I have not been feeling inspired by the literature I've been coming across lately, so I thought this would be a good time to do a "Day in the Life" post.
What exactly does an Instructional Services Librarian (often going by different names) do?
Today was not one of my busiest days, especially considering the semester has now ended and there have been very few people in the library, but my day went kind of like this:
8:00-10:00 a.m.: Reference Desk duty. Reference work was very slow since the library was virtually empty.
While serving on the desk, I completed a document on the learning objectives we use in our library instruction sessions, which I am going to present at a meeting on Monday with Humanities faculty. Also entered my reference desk schedule duties for June into my calendar.
10:00 a.m.: Helped a patron from Harford County, who was transferred to us by phone
from a Baltimore County public library branch, find specific articles
from the Baltimore Sun, from 1910 and 1925. Patron asked if our
microfilm went back that far. No, but we now have the Historical
Baltimore Sun online back to 1837! The patron had the exact date of the
articles, so that along with a specific topic (one was an obituary)
allowed me to easily find these articles for him, download the PDFs, and
email them to him.
11:00-11:30: Email correspondence with faculty regarding their summer library instruction sessions.
11:30-12:30: Lunch. Hobnobbed with colleagues. Went for a walk.
12:30-1:00: Not sure what happened during this half hour...
1:00 p.m.: Answered a faculty member's email requesting dates for a library instruction session this fall. Sent more email correspondence to other faculty members regarding their courses' library instruction sessions this summer.
2:00-2:45 p.m.: Met with faculty member from the Tutoring Center to discuss plans for a joint workshop with nursing students this summer, as well as a professional development workshop for tutors.
2:45-3:30 p.m.: Can't remember exactly, but I know I put away some papers in folders, did a little outlining of what I would show tutors during workshop this summer, and gathered handouts for meeting on Monday. Oh, and I made a couple of edits to the English 101 library instruction handouts.
3:30 p.m.: Read some professional development articles, with hopes of finding something to blog about. One article I read was this one on First Principles of Instruction (first article in this journal issues) as well as the Wikipedia article on the same thing, but decided not to blog about it.
4:00 p.m.: Decided to blog about my day instead!
I'll have to remember to blog about my day *while* I'm in the middle of my day next time. And maybe on a busier day.
Friday, May 18, 2012
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Kindles of the 1930s...
Fascinating to see someone's iteration of an e-reader of the future: http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/paleofuture/2012/03/the-ipad-of-1935
I always find it interesting to see these old images of "the future" as imagined at an earlier time. Often, there are uncanny similarities between what was imagined and what does end up happening -- yet obvious gaps in knowledge of what would be possible in the future. In this case, the artist/engineer could foresee the use of "miniaturized text," because it was already being used in microfilm. So basically, existing technology was just re-packaged in an armchair to invent a "reader." So really, the contraption shown was not all that innovative. What people could not have imagined (or did not imagine... until, of course, it was imagined) was invention of the computer chip and, subsequently, the Internet.
Looking at these old designs, aside from eliciting a chuckle, can remind us that we should not let what we know limit what we can imagine.
I always find it interesting to see these old images of "the future" as imagined at an earlier time. Often, there are uncanny similarities between what was imagined and what does end up happening -- yet obvious gaps in knowledge of what would be possible in the future. In this case, the artist/engineer could foresee the use of "miniaturized text," because it was already being used in microfilm. So basically, existing technology was just re-packaged in an armchair to invent a "reader." So really, the contraption shown was not all that innovative. What people could not have imagined (or did not imagine... until, of course, it was imagined) was invention of the computer chip and, subsequently, the Internet.
Looking at these old designs, aside from eliciting a chuckle, can remind us that we should not let what we know limit what we can imagine.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
College Handouts Don't Make the Grade
I can't say enough about the reports coming out of Project Information Literacy. Report #3, How Handouts for Research Assignments Guide Today's College Students, gives a detailed analysis of the information conveyed to students in research assignment handouts, compared to the needs of college students during their research processes (as determined in a prior study). It outlines how often specific resources are mentioned, including help from librarians. Very eye-opening and great fodder for developing more collaboration between librarians and faculty in designing research assignment descriptions.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
"Knowledge Building"
And here it is: higher education finally getting on the bandwagon and engaging in constructivist learning techniques (re-packaged, apparently, with the new label "knowledge building"). This article, I'm proud to say, comes from my own alma mater, Smith College: "What Do You Know? And How Well Do You Think?"
I will let the article speak for itself, but I'm glad to see that innovative instructional design involving active, constructive ("knowledge-building") learning is taking place at the college level.
I will let the article speak for itself, but I'm glad to see that innovative instructional design involving active, constructive ("knowledge-building") learning is taking place at the college level.
Library Video Using Xtranormal
You might have seen these types of videos floating around -- people are making these for a vast variety of reasons. I've seen library-related and educational videos made with this online software, and my husband commented last night that people on his Corvette forum have posted these types of videos as well (I didn't ask what, exactly, the videos on his forum were about).
Here's one I created about our library's one-on-one consultation service. It was easy and fun to do.
And this one was created by my co-worker, Jessica Ambrose.
Here's another one that I really liked that was posted by Sheila Webber on her blog.
From a pedagogical standpoint, I admit I really didn't understand the point of these until I made one. I think that, as with any technology, it's what you do with it and how well and soundly you use it.
A few points/rules of thumb that I can think of:
Here's one I created about our library's one-on-one consultation service. It was easy and fun to do.
And this one was created by my co-worker, Jessica Ambrose.
Here's another one that I really liked that was posted by Sheila Webber on her blog.
From a pedagogical standpoint, I admit I really didn't understand the point of these until I made one. I think that, as with any technology, it's what you do with it and how well and soundly you use it.
A few points/rules of thumb that I can think of:
- Keep them short. More than two-three minutes and you've lost your audience with these. All of the above videos are 40-50 seconds long, but they each serve their purpose: to inform about one concept, service, or process.
- Make them as content-rich as possible in that limited time.
- Think about your audience and write the script accordingly. Don't be overly corny or trying-too-hard-to-be-cool if you are writing for students.
- Make use of humor to capture the audience's attention. Selecting two characters who are just plain-looking, for example, and having a boring script defeats the purpose. If you want to make a boring video, then make a regular video and make it professional-looking. Only use Xtranormal or a similar script-reading video technology if you are going to capitalize on the tongue-in-cheek nature of the graphics and crudeness of the technology. (Disclaimer: by crudeness I am referring to the "low-tech" nature of it -- I am NOT suggesting that it should be used to create lewd or lascivious videos!)
Monday, February 6, 2012
College Scorecard?
The White House is trying to create a "scorecard" to help families determine the "affordability and value" of prospective colleges. As of now, the scorecard looks very limiting and misleading, in my opinion: http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/education/scorecard
Fortunately, they are looking for feedback. I understand that the types of statistics they are using for this scorecard are easy to gather, and seemingly can create a picture of a college's affordability and value; however, suggesting that each individual student's experience will be the same or even close to the same as the "average" this data creates is very misleading. A student who attends a college with a high percentage of at-risk or lower-achieving students could get an excellent education there if that college places a high value on teaching and learning effectiveness. The statistics at that college might look bleak, but a student with a lot of potential could take advantage of the high student-faculty ratio, the tutoring services, and leadership opportunities there, for example, to be very successful.
I appreciate the Government's efforts and intentions, but I fear that another shallow tool (shallower, in my opinion, than the U.S. News and World Report rankings that come out each year) will end up leading to "punishing" colleges that accept at-risk and low-income students, because they are worried about "raising their score" on this scorecard to get more applicants. There are so many factors that go into college value, and they vary greatly depending on the goals and purpose of the individual student attending. In general, though, I believe that looking at measures of the effectiveness of teaching and learning that takes place at a college -- particularly in the areas of critical thinking and information literacy -- can be a good measure of the college's value, no matter what the financial data might say.
Of course, this data is harder to capture. But just because data can be easily obtained does not mean that it should be used. It's like the expression, "You get what you pay for." Simplistic data leads to simplistic behaviors. Robust, qualitative data leads to robust, high-quality results -- but it is more complicated to gather and compile. Yet colleges and universities have been compiling this data for years, and in the last five years have been under a lot of pressure by accrediting agencies to compile even more. The data is there -- now it needs to be read and used accordingly to place real value on a college education.
Fortunately, they are looking for feedback. I understand that the types of statistics they are using for this scorecard are easy to gather, and seemingly can create a picture of a college's affordability and value; however, suggesting that each individual student's experience will be the same or even close to the same as the "average" this data creates is very misleading. A student who attends a college with a high percentage of at-risk or lower-achieving students could get an excellent education there if that college places a high value on teaching and learning effectiveness. The statistics at that college might look bleak, but a student with a lot of potential could take advantage of the high student-faculty ratio, the tutoring services, and leadership opportunities there, for example, to be very successful.
I appreciate the Government's efforts and intentions, but I fear that another shallow tool (shallower, in my opinion, than the U.S. News and World Report rankings that come out each year) will end up leading to "punishing" colleges that accept at-risk and low-income students, because they are worried about "raising their score" on this scorecard to get more applicants. There are so many factors that go into college value, and they vary greatly depending on the goals and purpose of the individual student attending. In general, though, I believe that looking at measures of the effectiveness of teaching and learning that takes place at a college -- particularly in the areas of critical thinking and information literacy -- can be a good measure of the college's value, no matter what the financial data might say.
Of course, this data is harder to capture. But just because data can be easily obtained does not mean that it should be used. It's like the expression, "You get what you pay for." Simplistic data leads to simplistic behaviors. Robust, qualitative data leads to robust, high-quality results -- but it is more complicated to gather and compile. Yet colleges and universities have been compiling this data for years, and in the last five years have been under a lot of pressure by accrediting agencies to compile even more. The data is there -- now it needs to be read and used accordingly to place real value on a college education.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
The Purpose--and Mis-Use--of Formative Assessment
This article from Education Week very simply and clearly explains what formative assessment is supposed to be, and how it is often misunderstood and misused.
A poignant point from the article: "[I]t’s not the test per se that is formative or summative. It is the use to which the test’s results are put."
This to me is one of the most important things to keep in mind. I have seen here at my institution "formative assessment" defined in such a way that the emphasis is on the assessment of the student progress rather than on how this data is being used to assess the effectiveness of the instruction. There is a big difference, but I think many educators (especially, I'd venture to say, those in higher education who do not necessarily have degrees in education fields) do not fully have this understanding. Giving quizzes or assignments throughout a course can be one means by which educators can employ formative assessment processes, but they are not the only, nor necessarily the most effective, means.
Regardless of the means by which formative assessment data is obtained, the purpose of formative assessment must be kept in mind: to evaluate whether or not teaching and learning activities are effective, and then to make changes accordingly to the lesson design and instructional methods. Formative assessment is a much more subtle, nuanced, and complicated process than simply monitoring students' quiz results or grades on assignments to assess their progress in class. It is what is done with these grades, quiz results, or other more informal assessment techniques (such as simply asking questions in class to gauge students' understanding at a given moment in time) that distinguishes formative assessment from summative assessment; the latter is for the purpose of evaluating what students have learned; the former is for evaluating how instruction or learning processes can be improved.
A poignant point from the article: "[I]t’s not the test per se that is formative or summative. It is the use to which the test’s results are put."
This to me is one of the most important things to keep in mind. I have seen here at my institution "formative assessment" defined in such a way that the emphasis is on the assessment of the student progress rather than on how this data is being used to assess the effectiveness of the instruction. There is a big difference, but I think many educators (especially, I'd venture to say, those in higher education who do not necessarily have degrees in education fields) do not fully have this understanding. Giving quizzes or assignments throughout a course can be one means by which educators can employ formative assessment processes, but they are not the only, nor necessarily the most effective, means.
Regardless of the means by which formative assessment data is obtained, the purpose of formative assessment must be kept in mind: to evaluate whether or not teaching and learning activities are effective, and then to make changes accordingly to the lesson design and instructional methods. Formative assessment is a much more subtle, nuanced, and complicated process than simply monitoring students' quiz results or grades on assignments to assess their progress in class. It is what is done with these grades, quiz results, or other more informal assessment techniques (such as simply asking questions in class to gauge students' understanding at a given moment in time) that distinguishes formative assessment from summative assessment; the latter is for the purpose of evaluating what students have learned; the former is for evaluating how instruction or learning processes can be improved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)