a future in which “the idea of ‘admission’ to college will become an anachronism, because the University of Everywhere will be open to everyone” and “educational resources that have been scarce and expensive for centuries will be abundant and free.”
why the majority of American college students decide to go to college
partly this [is] being driven by the fact that people need to go to college in order to make their way in the world and get credentials for, frankly, not the tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars that colleges charge today.
LITA and The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group have a discussion regarding e-conferencing tools (online meeting tools) and browser problems related to them:
BlackBoard Collaborate: https://youtu.be/UWX2kRazC-s has difficulties working on Google Chrome and Windows 10 Edge browser, since they not support Java.
WebEx, Canva. Adobe Connect, Zoom, Ultra
From:lita-l-request@lists.ala.org [mailto:lita-l-request@lists.ala.org] On Behalf Of Tyckoson, Mary Ellen Sent: Friday, October 02, 2015 9:51 AM To:lita-l@lists.ala.org Subject: RE: [lita-l] Free teleconferencing options?
We’ve been using https://www.freeconferencecall.com/ for years. It offers a record feature that allows you to download the call later as well as a report of the numbers that called in and the duration of their connection to the conference. Generally the call clarity is pretty good. The only time we had a problem seemed to be on the end user’s side. I think they also offer some free online meeting services, but we’ve never used those. The down side if that they are able to offer it for free because they are toll calls (usually to some number in a sparsely populated area – at least one of the numbers we use is out in the Mojave desert.)
Regards,
Mary Ellen
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Mary Ellen Tyckoson
Library Program Manager
San Joaquin Valley Library System
2420 Mariposa St, Fresno, CA 93721
559-600-6285
From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of J. Patrick Whitaker Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 2:09 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Online meeting tools
We have Ultra available – albeit in a “not quite ready for prime time” format (i.e. no recording, polling, etc.). We can assign it by course so some faculty are using Ultra for office hours. It’s much easier for students in particular.
Patrick Whitaker, PhD
Associate Professor, Assistant Coordinator,
Center for Distance Learning
Sargeant Reynolds Community College
PO BOX 85622
Richmond, Virginia 23285-5622
804-523-5612
“Education is what people do to you; Learning is what you do to yourself” – Joi Ito
We were told the release will come mid-semester and because we are in a system-wide environment shared by over 50 campuses, we will go at that time. I would much prefer to do it in January.
I have seen Collaborate Ultra (briefly) and agree it is completely different (in a good way). Last spring I was told by our account exec that it would be available to us beginning of fall. Haven’t heard anything yet and I’m not holding my breath… 😉
Scott Scott Robison, Ph.D.
Director, Learning Technologies and Online Education
Co-Director, Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning
Plymouth State University
Plymouth, NH
603.535.2262
“All courses are online courses; it’s just a matter of
how much time you meet face-to-face.”
One thing to consider with Bb Collaborate is that, since it is Java driven, there may be problems for users whose browsers no long support Java (Chrome, for one, and I think Windows 10 Edge browser too?).
“Java applications are offered though web browsers as either a web start application (which do not interact with the browser once they are launched) or as a Java applet (which might interact with the browser). This change does not affect Web Start applications, it only impacts applets.”
This is not a deal breaker because BbC doesn’t run in a browser (it just downloads the starter app). But the subsequent error message could throw some participants off.
There is a an HTML5 version in the works, I hear (haven’t seen it yet). But keep the Java aspect in mind, as it appears to me at least (FWIW) that Java is the new Flash — moving towards disfavor due to potential security issues.
Thx – Steve — Steve Covello
Rich Media Specialist/Instructional Designer/Online Instructor
At SCCC we have gone with Collaborate – largely due to integration to Blackboard Learn and the excellent pricing the SUNY system received. The interface isn’t the most intuitive for presenters, but works well enough. We recently saw Collaborate Ultra which will be launched this fall. The interface was ‘zoomed’ for lack of a better term. It is a huge improvement, extremely intuitive and performs significantly better. That with the Blackboard Learn integration makes any thought of looking elsewhere a non-starter for us.
Regards, Doug —— Doug Kahn
College Assistant Dean for Instructional Technology
We are providing a sandbox type of immersive program for faculty here to explore features of different web conferencing tools. Any information about integration of Training Center in WebEx to Canvas will be greatly appreciated.
Currently, NJIT uses WebEx and I used Adobe Connect at a different institution; we have WebEx set up so that instructors can create their own sessions as they find the need. They are both robust but have their own quirks to them. Adobe Connect had a big learning curve for instructors. WebEx seems a bit simpler just to start but I feel like it has more audio issues when you do VOIP; it’s also very confusing for our users because you have to click on a button after you log into WebEx to turn audio on. That goes for everyone–presenter and participant, no one can hear or be heard until this is done. Even users that have done this for a while sometimes forget this part–I’d say that’s the biggest quirk about it.
I have seen a lot of use of Zoom recently, but I don’t know if it is quite as robust or permits you to do as long or large of a session as WebEx would.
Our university is trying to determine which would be the best online meeting/class tool. We have narrowed our search down to Webex and Zoom. I was wondering if anyone, who is currently using these two tools, could give me some pros and cons for their use.
Darlene Davis
Digital Asset Coordinator
Alliance Life Sciences Consulting Group
From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Rob Abel Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 7:23 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Online meeting tools
Ed, et al-
We recently learned about an LTI integration for Connect from eSyncTraining. It is not yet certified LTI – but quite slick – and eSyncTraining recently joined IMS to get it certified.
From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Garay Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 7:12 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Online meeting tools
The feedback has been mixed. Some faculty like it, others hate it. Personally, I am disappointed that the java-less version is still elusive, that the LMS integration, albeit certified LTI, is not smart enough for my demanding taste, and that UIC was never able to really effectively and easily use it for non-Teaching & Learning applications. Elluminate Live! and Blackboard Inc. both knew we needed it also as a GoToMeeting-kind of solution, and they never delivered on that. (We had run Saba Centra Web Conferencing for many years before most of these tools ever existed)
My personal recommendation, today, would be to seriously evaluate Adobe Connect (again) and Zoom, …as long as they have an IMS Global-certified LTI integration.
From: Scott Robison Sent: 10/15/2015 3:35 PM To: Edward Garay Subject: RE: [BLEND-ONLINE] Online meeting tools
Ed,
How has the feedback been with Collaborate? We started using it a couple years ago too. There was more excitement for it then than there is now. There have been browser and Java issues and some find it too clunky, quality lacking (audio/video), and for many it is more than they need (or think they need). We are working on getting Collaborate Ultra integrated into Moodle. It is pretty sharp (web-based, clean, but fewer features at the moment). Are you using that, and if so, what do folks think?
Thanks, Scott Scott Robison, Ph.D.
Director, Learning Technologies and Online Education
Co-Director, Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning
Plymouth State University
Plymouth, NH
603.535.2262
“All courses are online courses; it’s just a matter of
how much time you meet face-to-face.”
I always liked Adobe Connect and thought it was easy to use by faculty, staff and students. We almost got it, a few years ago, but the committee picked up Blackboard Collaborate because it was more Teaching & Learning-friendly, which it was/is.
It would have helped if Adobe had invested in developing an LTI-compliant LMS integration for Connect. They still haven’t, unfortunately, certified or otherwise, I am afraid.
—
— Ed Garay University of Illinois at Chicago
UIC School of Public Health http://www.twitter.com/garay
Our primary online meeting tool is Adobe Connect, but we have been using Zoom for a year as well. The feedback we receive is that Adobe Connect is very “feature rich” and somewhat difficult to use at times, especially for individuals who simply want an easy web collaboration tool. Although some have become very comfortable with Adobe Connect and utilize many of the features and pods, it may be a bit complicated and confusing to use at times.
We have been using Zoom and although it does not have as many of the features as Adobe Connect, the quality is great and it’s easy to use. Zoom offers basic and pro accounts, as well as different meeting room options, SIP, VoIP, etc..
We are providing a sandbox type of immersive program for faculty here to explore features of different web conferencing tools. Any information about integration of Training Center in
From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Garay Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 2:55 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Online meeting tools
Please note that there are IMS-certified LTI tools and other “rogue” LTI tools that are not certified. The certified LTI tools go through a rigorous IMS process to ensure they are fully LTI-compliant. We should strive to use certified LTI LMS add-one, exclusively, and require/demand that vendors and individual developers of tools not certified be reprogram to meet full IMS LTI certification.
The IMS Certified LTI Tools catalog currently lists only Blackboard Collaborate and BigBlueButton, i.e. not Zoom, Adobe Connect, WebEX, GoToMeeting, etc. – http://developers.imsglobal.org/catalog.html
The Edu App Center, maintained by Instructure, purports to list certified and uncertified LTI tools. Adobe Connect (for Canvas, I believe) is listed (sans the LMS certification); I cannot find any listing of Zoom, however. – https://www.eduappcenter.com/
I am CCing Rob Abel, CEO at IMS Global, in case he’d like to chime in on the LTI certification or lack thereof.
— Ed Garay
University of Illinois at Chicago
UIC School of Public Health
twitter.com/garay
Currently, NJIT uses WebEx and I used Adobe Connect at a different institution; we have WebEx set up so that instructors can create their own sessions as they find the need. They are both robust but have their own quirks to them. Adobe Connect had a big learning curve for instructors. WebEx seems a bit simpler just to start but I feel like it has more audio issues when you do VOIP; it’s also very confusing for our users because you have to click on a button after you log into WebEx to turn audio on. That goes for everyone–presenter and participant, no one can hear or be heard until this is done. Even users that have done this for a while sometimes forget this part–I’d say that’s the biggest quirk about it.
I have seen a lot of use of Zoom recently, but I don’t know if it is quite as robust or permits you to do as long or large of a session as WebEx would.
Our university is trying to determine which would be the best online meeting/class tool. We have narrowed our search down to Webex and Zoom. I was wondering if anyone, who is currently using these two tools, could give me some pros and cons for their use.
********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
—
Nafiza Akter
Instructional Designer
Instructional Technology & Media Services (ITMS)
New Jersey Institute of Technology
Eales-Reynolds, L., Gillham, D., Grech, C., Clarke, C., & Cornell, J. (2012). A study of the development of critical thinking skills using an innovative web 2.0 tool. Nurse Education Today, 32(7), 752-756. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2012.05.017
finding ways to capture meaningful informal learning experiences by explicitly linking these to formal structures, and providing frameworks within which informal learning can then be validated and accredited (Cedefop Report 2007).
Education is clearly a social process but it is probably much closer to an ongoing discussion or debate than an extended celebration with an ever-expanding network of friends (p. 179, Ravenscroft et al.)
the community of inquiry (COI) model developed by Garrison and Anderson (2003) and social network analysis (SNA). European Commission-funded integrated
project called MATURE (Continuous Social Learning in Knowledge Networks), which is investigating how technology-mediated informal learning leads to improved knowledge practices in the digital workplace
Key to using socialmedia is the ability to stand back and evaluate the credibility of a source of information, apart from the actual content. While developing this critical attitude toward traditional media is important, the attitude is even more crucial in the context of using socialmedia because information didn’t go through the vetting process of formal publication. Can the student corroborate the information from multiple sources? How recent is this information? Are the author’s credentials appropriate? In other words, the ability to step back, to become aware of the metatext or metacontext is more important than ever.
Coad, D. T. (2013). Developing Critical Literacy and Critical Thinking through Facebook. Kairos: A Journal Of Rhetoric, Technology, And Pedagogy, 18(1).
Many instructors believe that writing on social networking sites undermines the rhetorical skills students learn in class because of the slang and abbreviations often used on these sites; such instructors may believe that social networks are the end of students’ critical awareness when they communicate. Johndan Johnson-Eilola and Stuart A. Selber (2009) contended that electronic writing forms actually require “sophisticated skills of understanding concrete rhetorical situations, analyzing audiences (and their goals and inclinations), and constructing concise, information-laden texts, as a part of a dynamic, unfolding, social process” (p. 18). It is this dynamic process that makes social networking a perfect match for the composition classroom and for teaching rhetorical skills: It helps students see how communication works in real, live rhetorical situations. Many students do not believe that communication in these media requires any kind of valuable literacy skills because they buy into the myth of how the news media portray social networks as valueless forms of communication that are decaying young people’s minds. This is why I introduced students to the passage from Invisible Man: to get them thinking about what kinds of skills they learn on Facebook. I found the text useful for helping them acknowledge the skills they are building in these writing spaces.
Stuart A. Selber (2004) in Multiliteracies for a Digital Age criticized so-called computer literacy classes for having “focused primarily on data representations, numbering systems, operating systems, file formats, and hardware and software components” rather than on the task of teaching students to be “informed questioners of technology” (p. 74). In a time when, as Sheelah M. Sweeny (2010) noted, “the ability to stay connected with others is constant,” it is increasingly important to engage composition students in critical thinking about the spaces they write in (p. 121). It is becoming clearer, as technology giants such as Google® and Apple® introduce new technologies, that critical literacy and critical thinking about technology are necessary for our students’ futures.
Valentini, C. (2015). Is using social media “good” for the public relations profession? A critical reflection. Public Relations Review, 41(2), 170-177. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.009
p. 172 there is no doubt that digital technologies and social media have contributed to a major alteration in people’s interpersonal communications and relational practices. Inter- personal communications have substantially altered, at least in Western and developed countries, as a result of the culture of increased connectivity that has emerged from social media’s engineering sociality ( van Dijck, 2013 ), which allows anyone to be online and to connect to others. Physical presence is no longer a precondition for interpersonal communication.
(Jiping) The Pew Research Center ( Smith & Duggan, 2013 , October 21) indicates that one in every ten American adults has used an online dating site or mobile dating app to seek a partner, and that in the last eight years the proportion of Americans who say that they met their current partner online has doubled. Another study conducted by the same organization ( Lenhart & Duggan, 2014 , February 11) shows that 25% of married or partnered adults who text, have texted their partner while they were both home together, that 21% of cell-phone owners or internet users in a committed relationship have felt closer to their spouse or partner because of exchanges they had online or via text message. Another 9% of adults have resolved online or by text message an argument with their partner that they were having difficulty resolving person to person ( Lenhart & Duggan, 2014 , February 11). These results indicate that digital technologies are not simply tools that facilitate communications: they have a substantial impact on the way humans interact and relate to one another. In other words, they affect the dynamics of interpersonal relations
To help improve understanding of BYOD and its impacts on modern network environments, this white paper will further explore the many differences that exist between corporate and educational approaches to the technology.
In the education space, dealing with non-standard, user-managed devices has been and still remains the norm. Unfortunately, the variety of devices means a multitude of operating systems and software are encountered, with many “standards” being defined. As a result there is little consistency in the device type or the software being installed. Since the device is owned by the student and is a personal resource, it is often difficult or impossible to enforce a policy that prevents users from installing software. In addition, due to the nature of learning as opposed to a corporate environment, it is also difficult to put a restriction on certain classes of software since all may provide a worthwhile educational purpose.
providing a solution that unifies management and deployment polices across both wired and wireless devices is very desirable.
The Internet of Everything (IoE) has spurred a revolution in mobility. Collaboration anywhere, anytime and with any device is quickly becoming the rule instead of the exception. As a result it is now common for students to bring mobile devices such as smartphones, tablets and e-readers into the academic environment to support their educational endeavors.
The infrastructure supporting BYOD no longer has the sole purpose of providing a wireless radio signal within a given area. The focus is now about providing the appropriate bandwidth and quality to accommodate the ever-growing number of devices and ensure that an application provides a good end-user experience. In a sense, applications are now the major driving force behind the continuing evolution of BYOD. For example, a teacher accessing video in the classroom for educational purposes during class hours should have greater priority than a student in the same area accessing a gaming site for recreation.
A state-of-the-art BYOD infrastructure should now be capable of providing more than just generic, general-purpose wireless connectivity. In the classroom environment, the notion of “differentiated access” often resonates with faculty and staff. Once this has been determined, a policy can be applied to the user and their activity on the network.
Granular security can also be intelligently delivered.
Quality of Service (QoS) rate limiting has been available for some time, but now there are newer QoS techniques available.
Location-based services can provide their first interaction with the university. By delivering campus maps and directional information, location-enabled services can enhance the experience of these visitors and provide a positive image to them as well. As a visitor enters a particular building location, information could automatically be provided. In the case of a visiting student, information about the history of a building, departments contained within the building, or other resources could be presented to enhance a guided tour, or provide the perspective student the ability to have a self-directed tour of the campus facilities.
After yesterday’s post about making the most of Google Keep I received a few emails from readers wanting to know a bit more about how Google Keep works. To answer those questions I recorded the short video that you see embedded below (click here if you cannot see the video).
Crompton, Muilenburg and Berge’s definition for m-learning is “learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices.”
The “context”in this definition encompasses m-learnng that is formalself-directed, and spontaneous learning, as well as learning that is context aware and context neutral.
therefore, m-learning can occur inside or outside the classroom, participating in a formal lesson on a mobile device; it can be self-directed, as a person determines his or her own approach to satisfy a learning goal; or spontaneous learning, as a person can use the devices to look up something that has just prompted an interest (Crompton, 2013, p. 83). (Gaming article Tallinn)Constructivist Learnings in the 1980s – Following Piage’s (1929), Brunner’s (1996) and Jonassen’s (1999) educational philosophies, constructivists proffer that knowledge acquisition develops through interactions with the environment. (p. 85). The computer was no longer a conduit for the presentation of information: it was a tool for the active manipulation of that information” (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula, & Sharples, 2004, p. 12)Constructionist Learning in the 1980s – Constructionism differed from constructivism as Papert (1980) posited an additional component to constructivism: students learned best when they were actively involved in constructing social objects. The tutee position. Teaching the computer to perform tasks.Problem-Based learning in the 1990s – In the PBL, students often worked in small groups of five or six to pool knowledge and resources to solve problems. Launched the sociocultural revolution, focusing on learning in out of school contexts and the acquisition of knowledge through social interaction
Socio-Constructivist Learning in the 1990s. SCL believe that social and individual processes are independent in the co-construction of knowledge (Sullivan-Palinscar, 1998; Vygotsky, 1978).
96-97). Keegan (2002) believed that e-learning was distance learning, which has been converted to e-learning through the use of technologies such as the WWW. Which electronic media and tools constituted e-learning: e.g., did it matter if the learning took place through a networked technology, or was it simply learning with an electronic device?
99-100. Traxler (2011) described five ways in which m-learning offers new learning opportunities: 1. Contingent learning, allowing learners to respond and react to the environment and changing experiences; 2. Situated learning, in which learning takes place in the surroundings applicable to the learning; 3. Authentic learning;
Diel, W. (2013). M-Learning as a subfield of open and distance education. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
15) Historical context in relation to the field of distance education (embedded librarian)
16 definition of independent study (workshop on mlearning and distance education
17. Theory of transactional distance (Moore)
Cochrane, T. (2013). A Summary and Critique of M-Learning Research and Practice. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
( Galin class, workshop)
P 24
According to Cook and Sharples (2010) the development of M learning research has been characterized by three general faces a focus upon Devices Focus on learning outside the classroom He focus on the mobility of the learner
25
Baby I am learning studies focus upon content delivery for small screen devices and the PDA capabilities of mobile devices rather than leveraging the potential of mobile devices for collaborative learning as recommended by hope Joyner Mill Road and sharp P. 26 Large scale am learning project Several larger am learning projects have tended to focus on specific groups of learners rather than developing pedagogical strategies for the integration of am mlearning with him tertiary education in general
27
m learning research funding
In comparison am learning research projects in countries with smaller population sizes such as Australia and New Zealand are typiclly funded on a shoe string budget
28
M-learning research methodologies
I am learning research has been predominantly characterized by short term case studies focused upon The implementation of rapidly changing technologies with early adopters but with little evaluation reflection or emphasis on mainstream tertiary-education integration
p. 29 identifying the gaps in M learning research
lack of explicit underlying pedagogical theory Lack of transferable design frameworks
Pachler, N., Bachmair, B., and Cook, J. (2013). A Sociocultural Ecological Frame for Mobile Learning. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
(Tom video studio)
35 a line of argumentation that defines mobile devices such as mobile phones as cultural resources. Mobile cultural resources emerge within what we call a “bile complex‘, which consist of specifics structures, agency and cultural practices.
36 pedagogy looks for learning in the context of identify formation of learners within a wider societal context However at the beginning of the twentieth first century and economy oriented service function of learning driven by targets and international comparisons has started to occupy education systems and schools within them Dunning 2000 describes the lengthy transformation process from natural assets Land unskilled labor to tangible assets machinery to intangible created assets such as knowledge and information of all kinds Araya and Peters 2010 describe the development of the last 20 years in terms of faces from the post industrial economy to d information economy to the digital economy to the knowledge economy to the creative economy Cultural ecology can refer to the debate about natural resources we argue for a critical debate about the new cultural resources namely mobile devices and the services for us the focus must not be on the exploitation of mobile devices and services for learning but instead on the assimilation of learning with mobiles in informal contacts of everyday life into formal education
37
Ecology comes into being is there exists a reciprocity between perceiver and environment translated to M learning processes this means that there is a reciprocity between the mobile devices in the activity context of everyday life and the formal learning
45
Rather than focusing on the acquisition of knowledge in relation to externally defined notions of relevance increasingly in a market-oriented system individual faces the challenge of shape his/her knowledge out of his/her own sense of his/her world information is material which is selected by individuals to be transformed by them into knowledge to solve a problem in the life world
Crompton, H. (2013). A Sociocultural Ecological Frame for Mobile Learning. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
p. 47 As philosophies and practice move toward learner-centered pedagogies, technology in a parallel move, is now able to provide new affordances to the learner, such as learning that is personalized, contextualized, and unrestricted by temporal and spatial constrains.
The necessity for m-learning to have a theory of its own, describing exactly what makes m-learning unique from conventional, tethered electronic learning and traditional learning.
48 . Definition and devices. Four central constructs. Learning pedagogies, technological devices, context and social interactions.
“learning across multiple contexts, through social and content interactions, using personal electronic devices.”
It is difficult, and ill advisable, to determine specifically which devices should be included in a definition of m-learning, as technologies are constantly being invented or redesigned. (my note against the notion that since D2L is a MnSCU mandated tool, it must be the one and only). One should consider m-learning as the utilization of electronic devices that are easily transported and used anytime and anywhere.
49 e-learning does not have to be networked learning: therefore, e-learnng activities could be used in the classroom setting, as the often are.
Why m-learning needs a different theory beyond e-learning. Conventional e-learning is tethered, in that students are anchored to one place while learning. What sets m-learning apart from conventional e-learning is the very lack of those special and temporal constrains; learning has portability, ubiquitous access and social connectivity.
50 dominant terms for m-learning should include spontaneous, intimate, situated, connected, informal, and personal, whereas conventional e-learning should include the terms computer, multimedia, interactive, hyperlinked, and media-rich environment.
51 Criteria for M-Learning
second consideration is that one must be cognizant of the substantial amount of learning taking place beyond the academic and workplace setting.
52 proposed theories
Activity theory: Vygotsky and Engestroem
Conversation theory: Pask 1975, cybernetic and dialectic framework for how knowledge is constructed. Laurillard (2007) although conversation is common for all forms of learning, m-learning can build in more opportunities for students to have ownership and control over what they are learning through digitally facilitated, location-specific activities.
53 multiple theories;
54 Context is central construct of mobile learning. Traxler (2011) described the role of context in m-learning as “context in the wider context”, as the notion of context becomes progressively richer. This theme fits with Nasimith et al situated theory, which describes the m-learning activities promoting authentic context and culture.
55. Connectivity
unlike e-learning, the learner is not anchored to a set place. it links to Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach.
Learning happens within various social groups and locations, providing a diverse range of connected learning experiences. furthermore, connectivity is without temporal restraints, such as the schedules of educators.
55. Time
m-larning as “learning dispersed in time”
55. personalization
my note student-centered learning
Moura, A., Carvalho, A. (2013). Framework For Mobile Learning Integration Into Educational Contexts. In: Berge and Muilenburg (Eds.). Handbook of Mobile Learning.
*Audiobooks Free public-domain audiobooks, read by volunteers, can be found atlibrivox.org. (Print versions of public-domain books are available atProject Gutenberg.)
Tumbleson, B. E., & Burke, J. (. J. (2013). Embedding librarianship in learning management systems: A how-to-do-it manual for librarians. Neal-Schuman, an imprint of the American Library Association.
Kvenild, C., & Calkins, K. (2011). Embedded Librarians: Moving Beyond One-Shot Instruction – Books / Professional Development – Books for Academic Librarians – ALA Store. ACRL. Retrieved from http://www.alastore.ala.org/detail.aspx?ID=3413
xi. the authors are convinced that LMS embedded librarianship is becoming he primary and most productive method for connecting with college and university students, who are increasingly mobile.
xii. reference librarians engage the individual, listen, discover what is wanted and seek to point the stakeholder in profitable directions.
Instruction librarians, in contrast, step into the classroom and attempt to lead a group of students in new ways of searching wanted information.
Sometimes that instruction librarian even designs curriculum and teaches their own credit course to guide information seekers in the ways of finding, evaluating, and using information published in various formats.
Librarians also work in systems, emerging technologies, and digital initiatives in order to provide infrastructure or improve access to collections and services for tend users through the library website, discovery layers, etc. Although these arenas seemingly differ, librarians work as one.
xiii. working as an LMS embedded librarian is both a proactive approach to library instruction using available technologies and enabling a 24/7 presence.
1. Embeddedness involves more that just gaining perspective. It also allows the outsider to become part of the group through shared learning experiences and goals. 3. Embedded librarianship in the LMS is all about being as close as possible to where students are receiving their assignments and gaining instruction and advice from faculty members. p. 6 When embedded librarians provide ready access to scholarly electronic collections, research databases, and Web 2.0 tools and tutorials, the research experience becomes less frustrating and more focused for students. Undergraduate associate this familiar online environment with the academic world.
p. 7 describes embedding a reference librarian, which LRS reference librarians do, “partnership with the professor.” However, there is room for “Research Consultations” (p. 8). While “One-Shot Library Instruction Sessions” and “Information Literacy Credit Courses” are addressed (p. 809), the content of these sessions remains in the old-fashioned lecturing type of delivering the information.
p. 10-11. The manuscript points out clearly the weaknesses of using a Library Web site. The authors fail to see that the efforts of the academic librarians must go beyond Web page and seek how to easy the information access by integrating the power of social media with the static information residing on the library web page.
p. 12 what becomes disturbingly clear is that faculty focus on the mechanics of the research paper over the research process. Although students are using libraries, 70 % avoid librarians. Urging academic librarians to “take an active role and initiate the dialogue with faculty to close a divide that may be growing between them and faculty and between them and students.”
Four research context with which undergraduates struggle: big picture, language, situational context and information gathering.
p. 15 ACRL standards One and Three: librarians might engage students who rely on their smartphones, while keeping in mind that “[s]tudents who retrieve information on their smartphones may also have trouble understanding or evaluating how the information on their phone is ‘produced, organized, and disseminated’ (Standard One). Standard One by its definition seems obsolete. If information is formatted for desktops, it will be confusing when on smart phones, And by that, it is not mean to adjust the screen size, but change the information delivery from old fashioned lecturing to more constructivist forms. e.g. http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/
p. 15 As for Standard Two, which deals with effective search strategies, the LMS embedded librarian must go beyond Boolean operators and controlled vocabulary, since emerging technologies incorporate new means of searching. As unsuccessfully explained to me for about two years now at LRS: hashtag search, LinkedIn groups etc, QR codes, voice recognition etc.
p. 16. Standard Five. ethical and legal use of information.
p. 23 Person announced in 2011 OpenClass compete with BB, Moodle, Angel, D2L, WebCT, Sakai and other
p. 24 Common Features: content, email, discussion board, , synchronous chat and conferencing tools (Wimba and Elluminate for BB)
p. 31 information and resources which librarians could share via LMS
– post links to dbases and other resources within the course. LIB web site, LibGuides or other subject-related course guidelines
– information on research concepts can be placed in a similar fashion. brief explanation of key information literacy topics (e.g difference between scholarly and popular periodical articles, choosing or narrowing research topics, avoiding plagiarism, citing sources properly whining required citations style, understanding the merits of different types of sources (Articles book’s website etc)
– Pertinent advice the students on approaching the assignment and got to rheank needed information
– Tutorials on using databases or planning searches step-by-step screencast navigating in search and Candida bass video search of the library did you a tour of the library
p. 33 embedded librarian being copied on the blanked emails from instructor to students.
librarian monitors the discussion board
p. 35 examples: students place specific questions on the discussion board and are assured librarian to reply by a certain time
instead of F2F instruction, created a D2L module, which can be placed in any course. videos, docls, links to dbases, links to citation tools etc. Quiz, which faculty can use to asses the the students
p. 36 discussion forum just for the embedded librarian. for the students, but faculty are encouraged to monitor it and provide content- or assignment-specific input
video tutorials and searching tips
Contact information email phone active IM chat information on the library’s open hours
p. 37 questions to consider
what is the status of the embedded librarian: T2, grad assistant
p. 41 pilot program. small scale trial which is run to discover and correct potential problems before
One or two faculty members, with faculty from a single department
Pilot at Valdosta State U = a drop-in informatil session with the hope of serving the information literacy needs of distance and online students, whereas at George Washington U, librarian contacted a distance education faculty member to request embedding in his upcoming online Mater’s course
p. 43 when librarians sense that current public services are not being fully utilized, it may signal that a new approach is needed.
pilots permit tinkering. they are all about risk-taking to enhance delivery
p. 57 markeing LMS ebedded Librarianship
library collections, services and facilities because faculty may be uncertain how the service benefits their classroom teaching and learning outcomes. my note per
“it is incumbent upon librarians to promote this new mode of information literacy instruction.” it is so passe. in the times when digital humanities is discussed and faculty across campus delves into digital humanities, which de facto absorbs digital literacy, it is shortsighted for academic librarians to still limit themselves into “information literacy,” considering that lip service is paid for for librarians being the leaders in the digital humanities movement. If academic librarians want to market themselves, they have to think broad and start with topics, which ARE of interest for the campus faculty (digital humanities included) and then “push” their agenda (information literacy). One of the reasons why academic libraries are sinking into oblivion is because they are sunk already in 1990-ish practices (information literacy) and miss the “hip” trends, which are of interest for faculty and students. The authors (also paying lip services to the 21st century necessities), remain imprisoned to archaic content. In the times, when multi (meta) literacies are discussed as the goal for library instruction, they push for more arduous marketing of limited content. Indeed, marketing is needed, but the best marketing is by delivering modern and user-sought content.
the stigma of “academic librarians keep doing what they know well, just do it better.” Lip-services to change, and life-long learning. But the truth is that the commitment to “information literacy” versus the necessity to provide multi (meta) literacites instruction (Reframing Information Literacy as a metaliteracy) is minimizing the entire idea of academic librarians reninventing themselves in the 21st century.
Here is more: NRNT-New Roles for New Times
p. 58 According to the Burke and Tumbleson national LMS embedded librarianship survey, 280 participants yielded the following data regarding embedded librarianship:
traditional F2F LMS courses – 69%
online courses – 70%
hybrid courses – 54%
undergraduate LMS courses 61%
graduate LMS courses 42%
of those respondents in 2011, 18% had the imitative started for four or more years, which place the program in 2007. Thus, SCSU is almost a decade behind.
my note:
library blog was offered numerous times to the LRS librarians and, consequently to the LRS dean, but it was brushed away, as were brushed away the proposals for modern institutional social media approach (social media at LRS does not favor proficiency in social media but rather sees social media as learning ground for novices, as per 11:45 AM visit to LRS social media meeting of May 6, 2015). The idea of the blog advantages to static HTML page was explained in length, but it was visible that the advantages are not understood, as it is not understood the difference of Web 2.0 tools (such as social media) and Web 1.0 tools (such as static web page). The consensus among LRS staff and faculty is to keep projecting Web 1.0 ideas on Web 2.0 tools (e.g. using Facebook as a replacement of Adobe Dreamweaver: instead of learning how to create static HTML pages to broadcast static information, use Facebook for fast and dirty announcement of static information). It is flabbergasting to be rejected offering a blog to replace Web 1.0 in times when the corporate world promotes live-streaming (http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/live-streaming-video-for-business/) as a way to promote services (academic librarians can deliver live their content)
p. 59 Marketing 2.0 in the information age is consumer-oriented. Marketing 3.0 in the values-driven era, which touches the human spirit (Kotler, Katajaya, and Setiawan 2010, 6).
The four Ps: products and services, place, price and promotion. Libraries should consider two more P’s: positioning and politics.
Mathews (2009) “library advertising should focus on the lifestyle of students. the academic library advertising to students today needs to be: “tangible, experiential, relatebale, measurable, sharable and surprising.” Leboff (2011, p. 400 agrees with Mathews: the battle in the marketplace is not longer for transaction, it is for attention. Formerly: billboards, magazines, newspapers, radio, tv, direct calls. Today: emphasize conversation, authenticity, values, establishing credibility and demonstrating expertise and knowledge by supplying good content, to enhance reputation (Leboff, 2011, 134). translated for the embedded librarians: Google goes that far; students want answers to their personal research dillemas and questions. Being a credentialed information specialist with years of experience is no longer enough to win over an admiring following. the embedded librarian must be seen as open and honest in his interaction with students.
p. 60 becoming attractive to end-users is the essential message in advertising LMS embedded librarianship. That attractivness relies upon two elements: being noticed and imparting values (Leboff, 2011, 99)
p. 61 connecting with faculty
p. 62 reaching students
attending a synchronous chat sessions
watching a digital tutorial
posting a question in a discussion board
using an instant messaging widget
be careful not to overload students with too much information. don’t make contact too frequently and be perceived as an annoyance and intruder.
p. 65. contemporary publicity and advertising is incorporating storytelling. testimonials differ from stories
p. 66 no-cost marketing. social media
low-cost marketing – print materials, fliers, bookmarks, posters, floor plans, newsletters, giveaways (pens, magnets, USB drives), events (orientations, workshops, contests, film viewings), campus media, digital media (lib web page, blogs, podcasts, social networking cites
p. 69 Instructional Content and Instructional Design
p. 70 ADDIE Model
Analysis: the requirements for the given course, assignments.
Ask instructors expectations from students vis-a-vis research or information literacy activities
students knowledge about the library already related to their assignments
which are the essential resources for this course
is this a hybrid or online course and what are the options for the librarian to interact with the students.
due date for the research assignment. what is the timeline for completing the assignment
when research tips or any other librarian help can be inserted
copy of the syllabus or any other assignment document
p. 72 discuss the course with faculty member. Analyze the instructional needs of a course. Analyze students needs. Create list of goals. E.g.: how to find navigate and use the PschInfo dbase; how to create citations in APA format; be able to identify scholarly sources and differentiate them from popular sources; know other subject-related dbases to search; be able to create a bibliography and use in-text citations in APA format
p. 74 Design (Addie)
the embedded component is a course within a course. Add pre-developed IL components to the broader content of the course. multiple means of contact information for the librarians and /or other library staff. link to dbases. link to citation guidance and or tutorial on APA citations. information on how to distinguish scholarly and popular sources. links to other dbases. information and guidance on bibliographic and in-text citations n APA either through link, content written within the course a tutorial or combination. forum or a discussion board topic to take questions. f2f lib instruction session with students
p. 76 decide which resources to focus on and which skills to teach and reinforce. focus on key resources
p. 77 development (Addie).
-building content;the “landing” page at LRS is the subject guides page. resources integrated into the assignment pages. video tutorials and screencasts
-finding existing content; google search of e.g.: “library handout narrowing topic” or “library quiz evaluating sources,” “avoiding plagiarism,” scholarly vs popular periodicals etc
-writing narrative content. p. 85
p. 87 Evaluation (Addie)
formative: to change what the embedded librarian offers to improve h/er services to students for the reminder of the course
summative at the end of the course:
p. 89 Online, F2F and Hybrid Courses
p. 97 assessment impact of embedded librarian.
what is the purpose of the assessment; who is the audience; what will focus on; what resources are available
p. 98 surveys of faculty; of students; analysis of student research assignments; focus groups of students and faculty
