-brief-digital-literacy-in-higher-education-II-ycykt3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How Does Digital Literacy Change Pedagogy?

Students are not all digital natives, and do not necessarily have the same level of capabilities. Some need to be taught to use online tools (such as how to navigate a LMS) for learning. However, once digital literacy skills for staff and students are explicitly recognized as important for learning and teaching, critical drivers for pedagogical change are in place.

Pedagogy that uses an inquiry based/problem solving approach is a great framework to enhance the use and practice of digital skills/capabilities in the classroom.

The current gap between students’ information literacy skills and their need  to  internalize  digital literacy competencies creates an opportunity for academic librarians to support students  in  the pursuit of civic online reasoning at the core of NMC’s multimodal model of three digital literacies. Academic librarians need a new strategy that evolves information literacy to an expanded role educating digitally literate students. Let’s build a new model in which academic librarians are  entrepreneurial collaborators with faculty,55  supporting  their  classroom  efforts  to  help  students become responsible sharers and commentators of news on social media.

“Digital literacy is not just about ensuring that students can use the latest technologies, but also developing skills to select the right tools for a particular context to deepen their learning outcomes and engage in creative problem-solving”

There is a disconnect between how students experience and interact with technology in their personal lives and how they use technology in their roles as  students.  Yes, students are digitally savvy, and yes,  universities  have  a  role  in  questioning  (insightfully  of  course) their sometimes brash digital savviness. We have a situation where students are expecting more, but (as I see it) cannot provide a clear demand, while faculty are unable to walk in  the  shoes  of  the students.

 

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

personalized learning

What Do We Really Mean When We Say ‘Personalized Learning’?

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

1 2 3 4