UoL Library Blog

Develop, debate, innovate.

Archive for the ‘Projects’ Category

Lecture capture

Posted by Andrew Dunn on 24 April, 2012

Tony Churchill gave a presentation at DL Forum on Tuesday 24/4/12 on lecture capture.  He talked about a project funded by Echo 360 – a supplier of lecture capture software.  The project looked at uses of lecture capture software beyond simply recording and posting lectures for students to revisit.

The project looked at taking recorded lectures and cutting them up into 15 minute snapshots which can then be used a subsequent year to support students’ learning.  The snapshots could be posted in VLEs before face-to-face lectures to provide students with background knowledge and free up time in lectures for more interaction and discussion.  Recordings of face-to-face lectures can be used to support DLs.
Short snapshots of lectures can be made publicly available and used as effective recruitment tools.

Denise Sweeny reported on a lecture capture project going on at the University of Leicester at the moment.  Using Adobe Connect and/or open source software OpenEyA (see for more information) lecturers from Media and Communication and from Chemistry have captured 5 hours of UG lectures and 12 hours of PGT lectures and have posted them in Bb with no guidance or instructions on how students should use them.  This term they will measure use of the captured lectures using Bb Analytics, focus groups, an online questionnaire and extended interviews.  They want to measure how often the lectures are accessed and how students use them.  They will also gather data on student demographics and their preferred modes of study.

If you want help and advise on capturing your own teaching sessions contact Simon Kear in BDRA.

Posted in Projects, Research Support, Service Delivery, Subject Support, Technology & Devices, Training, Web 2.0 & Emerging Technologies, Wider profession | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Copyright Masterclass

Posted by taniarowlett on 6 March, 2012

Aslib’s first ‘Copyright Masterclass’  took place last week with Naomi Korn at the helm.  We started with a brain storm on what we actually knew about IPR (which was a bit mean at 10.15 in the morning and considering we pretty much only knew about copyright).  Anyway, the general consensus was that it  covered a broad range of areas and could be extremely complex, with some parts of the ‘family’ needing to be registered (e.g.patents, trademarks), others not (e.g.copyright), and still others could be registered or unregistered.

Highlights of the day included Naomi:

  • Using a great analogy for IPR – you can essentially do the same things with them as you can with a property: buy, sell, rent (licence) and bequeath.  I shall be incorporating that into my next training session.
  • Introducing me to the term bona vacantia.  This where you have no idea who owns the rights to a work or item (e.g. if someone died intestate or with no known next of kin, or the item is an asset of a dissolved company).  The Treasury Solicitor handles the administration for such things, and will try to trace any living blood relatives of the deceased or handle the sale of a company’s assets.
  • Explaining that none of us present (a mix of people from museums, HE institutions and private firms) are either purely commercial or non-commercial, we are mostly going to be a mixture of both (ie. Commercial firms will run internal or free of charge training sessions, non-commercial activities such as teaching could be deemed commercial if students pay fees).
  • Providing an overview of the Hargreaves recommendations and the progress and timelines of the IPO consultation.  Potentially we could have draft legislation by Autumn 2012.
  • Giving an update on the DEA and how it could potentially affect Universities if we are classed as service providers, although responses to OFCOMs consultation have called for them to provide a category for ‘Non-qualifying ISPs’ under which Universities could fall. 

One other particular area of interest to me, due to my work on the Manufacturing Pasts project, was that of orphan works.  Apparently such works are estimated to constitute 50% items held in archives, and over 50 million of them exist in the UKs Public Sector alone.  I recently carried out my own analysis of the the Special Collections works we wish to digitize in our project, and estimated that approximately 60% of them are orphan works.

We also talked about the benefits and detrimental effects of contract overriding copyright law in the UK and how we handled the multitude of differences between each contract, along with recent cases (NLA v Meltwater and the Red Bus (not its real name but this seems to be what everyone knows it as)) and an overview of Creative Commons and its licenses.

 I should at this point finish by a. saying if you get the chance, go on this course, it is extremely interesting and helpful, and b. giving a plug both to JISCs IPR toolkit, which for anyone starting out in copyright will be of huge benefit as it includes model permissions templates and contract/license clauses, along with JISCs new OER IPR short video: Turning a Resource into an Open Educational Resource , which is exactly what it says on the tin.

Just one more thing, ASLIB currently run four communities of practice (COP): Business Information; Engineering and Technology; Education; and Translation and Technology, which they are keen for people to engage with.  So go on, have a look and see if you can get involved.

Posted in Copyright & Course Packs, Projects, Training, Web 2.0 & Emerging Technologies | Leave a Comment »

DREaMing of a Library and Information Science research network

Posted by katiefraser on 1 November, 2011

Last week I attended the first workshop of the AHRC-funded DREaM project. DREaM stands for ‘Developing Research Excellence and Methods’ and the project aims to create a network of Library and Information Science researchers across the UK. As an academic librarian with a research background I’m very enthusiastic about the potential for research to improve our practice, and I was delighted to be given a new professional’s travel bursary by the DREaM project, and to have my attendance supported by the Library. In return for my support from Leicester, I’ve been asked to think about how the methods discussed in each workshop might contribute to better understanding the community our academic library serves, and improving our services.

The DREaM workshops are being very thoroughly documented by the team running them: both slides and videos of the presentations are available at the Workshop 1 webpage. I’ll link to, rather than replicate, that content, and focus on my personal thoughts about each method from my own practitioner-researcher perspective.

Introduction to ethnography – Dr Paul Lynch
Ethnography is an approach used to understand culture, usually through immersion within that culture. Better understanding the culture of academic library users, students and staff, is clearly key to improving our service. My MA Librarianship dissertation used ethnographic interviews to look at how students viewed and understood library space, and I think there’s a lot more to be done on understanding how students use and want to use libraries.

In the workshop, Paul Lynch discussed the dual role of the ethnographer – as insider (participant in a culture) and outsider (observer of a culture). I suspect my ability to produce an ethnography of library users is limited by my increased distance from both student and academic roles, so this method may be out for me.

Introduction to social network analysis – Dr Louise Cooke
Social network analysis looks at the networks which exist within groups, and patterns in links between individuals, by asking members of a group to report on their own relationships. During the workshop I could immediately see the relevance of this method to my own work: a major part of my role is acting as liaison between the Library and academic departments, and recording the existence and nature of links between librarians and academic staff would be absolutely fascinating.

I could never use this method with my own departmental contacts: asking individuals to report on their relationships with yourself would be ethically unsound (and probably produce inaccurate results!) However, there is clearly potential to apply this technique elsewhere within the university: perhaps looking at networks between librarians, other academic support staff, and lecturer / researchers within one of the Colleges I don’t directly support.

Introduction to discourse analysis – Professor Andy McKinlay
Discourse analysis is a technique for analysing gathered data, rather than a method for gathering data itself. It involves analysis of what people say (or write) through understanding of the context in which it is said: the social norms embedded in that context, and how language is used to construct a way of seeing the world.

There’s clearly expectations, norms and values implicit in how users talk about the Library. One of the most common comments at from students walking into the David Wilson for the first time is ‘Where are all the books?’ I think that one sentence (and all its implicit assumptions about libraries) could keep a discourse analyst going for days! I could see focus groups, or even analysis of how students describe the Library to each other, on- and off-line, as a really useful way to surface these concepts, and work with, or think about changing them.

Unconference and ethics discussion
The workshop also included bonus research-related sections. In the middle of the day, an unconference session encouraged us to discuss what we wished: I outed myself as a methodological pluralist (i.e. one who believes there is no one best method for studying the world, and has dabbled in several!) and learned about the research interests and priorities of others in our emerging network. At the end of the day, Professor Charles Oppenheim led a section in which we debated ethics in a number of research-related scenarios.

Both these additional sessions really got me thinking about my role as a practitioner-researcher. There are a limited number of participants with dual roles in the DREaM network, but plenty of participants who have been on both sides of the divide at different times in their careers. I think there are lots of interesting discussions to be had about how practitioners use and carry out research, and I look forward to these workshops starting a few. Perhaps we can even kick off here: I’d be pleased to get feedback on some of my suggestions so far…

Posted in Projects, Wider profession | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Evidence-Based Library and Information Practice

Posted by katiefraser on 13 July, 2011

Earlier this month I attended the 6th annual Evidence-Based Library and Information Practice (EBLIP) Conference. In return for my kindly sponsored place, the Library and Information Science Research Coalition asked me to blog a day of the conference. I won’t repeat the same material here: my post covers day one, and my fellow sponsored attendees covered a pre-conference workshop, day two and day three.

Overall, it was a great conference, and a really useful opportunity for me to consider how to use evidence in my own work. The main messages I took away were:

  1. think small and manageable when gathering evidence in your own everyday work
  2. nothing is too small to share, there’s an appropriate place to publish any study
  3. library and information practice isn’t the same as medicine (where EBLIP emerged), librarians need to think about the kind of evidence which is appropriate to use in our own work.

Next up? Thinking about how to gather evidence for the new (and repeat!) sessions I’m running this coming academic year.

Posted in Meetings, Projects, Service Delivery | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

New strategies for Digital Content: 18 March 2011

Posted by benwynne2 on 23 March, 2011

I recently attended a one day conference organised by JISC on new strategies for creating digital content which was partly about presenting the outcomes of projects funded under JISC’s e-Content Programme (2009-2011).

How to ensure the sustainability and impact of digitisation initiatives were two major themes of the day.

Nancy Moran of Ithaka provided an update on their research into the sustainability of digitisation projects. This illustrated the continuing importance of the host organisation but also of developing different sources of income. One example she highlighted was the Encylopaedia of Philosophy at Stanford University which has been raising funds – largely from libraries – to build up an endowment to assure its long term future. In the meantime, Stanford has been filling the funding gap.

Alastair Dunning of JISC and David Hunter of the National Library of Scotland highlighted the importance of making your ‘content’ findable and visibile from as many different places as possible in order to increase its impact, with Flickr and the Internet Archive cited as examples. However, you do need to ensure that your institutional logo or other form of attribution is clearly visible.

‘Joining up content’ was also presented as a key aspect of increasing the visibility and impact of digital collections i.e. finding ways for related content to be found and brought together.

This brought us to a particularly interesting presentation by Andy McGregor of JISC. Andy has been closely involved with the ‘Resource Discovery Task Force’ (RDTF) over the last year and more – an intiative of JISC and RLUK which has been exploring what sort of resource discovery tools the UK libraries, musuems and archives sector needs for the future.

While the Task Force did not agree on what sort of resource discovery services would be needed for the future, there was clear agreement on the need to ‘aggregate’ metadata from different sources and to make it available in such a way that others could create services using it. This is seen as providing future benefits in terms of search, enriching metadata, collection management, mashups and visualisations and shared cataloguing to name a few.

JISC is funding exploratory work on use of open, reusable data as part of realising this vision and will also be making guidance available to metadata creators on how to make their data as reusable as possible (while recognising that it is not always appropriate to make all data open and reusable). One initiative which JISC is funding in this context is the use of data derived from COPAC to inform decision making on collection management (on de-duplication of monographs, for example) by the White Rose university Consortium of Leeds, Sheffield and York. The intention is also to make metadata aggregations available for Web developers to use. The use of ‘linked data’ is very much part of this intiative and thinking. One practical example of linked data in action which Andy cited is the BBC Wildlife Finder site which makes its data available in a number of different formats.

Further information is available on the Resource Discovery Task Force blog and an RDTF area on the MIMAS web site.

Against this background, my short presentation on future challenges for us at Leicester in sustaining our digitisation intiatives seemed at one level rather pedestrian but on another very much in line with the main themes of the day. The challenges were: strategy (being clear why we are doing it and for what benefit), money (how are we going to pay for it) and people (who is going to do it and how do we develop and sustain the necessary skills and expertise). Our JISC funded project to create the My Leicestershire History archive has given us a very good base from which to build (having previously not undertaken significant digitisation work for a number of years). The immediate response to these big challenges is short term and pragmatic – redeploying some existing staff time to this area of work and increasing the visibility of what we have done as much within our university as outside – in order to retain a capability from which we can build in the future.

The day concluded with some brief information about a likely forthcoming JISC Call (possibly in April) for a number of large digitisation projects – with key issues being embedding, partnerships and innovation. So, very much furthering some of the themes from the day …

Posted in Collection management, Projects | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

All about OTTERS – a day on open educational resources

Posted by gazjjohnson on 3 September, 2010

Today I went down to the BDRA to attend a day on the OTTER project and OERs (open educational resources/repositories).  Educational object repositories are a little to the left of my working experience, so this was a great opportunity to find out a little more.  The aim of the day was to give an overview of OTTER and OERs in a broader sense.

We began by seeking to define what an OER was – something that could be reused, re-purposed, freely available, and discrete (not embedded within an environment).  The primary concerns over using them are currency, sustainability and quality control.  IPR/licensing to use/reuse is also an issue – especially third party rights of contents embedded within items.  Interestingly there is a lot of use of these objects by Leicester students for their revision, not simply those produced at Leicester.  Noted that MIT with their Open Courseware have been leading in this field for at least 12 years.

(Incidentally my favourite learning object is on  Kongregate – a game that teaches cellular physiology.)

OTTER is mounted on PLONE, and of course JORUM Open is more well known – as this links to OERs in all kinds of teaching environments. OTTER over-delivered on their target credits material – almost 500 credits worth of material.  Also the CORRE framework for creating and evaluating OERs.


We started looking at Content gathering, and IPR/ownership questions were noted – the Uni generally owns copyright in OERs created here, but it was noted there are some cases where this might actually not be as cut and dried.  So OTTER worked with people where this wasn’t going to be a problem.  Even after the gathering there were questions over IPR and that some depts seemed to misunderstand what had been agreed to be supplied.  To get around this the BDRA devised a memorandum of understanding that was an agreement as to what partner depts would supply.  Noted that knowledge of copyright, let alone creative commons was poorly understood by the academic community and that education in this respect is needed.

Next is the Content screening – need to do some assessment of the content before you can decide that it is suitable for conversion into a OER.  OTTER used indicative questions to perform this analysis.  Interesting points about transnational issues over language and spelling were raised.  The amount of local references within OERs was an issue too – OTTER thought it was better to remove them and make them more generic, although other institutions didn’t always agree with this viewpoint – saying users could see past the local references to the reusable model underneath.

Then there is Openness – and the difference between creative commons and copyright.  In South America for example if it’s on the Web the normal assumption, even in the academic sphere, is that it is public domain and rights free.  The question of significant change to create a new object (and how much work is needed to demonstrate this) was raised.  Noted, like the LRA, that OTTER was very rigorous with copyright unlike some of the other projects – and had a series of indicative questions to be asked before an object could be progressed (developed with the consultation of Tania, our Copyright Administrator)

Next transformation – which is about enhancing the existing teaching materials as it becomes a OER, effectively making it an object independent of other resources that can be used on its own.  It may require restructuring – en.g. a lecture may be designed to work in a certain context, but as an OER its structure will need to be re-examined.

Then we looked at formatting and standardisation, making sure that final file formats are appropriate and openable by as wide a range of end users as possible.  It is also about making sure that metadata, and embedded metadata within the OER is  appropriate.  This was a manual process.  There was quite a discussion around the use of iTunesU and YouTube as alternative locations for mounting some OERs, the advantage being the discoverability would be enhanced by their search tools and greater visibility to a broader audience.  however, in contrast downloading of some objects can be restricted on these services, unlike from your own OER where you can control this more.

Now in Sahm’s words we move into a fashion parade – or Reuse and Repurpose – thinking about the end users and how they will be using it.  So these are questions to ask the various groups, although you can use your own in-house team to go through the tool kit questions.  Noted how they validated the materials by running it past real user groups e.g. EMALinc event with librarians.

Finally there is Evidence – this is about the impact and what is the value to teachers and learners around the wold, how do we measure it?  Senior management is more interested in evidence of impact, but as a teacher you will be more interested in the anecdotal evidence from learners on how these resources have helped in their learning experience.  like the LRA they use Google Analytics to track the quantitative data.  However, after all this effort and only 9 people use a resource the question of “worth” arises.  Hard to demonstrate what people get out of it – or what they would have not got, had the resource not existed.  Talked about MIT taking 10 years to demonstrate worth of their Open Courseware site. Akin to libraries making many materials available that few people use – but if they weren’t there, it would have diminished someone’s learning experience.

Applying CORRE

At this point we closed for lunch. After lunch we looked at some demos of objects in the Leicester OER, including a video with some upside down bits.  Following this we applied the CORRE framework to our own teaching examples – in my group’s case Marta from SDSS’ session on evaluating evidence.  We touched on the need to redesign teaching session objects from the ground up, if they were to fit through the CORRE framework – as they stand there is too little context to make them work alone, or too much referencing to other materials.

Finally the day reflected on how OERs and designing for openness has impacted on the work of the BDRA.  In particular thinking about stuff they are designing with this in mind from the start; alongside designing for the student.  They ask themselves “Can we make it open and can we enhance visibility for ourselves and our work through making it into an open resource?”


Overall this was an enjoyable and engaging day, and the chance to think about CORRE I think could have filled an entire day if we’d worked through it methodically.  Even though I don’t do that much teaching these days I found plenty to think about, and look forward to future engagements with the BDRA.

Slides will be available on the OTTER sige, along with the podcast from the day (with the odd audible comment from me on it).

Posted in Open Access, Projects, Subject Support | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

UHMLG (University Health and Medical Librarians Group) Conference 2009

Posted by sarahw9 on 8 July, 2009



Last week I enjoyed a very brief visit to this small and friendly conference of health librarians.  I was one of the speakers, talking about our project ‘Using web 2.0 to cultivate information literacy via the construction of personal learning environments’  at Leicester last year.

Sadly I had only made the Friday morning of the conference.   There I managed to catch Isla Kuhn sharing some of her expiences using web 2.0 at the University of Cambridge.  Using clickers in during her presentation we soon found out that of those in the room 68% didn’t use Twitter, but 14% did specifically for their library.  I admit I was surprised that so many are not using Twitter, perhaps I’m in more of a clique than I realised.  Isla described herself as a ‘complete non-paper librarian’  which raised a smile, well thats me too and I’m sure quite a few of others could say the same.  Do we have the right job-title?  Thats another issue.  The work of the Arcadia Project at Cambridge, exploring the role of the academic library in the digital age is worth watching, and they have already produced a favourite of ours here at Leicester, the science@cambridge portal

Sara Clarke from the Royal Free Hospital also gave an entertaining presentation on ‘Memoirs of an Invisible Librarian’, describing how her library had set about raising its profile at the hospital.  They worked on embedding their services, using the Map of Medicine to create a patient journey as it happens specifically at the Royal Free Hospital, to help clinicians redesign their services.  This way they reintroduced a new set of clinicians to the library services.  They did alot of the traditional profile raising activities, getting physically in the way of staff offering an ipod shuffle as a prize drawer in hospital corridors.  One interesting point was their posters campaign which promoted not just the services but what their staff could do for their users.  This is relevant to us – we need to show we are adding value and emphasise our human skills – not just say that we subscribe to a range of databases.  Sara said their membership rates doubled during that period.  They have also set up a clinical library service (we can smugly say we have an excellent clinical library service here at Leicester already) and have set about making their services known to senior management.  This sounds familiar but its continual process we can’t afford to forget. 


Posted in Digital Strategy & Website, Projects, Research Support, Visibility, Web 2.0 & Emerging Technologies, Wider profession | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

PEERing through the scholarly publishing gloom

Posted by gazjjohnson on 11 June, 2009

PEER (Publishing and the Ecology of European Research) is a pretty major European Union funded project looking at the impact and effects of arching in repositories of academic papers and the like.  The site has been live since late February but it was only through a mailshot yesterday that I became particularly aware of them.

Glad to see that repository managers and libraries are stakeholders.  Actually, I’d have been happier to see libraries paired off as a 5th separate stakeholder as I don’t believe that library interests and those of repositories are strictly speaking coterminus.  Repository administration is often, but not always, based within a library but this can be a marriage of convenience – a functional – decision rather than a strategic one.  Perhaps this is an area PEER needs to think about carefully.

After reading through the Web site, I can see how PEER may well produce some interesting information and reports on the European repository and publishing scene.  However, as with so many of these large inatives I’ve yet to spot where the directly applicable and readily employable outputs for repository people will be.  Is PEER to act as a lobbying service on our behalf?  No.  Will PEER mediate discussions twixt the various stakeholders?  Maybe.  Will PEER change the way our repository functions?  In some way I guess.

Perhaps it is too early to pour cold water on what PEER can, may or will achieve – but I’ve seen these big EU wide initiatives before (I’m thinking of DRIVER) which have had only a minor impact within the UK HEI repository community.  Worthy work for sure, but so much at a nebulous, Ivory tower strata rather than a practitioner level.  On the other hand initiatives such as the RSP or UKCoRR have had a real beneficial role directly supporting repository workers as well as performing a research and stakeholder interface function.  IMHO we need more of these, and less of the long term study initiatives.

Actually I think that’s perhaps a little harsh on DRIVER, which I believe had a bigger role to play in the European repository scene.  Unfortunately for the project, the UK repository scene was perhaps further along with it’s networking and building supporting communities, so what it did he;lp facilitate wasn’t as noticeable.

With this in mind I’ll be interested to see how PEER will interact with the UK HEIrepository community.  There aren’t currently any major UK comparable projects (I’ll happily be corrected on this point) on this scale, so it’s a noble endeavour for sure.   I am hoping they’ll be looking to directlyinteract with repository managers like me who work at the sharp end of things; though I suspect a lot of their work may end up being at a more strategic higher level.  I could be wrong though.  They’ll be appointing an advisoryboard soon, and I imagine that might shape significantly how, where and at what level it engages with the community.

All the same, it’s a site that’s well worth a look from anyone working with repositories; and no doubt in time some very interesting information will begin to seep forth from it.

Posted in Leicester Research Archive, Open Access, Projects, Research Support | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

JISC Landscape Study

Posted by gazjjohnson on 11 June, 2009

Hopefully you’ll have spotted the announcement that UKOLN on behalf of the JISC are doing a study about those of us in HE and how we’re using Web 2.0 tools and resources.  It’s well worth going along to and adding your comments on working practices, favourites or indeed those tools that are perhaps less in favour (Second Life for example) with some.  It’s being run on a WordPress platform, so if you’re familiar with commenting on blogs, you should find it easy enough to use.  If you’re not familiar with blogs – you’ll probably also find it easy enough.

So please go to the site (linked to above) and share your experiences.  The more comments they receive the more representative the outputs of the project will be.  And don’t forget to tell them you heard about it on our blog!

Posted in Projects, Web 2.0 & Emerging Technologies, Wider profession | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

A very SM@LL announcement

Posted by gazjjohnson on 22 April, 2009

About our (hopeful) new project

Posted in Projects | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

SCRUM Master wannabe

Posted by gazjjohnson on 17 April, 2009

Doubtless regular readers of this blog (yes both of you) will have been glued to the #jiscri twitter feed and ScienceLeicester blog where we’ve been discussing at some considerable length the process of developing a bid for the JISC Rapid Innovation 03/09 funding call.  This has rather eaten all my time of late, though considering the amount of time the repository has been taking up I think this seems a fair division of labour.

It has been…an interesting experience; especially since I made the noble/foolish gesture of putting myself forward as prospective project manager.  This rather catapulted me from interested party to organiser in one fell swoop.  I’ve been involved in bidding and preparation of bids in the past; but this is the first time I’ve actually led from the front.  I can begin to understand why my other half steers clear of bidding as much as possible.

But all the challenging ins and outs aside, it has really been quite an illuminating procedure; in that I know now the steps processes (and work load) needed to bring together a bid such as ours (I nearly uttered the name of the project there – that’ll have to wait until the bid’s in I think!).  Yes it is a lot of work, and in terms of working out the institutional procedures for such a thing a somewhat uphill challenge.  But now we’re almost through and the bid is ready to go, I can reflect back that next time (and hopefully somewhere/somewhen there will be another) I pull one of these together it certainly isn’t going to be quite so arcane a process.

On the other hand, don’t imagine for a moment that I believe the process will be any more quicker; just more matter of fact with experience.  If you’ve never been involved in bidding, it’s worth getting involved with; so that when the day comes and you need to headline one – you’ll find the whole process a little bit easier.

But only a little bit.

I’m also looking forward to employing SCRUM project management and seeing how that works in practice.  I think the team I’m working with should be fine with it; but I know it’s a very different style what a lot of folks are going to be used to.  I believe it should be very effective in keeping us focused and on track  without the need for such monolithic entities as PRINCE2.  And come Monday, we’ll be having our first semi-offical SCRUM…

Posted in Projects | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Librarians Information Literacy Annual Conference Cardiff ’09

Posted by sarahw9 on 1 April, 2009


 I’ve just come back from an all too brief visit to the LILAC conference (Librarians Information Literacy Annual Conference) at Cardiff University.  Sadly I could only be there for a very short visit, but its still great to hear about everyones ideas and developments, and I came away with lots of ideas. 

 For those who either were or weren’t there, the #lilac09 Twitter stream has lots of interesting snippets and comments tweeted live during the sessions. 

There was a heck of a lot more I would have love to have heard and seen, however from my brief visit the following will stay with me:

  • Andrew Walsh from Huddersfield University talked about how he has experimented with mobile phones during his information literacy sessions.  I absolutely love the idea of using mobiles during classes.  It can also feed into the ‘text a librarian’ service at Huddersfield (as a way of making sure they know about it).  I wondered what the benefits of using mobiles were compared to clickers, as most of the uses seemed to related to polling people.  It seems like clickers have less technical problems and problems with take-up.  There is something slightly more fun and personal about the idea of using phones though. 


  • Patricia Iannuzzi emphasised how we must align ourselves with the percieved needs and trends of Higher education as set out in policy and government reports – so that its the influencial people and not us librarians saying information literacy is essential. 


  • Leslie Burger gave an inspiring talk on how information literacy changes people lives, focusing in information literacy and digital citizenship from her background in public libraries.  This made me realise how the work of libraries in all sectors overlapp – public libraries have seen the students we later have in higher education, who then often will go back to public libraries.  It was also interesting to hear that public library membership is at a record high in the US (contrary to what you might expect). 


I also gave a paper ‘Using Web 2.0 to Cultivate Information Literacy within a Medical Ethics Course’ on the PLE project here at Leicester.  We ran simulataneous twitter debate – although in truth all the people there with laptops already seemed to be twittering, so perhaps there was no need to ask them to! Its interesting to see what people pick up on, in this case people picked up on the issues around getting students to comment on each others’ work for the blog and wiki during the project.  The reasons are partly that this particular set of students already comment face to face in their sessions, and also as they don’t like to be seen to be ‘criticising’ their colleagues.  We will be looking at this as we develop our resources.

Posted in Projects, Staff training, Wider profession | Tagged: , , | 4 Comments »