Open Discussion: Instruments and Methods for Formative Assessment: by invitation of teachers from Plovdiv region | Тема: Инструменти и методи за актуални училищни занятия
Where | Къде: СУ „Димитър Матевски“ https://goo.gl/maps/rojNjE3dk4s and online ( виртуално) When | Кога: 2. май, 2018, 14 часа | May 2, 2018, 2PM local time (Bulgaria) Who | Кой: преподаватели и педагози | teachers and faculty How | Как: използвайте “обратна връзка” за споделяне на вашите идеи | use the following hashtag for backchanneling#BGtechEd
Intro | Представяне – 5мин. Who are we (please share short intro about your professional interests) | Кои сме ние: споделете накратко професионалните си интереси (използвайте “comment” section под този блог) http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/faculty/
Reality Check (before we do tech) | минута за откровение (преди да започнем с технологии):
who is our audience | кого учим/обучаваме? https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/04/21/in-memoriam-avicii/ https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/04/17/edtech-implementation-fails/
why technology application fails | защо се проваля използването на технологии в обучението?
Understanding Purpose | какъв е смисълът
Insufficient Modeling of Best Practices | недостатъчен или несподелен опит
Bad First Impressions | лоши първи впечатления
Real-World Usability Challenges | ежедневни проблеми
The Right Data to Track Progress | кои данни определят успеха
Share your thoughts for the fails | Сподели твоите мисли за провала
Тема1. Сравняване на Kahoot, Edpuzzle и Apester – 1-1, 1/2 час продължителност Topic 1: A comparison of Kahoot, Apester and EdPuzzle
Дискусия, относно методиката на използване. Споделяне на опит кога и как го използват колегите от България и САЩ (други страни?).
Short demonstration and discussion regarding methodology of use. Sharing experience of use.
Споделяне на опит | ideas and experience exchange.
Comparison to other tools (e.g. flipped classroom advantage to Kahoot; difference from EdPuzzle, similarities to EdPuzzle) | съпоставяне с други инструменти: например, обърната класна стая – предимство пред Кахут; разлики и прилики с ЕдПъзил и тн)
Създаване на акаунт | account creation and building of learning objects
Comparison to other tools (e.g. flipped classroom advantage to Kahoot; difference from EdPuzzle, similarities to EdPuzzle) | съпоставяне с други инструменти: например, обърната класна стая – предимство пред Кахут; разлики и прилики с Еиптстър и тн)
Тема 2. Виртуална реалност в учебния процес – теория и практика- 1-1, 1/2 час продължителност Topic 2. Virtual reality in teaching and learning – theory and hands-on
When a student is brilliant on the street corner but falling asleep in class, something is wrong with the schooling system Ако учащ се е страхотен на ъгъла на улицата, но се проваля или заспива в клас, тогава нещо е грешно с учебната система https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/04/17/education-teched-frenemies/
Publisher / Organization: Athabasca University Press
Year founded: 2000
Description: The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning disseminates original research, theory, and best practice in open and distributed learning worldwide.
Publisher / Organization: The University of Illinois at Chicago- University Library
Year founded: 1996
Description: First Monday is among the very first open access journals in the EdTech field. The journal’s subject matter encompasses the full range of Internet issues, including educational technologies, social media and web search. Contributors are urged via author guidelines to use simple explanations and less complex sentences and to be mindful that a large proportion of their readers are not part of academia and do not have English as a first language.
Academic Management: University of Catalonia (UOC)
Year founded: 2004
Description: This journal aims to: provide a vehicle for scholarly presentation and exchange of information between professionals, researchers and practitioners in the technology-enhanced education field; contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge regarding the use of technology and computers in higher education; and inform readers about the latest developments in the application of information technologies (ITs) in higher education learning, training, research and management.
Description: Online Learning promotes the development and dissemination of new knowledge at the intersection of pedagogy, emerging technology, policy, and practice in online environments. The journal has been published for over 20 years as the Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks (JALN) and recently merged with the Journal of Online Learning and Teaching (JOLT).
Publisher / Organization: International Forum of Educational Technology & Society
Year founded:1998
Description: Educational Technology & Society seeks academic articles on the issues affecting the developers of educational systems and educators who implement and manage these systems. Articles should discuss the perspectives of both communities – the programmers and the instructors. The journal is currently still accepting submissions for ongoing special issues, but will cease publication in the future as the editors feel that the field of EdTech is saturated with high quality publications.
Description: The Australasian Journal of Educational Technology aims to promote research and scholarship on the integration of technology in tertiary education, promote effective practice, and inform policy. The goal is to advance understanding of educational technology in post-school education settings, including higher and further education, lifelong learning, and training.
DESCRIPTION: The Internet and Higher Education is devoted to addressing contemporary issues and future developments related to online learning, teaching, and administration on the Internet in post-secondary settings. Articles should significantly address innovative deployments of Internet technology in instruction and report on research to demonstrate the effects of information technology on instruction in various contexts in higher education.
Publisher / Organization: British Educational Research Association (BERA)
YEAR FOUNDED: 1970
DESCRIPTION: The journal publishes theoretical perspectives, methodological developments and empirical research that demonstrate whether and how applications of instructional/educational technology systems, networks, tools and resources lead to improvements in formal and non-formal education at all levels, from early years through to higher, technical and vocational education, professional development and corporate training.
Description: Computers & Education aims to increase knowledge and understanding of ways in which digital technology can enhance education, through the publication of high quality research, which extends theory and practice.
Description: TechTrends targets professionals in the educational communication and technology field. It provides a vehicle that fosters the exchange of important and current information among professional practitioners. Among the topics addressed are the management of media and programs, the application of educational technology principles and techniques to instructional programs, and corporate and military training.
Description: Advances in technology and the growth of e-learning to provide educators and trainers with unique opportunities to enhance learning and teaching in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education. IJEL serves as a forum to facilitate the international exchange of information on the current research, development, and practice of e-learning in these sectors.
Led by an Editorial Review Board of leaders in the field of e-Learning, the Journal is designed for the following audiences: researchers, developers, and practitioners in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education. IJEL is a peer-reviewed journal.
Description: JCMST is a highly respected scholarly journal which offers an in-depth forum for the interchange of information in the fields of science, mathematics, and computer science. JCMST is the only periodical devoted specifically to using information technology in the teaching of mathematics and science.
Just as researchers build reputation over time that can be depicted (in part) through quantitative measures such as h-index and i10-index, journals are also compared based on the number of citations they receive..
Description: The Journal of Interactive Learning Research (JILR) publishes papers related to the underlying theory, design, implementation, effectiveness, and impact on education and training of the following interactive learning environments: authoring systems, cognitive tools for learning computer-assisted language learning computer-based assessment systems, computer-based training computer-mediated communications, computer-supported collaborative learning distributed learning environments, electronic performance support systems interactive learning environments, interactive multimedia systems interactive simulations and games, intelligent agents on the Internet intelligent tutoring systems, microworlds, virtual reality based learning systems.
Description: JEMH is designed to provide a multi-disciplinary forum to present and discuss research, development and applications of multimedia and hypermedia in education. It contributes to the advancement of the theory and practice of learning and teaching in environments that integrate images, sound, text, and data.
Publisher / Organization: Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE)
Year founded: 1997
Description: JTATE serves as a forum for the exchange of knowledge about the use of information technology in teacher education. Journal content covers preservice and inservice teacher education, graduate programs in areas such as curriculum and instruction, educational administration, staff development instructional technology, and educational computing.
Publisher / Organization: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
YEAR FOUNDED: 2015
DESCRIPTION: The Journal of Online Learning Research (JOLR) is a peer-reviewed, international journal devoted to the theoretical, empirical, and pragmatic understanding of technologies and their impact on primary and secondary pedagogy and policy in primary and secondary (K-12) online and blended environments. JOLR is focused on publishing manuscripts that address online learning, catering particularly to the educators who research, practice, design, and/or administer in primary and secondary schooling in online settings. However, the journal also serves those educators who have chosen to blend online learning tools and strategies in their face-to-face classroom.
The most commonly used index to measure the relative importance of journals is the annual Journal Citation Reports (JCR). This report is published by Clarivate Analytics (previously Thomson Reuters).
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR indicator) measures the influence of journals based on the number of citations the articles in the journal receive and the importance or prestige of the journals where such citations come from. The SJR indicator is a free journal metric which uses an algorithm similar to PageRank and provides an open access alternative to the journal impact factor in the Web of Science Journal Citation Report. The portal draws from the information contained in the Scopus database (Elsevier B.V.).
Introduced by Google in 2004, Scholar is a freely accessible search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly publications across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.
Introduced by Elsevier in 2004, Scopus is an abstract and citation database that covers nearly 18,000 titles from more than 5,000 publishers. It offers journal metrics that go beyond just journals to include most serial titles, including supplements, special issues and conference proceedings. Scopus offers useful information such as the total number of citations, the total number of articles published, and the percent of articles cited.
Anne-Wil Harzing:
“Citations are not just a reflection of the impact that a particular piece of academic work has generated. Citations can be used to tell stories about academics, journals and fields of research, but they can also be used to distort stories”.
Harzing, A.-W. (2013). The publish or perish book: Your guide to effective and responsible citation analysis. http://harzing.com/popbook/index.htm
ResearchGate is a social networking site for scientists and researchers to share papers, ask and answer questions, and find collaborators. The community was founded in May 2008. Today it has over 14 million members.
Google Scholar allows users to search for digital or physical copies of articles, whether online or in libraries. It indexes “full-text journal articles, technical reports, preprints, theses, books, and other documents, including selected Web pages that are deemed to be ‘scholarly. It comprises an estimated 160 million documents.
Academia.edu is a social-networking platform for academics to share research papers. You can upload your own work, and follow the updates of your peers. Founded in 2008, the network currently has 59 million users, and adding 20 million documents.
The ORCHID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) is a nonproprietary alphanumeric code to uniquely identify scientific and other academic authors and contributors. It provides a persistent identity for humans, similar to content-related entities on digital networks that utilize digital object identifiers (DOIs). The organization offers an open and independent registry intended to be the de facto standard for contributor identification in research and academic publishing.
The Scopus Author Identifier assigns a unique number to groups of documents written by the same author via an algorithm that matches authorship based on a certain criteria. If a document cannot be confidently matched with an author identifier, it is grouped separately. In this case, you may see more than one entry for the same author.
+++++++++++++++++
more on metrics in this iMS blog
Outline:
The Gamification of the educations process is not a new concept. The advent of educational technologies, however, makes the idea timely and pertinent. In short 60 min, we will introduce the concept of gamification of the educational process and discuss real-live examples.
Learning Outcomes:
at the end of the session, participants will have an idea about gaming and gamification in education and will be able to discriminate between those two powerful concepts in education
at the end of this session, participants will be able search and select VIdeo 360 movies for their class lessons
at the end of the session, participants will be able to understand the difference between VR, AR and MR.
if you are interested in setting up a makerspace and/or similar gaming space at your school, please contact me after this workshop for more information.
How would you define gamification of the educational process?
Gaming and Gamification in academic and library settings (paper) Short URL: http://scsu.mn/1F008Re
Gamification takes game elements (such as points, badges, leaderboards, competition, achievements) and applies them to a non-game setting. It has the potential to turn routine, mundane tasks into refreshing, motivating experiences (What is GBL (Game-Based Learning)?, n.d.).
Gamification is defined as the process of applying game mechanics and game thinking to the real world to solve problems and engage users (Phetteplace & Felker, 2014, p. 19; Becker, 2013, p. 199; Kapp, 2012). Gamification requires three sets of principles: 1. Empowered Learners, 2. Problem Solving, 3. Understanding (Gee, 2005).
Apply gamification tactics to existing learning task
split in groups and develop a plan to gamify existing learning task
from the web page above, choose a movie or click on this link: https://youtu.be/nOHM8gnin8Y (to watch a black hole in video 360) Open the link on your phone and insert the phone in Google Cardboard. Watch the video using Google Cardboard.
I heard back from Steam, with exactly the response I expected: Our service model (users reserve our own PC and VR headset, using our Steam software) needs to use their site license program. And even if it’s just on that one PC, we’d still have to run their site license server locally to manage it.
We did an inventory of what it would cost us to purchase a site license for our most popular games: Of our top 25 most played VR games, only 10 have site licenses available at all. Those 10 games would in total cost us slightly more than $3000 per year to license, which strikes me as ridiculous.
But Tara, thanks for pointing out Springboard VR! At a glance it looks really promising. I’m really glad to hear about another option.
-Chad
We ran into the same problem last year with Steam. However, we are now working with Springboard VR. Our head VR specialist says you can test run their interface on a machine for free and that they are putting together an academic package that should be available soon! https://springboardvr.com/
Tara
Amazing timing, Laura! I was just looking into the site license program this week. I wrote up what I’ve learned so far for someone else this morning, shared below. But to sum up, it’s not very promising either from a financial or practical view of the way we use Steam currently (one PC with Steam titles that we’ve purchased under our account, with an attached HTC Vive).
I originally thought this was just a different kind of license for each game, one which allows public use in a library, cafe, etc. But I got some clarification questions answered by Steam support – it’s actually designed for users to log into one of our computers using their own Steam account. They can then check out a game we’ve purchased a site license for, and play it under their account while they’re on our computer.
This also requires running some sort of server locally to handle the checkouts.
So I don’t think this is going to work for us. The pricing is also pretty wild. One of our most popular titles is Space Pirate Trainer – currently $10 paid one time to own individually, or $30/month/seat for a site license subscription. And I’ve seen at least one title that’s free for individual ownership, but somehow costs $20/month/seat for site license.
Much of their documentation is contradictory and out of date.
Even more annoying is that you can’t even see the site license prices until you sign up for a site license account and fill out some legal forms.
Last but not least, many titles, even free ones, do not have site licenses available at all.
I have one more request into Steam support asking how they prefer we purchase things as a library. I’ll let you know what I hear.
Oh, also – you can’t convert an existing Steam account or purchases. You need to create a new one and start from scratch.
-Chad
We’d also like to know if any other libraries had set up the Steam/Valve Site license, which we were just starting to look into ourselves: https://support.steampowered.com/kb_article.php?ref=3303-QWRC-3436 – which sounds like it solves many of these problems. Our general counsel has a few issues with the license terms but are willing to consider especially if I can find examples of other institutions utilizing it!
Associate Director Library Information Technology and Digital Strategies
Echoing what Peter said there are no good solutions right now. It would be great if Steam or HTC or Oculus offered site licenses or group accounts, but they don’t. We have 2 HTC Vives that share an account. This causes problems occasionally as it doesn’t like it if two headsets are using the same program. Going offline usually takes care of it. Our 4 Oculus Rifts also share an account but the Oculus store is less problematic than Steam since it only contacts the mother ship when doing an update. If you have the option prepaid cards and individual accounts would be the best way to go but our purchasing department said no.
Edward Iglesias
In our library’s VR Studio, we have a separate library-owned Steam account for each of 7 VR workstation computers. Some have Vives, some have Oculus Rifts at them. We purchase content for each account. We also allow patrons to download free games/tools to those computers.
If a patron owns Steam content that we don’t, they may log in to their personal account and download the game to our computer. So far, this hasn’t posed a problem, except that the added game will show up in that workstation account’s game list, but will not be playable to other patrons. I occasionally delete personal games that are causing confusion to other patrons. Not too many patrons have downloaded content yet so if it gets to be too troublesome we may disallow it in the future.
For the Oculus Rift stations, there is a Steam account as mentioned above, plus the Oculus library. For Oculus, I’ve been able to use one account for all of the workstations. We purchase content once and it’s usable on all the computers from the one account. This has worked fine so far except for playing multi-player online. The single account will not support multiple instances of online play for the same game.
None of these is a perfect solution but they are mostly working as this is a continuous work in progress. Feel free to get in touch off list if you’d like more specific info, etc.
Thanks,
Pete
Hi all,
I was curious if any of your libraries have Steam from Valve installed on your public workstations to drive PC gaming and an HTC Vive? Any tips on how to set that up? Obviously the licensing issue with purchased programs/games through Steam is a problem when you are providing access for a large user base. There are multiple free games/programs available.
How do you handle providing each user with HDD/SSD space on your machines for downloaded games/programs through Steam?
Thanks,
Alex
—
Elisandro Cabada
Engineering and Innovation Liaison Librarian
Computer Science, Electrical and Computer Engineering Librarian
2018 Special Focus: Education in a Time of Austerity and Social Turbulence 21–23 June 2018 University of Athens, Athens, Greece http://thelearner.com/2018-conference
Theme 8: Technologies in Learning
Technology and human values: learning through and about technology
Crossing the digital divide: access to learning in, and about, the digital world
New tools for learning: online digitally mediated learning
Virtual worlds, virtual classrooms: interactive, self-paced and autonomous learning
Ubiquitous learning: using the affordances of the new mediaDistance learning: reducing the distance
Theme 9: Literacies Learning
Defining new literacies
Languages of power: literacy’s role in social access
Instructional responses to individual differences in literacy learning
The visual and the verbal: Multiliteracies and multimodal communications
Literacy in learning: language in learning across the subject areas
The changing role of libraries in literacies learning
Languages education and second language learning
Multilingual learning for a multicultural world
The arts and design in multimodal learning
The computer, internet, and digital media: educational challenges and responses
++++++++++
PROPOSAL: Paper presentation in a Themed Session
Title
Virtual Reality and Gamification in the Educational Process: The Experience from an Academic Library
short description
VR, AR and Mixed Reality, as well as gaming and gamification are proposed as sandbox opportunity to transition from a lecture-type instruction to constructivist-based methods.
long description
The NMC New Horizon Report 2017 predicts a rapid application of Video360 in K12. Millennials are leaving college, Gen Z students are our next patrons. Higher Education needs to meet its new students on “their playground.” A collaboration by a librarian and VR specialist is testing the opportunities to apply 360 degree movies and VR in academic library orientation. The team seeks to bank on the inheriting interest of young patrons toward these technologies and their inextricable part of a rapidly becoming traditional gaming environment. A “low-end,” inexpensive and more mobile Google Cardboard solution was preferred to HTC Vive, Microsoft HoloLens or comparable hi-end VR, AR and mixed reality products.
The team relies on the constructivist theory of assisting students in building their knowledge in their own pace and on their own terms, rather than being lectured and/or being guided by a librarian during a traditional library orientation tour. Using inexpensive Google Cardboard goggles, students can explore a realistic set up of the actual library and familiarize themselves with its services. Students were polled on the effectiveness of such approach as well as on their inclination to entertain more comprehensive version of library orientation. Based on the lessons from this experiment, the team intends to pursue also a standardized approach to introducing VR to other campus services, thus bringing down further the cost of VR projects on campus. The project is considered a sandbox for academic instruction across campus. The same concept can be applied for [e.g., Chemistry, Physics, Biology) lab tours; for classes, which anticipate preliminary orientation process.
Following the VR orientation, the traditional students’ library instruction, usually conducted in a room, is replaced by a dynamic gamified library instruction. Students are split in groups of three and conduct a “scavenger hunt”; students use a jQuery-generated Web site on their mobile devices to advance through “hoops” of standard information literacy test. E.g., they need to walk to the Reference Desk, collect specific information and log their findings in the Web site. The idea follows the strong interest in the educational world toward gaming and gamification of the educational process. This library orientation approach applies the three principles for gamification: empowers learners; teaches problem solving and increases understanding.
Similarly to the experience with VR for library orientation, this library instruction process is used as a sandbox and has been successfully replicated by other instructors in their classes.
University libraries have held collections of books and printed material throughout their existence and continue to be perceived as repositories for physical collections. Other non-print specialized collections of interest have been held in various departments on campus such as Anthropology, Art, and Biology due to the unique needs of the collections and their usage. With the advent of electronic media, it becomes possible to store these non-print collections in a central place, such as the Libray.
The skills needed to curate artifacts from an archeological excavation, biological specimens from various life forms, and sculpture work are very different, making it difficult for smaller university libraries to properly hold, curate, and make available such collections. In addition, faculty in the various departments tend to want those collections near their coursework and research, so it can be readily available to students and researchers. With the expansion of online learning, the need for such availability becomes increasingly pronounced.
With the advent of 3 dimensional (3D) scanners, it has become possible for a smaller library to hold digital representations of these collections in an archive that can be curated from the various departments by experts in the discipline. The Library can then make the digital representations available to other researchers, students, and the public through kiosks in the Library or via the Internet. Current methods to scan and store an artifact in 3Dstill require expertise not often found in a Library.
We propose to use existing technology to build an easy-to-use system to scan smaller artifacts in 3D. The project will include purchase and installation of a workstation in the Library where the artifact collection can be accessed using a large touch-screen monitor, and a portable, easy-to-use 3D scanning station. Curators of collections from various departments on the St. Cloud State University campus can check out the scanning station, connect to power and Internet where the collection is located, and scan their collection into the libraries digital archives, making the collection easily available to students, other researchers and the public.
The project would include assembly of two workstations previously mentioned and potentially develop the robotic scanner. Software would be produced to automate the workflow from the scanner to archiving the digital representation and then make the collection available on the Internet.
This project would be a collaboration between the St. Cloud State University Library (https://www.stcloudstate.edu/library/ and Visualization Laboratory (https://www.facebook.com/SCSUVizLab/). The project would use the expertise and services of the St. Cloud State Visualization Laboratory. Dr. Plamen Miltenoff, a faculty with the Library will coordinate the Library initiatives related to the use of the 3D scanner. Mark Gill, Visualization Engineer, and Dr. Mark Petzold, Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering will lead a group of students in developing the software to automate the scanning, storage, and retrieval of the 3D models. The Visualization Lab has already had success in 3D scanning objects for other departments and in creating interactive displays allowing retrieval of various digital content, including 3D scanned objects such animal skulls and video. A collaboration between the Library, VizLab and the Center for Teaching and Learning (, https://www.stcloudstate.edu/teaching/) will enable campus faculty to overcome technical and financial obstacles. It will promote the VizLab across campus, while sharing its technical resources with the Library and making those resources widely available across campus. Such work across silos will expose the necessity (if any) of standardization and will help faculty embrace stronger collaborative practices as well as spur the process of reproduction of best practices across disciplines.
Budget:
Hardware
Cost
42” Touch Screen Monitor
$2200
Monitor Mount
$400
2 Computer Workstations
$5000
Installation
$500
Cart for Mobile 3D Scanner
$1000
3D Scanner (either purchase or develop in-house)
$2000
Total
$11100
The budget covers two computer workstations. One will be installed in the library as a way to access the digital catalog, and will include a 42 inch touch screen monitor mounted to a wall or stand. This installation will provide students a way to interact with the models in a more natural way. The second workstation would be mounted on a mobile cart and connected to the 3D scanner. This would allow collection curators from different parts of campus to check out the scanner and scan their collections. The ability to bring the scanner to the collection would increase the likelihood the collections to be scanned into the library collection.
The 3D scanner would either be purchased off-the shelf or designed by a student team from the Engineering Department. A solution will be sought to use and minimize the amount of training the operator would need. If the scanner is developed in-house, a simple optical scanner such as an XBox Kinect device and a turntable or robotic arm will be used. Support for the XBox Kinect is built into Microsoft Visual Studio, thus creating the interface efficient and costeffective.
Dr. Miltenoff is part of a workgroup within the academic library, which works with faculty, students and staff on the application of new technologies in education. Dr. Miltenoff’s most recent research with Mark Gill is on the impact of Video 360 on students during library orientation:http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/
Mark Petzold, Ph.D. mcpetzold@stcloudstate.edu
320-308-4182
Dr. Petzold is an Associate Professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering. His current projects involve visualization of meteorological data in a virtual reality environment and research into student retention issues. He is co-PI on a $5 million NSF S-STEM grant which gives scholarships to low income students and investigates issues around student transitions to college.
Mr. Gill is a Visualization Engineer for the College of Science and Engineering and runs the Visualization Laboratory. He has worked for several major universities as well as Stennis Space Center and Mechdyne, Inc. He holds a Masters of Science in Software Engineering.
+++++++++++++
University of Nevada, Reno and Pennsylvania State University 41 campus libraries to include collaborative spaces where faculty and students gather to transform virtual ideas into reality.
Maker Commons in the Modern Library 6 REASONS 3D PRINTERS SHOULD BE IN YOUR LIBRARY
1. Librarians Know How to Share 2. Librarians Work Well with IT People 3. Librarians Serve Everybody 4. Librarians Can Fill Learning Gaps 5. Librarians like Student Workers 6. Librarians are Cross-Discipline
Augmented reality can be described as experiencing the real world with an overlay of additional computer generated content. In contrast, virtual reality immerses a user in an entirely simulated environment, while mixed or merged reality blends real and virtual worlds in ways through which the physical and the digital can interact. AR, VR, and MR offer new opportunities to create a psychological sense of immersive presence in an environment that feels real enough to be viewed, experienced, explored, and manipulated. These technologies have the potential to democratize learning by giving everyone access to immersive experiences that were once restricted to relatively few learners.
In Grinnell College’s Immersive Experiences Lab http://gciel.sites.grinnell.edu/, teams of faculty, staff, and students collaborate on research projects, then use 3D, VR, and MR technologies as a platform to synthesize and present their findings.
In terms of equity, AR, VR, and MR have the potential to democratize learning by giving all learners access to immersive experiences
downsides :
relatively little research about the most effective ways to use these technologies as instructional tools. Combined, these factors can be disincentives for institutions to invest in the equipment, facilities, and staffing that can be required to support these systems. AR, VR, and MR technologies raise concerns about personal privacy and data security. Further, at least some of these tools and applications currently fail to meet accessibility standards. The user experience in some AR, VR, and MR applications can be intensely emotional and even disturbing (my note: but can be also used for empathy literacy),
immersing users in recreated, remote, or even hypothetical environments as small as a molecule or as large as a universe, allowing learners to experience “reality” from multiple perspectives.
Code4Lib 2018 is a loosely-structured conference that provides people working at the intersection of libraries/archives/museums/cultural heritage and technology with a chance to share ideas, be inspired, and forge collaborations. For more information about the Code4Lib community, please visit http://code4lib.org/about/.
The conference will be held at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC, from February 13, 2018 – February 16, 2018. More information about Code4lib 2018 is available on this year’s conference website http://2018.code4lib.org.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Mark Gill and Plamen Miltenoff proposal:
Gamification of Library Orientation and Instruction
Abstract
The rapid advent in the technologies of augmented and virtual reality (VR) in the last several years and the surge down in price creates possibilities for its increasing and ubiquitous application in education. A collaboration by a librarian and VR specialist led to testing opportunities to apply 360 video in academic library orientation. The team seeks to bank on the inherited interest of Millennials toward these technologies and their inextricable part of a growing gaming environment in education. A virtual introduction via 360 video aims to familiarize patrons with the library and its services: http://bit.ly/VRlib. I short Surveymonkey survey following the virtual introduction assesses learning outcomes and allows further instruction when necessary. Patrons can use any electronic devices from desktop to any size mobile devices. Patrons can also watch in panorama mode, and are provided with goggles if they would like to experience the VR mode.
The next step is an introduction to basic bibliographic instruction, followed by a gamified “scavenger hunt”-kind of exercise, which aims to gamify students’ ability to perform basic research: http://bit.ly/learnlib. The game is web-based and it can be played on any electronic devices from desktops to mobile devices. The game is followed by a short Google Form survey, which assesses learning outcomes and allows further work shall any knowledge gaps occur.
The team relies on the constructivist theory of assisting patrons in building their knowledge in their own pace and on their own terms, rather than being lectured and guided by a librarian only.
This proposal envisions half a day activities for participants to study the opportunities presented by 360 video camera and acquire the necessary skills to collect quickly useful footage and process it for the library needs. The second half of the day is allocated for learning Adobe Dreamweaver to manipulate the preexisting “templates” (HTML and jQuery code) for the game and adapt the content and the format to the needs of the participants’ libraries.
Mr. Gill is a Visualization Engineer for the College of Science and Engineering and runs the Visualization Laboratory. He has worked for several major universities as well as Stennis Space Center and Mechdyne, Inc. He holds a Masters of Science in Software Engineering.
Dr. Miltenoff is part of a workgroup within the academic library, which works with faculty, students and staff on the application of new technologies in education. Dr. Miltenoff’s most recent research with Mark Gill is on the impact of Video 360 on students during library orientation:http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/
The 21st Century Skills of the Academic Librarian in Bulgaria
Applicant:
Plamen Miltenoff, PhD, MLIS, http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/faculty/
My experience and connections with the library organizations and professionals from Moldova, Bulgaria and Austria, as well as my 17+ years working at the St. Cloud State University library provides me with an opportunity for comparison and, consequently, proposal for collaborative practices with Bulgarian academic librarians.
Project Duration: one year
Problem Identification: Through the years, my work with faculty and librarians from Shoumen University (http://shu-bg.net/ ), Plovdiv University (https://uni-plovdiv.bg/), New Bulgarian University (https://nbu.bg/), the American University (https://www.aubg.edu/) and Sofia University (https://www.uni-sofia.bg/) helped me identify differences and similarities in the work of the Bulgarian educational institutions and academia from abroad.
The role of the academic librarian in the educational process is different/limited in Bulgaria compared to the United States. During a collaboration on gamifying library instruction (http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/), the NBU librarians demonstrated their propensity to shift their campus role close to the campus role of American librarians, yet in general the Bulgarian library guild remains traditional in their view of their responsibilities toward the educational process on campus.
Project Objectives:
This proposal aims regular discussions among professionals from Bulgarian and American (possibly other nations) librarians to determine the framework regarding librarian’s responsibilities. Are academic librarians faculty members or staff? Do they have teaching or service (or both) responsibilities? What are 20th century academic librarians’ responsibilities are to be preserved? Updated? What are the 21st century responsibilities to be gained? What is the relationship between academic librarians and faculty? What is expected from an academic librarians to ensure learning happens? To benefit faculty’s teaching?
A comparison of academic library structures, job descriptions, models and discourses can lead to deep[er] analysis of existing structures and possible reorganizations to improve the role of the library in particular and the efficiency of the educational institution in general.
Comparisons of topics and syllabi: multiliteraices as successor of information literacy? Is the academic library the hub for technological innovations (e.g makerspaces, 3D printing, virtual reality/augmented reality) and if not, what is the academic library role in the process?
Other relevant topics / issues are expected to transpire during such discourse.
Project Description:
The project is organized in collaboration of synchronous and asynchronous character during the span of one academic year. Three synchronous sessions each semester (six sessions for the entire semester) will provide a forum through e-conferencing tools (e.g. Adobe Connect, WebEx, Skype, Google Hangout etc.) for live discussions and planning. Weekly asynchronous dialog through social media (e.g. blog, Facebook Group, Google Group etc.) will provide the platform/ hub/ forum daily/detailed preparation for the monthly synchronous meetings.
Most valuable feedback through the weekly asynchronous discussions will be voted by participants and three best weekly contributions will be awarded badges. At the end of the academic year, the three contributors with largest collection of badges will be awarded cost for registration fee, travel and lodging to an important European conference regarding libraries and education.
The experience and lessons from the process will be summed up, published and presented at local (Bulgarian), regional (Balkans) and international (European, U.S.) educational conferences and events. Similar cross-cultural experiences and studies will be research and comparison and future collaboration will be sought.
Impact:
The use of synchronous tools will provide technological and didactical practice for academic librarians; an experience they later can apply in their service to the campus community.
Same with the asynchronous tools / social media
The practice and experience of using social media for institutional purposes can help librarians figure out pertinent outreach to the recent and incoming students (Millennials and Gen Y)
The use of social media will provide transparency and participatory governing of the process.
Sustainability:
The lessons from such endeavor aim to bring closer collaboration and understanding between academic librarians and campus faculty. Such collaboration can be measured, as well as impact of improved teaching and improved learning. The measurements should convince university administration to further support the continues process of cross-cultural collaboration between academic librarians.
