INF537 Critical Reflection

It has taken three years to complete my masters. For the first 18 months, I worked full-time in one school. For the next 18 months, I went into six different schools, primary and secondary, state and private, all boys, all girls, and co-educational. The shortest was one day relief teaching and the longest was a six week library contract. While working through the INF537 materials, I have often considered these schools to connect the academic theory with the practical reality.

When learning analytics was introduced (Welsh, 2016), I was in a school starting to mine this field. It should have been on my mind because information professionals are encouraged to collect data to update and review our practices. Though it had slipped off my radar it was highlighted again by the convergence of study and work. The academic mentoring team reached out to classroom teachers, encouraging them to consider the depth of statistics from the LMS, but I observed teachers grapple with data retrieval, and wrote about it on my blog. Busy teachers must consider the pros and cons. Will investing time analysing numbers and percentages benefit their students and improve their classroom practices? Experts say yes (Selwyn, 2014), and clearly analytics is effective in higher learning institutions (Siemens & Long, 2011), but there is concern at the secondary and primary school levels, and we are just starting to ponder the potential for learning. Exciting times!

I also wrote about the participatory web in that blog post. During my three years, almost every course alluded to it, informing my practice. The benefits of joining virtual communities is well documented (Burkhardt, 2009,  Rheingold, 2012, Seimens & Long, 2011), and I have demonstrated better learning when I collaborate and share with my academic peers. In many schools where I worked, the LMS is finally being normalised, and with more reliable hardware and wider bandwidth, there is more opportunity to create safe, private virtual spaces. It is still difficult to get quality student participation. While they share much in personal networks, they treat educational ones with scepticism, or as a place to play (meaning they post ridiculous, irrelevant spam). Teachers aren’t particularly good at moderating these sites yet, tending to either give up too easily, or let the nuisances have too much leeway. I am sure there are teachers who have successfully nurtured productive online discussions, and I am hopeful this area will grow. Exciting times!

But for all that is exciting for schools in the future, it seems the role of teacher librarian is less secure. We are marginalised, or returned to classrooms. In one secondary school, my role primarily was to assist students with their printing requirements. In another school, I was expected to teach Maths to a Year 1 class, even though it was outside my comfort zone and my teaching expertise. In almost every school, I was required to supervise students in study classes. These students didn’t have expectations of me, but neither did they respect or welcome my attempts to assist them. Very few teachers return to study apart from those moving into leadership positions. Yet teacher librarians go back once, sometimes even twice, and become leaders in academic research, educational theory, and immerse themselves in digital environments. Even in situations where I used my knowledge to advise or support, I was often humoured rather than taken seriously. Although my attempts to initiate action based on my academic learning in the different schools has been a challenging, even sometimes demoralising experience, this masters degree has been worthwhile.

References

Burkhardt, A. (2009). Four reasons libraries should be on social media. Information Tyrannosaur. Retrieved from http://andyburkhardt.com/2009/08/25/four-reasons-libraries-should-be-on-social-media/

Rheingold, H. (2012). Toward peeragogy. DML Central, 23 [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://dmlcentral.net/blog/howard-rheingold/toward-peeragogy

Siemens, G., & Long, P. (2011). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. EDUCAUSE Review, 46(5), 30.

Selwyn, N. (2010). Looking beyond learning: notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(1), 65–73.doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00338.x

Welsh, S. (Producer). (2016, 24 July 2016). Learning Analytics: A Traveller’s Guide. [online colloquium]

 

Student responses to questions – an infographic by visme

//my.visme.co/visme.js

One more survey

For me, one of the interesting aspects of Megan and Jackie’s forays into the Maker spaces world is the recognition they have been granted in the teacher librarian community. Or is it in fact, only because I follow their exploits on many of their social media outlets that I know so much about about their achievements.

So I have created one more survey that I would like our colleagues to complete. This will identify whether their fame has extended out beyond friend networks into broader professional ones.

Sharing and teaching others is a considerable criteria of digital scholarship (Boyer, 1990). Megan and Jackie qualify for this label because their journey has involved all of the foundations of scholarship. They set out to discover how best to promote 21st century teaching and learning practices, and when they researched the components of the Digital Technologies Curriculum, the engagement offered through maker spaces experiences, and applied it to their core work of research and literary lessons to build an integrated program, they demonstrated vital criteria of scholars. But to also take the one step further to not only share their learning, and their journey, but to also agree to teach it to others, is an indicator of what’s best about being a digital scholar (Weller, 2011; Pearce, et.al. 2010).

 

References:

Boyer, E. L. (1990). Enlarging the Perspective Scholarship Redefined Priorities of the Professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pearce, N., Weller, M., Scanlon, E., & Ashleigh, M. (2010). Digital Scholarship Considered: How Technologies could Transform Academic Work. in education, 16(1). Retrieved from http://ineducation.ca/ineducation/article/view/44/508

Weller, M. (2011). The Nature of Scholarship The Digital Scholar: How Technology is Transforming Scholarly Practice (pp. 41-51). London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Surveys (in draft form)

My case study is quite different from many others, in that I am completing it on behalf of others. This causes me some angst because I am not receiving feedback from the invested parties (Megan & Jackie) as quickly as I would like. I created three surveys that will be used with the parents, the teachers, and the students of the school, and either Megan and Jackie say ‘oh it looks good’, and don’t reply at all.

I need to impress on Megan and Jackie the need to study the wording, the multiple choices, and the range of questions carefully to ensure we are tapping into the heart of our goals. But they are busy, I get that. Maybe you can help. Here  are the three surveys. What do you think? I don’t want to ask too many questions of parents. I do not want to put the words ‘digital technologies’ into the mouths of teachers. I want them to come up with them. As for students, I want to give them words, but also let them have a chance to choose their own as well.

The Parent Survey

The Teacher Survey

The Student Survey

It’s a start. I think I am on the right track.

I have also added another comment to the VoiceThread – a very short summary of my meeting with Megan and Jackie.

Case study proposal

Impact of a collaborative planned K-6 Library Program

Proposal Topic: To what extent has the introduction of a K-6 library program in the St Aidan’s Junior Library impacted on formal teaching and learning, on the profile of the library, and on the students themselves? What unexpected positive results have occurred?

Description: Teacher Librarians Megan Daley and Jackie Child are colleagues at St Aidan’s Anglican Girls’ School. Two years ago, they designed a physical space in their junior library to incorporate a K‑6 program which combines literature, digital technologies, and makerspace activities. Over that time, the program has developed and grown through review and collaboration. This case study plans to examine the goals of the program, and measure the level of success. These goals include:

• Incorporating elements of the Digital Technologies Curriculum (DTC)
• Developing lifelong learners and readers
• Promoting Computer Science and Engineering careers to girls
• Raising the profile of the junior school library, and promoting it as a community hub

As well, the study will examine the impact on formal teaching and learning by surveying teachers, the perception of the program and the library in the school community by surveying parents, and the impact on students by surveying them. It will also reflect on any unexpected outcomes.

 Expected outcomes:

• To articulate the vision and the goals of the K-6 program over the last two years, and analyse changes in the light of review
• To identify skills and processes the students have developed that align with the DTC
• To measure the impact of a library program on formal teaching and learning
• To examine the perception of libraries and their role in the wider school community
• To survey invested parties to gather feedback on explicit and informal learning.
• To evaluate the impact on students
• To reflect upon unexpected consequences and how this impacts on the program in the future
• To use the gathered and analysed data to put forward recommendations

Case Study Plan:

August 29 – September 2

• Meet with Megan and Jackie to articulate their vision.
• Conduct a literature review on the growth of makerspaces and the way libraries change to remain relevant, and to support teaching and learning.
• Design surveys appropriate for each group

September 5 – 16

• Conduct surveys and interviews
• Continue with Literature review

September 19 – October 10

• Collate and analyse survey findings
• Write up findings and recommendations
• Write up critical reflection

Leading Learning and Computer Science

The last two weeks of colloquia have been on vastly different content, but both sell the same message. We need to change the way we manage our classrooms, and the syllabus documents are finally starting to reflect that need – and move classrooms from a point of choosing to be more inquiry based, to demanding that they are. ‘Laggards’ (Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971) are really on their last chance.

Pip Cleeves is the best example of her own philosophy (Cleeves, 2016). Her classes are full of 21^st century learning, and her passion and enthusiasm for this type of practice means her colleagues are very lucky to have her on board. She does what she says. She does it well. She does it passionately.

We are all at different stages of that 21^st century teaching and learning journey. Having only recently returned to a school after 12 months of relief work, it’s been both comforting and challenging. I can see a strong change in teaching methods, and at this school at least, it’s coming from the top. Great to see a leadership team that seems to recognise the value in the concepts of blended, flipped and cross curriculum classrooms. I am only just starting to integrate myself into these discussions, and my confidence is growing.

Last week’s contribution by Rebecca Vivian honestly left me lost. I have managed to become reasonably tech savvy without learning code or delving into other technical aspects. Which suits me. My focus too, has always been on boys (my own sons and 10 years in a boy’s school), so this shift to girls is sharp and swift. Robotics at my new school is being given much attention, and the person in charge is taking on the leadership over their conservative views on YouTube and social media. I will watch with interest.

What has surprised a lot of us has been the continual discussion around analytics. Even last night, Annabel from ABC Splash had her version of data collection. It’s becoming a constant in this subject.

References:

Cleaves, P. (2016, July 28). Leading learning in a Web 2 world [online meeting]. In INF537 Colloquium week 3. Retrieved from CSU LMS Interact2.csu.edu.au 

Rogers, E.M. & Shoemaker, F.F. (1971). Communication of innovations : a cross-cultural approach,  2nd ed. New York : Free Press.

Digital Learning Environments beyond schools

It is not only educational institutions that seek out user-friendly apps and software to allow students and staff to connect, not just within classrooms and across schools, but also across borders and oceans. Volunteer not-for-profit organisations also need ways to develop projects and partnerships, and it’s more likely they are dealing with people not even in the same industry.

The Children’s Book Council of Australia is about to launch its new website. All the content remains essentially the same, but we are aiming for a fresh look, an easier environment in which to work, and a better way to link into the numerous social media accounts we have built up over the years. I have been part of the National website team since about 2008, and it wasn’t much later than that, we started talking about upgrading, up-styling, up everything.

(If there’s one thing annoying about technology, it’s the need to keep upgrading constantly. Nothing stands still.)

As with most not-for-profits, money is tight, so the website stayed as is for many years, longer than it should have, to be honest. While others moved on to weeblys, or wordpress sites, we maintained our site as best we could, and started using other means to communicate with members and interested parties. Sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram (admittedly, that is my Qld Branch Instagram account).

We also moved into the digital world with our printed journal ‘Reading Time’. Subscribers dropped to below 1 000, and it wasn’t financially viable for us to continue. We set about creating an online review site, that after two years, boasts an audience of over 10 thousand page views per month.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(statistics via Google Analytics)

While it hasn’t been a decision that everyone liked (Disappointed to have lost access to our printed journal was a typical response in the early days), we just couldn’t justify such an outlay, given how few people were reading it. We now appear on Google searches, we have an email for subscribers, and people can comment and link back to our reviews from their sites. This has such potency and such reach only afforded by a thriving digital environment (Ito, et. al., 2012).

Back to the website. Over the past 6 months, I have been part of a team that stretches from South Australia to Queensland. Deb is in NSW, and the two web consultants who have been with us from the beginning, Murray and Dave are based in Melbourne.

Initially we communicated primarily through emails, but the threads reached so far back, it was impossible to keep track of who was attending to what, and precisely which tasks had been completed by whom. We then included skype meetings once every couple of weeks, where we able to talk, and view the website on our own screens, as we discussed various design issues, and the implementation of features that allowed best viewing on mobile devices.

The Object Media team also introduced us to Trello.

This collaborative platform made it possible for us to target specific jobs and allocated relevant persons, who could then update the rest of us on progress without needing to send emails. Its layout design is user-friendly and it’s easy to see all the elements at a glance. We could also ask each other questions, and if anybody made any changes, an email notification ensured I was aware, allowing me to choose a time to view the Trello board at my convenience.

These digital environments are only just a few that can be accessed while working through a project. This example demonstrates why it is necessary to use collaborative online web 2.0 tools with students. They will be required to work on them after leaving school, so anything educators can do to ensure students learn to communicate appropriately in the virtual world, will assist them, and make their working life better (Greenhow, 2012).

Our new website is now live.

It has been a lot of work behind the scenes. One of my main jobs has been to insert the last three years (2013 – 2015) worth of Book of the Year award winners into a searchable database. It is hoped that with continued entry of backdated awarded books, this will have the potential to be invaluable to librarians seeking quality Australia literature within a defined subject category. A long term goal.

References:

Cyberlearning Videos (2012, February 6). Christine Greenhow: Help from my friends: Social network sites and the future of cyberlearning [Video file]. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/zk9GA1KErc4.

Ito, M., et.al. (2012). Connected Learning Summary. Retrieved from DML Hub: http://dmlhub.net/sites/default/files/ConnectedLearning_summary.pdf.

Evaluation of the learning process

Web 2.0 has gained momentum since it was first recognised in 2005 (O’Reilly), and many of the original platforms have thrived. Its initial definition remains relevant, and the concepts and practices of maintaining a complicated on-line life continue to evolve because users invest and participate. Library managers noticed users embracing the platforms and quickly saw potential, nominating the term Library 2.0 (Miller, 2005), which stuck. Library 2.0 takes advantage of the participatory nature of Web 2.0, allowing libraries to reach out directly to patrons. However, educators on a quest to build safe, inclusive, and welcoming networks for young people still face many challenges.

Users embrace the social networks that are the most functional and friendly (Mallory & Kleingartner, 2011). The business models of Amazon and Google profit from the immersive online world (Belden, 2008), and while these sites have some use in education, librarians have embraced other social platforms (Bain, 2011; Young and Rossman, 2015). The Arizona State University (ASU) projects an on-line presence through a range of social media channels. Their librarians realised the need for YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram, because different students access material in different ways (Schrier, 2011).  Academic libraries are able to leverage social media more effectively than school libraries (Yi, 2014), because schools must be more assiduous with filtering, distractions, and user behaviour. One of the biggest challenges for schools is balancing the need for safe spaces with the reality that young people are already on these sites (Lenhart, 2015). It’s crucial to consider a site’s concern for users by carefully examining their advertising (Pearson, 2009) and privacy policies (Hudson, 2006) before allowing students to use them. Unfortunately, it is also important to observe the way developers update their sites, or sell them to the highest bidder, because these changes can mean the site is no longer appropriate or useful.

There are other concerning issues for information professionals who serve school-aged children, digital natives who show little regard for privacy (Raynes-Goldie, 2010), piracy, or authentic research (Garfinkel, 2008). Digital citizenship, while encouraged, is not mandated or consistent across schools. Information professionals accepted the challenge to create programs and lesson plans which highlight the importance of a positive digital presence. As in most real-life situations, the majority of students know how to conduct themselves appropriately in virtual environments, but it only takes a few recalcitrants to trigger calls for more censorship, more filters, and more rules.  As for the inquiry process, students left to their own devices, without explicit intervention from an information professional, are unlikely to develop the ability to critically evaluate websites, and are unlikely to understand the importance of citation. With an overwhelming amount of data already at children’s fingertips, skills to manage and process it all are needed more than ever.

While it might seem easy to reject Web 2.0 tools and justify that as child protection, libraries cannot avoid them and still remain relevant. Social media is arguably the most efficient, cost-effective means to prove the value of libraries to patrons (Bain, 2011; Casey & Savastinuk, 2006; Lorenzo, 2007). The digital world is no longer an option, or an add-on—it is immersive. Librarians in such a world recognise its benefits. Studies show over 70% of libraries worldwide (Taylor & Francis, 2014) acknowledge the need to engage patrons in on-line environments. The biggest obstacle to school libraries having effective social media programs is how time consuming maintaining a social media presence can be. Locating and cataloguing resources, and assisting individual staff and students with support and expertise are the most fundamental library tasks. To add tweeting, posting, blogging, and uploading pictures to the load, means something else has to go. Yet, what is the point of purchasing print resources or subscribing to online databases if nobody knows about them or how to access them? A well planned, coordinated approach can only be achieved when a library team collaborates successfully (Burkhardt, 2009). By targeting a small number of social networks, developing a consistent method and tone of delivery (Ramsey & Vecchione, 2014), and sticking to a well-documented social media policy (Burclaff & Johnson, 2014), school libraries can build effective and purposeful relationships with users.

It’s not surprising educators are feeling fatigued and overwhelmed by the responsibilities placed on them for student learning. Trust is a word linked to Library 2.0 (Jenkins, et. al., 2006; Reynes-Goldie, 2010; Young & Rossman, 2015), and teachers could be much more flexible about the way their classrooms are conducted. On-line communities and social networks are built on trust, and for the most part, this trust is validated. Information professionals must take on a mediated role, harness students’ enthusiasm for technology, and help teachers direct that energy in a positive and meaningful way.

References

Bain, T. A. (Producer). (2011). Leveraging Social Media to engage library users. Retrieved 14 April 2015 from http://www.slideshare.net/PickeringPublicLibrary/pickering-public-library?next_slideshow=1

Belden, D. (2008). Harnessing Social Networks to Connect with Audiences: If You Build It, Will They Come 2.0? Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 13(1), 99-111. doi: 10.1300/J136v13n01-06

Blummer, B. & Kenton, J. M. (2014). Reducing Patron Information Overload in Academic Libraries, College & Undergraduate Libraries, 21:2, 115-135, DOI: 10.1080/10691316.2014.906786

Buckley, P. (2015). Authentic information in a socially networked world. Retrieved 24 May 2015 from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/missusb/2015/05/22/authentic-information-in-a-socially-networked-world/

Buckley, P. (2015). Define: Librarian 2.0. Retrieved 24 May 2015 from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/missusb/2015/04/10/define-librarian-2-0/

Buckley, P. (2015). Did you know? Retrieved 24 May 2015 from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/missusb/2015/05/13/did-you-know/

Buckley, P. (2015). The ASU social networks. Retrieved 24 May 2015 from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/missusb/2015/04/07/the-asu-social-networks/

Buckley, P. (2015). Young people’s on-line identity, privacy & trust. Retrieved 24 May 2015 from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/missusb/2015/05/21/young-peoples-online-identity-privacy-trust/

Buckley, P. (2015). Trisha Buckley Pinterest Boards. Retrieved 24 May 2015 from https://www.pinterest.com/missusb1/

Burclaff, N., & Johnson, C. (2014). Developing a social media strategy Tweets, pins, and posts with a purpose. College & Research Libraries News, 75(7), 366–369.

Burkhardt, A. (2009). Four reasons libraries should be on social media. Information Tyrannosaur. Retrieved from: http://andyburkhardt.com/2009/08/25/four-reasons-libraries-should-be-on-social-media/

Casey, M. E., & Savastinuk, L. C. (2006). Library 2.0: Service for the next generation library. Library Journal, 51-62.

Garfinkel, S. L. (2008). Wikipedia and the Meaning of Truth. Technology Review, 111(6), 84-86.

Hodson, S.S. (2006). Archives on the Web: Unlocking collections while safeguarding privacy, First Monday, 11(8), August. Available http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1389/1307

Lenhart, A. (2015). Teens, Social Media & Technology Overview 2015.   Retrieved 12 April 2015, from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-media-technology-2015/

Lorenzo, G. (2007). Catalysts for change: Information fluency, Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and the new education culture. (March). Retrieved 18 May 2015 from https://web.archive.org/web/20110409150214/http://www.edpath.com/images/IFReport2.pdf

Mallory, T., & Kleingartner, J. (2011). Multi-Media Marketing with New and Traditional Media. PNLA Quarterly, 76(1), 74-81.

Miller. P (2005) “Web 2.0: Building the New Library”. Ariadne Issue 45 http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue45/miller/

O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. O’Reilly. Retrieved 17 May 2015 from O’Reilly website: http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a//web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html

Pearson, J. (2009). Life as a Dog. Meanjin, Vol. 68, No. 2, Winter: 67-77. Retrieved 18 May 2015 from http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/documentSummary;dn=346579933206675;res=IELAPA

Ramsey, E., & Vecchione, A. (2014). Channeling Passions: Developing a Successful Social Media Strategy. Journal of Library Innovation, 5(2).

Raynes-Goldie, K. (2010). Aliases, creeping, and wall cleaning: Understanding privacy in the age of Facebook. First Monday, 15(1), 1-1.

Schrier, R. A. (2011). Digital Librarianship & Social Media: the digital library as conversation facilitator. D-Lib Magazine, 17, 7-8.

Francis, T. (2014). Use of social media by the library: current practices and future opportunities. In W. Frass (Ed.), (pp. 29).

Yi, Z. (2014). Australian Academic Librarians’ Perceptions of Effective Web 2.0 Tools Used to Market Services and Resources. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(3–4), 220–227. doi:10.1016

Young, S. W. H., & Rossmann, D. (2015). Building Library Community Through Social Media. Information Technology & Libraries, 34(1), 20-37.

Young people’s on-line identity, privacy & trust

Internet privacy is inextricably linked to Internet identity. We who are older and wiser, keep demanding they who are younger and sillier, be cautious, be anonymous, and be bland. In order to protect ourselves, we mustn’t divulge too much information. We mustn’t connect with people we don’t know. We must second guess every post, every picture, and every comment. It’s only common sense, after all. These are traditional social expectations taught to every child for as long as there’s been a village green, a town square, or a shopping mall where people congregate and pass the time. Communities are built on these shared values of mutual respect and tolerance.  Treat someone the way you want to be treated. Giving is more beneficial than getting. You get back what you put in.

Yet, in less than a generation we have experienced the breakdown of traditional methods of communication, of community, and of the way we see ourselves and each other. The Internet, its participatory nature, and the ability to construct a life that is entirely fictional has allowed an anonymity with far-reaching implications for individuals and organisations, and society.

Rayna-Goldie (2010) distinguishes between social privacy and institutional privacy. Young people are more concerned with managing their friendship list, than they are about what Facebook intends to do with their personal information. It’s more important to make sure someone you don’t like doesn’t find you on social media, than it is to see customised advertising appear on the side of your wall, because you started searching ’winter boots’.

The impact of social networking sites selling our data to global corporations is also evident, in Pearson’s (2009) article. He is aware of how much information is being collected and mined, but he also an optimist, in that he believes trying to find an a specific piece of information about a particular person will be next to impossible, given just how much data there is (a lot!). Maybe it seems harmless enough, but it’s not. Especially when the end game is profit margins.

One positive element though, about young people and their online activity is their creativity and engagement (Mallan & Giardina, 2009). They post to their pages, and expect feedback and support. They are conscious of what their friends post, and validate their life by comparing friend lists, and by managing their on-line identity constantly. It helps that they trust people will respond to their participation positively.

The participatory web does have a lot to answer for. The lack of real life interaction is the biggest. Following this is the concern about the mediated life filter. Everything a person does on-line is subject to constant analysis and judgement. However, when balanced against the positive aspects, it’s possible to see that young people are savvy (Jenkins, et. al., 2006) and interested in building appropriate and affirming digital lives. And Social Networks play a significant role in the way young people engage with technology, their peers, and the way they present themselves virtually.

 

References

Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A. J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Available http://digitallearning.macfound.org/atf/cf/%7B7E45C7E0-A3E0-4B89-AC9C-E807E1B0AE4E%7D/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF

Mallan, K. & Giardina, N. (2009). Wikidentities: Young people collaborating on virtual identities in social network sites, First Monday, 14(6), 1 June. Available
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2445/2213 Date accessed: 16 May. 2015.

Pearson, J. (2009). Life as a dog: Personal identity and the internet. Meanjin, 68(2), 67-77. Retrieved from http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/fullText;dn=346579933206675;res=IELAPA

Raynes-Goldie, Kate. Aliases, creeping, and wall cleaning: Understanding privacy in the age of Facebook. First Monday, [S.l.], jan. 2010. ISSN 13960466. Available at: <http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2775/2432&gt;. Date accessed: 15 May. 2015. doi:10.5210/fm.v15i1.2775.

 

Did you know?

The video, Did you know? created back in 2009 posits a number of clear trends. Some have proved to be astute, while the others merit some debate about their longevity. Here are five that have withstood the test of time.

1. An increased reliance on visual media to access information.
2. Mobile devices as the primary source of accessing the Internet
3. The issue of piracy
4. Increased use of Social Media Networks in workplaces
5. Increased content creation

As more young people turning to video material for their information and entertainment (xplanevisualthinking, 2009), there is a genuine need from libraries to respond accordingly. Instead of creating help documents full of text, libraries need to take advantage of visual images that can impart the same assistance in a more appealing way. When trying to attract a higher participation rate of users, social networks, such as YouTube and Instagram, need to be leveraged rather than more text-based ways of communicating such as emails or blogs. By engaging with them on a platform they are familiar with and enjoy, libraries will have a better chance of capturing their attention.

Mobile devices as the primary browsing platform is forcing developers to re-envisage the way websites are built. Many of the templates that work well on standalone computers are being replaced by more mobile-friendly ones. They are graphically bolder, with less finesse, as such intricate extras are unnecessary when viewing on a phone. It’s also important to contain file sizes. People constantly using their phones might be partly responsible for the rise of microblogging sites like twitter, and visual sites like Instagram. These are easily accessible, and don’t take much time to update or download. Libraries who are connecting with patrons through their phones are realising the potential outreach.

 

Piracy continues to be an issue (xplanevisualthinking, 2009), and will increase unless governments put more thought into developing more sustainable policies. Currently legislature is so far behind the digital environment, it’s going to take a lot to stop people from taking whatever they want. It’s a primary role of school libraries to make young people aware of the ethical and legal issues surrounding, not only downloading content without permission, but also creating a positive online presence and being considerate and thoughtful towards others at all times.

Social media is becoming an acceptable, valid and effective way to market (xplanevisualthinking, 2009). As these previously ‘play’ sites become more oriented towards business and advertising, young people need to adjust the way they view them, and use them. Libraries can also leverage social networks to their own advantage, to market their services, and to promote themselves as a useful community resource.

The final trend is content creation (xplanevisualthinking, 2009). People are confidently uploading a range of different media styles and formats to the Internet, and sharing their artwork, their stories, and their ideas with a global audience. The immediacy, the cost-effectiveness, and the feedback means that anyone can post, and anyone can comment. Young people are learning very quickly how to monitor and assess their online presence. There is a lot ‘out there’ for libraries to also share, post and participate in.

These trends are not unexpected. Libraries need to ensure they can advantage of social networking tools to connect with patrons, as well as acknowledging their obligation to educate young people about the importance of creating a positive digital tattoo (McTaggart, 2015)

 

References

etsmagazine. (2015, March 2). The Digital Tattoo: Think Before You Ink. Retrieved 09 May 2015, from http://educationtechnologysolutions.com.au/2015/03/02/the-digital-tattoo-think-before-you-ink/

xplanevisualthinking. (2009, September 14). Did You Know 4.0. YouTube. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ILQrUrEWe8