Blogging student research. Five good reasons

Just posted my five top reasons for blogging the research process.  Check it out in my SLJ post.

K12 Online: The conference is coming

The 2nd annual K12 Online virtual conference is just about a month away. Make sure you attend, or attend the conference archive. The event is completely free. Important thinkers and dreamers and practitioners will present. Connect yourself with their visions of how our schools are evolving, how learning is changing.

Because the presentation list might overwhelm, yesterday the site began posting the workshop presenters’ teasers–short, online videos to give attendees a better idea of what their presentation will address. Four teasers are already up:

• Lisa Durff - “Pushing the Envelope or How to Integrate Web 2.0 Tools on a Shoestring”
• Chris Harbeck - “Release the Hounds”
• Dean Shareski - “Design Matters”
• Silvia Tolisano - “Travel Through Time and Space”

Let’s plan to demonstrate strong library presence at this one! Your attendance will help you help learners learn and help teachers teach.

Here’s the list of strands and presentations:

Classroom 2.0:

• Silvia Tolisano
  “Travel Through Space and Time”
• Drew Murphy
  “Step by Step- Building a Web2.0 Classroom”
• Chris Harbeck
  “Release the Hounds”
• Vance Stevens, Nelba Quintana, Doris Molero, Sasa Sirk, and Rita Zeinstejer
  “Motivating Student Writers by Fostering Collaboration through Tagging and Aggregating”
• Wendy Wolfe
  “If All My Classes Did This”
• Konrad Glogowski
  “Assessment and Evaluation”
• Anne Davis
  “Putting the Pedagogy into the Tools”
• Dean Shareski
  “Design matters”
• Jeff Utecht
  “Sustained Blogging in the Classroom”

New Tools:

• Liz Kolb
  “Cell Phones as Classroom Learning Tools”
• Frank Pirrone
  “Collaborative Concept Mapping - Breaking the Bounds of Location and Time… for $0.00 per Seat”
• Cheryl Oakes, Bob Sprankle, Alice Barr
  “Flat Agents of Change”
• Anne Davis
  “Learn to Blog : Blog to Learn”
• Jason Hando
  “LMS 2.0 - Engaging Learners Using More Advanced Techniques and the Odd Mash-up inside Moodle”
• Sharon Betts
  “Oodles of Googles”
• Kevin Jarrett and Sylvia Martinez
  “Second Life: K-20 Educators Exploring Virtual Worlds - Panel”
• Kurt Paccio and James Gates
  “The Electric Slide! Twenty-First Century Style”
• April Chamberlain
  “Trailfire”

Professional Learning Networks:

• Jen Wagner, Cheryl Oakes, Vicki Davis, Sharon Peters
  “Webcasting for Educators: Expanding the Conversation”
• Brandi Caldwell
  “Creating PLE’s with TLC”
• Kevin Hodgson and Bonnie Kaplan.
  “The Collaborative ABC Project: Using Technology to Tell Stories”
• Lee Baber, Paul Allison, Susan Ettenheim and Thomas Locke
  “Building Online Communities for Youth”
• Jeff Utecht
  “Online Professional Development”
• James Folkestad
  “Changing a System: Network Centric Learning Communities”
• Sharon Peters, Vincent Jansen
  “Building a Yardstick for PD Success: Establishing Key Performance Indicators for Web 2.0 Personal Optimized Learning Environments”
• Vinnie Vrotny
  “Expanding Horizons - Engaging the Adult Members of your Community (Teachers, Administrators, and Parents) through the Use of Personal/Professional Learning Networks”
• Alex Ragone and Arvind Grover
  “EdTechTalk: A Network of Homegrown Webcasters”

Obstacles to Opportunities:

• Patrick Ledesma
  “The Technology Specialist as Teacher Leader: Strategies to Ensure Successful Technology Integration and Student Learning in Schools”
• Ben Wilkoff
  “Starting From Scratch: Framing Change for All Stakeholders”
• Karen Richardson
  “Crossing the Copyright Boundary in the Digital Age”
• Shawn Nutting
  “Creating a Paradigm Shift in Technology”
• Lisa Durff
  “Pushing the Envelope or How to Integrate Web 2.0 Tools on a Shoestring”
• John Pearce
  ”Me blog? No way!!!”
• Sylvia Martinez
  “Web 2.0 Share the Adventure”
• Joseph Bires
  “Acceptable Use and the Web 2.0”
• Sylvia Martinez
  “Challenging Assumptions about Technology Professional Development”

SLJ SIGMS Podcasts from NECC

SLJ just posted podcasts of our SIGMS panel at NECC.

You can hear my 21st Century Librarian Manifesto, as well as David Warlick on 21st century literacies, Alice Yucht–who throws a lifeline to those drowning in an information ocean and suggests her new three Rs, and Lisa Perez–who urges us to explore the potential for libraries in Second Life.

Please listen and comment.

Database VoiceThread

In preparation for the Teachers Teaching Teachers webcast tonight, I put together a little VoiceThread called: Why I Love Databases. It’s a bit corny and it needs a little humor. I welcome your ideas!

Please try to join us tonight at 9 PM Eastern for an EdTechTalk conversation about using State Online Virtual Library Click on Listen to listen live. Participate in the live text chat by clicking on the CHAT link (no password needed).

Host Susan Ettenheim shares:

Joining us tonight, will be Nancy Keane, who taught the online class this past summer for YALSA about teens and database use and Michael Gorrell, the Chief Information Officer for EBSCO (thank you Karen Minton of GALILEO, Georgia for making the connection!) As a Dad of 5 boys, Michael understands our cries for support and greater understanding about using these resources. Join us to learn new info from the inside!

We also welcome back Kate Storms of NOVEL, New York, Sylvia Norton of MARVEL, Maine, Karen Minton and Courtney McGough of GALILEO, Georgia.
Join Lee Baber and I (Paul is still away) and Joyce Valenza and Kevin and TEB and all of the teachers who are sharing!

More on databases

Paul Allison, of Teachers Teaching Teachers, posted this entry on Databases and Research on his blog last night. Listen to the audio.

I think Paul’s comments honestly demonstrate the problems we have promoting databases. At one point Paul asks do students really need those old newspapers anyway?

Paul’s right about much of the access stuff. It’s too hard and too confusing.

But, like it or not, the fact is that not all scholarly content, not all content is free. The stuff in the lit databases, for instance, comes from books and journals that writers write and publishers publish to make a living. The books are not free, neither is the content within them. Nevertheless, in most cases the content is free to our users, most importantly our learners.

As for why folks in tech circles aren’t using databases more, this really bugs me.

I know tech people who spend far more time mastering a sexy new app, than it would take to get into and figure out how to search a database. These tools certainly have as much worth as Twitter. Why not give them a try?

As for “what is special about these resources”and as for “kids not needing old newspapers.” Hmmm.

Do we want kids to use homogenized texts only? Or do we want them to touch and explore more contemporaneous sources? At Springfield, we’ve explored the development of the Holocaust through the 1930s New York Times. We’ve also experienced Civil War reporting and the language of the Civil Rights Movement through a first hand approach. Has Paul seen the depth in Gale’s Literary Resource Center or Biography Resource Center or Opposing Viewpoints? Has he seen the specialized business and history databases in EBSCOhost? The radio and television transcripts and the video in elibrary? The educational video and supporting content in United Streaming or Safari Montage? The primary source content in the many ABC-CLIO databases? The scholarly archive of JSTOR? The comprehensive analysis in CQ Researcher? The 50,000 ebooks on all topics and levels in netlibrary?

He needs a tour. Everyone needs a tour, especially our tech people. I am screaming now. You are missing really good stuff. Maybe not for every information task, but for many of them.

Until you’ve tasted a really good bagel you don’t know what you are missing.

Take a look at the databases my students can access or browse them by subject. From school these resources are merely one click more for students. I make sure everyone (including all parents) have password lists. We do workshops for parents too. These resources are fabulous. My students love them.

Could they be easier to access? Absolutely. We MUST work on that.

Join the conversation at 9:00 PM Eastern tonight on Teachers Teaching Teachers.

Let’s work together on solutions.

***********************************************

For those of you who are truly interested in student response to database, in a school culture that values research, I am included transcripts from my focus group study published in Chelton and Cool’s Youth Information-Seeking Behavior, 2nd edition. Scarecrow, 2006. (I do exit interviews with seniors every year.)

“There’s a database for everything.” Virtual Library as Quality Filter (Q5 & Q6)
Students spoke often about the importance of discerning quality information, the importance of being able to locate primary and scholarly sources. They valued pathfinders as a way to quickly get to resources for specific assignments and to quickly access particular information formats. But perhaps the biggest revelation from the groups was the enormous appreciation students felt for access to online databases. Student voices gushed as they easily listed and described their favorites. GaleNet, especially its Opposing Viewpoints database, was universally acclaimed. A kind of “me too” syndrome emerged in each group as they discussed their most-loved databases. Though students had their favorites, they recognized that they each had particular strengths and choosing the right one for a particular information task was important. Some displayed surprising understanding of which database was provided by which vendor. (In a perfect virtual library world, that concept would be transparent to the user.)
A: I like e-library.
A: Me too.
A: I like GaleNet.
A: I love GaleNet.
A: I love EBSCOhost.
JV: Why do you like the databases?
A: Because they really give you good essays and good material. Like you’re not getting little flimsy thingies from Google, you’re getting good solid essays.
JV: So databases seem to be like the primary value.
All: Yes. (Heads nodding in agreement) (Group 1)
JV: What features of the library website do you value the most?
A: Catalogs and Databases. (Yes, all, laughter)
JV: It seems like that’s a value for everyone?
All: Yeah. (All responding at the same time) GaleNet—yes, GaleNet! EBCOhost, I like e-library. e-library is the best for Global.
JV: It’s interesting to see that it is such consensus over the databases. Why is that, do you think?
A: Cause they have everything. It links you to the whole world.
A: There’s a database for everything. Like if you need newspaper articles, there’s one for that. If you need like scholarly sources, there’s one for that too. If you need like pictures or reviews, there’s stuff for them too. (Group 2)
A: I use it when – actually, I’m a dork. I use it when I don’t know anything about that particular issue just to read up on it, or also if we have debates like the UN model that we did in one of our classes, I wanted to know a lot about my position that I was given, so I used Opposing Viewpoints and Research Gold (Student Resource Center Gold) which actually really helped me to get in-depth what I needed to learn.
A: I like how there’s like a myriad of different databases in there, because if I’m in GaleNet’s Opposing Viewpoints and I type in my topic and I only get three articles, I go search at e-Library and I find 20 articles. (Group 3) Why the universal acclaim for databases? They give students efficient access to the materials their teachers value and those they have come to value themselves. Students noted that databases offered greater searching flexibility and more options than free Web search tools. They knew that databases offered opportunities to filter for peer-reviewed materials and to search by media or document type.
A: And also because you can be really clear about what you’re searching for, and you can say like peer-reviewed or only magazines or only video pictures, primary sources. Just the options make it valuable. (Group 1)
And students appreciate the portability of their database options.
JV: So you appreciate search options in databases.
All: Yes.
A: A lot. And I also use them at home too since we have the passwords. And I usually go back and research further at home on the databases on my own computer. (Group1)
Students explained that their strategies for evaluation extend to examining database result lists. In Group 3, one young man a selection process that moves well beyond satisficing. He described the importance of the critical evaluation of results even when they appear in already filtered databases.
A: The other thing is the ability to differentiate. I mean, yes, you have something like GaleNet and Opposing Viewpoints. But even Opposing Viewpoints might have articles that don’t hold up to par as some others might, and you learn to look at those with a critical eye, learn to differentiate between good articles. I mean, it’s not like looking at Google and GaleNet. You’re looking at something that’s very good and then deciding between great and better. (Group 3)

“I really don’t have to Google things anymore, to aimlessly research.” Comparing Google to the Databases and Virtual Library Resources (Q6 & Q10)
Convincing students to look beyond the free Web and commercial search engines has been described by many researchers as an uphill battle. (De Rosa, Dempsey, and Wilson, 2003; Fallows, 2005; Griffiths, J.R. and Brophy, P., 2005; Mann, 2005). In fact, the OCLC Environmental Scan ( quotes one content vendor , “Google is disintermediating the library” (De Rosa, Dempsey, and Wilson, 2003 Introduction ¶ 2). For the students in the focus groups, there are times to use Google, and there are clearly times when Google does not quickly get them what they need. A student in Group 1 expressed an understanding of Google’s limits, noting, “Apparently there’s an invisible Web that I didn’t even know about.”
When searching options are no more than an extra click away, and when use of those options are highly valued by their teachers, the slope to develop a richer searching tool kit does not seem as steep. Without prompting, nearly all the students were eager to compare their experiences with the world’s most popular search engine to their experiences with the Virtual Library for academic research. Students compared their lack of success with Google to their positive experiences with the website 23 times.
While students continue to use Google’s significant information reach for other information tasks, their academic behaviors and attitudes fly in the face of the Pew findings relating to college students who ignore their university’s resources. The Pew researchers observed “students who were using the computer lab to do academic-related work made use of commercial search engines rather than university and library Web sites” (Jones and Madden, 2002). Each focus group repeatedly expressed the belief that their school library’s customized interface was better able to give them what they needed, as well as what their teachers hoped they would find. Google didn’t cut it for their school projects. It wasn’t efficient for their information needs; it didn’t filter for quality. It didn’t have the type of search features they found in their favorite databases.
A: When you research at the Virtual Library, you know that you’re getting like correct information and stuff. Like going to Google and getting someone’s like crap. Or a student project. (Group 3)
A: If you end up going to Google, you have all sorts, you have all this huge pile to sift through, but the library’s already sifted through all of those. (Group 4)
Students often compared Google to subscription databases. Though Google may have quality materials, students generally felt it would be more expedient to use databases. (Interestingly, these same students are linked on the Virtual Library to Google Scholar, Google Print, and Google’s Advanced search screens. In the short answer items of the Web-based survey, students noted appreciation for being introduced to these extended Google tools.) The focus group students appear to understand the difference between general free Web search tools and databases.
A: Google doesn’t really come up with…
A: Scholarly articles. That’s how the Virtual Library helps us out. (Group 1)
A: I think I understand more about like general Google searches versus the databases, like how they’re separate and how they each kind of do different things for you. (Group 2)
A: To me a good researcher is someone who doesn’t try to find the easiest way out. I mean, it can take you, yeah, ten seconds, whereas ten minutes you can find twice amount of articles, journals, scholarly articles than you could have found on Google or Jeeves. I mean, they’re search engines, and that’s what they’re specified for, search engines. They’re not in-depth scholarly articles. You’re not going to find Harvard Journal . . . and if you do, maybe Google’s stepping up their game. (Group 3)
A: I know that like before my boyfriend got into a different private school, the teachers don’t even know what a database is. They are just like go on Google or something. . .And then I compare it to students at this school, and it’s like this is real information, I see that it’s from a scholarly article rather than like someone’s website project or something. (Group 3)
A: I think it’s a waste to go on Google, because like five articles from Google equal one from GaleNet.
(Group 3)
Group 4 noted that other school websites may have limited resources and they feature prominent links to Google. The group laughed and wondered why a library would bother to link students to create such a link.
A: I went to sites from a different high school and they had like a website but it didn’t have any databases, good ones, they had maybe like two, it was like Ask Jeeves and Google. [All laugh]
A: A link to Google. (Laughter)
JV: Why do you laugh when you hear that?
A: Cause it’s so…
A: It’s like a joke to us.
A: Cause now we have all these resources.
A: All we go to Google is for pictures now.
A: When we started out to research, every time we’d go to the library to research, we hear, now don’t just go to Google.” And other schools are like, “Hey, go to Google.”
A: In eighth grade they used to tell us all Google, and sites like Dogpile.
A: And how when I go to Google and I actually read stuff, I’m like, did a 12-year-old write this?
A: And they’re just like weak. (Group 4)
Students sensed that the sources found using databases would be preferred by their teachers. Although the search engine would not likely to be visible in the URL in a standard citation, the here student refers to the general quality of the choices (Q4):
A: Well, the other thing is when your teacher looks at your citations he or she is not going to see Google, Google, Google, Google, Google, Ask Jeeves. It’s personally embarrassing for me to have that, so having something like New York University Medical Journal . . . that’s a very good thing to have. And the teacher says okay, this person took time to do it. (Group 3)

On hooding and babies and bathwater

I am back from Texas, from the UNT hooding ceremony and from visiting family in Houston. (Those of you who are already groaning, please keep reading, this post moves beyond the personal.)

First, let me say that I am grateful to the UNT SLIS faculty for offering me a precious gift–the chance to pursue the degree that eluded me through so many years of kids and work. I was able to graduate with two members of my wonderful cohort: Michael Stephens and Stacy Creel. And I am grateful to my committee: Carol Simpson, Brian O’Connor, Sam Hastings, and Marjorie Pappas for guiding me through an arduous process.

As I sat in the audience watching 72 doctoral candidates get hooded before it was my turn, I considered that arduous process.

I considered it in light of my recent post on databases in SLJ, the argument I’ve been following in Chronicle of Higher Education, Britannica’s Web 2.0 Forum, Prensky’s motto: “Engage me or enrage me,” our/my very honest passion for all things 2.0. And then Chris Sessums pointed to YouTube video based on an Alan Watts talk: Music and Life, fairly scornful of the arduous (empty) process.

I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between a scorn for the worn and the thrill of the new. Can we engage our learners without throwing out some of the 1.0 bathwater?

I grew up “paper trained.” But nearly every time I opened the bag I received (see that video), though I had to wait a bit, it actually did contain riches that allowed me to do the things I wanted to do and to grow as I did them. No one ever told me to sell insurance or wear a gray suit. Along the way there was time for music and dance and wine and friends.

Back in high school, I wrote carefully scrutinized papers, that were scanned for the quality of my argument and the quality of my evidence. I also worked on authentic projects; I tried to save the world; I created media (albeit primitive).

I am so impressed with Marco Torres’ students’ work. I want my students to create work like that, work is powerful and relevant and intelligent. I truly get the problems Marco’s students describe in Digital Students @ Analog Schools. I want my students to encounter university programs that allow them to continue to learn, to create in multiple media, to contribute.

But I want them also to learn to write a formal paper. I want them to develop the patience required to read serious nonfiction and journal articles. I want them to be able to carefully evaluate media and sources in any format. I want them to be ready and able to write an academic argument, an annual report, a carefully considered business plan.

As I work to engage them, as I look for projects that allow them to explore the power of media, to communicate effectively with expanded audiences, I want want them also to strive for quality. I want them to develop some more traditional skills.

I want them to have some level of academic patience. This work might take energy.

Though I want to make those databases I love way easier to find and use, I also don’t think asking students to go one more click beyond Google is too much to ask.

Teachers Teaching Teachers: Webcasts on Subscription Databases

Don’t miss the next two webcast chats on state subscription databases hosted by TeachersTeachingTeachers on the EdTechTalk channel. They’re coming up over the next two Wednesday nights at 9:00 PM Eastern time. Last night the TTT folks hosted representatives from Georgia’s Gallileo, New York’s NOVEL, Maine’s MARVEL!, and Florida’s FEL. Catch up with my SLJ post on the first chat (which I got to pretty late) and the things that keep me up at night. Thanks TTT for focusing on this important educational topic!

New NSBA Report: Net Dangers Overrated, Bring Social Networking to Schools

If you don’t yet have administrative or board blessing for curricular use of social networking, you might want to download the new NSBA (National School Board Association) study funded by Microsoft, News Corporation, and Verizon.

You may have already guessed it: the Internet is not always as dangerous as some people say.  Students use it in their work as learners:

Students report that one of the most common topics of conversation on the social networking scene is education. Almost 60 percent of students who use social networking talk about education topics online and, surprisingly, more than 50 percent talk specifically about schoolwork.

The report argues for the positive influence of social networking tools and urges districts to reexamine policies that limit educational opportunities:

. . . the vast majority of school districts have stringent rules against nearly all forms of social networking during the school day–even though students and parents report few problem behaviors online. Indeed, both district leaders and parents believe that social networking could play a positive role in students’ lives and they recognize opportunities for using it in education–at a time when teachers now routinely assign homework that requires the Internet to complete. In light of the study findings, school districts may want to consider reexamining their policies and practices and explore ways in which they could use social networking for educational purposes.

One of my favorite quotes:

Safety policies remain important, as does teaching student about online safety and responsible online expression, but students may learn these lessons while they’re actually using social networking tools.

The study concludes with some very reasonable recommendations for school board members (you may want to share these at meetings):

• Consider using social networking for staff communication and professional development
• Find ways to harness the educational value of social networking
• Ensure equitable access
• Pay attention to the nonconformists (as an influential leadership cadre among their peers and to improve their motivation and achievement)
• Reexamine social networking policies
• Encourage social networking companies to increase educational value

Greetings from Anchorage, Alaska where I got up early to prepare for a full day of workshops tomorrow. I was about to leave for a day of sightseeing, but two Twitter tweets got my attention this morning. (I am continually amazed at how my network on this ephemeral tool feeds my brain!)

First Al Lupton shared Mashable’s compilation of cool ways to search Flickr. The 11 Craziest Ways to Browse Flickr which should have some cool classroom and perhaps, research application. Among the crazy ways: by drawing an image, by entering song lyrics, by color.

And more importantly, Sheryl Nussbaum Beach posted a brilliant essay that helps us define and share the potential for Learning 2.0. Definitely read it and consider how you might use it in discussion with your faculty in September. Also see my SLJ post on Sheryl’s core components.

Now, off to see Anchorage!

Monday update: Update: Just saw another of Sheryl’s not-to-be-missed posts: The Art of Building Virtual Communities.  Read it. Share it.

Random thoughts–on booktalking 2.0 and graduating

I feel a strange pull between my two blogs.

Yesterday I posted a rather long list of options for finding podcast booktalks–as both models and as resources. I don’t want readers of this blog to miss it. So please see Booktalking 2.0 and please consider linking to the RSS feed for my SLJ Blog.

I thought that dissertation was done a couple of months ago. Done, it seems, is a relative word. The grad reader had lots to say about my use of dashes, and colons, and table formatting. Several days later, I think the word done finally applies. I can now go to Texas, see my old friends Stacy and Michael, and get hooded. Pics to come on Flickr.