Here is another good resource from Alaska. The screencasting apps reviewed are the same as above, but other good sources regarding a pedagogy involving the technology.
Bryan Alexander’s Future Trends Forum with Guest Sue Bohle, Serious Play Conference
An interactive discussion on gaming in education
January 17, 2 – 3 PM (EST)
Sue Bohle, Executive Director, Producer, Serious Play Conference, for a lively discussion on gaming in education.
Sue is a leader in the space and has seen tremendous growth and potential of serious games in corporate training and eLearning. The interview has been edited for clarity and length.
++++++++
notes from the webinar:
i had issues connecting and the streams of the guest speaker (Sue) and Bryan will stall when each of them were talking.
examples for formally learning through games
I’d love to hear Sue chat about: Students as game authors, what do you do to encourage reflection on game events?
Dan LaSota:
Is there any intersection between “Minds on Fire” from Mark Carnes, https://reacting.barnard.edu and your conference?
Dan LaSota
To me “simulation” means some scenario that can be rapidly run again and again, with the user/player tweaking variables and seeing what happens. If it’s “fun” there is more of an intersection with games. If not so fun, it might be considered by most more of a model. Computers can and do help with the iteration process because they can reset to T=0 much quicker than human players. Although “role play” is also a kind of simulation.
Facebook group the Tribe:
Minecraft in education.
John Gould with Drexel: he is going now after the school boards about games in education
Noreen Barajas Horizon Project Director, Educause
AI book integrated in junior high Seattle Michelle Zimmerman, article in Forbes,
Keven Diel Lockhead expert on AI, military
gaming as a way to bypassing the metacognitive (thinking about thinking). Without teaching about learning. Number of libraries Nebraska State: games are developed by libraries.
Tobee Soultie gaming industry. National Intelligence Agency for first response and refurbished for teachers and bullying.
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.
doctoral cohort student’s request for literature: “I am looking for some more resources around the historical context of teacher evaluation.”
pre-existing bibliography:
Allen, J., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. I., Lun, J., Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2013). Observations of Effective Teacher-Student Interactions in Secondary School Classrooms: Predicting Student Achievement With the Classroom Assessment Scoring System—Secondary. School Psychology Review, 42(1), 76–98.
Baker, B. D., Oluwole, J. O., & Green, P. C. (2013). The Legal Consequences of Mandating High Stakes Decisions Based on Low Quality Information: Teacher Evaluation in the Race-to-the-Top Era. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(5), 1–71. http://doi.org/http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1298
Benedict, A. E., Thomas, R. a., Kimerling, J., & Leko, C. (2013). Trends in Teacher Evaluation. Teaching Exceptional Children. May/Jun2013, 45(5), 60–68.
Bonavitacola, A. C., Guerrazzi, E., & Hanfelt, P. (2014). TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE IMPACT OF THE McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM ON PROFESSIONAL GROWTH.
Charlotte Danielson. (2016). Creating Communities of Practice. Educational Leadership, (May), 18 – 23.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A. E., & Pease, S. R. (1983). Teacher Evaluation in the Organizational Context: A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 53(3), 285–328. http://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053003285
Darling-Hammond, L., Jaquith, A., & Hamilton, M. (n.d.). Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting Effective Teaching.
Derrington, M. L. (n.d.). Changes in Teacher Evaluation: Implications for the Principal’s Work.
Gallagher, H. A. (2004). Vaughn Elementary’s Innovative Teacher Evaluation System: Are Teacher Evaluation Scores Related to Growth in Student Achievement? Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 79–107. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327930pje7904_5
Hallgren, K., James-Burdumy, S., & Perez-Johnson, I. (2014). STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHER EVALUATION POLICIES PROMOTED BY RACE TO THE TOP.
Hattie Helen E-Mail Address, J. T., Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. [References]. Review of Educational Research, .77(1), 16–7. http://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Ingle, W. K., Willis, C., & Fritz, J. (2014). Collective Bargaining Agreement Provisions in the Wake of Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Legislation. Educational Policy. http://doi.org/10.1177/0895904814559249
Moskal, A. C. M., Stein, S. J., & Golding, C. (2016). Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Can you increase teacher engagement with evaluation simply by improving the evaluation system? Can you increase teacher engagement with evaluation simply by improving the evaluation system? http://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1007838
Quinn, A. E. (n.d.). The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin Looking a t th e B igger Picture w ith Dr. R o b ert M arzan o : Teacher E valuation and D e v e lo p m e n t fo r Im p ro ved S tu d en t Learning.
Riordan, J., Lacireno-Paquet, Shakman, N., Bocala, K., & Chang, C. (2015). Redesigning teacher evaluation: Lessons from a pilot implementation. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/
Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (n.d.). Evidence of systematic growth in the effectiveness of midcareer teachers Can Teacher Evaluation Improve Teaching?
Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (n.d.). The problematic implementation of teacher evaluation policy: School failure or governmental pitfall? http://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213502188
Wong, W. Y., & Moni, K. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions of and responses to student evaluation of teaching: purposes and uses in clinical education. http://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.844222
my list of literature:
Avalos, B., & Assael, J. (2006). Moving from resistance to agreement: The case of the Chilean teacher performance evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(4-5), 254-266.
Cowen, J. M., & Fowles, J. (2013). Same contract, different day? an analysis of teacher bargaining agreements in Louisville since 1979. Teachers College Record, 115(5)
Flippo, R. F. (2002). Repeating history: Teacher licensure testing in Massachusetts. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 16(3), 211-29.
Griffin, G. (1997). Teaching as a gendered experience. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(1), 7-18.
Hellawell, D. E. (1992). Structural changes in education in England. International Journal of Educational Reform, 1(4), 356-65.
Hibler, D. W., & Snyder, J. A. (2015). Teaching matters: Observations on teacher evaluations. Schools: Studies in Education, 12(1), 33-47.
Hill, H. C., & Grossman, P. (2013). Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 371-384.
Hines, L. M. (2007). Return of the thought police?: The history of teacher attitude adjustment. Education Next, 7(2), 58-65.
Kersten, T. A. (2006). Teacher tenure: Illinois school board presidents’ perspectives and suggestions for improvement. Planning and Changing, 37(3-4), 234-257.
Kersten, T. A., & Israel, M. S. (2005). Teacher evaluation: Principals’ insights and suggestions for improvement. Planning and Changing, 36(1-2), 47-67.
Korkmaz, I. (2008). Evaluation of teachers for restructured elementary curriculum (grades 1 to 5). Education, 129(2), 250-258.
Lamb, M. L., & Swick, K. J. (1975). Historical overview of teacher observation Educational Forum.
Maharaj, S. (2014). Administrators’ views on teacher evaluation: Examining Ontario’s teacher performance appraisal. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (152)
Naba’h, A. A., Al-Omari, H., Ihmeideh, F., & Al-Wa’ily, S. (2009). Teacher education programs in Jordan: A reform plan. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 30(3), 272-284.
Ornstein, A. C. (1977). Critics and criticism of education Educational Forum.
Pajak, E., & Arrington, A. (2004). Empowering a profession: Rethinking the roles of administrative evaluation and instructional supervision in improving teacher quality. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 103(1), 228-252.
Stamelos, G., & Bartzakli, M. (2013). The effect of a primary school teachers, trade union on the formation and realisation of policy in Greece: The case of teacher evaluation policy. Policy Futures in Education, 11(5), 575-588.
Stamelos, G., Vassilopoulos, A., & Bartzakli, M. (2012). Understanding the difficulties of implementation of a teachers’ evaluation system in greek primary education: From national past to european influences. European Educational Research Journal, 11(4), 545-557.
Sullivan, J. P. (2012). A collaborative effort: Peer review and the history of teacher evaluations in Montgomery county, Maryland. Harvard Educational Review, 82(1), 142-152.
Tierney, W. G., & Lechuga, V. M. (2005). Academic freedom in the 21st century. Thought & Action, , 7-22.
Turri, M. (2014). The new italian agency for the evaluation of the university system (ANVUR): A need for governance or legitimacy? Quality in Higher Education, 20(1), 64-82.
VanPatten, J. J. (1972). Some reflections on accountability Journal of Thought.
Vijaysimha, I. (2013). Teachers as professionals: Accountable and autonomous? review of the report of the justice Verma commission on teacher education. august 2012. department of school education and literacy, ministry of human resource development, government of India. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 10(2), 293-299.
Vold, D. J. (1985). The roots of teacher testing in America. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 4(3), 5-7.
Wermke, W., & Höstfält, G. (2014). Contextualizing teacher autonomy in time and space: A model for comparing various forms of governing the teaching profession. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(1), 58-80.
Ydesen, C., & Andreasen, K. E. (2014). Accountability practices in the history of Danish primary public education from the 1660s to the present. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(120)
Our first Library 2.022 mini-conference: “Virtual Reality and Learning: Leading the Way,” will be held online (and for free) on Tuesday, March 29th, 2022.
Virtual Reality was identified by the American Library Association as one of the 10 top library technology trends for the future. The use of this technology is equally trending in the education, museum, and professional learning spheres. Virtual Reality is a social and digital technology that uniquely promises to transform learning, build empathy, and make personal and professional training more effective and economical.
Through the leadership of the state libraries in California, Nevada, and Washington, Virtual Reality projects have been deployed in over 120 libraries in the three states in both economically and geographically diverse service areas. This example, as well as other effective approaches, can help us to begin a national conversation about the use of XR/immersive learning technology in libraries, schools, and museums; and about making content available to all users, creating spaces where digital inclusion and digital literacy serves those who need it the most
This is a free event, being held live online and also recorded. REGISTER HERE
to attend live and/or to receive the recording links afterward.
Please also join this Library 2.0 network to be kept updated on this and future events.
Everyone is invited to participate in our Library 2.0 conference events, which are designed to foster collaboration and knowledge sharing among information professionals worldwide. Each three-hour event consists of a keynote panel, 10-15 crowd-sourced thirty-minute presentations, and a closing keynote.
CALL FOR PROPOSALS:The call for proposals is now open. We encourage proposals that showcase effective uses of Virtual Reality in libraries, schools, and museums. We encourage proposals that also address visions or examples of Virtual Reality impacting adult education, STEM learning, the acquisition of marketable skills, workforce development, and unique learning environments.. Proposals can be submitted HERE.
KEYNOTE SPEAKERS, SPECIAL GUESTS, AND ORGANIZERS:
Sara Jones
State Librarian, Washington State Library
Sara Jones previously served as the director of the Marin County Free Library since July 2013. Prior to her time in California, Jones held positions in Nevada libraries for 25 years, including serving as the Carson City Library Director, the Elko-LanderEureka County Library System Director and Youth Services Coordinator, and Nevada State Librarian and Administrator of the State Library and Archives from 2000-2007. Jones was named the Nevada Library Association’s Librarian of the Year in 2012; served as Nevada’s American Library Association (ALA) Council Delegate for four years; coordinated ALA National Library Legislative Day for Nevada for 12 years; served as the Nevada Library Association president; was an active member of the Western Council of State Libraries serving as both vice president and president; and served on the University of North Texas Department of Library and Information Sciences Board of Advisors for over 10 years. She was awarded the ALA Sullivan award for services to children in 2018. She is a member and past-president of CALIFA, a nonprofit library membership consortium.
Tammy Westergard
Senior Workforce Development Leader, Project Coordinator – U.S. Department of Education Reimagine Workforce Preparation Grant Program – Supporting and Advancing Nevada’s Dislocated Individuals – Project SANDI
As Nevada State Librarian (2020 – 2021), Tammy Douglass Westergard was a leader in envisioning the dynamic roles of libraries in the future of learning and democracy in America. Tammy was also named the Nevada Library Association’s 2020 Librarian of the Year. She deployed the first certification program within any public library in America where individuals can earn a Manufacturing Technician 1 (MT1), a nationally recognized industry credential necessary to get many of the high paying careers in advanced manufacturing. In parallel with California public libraries, Westergard launched in Nevada the first State-wide learning program in American public libraries delivering augmented reality and virtual reality STEM content and equipment, resulting in immersive learning experiences for thousands of learners. Westergard imagined and then became the project design leader for the first-ever initiative deploying 3D learning tools for the College of Southern Nevada’s (CSN) allied health programs. As a result, CSN is the first dialysis technician training program in the world to use a virtual reality simulation for instruction and CSN was able to accept remote, online learners into its program for students who were previously unable to access the program.Tammy received her bachelor’s degree from the University of Nevada, Reno, a Master of Library Science from the University of North Texas and is a member of Beta Phi Mu, the international library and information studies honor society. She is a member of the International Advisory Board of the Vaclav Havel Library Foundation. The Library Journal named Westergard an “Agent of Change Mover and Shaker.” Tammy’s great passion is advancing educational opportunities through the library. She believes there is dignity in work, which is why she is expanding first-in-the-country programs she created that help displaced workers reskill and upskill so they can step into living wage jobs.
Greg Lucas
California State Librarian
Greg Lucas was appointed California’s 25th State Librarian by Governor Jerry Brown on March 25, 2014. Prior to his appointment, Greg was the Capitol Bureau Chief for the San Francisco Chronicle where he covered politics and policy at the State Capitol for nearly 20 years. During Greg’s tenure as State Librarian, the State Library’s priorities have been to improve reading skills throughout the state, put library cards into the hands of every school kid and provide all Californians the information they need – no matter what community they live in. The State Library invests $10 million annually in local libraries to help them develop more innovative and efficient ways to serve their communities. Since 2015, the State Library has improved access for millions of Californians by helping connect more than half of the state’s 1,100 libraries to a high-speed Internet network that links universities, colleges, schools, and libraries around the world. Greg holds a Master’s in Library and Information Science from California State University San Jose, a Master’s in Professional Writing from the University of Southern California, and a degree in communications from Stanford University.
Milton Chen
Independent Speaker, Author, Board Member
Milton says that he has had a very fortunate and fulfilling career on both coasts, working with passionate innovators to transform education in creative ways. His first job out of college was at Sesame Workshop in New York, working with founder Joan Cooney and some amazingly talented colleagues in TV production and educational research. From 1976 to 1980, he worked in the research department, creating science curricula for Sesame Street and testing segments for The Electric Company, the reading series. He then served as director of research for the development of 3-2-1 Contact, a science series for 8- to 12-year-olds. Eventually, Sesame Street circled the globe, with broadcasts in more than 100 countries and versions in Spanish, Chinese, Arabic, and many other languages. He then came to the Bay Area to pursue doctoral studies in communication at Stanford. His dissertation looked at gender differences in high school computer use, including new desktop computers we called “microcomputers.” After two years as an assistant professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, he joined KQED-San Francisco (PBS) in 1987 as director of education. They worked with teachers to incorporate video into their lessons, using VCRs! He wrote my first book, The Smart Parent’s Guide to Kids’ TV (1994) and hosted a program on the topic with special guest, First Lady Hillary Clinton. In 1998, he joined The George Lucas Educational Foundation as executive director. During his 12 years there, thjey produced documentaries and other media on schools embracing innovations such as project-based learning, social/emotional learning, digital technologies, and community engagement. They created the Edutopia brand to represent more ideal environments for learning. Today, the Edutopia.org website attracts more than 5 million monthly users.
Karsten Heise
Director of Strategic Programs, Nevada Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED) i
Karsten Heise joined the Nevada Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED) in April 2012 initially as Technology Commercialization Director and then continued as Director of Strategic Programs. He leads Innovation Based Economic Development (IBED) in Nevada. As part of IBED, he created and manages Nevada’s State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) Venture Capital Program. He also leads and overseas the ‘Nevada Knowledge Fund’ to spur commercialization at the state’s research institutions and to foster Research & Development engagements with the private sector as well as supporting local entrepreneurial ecosystems and individual startups. In addition, Karsten is deeply familiar with the European vocational training system having completed his banking-apprenticeship in Germany. This experience inspired the development of the ‘Learn and Earn Advanced career Pathway’ (LEAP) framework in Nevada, which progressed to becoming the standard template for developing career pathway models in the state. He is deeply passionate about continuously developing new workforce development approaches dealing with the consequences of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Prior to joining the GOED, Karsten spent five years in China working as an external consultant to Baron Group Beijing and as member of the senior management team at Asia Assets Limited, Beijing. Before relocating to Beijing, Karsten worked for 10 years in the international equity divisions of London-based leading Wall Street investment banks Morgan Stanley, Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette (DLJ), and most recently Credit Suisse First Boston (CSFB). As Vice President at CSFB, he specialized in alternative investments, structured products, and international equities. His clients were entrepreneurs, ultra-high net worth individuals and family offices as well as insurance companies, pension funds, asset managers and banks. Karsten speaks German and Mandarin Chinese. Karsten completed his university education in the United Kingdom with a Bachelor of Science with First Class Honours in Economics from the University of Buckingham, a Master of Science with Distinction in International Business & Finance from the University of Reading, and a Master of Philosophy with Merit in Modern Chinese Studies, Chinese Economy from the University of Cambridge – Wolfson College. He is also an alumnus of the Investment Management Evening Program at London Business School and completed graduate research studies at Peking University, China.
Dana Ryan, PhD
Special Assistant to the President, Truckee Meadows Community College
With a doctorate in educational leadership from the University of Nevada, Reno, Dana has decades advancing education and training solutions to meaningfully link, scale, enhance and further develop digital components in healthcare, advanced manufacturing, logistics, IT and construction trades. She understands the WIOA one-stop-operating-system programs and processes and can communicate how delivery of services to clients through local offices, regional centers and libraries is achieved. Skill with analysis of a variety of labor market and other demographic information creates excellence in explaining the relevance of labor market data and local, state, and national labor market trends. Dana interfaces with labor and management groups/leaders, and others.
This is a free event, being held live online and also recorded. REGISTER HERE
to attend live and/or to receive the recording links afterward.
Please also join this Library 2.0 network to be kept updated on this and future events.
Laubersheimer, J., Ryan, D., & Champaign, J. (2016). InfoSkills2Go: Using Badges and Gamification to Teach Information Literacy Skills and Concepts to College-Bound High School Students. Journal of Library Administration, 56(8), 924.
From online trivia and virtual board games to complex first-person perspective video games and in-person scavenger hunts, libraries are creating games for a variety of purposes, including orientations and instruction (Broussard,2012; Mallon, 2013; Smith & Baker, 2011).
Although the line between gaming and gamification can be blurry, most scholars recognize differences. Games are interactive, involvechallenge, risk, and reward, and have rules and a goal (Pivec, Dziabenko, &Schinnerl, 2003; Becker, 2013). Gamification, on the other hand, utilizes spe-cific gaming elements, often interactivity and rewards, to make an ordinary task more engaging (Prince, 2013). The gamification layer is not the focus of an endeavor, but rather can add enjoyment and a sense of competition toa task.
Battista (2014) argues that well-executed badges could represent an authentic assessment tool, because they often require the student to tangibly demonstrate a skill, competency, or learning outcome.
Use of the badges helped the team organize the Web site and provided a hierarchy to follow once the steps for earning each badge were created.Each badge consists of three to six tasks. A task can be a tutorial, a video, a game, or a short reading assignment on a given topic. An assessment is given for each task
The fourth and final platform the group considered was BadgeOS fromLearningTimes. BadgeOS requires a WordPress installation BadgeOS was designed to work with Credly (https://credly.com/) and Mozilla Open Badges (http://openbadges.org/) as standard features. LearnDash was the most useful plugin for the project beyond BadgeOS. Available for a reasonable fee, LearnDash adds tools and features that give WordPress the ability to be used as a complete learning management system(LMS). Available for free under the GNU Public License, BuddyPress(https://buddypress.org/) is another plugin that was capable of integrating with BadgeOS as an extension. The advantage of BuddyPress for the project group was the addition of social media components and functionality to the project Web site. Go-daddy.com offered comprehensive technical support, easy application instal-lation, and competitively priced hosting packages. A 3-year hosting agree-ment was purchased that included domain registration, unlimited storageand unlimited bandwidth.
In 1972, when the U.S. government passed the landmark Title IX laws to promote gender equality in education, there was a 12 percentage-point gap in the proportion of bachelor’s degrees going to men compared to women. By 1982, the gap had closed. Nobody predicted what happened next: the gap started to widen rapidly in the opposite direction. By 2019, the gender gap in bachelor awards was wider, at 14 points, than it had been in 1972 — but the other way round. (We are not claiming here that Title IX had much impact, however).
To Hanna Rosin, author of The End of Men, it is “the strangest and most profound change of the century, even more so because it is unfolding in a similar way pretty much all over the world.”
Importantly, there is a gender gap not only in rates of college enrollment, as we described earlier in the year, and recently highlighted in the Wall Street Journal and The Atlantic, but also in rates of completion among those who do enroll.
College enrollment has steadily declined following the Great Recession, with total enrollment among both men and women decreasing each year from 2012 to 2020. But many more women than men were enrolling in college when rates began to fall in 2012 (11.6 million women were enrolled at the time, compared to 8.6 million men). If the relative decline among men and women had been similar, we would expect the gender gap in enrollment rates to remain constant. Instead, the fall 2020 decline in male enrollment eclipsed the decline in female enrollment for the fifth year in a row and the gender gap in enrollment is widening. COVID-19 accelerated this trend.
Women graduate high school and college at higher rates
Education gaps across the lifecycle
Men born from 1955 to 1974 (ages 45-64 in 2019) who likely wrapped up their postsecondary education decades ago, attained bachelor’s and graduate degrees at a similar rate to women in their age group. By contrast, older men born before 1955 had higher educational attainment than women, and younger men born after 1974 seem to be consistently outpaced by women their age.
according to Pew Research Center, 68 percent of American adults get their news from social media—platforms where opinion is often presented as fact.
results of the international test revealed that only 14 percent of U.S. students were able to reliably distinguish between fact and opinion.
News and Media Literacy (and the lack of) is not very different from Information Literacy
An “information literate” student is able to “locate, evaluate, and effectively use information from diverse sources.” See more About Information Literacy.
How does information literacy help me?
Every day we have questions that need answers. Where do we go? Whom can we trust? How can we find information to help ourselves? How can we help our family and friends? How can we learn about the world and be a better citizen? How can we make our voice heard?
Standard 1. The information literate student determines the nature and extent of the information needed
Standard 2. The information literate student accesses needed information effectively and efficiently
Standard 3. The information literate student evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base and value system
Standard 4. The information literate student, individually or as a member of a group, uses information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose
Standard 5. The information literate student understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information ethically and legally
Project Information Literacy
A national, longitudinal research study based in the University of Washington’s iSchool, compiling data on college students habits to seek and use information.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Developing Your Research Topic/Question
Research always starts with a question. But the success of your research also depends on how you formulate that question. If your topic is too broad or too narrow, you may have trouble finding information when you search. When developing your question/topic, consider the following:
Research always starts with a question. But the success of your research also depends on how you formulate that question. If your topic is too broad or too narrow, you may have trouble finding information when you search. When developing your question/topic, consider the following:
Is my question one that is likely to have been researched and for which data have been published? Believe it or not, not every topic has been researched and/or published in the literature.
Be flexible. Consider broadening or narrowing the topic if you are getting a limited number or an overwhelming number of results when you search. In nursing it can be helpful to narrow by thinking about a specific population (gender, age, disease or condition, etc.), intervention, or outcome.
Discuss your topic with your professor and be willing to alter your topic according to the guidance you receive.
Getting Ready for Research
Library Resources vs. the Internet
How (where from) do you receive information about your professional interests?
Advantages/disadvantages of using Web Resources
Why Keyword Searching?
Why not just type in a phrase or sentence like you do in Google or Yahoo!?
Because most electronic databases store and retrieve information differently than Internet search engines.
A databases searches fields within a collection of records. These fields include the information commonly found in a citation plus an abstract (if available) and subject headings. Search engines search web content which is typically the full text of sources.
The bottom line: you get better results in a database by using effective keyword search strategies.
To develop an effective search strategy, you need to:
determine the key concepts in your topic and
develop a good list of keyword synonyms.
Why use synonyms?
Because there is more than one way to express a concept or idea. You don’t know if the article you’re looking for uses the same expression for a key concept that you are using.
Consider: Will an author use:
Hypertension or High Blood Pressure?
Teach or Instruct?
Therapy or Treatment?
Don’t get “keyword lock!” Be willing to try a different term as a keyword. If you are having trouble thinking of synonyms, check a thesaurus, dictionary, or reference book for ideas.
Keyword worksheet
Library Resources
How to find the SCSU Library Website
SCSU online databases
SCSU Library Web page
Basic Research Skills
Locating and Defining a Database
Database Searching Overview:
You can search using the SCSU library online dbases by choosing:
Simple search
Advanced search
Identifying a Scholarly Source
Boolean operators
Databases:
CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Health Source: Consumer Edition, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition
Psychology:
PsychINFO
General Science
ScienceDirect
Arts & Humanities Citation Index
How do you evaluate a source of information to determine if it is appropriate for academic/scholarly use. There is no set “checklist” to complete but below are some criteria to consider when you are evaluating a source.
ACCURACY
Does the author cite reliable sources?
How does the information compare with that in other works on the topic?
Can you determine if the information has gone through peer-review?
Are there factual, spelling, typographical, or grammatical errors?
AUDIENCE
Who do you think the authors are trying to reach?
Is the language, vocabulary, style and tone appropriate for intended audience?
What are the audience demographics? (age, educational level, etc.)
Are the authors targeting a particular group or segment of society?
AUTHORITY
Who wrote the information found in the article or on the site?
What are the author’s credentials/qualifications for this particular topic?
Is the author affiliated with a particular organization or institution?
What does that affiliation suggest about the author?
CURRENCY
Is the content current?
Does the date of the information directly affect the accuracy or usefulness of the information?
OBJECTIVITY/BIAS
What is the author’s or website’s point of view?
Is the point of view subtle or explicit?
Is the information presented as fact or opinion?
If opinion, is the opinion supported by credible data or informed argument?
Is the information one-sided?
Are alternate views represented?
Does the point of view affect how you view the information?
PURPOSE
What is the author’s purpose or objective, to explain, provide new information or news, entertain, persuade or sell?
Does the purpose affect how you view the information presented?
Lischer-Katz, Z., & Clark, J. (2021). Institutional Factors Shaping XR Technology Accessibility Policy & Practice in Academic Libraries. Survey. The EDUCAUSE XR (Extended Reality) Community Group Listserv <XR@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>. https://uarizona.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1Ya9id4uCXoktLv
participate in a survey is being sent out to those responsible for managing and providing XR technologies in academic libraries. This survey is part of a study titled “Institutional Factors Shaping XR Technology Accessibility Policy & Practice in Academic Libraries.” The principal investigator (PI) is Dr. Zack Lischer-Katz, PhD (Assistant Professor, School of Information, University of Arizona) and the co-principal investigator (Co-PI) is Jasmine Clark (Digital Scholarship Librarian, Temple University).
An Institutional Review Board (IRB) responsible for human subjects research at The University of Arizona reviewed this research project and found it to be acceptable, according to applicable state and federal regulations and University policies designed to protect the rights and welfare of participants in research
Please feel free to share this survey widely with colleagues.
Introduction
Over the past five years, many academic libraries have begun systematically integrating innovative technologies, including virtual reality (VR) and other “XR” technologies, into their spaces and services. Even though schools, libraries, and the library profession all stress equitable access to information and technology for all community members, accessibility – understood in terms of the design of spaces, services, and technologies to support users with disabilities – is rarely given sufficient consideration when it comes to the design, implementation, and administration of XR technology programs. Because XR technologies engage the body and multiple senses they show great potential for providing enhanced means for disabled users to access information resources; however, without accessibility policies in place, the embodied aspects of XR technologies can create new barriers (e.g., chairs and other furniture that cannot be adapted, controllers that cannot be adjusted for different degrees of dexterity, etc.)
Purpose of the study
The purpose of this study is to develop new understanding about the current landscape of accessibility policies and practices for XRtechnology programs and to understand the barriers to adoption of XR accessibility policies and practices.
The main research objective is to understand what policies and practices are currently in place in academic libraries and their level of development, the existing beliefs and knowledge of library staff and administrators involved with XR technology programs and spaces, and the institutional factors that shape the adoption of accessibility policies for XR technology programs.
The survey will be open from February 1, 2021 to April 30, 2021. More information regarding confidentiality and consent can be found at the beginning of the survey.
Here are some ways you can use memes in your classroom.
Create class rules.
Make a meme for each rule and post them in the classroom. As an alternative ice-breaking activity on the first day of school, ask students to create their own memes based on the rules and share the best ones with the class or post on the bulletin board.
Learn new vocabulary.
Students can create memes to define or use new vocabulary. Display the word at the top, and place the definition or a sentence using the word below.
Identify the novel.
Students can use memes to dramatize a point from a novel or short story they are studying. Teachers can break the class into groups and have each group create a meme from assigned chapters in a class novel.
Emphasize a historical event.
Teachers and/or students can import an image into a meme-creation program and make their own meme with a witty subtitle.
Use as a device to check for understanding.
Students can also create memes as a way to review the material or to explain math formulas or science concepts.