Searching for "technology library"

Technology Training for Library Staff

Please join us for this free webinar and learn fun and effective ways to develop technology skills amongst library staff:

Technology Training for Library Staff: Effective and Engaging Training Programs
Wednesday, January 27, 11:00am-12:00pm PST

Registration Link: https://cc.readytalk.com/r/lpbeog1w500a&eom

 

PPT Tech Skills Library Staff

How can we get library staff excited about learning new technology skills? How can libraries be better prepared to help the public with technology questions? How can staff go from tech shy to tech savvy? Designing an engaging technology training program can help all library staff get up to speed.

Join us for this free webinar to learn about two fun and engaging staff technology training programs in public libraries. Our guest panelists will share details of their programs, including success stories and lessons learned.

  • The Estes Valley Library dedicated six months to bringing every staff member up to technical literacy through trainings that were hands-on and fun. Tech Guide Diana Laughlin will share their Technology Competencies, the process they created for staff learning, and the way they approached staff accountability.
  • The Sunnyvale Public Library designed the True Tech Ninja program. Adult Services Librarian Rachel Schmidt will share how they created a gamified program to teach technology skills through seven stages. Team work was encouraged and rewarded, and library administration played a key role in motivating staff to learn.

This webinar will be recorded and archived on the TechSoup for Libraries website. Please register for this webinar to receive an email notification when the archive is available. Email questions to cschimpf@techsoupglobal.org

Register for this webinar here: https://cc.readytalk.com/r/lpbeog1w500a&eom

Crystal Schimpf

Webinar Producer, TechSoup for Libraries

 

my notes:

1PM, Wed, Jan 27. #ts4libs

librarians excited about tech stuff
Diana Laughlin

she from a small public library in a small (5K) town in Colorado.

tech scavenger hunt: complete tech tasks all around the lib; once a year.

The Invisible Digital Divide In Libraries

by https://twitter.com/sallyheroes

tech ninja training. 7 ninja skills. your first mission is to master the library web page. complete these three tasks.

(my note: using gaming and gamification techniques). and this is how this library improved their web site – through gamification and including ALL parties, whereas this SCSU library has a web committee, where a regular LRS employee (heaven forbid a regular student) to gain participation on its web page is very much the same as to gain access to the federal reserve.

@TechSoup4Libs
“Would you like fries like that?” aka the art of up-selling: Tell patrons about services they might not already know about! . like for example the digital literacy instruction and other technology technology sessions, which some of the LRS faculty offer, but for some reason, they fail to be promoted by the LRS librarians.

Technology Skills for Library Staff: Effective and Engaging Training Programs

Dear Plamen Miltenoff,

Thank you for attending our webinar! You can view the archive materials for this webinar by clicking the links on the right. Additional resources can be viewed at the links below. Be sure to sign up to receive the TechSoup for Libraries Newsletter.

Upcoming TechSoup Webinars:

Presenter Resources:

TechSoup Product Donations:

TechSoup Blog Posts:

TechSoup:

 

Top Tech Trends – 2013 Annual | Library Information Technology Association (LITA)

Top Tech Trends – 2013 Annual

http://www.ala.org/lita/node/723

Trends

  • DIY Library eBook Platforms
  • Digital Rights Management
  • Discovery and rights determination
  • MOOCs, flipped classrooms, and gamification fatigue
  • Linked data
  • Makerspaces
  • Data collection and data mining

library IT’s approach to managing tech support

your library IT’s approach to managing tech support within the framework of moving IT projects forward. Also, how big is your IT team vs your staff?

We have created an environment at our library where staff anticipate almost instant tech support. While this is great for our staff and patrons it’s proven not so great for the IT department as our IT projects that must get done take longer than they should and seem to roll endlessly. It can feel like we’re sacrificing the “big boulders” for endless minutia.

I wondered if you all could tell me your library IT’s approach to managing tech support within the framework of moving IT projects forward.

Also, how big is your IT team vs your staff?

Thank you,
Madeleine  Madeleine Sturmer IT Manager | Teton County Library msturmer@tclib.org | 307.733.2164 x143

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

While the responses will vary widely based on size, type and IT-issues approaches, I can share one.

Providence College is a private, medium-sized (4,300 FTE students) Masters-I institution.

Our library is a fully integrated (horizontally and vertically) Commons (Library+Commons = no silos, traditional+technology-rich, open 116 hours/week for a primarily residential campus.

IT issues are tiered (e.g., 1-5 in complexity) and we have in-house IT specialists (two – one M-F days, one S-Th evenings) and many “back-up specialists”.  The IT specialists handle most tiers-1-3 issues (sometimes tier 4) very promptly and refer tier 4-5 issues to central IT.  All Library+Commons staff are hired with “relative high-tech/digital expertise, so that there is an articulated in-house IT team.  This means that most IT issues are handled in-house and promptly.  Library+Commons IT reports up to the Assistant Director and Head of Technology & Access.

Russell Bailey, Ph.D.     Professor & Library Director, Providence College  http://www.providence.edu/library  http://works.bepress.com/d_r_bailey/ http://www.providence.edu/library/faculty/Pages/drbailey.aspx

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

the biggest challenge (and the most important) is to get the word out to the staff about how it works.  I spoke at multiple all staff meetings about the process, put out a lot of documentation, and spoke at multiple meetings of various teams and departments to get the word out.  Once you have a structure you have to support and enforce it.  Getting your administration on board is vital-if the director or associate director thinks that they can “jump the queue” it won’t work.  They have to understand that for the good of the whole, they might have to wait for something that is non-emergency.

Hope that helps-glad to provide further info offline if needed.

Carolyn Carolyn Coulter PrairieCat LLSAP Services Manager / PrairieCat Director Reaching Across Illinois Library System Coal Valley Office Phone: 309.623.4176 Fax: 309.517.1567 carolyn.coulter@railslibraries.info
++++++++++++++++++++
more on technology in the library in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=library+technology

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) – http://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: http://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.

measuring library outcomes and value

THE VALUE OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIES
A Comprehensive Research Review and Report. Megan Oakleaf

http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/issues/value/val_report.pdf

Librarians in universities, colleges, and community colleges can establish, assess, and link
academic library outcomes to institutional outcomes related to the following areas:
student enrollment, student retention and graduation rates, student success, student
achievement, student learning, student engagement, faculty research productivity,
faculty teaching, service, and overarching institutional quality.
Assessment management systems help higher education educators, including librarians, manage their outcomes, record and maintain data on each outcome, facilitate connections to
similar outcomes throughout an institution, and generate reports.
Assessment management systems are helpful for documenting progress toward
strategic/organizational goals, but their real strength lies in managing learning
outcomes assessments.
to determine the impact of library interactions on users, libraries can collect data on how individual users engage with library resources and services.
increase library impact on student enrollment.
p. 13-14improved student retention and graduation rates. High -impact practices include: first -year seminars and experiences, common intellectual experiences, learning communities, writing – intensive courses, collaborative assignments and projects, undergraduate research, Value of Academic Libraries diversity/global learning, service learning/community -based learning, internships, capstone courses and projects

p. 14

Libraries support students’ ability to do well in internships, secure job placements, earn salaries, gain acceptance to graduate/professional schools, and obtain marketable skills.
librarians can investigate correlations between student library interactions and their GPA well as conduct test item audits of major professional/educational tests to determine correlations between library services or resources and specific test items.
p. 15 Review course content, readings, reserves, and assignments.
Track and increase library contributions to faculty research productivity.
Continue to investigate library impact on faculty grant proposals and funding, a means of generating institutional income. Librarians contribute to faculty grant proposals in a number of ways.
Demonstrate and improve library support of faculty teaching.
p. 20 Internal Focus: ROI – lib value = perceived benefits / perceived costs
production of a commodity – value=quantity of commodity produced × price per unit of commodity
p. 21 External focus
a fourth definition of value focuses on library impact on users. It asks, “What is the library trying to achieve? How can librarians tell if they have made a difference?” In universities, colleges, and community colleges, libraries impact learning, teaching, research, and service. A main method for measuring impact is to “observe what the [users] are actually doing and what they are producing as a result”
A fifth definition of value is based on user perceptions of the library in relation to competing alternatives. A related definition is “desired value” or “what a [user] wants to have happen when interacting with a [library] and/or using a [library’s] product or service” (Flint, Woodruff and Fisher Gardial 2002) . Both “impact” and “competing alternatives” approaches to value require libraries to gain new understanding of their users’ goals as well as the results of their interactions with academic libraries.
p. 23 Increasingly, academic library value is linked to service, rather than products. Because information products are generally produced outside of libraries, library value is increasingly invested in service aspects and librarian expertise.
service delivery supported by librarian expertise is an important library value.
p. 25 methodology based only on literature? weak!
p. 26 review and analysis of the literature: language and literature are old (e.g. educational administrators vs ed leaders).
G government often sees higher education as unresponsive to these economic demands. Other stakeholder groups —students, pa rents, communities, employers, and graduate/professional schools —expect higher education to make impacts in ways that are not primarily financial.

p. 29

Because institutional missions vary (Keeling, et al. 2008, 86; Fraser, McClure and
Leahy 2002, 512), the methods by which academic libraries contribute value vary as
well. Consequently, each academic library must determine the unique ways in which they contribute to the mission of their institution and use that information to guide planning and decision making (Hernon and Altman, Assessing Service Quality 1998, 31) . For example, the University of Minnesota Libraries has rewritten their mission and vision to increase alignment with their overarching institution’s goals and emphasis on strategic engagement (Lougee 2009, allow institutional missions to guide library assessment
Assessment vs. Research
In community colleges, colleges, and universities, assessment is about defining the
purpose of higher education and determining the nature of quality (Astin 1987)
.
Academic libraries serve a number of purposes, often to the point of being
overextended.
Assessment “strives to know…what is” and then uses that information to change the
status quo (Keeling, et al. 2008, 28); in contrast, research is designed to test
hypotheses. Assessment focuses on observations of change; research is concerned with the degree of correlation or causation among variables (Keeling, et al. 2008, 35) . Assessment “virtually always occurs in a political context ,” while research attempts to be apolitical” (Upcraft and Schuh 2002, 19) .
 p. 31 Assessment seeks to document observations, but research seeks to prove or disprove ideas. Assessors have to complete assessment projects, even when there are significant design flaws (e.g., resource limitations, time limitations, organizational contexts, design limitations, or political contexts); whereas researchers can start over (Upcraft and Schuh 2002, 19) . Assessors cannot always attain “perfect” studies, but must make do with “good enough” (Upcraft and Schuh 2002, 18) . Of course, assessments should be well planned, be based on clear outcomes (Gorman 2009, 9- 10) , and use appropriate methods (Keeling, et al. 2008, 39) ; but they “must be comfortable with saying ‘after’ as well as ‘as a result of’…experiences” (Ke eling, et al. 2008, 35) .
Two multiple measure approaches are most significant for library assessment: 1) triangulation “where multiple methods are used to find areas of convergence of data from different methods with an aim of overcoming the biases or limitations of data gathered from any one particular method” (Keeling, et al. 2008, 53) and 2) complementary mixed methods , which “seek to use data from multiple methods to build upon each other by clarifying, enhancing, or illuminating findings between or among methods” (Keeling, et al. 2008, 53) .
p. 34 Academic libraries can help higher education institutions retain and graduate students, a keystone part of institutional missions (Mezick 2007, 561) , but the challenge lies in determining how libraries can contribute and then document their contribution
p. 35. Student Engagement:  In recent years, academic libraries have been transformed to provide “technology and content ubiquity” as well as individualized support
My Note: I read the “technology and content ubiquity” as digital literacy / metaliteracies, where basic technology instructional sessions (everything that IMS offers for years) is included, but this library still clenches to information literacy only.
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) http://nsse.indiana.edu/
http://nsse.indiana.edu/2017_Institutional_Report/pdf/NSSE17%20Snapshot%20%28NSSEville%20State%29.pdf
p. 37 Student Learning
In the past, academic libraries functioned primarily as information repositories; now they are becoming learning enterprises (Bennett 2009, 194) . This shift requires academic librarians to embed library services and resources in the teaching and learning activities of their institutions (Lewis 2007) . In the new paradigm, librarians focus on information skills, not information access (Bundy 2004, 3); they think like educators, not service providers (Bennett 2009, 194) .
p. 38. For librarians, the main content area of student learning is information literacy; however, they are not alone in their interest in student inform ation literacy skills (Oakleaf, Are They Learning? 2011).
My note: Yep. it was. 20 years ago. Metaliteracies is now.
p. 41 surrogates for student learning in Table 3.
p. 42 strategic planning for learning:
According to Kantor, the university library “exists to benefit the students of the educational institution as individuals ” (Library as an Information Utility 1976 , 101) . In contrast, academic libraries tend to assess learning outcomes using groups of students
p. 45 Assessment Management Systems
Tk20
Each assessment management system has a slightly different set of capabilities. Some guide outcomes creation, some develop rubrics, some score student work, or support student portfolios. All manage, maintain, and report assessment data
p. 46 faculty teaching
However, as online collections grow and discovery tools evolve, that role has become less critical (Schonfeld and Housewright 2010; Housewright and Schonfeld, Ithaka’s 2006 Studies of Key Stakeholders 2008, 256) . Now, libraries serve as research consultants, project managers, technical support professionals, purchasers , and archivists (Housewright, Themes of Change 2009, 256; Case 2008) .
Librarians can count citations of faculty publications (Dominguez 2005)
.

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

Tenopir, C. (2012). Beyond usage: measuring library outcomes and value. Library Management33(1/2), 5-13.

http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dllf%26AN%3d70921798%26site%3dehost-live%26scope%3dsite

methods that can be used to measure the value of library products and services. (Oakleaf, 2010; Tenopir and King, 2007): three main categories

  1. Implicit value. Measuring usage through downloads or usage logs provide an implicit measure of value. It is assumed that because libraries are used, they are of value to the users. Usage of e-resources is relatively easy to measure on an ongoing basis and is especially useful in collection development decisions and comparison of specific journal titles or use across subject disciplines.

do not show purpose, satisfaction, or outcomes of use (or whether what is downloaded is actually read).

  1. Explicit methods of measuring value include qualitative interview techniques that ask faculty members, students, or others specifically about the value or outcomes attributed to their use of the library collections or services and surveys or interviews that focus on a specific (critical) incident of use.
  2. Derived values, such as Return on Investment (ROI), use multiple types of data collected on both the returns (benefits) and the library and user costs (investment) to explain value in monetary terms.

++++++++++++++++++
more on ROI in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/11/02/roi-of-social-media/

Zello for library use

learning from real life experience

Today’s report on the use of Zello (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/houston-residents-and-civilians-turn-to-zello-app-to-coordinate-rescue-efforts-2017-08-29) by Houston residents during Hurricane Harvey has parallels with the organizational efforts of using Zello by the Venezuelan people (https://zello.com/channels/k/b2dDl) in 2014. (https://advox.globalvoices.org/2014/02/23/walkie-talkie-app-zello-blocked-in-venezuela/)

Zello, HeyTell and Voxer Make Your Smartphone a Walkie-Talkie (NYT, 2012) are apps for smart phones and mobile devices.
They are free.
They do much more than a physical walkie-talkie (e.g. send visuals, record messages)
They are more environment friendly, since do not require physical presence and so much battery power: https://www.compareninja.com/tables/single/60573

Yo is a similar messaging app: http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/07/09/social-media-yo/

Library and University use:

In 2014, we proposed to the middle management the consideration of Yo as alarm system:

From: Miltenoff, Plamen
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2014 9:17 PM
To: ??????, Mark A. <???????@stcloudstate.edu>
Subject: FW: Yo at LRS

Good evening Mark

Based on the article below:

http://www.businessinsider.com/yo-updates-on-israel-missile-attacks-2014-7

The upper management might consider fire and/or tornado alarm app for SCSU students similarly to the one, which the Israelis are using to back up their alarm system.

I am confident that some other US school is already thinking about the same and developing probably the app.

Thanks for considering…

Plamen

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

From: Miltenoff, Plamen
Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2014 8:59 PM
To: ???????, Colette ?????????
Cc: ??????, Joseph
Subject: Yo at LRS

Collette,

I am not sure if this news

http://www.businessinsider.com/yo-updates-on-israel-missile-attacks-2014-7

will increase your interest toward “Yo” since you said that you are not interested in politics

As shared with Joe several months ago about “Zello” being used in Venezuela  (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/02/21/venezuela-blocks-zello-ap_n_4830452.html ), ingenuity during political events can give us great ideas how to use social media apps in daily work

I would like to ask you again to consider testing Yo and sharing your ideas how we can apply it at LRS
It is worth checking the penetration of Yo among SCSU students and use it.

Thank you and lkng forward to hearing your opinion

Plamen

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

benefits for the library and potentially for the campus:

  1. reduce financial cost: batteries for the walkie talkies and the wear off of the walkie talkie can be replaced by a virtual app (again, apps for each of the three potential candidates are free)
  2. environmentally friendly. Apps are virtual. Walkie talkies are physical
  3. improve productivity. walkie talkie allow only talk. Apps allow: audio, video (images) and text
  4. raise the level of critical thinking (increase productivity by proxy): the use of several media: text, visuals, audio will allow users to think in a wider diapason when troubleshooting and/or doing their tasks
  5. the library can be the sandbox to smooth out details of the application and lessons learned can help replace walkie talkies across campus with 21st century tools and increase productivity campus wide.

+++++++++++++++++++
previous posts on Zello in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=zello

 

Privacy & Security in Today’s Library

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

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

Hi Plamen,

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

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

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks!
___________________

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

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

Bio

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

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

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

Twitter handle @SCSUtechinstruc

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

The virtuality of privacy and security on the modern campus:

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

Abstract/Summary of Your Proposed Session

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

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

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

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

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

Abstract

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

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

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

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

Anything else you would like to add

3 take-aways from this session:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

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

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

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

 

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

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

1 2 3 12