An understanding of technology and the Web is vital to learning and participating in today’s culture. Using social media outside of the classroom connects the course material and the real world, said David Parry, professor at the University of Texas at Dallas.[1]
David Swartz, chief information officer of American University, said the University’s push for improving web and media literacy began in August 2009.
“If the University shut down because of a pandemic, could we handle it?” he said.
“I proposed that we get more aggressive about literacy. I think we ought to spell out what people need to know.”
Swartz said the challenge is working with the needs of each school within the University, as each school has different priorities. “But there needs to be some minimal level of competence and make learning available on the web and in-demand for people.”
The University currently utilizes Wimba, an online classroom, and Lynda.com, a training module, to offer students and faculty opportunities to learn independently from the classroom setting. Although the H1N1 Influenza, a pandemic of 2009, did not force a shutdown, technology connected students and professors when weather prevented meeting in person.
Many, like Swartz, utilized Wimba during the February 2010 blizzard. School of Communications professor David Johnson “invited faculty to join the virtual classroom via Twitter and the Google site where the editorial budget and workflow were tracked.”[2] Anyone could observe the class through the American Observer’s Ustream channel.
With the popularity of online social communities like Ustream, students create and share content on a daily basis. Laptops are prominent in the classroom and mobile devices offer new ways to communicate. Some professors, like Johnson, have utilized the media culture to enhance learning.
In order to develop a more web and media literate community, the University should:
Engage students and faculty in a meaningful and collaborative social media environment.
Encourage incoming freshman to own a smartphone so that professors can create curriculums that incorporate cross-platform learning. Professors requiring online course materials in lieu of expensive books will offset the cost.
Shoot, produce, and edit short pieces that highlight AU programs and publish to AU’s newly created YouTube channel and prominent media player on AU site. Create video database of lectures and symposiums for YouTubeEDU and Videolectures.net.
Fully utilize the flexibility of learning applications, like Blackboard. Explore partnership opportunities with open source course management systems like Sakai or Moodle. Explore “Bboogle” model of Northwestern University in which Blackboard is partnered with Google collaborative applications.
Create incentives for professors that incorporate multiple platforms and multimedia within curriculum, in order to facilitate critical thinking and media analysis in the classroom.
Encourage faculty and students to attend MediaStorm (or other) multimedia workshops.
Have faculty attend a seminar on open courseware and its implications for the university.
Adopt Google Docs/Reader/Calendar at an institutional level, as students are already utilizing it as a collaborative tool.
Pursue an open courseware model championed by MIT, opening course materials, lectures, video pieces, to the general public.
Media literacy is a key building block when considering a strategy for increasing the participation and use of technology among students and faculty. While content is a nearly infinite factor, the methods and means for its presentation and access is an important thing to consider.
Encouraging student use of video, multimedia, social networking, mobile, and e-learning is key to improving literacy. Professors have noted that use of media also leads to higher engagement in the course and the subject matter. Six schools, American University, Boston University, Emory University, George Washington University, Georgetown University, and Syracuse University, are making literacy a focus in curriculum. This section will discuss current state of literacy at these schools.
Definitions and history of media literacy, web literacy and information literacy
Media literacy
Media literacy is the ability to analyze, evaluate and learn from various forms of media. Media can range from information delivered via a text message to entertainment television to traditional newspaper articles.
A media literate individual takes an active and critical view of how and why media impacts one’s outlook on the world. There are two forms of media literacy:
Analysis: The ability to look at all media from a critical perspective, analyzing messages to detect inaccuracy and bias. This includes viewing commercials and public relations techniques with a critical eye, and recognizing how that affects an individual’s worldview.[3]
Competency: Putting various types of media to their best use to foster literacy and global understanding. This includes understanding the way media consumption impacts the way people learn.
The core concepts and key questions of media literacy give people a process through which to consistently and readily analyze and filter information, as well as a common vocabulary. Tessa Jolls, president and CEO of the Center for Media Literacy, said it is this common vocabulary and understanding of our relationship with media systems that media literacy provides.
While media literacy can apply purely to information, it also applies to the tools used to access information. At its base is information literacy and the “ability to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively use that information for the issue or problem at hand.”[4]
Jennifer Neidenberg, Web producer for Education Week, defines media literacy.
History of media literacy
Media literacy initiatives were first introduced in 1960s classrooms in experimental form.[5] In 1967, the first television studio was installed in an elementary school in New York, earning national media attention.[6] In the 1970s and 1980s, early programs were introduced to mixed results. The field was flourishing in Europe by the 1980s. Media literacy initiatives earned respect in educational circles in the 1990s, and curriculum began to incorporate media education. For example, the Safeguarding our Youth Conference in 1993 linked media literacy to violence prevention efforts. By the early 2000s, National conferences, research, and collaborations brought media literacy in education to the forefront. The first national membership organization for media literacy, the Alliance for a Media Literate America, began advocating for the needs of modern students in the 2001.[7]
Web literacy
Web literacy education is empowering students to use the full array of online tools to gather and dissect information. Web literacy is a term for finding, scanning, digesting, and storing internet information. It is “an ability to recognize and assess a wide range of rhetorical situations and an attentiveness to the information conveyed in the source’s non-textual features.”[8] Web Literacy addresses the two issues raised in the MacArthur foundation study that will shape young people and their use of the new media landscape: the transparency problem, and the ethical challenges of emerging participatory cultures.[9] In order to discern the value of a particular website and the information therein, users must consider these core areas:
Authority - Who is the author, and by what authority does he or she speak? Who is the publisher of this content? What is the relationship between author and publisher/server?
Accuracy – Can you verify the background/factual information present? Does the document rely on sources that are footnoted/present in a bibliography? If it’s original research, is the methodology clearly explained?
Bias – Is the site trying to sell a product, service, or idea? Is information on the site documented with references? Is the information balanced?
Currency – When was the data gathered? What dates are covered by the data? When was the document last updated?
Coverage – At what depth do you need the topic to be covered? Is this the right web page for you? Does the author display a breadth of knowledge on the subject? Coverage is really the sum total of all the other criteria–Authority, Accuracy, Bias, and Currency.
Historical context of web literacy
The shift in literacy paradigms in the late 1990s hinged upon technological advancements in communications realms. Similar to the more traditional definitions of information literacy, web literacy aims to turn raw data and information into knowledge, but not in the brick and mortar sense of reading a book at the local library, but in the sense of accessing and analyzing diverse information sources on the web. In this sense, literacy is not a static term and must be able to evolve to new modes of technologies.[10] The history of web literacy reflects the evolution of the literary concept as it bends and molds to fit new communication models. Information Literacy evolved into media literacy during the last century, similarly, web literacy is the natural evolutionary descendant of media literacy.
Information literacy
”Information Literacy is defined as the ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively use that information for the issue or problem at hand.”[11]
The American Library Association defines information literacy as the ability “to know when there is a need for information, to identify information for that need, and to be able to locate, evaluate and effectively use that information are not new abilities that have emerged as a result of the Information Age. In fact, these abilities have always been important to success and quality of life. The only thing that has changed is the amount and variety of information that is now available. Fifty years ago, people had limited sources from which to obtain needed information: books, newspapers, radio, journals, community experts, and government offices.”
”Today, however, information is not only available from those sources but also from television, CD-ROM, online databases, the Internet, multimedia packages, and digitized government documents; and the amount of information from all of those sources is staggering. Although there has always been a need to find, evaluate, and effectively use information, the abilities needed to do so have just grown larger, more complex, and more important as the volume of available information has mushroomed beyond everyone’s wildest imagination.”[12]
Education researchers Jeremy Shapiro and Shelley Hughes outline a “prototype curriculum” with seven components:
Tool literacy, or the ability to understand and use the practical and conceptual tools of current information technology relevant to education and the areas of work and professional life that the individual expects to inhabit.
Resource literacy, or the ability to understand the form, format, location and access methods of information resources, especially daily expanding networked information resources.
Social-structural literacy, or understanding how information is socially situated and produced.
Research literacy, or the ability to understand and use the IT-based tools relevant to the work of today’s researcher and scholar.
Publishing literacy, or the ability to format and publish research and ideas electronically, in textual and multimedia forms … to introduce them into the electronic public realm and the electronic community of scholars.
Emerging technology literacy, or the ability to continuously adapt to, understand, evaluate and make use of the continually emerging innovations in information technology so as not to be a prisoner of prior tools and resources, and to make intelligent decisions about the adoption of new ones.
Critical literacy, or the ability to evaluate critically the intellectual, human and social strengths and weaknesses, potentials and limits, benefits and costs of information technologies.[13]
History of information literacy
The term first appeared in a 1974 paper by Paul G. Zurkowski, written on behalf of the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. Zurkowski used the phrase to describe the “techniques and skills” known by the information literate “for utilizing the wide range of information tools as well as primary sources in molding information solutions to their problems.”
A National Forum on Information Literacy was formed in the 1980s and the American Library Association expanded upon the concept with the release of their white paper in 1998. The term grew to new prominence when President Barack Obama proclaimed October 2009 National Information Literacy Awareness Month.[14]
Current state of information literacy at American University
Supervisor involvement drives learning and staff members need the support and coaching of their managers to become stronger professionals.
“If no one said it’s important, and you’re not self-motivated, what is going to prompt you to learn?” said Dawn DePasquale, American University chief learning director for staff.
She said a subgroup of American University training partners plan to review the learning management system and evaluate the offerings of the different departments across the University. DePasquale said she is looking for the best methods to manage information.
“I have two phones. I have a computer. So many sources of information. I think the challenge is how we can help people to manage the incoming information. Nobody knows shortcuts and everybody is doing things to the best of their ability,” she said.
She believes that making a more literate community can create the necessary efficiencies.
“You have to think about whom you need to reach and what is the best way to reach them. Everybody works differently and we want to give people some help. They are drowning in information. That’s the biggest problem. … We’re working to 50 percent of our capacity because we’re not using the technology to the best of our ability,” DePasquale said.
Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats: An analysis of American University technology
Current social networking practices at American University
Strengths:
There is a Facebook and Twitter presence
Communicating with fellow students
Weaknesses:
Communicating with professors and administration
School of Communication page does not have Facebook & Twitter link
The existing groups and pages aren’t very active or useful
Rare to use during class to enrich learning
No reliably useful substance
Opportunities:
Could better engage commuters and weekend students
Extend your message and brand into new communication realms
Professors could use it as an alternative channel of communication with students, less formal, get to know class better
School could be more in touch with students’ needs and interests
You can stand out from the pack and be more forward thinking
Threats:
Lose touch with younger students who aren’t constantly engaged with email
Missing out on an important aspect of communication and engagement among student body
If you delay, you will always be playing catch up
You wont be where things happen in terms of trends, news and events
Current use of e-learning tools
Strengths:
Document sharing
Professor-student communications
Posting assignments and responding
Discussion boards
Posting grades
Weaknesses:
Not clear where you go for which information (redundant, confusing names for categories)
Difficult to navigate
Clunky, unattractive interface
Tools and sections are underused
Opportunities:
Find a way to integrate it with social networks and/or email to help students manage their class communications
Make it easier to use so that it is used more
Increase uniformity among professors so that students can stay organized without getting confused
Make discussion board less forced, more organic and it will be better used
If the school upgrades we can have cooler packages with wikis, etc.
Students can be reached on their phones, out in the real world
Threats:
Lack of communication
Confusion
Class is less engaging and enjoyable for students
It will become marginalized by better programs
Decentralized learning is disjointed and hard to manage
Current use of video tools
Strengths:
World Class faculty with video backgrounds at SOC (ex. – Bill Gentile)
Well Equipped classrooms with DVD/Video projector capabilities
Students can rent out video equipment
Partnerships & Collaborators: Center for Environmental Filmmaking, Public Media Camp, Investigative Reporting/Frontline, etc.
Frequent film events/discussions
Some lectures video taped and present on web, not all
Faculty frequently use visual communication to enhance lecture experience
There aren’t many resources offered on library mobile site
The Blackboard mobile app and library mobile site aren’t widely publicized or used
Classes do not use the interactive, real-world learning capabilities of mobile
Opportunities:
New smartphone apps can serve educational purposes like audio tours, and educational scavenger hunts
The pending release of the iPad can allow students to do more reading and interactive learning on the go
Threats:
Not all students can afford a smartphone or iPad, and the equipment could be cost-prohibitive for them
American University could lag behind other competitors in what is becoming the fastest-growing tools
How does American University compare to its peers in key web and information media technologies?
In this section of our report we will analyze how American University compares to competitive academic institutions in these core new media technologies: Social networking, mobile technology, video, e-learning tools, collaborative tools and multimedia skills. This chapter examines six comparable universities based on size, tuition and technology.
American University:
Demographic Snapshot:
Status – Private, liberal arts institution in Washington, D.C.
Faculty – 591 full-time faculty with more than 90 percent holding the highest degree in their field.
Subsets of population have Facebook group, ie. SOC grad program group on Facebook — http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/pages/Washington-DC/School-of-Communication-Graduate-Programs/49871056800?ref=ts – people share their stories/network
AU has a “Center for Social Media” http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/ “We investigate, showcase and set standards for socially engaged media-making. We organize conferences and convenings, publish research, create codes of best practices, and incubate media strategies.”
Syracuse has many active social media groups and a wide-reaching presence on various sites: http://ischool.syr.edu/ilife/networking.aspx The Web site advertises them in a central space. You can even follow most sports teams on Twitter.
The school of Information Studies is active in tweeting and communicating on social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter
Has a course “Social Media in Business, Development and Government,” a class called “Social Network Analysis,” and another class “Social Media for Social Good,” which has a very active class blog.
Dedicating an annual symposium to “Social Media in the Classroom: Implications for Teaching and Learning” on February 19, 2010.
Very cool “remix challenge” on YouTube channel, where students remix admissions videos, “A Year in the Life”
E-learning tools (Blackboard and other course management systems)
American University, www.american.edu
American University employs the use of the Blackboard system and is exploring an upgrade to version 9, according to Chief Information Officer Dave Swartz. The university is also utilizing Wimba, a videoconferencing tool instructors can access through the Blackboard suite.
George Washington University, www.gwu.edu
George Washington University relies on Blackboard version 7 as its primary e-learning tool.
Spring 06
Fall 06
Spring 07
Total Number of Banner courses in Blackboard
4440
4608
4637
Total Number of Banner courses available in Blackboard
1975
2297
2288
Percentage of Banner loaded courses made available for use.
44.48
49.85
49.34
Georgetown University, www.georgetown.edu
“Since Fall 1998, Georgetown faculty have used the Blackboard Course Management system to extend the learning environment, including posting course materials, hosting online class discussions, and quizzing students.” (http://cndls.georgetown.edu/blackboard/numbers.html)
2008-2009 Academic Year Statistics
Over 15,000 unique student, faculty, and staff users
3,828 active course sites (Fall 2008, Spring 2009, and Summer 2009 available course sites)
Schools should offer library resources via a mobile site, so that students can access them via smartphones and iPads
E-learning tools like Blackboard should be available on a mobile site so students can check in with their classmates and get course information on the go
Classes should use mobile technology to incorporate real-world events and places into the curriculum (i.e. a mobile tour of a museum)
Encourage incoming freshman to own a smartphone so that professors can create curriculums that incorporate cross-platform learning. Professors requiring online course materials in lieu of expensive books will offset the cost.
Video
Video is one of the most engaging formats to communicate your message to students, and Internet users alike. Visual information is encoded with a dense amount of data that savvy media users have become accustomed to dissecting and processing it. To bolster AU’s brand, and ultimately admissions numbers, creating visually arresting video pieces that profile students, faculty, institutes, and programs is key. Creating a YouTube channel for different departments (think Admissions, Today@AU, etc.) will be one of the conduits for these video pieces. Additionally, I think that recording more lectures and symposiums and participating in online academic video communities like YouTubeEDU and Videolectures.net will help profile our world-class faculty.
Shoot, Edit, and produce high quality profile pieces on AU faculty, students, programs and institutes (think 3-5 min., you could even get your master’s students to do this, thus cutting costs!)
Create high profile locations on the website to embed video pieces (Boston University’s “You at BU” is a good benchmark)
Engage in academic video communities like YouTubeEDU and Videolectures.net in pursuit of the open courseware model.
Create Vimeo and YouTube channels specific to AU programs and departments to help disseminate the AU message and bolster the brand.
Create a central repository/database of video content on the AU website for archival and search purposes.
More prominent displays of video pieces “front and center” on the AU site.
E-learning tools
In 2008, Syracuse University started a partnership between Blackboard and Sakai, an open source course management system. The pairing of the two systems will allow a system like Sakai, which can be built upon and improved by independent software developers, to bolster the capabilities of Blackboard which has been criticized as rigid because it is a license-based application. More enterprising professors can use the creativity and flexibility of open-source developed applications within the Blackboard system already established among the e-learning framework of a majority of colleges and universities.
Sakai and Moodle are two open-source communities for e-learning which AU could analyze for usefulness and whether they would fit with the current Blackboard framework. License and cost issues will have to be considered.
Another best practice is weaving together what students already use on the Web with tools like Blackboard.
Jim Farmer, a software engineer who works with Georgetown University’s Information System’s Scholarly Systems Group, said privacy laws need to be considered. Security is a prime concern when using collaborative tools like Google Wave or Facebook, especially when considering the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) which safeguards a student’s educational record and work.
Farmer said Blackboard has cornered the market because it was 10-15 years ahead of other applications. That may be changing though, as Blackboard merges with applications and Web technologies that are gaining in popularity. An example is Northwestern University and “Bboogle” an integration of Blackboard and Google collaborative apps.
David Swartz, chief information officer at American University, said the university is looking to upgrade to Blackboard version nine and needs to consider the Blackboard and Google integration. The newer version allows more multi-use.
Swartz said Northwestern University is integrating Blackboard with Google applications. The new model is named “Bboogle.” The joint-effort will allow the learning conversation on Blackboard to be opened up to people outside the domain. It also gives students an easier portal into the course management system where they will be able to use their pre-existing Google apps like Calendar or Wave to interact with teaching staff and fellow students.
Collaborative tools
Education in the 21st century is going to be characterized by the ability of institutions to foster organic online communities through technological collaboration. Creating an environment that is hospitable to these collaborations is key to engaging a new student populace accustom to online communities. Furthermore, collaborative tools are a mechanism for faculty to further their research and create meaningful projects that are interdisciplinary in nature and extend beyond these granite walls. AU is moving in the right direction with the Center for Research in Collaborative Learning Technologies, which in conjunction with Syracuse is exploring the intersection of these ideas of online, communities, technology, and collaboration. Additionally, the reinstatement of AUpedia is another step in the right direction, which aims to create an database of information for the AU community, by the AU community, which extends outside of campus and engages alumni. However, I would argue that AU needs to begin exploring a more open courseware model that will characterize academia in the coming years. A good model to base our thinking on would MIT’s open courseware project, which is arguably the trailblazer in this regard.
Adopt Google Docs/Reader/Calendar at an institutional level, as students are already utilizing it as a collaborative tool.
Pursue an open courseware model championed by MIT, opening course materials, lectures, video pieces, to the general public.
Foster and develop AUpedia
Encourage faculty to collaborate with sister institutions and their faculty on projects related to their research.
Continue work with Syracuse at the COTELCO.
Multimedia skills
The ability to communicate visually and on the web is quickly becoming an essential skill set that all graduates will need in order to survive in the job market of the 21st century. As a higher learning institution it is our responsibility to equip our student body with the necessary tools and skill sets to conceptualize, create, execute, and publish multimedia content that is both informative and compelling. AU has been steadily increasing its curriculum offerings at the graduate level in multimedia content creation over the past few years and this trend should continue. The SOC faculty is a world class amalgamation of multimedia talent that has the potential to be a valuable assest in AU’s brand development on the web. I feel that implementing multimedia content on the front page of the AU & SOC website that profiles AU faculty, students, institutes is a good 1st step (BU is a good model). Being fluent in multimedia will be a distinguishing factor for graduates and faculty alike in the modern age.
Create multimedia content that is compelling and profiles AU people, programs, and places (slideshows of DC neighborhoods, interactive graphic on AU’s student schedule as an admissions tool).
Embed multimedia content at high profile locations on the AU and SOC sites.
Encourage faculty to continue using multimedia in the classroom to engage the student body.
Ability to subscribe to AU streams (Flickr,RSS feeds, etc) should be present throughout the site.
Create dedicated lab that focuses on multimedia research and content creation
Media Literacy
Overview
An understanding of technology and the Web is vital to learning and participating in today’s culture. Using social media outside of the classroom connects the course material and the real world, said David Parry, professor at the University of Texas at Dallas.[1]
David Swartz, chief information officer of American University, said the University’s push for improving web and media literacy began in August 2009.
“If the University shut down because of a pandemic, could we handle it?” he said.
“I proposed that we get more aggressive about literacy. I think we ought to spell out what people need to know.”
Swartz said the challenge is working with the needs of each school within the University, as each school has different priorities. “But there needs to be some minimal level of competence and make learning available on the web and in-demand for people.”
The University currently utilizes Wimba, an online classroom, and Lynda.com, a training module, to offer students and faculty opportunities to learn independently from the classroom setting. Although the H1N1 Influenza, a pandemic of 2009, did not force a shutdown, technology connected students and professors when weather prevented meeting in person.
Many, like Swartz, utilized Wimba during the February 2010 blizzard. School of Communications professor David Johnson “invited faculty to join the virtual classroom via Twitter and the Google site where the editorial budget and workflow were tracked.”[2] Anyone could observe the class through the American Observer’s Ustream channel.
With the popularity of online social communities like Ustream, students create and share content on a daily basis. Laptops are prominent in the classroom and mobile devices offer new ways to communicate. Some professors, like Johnson, have utilized the media culture to enhance learning.
In order to develop a more web and media literate community, the University should:
Media literacy is a key building block when considering a strategy for increasing the participation and use of technology among students and faculty. While content is a nearly infinite factor, the methods and means for its presentation and access is an important thing to consider.
Encouraging student use of video, multimedia, social networking, mobile, and e-learning is key to improving literacy. Professors have noted that use of media also leads to higher engagement in the course and the subject matter. Six schools, American University, Boston University, Emory University, George Washington University, Georgetown University, and Syracuse University, are making literacy a focus in curriculum. This section will discuss current state of literacy at these schools.
Overview | Definitions and history | Current state of information literacy | An analysis of American University technology | How does American University compare to its peers? | Best practices and recommendations | Resources
Definitions and history of media literacy, web literacy and information literacy
Media literacy
Media literacy is the ability to analyze, evaluate and learn from various forms of media. Media can range from information delivered via a text message to entertainment television to traditional newspaper articles.
A media literate individual takes an active and critical view of how and why media impacts one’s outlook on the world. There are two forms of media literacy:
The core concepts and key questions of media literacy give people a process through which to consistently and readily analyze and filter information, as well as a common vocabulary. Tessa Jolls, president and CEO of the Center for Media Literacy, said it is this common vocabulary and understanding of our relationship with media systems that media literacy provides.
While media literacy can apply purely to information, it also applies to the tools used to access information. At its base is information literacy and the “ability to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively use that information for the issue or problem at hand.”[4]
Jennifer Neidenberg, Web producer for Education Week, defines media literacy.
History of media literacy
Media literacy initiatives were first introduced in 1960s classrooms in experimental form.[5] In 1967, the first television studio was installed in an elementary school in New York, earning national media attention.[6] In the 1970s and 1980s, early programs were introduced to mixed results. The field was flourishing in Europe by the 1980s. Media literacy initiatives earned respect in educational circles in the 1990s, and curriculum began to incorporate media education. For example, the Safeguarding our Youth Conference in 1993 linked media literacy to violence prevention efforts. By the early 2000s, National conferences, research, and collaborations brought media literacy in education to the forefront. The first national membership organization for media literacy, the Alliance for a Media Literate America, began advocating for the needs of modern students in the 2001.[7]
Web literacy
Web literacy education is empowering students to use the full array of online tools to gather and dissect information. Web literacy is a term for finding, scanning, digesting, and storing internet information. It is “an ability to recognize and assess a wide range of rhetorical situations and an attentiveness to the information conveyed in the source’s non-textual features.”[8] Web Literacy addresses the two issues raised in the MacArthur foundation study that will shape young people and their use of the new media landscape: the transparency problem, and the ethical challenges of emerging participatory cultures.[9] In order to discern the value of a particular website and the information therein, users must consider these core areas:
Historical context of web literacy
The shift in literacy paradigms in the late 1990s hinged upon technological advancements in communications realms. Similar to the more traditional definitions of information literacy, web literacy aims to turn raw data and information into knowledge, but not in the brick and mortar sense of reading a book at the local library, but in the sense of accessing and analyzing diverse information sources on the web. In this sense, literacy is not a static term and must be able to evolve to new modes of technologies.[10] The history of web literacy reflects the evolution of the literary concept as it bends and molds to fit new communication models. Information Literacy evolved into media literacy during the last century, similarly, web literacy is the natural evolutionary descendant of media literacy.
Information literacy
”Information Literacy is defined as the ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively use that information for the issue or problem at hand.”[11]
The American Library Association defines information literacy as the ability “to know when there is a need for information, to identify information for that need, and to be able to locate, evaluate and effectively use that information are not new abilities that have emerged as a result of the Information Age. In fact, these abilities have always been important to success and quality of life. The only thing that has changed is the amount and variety of information that is now available. Fifty years ago, people had limited sources from which to obtain needed information: books, newspapers, radio, journals, community experts, and government offices.”
”Today, however, information is not only available from those sources but also from television, CD-ROM, online databases, the Internet, multimedia packages, and digitized government documents; and the amount of information from all of those sources is staggering. Although there has always been a need to find, evaluate, and effectively use information, the abilities needed to do so have just grown larger, more complex, and more important as the volume of available information has mushroomed beyond everyone’s wildest imagination.”[12]
Education researchers Jeremy Shapiro and Shelley Hughes outline a “prototype curriculum” with seven components:
History of information literacy
The term first appeared in a 1974 paper by Paul G. Zurkowski, written on behalf of the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. Zurkowski used the phrase to describe the “techniques and skills” known by the information literate “for utilizing the wide range of information tools as well as primary sources in molding information solutions to their problems.”
A National Forum on Information Literacy was formed in the 1980s and the American Library Association expanded upon the concept with the release of their white paper in 1998. The term grew to new prominence when President Barack Obama proclaimed October 2009 National Information Literacy Awareness Month.[14]
Current state of information literacy at American University
Supervisor involvement drives learning and staff members need the support and coaching of their managers to become stronger professionals.
“If no one said it’s important, and you’re not self-motivated, what is going to prompt you to learn?” said Dawn DePasquale, American University chief learning director for staff.
She said a subgroup of American University training partners plan to review the learning management system and evaluate the offerings of the different departments across the University. DePasquale said she is looking for the best methods to manage information.
“I have two phones. I have a computer. So many sources of information. I think the challenge is how we can help people to manage the incoming information. Nobody knows shortcuts and everybody is doing things to the best of their ability,” she said.
She believes that making a more literate community can create the necessary efficiencies.
“You have to think about whom you need to reach and what is the best way to reach them. Everybody works differently and we want to give people some help. They are drowning in information. That’s the biggest problem. … We’re working to 50 percent of our capacity because we’re not using the technology to the best of our ability,” DePasquale said.
Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats: An analysis of American University technology
Current social networking practices at American University
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:
Current use of e-learning tools
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:
Current use of video tools
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:
Current use of collaborative tools
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:
Current use of multimedia tools
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:
Current use of mobile
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:
How does American University compare to its peers in key web and information media technologies?
In this section of our report we will analyze how American University compares to competitive academic institutions in these core new media technologies: Social networking, mobile technology, video, e-learning tools, collaborative tools and multimedia skills. This chapter examines six comparable universities based on size, tuition and technology.
American University:
Demographic Snapshot:
Status – Private, liberal arts institution in Washington, D.C.
Faculty – 591 full-time faculty with more than 90 percent holding the highest degree in their field.
Enrollment – 6,023 undergraduate; 3,297 graduate; 1,667 law; 1,199 non-degree
Average class size: 22 undergraduate; 16.9 graduate
Tuition (2009/2010): undergraduate $17,228 per semester; graduate $1,237 per credit hour
(Source: American University Fast Facts – http://www.american.edu/discoverau/fast-facts.cfm
Source: American University Tuition – http://www.american.edu/finance/studentaccounts/Tuition-and-Fees-Information.cfm)
Emory University:
Demographic Snapshot:
Status – Private, research university in Atlanta, Ga.
Faculty and staff – 3,124 full-time faculty
Enrollment – 6,980 undergraduate; 5,950 graduate and professional
Average class size: 18
Tuition (2009/2010): undergraduate $37,500; graduate $32,800
(Source: http://www.emory.edu/home/about/factsfigures/index.html
Source: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/atlanta-ga/emory-university-1564)
Georgetown University:
Demographic Snapshot:
Status – private Catholic, liberal arts international research university in Washington, D.C.
Faculty – 1,268 full-time faculty; 689 part-time
Enrollment – 7,092 undergraduate; 5,330 graduate; 2,083 law; 813 medical school
Student to Faculty Ratio – 11:1
Tuition (2009/2010): undergraduate $38,616; graduate $36,744
(Source: Georgetown University At a Glance – http://explore.georgetown.edu/documents/?DocumentID=742;
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/94/opinions_college08_Georgetown-University_94158.html)
George Washington University:
Demographic Snapshot:
Status – Private, liberal arts institution in Washington, D.C.
Faculty – 1,576 full-time faculty
Enrollment – 10,000 undergraduate; 14,000 graduate; 1,000 non-degree
Average class size: 28 undergraduate
Tuition (2009/2010): undergraduate $41,610; graduate $1,118.00 per credit hour
(Source: http://www.gwu.edu/explore/aboutgw/facts)
Syracuse University:
Demographic Snapshot:
Status – Private institution in Syracuse, New York
Faculty – 955 full-time
Enrollment – 13,040 undergraduate; 3,297 graduate and law school; 3,814 (696 part-time undergraduate; 1,868 part-time graduate and law school)
Faculty to Student ratio- 1:15
Tuition (2009/2010): undergraduate $33,630; graduate $38,522
(Source: http://www.syr.edu/about/facts.html; http://financialaid.syr.edu/COA-grad.htm)
Social networking
American University:
Syracuse University:
George Washington University:
Georgetown University:
Boston University:
Emory University:
Mobile technology
American University:
Syracuse University:
George Washington University:
Georgetown University:
Boston University:
Emory University:
Video
American University:
Syracuse University:
George Washington University:
Georgetown University:
Boston University:
E-learning tools (Blackboard and other course management systems)
American University, www.american.edu
American University employs the use of the Blackboard system and is exploring an upgrade to version 9, according to Chief Information Officer Dave Swartz. The university is also utilizing Wimba, a videoconferencing tool instructors can access through the Blackboard suite.
George Washington University, www.gwu.edu
George Washington University relies on Blackboard version 7 as its primary e-learning tool.
Georgetown University, www.georgetown.edu
“Since Fall 1998, Georgetown faculty have used the Blackboard Course Management system to extend the learning environment, including posting course materials, hosting online class discussions, and quizzing students.” (http://cndls.georgetown.edu/blackboard/numbers.html)
2008-2009 Academic Year Statistics
Emory University, www.emory.edu
Boston University is currently using version 8 of the Blackboard application. Version 9 will be used starting in May 2010
Boston University, www.bu.edu
Boston University is currently using version 8 of the Blackboard application.
Syracuse University, www.syracuse.edu
Syracuse University is working on collaboration between Blackboard and another course management system called Sakai. Sakai is an open-source system that allows a community of users to tailor applications to their own uses.
Collaborative tools
American University:
Syracuse University:
George Washington University:
Georgetown University:
Boston University:
Multimedia skills
American University:
Syracuse University:
George Washington University:
Georgetown University:
Boston University:
Henry Jenkins of the MacArthur Foundation talks about digital media and learning.
Best practices and recommendations
Social media
The Universities that put social media to its best use in an effort to aid Web literacy share key components of a successful social media strategy:
Mobile
Educational use for mobile technology is continually evolving. Colleges should be forward thinking about developing mobile strategies in order to make use of these advancements. Mobile phones will soon outnumber desktop computers for today’s teens, and about 20 percent of them already own smartphones. In order to plan for students who are currently in middle or high school, universities should embrace their favorite medium: mobile. While most schools are only using mobile technology to post safety messages, there are some emerging trends that are sure to take center stage in the next 5-10 years:
Video
Video is one of the most engaging formats to communicate your message to students, and Internet users alike. Visual information is encoded with a dense amount of data that savvy media users have become accustomed to dissecting and processing it. To bolster AU’s brand, and ultimately admissions numbers, creating visually arresting video pieces that profile students, faculty, institutes, and programs is key. Creating a YouTube channel for different departments (think Admissions, Today@AU, etc.) will be one of the conduits for these video pieces. Additionally, I think that recording more lectures and symposiums and participating in online academic video communities like YouTubeEDU and Videolectures.net will help profile our world-class faculty.
E-learning tools
In 2008, Syracuse University started a partnership between Blackboard and Sakai, an open source course management system. The pairing of the two systems will allow a system like Sakai, which can be built upon and improved by independent software developers, to bolster the capabilities of Blackboard which has been criticized as rigid because it is a license-based application. More enterprising professors can use the creativity and flexibility of open-source developed applications within the Blackboard system already established among the e-learning framework of a majority of colleges and universities.
Sakai and Moodle are two open-source communities for e-learning which AU could analyze for usefulness and whether they would fit with the current Blackboard framework. License and cost issues will have to be considered.
Another best practice is weaving together what students already use on the Web with tools like Blackboard.
Jim Farmer, a software engineer who works with Georgetown University’s Information System’s Scholarly Systems Group, said privacy laws need to be considered. Security is a prime concern when using collaborative tools like Google Wave or Facebook, especially when considering the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) which safeguards a student’s educational record and work.
Farmer said Blackboard has cornered the market because it was 10-15 years ahead of other applications. That may be changing though, as Blackboard merges with applications and Web technologies that are gaining in popularity. An example is Northwestern University and “Bboogle” an integration of Blackboard and Google collaborative apps.
David Swartz, chief information officer at American University, said the university is looking to upgrade to Blackboard version nine and needs to consider the Blackboard and Google integration. The newer version allows more multi-use.
Swartz said Northwestern University is integrating Blackboard with Google applications. The new model is named “Bboogle.” The joint-effort will allow the learning conversation on Blackboard to be opened up to people outside the domain. It also gives students an easier portal into the course management system where they will be able to use their pre-existing Google apps like Calendar or Wave to interact with teaching staff and fellow students.
Collaborative tools
Education in the 21st century is going to be characterized by the ability of institutions to foster organic online communities through technological collaboration. Creating an environment that is hospitable to these collaborations is key to engaging a new student populace accustom to online communities. Furthermore, collaborative tools are a mechanism for faculty to further their research and create meaningful projects that are interdisciplinary in nature and extend beyond these granite walls. AU is moving in the right direction with the Center for Research in Collaborative Learning Technologies, which in conjunction with Syracuse is exploring the intersection of these ideas of online, communities, technology, and collaboration. Additionally, the reinstatement of AUpedia is another step in the right direction, which aims to create an database of information for the AU community, by the AU community, which extends outside of campus and engages alumni. However, I would argue that AU needs to begin exploring a more open courseware model that will characterize academia in the coming years. A good model to base our thinking on would MIT’s open courseware project, which is arguably the trailblazer in this regard.
Multimedia skills
The ability to communicate visually and on the web is quickly becoming an essential skill set that all graduates will need in order to survive in the job market of the 21st century. As a higher learning institution it is our responsibility to equip our student body with the necessary tools and skill sets to conceptualize, create, execute, and publish multimedia content that is both informative and compelling. AU has been steadily increasing its curriculum offerings at the graduate level in multimedia content creation over the past few years and this trend should continue. The SOC faculty is a world class amalgamation of multimedia talent that has the potential to be a valuable assest in AU’s brand development on the web. I feel that implementing multimedia content on the front page of the AU & SOC website that profiles AU faculty, students, institutes is a good 1st step (BU is a good model). Being fluent in multimedia will be a distinguishing factor for graduates and faculty alike in the modern age.
[1] http://academhack.outsidethetext.com/home/2008/twitter-for-academia
[2] http://www.american.edu/soc/news/snow-days.cfm
[3] Beyond Censorware: Teaching Web Literacy. Penn Web Literacy Interactive
[4] http://www.infolit.org
[5] http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/rr2.php
[6] http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article425.html
[7] http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article390.html
[8] http://tapor.ualberta.ca/Resources/e-text reading/Sutherland – Weaving – RT 55.pdf
[9] http://www.internetevolution.com/document.asp?doc_id=179505&page_number=1
[10] http://tapor.ualberta.ca/Resources/e-text reading/Sutherland – Weaving – RT 55.pdf
[11] http://www.infolit.org
[12] http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/publications/whitepapers/progressreport.cfm
[13] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_literacy#cite_note-0
[14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_literacy#cite_note-0