I was pleased that my proposal had been accepted (apparently there had been 28 proposals and 10 were chosen to speak), but I was incredibly nervous about talking at the conference. I was even more nervous when I found out the week before the event that there were 90 delegates; I had only expected it to be a small event (as had the organisers who were pleasantly surprised by how many delegates they had!). Some of the organising committee met us the evening before for dinner, and I soon realised that many of the speakers were as apprehensive as I was – we were all in it together.

The venue was London Metropolitan University, and those of us who had arrived the day before were escorted from the hotel to the event (which was a relief – navigating the tube isn’t so tricky when there’s a group of you!). The speakers had the opportunity to set up before the delegates arrived and it was good to have chance to ensure our presentations displayed as planned as well as get a feel for the room and the microphones. A couple of people’s presentations didn’t display as expected despite saving in the correct format, so I linked my laptop to the projector and some of us used that instead – I knew it was a good idea to bring my proper laptop!

There were three sections of three presentations centred around a theme, as well as the first speaker, Katie Hill, who had her own special section on the consumer generation at the beginning of the day. My presentation wasn’t until the afternoon in the section around marketing ourselves; there were also sections on meeting the challenges and career profiles.

The presentations were as follows:

The New Generation:
“The Consumer Generation and How it is Changing the Library and Information Profession”: Katie Hill, Serials and E-resources Assistant, University of York

Meeting the Challenges:
“Why Are We Still Defined by Our Building?”: Ned Potter, Digitisation Coordinator, University of Leeds
“Attracting Young People into the Profession”: Sarah Newbutt, Assistant Librarian, The Grammar School at Leeds
“Gaining Skills in the Social Aspects of Libraries”: Lydia Mayor, Knowledge Advisor: Research and Training Support, Eversheds
Followed by panel discussion chaired by Christopher Rhodes, New Professionals Co-ordinator, Career Development Group

Marketing Ourselves:
“Unleashing the Potential: New Professionals in the Workplace”: Emma Illingworth & Sarah Ison, Assistant Information Advisers, University of Brighton
“Beyond the Counter: What Skills Can New Professionals Offer in the Public Library Sector”: Kath Aitken, Reader Development and Stock Management Librarian, Derbyshire County Council
“Market Yourself Using Online Tools”: Joanne Alcock, Resources Librarian, University of Wolverhampton
Followed by panel discussion chaired by Dave Percival, Vice-Chair, Diversity Group

Career Profiles:
“From Old School to New Profession”: Hazel James, Librarian, Dame Alice Owens Secondary School, Hertfordshire.
“New Technologies, New Professionals”: Nicolás Robinson, Graduate Trainee, EC3: Science and Scientific Communication Evaluation, University of Granada, Spain.
“Wanted: New Professionals for Public Library Service”: Anne Sherman, Literature & Reading Development Officer, Cheshire East Council
Followed by panel discussion chaired by Sylvia James,Treasurer & Board Liaison to the First Five Years Council of the Special Libraries Association

Laura, one of the delegates, has written a fantastic summary of each of the talks over on her blog (part 1, part 2, part 3). The summaries cover a lot more than I can remember – I made some notes but missed some, especially those in my own section as I was sat in the panel with my back to the screen! There are also some write ups on the day from Kathy Ennis (CILIP) and Lizzie Russell (Sue Hill Recruitment).

It was a fantastic event (I may be biased but I really enjoyed the other talks!), and it was great to see so many new professionals passionate and enthusiastic about the library profession. I really liked the structure of the event; the panel discussions with involvement from the audience were really interesting. There was plenty of opportunity for networking too, with breaks throughout the day and a long enough lunch to eat as well as network. As well as new professionals, some delegates had been in the profession for longer, and representatives from CILIP and Sue Hill Recruitment were also there. There seemed to be quite a mix of sectors from delegates and speakers; academic, public, school and corporate librarians.

I actually really enjoyed presenting for the conference, it was a little overwhelming at first but after a minute or so I realised it really wasn’t that scary. There is quite a lot of interest in online networking at the moment and I had a number of people speak to me after the presentation, as well as contact me privately since the day. It’s great to think that I may have inspired someone to start using these tools and makes all the effort and nerves worthwhile. I’ve been asked to speak at the CILIP Graduate Day in September and hope to be able to share my experiences there too.

Overall, I’m really glad I chose to take Meredith Farkas’ advice to try new things, and at least now I’ve lost my speaker’s virginity maybe next time it won’t be so scary!

I chose to talk about online networking and personal marketing as I thought it would be particularly relevant to new professionals,  and I could share my own experiences. My presentation introduced professional networking and then went on to discuss three web tools which can be used for professional networking; blogging, microblogging and social networking. I introduced each tool and how it can be used for professional networking, and shared my own experiences of them using the Joeyanne Libraryanne blog, Twitter and Facebook as examples. I concluded with 10 top tips to get the most out of using online networking tools for professional purposes.

I have added both the presentation and conference paper to my Slideshare account, and they are also embedded below (easiest to view if you use the fullscreen option). Please let me know what you think, is there anything I’ve overlooked?

This year’s event had a number of themes around the concept of blended learning including collaborative work, content, ePDP, formative assessment, and e-submission and feedback.. The presentations were primarily from current University projects, many of which are coming to a close. It was interesting to hear about the work going on in the academic schools on e-learning, although it was a little disheartening to learn about some of them as I had no idea they were going on and feel our department could have offered support for some of them. Nevertheless, a lot was covered in just one morning, and it was really good to find out about some of the initiatives going on around the university.

Supporting Creative Practice in Virtual Worlds

Denise Doyle was first and spoke about her project on supporting practice in virtual worlds. Denise has been using Second Life for two years to support her teaching within the School of Art and Design. She has used it to hold in world seminars, although found more staff presence is necessary than would be in a traditional classroom environment. The island on Second Life owned by the school has also been used to host exhibitions of student work, with the advantage that the space can be developed in a creative way. Denise’s current project is coming to an end, but she would like to research further into how Second Life can be used in collaborative practice to reduce issues such as geographical location and to share areas of work with other practitioners around the world.

“I wish we’d had these”: video podcasts for the dance studio

Dennie Wilson and Ben Andrews spoke next about video podcasts they developed for use with dance students. They created a series of 7 podcasts and hosted them on a webfolio which was also used to enable communication about the podcasts via the e-portfolio. The podcasts featured current and alumni students; beginning with instructional podcasts, gradually becoming more conceptual. The school also had 25 video iPods which could be borrowed to access the podcasts. Students found the podcasts useful, and those who created them wished they had been available whilst they were studying the module.

The use of Facebook as a tool for collaborative learning…. and infinity!

Dean-David Holyoake spoke next about his use of Facebook with paediatric students. Dean-David and his colleague John Thain built a community on Facebook for one of their module groups. The group was closed access (i.e. only those on the module could join) and was voluntary. A few students joined in the first week, and within three weeks all 20+ students in the group had joined the Facebook group. The group was mainly used as a supportive learning community with little input from Dean-David or John. The group gossiped, shared experiences and resources, and built an online support system.

E-Evolve and Enhancing Employability

Rob  Edwards was next who spoke briefly about the E-evolve project (Enhancing Employability and Vocational Opportunities by Learning in Virtual Learning Environments). The idea of the project was to create a repository, on the institutional VLE, storing useful resources and links relating to developing skills to enhance employability. Resources include powerpoint presentations, Adobe Presenter video lectures, Word documents, and self-test quizzes. The resources are available for anyone in the University to use, and currently has around 1500 subscribers who have accessed the content.

Facilitating Experiential Learning of Study Skills in Sports Students

Mark Groves and Julian Smith talked about their project which aimed to improve study skills support to Year 1 sports students. They adapted the core sports module (250 students) and replaced what used to be a study skills lecture in a traditional style to a blended learning approach whereby they would first have a subject specific lecture, and then be expected to use the VLE to learn about the week’s skill (including information skills which were created by library staff) and complete a related task. They would then need to bring their completed task to the following lecture where they received feedback in small groups in the form of a tutorial. They found that the students engaged with the learning far more when using the blended learning approach, and as a result pass grades for the module increased.

Screen capture tutorials: teaching music technology software

Rebecca Summers from the music department demonstrated her screen capture tutorials for using music software which she know uses in her lectures instead of demoing at the front of the room whilst students try to follow. Rebecca used iShowU ($10 on Mac) to record the videos, and took just one take – she didn’t write a script or plan the video too meticulously, just did it as she would in a lecture situation. Students preferred learning in this was as they can work at their own pace, and it also leaves the lecturer free during the lecture to help on a 1:1 basis without holding the rest of the group back. 67% of the students also looked back at the videos in their own time, which is another key advantage over a traditional lecture.

Designing a student support website

Jon Rhodes from the School of Art and Design spoke briefly about the student support website that will act as a supplementary service to the face to face support provided by the Centre of Learning Development. Unfortunately the site is not live yet, although a lot of work has gone on including the main design elements and ensuring the website is easy to use in different format, which is particularly relevant as many of the potential users (e.g. dyslexic, visually impaired) may require elements such as different background colours and varying text sizes.

“Help is never more than a click away” (blogging to aid transition to HE)

Catherine Lamond from the School of Education shared their experience of using blogging as a tool to aid transition to HE for students on the foundation degree, many of whom also work full or part time. The blogs were launched at the pre-induction session which gave students a voice to air any concerns they had before the course started and during the first few weeks. Tutors and others in the cohort were encouraged to comment on blog posts, and they found that students got a confident boost, particularly if a tutor commented on their blog.

Academic Skills Development Arena

Nicki Walsh, shared the Academic Skills Development Arena (ASDA!) that she had created for students to improve all areas of academic skills. In the past students had been given a link to a Word document with links on, but they found that this was not very easy to use, so Nicki developed an area on the VLE which links to useful web resources as well as some images, text, and activities designed by Nicki. She is hoping to develop this further adding more materials to be used as part of modules and also as a stand-alone training guide.

An evaluation of Learner Response Systems in HE

Diana Bannister and Andy Hutchinson from education partnerships gave an overview of their work in the evaluation of Learner Response Systems (LRSs) in Higher Education. Turning Point is used throughout the university for different uses, and Diana and Andy furthered the research they had already completed into the use of LRSs in schools, the REVEAL project. They emphasised the importance of sharing good practice across the university.

Delivering student feedback: the role of podcasting

Steve Cooper from the music department knew that student’s weren’t making the most out of their written assignment feedback and were only really using it to check what grade they received. He decided to use podcasts to give feedback and bury the grade in the podcast to ensue students listened to the feedback. Steve used Audacity (also recommended at the CoFHE Conference talk on podcasting), and a relatively decent microphone to ensure the feedback was clear. He didn’t edit the files, and left them with the natural style and tone as if it was part of a conversation. Each track was around 3 minutes in length, and Steve found he could grade and give feedback on around 6 an hour (i.e quicker than written feedback). He identified the files by student number on his staff web space. Feedback from students showed that 70% felt it was more constructive; they felt it was more personal, like a tutorial session, and the use of tone for criticism made it easier for Steve to give constructive criticism. He found there was a collective motivation to getting the feedback and felt that students engaged with it far moe than they would written feedback. Most of the students also kept copies of the files on their computers to refer back to when working on a new piece. The issue of auditing came from the audience, but Steve confirmed that a CD of the feedback had been satisfactory as an alternative to written feedback sheets.

Laurie Roberts, Liaison Librarian at QMU, explained the use of podcasting at QMU and introduced iTunesU (iTunes University) – watch introductory video for an overview.

You can download a copy of Laurie’s presentation, which includes relevant links as well as her notes.

As part of Laurie’s job role, she has the task to investigate use of Web 2.0 technologies and how they can be used to support the library services. Laurie therefore “plays” with web 2.0 technologies, explores potential use for library, and attends courses to discover new tools and share good practice. Currently, QMU are using a library blog, Flickr account (to share photos of the library and any events they hold), Facebook page, YouTube videos, Twitter, and Meebo (for virtual enquiries) to communicate with their users and support the library service.

The focus of this particular presentation was podcasting and iTunesU, so Laurie began with an introduction to podcasting and some recommendations such as purchasing a decent headphone/microphone and using software such as Audacity to edit any mistakes.

At QMU, physiotherapy lecturers use video podcasts to teach anatomy – students can watch these at their own pace either on a PC or on their own mp3 players, iPods etc. The students appeared to engage more in this style learning and were able to prepare themselves for practical sessions by watching the podcasts and reading the recommended resources. There are around 50 videos on the examination and assessment for physiotherapists, and Laurie found that other academic schools were also using video podcasts to support learning.

Laurie decided to investigate the possibility of adding this material to a central store so that this material could be used by different students (e.g. nursing students may find the physiotherapist podcasts useful). After attending a seminar at the Apple Training Suite in London about iTunesU, Laurie decided it may be a useful service for QMU to use, and contacted academic departments to see if they would be interested in adding videos/podcasts for students to use. The emphasis is that “content is king” and it must be an institutional effort incorporating lecturers, IT, legal, marketing etc.

In order to set up an iTunesU account, there are quite a few hoops to jump through and the process takes quite a while. iTunes like you to have 300 items before going live, and ensure that you keep it up-to-date so that the page isn’t stagnant. You can have a public page (i.e. open to anyone), a private page (apparently works with Shibboleth or other authentication methods), or a combination of the two. QMU have 16 subject categories and are now organising the 400 items they currently have before launching the site. The front page can also be customised so designers are working on building an institutional page.

QMU are hoping to record some lectures to add these to iTunesU, possibly by using Echo 360 ( which I hadn’t heard of before but have since watched a great video from University of Birmingham). They are also hoping to record some student and staff views about the University to add to the iTunesU page, marketed as “Life at QMU”. I asked about library material and at the moment there are no plans to add library videos/podcasts, although they may consider it in future. They currently have library videos produced using Microsoft Photo Story 3, which could probably be re-used or adapted and added to iTunesU.

University of Warwick was recommended as a good example of an iTunesU page; Cambridge and Oxford also have a presence on there (as do Open University and Coventry University I have just found).

QMU have iTunes software on 10 of their PCs in the LRC, which are wiped each night to clear the iTunes libraries. I wonder how other institutions offer iTunes to students without having the issues of different music libraries, is there is a way to enable viewing of iTunesU material without having to edit the iTunes library? I guess syncing is an issue, would be good if you could just do it one way to add a video/podcast to a device but not alter anything else on there.

I’m really glad I managed to attend this session, it covered a lot of information about iTunesU which I didn’t realise but also some advice from lessons they have learnt at QMU which I will take back to my place of work. A presence on iTunesU is a big commitment; it needs to be an institutional decision and requires co-ordination of many departments. In terms of mobile learning though I think it could really help developments in education.

Interestingly, I updated my iPod Touch software to OS 3.0 when I got back from the conference, and noticed the iTunesU is now available directly from the iPhone/iPod Touch. I was really pleased to see this as I think the iPhone/iPod Touch can be a great tool in education; hopefully developments such as this will really help mobile learning gain popularity.

Ayub Khan, Head of Libraries (Strategy) at Warwickshire County Libraries, introduced the Encompass scheme, to encourage BME graduates to libraries.

Encompass is a three way partnership between CILIP, PATH (a skills development agency) and employers. Employers are asked to convert existing post or create new one on a 3 year contract basis whereby the trainee would be in the workplace 4 days a week and spend 1 day each week studying. The aim is for the trainee to have completed a CILIP-accredited postgraduate qualification in Librarianship and gain their Chartership by the end of the three years.

Benefits for employer

• Employer saves money in staff costs, national insurance – could save a threatened post.
• Also promote creativity and innovation through diversity
• Contributes to diversity and equality agenda of institution

Support for trainee

• Mentoring and support from PATH National
• Place provided on part time or distance learning CILIP-accredited course
• CPD opportunities provided by PATH
• Free CILIP membership
• Networking opportunities through CILIP and PATH

Outcome for trainee

• Masters in LIS
• MCLIP
• Network of contacts
• Increased employability

You can see more information on the Encompass website, including an Encompass toolkit, a standalone document with guidance and advice that can be used by anyone to encourage BME graduates to the profession. You may also wish to download a copy of Ayub’s powerpoint presentation.

Rachel Van Riel from Opening the Book gave a thoroughly inspiring talk about observing library users and how to adjust your library to suit your user’s needs. This is something that I was particularly interested in from a work point of view as I am responsible for a special collection for our trainee teachers and I’m not sure how it is currently used but feel it could be better utilised if it was laid out differently.

Rachel spoke about how libraries can learn a lot from retail and recommended Paco Underhill’s Why We Buy: the Science of Shopping (which I’ve added to my wishlist!) as well as the TV programmes Mary, Queen of Shops and I’m Running Sainsbury’s. Rachel referred to some of the interesting findings of Underhill, including the fact that 2 out of 3 shoppers want no assistance, and 50% of those who touch an item buy it. Obviously libraries are slightly different to shops, but many of the principles are transferable to libraries.

Rachel emphasised the importance of observing your library users, as we often have assumptions which may not be correct. Much of Rachel’s research so far has been with public libraries, but she has also observed in academic libraries with surprising findings. Some examples of her research include:

• Leaflets in an entrance area which were observed by security from 9am until 7pm. 1726 visitors entered the area; only 15 looked at the leaflets and no one took a leaflet. The institution re-considered the placement of the leaflets. Rachel’s advice is to try different places and observe – how many look, how many take – get evidence to help your decisions.
• Time of visit – could be observed by head counts or using the counters at entrance/exit. Evidence shows that libraries tend to be busiest around lunchtime, although this may well vary at different times of year and on different days, particularly in academic libraries (e.g. if there is a key lecture at a certain time). This information could be used to aid decisions with staffing and where priorities should be at different imes of the day – e.g. shelving, staffing circulation desk, roving enquiries etc.
• Observing age of visitors at a public library service, estimated by front line staff. The library service concerned thought most of their visitors were over 70, but in actual fact there was a wide range across all different age groups, with the most common age group 30-40. This helped shape the future direction of their service. Could also be used to look at gender differences or different demographic at different times.
• Length of time of visit, either by asking people on their exit (although perception may not be accurate) or by issuing slips of paper on entrance to be collected at exit. At a UK academic library, they found that the most visits range from 6 to 20 minutes; taking into account that many visits will have been well over this, there must also have been a lot of very short visits. In this case, the institution needed to make sure the needs of those who visit for only a short amount of time are met.
• Flow from main entrance – where do people go? A study in the academic library showed that the majority of people either went to the main circulation desk (near the entrance) or to the area on the ground floor with journals, book stock and study tables. Very few people visited the enquiries desk or IT desk, demonstrating that staff time may be better utilised by roving in areas of high traffic to assist users at their point of need. A more detailed study looked at how many users were using stock from the library – often difficult to measure if it is not borrowed. Interestingly, they found that the shelves had as much traffic as the IT area which surprised staff.
• Browsing – how do people browse the shelves? Do they suffer from the uncomfortable “browser’s neck”?! Important to make material easy to browse for those not looking for a particular item – use forward facing feature fillers and locate pertinent material at eye level if possible.

Whatever observation you undertake, it is important to have an easy to complete observation chart and ensure all staff observe in the same way.

The talk really highlighted the importance of observation and how such a simple thing can add so much more understanding about your service than just listening to those who volunteer feedback, as this is such a small proportion of your users. Certainly food for thought, and also encouraged me to buy Rachel’s book, The Reader-Friendly Library Service, which is primarily written for public libraries but has a lot which is also applicable to academic libraries. I felt really inspired after Rachel’s talk and hope to suggest some of the observation ideas in my own workplace.

The development of Library 2.0 and the use of Web 2.0 technologies in FE library services

Andrew Eynon, Library Resource Manager at Coleg Llandrillo Cymru, shared the work he has been doing with Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 technologies in FE. I subscribe to Andrew’s blog and follow him on Twitter, so it was good to meet him in person to see the work he has been doing in FE. He even mentioned my blog in his presentation too (thanks Andrew if you’re reading!) but I forgot to give him one of my lovely new Joeyanne Libraryanne cards.

Andrew started the presentation by asking is to discuss in groups the concept of Web 2.0, Library 2.0 and if they are the same thing or fundamentally the same. My group decided that Web 2.0 = user-generated, interactive, read write web; Library 2.0 = use of Web 2.0 in library context. Andrew added his thoughts that Library 2.0 is about the outcomes and processes rather than the tools and technologies.

The project he was involved in aimed to employ a Web 2.0 librarian to support library and teaching staff, discover how Web 2.0 is currently being used, look at the development of Library 2.0 in FE, and develop an online tutorial on Web 2.0 technologies (see presentation for full list of project aims). They also aimed to used these technologies as part of the project (e.g. using a blog to document the project progress).

The main outcomes of the project included a number of useful resources collecting current use of Web .20/Library 2.0, such as the FE Library 2.0 wiki, Library 2.0 in Wales wiki, the Library Web Quest (a staff training tool adapted from the Learning 2.0 programme) and the LibeRaCe blog for Coleg Llandrillo Cymru. Andrew spoke about the different uses of the LibeRaCe blog including lirary news, current awareness, marketing, suggestions, book requests, reference enquiries and a discussion forum. They currently get around 1000 hits per month on the LibeRaCe blog which is great to hear.

It was nice to see so many at the talk discussing the use of Library 2.0; some who are yet to try anything but eager to find out more, others who are experimenting with numerous different uses.

Sheila Cannell, Director of Library Services at University of Edinburgh, spoke about the current risks to libraries and how to try to overcome some of them during the recession.

The risks she highlighted included:

• Value proposition
• Human Resources – large numbers close to retirement age, little to attract newcomers to profession
• Durable goods – value of books decrease, value of space increase
• Legacy technology – still using old technology
• Intellectual property – using Google to find e-books etc.

Sheila made suggestions as to how these risks could be addressed, such as changing the perception of the library, investing in staff development, building a new vision for the profession, adapting the collection to use space differently, and collaborating to find new ways of doing things (e.g. collaborative digital books such as Hathi Trust).

She talked about how many of our users are in different places to libraries, using a version of the Web Trend Map with its distinct lack of library presence to demonstrate this (click image for larger version):

Web Trend Map from Information Architects (formforce on Flickr)

Sheila emphasised that the word “library” isn’t an issue, and instead of trying to rebrand as a different entity we need to focus our efforts on changing people’s perceptions of the library.

Some of the ways libraries can address the recession include:
1. Taking costs out of the business (e.g. giving user what they need, but not more than they need; review all activities and stop some if appropriate; review staff costs; increase productivity)
2. Finding other sources of income (e.g. diversification of income streams – charge for services, find different funding streams, new business opportunities, grants)
3. Collaboration (e.g. work with others to reduce costs or bring in income, cloud computing, hosted services – for example SHEDL, Scottish Higher Education Digital Library, which combines funds from Scottish HE institutions to allow access to wider variety of e-journals for each institution)
4. Innovation and creativity (e.g set a tone in library to encourage low cost innovative ideas, create a culture to discover small solutions that work for users)

As well as saving money, the recession gives libraries the opportunity to move on with other agendas, e.g. sustainability, digital, open access, empathising with user groups.

What can we do?

• Move to user’s space (e.g. Web 2.0)
• Provide easy to navigate digital environment
• Support institutional business in all ways possible (learning and research)
• Transform library as space
• Think about information literacy agenda
• Provide help, support and consultancy
• Measure impact! Value value value
• Be proactive
• Collaborate, collaborate, collaborate (users, others professions, other departments etc.)
• Listen to users

As many of the audience were managerial staff, Sheila also discussed how bosses need to adapt their skills to cope with the economic climate. She emphasised the important of looking after staff and also themselves by sharing values, motivating, developing, being open and honest to build trust, and the key – communicate, communicate, communicate.

I was pleased to see Sheila mentioning how important communication is; it’s something I’ve been harping on about for a while as I think it’s something that as a profession we need to improve, it’s been evidenced both at local levels in all the library work I have experienced, as well as on national level (such as the CILIP 2.0 event regarding communication from CILIP), and even further afield to global communication with other countries e.g. American Library Association. One of my main areas of concern when implementing anything at work is the consideration of communicating that change to both staff (within our department and further afield) and users.

Sheila’s talk was really interesting, it’s good that despite accepting the difficulties, we can focus on how to overcome these and there was actually a lot of positive ideas in her presentation. I certainly look forward to more collaborative work and addressing some of the other agendas affecting libraries at the moment.

If I’m being perfectly honest, I think there were a lot of us who were wondering if a session on copyright had been a good choice for the slot first thing in the morning on the second day. However, out doubts were proven to be unfounded when Jason Miles-Campbell from JISC Legal gave an incredibly interesting and upbeat presentation about the legalities of copyright and how to work with them.

Jason began with a really simple slide summarising the basics of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR):

Are you the owner? If not get permission, or use statutory exception.

It’s a simple concept but that really is the main premis behind IPR, and it was a great simplistic start to the presentation. He then went on to discuss his top tips surrounding copyright use in education:

1. Turn negative to positive – need to avoid using negative terminology and emphasise how re-using and adapting other material can mean a shift of focus to different pedagogy and approach to teaching rather than preparing materials. Set a good example by using material you are able to use with confidence and certainty.
2. Get it on the agenda – formulate a mission for the institution to use other people’s material to save money and resources, whilst raising awareness of copyright and what it means.
3. Tackle ownership issues – think about IPR of staff work (if it is produced for employment purposes then institution own rights) and IPR of student work
4. Declare an expert – have an institutional champion who is visible and can make decisions
5. Publicise your licenses – ensure lecturers know about licenses and what they enable them to do. There is support material on the JISC legal website and the license websites themselves.
6. Use what’s available – raise awareness of material that can be used; copyright owned material, license owned material and appropriate creative commons licensed material. Build up a bank of support material (e.g. institutional repository)
7. Integrate copyright – lead by example and show best practice; integrate into courses to raise student awareness.
8. Circulate case studies – examples of how to use the material available to you
9. Ask the question – ask the owner of copyright material if you/your institution would like to use it, and explain the exact purpose you would like to use it for, you may be surprised that people will allow you to use material for little cost (or even nothing at all!) if it is for educational purposes only. It may be worthwhile having a template of how to ask.
10. Use JISC Legal – wide experience of issues which JISC legal provide information on – they are not lawyers so cannot tell you what to do but they can offer advice. It’s a service you’re paying for so you should utilise it.

It was a really interesting talk and I will certainly be visiting the JISC legal site in future. I hope to work with our Copyright Co-ordinator (at least we’re already doing number 4!) to look at how we can help our lecturers, as I know it is a major issue for our academic staff at the moment; they’re are torn between the conflict of trying to offer online material and interactive resources, yet be aware of copyright when linking to external material.

Chrissie Turkington, Senior Advisor at JISC Regional Support Centre in the Northwest, talked about the basics of Shibboleth, and played JISCs Introduction to Federated Access Management video (embedded below). I hadn’t seen the video before and was impressed with the simple manner it explains something that is usually so confusing.

Chrissie then split us into groups to discuss the benefits and issues of implementing Shibboleth from different points of view; senior management, lecturers/teachers, IT staff, and learners. Interestingly, she had set up a FE Federated Access Management wiki before the session, and added to it as we gave feedback after our group discussion. Have a look at the wiki if you would like an idea of the discussions we had, and if you would like to add/edit the wiki I’m sure Chrissie would be happy to add you, she was happy for anyone in the session to collaborate on the wiki. The main focus was FE as the majority of the audience were from colleges, but similar principles also apply to HE.

e-books for FE: getting beyond handouts to providing a 24/7 digital library

I went along to this session more for information purposes, as I’m interested in e-books and how they are being used in education. Obviously, many of our prospective students are currently in FE and their experiences of e-books in FE may well shape their views and opinions coming into HE.

I was unaware of the e-books for FE project before the session, so it was interesting to hear that almost 3000 e-books covering core areas in FE are now available for all FE institutions for 5 years with ulimited concurrent usage. Even better, FE colleges has been consulted throughout the project to see what their needs are and which books they would appreciate having access to. Anna spoke about the project itself, including the consultation phase (over 80,000 votes were made regarding which e-books to purchase) and the details of the license the e-books are available on.

The books are available on the Ebrary platform, so a representative from Ebrary showed a demo of some of the main features. There were a few features which impressed me, such as opening as a web page rather than pdf (which means even mobile devices can open e-books), ranking  relevance from a search shown in the tables of contents (i.e. more relevant chapters easily identified), and including a citation and URL automatically when adding copied text to a document (although of course this may not be the referencing style you use). The issue of copyright was raised, and Ebrary has set up a restriction of 40 pages copy/print (i.e. if you copy 10 pages, you would only be able to print 30 pages), however this is per session which I think needs clarifying as it could potentially open it up to abuse. Ebrary can also customise the page for each college free of charge, and are looking at a pricing model to enable colleges to purchase extra books or newer editions to expand the collection.

The project sounds like a really great oppportunity for FE colleges, and something I hope will support them and their teaching as well as introducing students to using e-books for their studies.

The keynote was delivered by Fraser Muir, Director of Information Services and Learning Resource Centre at Queen Margaret University (QMU), who opened the conference with a presentation about the campus and its sustainable strategy. He began the talk by asking us some questions to respond to using TurningPoint voting systems. Interestingly, 45% of the attendees were currently involved in a new building project, and 63% of participants were actively discussing sustainability at their institutions. I was amazed at how many of us are involved in new builds, especially when you take into account the current financial issues many institutions are suffering.

Fraser went on to discuss project re:locate, which was established to enable design and planning for the QMU campus in Musselburgh which opened in 2007. The aspirations of the project were to design a campus which was welcoming, inspiring, had a community focus, learning centred, flexible, extendable, integrated, distinctive identity, and sustainable (saving money and environment too). One of the aims of the campus is to be the most sustainable in the UK; “to develop a sustainable community for learning and life”. Achieving this level of sustainability included consideration of many different areas within the campus, including:

• thermal insulation
• natural ventilation and thermal mass (absorbs heat in the day and releases it at night)
• lighting control systems
• biodiversity and sustainable drainage (they even have a family of swans on campus)
• low carbon footprint (including consideration about how people travel to the campus)
• sustainable IT
• efficient use of space

The Learning Resource Centre forms the bedrock of the academic building on campus, and is the only area to have increased in size following the merge of the two previous campuses (currently 4500m². The LRCs brief was to be the heart of the campus, technology-rich, environmentally friendly, and provide flexible learning space for students. There was a clear design emphasis on flexibility in the LRC, with flexible learning spaces and open areas for differing study purposes evident throughout the building. The study space ratio to FTE is 1:4 (half with IT access); in order to utilise space efficiently study spaces are merged with social spaces, terraces are utilised for PC access, and use of laptops turn classrooms/study rooms into an IT lab. 43% of the shelving is compact shelving to improve space effiency of the stock within the LRC. The ground floor is separated into a secure area (with the book stock etc.) and a non-secure area (incorporating the social PC areas and canteen).You can see loads of photos of the LRC at the library Flickr account.

Other initiatives to promote sustainability include reuse and recycling of out-of-date books with a local book donors agreement, and the use of canvas LRC bags (see below) which help reduce the use of carrier bags and also act as a source of income (£2 each).

QMU canvas bags

Another major issue is the use of IT; “IT strategy employed by QMU is absolutely fundamental to the overall sustainable strategy”. Fraser presented a scary statistic; UK HE and FE utilise nearly 1,470,000 computers and will have ICT related bills of around £116m this year. QMU have adopted thin client technology for the majority of their machines (still have some PCs which act as a backup). They estimate that they should get 5-6 years from each thin client and each also uses less electricity which combine to save a lot of money. The use of thin client also enables remote working, which can help reduce unnecessary transport and therefore the carbon footprint.

QMU have received an excellent rating on both CEEQUAL and BREEAM (where they were the highest scoring UK university project), and scored 17 ecopoints from Envest (lower scores are better; 22 points for an ecobuilding, typical building is 40 points). Their energy certificate score is B+ (with the only suggestions for improvements being solar power and wind turbines which QMU ruled out as they were too expensive).

Just earlier this week (I knew there was a reason for not finishing this blog post until now!) they won a Green Gown award for the Green ICT category, and were highly commended in the Sustainable Construction category.

You can read more about the sustainability at QMU on the sustainability section of their website.