Blog

AMICAL conferences are always a great opportunity to learn new things, connect with old colleagues and meet new ones. And they are always fun! This year we managed to share more of that special AMICAL juice and spill it all over social media! Here’s a collection of attendees’ posts during AMICAL 2015. Thank you for sharing!

I am back in Oregon now and my email inbox is under control after a week in Bulgaria at the AMICAL conference. When Dimitris asked if I would write a little piece for this blog about the experience I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to say thank you to AMICAL, its members and the conference organizers for the invitation and especially to our hosts at AUBG for the wonderful, wonderful hospitality. I don’t think I have ever been so well taken care of at a conference! I taught a pre-conference workshop called It takes a campus: Creating research assignments that spark curiosity and collaboration. This is one of my favorite topics and I spend a lot of time talking about assignment design with librarians and faculty. This workshop had a dual purpose. We talked about the needs and challenges students face, which helps us help them. And we also talked about how we can advocate for our students’ needs on campus. All of the activities we did work equally well with students and in faculty/staff/librarian workshops. Here are the slides and handout. The workshop was broken into two parts. In the first half we thought about four factors that significant affect the success of research assignments, particularly with undergraduate students. I argued that good research assignments: ask students to work on real-world tasksintroduce students to academic cultureprovide support when they push students out of their comfort zonesbuild in plenty of opportunities for meaningful feedback Then I asked participants to jump in and think about all four of these factors as they applied to their own teaching goals. Even though this meant trying to do several weeks’ worth of work in a few hours - they did amazing work! You can see the results here. (Apologies for my terrible photography) In the second half of the workshop we played with the concepts of curiosity and collaboration. We examined a bunch of random objects and reflected on how curiosity is sparked by many things. We took a variety of research topics and tried to find practical and conceptual connections between them. All of these exercises are designed to help us help students ask better and deeper questions — a skill that is at the core of the academic research process. Whenever I teach a workshop I learn more from everyone else than they learn from me, and I don’t think this was any exception. I got so many new ideas about how these concepts can be used in teaching from the participants in Bulgaria. I arrived home late Monday night and Tuesday afternoon went into my library to teach a workshop for our First-Year Experience faculty, where we did some of the same work. It was wonderful to share what I learned together with the AMICAL attendees with this new group. I couldn’t be more grateful that I got the opportunity to attend this conference with this wonderful group of people. Hopefully, I’ll have the chance to continue working with this great community in the future. Image credit: Dimana Doneva / See more

This session comprised of three presentations on learning models of information literacy and instructional technology. The session included three presentations: Cognitive apprenticeship: a model for information literacy instruction in a virtual reference environment, by Mary Kickham-Samy Information literacy as complex learning, by Anguelina Popova On the threshold of a new era: information literacy and Generation Z, by Dannie Chalk & Krasimir Spasov In the first presentation, Mary Kickham-Samy highlighted the importance of identifying learning opportunities via virtual reference. She also suggested a cognitive apprenticeship model comprised of six points including modeling, scaffolding, fading, coaching, visibility and meta-cognitive activities. She also suggested some recommendations to make the goals and strategies of information literacy more visible to the students. In the second presentation Anguelina Popova discussed critical thinking exercises and information literacy as complex learning. She discussed the importance of complex learning because it create knowledge, skills and attitudes. She also discussed the four components of information literacy as complex learning including learning tasks, supportive information, procedural information and part task practice. In the last she also mentioned three holistic scenarios of complex learning. The third presentation was a team presentation by Karismir Spasov and Dannie Chalk. The speakers discussed information literacy requirements by generation Z. The speaker discussed presented the background of how the world has changed with the inventions such as the Internet, Google, the iPhone, WiFi and how they affected people’s lives. They also discussed that new generation of students dislike traditional lecture method and they see graphics as a quick way to understand. They also presented their experience and research on a cloud-based instructional platform. Image credit: Dimana Doneva / See more

Nancy Fried Foster spoke of her research of the practices of people who do research, in a university environment. Her research is within the overall scope of helping students become Information Literate (IL). (She stated that due to the newness of the research results, some information shown to the AMICAL audience should not be digitized yet.) She places this research within the IL Threshold Concepts model. She described how she wanted to start from the premise—that IL should be defined by the actual practices of productive and excellent researchers. The actual practices of these excellent researchers are not just confined to the office/library environment. The 24 hour movements, activities, and places of such researchers—analyzed within an ethnographic model, could reveal and become the definition of IL. Foster than described several ethnographic study methods, being applied to excellent researchers. The studies are in-progress. The study methods include: Observation; Photo Elicitation Interviews (ref. Douglas Harper method); Map Diaries (ref. Michael Moffitt); Retrospective Interviews (conducted by Merrilee Proffitt at OCLC Research), and the “Day in the Life” approach (referring to a current project by Kornelia Tancheva at Cornell U.). The initial results were shown from these, and other, studies. Overall, the study (singly or combined) results show the relative importance to excellent researchers of: databases, literature searches, known knowledge, footnotes, personal networks, and search engines. The results also indicate how researchers will spend time, in a variety of activities—such as note taking, manuscript preparation, managing documents, interacting with others directly or remotely—which are also important with respect to understanding his/her IL level. She noted the status of the researchers involved as subjects in the studies: mostly upper-level graduate students or junior faculty (Cornell U. study); non-tenure stream faculty (U. of Pittsburg study). Often, the research/IL was taught as part of an English composition course. The heavy usage of junior faculty to teach IL skills and concepts to undergraduates implies that such faculty should be a part of the university’s research community. She concluded by emphasizing that she believes the studies show that excellent IL can be described by activity and thought; IL does not remain an abstract concept. The results show the importance of connecting students to researchers (with work and life activity patterns); IL is not a product, it is instead a process.

Anchalee Panigabutra-Roberts (Joy) from the American University in Cairo described preparation for the post-MARC world. She mentioned the relevance of the idea of the Semantic Web, and its description in the 2001 Scientific American article by Berners-Lee, Hendler, and Lassila. The goal, for libraries (libraries being one part of community of all digitized information, or all metadata) continues to be to move information on the web into web/machine readable data. For libraries, this goal then implies that data elements must be conceptually described in formats focusing on RDF Schema (Resource Description Framework Schema), often abbreviated as RDFS/RDFa. The basic concept of the Semantic Web is that RDFS will allow search results based on links between elements, rather than just frequency of usage of key word(s). Joy then described how the US Library of Congress is initiating a large project, or model, called BIBFRAME which will eventually replace the MARC standards for bibliographic data. The full characteristics of the BIBFRAME model are a work-in-progress, however at its base will be the categories of: Works, Instances, Authorities, and Annotations. BIBFRAME will be applied to serials, and also resources found on the web such as audio and video. Related links: Semantic Web basics Linking Open Data Cloud BIBFRAME initiative

This session included three speakers presenting their studies on library services, resource and information literacy. This session was attended by around 60 participants. The session started with the presentation on using assessment to improve library services by Daphne Flangan followed by Gohar Stepanyan’s presentation on use of library resources for research assignments by MBA students and in last speaker was Meggan whose presentation was on the snapshot of information literacy programs at AMICAL Institutions. Using assessment to improve library services: the American University of Sharjah library experience by Daphne Flangan Daphne started her presentation introducing American University of Sharjah and highlighting the importance of assessing library services. American University of Sharjah took four initiatives to assess library services which included placing a board for comments, compliments and complaints to receive feedback from the users about library. The second initiative was LibQual survey to measure library services. Third initiative was studying students: an ethnographic study which was based on the study of University of Rochester. The fourth initiative was to assess the services of Research Help Desk. These results found that students need many different types of learning spaces in library. Faculty wants access to more resources. Students prefer to communicate with librarian in person. The study also found higher satisfaction rate with Research Help Desk at American University of Sharjah. Few new services were started keeping in view the results of the study it included “weekend ask a librarian service”. The use of library resources for research assignments in MBA programs: a case study by Gohar Stepanyan Gohar Stepanyan began her presentation by highlighting the importance of quality of information resources and their expensiveness. She also highlighted the importance of information literacy in the 21st century for students. Focus of her study was to assess the use of library resources by the MBA students of the American University of Armenia and the method she used was a survey questionnaire. The Sample size of the study included 105 MBA students at American University of Armenia. She presented the results of the study in figures and tables to show the satisfaction and usage of library services and resources by MBA students at American University of Armenia. The results of the study showed that the MBA students are least likely to contact librarians for seeking help on finding information. She highlighted that the students favor the internet over the library for initial search for information and the use library for only reading and study space. She suggested introducing compulsory library instructions for the students or integrating information literacy into the curriculum. On the threshold of a new era: a snapshot of information literacy at AMICAL institutional by Meggan Houlihan Meggan Houlihan’s presentation was based on a survey done on AMICAL institutions to assess their information literacy programs. Her study highlighted that how many AMICAL institutions have Subject Librarians, Librarians having faculty status and instruction librarian in the job title of the librarians. Her study showed that different terms are being used for information literacy such as Library safari, Library Training Workshops, Training Sessions, Research Education and Digital Literacy etc. Library patrons and partners expect the support in form of instruction session, research support and resources from librarians. She highlighted that the skills and resources taught in instruction session by AMICAL institutions include citation management tools, academic integrity, Google scholar, subject specific search engines etc. Only half of the AMICAL institutions have separate instruction spaces in their libraries with facilities like whiteboards, clickers, AB tutor, blackboard, multimedia equipment and LCD screen.

Professor Spirovska posed the following questions: Have Liberal Arts institutions stepped up to deliver a values-based education relevant for the 21st century? Are educators prepared to deliver integrated, multi-disciplinary experiences that promote long-term sustainability across societies, organizations and the environment? As the Chair of a new Innovation Team, convened by her Dean, our speaker was charged with helping her institution move towards a common 1st year student experience focused on sustainability, and with identifying a relevant curriculum. She distributed green index cards and asked attendees to write down what came to mind when they heard the word “sustainability.” Some of the responses were durability, long-term planning, gaining traction, surviving and thriving, ethical responses and global development. Professor Spirovska then shared part of the U.N.’s 1987 definition (from the report of the Brundtland Commission): “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This led to her discussing the questions “who defines the needs?” and “how can we know what will constitute the needs of future generations?” “What are real needs vs. perceived needs?” “How can we face the challenges and choices of reinventing education or taking it back to its roots…and what could constitute a “holistic education?” She urged the audience to consider our vision(s) of the 21st century student, and what we want for them. For example, it is not enough to teach students how to make money without teaching them how to spend it, making students aware that their spending choices are equivalent to their votes for sustainable systems. She then divided the audience into two groups to discuss and share what we do at our home institutions to promote and sustain the liberal arts & sciences, as well as environmental sustainability — and also what we feel are the main challenges to our succeeding. Professor Spirovska also gave us several examples of her First-Year-Experience project for sustainability in a Liberal Arts curriculum, including an anecdote about using “A Fertile Crescent” as a teaching tool. She employs four modules in order to help students develop an expanded world view encompassing sustainability and enabling them to find their place in society as global citizens. Her four themes are: Self and meaningCulture and society 21st c. challenges, innovations, professionsFuture forecasting and leadership in environmental initiatives She concluded by emphasizing that we need to support students as they find their own purpose, passions, values… and to help them move beyond being consumers, or merely expecting to be “entertained.” Professor Spirovska shared an important resource with the audience: http://www.aashe.org/ (Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education). It was an inspiring and provocative session.

Workshop facilitated by Anne-Marie DeiteringOregon State University Libraries and Press Anne-Marie led the participants through the process of rethinking the way assignments are designed and delivered. The key point is to note that we are asking students to keep an open mind and sometimes to change and challenge their set of beliefs and opinions. The interaction couldn’t have been more authentic as groups discussed internally examples of bad assignments and what are the underlying reasons that made them as such. Some examples given were asking students to check resources that are not available through the Library, or students finding irrelevant sources through the libraries. This shows that a Library is not a source sandbox. Anne-Marie stressed that such assignments are not better than nothing, they can be harmful. And this is something critical since it impacts the role of the Library by not being able to serve the students properly. To address this issue, there is a need to firmly articulate the learning goals, and to understand the students’ needs. These needs will be used to achieve the defined goal. For example, students need to practice by doing real life tasks. Students need to know about how people use the data/sources that we are asking them to check, because the students’ behavior should reflect how people act in a specific discipline. So needless to say, assignment instructions should be based on real life behaviors. In addition, while teaching and guiding students we need to start by something that they already know and then guide them beyond their comfort zone. Anne-Maries did a fantastic job facilitating this workshop and it was a learning lesson on workshop management :) (Segment by Hossein Hamam) In this part of the invited workshop, Anne Marie Dietering gave us ideas and inspiration for assisting students with creative topic generations. A key issue in research is understanding where questions come from, and how to encourage students to approach research from a perspective of genuine curiosity and creativity, not requirement. She pointed out that students usually choose a topic they are already familiar with, because they perceive it as too risky to choose an unknown topic, thereby missing the point that research is based on curiosity and risk. We began the session in small groups, discussing a random object that had been placed on each table. We were asked to come up with questions about the object. Then, she walked us through a three-item scale to help us identify our own curiosity sources. Epistemic curiosity is stimulated by ideas and components, such as puzzles and how things work. Perceptual curiosity is stimulated by the senses, such as touch, sound and smell. Interpersonal curiosity is stimulated by other people, such as wondering how they behave and what they feel or think. More information and an online test is available here. After examining our sources of curiosity, we revisited the random object and discussed our process of coming up with questions about it - how did our inherent style of curiosity affect our questions? Key takeaways from this exercise are that when stakes are low, curiosity can be higher; and, working in groups can give confidence to brainstorm other questions. We then discussed topic selection in research, and how library instruction tends to come in after the topic has been selected, when it should be considered as well. Choosing a topic requires openness, awareness and confidence. Students must understand that research both answers and generates questions. “Field research” in the sense of going out and talking or observing people can be used to generate research topic ideas. Another exercise to develop research topics is to take two topics and find connections. This interdisciplinary approach can result in new and interesting ideas. (Segment by Rebecca Miller) Photo credit: Dimana Doneva More photos available here.

Our speaker Mr. Simon Day has started his workshop by introducing, presenting, and defining WorldCat discovery interface. He has given a demonstration by highlighting the changes from 2008 to 2015: The transition from Cataloging to WorldShare Record Manger, and WorldShare Collection Manger; the transition from Resource Sharing to WorldShare Interlibrary loan; the transition of Collection Analysis to WorldShare Collection Evaluation; the transition of First Search WorldCat to WorldCat Discovery Services. By demonstrating the options; content; features of WorldCat: such as direct link to the local OPAC, MARC RECORD, CONTENTdm, quick start to build digital collections, etc. as a primary resource solution with real-time availability and item location, group views, course reserves, remote database searching. Further concluding his workshop by exploring some configuration options such as adding branding and databases.

This session included presentations from three vendors: DeGruyter, EBSCO, and EuroMonitor (Oxford University Press was not present). Anne O’Riordan presented an overview of DeGruyter and new activities. DeGruyter is a well known German publisher in social sciences, humanities, and sciences, and has been in business for 260 years. It has over 60,000 books in its catalog, and is adding roughly 1,800 titles every year. It offers 750 journals, most in English, of which nearly 400 are available openly and 375 are subscription. There are also 48 online databases available. DeGruyter offers electronic formats as well as print, with the benefits of pricing parity between formats and no ongoing platform fees. Textbooks are priced at a multiple of the print cost, but includes perpetual site licensing. Partner publishers include Harvard, University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, Princeton, and many more. Dragan Nikolic presented an overview of the EBSCO Discovery Service, to give people a taste of the session later in the day. EDS is the most popular discovery service as measured by ALA, with 5,612 subscribers in 2014, compared to 1,717 for OCLC WorldCat Local, 1,407 for ExLibris, and approximately 600 for Summon. EDS provides a robust relevance ranking algorithm, and makes metadata available to any discovery service. EDS integrates with link resolvers, ILS partners, and though an API with many other ILS. There are 100+ apps and plugins available for detailed customization. New to 2015 is the addition of over 340,000 videos from the Associated Press archives. Ranwah Abdulrazzaq and Andrea Fogliati from EuroMonitor presented Passport, a database offering detailed statistics and reports for business and socioeconomic indicators, across 27 industry clusters. Two case studies demonstrated how Passport can be used to answer market analysis and consumer analysis problems. The visual tool “Dashboard” displays data on a country level. Industry overview summaries and company summaries provide deeper analysis of the data. AMICAL has entered into an agreement with EuroMonitor to provide access to Passport at reduced rates; see the email announcement for more details. Photos by: Dimana Doneva