The NCSU Libraries Mobile Scavenger Hunt is designed to allow maximum mobility of student teams as they explore the library, while the librarians hosting the hunt keep score in real time from a central location. Each team is supplied with a clue sheet with 15 questions about the library and its services, a map of the library, and an iPod Touch for entering clue answers. Students are given a brief introduction to the activity and its rules, as well as basic instruction in use of the iPod and relevant apps, before being sent off to answer their clues. Teams are allowed 25 minutes to explore the libraries and answer the questions before returning to the starting location to review correct answers, learn which team won, and receive prizes.

The teams' iPod Touches are equipped with the Evernote multimedia note-taking application, which the teams use to submit text- and photo-based answers to the clues. Each team's Evernote account is shared with a master account monitored by the librarians running the show; through the Evernote web or iPad app, librarians can see each team's notes in real-time as they are created. Scorekeeping is performed using a Google Spreadsheet, which is configured with the expected answers for each question. As teams submit their notes, the librarians are able to mark which questions were answered correctly by modifying the corresponding spreadsheet cells. Scores are tabulated automatically based on which questions are marked correct.

NCSU Libraries Mobile Scavenger Hunt: information for instructors4 Complete implementation documentation (pdf)5 Sample introduction slide show (pdf)6 Sample scavenger hunt questions (pdf)7 Scoring sheet template (Google spreadsheet)

He co-edited with Brian O’Leary the seminal Book: A Futurist’s Manifesto, which has enough meaningful, thought-provoking essays in it to keep you muttering to yourself from the tiki bar back to the pool for the rest of the summer. Have a look if you haven’t seen its free online version.

McGuire points out that both Amazon’s Kindle and Apple’s iPhone arrived in 2007.

Publishers are deathly afraid of the Internet. And they have very good reason to be, because the Internet is famous for gobbling up business models and spitting out total chaos.

One of their assignments is to interview a researcher in their field. This year, since the students had a nice mix of majors from across the curriculum, we used reports from the interviews as an opportunity to analyze on how research traditions vary from one discipline to another and how these experts’ processes differ from those of non-experts.

One thing that many students remarked on as they reported on their interviews: the activities that define research are enormously varied from one discipline to another. The process a researcher goes through to examine the historical context in which Shakespeare wrote one of his history plays is a world apart from what a researcher does to develop a new vaccine or what an ethnographer does when studying an isolated culture in Brazil.

The scientists all had co-authors; the social scientists were a mix of solo and collaborative projects, and the humanists all performed solo acts. And yet, it became clear that all of them were working within an ongoing conversation. None of them was doing work that didn’t draw on and respond to the work of others.

The characteristics of “Flow” according to Czikszentmihalyi are: Completely involved, focused, concentrating – with this either due to innate curiosity or as the result of training Sense of ecstasy – of being outside everyday reality Great inner clarity – knowing what needs to be done and how well it is going Knowing the activity is doable – that the skills are adequate, and neither anxious or bored Sense of serenity Timeliness – thoroughly focused on present, don’t notice time passing Intrinsic motivation – whatever produces “flow” becomes its own reward

(http://austega.com/education/articles/flow.htm)

Intellectual challenge was measured by Csikszentmilhalyi’s theory of flow. (Source for the following http://www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article/sorting-students-learning)

Peer evaluation:  You must do your assignments satisfactorily to fulfill your contract.   Each week, two or three students will work as a peer group in charge of leading our joint education for two or three classes.  During that unit, the peer leaders will assign readings as well as writing or multimedia assignments--and they will be charged with determining if each student has satisfactorily completed the assignment.   They will be charged with providing written feedback on all assignments.  Their goal will be to ensure that each student satisfactorily completes the assignment and they will work with each student to make sure they succeed.

How to Crowdsource Grading, I described this method: http://www.hastac.org/blogs/cathy-davidson/how-crowdsource-grading

SYLLABUS We will be co-creating a syllabus in this course.  Professor Davidson will begin, there will be several special guests or other events, but the remainder of the course content will be assigned by peer-leaders charged with offering a challenging, creative, informative, inspiring, participatory educational experience (No Talking Heads Please!) for the class.   Peer-led classes might that involve reading/seeing/listening to/experiencing imaginative works (including scientific papers,) attending lectures, visiting art museums and going to concerts together, or visiting businesses and community organizations to understand how these literacies are changing.  I will get us started with some readings and a museum visit and a collaborative public wiki-based writing assignment.   We have a number of exciting visitors coming this term.   The rest of the syllabus will be filled out by the peer leaders and will evolve over the course.

I worked with a task force to develop learning outcomes that describe the breadth of our library instruction program

I talk about this, and our model, in the most recent Adventures in Library Instruction podcast.

I’m now working with our distance learning librarian and our newly-hired instructional designer to develop a two-tiered model for deploying learning objects (one for students to drill down to just the content that meets their information need and the other for faculty to easily embed learning objects — with suggested assessments and lesson plans — in their courses).