Group items tagged

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's School of Information and Library Science celebrated the ending of its 80th anniversary year by taking a forward look at the future of our field and its graduates. The Information Professionals 2050 (IP 2050) Conference brought in information and library science leaders who discussed key issues related to future visions, skills and values. Themes of the day included the areas of the 1) Information Industry, 2) Libraries and Archives, 3) Education and 4) Information Trends. The contributors are thought leaders of our profession and included: * Marshall Breeding, director for Innovative Technologies and Research, Vanderbilt University Libraries * Anne Caputo, executive director, Dow Jones' Learning and Information Professional Programs * Bonnie Carroll, president, International Information Associates * Mary Chute, deputy director for Libraries, Institute for Museum and Library Services * Lorcan Dempsey, vice president and chief strategist, OCLC * Michael Eisenberg, professor and dean emeritus, University of Washington School of Information * Buck Goldstein, University entrepreneur in residence and professor of practice, Department of Economics University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill * William Graves, senior vice president, Academic Strategy at Ellucian * Elizabeth Liddy, dean and trustee professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies * Charles Lowry, executive director, Association for Research Libraries * Joanne Marshall, alumni distinguished professor, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill * Nancy Roderer, director, Johns Hopkins University Welch Medical Library * Roger Schonfeld, director of research, Ithaka * David Silver, associate professor, University of San Francisco * Duncan Smith, co-founder, Novelist (EBSCO Publishing) Moderators included, * Susan Nutter, vice provost and director of Libraries, North Carolina State University * Sarah Michalak, university librarian and associate prov

Objective: This study sought to better understand the research expectations of first-year students upon beginning university study, and how these expectations differed from those of their professors. Most academic librarians observe that the research expectations of these two groups differ considerably and being able to articulate where these differences are greatest may help us provided more focused instruction, and allow us to work more effectively with professors and student support services. Methods: 317 first-year undergraduate students and 75 professors at Mount Saint Vincent University in Halifax, NS were surveyed to determine what they each expected of first-year student research. Students were surveyed on the first day of term so as to best understand their research expectations as they transitioned from high school to university. Results: The gulf between student and professor research expectations was found to be considerable, especially in areas such as time required for reading and research, and the resources necessary to do research. While students rated their preparedness for university as high, they also had high expectations related to their ability to use non-academic sources. Not unexpectedly, the majority of professors believed that students are not prepared to do university-level research, they do not take enough responsibility for their own learning, they should use more academic research sources, and read twice as much as students believe they should. Conclusions: By better understanding differing research expectations, students can be guided very early in their studies about appropriate academic research practices, and librarians and professors can provide students with improved research instruction. Strategies for working with students, professors and the university community are discussed.

The core explanation is this: the academy lacks a serious culture of teaching and learning. When students do not learn enough, we must question whether institutions of higher education deliver enough value to justify their costs. Resolving the learning crisis will therefore require fundamental, thoroughgoing changes in our colleges and universities.

In March, Inside Higher Ed released an "inaugural" Survey of College & University Chief Academic Officers.  This report was the fourth in a series of surveys of senior academic leaders with the three other reports conducted in 2011 focusing on admissions officers, chief business officers, and presidents.

"The report summarizes and provides analysis based on the experience and impressions of senior administrators and deans from a range of institutions including research universities, small colleges, and community colleges."

Researchers at the Information School at the University of Washington released an important and thought-provoking report in late 2009: "Lessons Learned: How College Students Seek Information in the Digital Age."1 The study confirms and expands on the results of other reports. Its particular value is the size of the population studied, the diversity of institutions represented, and the use of both a survey and follow-up interviews for data collection.

Providing a unified interface through which patrons can access nearly all of your library's collection has an obvious appeal on all sides. Users get the googley familiarity and convenience of a singular, wide-ranging search box and, according to a recent case study done at Grand Valley State University, the reduced friction patrons face when using library resources correlates to an increase - potentially dramatic - in the frequency with which they access them. If the new tool is like Google, then why does it require instruction?

Steven Bell looks at trends in unaccredited education (OER, for-profit) and postulates on what it might mean for academic libraries. 

I actually disagree with a few of their arguments, but thought it was worth a share.

A well-organized table of various social media accounts from departments across the University of Kansas.

"The goal of this article is to build on the assessment links Jarson provided. Her stated goal was to "guide readers to important resources for understanding information literacy and to provide tools for readers to advocate for information literacy's place in higher education curricula." In addition to the information on resources and tools, Jarson provided links to universities whose assessment tools were available for review on their Web sites. For this article, selected Web sites have been accessed and evaluated further. A handful of additional information resources have been profiled, including new Web sites that offer a variety of assessment tool formats."

Future U is a multipart series on the university of the 21st century. We will be investigating the possible future of the textbook, the technological development of libraries, how tech may change the role of the professor, and the future role of technology in museums, research parks and university-allied institutions of all kinds.

Joshua Vossler, Information Literacy/Reference Librarian at Coastal Carolina University, gave an incredibly entertaining and energetic presentation on creating instructional videos. He believes that learning is dependent on focused attention; therefore, the instructional videos we create need to be dynamic and humorous.  Joshua provided a helpful list of best practices for creating instructional videos, such as "Use anything silly or weird, such as a chicken" and "Videos should be no longer than three minutes." I highly recommend that you check out his videos here. He has certainly inspired me to brainstorm ways I can infuse more humor into my own instructional video series.

"Game Changers: Education and Information Technologies is a collection of chapters and case studies contributed by college and university presidents, provosts, faculty, and other stakeholders. Institutions are finding new ways of achieving higher education's mission without being crippled by constraints or overpowered by greater expectations."

On Thursday, May 31, 2012 the Getty Research Institute (GRI) will launch the Getty Research Portal, an unprecedented resource that will provide universal access to digitized texts in the field of art and architectural history.  The Getty Research Portal is a free online search gateway that aggregates descriptive metadata of digitized art history texts, with links to fully digitized copies that are free to download. Art historians, curators, students, or anyone who is culturally curious can unearth these valuable sources of research without traveling from place to place to browse the stacks of the world's art libraries. There will be no restrictions to use the Getty Research Portal; all anyone needs is access to the internet.

PP slides from a lecture given by Dr. Jane Secker at the University of Sheffield iSchool on March 1st, 2012.

This presentation offers some interesting graphics and new ways to define what I am trying to figure out we are trying to accomplish with our instructional opportunities and classroom collaborations.

The institution negotiates a deep discount off the list price of the textbook in order to have access to an e-text edition. In return for the discount, the university guarantees that every single student in the course will buy the e-text, which is charged like a lab fee. This is a definite change from the current textbook model, in which each student is personally responsible for showing up to class armed with the textbook, either in printed or digital form. As schools are discovering, as the prices of printed textbooks rise, so does the number of students who avoid buying the textbook. When we made this arrangement, we were considering, what does the publisher need to have, what does the author need to have, and what does the student need to have? You have to create a model, I think, that works out for all three of those pieces.

Does the use of library print and digital collections correlate with course pass/fail rates, grades, or GPA? How does use of instructional tools or attendance at instruction sessions or workshops correlate with student success in the classroom? Using circulation data, online resource usage records, workstation login data, workshop registrations, and more, the University of Minnesota Libraries are attempting to answer these questions. To access the full presentation for this session, click on the "Download" button on the right.