Found through an infolit blog, the Research Information Network proposes Criteria for describing and assessing interventions – provisional version last September.
The same group came up with the Finch Report, which looks open access policies in UK universities. I also stumbled on these above guidelines and thought of sharing…
Just read the “Joint Statement on Faculty Status of College and University Librarians” from the American Association of University Professors.
The American Library Association’s Office for Information Technology Policy launched last January a report called “Digital Literacy, Libraries, and Public Policy” – the 27 page PDF report can be downloaded here.
Here is what the document has to say about Academic Libraries (p. 14-16)
The role of the academic library in the higher education ecosystem reflects the important relationship between the classroom professors, the curriculum, and the librarians in contributing to students‟ digital literacy. That is, the degree to which students take advantage of library resources—and the digital literacy skills they can gain by working with librarians—is influenced by the extent to which their official coursework or classroom time provides a link.
Digital Literacy through Information LiteracyAlthough academic libraries are more focused on information literacy than digital literacy, these two twenty-first century literacies are closely linked: information literacy requires digital literacy to access appropriate online research sources, and information literacy gives further context to the evaluation skills developed by digital literacy. ACRL‟s Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education are often cited as a key resource on the role of and criteria for information literacy.
44 Furthermore, students learn many skills and research methods beyond what they learn in or about the library; thus, the development of information literacy is gained partly inside but also outside of the library.
Information literacy initiatives often are a campus-wide effort. Librarians partner with professors, student affairs professionals, and media services staff, among others, to advance both the library and campus missions. Yet despite the potential of academic libraries to contribute to information literacy, perhaps the greatest challenge for academic librarians is that college students make much less use of librarians‟ expertise than they could. A five-campus, 2-year ethnographic study investigating how students perceive and use their campus libraries revealed that “students rarely ask librarians for help, even when they need it.”
45 The study findings detail just how underdeveloped students’ skills are when it comes to applying the digital fluency they show in nonacademic settings (e.g., on Facebook, in texting, in sharing videos with friends) in traditionally academic settings and with academic resources.
Many campuses are recognizing the importance of redefining what digital literacy means in the realm of higher education. They are taking an unvarnished, pragmatic look at students’ struggles to engage fully with digital resources and communities in academic settings and at what information skills students need for the workplace. Librarians are applying these findings by striving to work closely with university administrators and professors to integrate information literacy skills into the student learning process. At the University of Tennessee in Chattanooga, for example, librarians helped write the basic English curriculum, ensuring that the standard course, reaching 78 percent of freshmen, was aligned with ACRL information literacy standards.
Today, “students simply cannot pass either semester of freshman composition without meeting a certain minimal threshold of information literacy in accordance with ACRL standards 1 through 4.” (note 46)
Activity Level in the Field
Instructional efforts at academic libraries take many forms, from face-to-face and web-based instructional offerings to carefully crafted pathfinders and guides. The libraries have appointments devoted to instruction and information literacy, and each year ACRL‟s Institute for Information Literacy Immersion Program trains academic librarians in the development, delivery, assessment, and management of information literacy. (note 47)
Today‟s information literacy efforts reflect an extensive level of activity in the field. According to a recent ALA report on Trends in Academic Libraries, for example, “nearly half (46.6 percent) of all academic libraries reporting had a definition for information literacy or an information literate student, increasing
about 18.2 percent in 2008 from 2004.” (note 48 )
Additionally, there was “a 13 percent increase in 2008 from 2004 of all academic libraries reporting having incorporated information literacy into their institutional missions.” Note 49
Growth also has occurred in the overall number of instruction sessions and in the number of learners reached by the instruction.
In addition to course-integrated offerings and guides, some institutions offer for-credit information literacy courses. Iowa State University‟s Library 160 course is by far one of the oldest information literacy courses in the United States. In its nearly 100-year history, the course has undergone many curriculum transformations, from an introductory library session to now shaping its core outcomes according to ACRL‟s Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. The required 1-credit hour course is structured with readings and quizzes that cover information needs, web resources and evaluation, library resources, scholarly and popular articles, how to work with the library‟s databases, and academic integrity and plagiarism. In today‟s digital environment, social responsibility in information use is more important than ever.
Librarians instruct students in proper citation techniques and ethical retrieval methods. They help college students hone the critical and problem-solving skills needed to survive and thrive in a digital world. Such activities will prepare students for future academic success and set the stage for lifelong learning habits.
The Academic Librarian’s Toolkit
Academic librarians are true innovators in the classroom, ever investigating interactive instructional methods and new modes of delivering instruction. Today‟s classroom environment calls on librarians to meet students where they are, which may be beyond library walls.
Librarians work to embed tools such as chat widgets into library databases and use multimedia guides such as LibGuides to enhance instruction sessions and assignments. They also create online tutorials and instructional videos; use learning management systems; and craft interactive, homegrown games for use by students to explore information literacy concepts. And by working with Web 2.0 technologies, they encourage students to gain confidence with exploring new technologies while modeling appropriate, responsible use of them. In all of these efforts, librarians strive to make the learning experience as dynamic and engaging as possible.
Information Literacy Assessment Initiatives
An extensive body of literature focused on information literacy explores, among many other aspects of the subject, how people experience and respond to the changing digital world. The University of Washington Information School‟s ongoing research project on Project Information Literacy is one example of a systematic and concentrated effort to document the state of competency in information literacy among undergraduate students across the United States and across all institution types, including public and private universities and colleges and community colleges. note 50
Many academic libraries today, in line with campus information literacy initiatives, have undertaken assessment of the impact of these initiatives on student learning and the effectiveness of instruction. Standardized testing options are available with which to assess instructional programs and measure the information literacy abilities of students. The Standardized Assessment of Information Literacy Skills (SAILS) and the iSkills Assessment from the Educational Testing Service are two tools used for this purpose. Additionally, libraries may use a self-reporting assessment tool such as LibQUAL+ to collect both quantitative and qualitative information on instructional programs and information literacy efforts. The National Survey of
Student Engagement (NSSE) is another assessment tool that measures the quality of colleges and universities in relationship to the effort students put into learning, how institutions make resources available, and how they organize curriculum. Currently, an information literacy module is being developed for NSSE. note 51
These assessments enable librarians to remain responsive to user needs. In turn, librarians can confidently communicate with campus administrators and legislators, showing them data that support the impact of the library on students‟ information literacy development.
Stumbled on this flowchart from Jenny Mueller-Alexander at Arizona State University Libraries about researching a single company or an industry.
I like how the company process splits into private company and public company – which has a huge impact on the amount of information available. Remember that anything a company tells you is either to their benefit, either required my law (like disclosing financial statements when their equity is traded on public markets of capital like stock exchanges).
I’ve been meaning to adapt my similar research protocol for business students to distinguish between researching a business idea (entrepreneurship) that targets consumers versus other companies. This also has great bearing on how one researches the information for a business plan… more on that later…
The Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) invites application for its Research in Librarianship Grant – due by August 13th 2013, the grant can be worth up to 2000$.
Following my post on prof Hirumi, his InterPLAY model and experiential learning,
I sent off to learn more on gamification, eLearning and other related topics. I setup an quick and dirty bibliography on the topic and shared it from my RefWorks site.
In addition to what I have posted in my first post on prof. Hirumi, here are the items in it so far in my gamification bibliography:
Annetta, L. A., & Bronack, S. C. (Eds.). (2011). Serious educational game assessment : Practical methods and models for educational games, simulations and virtual worlds. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Anthropy, A. (2012). Rise of the videogame zinesters : How freaks, normals, amateurs, artists, dreamers, dropouts, queers, housewives, and people like you are taking back an art form (Seven Stories Press 1st ed.). New York: Seven Stories Press.
Haythornthwaite, C. A., & Andrews, R. (Eds.). (2011). E-learning theory and practice. Los Angeles: Sage.
Hirumi, A. (Ed.). (2010). Playing games in school : Video games and simulations for primary and secondary classroom instruction (1st ed.). Eugene, Ore: International Society for Technology in Education.
Juwah, C. (Ed.). (2006). Interactions in online education : Implications for theory and practice. London ; New York: Routledge.
Suits, B. (2005). The grasshopper games, life and utopia. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press.
Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (Eds.). (2012). For the win : How game thinking can revolutionize your business. Philadelphia: Wharton Digital Press.
I also have another open bibliography on business information literacy.
I learned so much from the e.SCAPE conference at Concordia – but professor Hirumi inspired me to look into grounding the curriculum I am developing for business information literacy in proven theories.
Professor wrote a book in 2010 on this model:
Call Number LB 1029 S53P53 2010
Title Playing games in school : video games and simulations for primary and secondary classroom instruction / edited by Atsusi “2c” Hirumi
Edition 1st ed
Publisher Eugene, Ore : International Society for Technology in Education, c2010
He also wrote a book chapter in 2006:
Atsusi Hirumi — Designing interaction as a dialogue game : linking social and conceptual dimensions of the learning process
Call Number LB 1044.87 I548 2006
Title Interactions in online education : implications for theory and practice / edited by Charles Juwah
Publisher London ; New York : Routledge, 2006
Prof. Hirumi’s chapter in this book is available here.
In addition, prof. Hirumi offered some great summaries of contemporary proven learning theories For example, see this 30 page summary I found on a conference website.
During the conference, he presented his InterPLAY model, as seen here from a few of his slides:
He also presents it as such in the pdf document linked above. On page 19, he describes it as such:
(Stapleton & Hirumi, 2011; Hirumi, Atkinson, & Stapleton, 2011)
Based on the belief that the learning of facts, concepts and principles occurs best in context of how they will be used, the Interplay strategy evokes emotions and sparks imagination, based on cognitive neuroscience research, to enhance experiential learning theories by addressing three primary conventions of interactive entertainment and their related elements (i.e., Story – characters, events, worlds; Game – rules, tools, goals; Play – stimulus, response, consequences).
1. Expose – Exposure provides the back-story to entice empathy for the character or player, and orients the audience into the same reference point or point of view. Exposure sets up specified learning objectives in a meaningful way to invite the student to contribute, to engage and to achieve the challenges set before them.
2. Inquire – Inquiry validates Exposure. If exposure sets a desire to learn, then inquiry is automatic. Inquire provides a response to student’s curiosity with something to do that showcases different elements that will be used later.
3. Discover –Discovery provides the personal reward, achievement, and the “ah ha” moment. The consequences of discovery, whether negative or positive, provide feedback to inspire further exploration to the next level of achievement.
4. Create – Transforms the experience from being merely reactive to truly interactive. Instead of responding to cues, the learner contributes to the content by applying the elements of the subject matter in novel ways.
5. Experiment – Provides an opportunity to assess learning and provide feedback without losing or winning. The goal is less about the hypothesis being right or wrong, but rather setting up the elements of the subject matter so that new knowledge can be gained. Failure should be fun.
6. Share – The sharing of personal experiences and feelings is facilitated at the end of the lesson or unit, to seal the memory of the learning experience. Sharing compels learners to put lessons learned in their own perspective as well as others.
He presented the context of the InterPLAY model as such:
In addition to the books references above, here are some works prof. Hirumy contributed to:
Crippen, K. J., Archambault, L., & Kern, C. (in press). Using Scaffolded Vee Diagrams to Enact Inquiry-Based Learning. In A. Hirumi (Ed.). Grounded Designs for Online and Hybrid Learning: Practical Guidelines for Educators and Instructional Designers. Eugene, WA: International Society for Technology in Education.
Hirumi, A. (2002). Student-centered, technology-rich, learning environments (SCenTRLE): Operationalizing constructivist approaches to teaching and learning. Journal for Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 497-537.
Hirumi, A. (1998, March). The Systematic Design of Student-Centered, Technology-Rich Learning Environments. Invited guest presentation given at the first Education Graduate Students and Academic Staff Regional Meeting, Guadalajara, Mexico.
Hirumi, A. (1996, February). Student-Centered, Technology-Rich Learning environments: A cognitive-constructivist approach. Concurrent session held at the Association for Educational Communication and Technology Conference, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Hirumi, A. & Stapleton, C. (in press). Designing InterPLAY Learning Landscapes to Evoke Emotions, Spark the Imagination, and Foster Creative Problem Solving. In A. Hirumi (Ed.). Grounded Designs for Online and Hybrid Learning: Practical Guidelines for Educators and Instructional Designers. Eugene, WA: International Society for Technology in Education.
Hirumi, A., Atkinson, T., Stapleton, C. (2011). Interplay: Evoking Emotions andSparking Imagination through Story, Play and Game. Concurrent Session presented the annual Association for Educational Communication and Technology conference, Jacksonville, FL. Nov. 8-12.
Stapleton, C. & Hirumi, A. (2011). Interplay instructional strategy: Learning by engaging interactive entertainment conventions. In M. Shaughnessy & S. Fulgham (eds). Pedagogical Models: The Discipline of Online Teaching (pp. 183-211). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
I gave a talk at the e.Scape conference at Concordia University on the topic of :
The unexpected journey from a 60 minute lecture to a MOOC: a librarian’s mid-way report
Here is the description:
Information Literacy can be understood as the curriculum Librarians must curate without a classroom. Traditionally, this has meant organising library services as well as in-class lectures to advise students on research skills and strategies. But two factors have moved me to explore a new approach. Firstly, the Internet and open education offer incredible opportunities to disseminate knowledge and collaborate with colleagues worldwide. Secondly, as one of the Business Librarians working closely with the John Molson School of Business, my community is broad and their needs are as deep as their passion for their field. In order to meet this challenge, I’ve implemented a series of training videos in order to test a new curriculum deployment strategy.
Learning objectives for the session
Determine the resource implications of designing a MOOC, in terms of effort (time), technology and skill
Evaluate the relevance of the MOOC model for one’s teaching
I briefly discuss MOOCs. More on MOOCs here (this is the video I show in my lecture):
I position MOOCs as the extreme end of the elearning continuum – both in terms of structure and pace. I may never achieve this end-game in my development of curriculum and learning objects. In fact, I realistically envision that I will develop a series of learning objects that will be embedded in various courses throughout the undergraduate experience at the John Molson School of Business. Taken as a whole, these learning objects may constitute enough content to be called a MOOC or an online class. But for now, I am focussing on developing my curriculum and building meaningful learning objects from that.
I will be giving my talk shortly this morning at the e.Scape conference at Concordia University on the topic of :
The unexpected journey from a 60 minute lecture to a MOOC: a librarian’s mid-way report
I’ll be talking about how my use of technology has changes my professional practice.
I’ll briefly discuss MOOCs also, positioning them as the extreme end of the elearning continuum – both in terms of structure and pace. More on MOOCs here:
Mostly, I’ll discuss my training videos as well as the development of a business information literacy curriculum as part of my employment, most of which are in various stages as pilot projects or drafts.