an August 2017 working paper, “Education Technology: An Evidence-Based Review,” published by the National Bureau of Economic Research with clear tables on which technology improves learning and which doesn’t.
1. Computers and internet access alone don’t boost learning
Handing out laptops, providing high-speed internet access or buying most other kinds of hardware doesn’t on its own boost academic outcomes. The research shows that student achievement doesn’t rise when kids are using computers more, and it sometimes decreases.
2. Some math software shows promise
math programs such as SimCalc and ASSISTments. One popular program, DreamBox, showed small gains for students, as well. Only one piece of software that taught reading, Intelligent Tutoring for the Structure Strategy (ITSS), showed promise, suggesting that it is possible to create good educational software outside of math, but it’s a lot harder.
One commonality of the software that seems to work is that it somehow “personalizes” instruction. Sometimes students start with a pre-test so the computer can determine what they don’t know and then sends each student the right lessons, or a series of worksheet problems, to help fill in the gaps. Other times, the computer ascertains a student’s gaps as he works through problems and makes mistakes, giving personalized feedback. Teachers also get data reports to help pinpoint where students are struggling.
3. Cheap can be effective
a study in San Francisco where texts reminded mothers to read to their preschoolers. That boosted children’s literacy scores.
your library IT’s approach to managing tech support within the framework of moving IT projects forward. Also, how big is your IT team vs your staff?
We have created an environment at our library where staff anticipate almost instant tech support. While this is great for our staff and patrons it’s proven not so great for the IT department as our IT projects that must get done take longer than they should and seem to roll endlessly. It can feel like we’re sacrificing the “big boulders” for endless minutia.
I wondered if you all could tell me your library IT’s approach to managing tech support within the framework of moving IT projects forward.
Also, how big is your IT team vs your staff?
Thank you,
Madeleine Madeleine Sturmer IT Manager | Teton County Library msturmer@tclib.org | 307.733.2164 x143
+++++++++++++++++++++
While the responses will vary widely based on size, type and IT-issues approaches, I can share one.
Providence College is a private, medium-sized (4,300 FTE students) Masters-I institution.
Our library is a fully integrated (horizontally and vertically) Commons (Library+Commons = no silos, traditional+technology-rich, open 116 hours/week for a primarily residential campus.
IT issues are tiered (e.g., 1-5 in complexity) and we have in-house IT specialists (two – one M-F days, one S-Th evenings) and many “back-up specialists”. The IT specialists handle most tiers-1-3 issues (sometimes tier 4) very promptly and refer tier 4-5 issues to central IT. All Library+Commons staff are hired with “relative high-tech/digital expertise, so that there is an articulated in-house IT team. This means that most IT issues are handled in-house and promptly. Library+Commons IT reports up to the Assistant Director and Head of Technology & Access.
the biggest challenge (and the most important) is to get the word out to the staff about how it works. I spoke at multiple all staff meetings about the process, put out a lot of documentation, and spoke at multiple meetings of various teams and departments to get the word out. Once you have a structure you have to support and enforce it. Getting your administration on board is vital-if the director or associate director thinks that they can “jump the queue” it won’t work. They have to understand that for the good of the whole, they might have to wait for something that is non-emergency.
Hope that helps-glad to provide further info offline if needed.
In 2015, former library dean purchased two large touch-screen monitors (I believe paid $3000 each). Shortly before that, I had offered to the campus fitting applications for touch screens (being that large screens or mobiles):
With the large touch screens, I proposed to have one of the large screens, positioned outside in the Miller Center lobby and used as a dummy terminal (50” + screens run around $700) to mount educational material (e.g. Guenter Grass’s celebration of his work: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/04/15/gunter-grass-1927-2015/ ) and have students explore by actively engaging, rather than just passively absorbing information. The bus-awaiting students are excellent potential users and they visibly are NOT engaged by by the currently broadcasted information on these screens, but can be potentially engaged if such information is restructured in interactive content.
The initial library administration approval was stalled by a concern with students “opening porno sites” while the library is closed which, indeed, would have been a problem.
My 2015 inquiry with the IT technicians about freezing a browser and a specific tab, which could prevent such issues, but it did not go far (pls see solution below). Failing to secure relatively frigid environment on the touch screen, the project was quietly left to rot.
I am renewing my proposal to consider the rather expensive touch screen monitors, which have been not utilized to their potential, and test my idea to engage students in a meaningful knowledge-building by using these applications to either create content or engage with content created by others.
Further, I am proposing that I investigate with campus faculty the possibility to bring the endeavor a step further by having a regularly-meeting group to develop engaging content using these and similar apps; for their own classes or any other [campus-related] activities. The incentive can be some reward, after users and creators “vote” the best (semester? Academic year?) project. The less conspicuous benefit will be the exposure of faculty to modern technology; some of the faculty are still abiding by lecturing style, other faculty, who seek interactivity are engulfed in the “smart board” fiction. Engaging the faculty in the touch screen creation of teaching materials will allow them to expand the practice to their and their students’ mobile devices. The benefit for the library will be the “hub” of activities, where faculty can learn from each other experience[s] in the library, rather than in their own departments/school only. The reward will be an incentive from the upper administration (document to attach in PDR?). I will need both your involvement/support. Tom Hergert by helping me rally faculty interest and the administrators incentivizing faculty to participate in the initial project, until it gains momentum and recognition.
In the same fashion, as part of the aforementioned group or separate, I would like to host a regularly-meeting group of students, who besides play and entertainment, aim the same process of creating interactive learning materials for their classes/projects. Same “best voted” process by peers. My preferable reward: upper administration is leaving recommendation in the students’ Linkedin account for future employers. I will need both your involvement/support. The student union can be decisive in bringing students to this endeavor. Both of you have more cloud with the student union then only a regular faculty such as me.
In regard to the security (porn alert, see above) I have the agreement of Dr. Tirthankar Ghos with the IS Department. Dr. Ghosh will be most pleased to announce as a class project the provision of a secure environment for the touch screen monitor to be left after the group meetings for “use” by students in the library. Dr. Ghosh is, however, concerned/uncertain with the level of cooperation from IT, considering that for his students to enable such environment, they have to have the “right” access; namely behind firewalls, administrative privileges etc. Each of you will definitely be more persuasive with Phil Thorson convincing him in the merit of having IS student work with SCSU IT technician, since it is a win-win situation: the IT technician does not have to “waste time” (as in 2015) and resolve an issue and the IS student will be having a project-based, real-life learning experience by enabling the project under the supervision of the IT technician. Besides: a. student-centered, project-based learning; b. IT technician time saved, we also aim c. no silos / collaborative SCSU working environment, as promised by the reorganization process.
Please join me September 20 for a free webinar where Dr. Sheryl Abshire, CTO of Calcasieu Parish SD and a recognized leader in K-12 technology, shares her insights on the top strategies, best practices and most valuable ideas that can reduce IT departmental costs and increase efficiencies.
What: New Ways to Measure & Leverage the Value of IT When: 09/20 @ 2:00 PM ET | 11:00 AM PT
Listen in and learn how to:
· Use data you already collect to justify needs and resources
· Create a new value proposition for IT
· Measure the strategic use of IT in the district
· Determine if your current technology is making the difference you expected
https://www.schooldude.com/ Tech support costs in K12 increased by 50% in the last four years from 14% to 21% of the technology budget. One half of the school technology leaders said that their school board understands that technology relates to district oveall goals , it is not as supportive financially. Worse, 8% felt that the school board does not believe technology is important to their district overall goals
Harvard Business Report Driving Digital Transformation. 2015 surveyed digital leaders. Driving innovation most important role breaking down internal silos
virtualization; data deluge; energy and green IT; complex resource tracking; consumerization and social software; unified communications; mobile and wireless; system density; mashups and portals; cloud computing
what is a quick recovery?
Action plan: 1. Focus on virtualization and green IT for immediate cost and flexibility benefits. 2. Look at storage virtualization, deduplication and thin provisioning. 3. Evaluate web social software to transform interactions 4. exploit mashups and cloud-based services to address immediate user needs. 5. link UC to collaboration and enterprise applications to support growth initiatives. 6. begin to track weak signals and subtle patterns – from everywhere.
managing upkeep and replacement of growing number of devices
time
perception gap (what we are doing)
tool: Insight
agentless network discovery mechanism. scanning of devices on the network. optimize hard software usage, improve planning and budgeting process with status reporting.
MDM (mobile device management). supports both BYOD and school devices. control app distribution across the network, supervise device usage, remotely manage device policy
Helpdesk: complete ticket to close helpdesk solution
++++++++++++++++++
Q&A time
technology facilitators: spend time at assigned schools; talk to teacher and try to figure out what teachers know about technology and then work the principal to customize workshops (PLCs) to build the skills based on their skills set. versus technology facilitator at every school. Help them grow their own.
Southeast Regional Conference November 6-7, 2017 University of Virginia
Conference Description and CFP The Association for Authentic, Experiential, and Evidence-Based Learning (AAEEBL) and the University of Virginia (UVa) are pleased to host the 2017 Southeast Regional AAEEBL Conference. AAEEBL is an international professional association dedicated to supporting educational leaders committed to education transformation relevant to 21st century learnings and best known for promotion of ePortfolios as a high impact practice in higher education.
Theme: Meaning-Making with Eportfolios ePortfolios provide an authentic context for learning and assessment as well as fertile ground for the exploration of the learning process itself. In this conference, we propose to explore the role of “meaning making” in the various facets of the ePortfolio building process and the way it informs the experiences of our students and our understanding of learning.
