Classroom Discussion and Students Participation

Classroom Discussion and Students Participation: how to Secure Student Engagement to Increase Learning and Improve Teaching

  • How to increase the number of students who take part in classroom discussions
  • How to avoid the problem of dominant talkers
  • How to encourage introverted students to increase their participation in classroom discussions
  • Strategies to help your students recognize what they learned in any discussion
  • How to use the first day of the semester to engage your students—and techniques for getting them to participate right from the start
  • What common classroom practices can decrease the likelihood of a student participating in discussion?
  • What strategies can you use to overcome established classroom practices and increase student participation?
  • And how can you structure classroom discussions to better facilitate student learning?

What does Research Tell Us about Classroom Discussion? Jay Howard
http://digitalcommons.butler.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1163&context=facsch_papers

Do College Students Participate More in Discussion in Traditional Delivery Courses or in Interactive Telecourses?
https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_higher_education/v073/73.6howard.html

facts from sociological research:

  • Gender yields mixed results
    • Males participate more frequently than females.
    • Males participate more frequently in courses taught by female instructors
    • Other studies show the opposite
  • Non traditional students participate more frequently
  • Instructors’ gender also returns mixed results
  • Class size as variable is important, smaller classes, more participation
  • Class participation – grading
    • Make the students grade themselves at the end of each class period. By making them grade themselves, they reflect and makes them more aware of their contribution.
      0 – absent
      1 – present but did not verbally participate
      2 – verbally participated one time
      3 – verbally participated more than once
      4 – made an equitable contribution to discussion in terms of both quantity and quality

 

  • The well-known and established belief that smaller classes spur more participation.
    Jay Howard maintain his sociological research in 20th centuries constants: physical classroom, no technology surrounding.
    In the 21st century, clickers changed the opportunity for immediate feedback. They changed also the discourse of the traditional student participation and classroom discussion:
    http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=clickers&submit=Search

Traditional forms and techniques for discussion and participation

Weih, T. G. (2015). Discussion Strategies for the Inclusion of ALL Students. Online Submission,
http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED561060

  • Don’ts:
    call on student
    instructor’s personality issues:

Does the instructor really care of what students have to say
lecturing does not predispose to discussion

  • The 10 second rule: students discuss in pairs the concept/question
  • Think-Pair-Share: discussion strategy before or after lesson, similar to 10 second but longer
  • Quick writes: write their thoughts and then share. Loose paper, names on top,
  • Recorder-reporter. Post-lecture. The person reps the group, who is working on a specific question. Each group different question.
  • K-W-L. what we know, what we want to learn, what we learned. Teacher instructs students that K = what they know, W = what they want to learn and L = what they learned. . work in small groups, but each student works on h/er chart, thus if student disagrees with rest of the group, has record. L is left blank for after the discussion.

Simich-Dudgeon, C., & National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, W. D. (1998). Classroom Strategies for Encouraging Collaborative Discussion. Directions in Language and Education. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED435188

  • Using storytelling

Chen, W., & Looi, C. (2007). Incorporating Online Discussion in Face to Face Classroom Learning: A New Blended Learning Approach. Australasian Journal Of Educational Technology, 23(3), 307-326.
Discussions and participation in hybrid environment

Jinhong, J., & Gilson, T. A. (2014). Online Threaded Discussion: Benefits, Issues, and Strategies. Kinesiology Review, 3(4), 241-246.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3ds3h%26AN%3d100248254%26site%3dehost-live%26scope%3dsite

For each OTD topic, the instructor randomly assigns two to four student discussion leaders who are in charge of organizing OTD for the assigned week. Each of the discussion leaders is asked to generate one or two discussion questions related to the topic based on reading assignments. The use of student discussion leaders is a strategy to encourage active participation and help develop ownership of learning. Once student discussion leaders post their questions, other students are encouraged to contribute to the discussion by answering each question, commenting on the ideas of others, or asking questions of peers or the instructor for the next two days. When the week’s discussion is complete, the student leaders and instructor work together to summarize the discussion and evaluate each student’s participation and contribution to the discussion using a scoring rubric. (p.242)

Implementation (p. 243):

  • preparation : On the first day of the course, the instructor introduces topics, how-tos, expectations, grading procedures, and required reading assignments for OTD, and organizes discussion leaders for each online discussion (2–4 leaders for each)
  • Opening and Responding: Posted discussion questions become open at the time of the class and students who are not the leaders are required to post at least one response per question within 48 hrs. During this time, the leaders facilitate discussion by responding to comments, raising questions, or redirecting discussion to encourage active participation and ensure the discussion is on track
  • Summary and Assessment: The job of the leader is to moderate, summarize discussion threads, and assess them at the end of the discussion. When the week’s discussion is complete, the leaders meet with the instructor to debrief and evaluate each student’s participation and contribution to the discussion using a scoring rubric given by the instructor. After the meeting, each leader posts his or her summary of the discussion to BBCMS and reports at the next in-person class.

 

  • D2L
  • Beyond CMS (D2L)

Discussions and participation in online environment

Darabi, A., Liang, X., Suryavanshi, R., & Yurekli, H. (2013). Effectiveness of Online Discussion Strategies: A Meta-Analysis. American Journal Of Distance Education, 27(4), 228-241. doi:10.1080/08923647.2013.837651

  • Beyond CMS (D2L)

Lin, P., Hou, H., Wang, S., & Chang, K. (2013). Analyzing knowledge dimensions and cognitive process of a project-based online discussion instructional activity using Facebook in an adult and continuing education course. Computers & Education, 60(1), 110-121. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.017
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131512001819

  1. 111 results suggest that using Facebook is not necessarily harmful to a student’s learning performance. Adequate learning activity design and pedagogical goal setting could, in fact, exploit the social and information-sharing function of Facebook, thereby supporting academic learning (Gray et al., 2010). this study seeks to advance the understanding of adult learners’ behaviors in online project discussions using Facebook.

In the process of project-based learning, learners must utilize different kinds of knowledge (e.g., discrete declarative knowledge and dynamic procedural knowledge) (Lou, 2004). Meanwhile, students can develop higher level of cognitive skills for a specific domain as well as the ability to apply adequate knowledge to a specific domain or context during PBL (Barron et al., 1998; Blumenfeld et al., 1991).

  1. 118
    Select driving questions or controversial issues as project topics: Blumenfeld et al. (1991) noted that driving questions could facilitate students to explore the project topic. In the exploration process, students must first collect information and propose diverse viewpoints on the project topics. They could subsequently filter out and reach consensus during online discussions. This process involves diverse and converging phases that can move students toward higher-order thinking (Jorczak & Bart, 2009).
  2. Allow ample time for online discussion: Results of this study indicated that student online discussions lacked diversity in both knowledge and cognitive process dimensions. One possible reason could be that the allotted time for online discussions was not sufficient. Considering the multiple roles that adult learners play in family and/or work, they may not be able to respond to the discussions in a timely manner. Therefore, allowing more time for students to discuss may provide opportunities for students to demonstrate more diverse and deeper thinking (Scherling, 2011).
  3. Provide a structured rubric for online discussions: Well-designed discussion guidelines and evaluation criteria, i.e., posting protocols or rubric for grading, could serve as scaffolds for student online discussions, which may, subsequently, lead to more meaningful learning (Gilbert & Dabbagh, 2005). Following that, more diverse type of knowledge and levels of cognitive process could be expected to be shown.
  4. Pay attention to the effects that individual differences may exert on the learner’s interactions: Our results showed that, in the context of online discussions, females and older learners are more likely to have off-topic discussions than their male and/or younger counterparts. These findings are in accord with previous research that suggested effects of individual differences on learning as well as on the use of SNSs (Glynn et al., 2012; Muscanell & Guadagno, 2012; Price, 2006; Yukselturk & Bulut, 2009). Therefore, considering the potential effects that gender and age may exert on online discussions, instructors are advised to consider individual differences when grouping students for online discussions, as a balanced group composition of evenly distributed age and gender could be a better approach than a skewed distribution of individuals.

 

social interaction, which was considered as irrelevant discussion, may also leading to meaningful thinking and echoes the viewpoints from previous studies, which suggest social interaction can be a critical element in the CSCL environment (Abedin et al., 2011a, 2011b).

Incorporating online discussion in face to face classroom learning: A new blended learning approach

Wenli Chen, Chee-Kit Looi

Abstract

This paper discusses an innovative blended learning strategy which incorporates online discussion in both in-class face to face, and off-classroom settings. Online discussion in a face to face class is compared with its two counterparts, off-class online discussion as well as in-class, face to face oral discussion, to examine the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed strategy. By integrating online discussion into the flow of the classroom, learners are given dedicated time to foster a habit of critical thinking, reflection and articulating these online, which can subsequently seed further in-class oral discussions, and off-class online discussions. It is found that in-class, online discussion can provide a wider spectrum of discussion perspectives, equalise participation in discussion, and promote cognitive thinking skills and in depth information processing. However, the lack of face to face interactions and the need for sufficient time to do online postings pose challenges in implementing online discussion for face to face classroom learning.

PDF file available

=============

More on classroom discussions in this IMS blog:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=discussions&submit=Search

extend test time for student with disability

How to extend D2L quiz time for specific students

  1. Go to “Assessment” and select “Quizzes”
    scroll down the menu, right to the quiz you are about to alter

locate and open the quiz

 

Edit the quiz

 

assign student

change the parameters

check and save

 

 

 

 

2. sellect “Edit” quiz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Switch to the “Restriction” tab
Click on “Add Users to Special Access”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. make the necessary changes
select the student[s] names by checking the box left to their names

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5. check the changes and save

Next Generation Learning Environment

Pathways for a Next Generation Learning Environment

A short meeting to introduce you to the “Pathways for a Next Generation Learning Environment” project (Phase 1). http://www.asa.mnscu.edu/educationalinnovations/projects/ngle/index.html

Next Generation LE Project
Tuesday, January 5, 2016
11:00 am |   Central Standard Time (Chicago)   | 1 hr
Join WebEx meeting
Meeting number: 633 316 768

Join by phone1-866-469-3239 Call-in toll-free number (US/Canada)1-650-429-3300 Call-in toll number (US/Canada)Access code: 633 316 768Toll-free calling restrictions

Add this meeting to your calendar. (Cannot add from mobile devices.)

Notes:

Dick McMullen and Lesley meeting for site admin trainers.

moving from LMS to LE realizing that it is a mash up, rather then only the systems (especially commercial ones).

cloud hosting.
MnSCU self-hosted D2L instance is experiencing some issues with possible increasing feature loss

ASA Technology Council. RFP (recommended timeframe)

Schoology, Canvas, Moodle hosting companies, BB and D2L were contacted.

http://www.asa.mnscu.edu/educationalinnovations/LE/2015NextGenLE/Next%20Gen%20LE%20RFI_December%202015.pdf

my question was about Drupal, Joomla, Django, Sakai:
http://www.academia.edu/1675990/Adventures_in_Open_Source_-_Moodle_Mahara_Drupal_et._al._at_Purchase_College

MUSM123

Guide for taking your multimedia quiz online.

Your Listening Exam IV: American Music, and World Music consists of matching questions:
you need to match an audio file, which you will be listening to, with the matching name of the music file. 

After you open your browser, login in D2L.
Find your MUSM123 D2L course and go to Assessment / Quizzes.

Start the Listening Exam IV: American Music, and World Music quiz. 

You might be required to allow the audio clips to play on your computer, If this is the case, following the directions of the pop up window. Choose the option “Allow and remember,” if there is such.

You will know that you have accomplished the task, when you see on your window an audio bar, where you can hit the Play button.

The list, where you can log in your answers, is on the left hand-side of the audio clips. Scroll down to reach it:

MediaSpace

MediaSpace

LMS and student learning

Techniques for Unleashing Student Work from Learning Management Systems

http://ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2015/02/13/techniques-for-unleashing-student-work-from-learning-management-systems/

the fundamental problem is that learning management systems are ultimately about serving the needs of institutions, not individual students.

In his manifesto on Connectivism, George Siemens writes that in Connectivist learning environments, the “pipes” of a course are more important than what flows through those pipes. The networks that students build are durable structures of lifelong learning, and they are more important

by having students own their learning spaces and democratize the means of production. Rather than forcing students to log in to an institutional LMS, I asked them to create their own websites, blogs, Twitter accounts and spaces on the open Web. In these spaces, students could curate links and connections and share their evolving ideas. Whatever they create is owned and maintained by them, not by me or by Harvard. They can keep their content for three months, three years, or the rest of their lives, so long as they continue to curate and move their published content as platforms change.

so, it is back what i claimed at the turn of the century: LMS were claimed to be invented to make the instructor’s life “easier”: instead of learning HTML, use LMS. My argument was that by the time one learns the interface of WebCT, one can learn HTML and HTML will be remain for the rest of their professional life, whereas WebCT got replaced by D2L and D2L will be replaced by another interface. I was labeled as “D2L hater” for such an opinion.
Now to the argument that LMS was a waste of instructors’ time, is added the new argument that it is also a waste of students’ time.

The way that Connected Courses deal with this challenge is by aggregation, sometimes also called syndication. All of the content produced on student blogs, websites, Twitter accounts and other social media accounts is syndicated to a single website. On the Flow page, every piece of content created by students, myself and teaching staff was aggregated into one place. We also had Blog and Twitter Hubs that displayed only long-form writing from blogs or microposts from Twitter. A Spotlight page highlighted some of the best writings from students.

This online learning environment had three important advantages. First, students owned their means of production. They weren’t writing in discussion forums in order to get 2 points for posting to the weekly prompt. They wrote to communicate with audiences within the class and beyond. Second, everyone’s thinking could be found in the same place, by looking at hashtags and our syndication engines on t509massive.org. Finally, this design allows our learning to be permeable to the outside world. Students could write for audiences they cared about: fellow librarians or English teachers or education technologists working in developing countries. And as our networks grew, colleagues form outside our classroom could share with us, by posting links or thoughts to the #t509massive hashtag.

 

 

 

Technology Instruction available free

Featured

Spring 2016 technology Sessions available

Student’s relationship with technology is complex. They recognize its value but still need guidance when it comes to better using it for academics.

Educause’s ECAR Study, 2013

InforMedia Services

IMS faculty would be happy to meet with you or your group at your convenience.
Please request using this Google Form:  http://scsu.mn/1OjBMf9 or
by email: pmiltenoff@stcloudstate.edu | informedia@stcloudstate.edu

How you can reach us:

Services we provide:

  • Instruct and collaborate with faculty, staff and students on specific computer, Cloud and mobile applications
  • Assist faculty in course design and instruction to incorporate SCSU’s resources
  • Join faculty in the classroom instructional design to assist students with learning technology application for the class
  • Consult with faculty on instructional design issues, particularly those that use the World Wide Web, multimedia techniques and interactivity
  • Collaborate with faculty, staff and students on technology-related projects
  • Work with campus units in technology planning and acquisition
  • Respond to faculty, staff and students requests and technology developments

wordpress


twitter
facebook1google2 copyyoutubeadobe connect2

http://scsu.mn/TechInstruct

the future of LMS

Blackboard loses high-profile clients as its rivals school it in innovation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/blackboard-loses-high-profile-clients-as-students-gripe-about-its-design/2015/08/21/1fd91708-4511-11e5-8e7d-9c033e6745d8_story.html

My note: if this is going on with BB, imagine what is the issue with D2L.

competitors emerged that were more difficult to ignore. Firms such as Instructure and Sakai attempted to separate themselves from Blackboard by focusing on customizing their software for clients and providing extensive daily maintenance.

As rivals gained traction, Blackboard’s grip on the market began to slip. Some companies relied on open-source software that made them more nimble. Blackboard didn’t adopt it until 2012. Student and faculty complaints about the software also took on new life.

“Blackboard will be the death of me,” wrote one student on Tumblr a year ago.

“Why is everything so counter-intuitive?” said one professor on an online forum at the Chronicle of Higher Education. “Why do you have to click a million times just to do a simple task?”

the company has struggled to find technology that will appeal to all students and professors

It is focused on expanding its reach in K-12 institutions to broaden the market, Blot said, and is diving into the world of mobile apps.

future of LMS (D2L)

The Move from Course Management to Course Networking

A Q&A with Ali Jafari

http://campustechnology.com/articles/2015/08/18/the-move-from-course-management-to-course-networking.aspx

We need now to have a totally new type of learning environment, both conceptually and technically, and it will also need to be different from a business perspective.

You might think of CN (Course Networking) as a complete social learning suite combined with comprehensive learning management tools, along with associated elements like ePortfolio, data mining, globalization and collaboration tools, and much more.

Every student on the CN has a “social portfolio”, which will be there for the student to access, life long. This social portfolio is different from a “typical” ePortfolio in several ways, but importantly, it can be created dynamically — for example, a teacher might check a box indicating that each student in the top ten percent of her class will receive a badge. Beyond that checkbox, everything happens automatically, without a need for the student to locate and upload the badge for display, and no need for the teacher to monitor or be further involved with the awarding of badges. As a student I can manage my social portfolio, and determine who will see or not see certain elements of it.

we are building and maintaining really one big network — instead of necessarily supporting many, many independent institutional client implementations.

 

LMS and embedded librarianship

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.

Embedding librarianship in learning management systems:

https://scsu.mplus.mnpals.net/vufind/Record/007650037

p. 20 Embedding Academic and Research Libraries in the Curriculum: 2014-nmc-horizon-report-library-EN

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.ghttp://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.

p. 58 promotional methods:

  • word of mouth
  • personal invitation by librarians
  • email by librarians
  • library brochures
  • library blogs

four years later, the LRS reference librarians’ report https://magic.piktochart.com/output/5704744-libsmart-stats-1415 has no mentioning of online courses, less to say embedded librarianship

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

ADDIE model 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

p. 100 assessment methods: p. 103/4 survey template
https://www.ets.org/iskills/about
https://www.projectsails.org/ (paid)
http://www.trails-9.org/
http://www.library.ualberta.ca/augustana/infolit/wassail/
p. 106 gathering LMS stats. Usability testing
examples: p. 108-9, UofFL : pre-survey and post-survey of studs perceptions of library skills, discussion forum analysis and interview with the instructor

p. 122 create an LMS module for reuse (standardized template)
p. 123 subject and course LibGuides, digital tutorials, PPTs,
research mind maps, charts, logs, or rubrics
http://creately.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Research-Proposal-mind-map-example.png
http://www.library.arizona.edu/help/tutorials/mindMap/sample.php  (excellent)
or paper-based if needed: Concept Map Worksheet
Productivity Tools for Graduate Students: MindMapping http://libguides.gatech.edu/c.php

rubrics:
http://www.cornellcollege.edu/LIBRARY/faculty/focusing-on-assignments/tools-for-assessment/research-paper-rubric.shtml
http://gvsu.edu/library/instruction/research-guidance-rubric-for-assignment-design-4.htm
Creating Effective Information Literacy Assignments http://www.lib.jmu.edu/instruction/assignments.aspx

course handouts
guides on research concepts http://library.olivet.edu/subject-guides/english/college-writing-ii/research-concepts/
http://louisville.libguides.com/c.php
Popular versus scholar http://www.library.arizona.edu/help/tutorials/scholarly/guide.html

list of frequently asked q/s:
blog posts
banks of reference q/s

p. 124. Resistance or Receptivity

p. 133 getting admin access to LMS for the librarians.

p. 136 mobile students, dominance of born-digital resources

 

 

 

———————-

Summey T, Valenti S. But we don’t have an instructional designer: Designing online library instruction using isd techniques. Journal Of Library & Information Services In Distance Learning [serial online]. January 1, 2013;Available from: Scopus®, Ipswich, MA. Accessed May 11, 2015.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedselc%26AN%3dedselc.2-52.0-84869866367%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

instructional designer library instruction using ISD techniques

Shank, J. (2006). The blended librarian: A job announcement analysis of the newly emerging position of instructional design librarian. College And Research Libraries, 67(6), 515-524.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedselc%26AN%3dedselc.2-52.0-33845291135%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

The Blended Librarian_ A Job Announcement Analysis of the Newly Emerging Position of Instructional Design Librarian

Macklin, A. (2003). Theory into practice: Applying David Jonassen’s work in instructional design to instruction programs in academic libraries. College And Research Libraries, 64(6), 494-500.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedselc%26AN%3dedselc.2-52.0-7044266019%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

Theory into Practice_ Applying David Jonassen_s Work in Instructional Design to Instruction Programs in Academic Libraries

Walster, D. (1995). Using Instructional Design Theories in Library and Information Science Education. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, (3). 239.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedsjsr%26AN%3dedsjsr.10.2307.40323743%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

Using Instructional Design Theories in Library and Information Science Education

Mackey, T. )., & Jacobson, T. ). (2011). Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College And Research Libraries, 72(1), 62-78.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedselc%26AN%3dedselc.2-52.0-79955018169%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

Reframing Information Literacy as a metaliteracy

Nichols, J. (2009). The 3 directions: Situated information literacy. College And Research Libraries, 70(6), 515-530.
http://login.libproxy.stcloudstate.edu/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedselc%26AN%3dedselc.2-52.0-73949087581%26site%3deds-live%26scope%3dsite

The 3 Directions_ Situated literacy

 

—————

Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning (J Libr Inform Serv Dist Learn)

https://www.researchgate.net/journal/1533-290X_Journal_of_Library_Information_Services_in_Distance_Learning

http://conference.acrl.org/

http://www.loex.org/conferences.php

http://www.ala.org/lita/about/igs/distance/lit-igdl

————

https://magic.piktochart.com/output/5704744-libsmart-stats-1415

LMS as a concept under scrutiny

A Blend-Online listserv thread regarding the choice of LMS and the future of LMS

Schoology HEd – Digital Learning Ecosystem (March 2015) (PDF document)

From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert Tousignant
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 1:41 PM
To: BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection

I’ve been reviewing this thread and thought I’d introduce a new player… Schoology is getting the attention of the analyst community and gobbling up the SIIA Codie awards for best learning platform the last couple of years.  (Please note, I am not an impartial observer and I do a horse in the race)

The attached document includes information that will explain a new paradigm for evaluating an LMS that we see being adopted more and more  – a move from a focus on utility (features and functions) to one focused standards, interoperability and the user experience (UI/UX).

Feel free to reach out directly if I can be of assistance.

Robert Tousignant

Sr. Director

Schoology Higher Education

O:  (212)213-8333 x69

M: (617)838-1366

rtousignant@schoology.com

Colorado State University’s Global Campus Announces Strategic Partnership with Schoology

From: Edward Garay <garay@UIC.EDU>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Date: Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 2:27 PM
To: BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU” <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection

These days, I tend to favor LMS Review/Selection initiatives that take one to two years to complete, but as always, it depends on the institution, its readiness to spec the needs of their faculty/students and evaluate viable options, as well as the campus resources available to nurture a possible smooth LMS platform transition. I like pointing out to the well-executed recent LMS selection initiatives carried out by UCF, Northwestern, Indiana, Harvard and Dartmouth, although there are many others.

I am also fond of Educause Review 2014 article on Selecting a Learning Management System: Advice from an Academic Perspective available at http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/selecting-learning-management-system-advice-academic-perspective

 


— Ed Garay
University of Illinois at Chicago
UIC School of Public Health
www.twitter.com/garay

*** Attend the FACULTY SUMMER INSTITUTE :: Wed-Fri May 27-29 at Urbana-Champaign
#pedagogy #BlendedLearning #classroom #teaching #OnlineLearning #EdTech
http://go.illinois.edu/facultysummerinstitute

 

_____________________________
From: Hap Aziz <hapaziz@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection
To: <blend-online@listserv.educause.edu>
That’s sounds like a similar timeframe to what we had at UB when we moved from Blackboard to Canvas. While LTI didn’t not play a large role in the decision-making process as we changed our LMS, it is now a central consideration as we look to acquire any new app functionality for our learning environment.

 

I’m setting up an area in the IMS forum area for LTI policy discussion. I’ll share that location with the group shortly so we can take some of the in-the-weeds discussion offline here.

 

Hap Aziz

Associate Vice President

University of Bridgeport

http://bridgeport.edu

 

Connected Learning Innovation Community

IMS Global Learning Consortium

http://imsglobal.org

 

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Sam Bachert <BachertS@sanjuancollege.edu> wrote:

Hap,

 

The selection process started in January of 2013 and the task force voted at the end of May of 2013 unanimously for Canvas so about 5 months.  By October we started training faculty in preparation for the Spring 2014 semester what was amazing about our transition to Canvas was that we had everyone moved out of ANGEL by start of Summer 14 so we only had 1 semester where we were supporting both ANGEL and Canvas.  The use of LTI integrations and Canvas makes our jobs a lot easier to support the various tools that faculty are adopting for their classes – it also makes it a lot easier for faculty to integrate other technologies and keep them in the LMS or have single sign on so it is more seamless for students.

 

Thanks, Sam

 

Samuel R. Bachert

Manager, Online Services

 

ellucian®

San Juan College

4601 College Boulevard

Farmington, NM 87402

Voice: 505.566.3310 Mobile: 505.609.0573 Fax: 505.566.3570

bacherts@sanjuancollege.edu * samuel.bachert@ellucian.com

www.ellucian.com

Follow us:

CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Hap Aziz
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 7:09 PM
To: BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection

Hey, Sam, long time no see! Do you know about how long your whole selection process took? Also, does LTI conformance make your job with academic technology more straightforward to deal with?

Hap Aziz

Associate Vice President

University of Bridgeport

http://bridgeport.edu

Connected Learning Innovation Community

IMS Global Learning Consortium

http://imsglobal.org

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Sam Bachert <BachertS@sanjuancollege.edu> wrote:

JeJe,

I am at San Juan College and we also recently went through the selection process for a new LMS and like others who have commented switched to Canvas (from ANGEL).  We ended up with a selection team that was primarily faculty, a couple students, and a handful of technology staff that reviewed the various LMSs and then made our final decision.  If you would like I can get you the contact information for the faculty who assisted on the selection team.

Thanks,

Sam

Samuel R. Bachert

Director of Academic Technology

ellucian®

San Juan College

4601 College Boulevard

Farmington, NM 87402

Voice: 505.566.3310 Mobile: 505.609.0573 Fax: 505.566.3570

bacherts@sanjuancollege.edu * samuel.bachert@ellucian.com

www.ellucian.com

Follow us:

CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

From: The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Noval, JeJe (LLU)
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 9:25 PM
To: BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [BLEND-ONLINE] Faculty Involvement in LMS Selection

 

Hello Colleagues,

Were any of you, faculty members, involved in the learning management selection process of your educational institution?  If so, would it be possible to interview you in the future for a research study?

Best,

JeJe Noval, MS, RD
Assistant Professor
Loma Linda University