Attending:  Bert Johnson (co-convenor), Kemi Fuentes-George, David Stoll, Shel Sax, Joe Antonioli, Richard Jenkins, Carrie Macfarlane, Brenda Ellis (co-convenor/notes)

Topics:

• LIS Liaison Program Effectiveness
• Curricular Technology Support
• Information Desk Replacement

LIS Liaison Program Effectiveness

As leader of the LIS Liaison group, Carrie Macfarlane explained that LIS is currently evaluating the program over multiple years, with this year focusing on communication. LIS will review information already available to us (past surveys, etc.) but welcomed any feedback from the group.

Faculty in attendance noted that most of their communications with LIS deal with technology or with reserves, (Kellam was praised highly).  No complaints about course support; one professor used a blog and middfiles for the first time and found that both worked fine.  Another didn’t know much about middfiles and is interested because uploading files to Moodle is time-consuming.  One professor doesn’t have many questions himself but often sends his students in for help.

Concerns:  Faculty expressed concern re: staffing shortages at the helpdesk and frustration with the level of service at the walk-in help desk.  Specifics have been shared with the appropriate areas of LIS.

Curricular Technology Support

Joe Antonioli, Manager of Web & Interactive Digital Media Technologies, shared usage statistics for the current semester from the Course Hub, which has been in use since Fall 2011.

Fall 2012 Overall:

• 66% (2/3) of classes on the course hub have had something added to them (beyond the standard setup)
• 83% of instructors have added something to the course hub

Usage By type of resource:

• E-res:  25% of instructors (65% of students)
• Link Resource (url link to a web-based resource):   14% of instructors (35% of students)
• Middfiles Class folder:  48% of instructors (86% of students)
• Moodle:  30% of instructors (65% of students)
• WordPress:  9% of instructors (21% of students)
• Syllabus Upload:  30% of instructors (69% of students)
• Syllabus Text:  2% of instructors (6% of students)
• RSS feed:  1% of instructors (2% o students)

Comments:

Kemi uses Moodle.  He noted that uploading files to Moodle is a pain (too many steps).  Joe announced that we are upgrading to Moodle 2 in a month and that will make file uploads easier.

Bert uses a google.com site and E-res for copyrighted readings and classes folder for datasets.  He reported that he can’t add a Twitter RSS feed (as opposed to a link to twitter) to the hub.  Joe will investigate.

David uses the classes folder (which now has links from the Hub).  Easy to drop a syllabus and other docs there.

Information Desk replacement

Brenda explained that LIS was looking for suggestions for replacing the round desk in the front of the library (that currently has flyers, staplers, fax, etc.) .   The desk is no longer staffed and other uses for this prominent space may make more sense.  Possibilities that have been suggested include an electronic kiosk, a tree, artwork, or a seating area.   David expressed a strong aversion to an electronic kiosk – no more TV’s and visual pollution. He’d rather see a tree or seating area.  Kemi was neutral.  Bert preferred rotating artwork.

Moodle/course hub feedback

Currently there are about 110 active Moodle sites.

Faculty feedback: faculty felt the Moodle orientation sessions and especially the work sessions were great, but there simply wasn’t enough time before classes began to start using it for the fall.  (The delay had to do with our Moodle vendor not being able to implement it sooner).   David thought Moodle will be more useful for his larger classes when he has more students to manage. Bert is using the course hub with links to a public Google site.  He uses E-res for any copyrighted material but posts out of copyright works on his website which isn’t password protected.  Note:  Both the course hub and Moodle will allow faculty to upload an updated syllabus, should the need arise, and faculty can tell students the latest version is there to avoid confusion from different versions via email.

There will be more workshops in Dec. but some thought faculty will be too busy then.  Workshops will also be offered during J-term, so look for future announcements or see http://go/lisworkshops.  Also short Moodle video tutorials are available on Lynda.com http://go/lynda.

Summon (the new library quick search)
Your students are using it – do you know what it is? Do you like it?

Summon is the Library’s Google-like search box. It’s a single search for books, newspaper articles, journal articles and citations, and more. Summon will try to link directly to full-text if we have it. It searches MIDCAT, the Library’s Digital Collections, and over 90% of our journal articles.  For more details see the What’s Summon link next to the search box on the library homepage.  Brenda demo’d how to do a search and narrow it.  See the Summon 2 ½ minute tutorial if you weren’t at the meeting (the link to the tutorial is under the search box).  There are still some issues with some of the links, but usually if the article doesn’t come up directly, you can search the title again and find it at the source.

Summon also searches the 45,000+ new ebooks added to midcat.  You can search the ebook collection directly at http://go/ebooks. These can be downloaded to computers and iPads for 7 days but not to Kindles.  We only pay for the ebooks we use, so we can offer many more titles this way.

Faculty feedback:  David has found lots of useful information using Summon.  Some people didn’t realize you can still get to Midcat (and NExpress and Worldcat) by clicking on the Catalogs tab next to Summon.  Summon is great for doing a search across lots of content, and then narrowing with limits,  but there are still times it will be better to use a specific database for its special features or discipline focus.

Classrooms and Labs
Smart classrooms progress and feedback; update on Econ Stats Lab in the library

Currently there are 44 “non-smart” classrooms on campus, plus several other spaces used as classrooms during the Language Schools. LIS will convene a group this fall to prioritize upgrade requests, resulting in a budget request for conversion.  LIS will also be looking at existing older smart classrooms that need upgrades.  Stay tuned for ways faculty can give input on the priorities. UPDATE: “Bob Cluss is making these decisions, so faculty should probably contact him directly if they want to advocate for a specific classroom space.”

Also the Library 140 classroom is being expanded and converted into an Economics Stats lab with 35 computers.  Economics has long had a need for a larger lab for their large statistics classes and for doing experiments.

Faculty feedback:  Bob suggested that we look at data on classroom use to help inform decisions.

Other LIS updates

Upcoming evaluation of Google Apps/Microsoft 365
Update and how best to get your input about alternative systems we might potentially use (gmail, calendaring, contacts, plus additional collaborative tools like Google Docs).

Shel spoke about why the college is considering such a move.  Storing data “in the cloud” at remote servers instead of on local servers has many benefits. It is both about potentially saving money through economies of scale but also about better redundancy and disaster recovery since Google and Microsoft have better capabilities for backing up data and providing access from multiple servers around the world should problems arise locally.  Service agreements and privacy issues will be evaluated closely.  Look for more information as this progresses.

Faculty feedback:

Faculty expressed concern we might be offered such services at a teaser rate but later be locked into continuing at higher rates, especially if these companies continues to dominate the market.  Also there was concern re: how our information will be used by commercial companies.  Will Google be benign or evil?  Bob reminded us that this is capitalism and the tiger is only acting in his nature to eat the lamb.

How do we increase attendance?
We began the meeting by discussing how to increase attendance.  Is it an issue of when or an issue of what’s on the agenda?  Every time during the semester is a busy time for faculty. Everyone is maxed out.  Shel suggested using the time period after graduation but before local schools get out.  There’s no response to calls for agenda topics, so its hard to know what might draw people.  Brenda suggested narrowing the group to make communication easier.  International Studies heads of program areas revolve yearly, so it might be better to get someone to volunteer to be representative for all areas for multiple years.  Also, Bert suggested people are more willing to do something if asked by someone they know. Thus it might help if we personally contacted someone from each area at the beginning of the academic year to confirm if they are willing to serve for their department or program.

New Course Management System
Shel announced that Moodle was selected to replace Segue as our new learning management system. All classes will be linked from the Course Hub http://go.middlebury.edu/hub which will include basic information on each course with the ability to add a syllabus (Word or PDF) and link to other resources such as E-res, a blog, wiki, moodle course site, or a course website in another form such as Google sites. Shel showed Bert what the course hub will look like from the student view and the faculty view.  LIS will be offering workshops on Moodle later in the summer, for those who want the extra features this system will provide.  LIS liaisons will also get training.

Information Literacy
Brenda showed the new Information Literacy website that is being developed http://go.middlebury.edu/infolit. She showed where to find the introductory research and technology skills that we want first years to learn during their FYSE’s and other introductory courses. The site provides access to the skills doc and other useful items (articles, handouts, resources for learning the skills, etc).  There is currently a pilot project to start developing discipline-specific skills at the intermediate and advanced level that can be incorporated into department learning goals.

Topics faculty indicated they want to know more about.
The MISO survey sent to the campus indicated there are several issues that faculty want to know more about.  These include copyright, use of digital collections, data backups, and online quizzes/polls.  Moodle has an online quiz feature.  Bert mentioned wanting a way to quickly poll students on the fly in class, similar to clickers but without the hardware hassles.  It might be a way to engage students who surf the web on the laptops in class.  Brenda said there are now web-based applications that students can use mobile phones or laptops to respond with.  Shel mentioned that LIS is concerned about the number of faculty who don’t use middfiles to save their work (in some cases because of connection problems) yet don’t have a regular backup strategy.  He suggested using Dropbox.com which gives a fair amount of free space that easily sincs files on multiple devices.  Bert likes using a portable hard drive for regular backups.  Faculty can use whatever they prefer, as long as they are using something secure to regularly backup their data.

Couldn’t make the meeting but have a question or comment?  Use the respond link.  We’d love to hear your thoughts!

I. Discuss Information Literacy Standards and Proposals

Brenda introduced the topic and handed out the draft document that outlines Research Skills needed by Middlebury Students prepared by 4 reference librarians, also available online:  http://docs.google.com/View?id=dgjhxcwm_5d9xgfbhs 

She noted there are much longer ACRL (Assoc. of College & Research Libraries) information literacy standards that have been developed for academic libraries, but the group created their own version that  distills a lot of the key concepts much more sucinctly.  Our draft document focuses the most attention on the the first year because the basics are needed early to form a foundation for more discipline-specific work for the upper level classes and departments may decide to articulate their own additional goals for their majors.  The Middlebury document outlines a time frame from the FYSE through senior year for when students would be expected to develop their research skills.  It is clear to the reference librarians that many students start their senior papers or thesis work and don’t know enough about doing research beyond using Google or Midcat. David concurred that in some cases, it is obvious that seniors wrote papers that did not get beyond Google as their research method.

Brenda asked for feedback, in particular, what we may have missed.  As librarians, they are proposing a more active role in the first year seminar which is a good opportunity to introduce research skills, but not all faculty incorporate a research-based assignment into their classes.  Librarians want to give all students a basic foundation that first semester so that upper level library instruction classes don’t have to repeat the basics for those who’ve missed them and can instead focus on more advanced skills or discipline-specific resources.

Librarians want all FYSE faculty to incorporate some sort of research piece into the FYSE so that the librarians could then have an assignment to base an instruction session on.

Brenda shared some of the feedback that the group received from FLAC (Faculty Library Advisory Committee).  They were very positive about the proposal to make a research component part of every FYSE and gave a few tips for improving the skills document.

David thinks that the inquiry-based project needs to be very focused – some research issue that requires them to find data on the web which would guarantee that they’d have to learn the research tools the librarians are recommending.

Bert is concerned that faculty will feel that they would be losing more control of their class if they had to accommodate a research paper.  Many faculty feel that the purpose of a first year seminar is get students to talk, think critically, argue, etc and Bert noted that he can foresee resistance.

It was noted that some departments have a research methods class either in first or second year and is very research-based, but this is not the case for all departments, the the FYSE is the one place to reach all students at the same time.

Brenda asked whether an online tutorial would be a satisfactory substitute for some of the really basic info (how to see if we have a journal, etc).

Bert thinks the intro Pol Sci class is the best place to introduce a research-based assignment rather than a FYS which is supposed to be non-departmental.  However, Brenda noted that not every student takes the same intro course.

David thinks the Soc/Anthro 300 level methods course is the most likely place to have a serious research topic and that in a methods course like this, it would be an appropriate.

There was discussion of research methods courses and the difference between Soc/Anthro and Pol. Sci’s courses. 

Brenda noted the existence of online assessment tests, also pre-tests.

Bert suggested not providing journal articles but making the students find it.  David noted that if these articles weren’t provided, a smaller fraction of students will have read them with consequences for discipline, quality of work, class discussions, etc.

II. Effect of the new printing rules for students on classes.

Printing impact:

Bert noticed that most of his students now bring their laptops to class in order to not have to print the article.  His students are distracted by the computer and internet availability.  He also reported that when others are observing his class (e.g. when under review, adult auditors) they report that the students spend a lot of time surfing instead of participating in the class.

Bert reported that more of his students assignments are submitted electronically and he grades more electronically than previously.  David asks for printed submissions so that he can correct, comment and grade more effectively.

Bert noted that it is difficult to correct rather than comment on line because it requires using the ‘track changes’ features and students can simply accept changes.

Agenda:

• More Q & A re: new website and options besides Segue (and future planning)
• How have budget cuts affected LIS services and resources
• Library print to digital initiative (journals, databases, reference materials, primary sources)

Segue Replacement Update: (Joe Antonioli)

Segue will continue to be available through this summer and probably through next fall as well.  Tools will be in place to migrate Segue content to other platforms.  We will be engaging various groups on campus to via surveys and focus groups to help us determine what features and functionality are most needed for course sites and online curricular resources.

Web Makeover Update: (Joe Antonioli)

The new website will run on Drupal.  Drupal workshops will begin the week of Oct. 12th. The Web Makeover committee has reviewed more designs from White Whale (the company that is designing the website).  The latest presentation from White Whale can be viewed on the Web Makeover Blog, where you can find more detailed updates and mock-ups of department webpage and a faculty page.

Q:  Who has editing ability for department webpages?
A:  This will vary by dept. and is determined by the Primary Contact.  In some cases, multiple people will have editing permission, while in other cases, content changes will go through the Primary Contact.  Some things will be standard across all departments, but there will be many additional options to choose from.  Faculty will have their own pages.

Q:  Will it be possible to upload files such as data sets or articles?
A:  Yes!

LIS Budget Cuts Overview (Carol Peddie)

Carol gave an overview of the various LIS budgets.  The Operating Budget was cut by approximately 9.5 % (-$340,000).  This includes library resources, software, professional development funds – everything but computers and network equipment.  Many cuts were made behind the scenes.  For example, some maintenance contracts were reduced to M-F 9-5 rather than 24/7.  Software packages weren’t automatically renewed (ex. dropped Novell license).

Q: How much is spent on software?
A:  Approx. 1 million, but much of that is administrative (ex. Banner).  Most software is paid on an annual basis and that cost goes up each year.  Faculty software ranges from $100 for site license to $1500 per seat.  No plans to cut faculty software but growth will be slower.

The library resource budget was cut by over $100,000.  More on that later in the meeting. The capital budget was cut by 35%.  This includes classroom equipment, computers, and network infrastructure.  The budget went from $2.5 million (high) to $1.8 million to $1.2 million.  Approx. $900,000 is spent annually on replacing desktop computers. In response, LIS is investigating virtualization of software and thin client computing and concurrent use software.  Also, LIS is analyzing lab and public computers and will reduce computers in underutilized areas.  Classroom upgrades will happen more slowly (comes from facilities budget).

Q:  What percent of students come with their own computers?
A:  Over 90% (mostly laptops)

Comment: There aren’t enough computers in geography to support GIS.

LIS Staffing: Carol reported that by the end of Nov, LIS will be down 22% of staff and there will be no rehiring of frozen positions until January.

Library Materials budget: (Joe Toth).  Last year the budget was cut 5% mid year (i.e. -$78,000) then was level-funded this year.  But because our subscriptions go up (this year it was less than usual because some publishers held the line), it resulted in the need to cut $100,000 from the materials budget.  In response, book selecting by librarians was shut down early last year, database usage stats were examined and low use databases were cancelled, and the book/media budget for this year was reduced.  LIS will rely more on NExpress for borrowing and reduce duplication with those libraries and will do more strategic purchasing in the future.  Overall book circulation is declining and statistics show that overall, there is higher circulation of materials selected by librarians, followed by approval books (profiles) followed by faculty selections.  Ann commented that faculty need to be made aware of these cuts and be asked to reduce their ordering.  However, there is great variation in ordering by faculty,  so only those faculty who do heavy ordering may need to pull back (selections should support the curriculum in any case) and liaisons can contact those faculty if needed.  Joe responded that he will soon be sending out a collection development newsletter that will help explain all this to the rest of faculty. [This newsletter has since been sent out via email as Library Collection News and parts of it can be found here.]

Q:  Is Middlebury going to participate in consortial buying plans?
A:  Colby, Bate, and Bowdoin (some of our NExpress partners) are already doing this and Middlebury would like to do something similiar with 1-2 other NExpress partners, if they are willing.

LIS Responses to all  cuts: (many of these are detailed in the campus letter from the Dean of LIS that came out the following day).  LIS has stopped staffing the info desk (except 1st week of semester); may reduce helpdesk hours; may revisit ILL policies; may reduce support for screening DVD’s; public printing reductions; stop providing phones in student rooms (hallways instead – $50,000 savings); 2 weeks notice for reserves; Exams – close the library at 1 am (not 24/7); stopped retrieving books from stacks (unless disabled); More reliance on borrowing materials from NExpress; changes in reference service (will have 3 fewer librarians) – Sat and Thurs. evening hours cut – the rest of time ref service offered from offices or special collections so librarians’ time will be used more efficiently. For details see http://go/refhours.  Also, the number of library subject guides have been reduced (some consolidated – mostly will use existing ones rather than create new specialized ones).  In general expect that projects requiring a lot of staff time will be prioritized and some won’t be approved.

Q: David asked why there was no announcement about dial-up access ending.
A:  Carol explained that it broke and it took awhile to cobble together a limited fix.  However this will probably be discontinued altogether in January.

Library Print to Digital Initiative (Brenda)

LIS has been moving a number of library resources from print to electronic access.  Where possible, we have changed journal subscriptions to electronic only and have expanded journal access through electronic packages of current journals.  Packages allow us to greatly expand the titles we get from a publisher for a small additional sum.  LIS has also purchased more digital archive packages of historical journal issues (JSTOR, PAO, American Periodicals Series).  Also digital archives of primary source materials (newspaper collections, Archive of Americana, etc.)   In addition, other areas where digital has been preferred to print are reference materials (ex. online encyclopedias), and statistical compilations (statistical databases such as World Development Indicators).  In the future, LIS will investigate which areas or disciplines might be appropriate for expanding E-books via E-book packages or individual selection.   Among the many advantages digital access provides, is 24/7 access to our local Middlebury users as well as Middlebury users who are abroad.  For a list of recent electronic purchases and subscriptions see this list by title and this slightly different list:  Major New Library Databases last 3yrs. To access any of these databases, see http://go/librarydatabases.  To access any of these journals or newspapers, see http://go/journals.

Announcements:

LIS and the CTLR are looking for examples of innovative uses of technology to feature on the new “Teaching with Technology Blog” (http://sites.middlebury.edu/teachwithtech/) and in next year’s Pedagogy and Technology Fair. Please consider sharing your ideas for technology use with others. Let me know if you’re interested.

May 19, 2009

Present: Bob Prasch, Thierry Warin, Anne Knowles, Bert Johnson, Brenda Ellis, Kathy Morse, Shel Sax, Joe Antonioli, David Stoll

Agenda: Web Makeover; Future Plans for Course Mangement Systems: Segue, etc.; Tracking Issues

Web Makeover (Joe Antonioli, Web Makeover Committee):

Joe mentioned the web makeover blog which is at sites.middlebury.edu/webredo or just use go/blogs and choose it from the side menu.

First question was about timeline and transfer of content. A copy of the timeline from the blog was distributed http://sites.middlebury.edu/webredo/about/timeline/. Mary Backus (LIS Director of User Services) will be leading a team to address these issues and provide support material, in particular, what steps are needed to take to provide the information, training, and support for each department. Joe said that each department should have someone in the department who has a ‘vision’ of the department’s web presence and the ownership and decision-making needs. Division of labor is at the discretion of the department. In this phase, White Whale is designing a set of templates from which departments can select. There will be some branding (similar elements) but each department can select from one of these templates. Thus there will be more options than in the past.

Thierry asked about how the webpages would be done for the International Studies program, since it’s one program with 7 tracks. How will this be addressed – what choices does the department have – can all seven tracks all look the same? or can each track have a different look and feel? Joe said it is up to the program itself to decide how much variation they want, based on the template selection.

Kathy has her personal page on middunix, courses on Segue and no presence on the departmental web site. How will she be able to integrate all of this material? Joe said that it would be up to Kathy as to how she integrates her personal web material into the new web site. She will have more control over her faculty page so it should be easier for her to add content and links.

Joe mentioned a number of the features that we’re looking to incorporate – single sign on, web makeover, course catalog, etc. so focus needs to be on the main College site in the current time frame.

Departments need to be ready with the person with the vision this summer. So, this summer is the time to evaluate current content, what needs to be transferred, what needs to be changed and added to. The new departmental sites need to be ready for January. White Whale and LIS are coming up with resources to guide departments through the process. White Whale and LIS are developing a workbook to guide departments through adding various elements to departmental web sites. Jason Mittell and Molly Costanza-Robinson will help to keep faculty in the loop.

Site design will be revealed to the community and makeover team on July 27^th. All information will be put on the web makeover blog. There will be opportunity for comment before we move to implement the design.

Anne asked if there is no current chair, or the chair isn’t around this summer, what will happen if there’s no one willing to take responsibility for the departmental ‘vision’. The answer is that there will be a default design that will be used until departments take more responsibility for their web presence.

Features of the webmakeover (we’re using a platform called Drupal) will include the ability to include images, video, a calendar (pulling information from the calendaring system R25 so can list departmental events or anything in the Master Calendar that is specific to a department), improved search facility. The question came up about how much of this initiative is about ‘marketing’ and ‘branding’.

Thierry asked about using Netvibes (an RSS aggregator) which can be a group homepage as well as an individual page. Thierry was thinking of using this as a home page for the international studies program since students don’t typically go to the IS’s current web page. Each person can personalize each home page and aggregate their relevant information. Should he wait to do this? Joe suggested he wait if he doesn’t need anything urgently this fall since next spring will be the go live date.

Monterrey will go first and graphic standards, design elements, etc. will be in place shortly since it needs to go live this September.

Brenda showed the group the ‘examples’ link on the web makeover page which links to a variety of web sites at other institutions that may serve as examples for us. http://sites.middlebury.edu/webredo/category/examples/

Future Plans for Course Management Systems: Segue, etc. (Shel Sax)

Shel talked about Segue, its phasing out, the issues of timing, alternatives and extracting data. LIS will stop developing new features for Segue 2 but will fix any bugs that may arise in the current system. Shel explained the rationale for the decision. It is both an issue of economics (2 full time developers) and the inability of 2 people to keep up with developments in the field (there are other open source systems that have much larger communities of developers supporting them). We have not yet identified what system we will move to. There are other open sources systems such as Moodle that are possibilities and after the webmakeover migration is complete we may collaborate with Amherst who is customizing Moodle to use it for their course management system. The trend at other institutions is away from commercial ventures like Blackboard due to cost and lack of adequate development. As we move forward, LIS will consult with faculty about timelines, features, extracting data from existing Segue sites, etc.

The question arose as to what faculty should use in the fall. Faculty who already know how to use segue can continue using it or try out WordPress, our blogging software that may be adequate for some purposes. New faculty will be steered towards WordPress. WordPress has a blog feature (posts) as well as webpages and you can have links to media stored on MIDDMedia and you can upload documents. The disadvantage is that you can’t setup groups so if you want to limit it to a class or upload copyrighted material (such as course readings), you have to make it private which means you’ll have to setup individual logins for your students.

Shel said he would offer workshops on WordPress in August. Brenda noted that faculty can get help anytime before then from the Media Lab tutors, who will be working all summer.

Question arose about the future of ERes (E-Reserves) and whether its use will grow or wither. Segue is by default a closed system that prohibits public access – WordPress is the opposite. Brenda noted that faculty can currently manage their own ERes site but many faculty don’t know this. So those faculty who like segue because they can upload a course reading at the last minute can do this through ERes instead. To manage their ERes site, faculty need to contact Library Reserves to get setup as administrators of their account. Brenda noted the advantages of E-Res in terms of fair use, copyright/licensing, etc. (E-Res limits access to just those students in the class and the library can keep track of copyright fees we need to pay). Currently when faculty upload copyrighted material to segue, if its not limited to the class, it is a violation of copyright even if it’s restricted to the Middlebury community.

NOTE TO LIS: Faculty expressed interest in having future systems integrate ERes with their course website.

Tracking Issues: (Brenda Ellis)

Brenda mentioned that LIS will track some issues internally and post updates for faculty on the Advisory Groups Blog under the category of Items for Consideration.

Announcements:

June 4^th Tech Fair in the Great Hall of Bi-Hall from 10:30-noon. The media tutors will have a table and faculty will have posters of how they’ve used technology in their courses.

Action Items:

Brenda will send additional information to faculty re: managing their ERes accounts if they would like that option.

Brenda will keep the group informed over the summer as web makeover process continues. She’ll email links to important content posted to the blog since many faculty will be away and not think to check the blog.

Next Meeting:

We will aim to schedule the next meeting at the beginning of the Fall semester sometime between weeks 2 – 4.

]]> http://sites.middlebury.edu/lisadvisors/2009/05/22/social-science-advisory-group-notes-from-2nd-mtg/feed/ 0 http://sites.middlebury.edu/lisadvisors/2009/02/24/notes-from-initial-meeting/ http://sites.middlebury.edu/lisadvisors/2009/02/24/notes-from-initial-meeting/#comments Wed, 25 Feb 2009 02:56:28 +0000 Brenda Ellis http://sites.middlebury.edu/lisadvisors/2009/01/29/notes-from-initial-meeting/ Continue reading →]]> The Social Science Advisory Group met on February 23rd.  The agenda included a review of the departmental technology assessments and suggestions for future meeting topics.

Attending: Co-Chairs Brenda Ellis (LIS) and Bert Johnson (Political Science); Anne Knowles (Geography/FLAC rep.); Claudia Cooper (Teacher Education); Ellen Oxfeld (Women and Gender Studies); Thierry Warin (Int’l Studies and sub for Economics); Carlos Velez (Psychology); Kathy Morse (Environmental Studies); Shel Sax (LIS/CTLR); Bryan Carson (LIS); Jean Simmons (LIS); Andy Wentink (LIS); Carrie Macfarlane (LIS).

Introductions

Briefly discussed the role of the group and how it relates to the smaller Faculty LIS Advisory Committee (FLAC) and how the group supplements (not replaces) the individual liaison program for departments.

Review of departmental  technology assessments

22 departments had reviews (with whole dept. or representatives), including from SS group: Economics, Psychology, Environmental Studies, Geography, Teacher Ed.
14 departtments did not have a review, including from SS group: Political Science, Soc/Anthro, WAGS, Int’l Studies.

Discussion re: Broad Themes from reviews

Classrooms, labs

Note: Classrooms Committee was formed (Deans, LIS, faculty, scheduling office) but suspended because there is no $ for upgrades.

• Need more writing spaces in classrooms.  Common complaint that the projection screen covers most of the writing spaces.
  Suggestion to LIS: also need blackboards – preferred by many.  Chalk easier to erase. Don’t have problems with markers running out of ink.

• There are not enough “smart “classrooms on campus and the setups vary.
  Suggestion to faculty: list any key equipment needed when requesting a room.  Be willing to use a room that matches their needs rather than expect (in these budget times) that their favorite room can be modified.
  Suggestion to faculty: See go/mls to see room schedules.  See go/classrooms to see a guide to academic facilities that shows equipment in each room. See go/software to see a chart of software in each lab. See go/smartguides to see smart classroom user guides. See go/scheduling to get to the room request form.
  Discussion about difficulty of finding certain pages on our web site – talked about tagging (such as del.i.cious) and the go menu system. go.middlebury.edu
  Suggestion to faculty: Faculty should visit room they will teach in at beginning of semester to become familiar with setup.
  Discussion: how define “smart”?
  Suggestion to LIS: equip more rooms with only a simple computer (could be older model) and projector so faculty could easily just bring zip/usb/thumb drive and/or connect via network to needed files.  Often DVD’s could be shown from the computer rather than using an additional DVD player.  Such lower tech smart rooms wouldn’t need touchpads, monitors, DVD/VHS players, etc. so less expensive/ more rooms could be equipped and faculty wouldn’t have to hassle with connecting their laptops (common helpdesk call according to call logs).

• Computer labs often have one or two machines down, leaving full classes (20 students or more) without a computer. There will always be the possibility that not all of the computers will be functioning at 8:00, even if they were checked and verified as fine the night before. So realistically we should assume 18 is the maximum number of computers available. (Problem because sometimes are using specialized software not on student laptops). Report all problems to helpdesk x2200.
  Suggestion to LIS: more preventative maintenance (check bulbs, software licenses, etc.)

Software (topic for future meeting with more in-depth discussion)

• LIS needs to coordinate software upgrades in labs/classrooms in conjunction with faculty machines to assure compatibility between students and faculty.  Timing can’t please everyone (dif. needs).  Typcially don’t upgrade mid-semester but Language/summer school support provides challenges in summer and now there are additional programs to support).  Faculty would like to see web list of software available & be able to click for delivery or upgrade (self-service). Group supported this idea.
• LIS is investigating software delivery via server (vs. application on hard drive).  Virtualization could enable students to bring laptops and access applications not installed on their computer (would help with lab problems mentioned earlier). Pilot project now.  Not all software licenses allow this.  Expect several years for conversion of those programs that are feasible.
• LIS can’t support all software (ex. too many stats pkgs; presentation pkgs) so need to id. those that are most used.
  Suggestion to LIS: Use more open-source software rather than always relying on commercial software.  Advantages: save huge amounts of money, often more up-to-date. Thierry gave lots of examples, including ubuntu.  Great publicity opportunity if are first school to implement. Much more to discuss and would be helpful to do demos of open-source software for faculty.
  Suggestion to LIS: topic broader than just Social Science group.  Have a LIS technology lunch focused on open-source software.  Also possible topic for CTLR workshops during summer.

Data storage

• Some faculty have stopped using Tigercat or other servers – partly because the space is not big enough (quota issues).  Faculty are not aware that they can request additional storage/server space if needed.  Critical that faculty use a source that is backed up.  We can’t always recover lost data on individual computers and its very expensive (outsourced).
  Suggestion to faculty: call helpdesk x2200 or email helpdesk to request quota increase if needed.  Consult with liaison if have special needs.
• Student or other video work is removed from Muskrat server every semester (not all faculty were aware this was only temp. storage space).
  Suggestion to faculty: Use new Middmedia system: middmedia.middlebury.edu (no cutoff at this time).
• VHS Films – a number of heavily used anthropology films on VHS are wearing out.  Discussion re: copyright limitations for streaming or making duplicate archival copy (can’t if commercially available).
  Suggestion to LIS: work with Soc/Anthro dept. to identify films in need of preservation/replacement or which can be streamed indefinitely.

Support in Bi Hall

• Almost every department located in Bicentennial Hall would like to see LIS tech support in-house.
  LIS staff regularly go to MBH as needed.  No new staff in this budget environment.

Training opportunities

• LIS training classes aren’t always offered at times convenient for all faculty. They are usually scheduled during peak teach times, making attendance for faculty difficult (also times of day can be difficult).  However attendance has been low when scheduled during breaks.  Seems to be faculty-specific.
  Suggestion to faculty: faculty can request training for their class or for a department or subset at a time that suits their needs.  Contact helpdesk or liaison.
  Suggestion to LIS: Need better Segue support at helpdesk.  Support not always timely – too few people are knowledgeable – most helpdesk students aren’t.

Future Meetings

Topics:

• Software updates and open source (continue discussion with key LIS personnel)
• Classrooms – define what really is necessary for “smart”; consider creative solutions
• Streaming Video / Middmedia; archiving; copyright issues
• Segue
• Library resources (once know next FY budget situation)
• Research expectations for students

Timing: meet before semester ends (exam time would be good).

Action Items

Faculty reps check with their departments (which haven’t yet had reviews) to see if their department would like a review (with whole department or select representatives).  Using a survey instead is a possibility.