Ungerer, L. M. (2016). Digital Curation as a Core Competency in Current Learning and Literacy: A Higher Education Perspective. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(5). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i5.2566
Dunaway (2011) suggests that learning landscapes in a digital age are networked, social, and technological. Since people commonly create and share information by collecting, filtering, and customizing digital content, educators should provide students opportunities to master these skills (Mills, 2013). In enhancing critical thinking, we have to investigate pedagogical models that consider students’ digital realities (Mihailidis & Cohen, 2013). November (as cited in Sharma & Deschaine, 2016), however warns that although the Web fulfils a pivotal role in societal media, students often are not guided on how to critically deal with the information that they access on the Web. Sharma and Deschaine (2016) further point out the potential for personalizing teaching and incorporating authentic material when educators themselves digitally curate resources by means of Web 2.0 tools.
p. 24. Communities of practice. Lave and Wenger’s (as cited in Weller, 2011) concept of situated learning and Wenger’s (as cited in Weller, 2011) idea of communities of practice highlight the importance of apprenticeship and the social role in learning.
criteria to publish a paper
Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?
Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any significant work ignored?
Methodology: Is the paper’s argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?
Results: Are results presented clearly and analyzed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?
Implications for research, practice and/or society: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for research, practice and/or society? Does the paper bridge the gap between theory and practice? How can the research be used in practice (economic and commercial impact), in teaching, to influence public policy, in research (contributing to the body of knowledge)? What is the impact upon society (influencing public attitudes, affecting quality of life)? Are these implications consistent with the findings and conclusions of the paper?
Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal’s readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.
Stanton, K. V., & Liew, C. L. (2011). Open Access Theses in Institutional Repositories: An Exploratory Study of the Perceptions of Doctoral Students. Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 16(4),
We examine doctoral students’ awareness of and attitudes to open access forms of publication. Levels of awareness of open access and the concept of institutional repositories, publishing behaviour and perceptions of benefits and risks of open access publishing were explored. Method: Qualitative and quantitative data were collected through interviews with eight doctoral students enrolled in a range of disciplines in a New Zealand university and a self-completion Web survey of 251 students. Analysis: Interview data were analysed thematically, then evaluated against a theoretical framework. The interview data were then used to inform the design of the survey tool. Survey responses were analysed as a single set, then by disciple using SurveyMonkey’s online toolkit and Excel. Results: While awareness of open access and repository archiving is still low, the majority of interview and survey respondents were found to be supportive of the concept of open access. The perceived benefits of enhanced exposure and potential for sharing outweigh the perceived risks. The majority of respondents were supportive of an existing mandatory thesis submission policy. Conclusions: Low levels of awareness of the university repository remains an issue, and could be addressed by further investigating the effectiveness of different communication channels for promotion.
PLEASE NOTE:
the researchers use the qualitative approach: by interviewing participants and analyzing their responses thematically, they build the survey.
Then then administer the survey (the quantitative approach)
How do you intend to use a mixed method? Please share
Metaphors: A Problem Statement is like… metaphor — a novel or poetic linguistic expression where one or more words for a concept are used outside normal conventional meaning to express a similar concept. Aristotle l The DNA of the research l A snapshot of the research l The foundation of the research l The Heart of the research l A “taste” of the research l A blueprint for the study
digital object identifier (DOI) is a unique alphanumeric string assigned by a registration agency (the International DOI Foundation) to identify content and provide a persistent link to its location on the Internet. The publisher assigns a DOI when your article is published and made available electronically.
Why do we need it?
2010 Changes to APA for Electronic Materials Digital object identifier (DOI). DOI available. If a DOI is available you no longer include a URL. Example: Author, A. A. (date). Title of article. Title of Journal, volume(number), page numbers. doi: xx.xxxxxxx
Accodring to Sugimoto et al (2016), the Use of social media platforms for by researchers is high — ranging from 75 to 80% in large -scale surveys (Rowlands et al., 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013; Van Eperen & Marincola, 2011) .
There is one more reason, and, as much as you want to dwell on the fact that you are practitioners and research is not the most important part of your job, to a great degree, you may be judged also by the scientific output of your office and/or institution.
In that sense, both social media and altimetrics might suddenly become extremely important to understand and apply.
Shortly altmetrics (alternative metrics) measure the impact your scientific output has on the community. Your teachers and you present, publish and create work, which might not be presented and published, but may be widely reflected through, e.g. social media, and thus, having impact on the community.
How such impact is measured, if measured at all, can greatly influence the money flow to your institution
For EVEN MORE information, read the entire article:
Sugimoto, C. R., Work, S., Larivière, V., & Haustein, S. (2016). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: a review of the literature. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.08112
Thelwall, M., & Wilson, P. (2016). Mendeley readership altmetrics for medical articles: An analysis of 45 fields. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1962–1972. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23501
Todd Tetzlaff is using Mendeley and he might be the only one to benefit … 🙂
Here is some food for thought from the article above:
Doctoral students and junior researchers are the largest reader group in Mendeley ( Haustein & Larivière, 2014; Jeng et al., 2015; Zahedi, Costas, & Wouters, 2014a) .
Studies have also provided evidence of high rate s of blogging among certain subpopulations: for example, approximately one -third of German university staff (Pscheida et al., 2013) and one fifth of UK doctoral students use blogs (Carpenter et al., 2012) .
Social data sharing platforms provide an infrastructure to share various types of scholarly objects —including datasets, software code, figures, presentation slides and videos —and for users to interact with these objects (e.g., comment on, favorite, like , and reuse ). Platforms such as Figshare and SlideShare disseminate scholars’ various types of research outputs such as datasets, figures, infographics, documents, videos, posters , or presentation slides (Enis, 2013) and displays views, likes, and shares by other users (Mas -Bleda et al., 2014) .
Frequently mentioned social platforms in scholarly communication research include research -specific tools such as Mendeley, Zotero, CiteULike, BibSonomy, and Connotea (now defunct) as well as general tools such as Delicious and Digg (Hammond, Hannay, Lund, & Scott, 2005; Hull, Pettifer, & Kell, 2008; Priem & Hemminger, 2010; Reher & Haustein, 2010) .
qualitative research
“The focus group interviews were analysed based on the principles of interpretative phenomenology”
if you are not podcast fans, I understand. The link above is a pain in the behind to make work, if you are not familiar with using podcast.
Here is an easier way to find it:
1. open your cell phone and go find the podcast icon, which is pre-installed, but you might have not ever used it [yet].
2. In the app, use the search option and type “stuff you should know”
3. the podcast will pop up. scroll and find “How the scientific method works,” and/or search for it if you can.
Once you can play it on the phone, you have to find time to listen to it.
I listen to podcast when i have to do unpleasant chores such as: 1. walking to work 2. washing the dishes 3. flying long hours (very rarely). 4. Driving in the car.
There are bunch of other situations, when you may be strapped and instead of filling disgruntled and stressed, you can deliver the mental [junk] food for your brain.
Earbuds help me: 1. forget the unpleasant task, 2. Utilize time 3. Learn cool stuff
Here are podcasts, I am subscribed for, besides “stuff you should know”:
TED Radio Hour
TED Talks Education
NPR Fresh Air
BBC History
and bunch others, which, if i don’t go a listen for an year, i go and erase and if i peruse through the top chart and something picks my interest, I try.
If I did not manage to convince to podcast, totally fine; do not feel obligated.
However, this podcast, you can listen to on your computer, if you don’t want to download on your phone.
It is one hour show by two geeks, who are trying to make funny (and they do) a dry matter such as quantitative vs qualitative, which you want to internalize:
1. Sometimes at minute 12, they talk about inductive versus deductive to introduce you to qualitative versus quantitative. It is good to listen to their musings, since your dissertation is going through inductive and deductive process, and understanding it, can help you control better your dissertation writing.
2. Scientific method. Hypothesis etc (around min 17).
While this is not a Ph.D., but Ed.D. and we do not delve into the philosophy of science and dissertation etc. the more you know about this process, the better control you have over your dissertation.
3. Methods and how you prove (Chapter 3) is discussed around min 35
4. dependent and independent variables and how do you do your research in general (min ~45)
Shortly, listen and please do share your thoughts below. You do not have to be kind to this source offering. Actually, be as critical as possible, so you can help me decide, if I should offer it to the next cohort and thank you in advance for your feedback.
the idea of a blog. the advantages compared to SM such as WeChat / Facebook
Reflections
Multimedia
Connecting blogs to social media (WeChat and similar)
Digital Literacy instruction
what is digital literacy and how does it differ from other literacies? Why is it important?
What other literacies must be considered when speaking about DL? E.g. media literacy: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=media+literacy
Internet Resources
How do we search?
Google and Google Scholar (more focused, peer reviewed, academic content)
SCSU Library search, Google, Professional organization, (NASSP), Stacks of magazines, csu library info, but need to know what all of the options mean on that page
Preliminary Plan for Monday, Sept 10, 5:45 PM to 8 PM
Introduction – who are the students in this class. About myself: http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/faculty Contact info, “embedded” librarian idea – I am available to help during the semester with research and papers
#FakeNews is a very timely and controversial issue. in 2-3 min choose your best source on this issue. 1. Mind the prevalence of resources in the 21st century 2. Mind the necessity to evaluate a) the veracity of your courses b) the quality of your sources (the fact that they are “true” does not mean that they are the best). Be prepared to name your source and defend its quality.
How do you determine your sources? How do you decide the reliability of your sources? Are you sure you can distinguish “good” from “bad?”
Compare this entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites
to this entry: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10eA5-mCZLSS4MQY5QGb5ewC3VAL6pLkT53V_81ZyitM/preview to understand the scope
Do you know any fact checking sites? Can you identify spot sponsored content? Do you understand syndication? What do you understand under “media literacy,” “news literacy,” “information literacy.” https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/03/28/fake-news-resources/
Why do we need to explore the “fake news” phenomenon? Do you find it relevant to your professional development?
So, how do we do academic research? Let’s play another Kahoot: https://play.kahoot.it/#/k/5e09bb66-4d87-44a5-af21-c8f3d7ce23de
If you to structure this Kahoot, what are the questions, you will ask? What are the main steps in achieving successful research for your paper?
Research using social media
what is social media (examples). why is called SM? why is so popular? what makes it so popular?
use SM tools for your research and education:
– Determining your topic. How to?
Digg http://digg.com/, Reddit https://www.reddit.com/ , Quora https://www.quora.com
Facebook, Twitter – hashtags (class assignment 2-3 min to search)
LinkedIn Groups
YouTube and Slideshare (class assignment 2-3 min to search)
Flickr, Instagram, Pinterest for visual aids (like YouTube they are media repositories)
+++++++++++++++++++++ Defining my interests. Narrowing a topic. How do I collect information? How do I search for information?
How do we search for “serious” information?
Google and Google Scholar
Microsoft Semantic Scholar (Semantic Scholar); Microsoft Academic Search; Academicindex.net; Proquest Dialog; Quetzal; arXiv;
basic electronic (library) search information and strategies. Library research services (5 min)
using the library database, do a search on a topic of your interest.
compare the returns on your search. make an attempt to refine the search.
retrieve the following information about the book of interest: is it relevant to your topic (check the subjects); is it timely (check the published date); is it available
Strategies for conducting advanced searches (setting up filters and search criteria)
Do you know any fact checking sites? Can you identify spot sponsored content? Do you understand syndication? What do you understand under “media literacy,” “news literacy,” “information literacy.” https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/03/28/fake-news-resources/
what is social media (examples). why is called SM? why is so popular? what makes it so popular?
use SM tools for your research and education:
– Determining your topic. How to?
Digg http://digg.com/, Reddit https://www.reddit.com/ , Quora https://www.quora.com
Facebook, Twitter – hashtags (class assignment 2-3 min to search)
LinkedIn Groups
YouTube and Slideshare (class assignment 2-3 min to search)
Flickr, Instagram, Pinterest for visual aids (like YouTube they are media repositories)
Sugimoto, C. R., Work, S., Larivière, V., & Haustein, S. (2016). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: a review of the literature. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.08112
One of the central issues associated with altmetrics (short for alternative metrics) is the identification of communities engaging with scholarly content on social media (Haustein, Bowman, & Costas, 2015; Neylon, 2014; Tsou, Bowman, Ghazinejad, & Sugimoto, 2015) . It is thus of central importance to understand the uses and users of social media in the context of scholarly communication.
most identify the following major categori es: social networking, social bookmarking, blogging, microblogging, wikis , and media and data sharing (Gu & Widén -Wulff, 2011; Rowlands, Nicholas, Russell, Canty, & Watkinson, 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013) . Some also conside r conferencing, collaborative authoring, scheduling and meeting tools (Rowlands et al., 2011) or RSS and online documents (Gu & Widén -Wulff, 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013) as social media. The landscape of social media, as well as that of altmetrics, is constantly changing and boundaries with othe r online platforms and traditional metrics are fuzzy. Many online platforms cannot be easily classified and more traditional metrics , such as downloads and mentions in policy documents , have been referred to as altmetrics due to data pr ovider policies.
the Use of social media platforms for by researchers is high — ranging from 75 to 80% in large -scale surveys (Rowlands et al., 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013; Van Eperen & Marincola, 2011) .
but
less than 10% of scholars reported using Twitter (Rowlands et al., 2011) , while 46% used ResearchGate (Van Noorden, 2014) , and more than 55% use d YouTube (Tenopir et al., 2013) —it is necessary to discuss the use of various types of social media separately . Furthermore, there i s a distinction among types of us e, with studies showing higher uses of social media for dissemination, consumption, communication , and promotion (e.g., Arcila -Calderón, Piñuel -Raigada, & Calderín -Cruz, 2013; Van Noorden, 2014) , and fewer instances of use for creation (i.e., using social media to construct scholarship) (British Library et al., 2012; Carpenter, Wetheridge, Tanner, & Smith, 2012; Procter et al., 2010b; Tenopir et al., 2013) .
Frequently mentioned social platforms in scholarly communication research include research -specific tools such as Mendeley, Zotero, CiteULike, BibSonomy, and Connotea (now defunct) as well as general tools such as Delicious and Digg (Hammond, Hannay, Lund, & Scott, 2005; Hull, Pettifer, & Kell, 2008; Priem & Hemminger, 2010; Reher & Haustein, 2010) .
Social data sharing platforms provide an infrastructure to share various types of scholarly objects —including datasets, software code, figures, presentation slides and videos —and for users to interact with these objects (e.g., comment on, favorite, like , and reuse ). Platforms such as Figshare and SlideShare disseminate scholars’ various types of research outputs such as datasets, figures, infographics, documents, videos, posters , or presentation slides (Enis, 2013) and displays views, likes, and shares by other users (Mas -Bleda et al., 2014) . GitHub provides for uploading and stor ing of software code, which allows users to modify and expand existing code (Dabbish, Stuart, Tsay, & Herbsleb, 2012) , which has been shown to lead to enhanced collaboratio n among developers (Thung, Bissyande, Lo, & Jiang, 2013) . As w ith other social data sharing platforms, usage statistics on the number of view and contributions to a project are provided (Kubilius, 2014) . The registry of research data repositories, re3data.org, ha s indexed more than 1,200 as of May 2015 2 . However, only a few of these repositories (i.e. , Figshare, SlideShare and Github) include social functionalities and have reached a certain level of participation from scholars (e.g., Begel, Bosch, & Storey, 2013; Kubilius, 2014) .
Video provide s yet another genre for social interaction and scholarly communication (Kousha, Thelwall, & Abdoli, 2012; Sugimoto & Thelwall, 2013) . Of the various video sharing platforms, YouTube, launched in 2005, is by far the most popular
A study of UK scholars reports that the majority o f respondents engaged with video for scholarly communication purposes (Tenopir et al., 2013) , yet only 20% have ever created in that genre. Among British PhD students, 17% had used videos and podcasts passively for research, while 8% had actively contributed (British Library et al., 2012) .
Blogs began in the mid -1990s and were considered ubiquitous by the mid- 200 0s (Gillmor, 2006; Hank, 2011; Lenhart & Fox, 2006; Rainie, 2005) . Scholarly blogs emerged during this time with their own neologisms (e.g., blogademia , blawgosphere , bloggership) and body of research (Hank, 2011) and were considered to change the exclusive structure of scholarly communication
Technorati, considered t o be on e of the largest ind ex of blogs, deleted their entire blog directory in 2014 3 . Individual blogs are also subject to abrupt cancellations and deletions, making questionable the degree to which blogging meets the permanence criteria of scholarly commu nication (Hank, 2011) .
ResearchBlogging.org (RB) — “an aggregator of blog posts referencing peer -reviewed research in a structured manner” (Shema, Bar -Ilan, & Thelwall, 2015, p. 3) — was launched in 2007 and has been a fairly stable structure in the scholarly blogging environment. RB both aggregates and —through the use of the RB icon — credentials scholarly blogs (Shema et al., 2015) . The informality of the genre (Mewburn & Thomson, 2013) and the ability to circumve nt traditional publishing barr iers has led advocates to claim that blogging can invert traditional academic power hierarchies (Walker, 2006) , allow ing people to construct scholarly identities outside of formal institutionalization (Ewins, 2005; Luzón, 2011; Potter, 2012) and democratize the scientific system (Gijón, 2013) . Another positive characteristic of blogs is their “inherently social” nature (Walker, 2006, p. 132) (see also Kjellberg, 2010; Luzón, 2011 ). Scholars have noted the potential for “communal scholarship” (Hendrick, 2012) made by linking and commenting, calling the platform “a new ‘third place’ for academic discourse” (Halavais, 2006, p. 117) . Commenting functionalities were seen as making possible the “shift from public understanding to public engagement with science” (Kouper, 2010, p. 1) .
Studies have also provided evidence of high rate s of blogging among certain subpopulations: for example, approximately one -third of German university staff (Pscheida et al., 2013) and one fifth of UK doctoral students use blogs (Carpenter et al., 2012) .
Academics are not only producers, but also consumers of blogs: a 2007 survey of medical bloggers foundthat the large majority (86%) read blogs to find medical news (Kovic et al., 2008)
Mahrt and Puschmann (2014) , who defined science blogging as “the use of blogs for science communication” (p. 1). It has been similarly likened to a sp ace for public intellectualism (Kirkup, 2010; Walker, 2006) and as a form of activism to combat perceived biased or pseudoscience (Riesch & Mendel, 2014. Yet, there remains a tension between science bloggers and science journalists, with many science journals dismissing the value of science blogs (Colson, 2011)
.
while there has been anecdotal evidence of the use of blogs in promotion and tenure (e.g., (Podgor, 2006) the consensus seem s to suggest that most institutions do not value blogging as highly as publishing in traditional outlets, or consider blogging as a measure of service rather than research activity (Hendricks, 2010, para. 30) .
Microblogging developed out of a particular blogging practice, wherein bloggers would post small messages or single files on a blog post. Blogs that focused on such “microposts” were then termed “tumblelogs” and were described as “a quick and dirty stream of consciousness” kind of blogging (Kottke, 2005, para. 2)
most popular microblogs are Twitter (launched in 2006), tumblr (launched in 2007), FriendFeed (launched in 2007 and available in several languages), Plurk (launched in 2008 and popular in Taiwan), and Sina Weibo (launched in 2009 and popular in China).
users to follow other users, search tweets by keywords or hashtags, and link to other media or other tweets
.
Conference chatter (backchanneling) is another widely studied area in the realm of scholarly microblogging. Twitter use at conferences is generally carried out by a minority of participants
Wikis are collaborative content management platforms enabled by web browsers and embedded markup languages.
Wikipedia has been advocated as a replacement for traditional publishing and peer review models (Xia o & Askin, 2012) and pleas have been made to encourage experts to contribute (Rush & Tracy, 2010) . Despite this, contribution rates remain low — likely hindered by the lack of explicit authorship in Wikipedia, a cornerstone of the traditional academic reward system (Black, 2008; Butler, 2008; Callaway, 2010; Whitworth & Friedman, 2009) . Citations to scholarly documents —another critical component in the reward system —are increasingly being found i n Wikiped ia entries (Bould et al., 2014; Park, 2011; Rousidis et al., 2013) , but are no t yet seen as valid impact indicators (Haustein, Peters, Bar -Ilan, et al., 2014) .
The altmetrics manifesto (Priem et al., 2010, para. 1) , altmetrics can serve as filters , which “reflect the broad, rapid impact of scholarship in this burgeoning ecosystem”.
There are also a host of platforms which are being used informally to discuss and rate scholarly material. Reddit, for example, is a general topic platform where users can submit, discuss and rate online content. Historically, mentions of scientific journals on Reddit have been rare (Thelwall, Haustein, et al., 2013) . However, several new subreddits —e.g., science subreddit 4 , Ask Me Anything sessions 5 –have recently been launched, focusing on the discussion of scientific information. Sites like Amazon (Kousha & Thelwall, 2015) and Goodreads (Zuccala, Verleysen, Cornacchia, & Engels, 2015) , which allow users to comment on and rate books, has also been mined as potential source for the compilation of impact indicators
libraries provide services to support researchers’ use of social media tools and metrics (Lapinski, Piwowar, & Priem, 2013; Rodgers & Barbrow, 2013; Roemer & Borchardt, 2013). One example is Mendeley Institutional Edition, https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/mendeley/Mendeley-Institutional-Edition, which mines Mendeley documents, annotations, and behavior and provides these data to libraries (Galligan & Dyas -Correia, 2013) . Libraries can use them for collection management, in a manner similar to other usage data, such as COUNTER statistics (Galligan & Dyas -Correia, 2013) .
Factors affecting social media use; age, academic rank and status, gender, discipline, country and language,
Faculty perceive undergraduates to be less proficient with digital literacy skills. One-third think
their students do not find or organize digital information very well. The majority (52%) think
they lack skill in validating digital information. My note: for the SCSU librarians, digital literacy is fancy word for information literacy. Digital literacy, as used in this report is much greater area, which encompasses much broader set of skills
Faculty do not prefer to teach online (57%) or in a hybrid format (where some sessions occur
online, 32%). One-third of faculty reported no experience with these least popular course types
my note: pay attention to the questions asked; questions I am asking Mike Penrod to let me work with faculty for years. Questions, which are snubbed by CETL and a dominance of D2L and MnSCU mandated tools is established.
Table 5. Do you use these in-class technologies for teaching undergraduates? Which are the Top 3 in-class technologies you would like to learn or use more? (n = 442)
usingonline resourcesto find high quality curricular materials
37%
48%
31%
3%
18%
iClickers
24%
23%
16%
9%
52%
otherpresentation tool (Prezi, Google presentation, Slide Carnival, etc.)
23%
14%
21%
15%
51%
whiteboard / blackboard
20%
58%
23%
6%
14%
Powerpoint or Keynote
20%
74%
16%
4%
5%
document camera / overhead projector
15%
28%
20%
14%
38%
Table 6. Do you have undergraduates use these assignment technology tools? Which are your Top 3 assignment technology tools to learn about or use more? (n = 432)
D2Lasa portal to other learning tools (homework websites, videos, simulations, Nota Bene/NB, Voice Thread, etc.)
21%
28%
18%
11%
42%
videos/animationsproducedelsewhere
19%
40%
36%
2%
22%
In both large and small classes, the most common responses faculty make to digital distraction are to discuss why it is a problem and to limit or ban phones in class. my note: which completely defies the BYOD and turns into empty talk / lip service.
Quite a number of other faculty (n = 18) reported putting the onus on themselves to plan engaging and busy class sessions to preclude distraction, for example:
“If my students are more interested in their laptops than my course material, I need to make my curriculum more interesting.”
I have not found this to be a problem. When the teaching and learning are both engaged/engaging, device problems tend to disappear.”
The most common complaint related to students and technology was their lack of common technological skills, including D2L and Google, and needing to take time to teach these skills in class (n = 14). Two commented that digital skills in today’s students were lower than in their students 10 years ago.
Table 9. Which of the following are the most effective types of learning opportunities about teaching, for you? Chose your Top 2-3. (n = 473)
Count Percentage
meeting 1:1 with anexpert
296
63%
hour-longworkshop
240
51%
contact an expert on-call (phone, email, etc)
155
33%
faculty learning community (meeting across asemester,
e.g. ASSETT’s Hybrid/Online Course Design Seminar)
116
25%
expert hands-on support for course redesign (e.g. OIT’s Academic Design Team)
114
24%
opportunityto apply for grant funding with expert support, for a project I design (e.g. ASSETT’s Development Awards)
97
21%
half-dayorday-longworkshop
98
21%
other
40
8%
multi-day retreats/ institutes
30
6%
Faculty indicated that the best times for them to attend teaching professional developments across the year are before and early semester, and summer. They were split among all options for meeting across one week, but preferred afternoon sessions to mornings. Only 8% of respondents (n = 40) indicated they would not likely attend any professional development session (Table 10).
Table T1: Faculty beliefs about using digital technologies in teaching
Count
Column N%
Technology is a significant barrier to teaching and learning.
1
0.2%
Technology can have a place in teaching, but often detracts from teaching and learning.
76
18.3%
Technology has a place in teaching, and usually enhances the teaching learning process.
233
56.0%
Technology greatly enhances the teaching learning process.
106
25.5%
Table T2: Faculty beliefs about the impact of technology on courses
Count
Column N%
Makes a more effective course
302
72.6%
Makes no difference in the effectiveness of a course
42
10.1%
Makes a less effective course
7
1.7%
Has an unknown impact
65
15.6%
Table T3: Faculty use of common technologies (most frequently selected categories shaded)
Once a month or less
A few hours a month
A few hours a week
An hour a day
Several hours a day
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Computer
19
4.8%
15
3.8%
46
11.5%
37
9.3%
282
70.7%
Smart Phone
220
60.6%
42
11.6%
32
8.8%
45
12.4%
24
6.6%
Office Software
31
7.8%
19
4.8%
41
10.3%
82
20.6%
226
56.6%
Email
1
0.2%
19
4.6%
53
12.8%
98
23.7%
243
58.7%
Social Networking
243
68.8%
40
11.3%
40
11.3%
23
6.5%
7
2.0%
Video/Sound Media
105
27.6%
96
25.2%
95
24.9%
53
13.9%
32
8.4%
Table T9: One sample t-test for influence of technology on approaches to grading and assessment
Test Value = 50
t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower
Upper
In class tests and quizzes
-4.369
78
.000
-9.74684
-14.1886
-5.3051
Online tests and quizzes
5.624
69
.000
14.77143
9.5313
20.0115
Ungraded assessments
1.176
66
.244
2.17910
-1.5208
5.8790
Formative assessment
5.534
70
.000
9.56338
6.1169
13.0099
Short essays, papers, lab reports, etc.
2.876
70
.005
5.45070
1.6702
9.2312
Extended essays and major projects or performances
1.931
69
.058
3.67143
-.1219
7.4648
Collaborative learning projects
.000
73
1.000
.00000
-4.9819
4.9819
Table T10: Rate the degree to which your role as a faculty member and teacher has changed as a result of increased as a result of increased use of technology
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat Disagree
Somewhat Agree
Agree
Strongly Agree
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
shifting from the role of content expert to one of learning facilitator
12
9.2%
22
16.9%
14
10.8%
37
28.5%
29
22.3%
16
12.3%
your primary role is to provide content for students
14
10.9%
13
10.1%
28
21.7%
29
22.5%
25
19.4%
20
15.5%
your identification with your University is increased
23
18.3%
26
20.6%
42
33.3%
20
15.9%
12
9.5%
3
2.4%
you have less ownership of your course content
26
20.2%
39
30.2%
24
18.6%
21
16.3%
14
10.9%
5
3.9%
your role as a teacher is strengthened
13
10.1%
12
9.3%
26
20.2%
37
28.7%
29
22.5%
12
9.3%
your overall control over your course(s) is diminished
23
17.7%
44
33.8%
30
23.1%
20
15.4%
7
5.4%
6
4.6%
Table T14: One sample t-test for influence of technology on faculty time spent on specific teaching activities
Test Value = 50
t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower
Upper
Lecturing
-7.381
88
.000
-12.04494
-15.2879
-8.8020
Preparing course materials
9.246
96
.000
16.85567
13.2370
20.4744
Identifying course materials
8.111
85
.000
13.80233
10.4191
17.1856
Grading / assessing
5.221
87
.000
10.48864
6.4959
14.4813
Course design
12.962
94
.000
21.55789
18.2558
24.8600
Increasing access to materials for all types of learners
The Honor system is a phenomenon well known in many cultures across the globe and strongly presented in cultures since Ancient Greece and Rome. The concepts of honor and shame have long been associated with cultures in the Mediterranean region mostly because the first scholars to study the social impact of these concepts did so in Southern Europe. Honor has two fundamental components: birth and morality. People could gain or lose their honor by the morality of their conduct. Despite the scholarly emphasis on the Mediterranean, the concept of honor influenced social systems all over the world, and historians are beginning to detect its traces in places as different as China and Africa. The Southern Honor system can firmly be traced back in the European roots and determined to a great degree the American history of the 19th century.
This course will study the geography, history, sociology and religions, cultural and political systems of two worlds and learn to compare the findings. Based on those comparisons, lessons in gender, culture and politics will be drawn.
What is Honor and Shame system and why is it so important to know about it and recognize it
What is the connection between the Honor system in the Mediterranean and in the American South
How does the knowledge of the Honor system aim our daily actions and our global perspective
Course Goals
Students in this course will
Practice research methods and ability to find and evaluate information as well as select reliable information technologies.
Explore applications and technologies for communication and creative collaboration.
Gain practical, hands-on experience with a wide variety of research and online communication tools.
Students will demonstrate ability to research and find academically reliable information from peer-reviewed sources in the online databases, which SCSU is subscribed. Students will demonstrate ability to find and evaluate information from the Internet.
Students will demonstrate competencies in creation of textual and multimedia narratives in individual and collaborative environment.
Students will demonstrate competencies in application of technology toward creation and dissemination of textual and multimedia materials.
Attendance/Discussion Requirements
Attendance is required. If you cannot attend class, it is required to alert the instructor in advance. If the reason for the absence is an emergency, it is expected to approach the instructor and provide an explanation thereafter about the character of the emergency.
Discussion are expected. If you are shy and are hesitant to participate in class, you must compensate with the use of other communication tools (e.g., D2L Discussion List).
Assignment Descriptions
Discussions. You are expected to contribute to each class session with your ideas and your responses to the ideas of your peers. Your comments are expected in class and in between class sessions (using, e.g., D2L discussion list). Your comments must go beyond “yes, I agree,” and “no, I disagree” and provide analysis and synthesis of your thoughts.
Readings – you will be expected to contribute to each class sessions with bibliographical findings on your own.
Written responses – you will be expected to deliver four written responses to peer-reviewed articles related to topics discussed in the class sessions.
Final project – you will be expected to write and present a final project. The written part of the project will be in the realm of 4-5000 words; will adhere to academic research and style; will include a bibliography with at least 2/3 of the sources being peer-reviewed and outside of the 5000 words. The presentation can be of any multimedia form, whereas it will be peer-evaluated, but my (instructor’s) preference will be given to advance multimedia presentations (beyond PPT and using e.g. Prezy, iMovie/Moviemaker movie and/or audio narration)
All assignments should be submitted by midnight of the date on which they are due. Ten percent of an assignment’s point value will be removed for each day an assignment is late. This policy will be adjusted on a case-by-case basis if emergencies prevent you from submitting an assignment on time. In these situations, contact me as soon as is reasonable to determine how this policy can be adjusted in a way that meets your needs and is still fair to other students.
The grade book in D2L will be used to show detailed information about grades in this course. The table below shows the value of each assignment and the total number of points available.
Overall Grade
94% – 100% = A
90 % – 93.99% = A-
86% – 89.99% = B+
83% – 85.99% = B
80% – 82.99% = B-
70% – 79.99% = C
60% – 69.99% = D
59.99% or lower = F
Assignments Schedule
WEEK 1. August 28
Reading[s]:
Peruse through all articles in the D2L content area. Choose one article to your liking and be ready to reflect on it.Assignment[s]:
1. complete entry survey. 2. Prepare to present in coherent and concise manner your understanding of Honors and Shame and discuss the goals for this course. 3. Enter a short essay in the D2L discussion on how do you see applying the knowledge from this course in your future studies, research and work
Introduction. Orientation, class parameters and familiarizing with the syllabus. Questions and issues. Course goals
What is an/the Honor System? Entry Interview (D2L survey is completed and analyzed). Why explore this topic and these vastly different geographic entities (US South and the Mediterranean). Define interest in this class and interest for a project; how this class can help your studies? Your career? All over as a human being?
WEEK 2.Sept 4
Reading[s]:
BUSATTA, S. (2006). Honour and Shame in the Mediterranean. Antrocom, 2(2). 75-78. Retrieved March 19, 2013, from http://www.academia.edu/524890/Honour_and_Shame_in_the_Mediterranean
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499. (p. 24-26).
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Esmer, T. U. (n.d.). Honor in Ottoman and Contemporary Mediterranean Societies: Controversies, Continuities, and New Directions. conference announcement. Retrieved from http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=196551
Assignment[s]: 1. Find an article on Honor and Shame. 2. Outline in two paragraphs the content of one of the three articles and in a third paragraph compare to your findings; use academic style to log your responses. If you have hesitation about your style, please check with the Write Place, your peers and me.
Why research? Work on the reading material for class
Find articles for the course.
What is academic research? What is a peer-review article? When and how research the Internet. How do I access and keep track of resources.
RefWorks versus Zotero and Mendeley
What is an academic paper. How do I write an academic paper. The Write place.
Making plans: final project
WEEK 3. Sept 11
Reading[s]:
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Smith, A. (2004). Murder in Jerba: Honour, Shame and Hospitality among Maltese in Ottoman Tunisia. History and Anthropology Routledge, 15(2), 107–132.
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Assignment[s]:
Your first written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a historical perspective
Do we have a robust theory/notion about the Honor/Shame system through the centuries? Do you think tracking that model through centuries helps in the 21st century? If yes, how and if no, why?
WEEK 4. Sept 18
Reading[s]: Fernand Braudel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernand_Braudel) and the Annales School
Santos, N. F. (2008). Family, Patronage, and Social Contests: Narrative Reversals in the Gospel of Mark. S&J, (2). (footnote p. 200).
Hall, J. L. (1907). Half-hours in southern history. B. F. Johnson publishing co.
Harrell, L. A. (2009, December 4). It’s an honorable choice: Rebellions Against Southern Honor in William Styron’s The Confessions of Nat Turner. Retrieved from http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.16/2614
Assignment[s]:
Your second written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a geographic perspective
Is there a “southern” connection (Mediterranean is the European South)? Can be Annale School be right (geography and relief determines history)? To what degree geography and geographical conditions determine such models (Honor/Shame)?
WEEK 5. Sept 25
Reading[s]: Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611.
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499 (p. 22)
Lever, A. (1986). Honour as a Red Herring. Critique of Anthropology, 6(3), 83–106. doi:10.1177/0308275X8600600305
Assignment[s]:
Your third written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a cultural perspective. Gender roles, Masculinity
Does the Honor/Shame model help understand gender roles, social status, masculinity etc.?
WEEK 6. Oct 2
Reading[s]:
Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611. (p. 593)
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499. (p. 26-27; p. 30-33).
Cohen, D. (n.d.). Insult, Aggression, and the Southern Culture of Honor: An “Experimental Ethnography.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 945–960.
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Assignment[s]:
Your forth written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a political and social perspective
Can Honor/Shame be connected with the current political situation in Egypt, Syria, Turkey? Did Honor/Shame system influence decision in American history?
WEEK 7. Wednesday Oct 9
Assignment[s]: final project details
Start working on the final project
Present and discuss your final project: 1. Finalized title 2. Outline 3. Plan 4. Clear work distribution among group members 5. Clear way for peer assessment.
WEEK 8. Wednesday Oct 16
Assignment[s]: details on final project
Final brainstorming and start working on the project
Meeting as a whole: 1. Present group’s plan to class. 2. Share group’s ideas with class. 3. Share technology 4. Share sources 5. Share means for peer assessment
WEEK 9. Wednesday Oct 23
Assignment[s]: draft of bibliography
Class as a whole: peer review and brainstorming
Meeting as a whole: 1. Are sources reliable? 2. Are sources of academic origin (peer-reviewed)? 3. Is the bibliography adhering correctly to the formats (APA, Chicago, ALA)
WEEK 10. Wednesday Oct 30
Assignment[s]: details on presentation
Work on the final project
Meeting as a whole: 1. Presentation format 2. Share technology 3. Share ideas
WEEK 11. Wednesday Nov 6
Assignment[s]: paper draft due in D2L dropbox
Work on final project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 12. Wednesday Nov 13
Assignment[s]: paper draft and presentation
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Nov 20
Assignment[s]: paper draft due in D2L dropbox
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Nov 27
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Dec 4
Assignment[s]: paper final draft due in D2L dropbox
Cohen, D. (n.d.). Insult, Aggression, and the Southern Culture of Honor: An “Experimental Ethnography.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 945–960.
Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611.
Dussere, E. (2001). The Debts of History: Southern Honor, Affirmative Action, and Faulkner’s Intruder in the Dust. Faulkner Journal, 17(1), 37–57.
Esmer, T. U. (n.d.). Honor in Ottoman and Contemporary Mediterranean Societies: Controversies, Continuities, and New Directions. conference announcement. Retrieved from http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=196551
Family, Patronage, and Social Contests.pdf. (n.d.).
Hall, J. L. (1907). Half-hours in southern history. B. F. Johnson publishing co.
Harrell, L. A. (2009, December 4). It’s an honorable choice: Rebellions Against Southern Honor in William Styron’s The Confessions of Nat Turner. Retrieved from http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.16/2614
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Hellerman. (n.d.). Reconstructing Honor in Roman Philippi. Cambridge University Press.
Herzfeld, M. (1980). Honour and Shame: Problems in the Comparative Analysis of Moral Systems. Man, 15(2), 339–351. doi:10.2307/2801675
Honor, Shame, and Social Status.pdf. (n.d.).
honor-04-Antrocom_Honour and Shame in the Mediterranean_S.pdf. (n.d.).
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499
Murder in Jerba_ Honour, Shame and.pdf. (n.d.).
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity.pdf. (n.d.).
Wyatt-Brown, B. & Milbauer, Richard J. (2004). Honor, Shame, and Iraq in American Foreign Policy. In Note prepared for the Workshop on Humiliation and Violent Conflict, Columbia University, New York, November 18-19, 2004. Presented at the Workshop on Humiliation and Violent Conflict, Columbia University, New York,. Retrieved from http://www.humiliationstudies.org/documents/WyattBrownNY04meeting.pdf
