Well, there certainly is a lot of material to cover today. First, a recap of our one-shot workshops. Other than having seven workshops in our group which made everyone feel kind of rushed, it was a great and informative evening. We covered some really interesting topics, including filtering, the value of Twitter, the process for pulling books and how to deal with it, and copyright. And of course, there were two others, and ours, but they escape me at the moment. It made me wish there were more time to have a full length workshop on the topics, because there was so much to learn.
On to this weeks readings. On the docket, we have:
"The Embedded Librarian Online or Face-to-Face: American University's Experiences" by Michael A. Matosa and Nobue Matsuoka-Motley and William Mayer
"Online Webinars! Interactive Learning Where Our Users Are: The Future of Embedded Librarianship" by Susan E. Montgomery
and chapter 7 from How People Learn.
The first two articles addressed the idea of embedded librarianship, both traditional and hybrid approaches. This is a practice found on college campuses and academic libraries, in which a librarian is deployed to a specific department. This can occur to different degrees. The librarian can be a liaison, based from the library but working with a particular school or department. By working in the the school, librarians are better able to understand user needs and breaks down the barriers between librarian and user, in this case faculty and students.
Montgomery also points out that embedded librarianship provides a unique chance to incorporate new technologies into education. She points out that the internet and internet tools are a must to attract this generation of students. Email, Facebook, Twitter, and other web tools are a part of the university educational experience, and librarians can harness these tools. More and more reference questions come in via email, chats are becoming a standard reference tool, and webinars provide an excellent way to conduct training for distance learners or other non-traditional learners. Webinars in particular are an excellent library instruction tool.
How People Learn Chapter 7 breathes new life into history, mathematics, and science. It analyzes the approaches of successful teachers in teaching these subjects. The big takeaway is that a teacher needs to have a deep knowledge of their subject and they need to be knowledgeable on teaching methods that help students to learn and ask questions.
So, my thoughts. First, I was delighted with the examples on teaching history. I think history is one of the most undervalued subjects, and in my view its a real shame. But How to Learn does an excellent job of demonstrating the difference teaching methods can make in bringing a subject to life and engaging interest. In terms of math, I had a roommate who taught third grade math, and she was actually using these concepts. Its very different from the way I learned math. Students not only learn how to do the problem, they learn to identify the why. In my day, you learned the formula and applied it, with the exception of an excellent calculus teacher. (Have I told this story before? Skip to the next paragraph if I have). We had all heard of the dreaded derivative and knew that someday we would be forced to do battle with it. One day in class, our teacher started out with a typical graph. Then he asked another question we knew the answer to, and continued to build on each step. Then, he announced, "That is a derivative." And I thought, "That's it? But that's easy!" That is the closest my math education ever came to the approach from chapter 7, but I have never forgotten that experience.
Chapter 7 does omit one particular benefit of its recommended approach. Back to my derivative example: because we were engaged in the learning process and it built on knowledge we already had, it stuck better. I feel that I needed less practice and reteaching because of that. We were also confident in our ability to explain it to other people, and when you can teach something, it helps you understand it better. I think this is another advantage of these strategies. By involving the students in learning, they have a chance to participate in the teaching, which means they are improving their learning.
I do wonder how these teachers have time to teach like this. It's amazing, and wonderful, and I have nothing but respect, but I still wonder how they do it.
And, webinars. I really did participate in a webinar this week. It wasn't one on the list, and I want to watch one of them too. But I had a webinar for training on a program we are using in another class. It was helpful. Overall it was really helpful. One thing I really liked was they had a demonstration where they showed what they talked about. Also, they paused frequently for questions. It was also nice because I was able to apply it directly to my project while the webinar was going on.
I'm really interested for class, to see how all the readings come together and connect to webinars. I'll see you there!
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Let's Eat: A meal approach to workshops
I really liked the way Kristin presented putting together a workshop. Looking at it as courses to a meal is a really helpful strategy. There were a lot of things I had never considered. I tend to focus on the content of a presentation, rather than the basics that other people will be worrying about. When I am in the audience, I think about a lot of other things besides the content, so it makes sense to consider that as the presenter. And in terms of content, I usually tend to think about the new ideas I want to present, rather than considering what they already know and how I can build on that, how I can connect to the audience. I haven't ever done anything quite on the scale of a workshop, but I think these same principles could apply in other situations.
It was also interesting to participate in the discussion with Bobbi Newman. First, I just have to say, as wonderful as chat is, it has its limits. Every now and then, my siblings (I have 7) and I end up in a big chat, and it really is like everyone in the room talking at once to everyone. I'd almost rather have the conversation in a room, because then at least I don't have to read everything to follow the mini-conversation I'm part of! (And, then I'd be hanging out with my siblings, which is a definite bonus!)
But I really did get more out of the discussion than "large chats can be chaotic". First off, I really appreciated that Bobbi was able to step back from the emotions of the HarperCollins situation. I think that our first reaction can cloud our thinking and keep us from finding out all of the facts. Also, from just reading on the web, you get the feeling that everyone in libraries is irate about this, but Monday's discussion gave a different perspective. Once you know that there are publisher's that don't distribute e-books to libraries, all of a sudden the whole situation seems less dramatic. That's not to say that the HarperCollins debate is a non-issue. Obviously there are concerns, and decisions that need to be made. But having broader background knowledge, for me at least, changed how I understand the situation and the problem. It also made the response by ALA and OverDrive more appropriate.
The discussion my cohorts and I had before we had the discussion with Bobbi Newman was also enlightening. The issue certainly didn't arouse passions - it concerned us, and got us thinking, but I don't think any of us felt passionate enough to boycott or write letters to our congressmen. The discussion we had generated some interesting thoughts. One thing we discussed was how people are becoming like libraries. People felt like the HarperCollins policy was differentiating libraries from regular customers, which, they are in a way. I buy a book, and I can loan it to people, but that's not why I buy the book. A library buys a book to loan to people. But what is interesting is how people are becoming more like libraries. I can buy music on itunes and play it on a certain number of computers, and then transfer it to other devices, as well. And, from what I understand, certain ebook vendors are doing the same type of thing. We didn't really have time to finish the discussion, and I'm not sure what the implications are or what I feel about it, but it is interesting to consider.
All in all, it was another great class with great discussion. Stay tuned - great same blogspot, great same amateur blogger - for the details of our workshop!
It was also interesting to participate in the discussion with Bobbi Newman. First, I just have to say, as wonderful as chat is, it has its limits. Every now and then, my siblings (I have 7) and I end up in a big chat, and it really is like everyone in the room talking at once to everyone. I'd almost rather have the conversation in a room, because then at least I don't have to read everything to follow the mini-conversation I'm part of! (And, then I'd be hanging out with my siblings, which is a definite bonus!)
But I really did get more out of the discussion than "large chats can be chaotic". First off, I really appreciated that Bobbi was able to step back from the emotions of the HarperCollins situation. I think that our first reaction can cloud our thinking and keep us from finding out all of the facts. Also, from just reading on the web, you get the feeling that everyone in libraries is irate about this, but Monday's discussion gave a different perspective. Once you know that there are publisher's that don't distribute e-books to libraries, all of a sudden the whole situation seems less dramatic. That's not to say that the HarperCollins debate is a non-issue. Obviously there are concerns, and decisions that need to be made. But having broader background knowledge, for me at least, changed how I understand the situation and the problem. It also made the response by ALA and OverDrive more appropriate.
The discussion my cohorts and I had before we had the discussion with Bobbi Newman was also enlightening. The issue certainly didn't arouse passions - it concerned us, and got us thinking, but I don't think any of us felt passionate enough to boycott or write letters to our congressmen. The discussion we had generated some interesting thoughts. One thing we discussed was how people are becoming like libraries. People felt like the HarperCollins policy was differentiating libraries from regular customers, which, they are in a way. I buy a book, and I can loan it to people, but that's not why I buy the book. A library buys a book to loan to people. But what is interesting is how people are becoming more like libraries. I can buy music on itunes and play it on a certain number of computers, and then transfer it to other devices, as well. And, from what I understand, certain ebook vendors are doing the same type of thing. We didn't really have time to finish the discussion, and I'm not sure what the implications are or what I feel about it, but it is interesting to consider.
All in all, it was another great class with great discussion. Stay tuned - great same blogspot, great same amateur blogger - for the details of our workshop!
Saturday, March 12, 2011
And the results are in...
First item of business: Book Clubs. How did yours go? The book clubs I participated in were interesting. We had great chats about death. Really, it was a fun experience. My group went first, and so I think everyone was a little shy at first, and we were a little unsure of ourselves, but we got good feedback. It was interesting to watch the dynamics of each group. I have been part of a book club before, but I never gave the process a lot of thought before. I read the book and discussed it and that was that. So it was an interesting experience to approach it from a planner's perspective. I picked up on things I had never considered before. For example, the way you introduce characters into the discussion can limit how the discussion about them progresses. Pretty obvious, but not something you'd give a lot of conscious thought to unless you were in a situation where you had to--like this one. Also, (and I know this wasn't something that could be helped in our situation), the seating arrangement is pretty important. I have a new appreciation for sitting in a circle to discuss a book.
On to this weeks readings. Just to recap (yes, I reviewed the guidelines, and remembered why I was reviewing the readings. I have seen the error of my ways and am getting back on track), here's this weeks readings:
First, the ALA Code of Ethics. This document contains the guidelines for library professionals. They give a very useful definition of an ethical dilemma as a conflict of values. One of the points that stood out to me was that this is a framework that professionals can use to guide their behavior and make it ethical. I thought it worth noting that personal beliefs should remain separate from professional responsibilities. It is definitely something that every professional or future professional needs to contemplate and prepare for. I found the emphasis on continuing education exciting and encouraging.
The next article, by Mosley, was about the workshops for faculty. This was a really cool article. First, I think it was great that they included the role plays and materials. I think their approach to conducting these workshops was so logical, and I appreciate logic and common sense. The assignments were really practical. I actually wouldn't mind going to this workshop. In relation to the Code of Ethics, I noticed that throughout the workshop, they emphasized the importance of being respectful of faculty and not trying to demean them. I think it also demonstrates the mission of the profession and their guideline to be organized, make information accessible, and so on (Guideline I).
On to the hot topic: HarperCollins and their decision to limit use of e-books. I decided to read the HarperCollins letter, the statement released by OverDrive, the response by the ALA, and the article from CBC (Canadian news). I think the general response to HarperCollins' decision has been pretty negative, and I found their statement vague. If you knew absolutely nothing about the subject, you'd think they were trying to do the best thing for everyone, and maybe they really perceive themselves in that light. But they don't really say anything--it is very political, in the sense that they say something without saying anything. OverDrive seemed to be more to the point. I noticed they were still very diplomatic, but they seemed to explain their position a little better. I also note that their response was fairly level-headed. They expressed their concern, and their solution, but their response wasn't rash. The ALA was somewhat indefinite as well. Their overall response seemed to be, "We're looking into it." I don't think that's a bad thing, necessarily. While it would be nice to get a firm stance, I appreciate that this is unprecedented and it does require thoughtful study. The trick is to study it within a reasonable amount of time. Last of all was the CBC article. It was interesting to me that they didn't necessarily disagree with HarperCollins theory, but they did feel that the implementation was inappropriate. They were able to acknowledge HarperCollins perspective, but they make a very valid argument about the 26 uses idea.
It was interesting to read these perspectives on the issue and to read it in terms of ethics. I can understand HarperCollins reasoning--they are a business and they are concerned with the bottom line. Particularly if digital books do take over, then the effect on publishers has to be considered. However, I don't think HarperCollins has chosen the best option. I tend to think they chose the option that they liked best and that liked their bank accounts best, and then tried to present it as rational. I sympathize more with libraries and honest patrons. This is definitely an issue, and I think it's great that the discussion is taking place. I'm not sure what the best solution is, but I am sure this isn't it. What are your thoughts? Any solutions?
On to this weeks readings. Just to recap (yes, I reviewed the guidelines, and remembered why I was reviewing the readings. I have seen the error of my ways and am getting back on track), here's this weeks readings:
First, the ALA Code of Ethics. This document contains the guidelines for library professionals. They give a very useful definition of an ethical dilemma as a conflict of values. One of the points that stood out to me was that this is a framework that professionals can use to guide their behavior and make it ethical. I thought it worth noting that personal beliefs should remain separate from professional responsibilities. It is definitely something that every professional or future professional needs to contemplate and prepare for. I found the emphasis on continuing education exciting and encouraging.
The next article, by Mosley, was about the workshops for faculty. This was a really cool article. First, I think it was great that they included the role plays and materials. I think their approach to conducting these workshops was so logical, and I appreciate logic and common sense. The assignments were really practical. I actually wouldn't mind going to this workshop. In relation to the Code of Ethics, I noticed that throughout the workshop, they emphasized the importance of being respectful of faculty and not trying to demean them. I think it also demonstrates the mission of the profession and their guideline to be organized, make information accessible, and so on (Guideline I).
On to the hot topic: HarperCollins and their decision to limit use of e-books. I decided to read the HarperCollins letter, the statement released by OverDrive, the response by the ALA, and the article from CBC (Canadian news). I think the general response to HarperCollins' decision has been pretty negative, and I found their statement vague. If you knew absolutely nothing about the subject, you'd think they were trying to do the best thing for everyone, and maybe they really perceive themselves in that light. But they don't really say anything--it is very political, in the sense that they say something without saying anything. OverDrive seemed to be more to the point. I noticed they were still very diplomatic, but they seemed to explain their position a little better. I also note that their response was fairly level-headed. They expressed their concern, and their solution, but their response wasn't rash. The ALA was somewhat indefinite as well. Their overall response seemed to be, "We're looking into it." I don't think that's a bad thing, necessarily. While it would be nice to get a firm stance, I appreciate that this is unprecedented and it does require thoughtful study. The trick is to study it within a reasonable amount of time. Last of all was the CBC article. It was interesting to me that they didn't necessarily disagree with HarperCollins theory, but they did feel that the implementation was inappropriate. They were able to acknowledge HarperCollins perspective, but they make a very valid argument about the 26 uses idea.
It was interesting to read these perspectives on the issue and to read it in terms of ethics. I can understand HarperCollins reasoning--they are a business and they are concerned with the bottom line. Particularly if digital books do take over, then the effect on publishers has to be considered. However, I don't think HarperCollins has chosen the best option. I tend to think they chose the option that they liked best and that liked their bank accounts best, and then tried to present it as rational. I sympathize more with libraries and honest patrons. This is definitely an issue, and I think it's great that the discussion is taking place. I'm not sure what the best solution is, but I am sure this isn't it. What are your thoughts? Any solutions?
Friday, March 4, 2011
Storytime
My readings for this week were "The Imp of the Perverse", by Edgar Allen Poe; "A Good Man is Hard to Find", by Flannery O'Connor; and "Roosts" by Zack Brockhouse. I am not sure why, but we all chose rather unhappy stories. ("Roosts" maybe isn't unhappy, but it's certainly not bright and cheery). I think that is interesting. Maybe it is kind of like the stories we tell about our own life--we never tell about how great things are, we tell about all the mishaps of life. I imagine there would be very little to say about a story where everything was happy. What were your stories like? Any happy endings?
I did notice that one of the suggestions on Vicki's handout mentioned choosing books with unclear endings, and while the endings were pretty clear, all of these stories did have some aspect that was unclear, and it will be interesting to see how the discussions go on Monday.
In other news, I have been helping out at a branch of the Detroit Public Library this week, and it has been an interesting experience. First, it has been interesting to see the difference between their library system and the Ann Arbor system, as well as to compare it to the libraries I was familiar with in Idaho and Utah. Second, it was interesting because Detroit is cutting library staff by twenty percent, and the layoffs began this week, so I received a front row seat to the cold, hard reality of the impact of the economic crisis on librarianship (although there were rumors that this wasn't the result of just the economy). So that was fun.
Really though, it was a good experience, and even though there was the sadness of layoffs, the work was interesting and I enjoyed it, and the librarians I worked with really did fit the mold Kristin has talked about. They knew the regulars, and tried to cut people a break whenever they could. It reminded me that librarians really have to know how to give good customer service, which while one of the biggest challenges, is also one of the most rewarding things in any job. Not a bad spring break at all!
I did notice that one of the suggestions on Vicki's handout mentioned choosing books with unclear endings, and while the endings were pretty clear, all of these stories did have some aspect that was unclear, and it will be interesting to see how the discussions go on Monday.
In other news, I have been helping out at a branch of the Detroit Public Library this week, and it has been an interesting experience. First, it has been interesting to see the difference between their library system and the Ann Arbor system, as well as to compare it to the libraries I was familiar with in Idaho and Utah. Second, it was interesting because Detroit is cutting library staff by twenty percent, and the layoffs began this week, so I received a front row seat to the cold, hard reality of the impact of the economic crisis on librarianship (although there were rumors that this wasn't the result of just the economy). So that was fun.
Really though, it was a good experience, and even though there was the sadness of layoffs, the work was interesting and I enjoyed it, and the librarians I worked with really did fit the mold Kristin has talked about. They knew the regulars, and tried to cut people a break whenever they could. It reminded me that librarians really have to know how to give good customer service, which while one of the biggest challenges, is also one of the most rewarding things in any job. Not a bad spring break at all!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)