The Terrible 2.0s? Web 2.0 without tears
On Wednesday I attended a CoFHE event at the Open University in Milton Keynes.
The event was titled “The Terrible 2.0s? Web 2.0 without tears” and covered a variety of Web 2.0 topics such as podcasting, blogging, wikis and social software in general.
The keynote speaker was Peter Godwin, who started the event with a talk on Information Literacy and the Google Generation. Peter’s presentation was very interesting with lots of thought-provoking points made about today’s students (like those made in the CIBER report earlier this year). The main theme emerging from the talk was how today’s students are visual learners who like to learn in small chunks. Like Peter admitted though, doesn’t that describe a lot of us? Definitely something to think about when I’m next preparing material on “boring” (Peter’s words not mine!) topics such as Information Literacy though! He also included one of me favourite YouTube videos, A Vision of Students Today, which it was great to see again. I’ve previously written about Peter’s book which he co-edited with Jo Parker, Information Literacy Meets Library 2.0, but just to highlight it again, it really is a very interesting read for anyone involved in teaching information literacy skills.
The next talk was by Jane Knight and Steve Burholt from Oxford Brookes. They shared their experiences of podcasting for libraries from both a librarian and a techy point of view. I found this approach very interesting, it was good to hear about the practical experience for the librarian but was very refreshing to also hear from the techy side. I think it made a lot of us in the room (including myself) realise how much effort is needed to successfully implement a regular podcast for the library. The enthusiasm of the group from Oxford Brookes is certainly to be commended! You can view a copy of the slides for the presentation here.
We then had a break for lunch, which was a great opportunity for networking. I had a number of interesting conversations with other people at the event, mainly discussing new technologies and examples of good practice, as well as the inevitable hurdles people are encountering when trying to implement these new Web 2.0 technologies.
After lunch we had a session on social software by Christian Cooper, a lecturer from Thames Valley University who favours a social constructivist approach to teaching and learning. He discussed educational uses of social software including group critiques (particularly useful for Art and Design students), reflective journals and collaborative learning. The main content of his presentation concentrated on the use of blogging as a tool for learning by encouraging students to use it as a reflective journal of their learning experiences. You can view a copy of the presentation here.
Following a short CoFHE AGM, we then had the opportunity to have a guided tour of the Open University library, and explore the DigiLab, a room within the library for all OU staff and researchers to use to encourage them to explore new technologies and think about how they can apply these technologies to learning.
The DigiLab visit was my personal highlight of the day. Keren Mills, Digital Services Development Officer, gave us a brief introduction to the room and the main purposes of it before taking us to have a look. The room contains different areas of new technologies - it has an area for gaming (including a Wii, Xbox and Playstation2 amongst others), a PC area (for both gaming and advanced software packages), a Mac area (for podcasting, video editing etc.), and a mobile learning area (with PDAs and Smartphones). There are also a number of publications for general interest (I’d be in heaven in there with all the geeky magazines!), as well as copies of reports demonstrating how the technologies can be used (e.g. there was a report on mobile learning and some factsheets for anyone who is new to the area). The room is designed to be a creative space and is very informal in nature, it has comfy chairs and even Lego, plasticine and pipe cleaners to encourage creativity! What I particularly liked about the space was that it is open whenever the library is open and anyone is free to use the facilities whenever they want to. When we first went into the room, there was a group gathered around the Macs and PCs discussing their project on Second Life and it was great to see academics and researchers really embracing the new technologies and thinking about ways to use them to improve learning. The room is still in its infancy and Keren says there are still some concerns from staff that trying these new gadgets is just playing rather than working. I think for the majority of people that have visited the lab though, it is clear that it is an educational space and I hope more academics will take the opportunity to visit it and use the technologies. OU is a pioneer in this sort of thing, but I really hope we see similar schemes being set up in other Universities.
At the end of the day I had a brief tour of the Open University library, which I hadn’t realised had only quite recently been opened for students and the general public (when I say recent, I’m talking years not months, but I’d always naively assumed that all academic libraries were mainly used by students). I was surprised at how relatively small the stock area of the library is, but I hadn’t realised that OU don’t offer a postal lending scheme so the stock they have is only really for academic staff and local students. I can see why they don’t have a postal loan scheme as I’m sure it would be a logistical nightmare, as well as very expensive. Aberystwyth currently offer this for their distance learning students (I’ve never used it though to be perfectly honest!) but then they don’t have anywhere near the student numbers of the OU studying from a distance. It really highlights the importance of schemes such as the SCONUL Access scheme to allow students to borrow or at least use the material at their local libraries, and also the importance of providing access to e-books and e-journals so that OU students can access material from home. The OU Information Helpdesk is in the staff office too, as all their enquiries are taken by phone, e-mail or online chat. It was very interesting to see an academic library which supports a totally different user base to the traditional academic library. I think we were all a little bit envious of not having to deal with group study room bookings and various other annoying things, but I’m sure there are the fair share of problems working with student from such a distance!
All in all it was a very enjoyable day with a good mix of sessions and great networking opportunities. I also happened to meet fellow blogger Clari who works at the Open University, it was nice to meet her in real life. :)
Jo Alcock, University of Wolverhampton -
taken from her podcast http://www.joeyanne.co.uk with thanks
Spaced Out? Design solutions for effective learning spaces in academic libraries
June 19th 2007, TVU, Slough
Click here for event presentations
Ain't Misbehavin'
A joint CoFHE Mid-West and UC&R BBO event, this was a stimulating day, full of new ideas and angles on a difficult and generally under-discussed topic. The day was designed to bring attention to the issue of student behaviour in libraries and how best we can manage it.
The first speaker was Ged Lombard, a psychologist based in Wiltshire, who works mainly in the Further Education sector. He has spent many years helping 'problem' teenagers and using this wealth of experience, gave a lively and humorous talk. There was, of course, a serious side to it all, and this was to show us how our own behaviour, actions and body language can do little to help a difficult situation, and indeed can often make it far worse.
Jude Carroll from Oxford Brookes University library led the next session, which continued Ged's theme of looking at ourselves and our own body language. This was highly interactive and made us all think about our own methods of approaching misbehaving students and how, by employing an open and balanced body stance and a steady voice, we can appear more confident and less submissive. We also considered where our bottom line was with bad behaviour, enabling us to take a consistent approach, yet not picking up on small things that don't really matter.
After lunch (during which we were allowed to visit Reading University library), Dean McIlwraith talked to us about the University of Warwick's innovative 'Learning Grid' - an additional facility to their more traditional library, where students have 'ownership' of the space and equipment and enjoy 24-hour access. It was interesting to hear about the successes and failures of a project so very at odds with what we normally associate with a library or learning resource centre.
The final session was another interactive one, lead by Matthew Lawson from Guy's and St Thomas's library (part of King's College London). First of all, he explained how he has tackled bad behaviour in his library. In simplifying and clarifying the rules, he made them more reasonable and therefore easier to control. They decided to avoid pettiness and to meet students half way, for example allowing the use of mobile phones as long as the functions are silent (such as text messages) but still banning ringing phones and phone calls. Flyers were produced outlining the ‘Good Conduct’ guidelines and explaining why rules such as ‘no food and drink’ exist, finding that once students understand why a rule is in place, they are more likely to adhere to it. With these clear guidelines, staff have found it less daunting to approach misbehaving students and anyone now breaching a rule can expect an official letter from Matthew (the first in a series of three that get increasingly severe). Dividing into groups, we then had a chance to discuss a particular behaviour issue and how we could find new ways of improving the situation in our own library.
I found the whole day fascinating. As a subject I had previously thought little about, I found it comforting that problems such as noise, eating and drinking, and mobile phones are common to every library. I found the tips on body language useful as I had never really considered how my approach may not be helping me or the student(s) I am trying to talk to. In coming back to work, the idea that has stayed with me the most, is the need to explain and justify the rules we set. It does no good to keep a rule simply because it has always existed. If the students find the rules incomprehensible they are less likely to take notice of them, but conversely, are more willing to comply if they can see how the rules benefit everyone. I thought the two morning sessions particularly were excellent, as they were lively, humorous and interesting, and overall the day was extremely thought-provoking.
Anne Taylor, Corpus Christi College
February 2007
Fifty-odd assorted librarians, learning advisors and learning technicians gathered at Oxford Brookes University’s Gipsy Lane campus for a varied yet coherent and cohesive programme of talks and discussions on a variety of topics relating to e-learning.
The first speakers, Gary John and David Crook from the Copyright Licensing Agency cheerfully acknowledged that they weren’t used to such large audiences, as most people’s reaction to “a talk about copyright” is to remember a previous engagement and make excuses. Gary gave a quick run-through of the terms of the copyright licences for FE institutions, and David followed him with information about licences in HE.
Reassuringly, they confirmed that it’s entirely reasonable to find the whole thing daunting as copyright is a very complex area, full of pitfalls, and digitisation of material is only adding to the problem! As single or multiple copies of documents or images can be scanned, retyped, stored, faxed or emailed and uploaded to VLEs by even very averagely competent IT users, it’s probably all too easy to fall into a trap. (Indeed, there was a certain amount of guilty shuffling in the audience as we all remembered those things we ought not to have done.)
In answer to questions, we were reminded that there were exceptions and allowances made for users with visual impairments, or specific learning difficulties, like dyslexia. There is no limit on the amount of scanning or manipulation (eg. enlargement) of documents or images permitted in order to make them accessible.
An hour-long session is nowhere near long enough to consider everything to do with copyright, although it’s probably as much as most people can cope with! We touched on the distinction between “viewing” and “downloading”, the scanning of material published in the UK and how to check reciprocal arrangement for the reproductive rights agencies in other countries (especially important in e-learning), the issues of multiple hard copies versus access to all in digital format, and the importance of ensuring that online resources are password protected, thus accessible only to authorized, and therefore licensed, users.
Finally, the message was simply to remain “copyright aware”, and to keep checking the CLA website (www.cla.co.uk) and the CLA newsletter Clarion for up to date advice and information on how to remain well within the e-copyright boundaries.
Next up were Artie Vossel-Newman and Andy Kirk from the JISC Regional Support Centre (South-East), who reminded us of the range of (free) online resources available. Andy demonstrated (eventually – there was a frisson of schadenfreude as the system initially failed to connect – we’ve all been there!) the Resource Discovery Network pages, and encouraged setting up a link to the RDN search box directly from a VLE, thus (we hope) bypassing Google.
We also had a chance to play with the Classroom Performance System interactive voting pads, as Andy “asked the audience” a series of questions about the JISC resources (we all did very well, which is reassuring.)
Andy announced that as from June RDN is being rebranded, and will be know as Intute. You read it here first.
Artie’s “famous Tech-Dis box” disgorged a range of tools designed to make ILT use more entertaining, interactive, and comfortable. Artie is very conscious of the risks of RSI, and encouraged us to consider ergonomic keyboards and wrist-rests, as well as large-format keyboards for the visually impaired and similar devices. She also recommended alternating hands when using the mouse, to avoid strain – this will also engage the left (or right?) side of the brain and make you more intelligent and creative!
The challenge is to keep up with the technology being designed to support teaching and learning! Artie showed us a USB/MP3/voice recorder which could be particularly useful for students with dyslexia, and demonstrated a video recording device, which looked like something from an ENT department, but was used to capture on film 50 librarians all waiting for their lunch. She then played the tape back and proved to us that our attention was drifting as none of us had spotted the alien running across the room! (You had to be there…..)
It was absolutely no reflection on Andy and Artie’s presentation that we were all more than ready for lunch, simply an indication that we’d all been concentrating very hard and had a lot to discuss. For forty minutes we ate (very good) sandwiches and crème brulee (top marks for Catering, OB!) and chatted, networked, and exchanged e-mail addresses, experiences, ideas and plans.
Back from lunch, the first session had the title “Librarians take centre stage” and Debbi Boden and Gwyneth Price, obviously feeling inadequate after all Artie’s whizzy technical stuff, entertained us with a ninety-second version of “Alien” – presumably downloaded from the Reduced Hollywood Company’s (or similar) website with scant regard for copyright – fortunately Gary and David had left by then!
But, seriously, folks – this session was packed with food for thought, as Debbi opened up questions about the nature of e-learning, or “blended learning”, reminding us that ILT is simply another tool to use, (and just sometimes, whisper it low!, not even a necessary one). However, as a VLE is an ideal forum for teaching information literacy skills, Debbi demonstrated some examples of online courses, created with different software – WebCT, Blackboard and Moodle - including the very impressive OLIVIA course that she has developed and managed at Imperial College.
The skills needed to create online materials are usually those that library staff already possess, whereas information skills are not included in teacher training. Development of VLEs gives the ideal opportunity for library and teaching staff to work together, and for librarians to have an input into the quality and management of online learning in their institutions. Debbi and Gwyneth touched on the opportunities for marketing LRC services , including the “Borrow a Librarian” scheme, whereby teaching staff who may be reluctant to come to the library or acknowledge that they lack research skills, can book time for a member of LIS staff to visit them for one to one training.
“This is our time” was the rallying cry. Debbi spoke about “digital natives and digital immigrants” – those for whom the online world was familiar and comfortable and the rest – significant numbers of learners and teachers who are running as fast as they can but might never catch up with the “millennium generation”.LIS staff are ideally placed to bridge the gap, and offer the support, quality monitoring and advice necessary for cohesive and effective online learning.
Following on from this session, Irmgard Huppe and Richard Persaud from Oxford Brookes delivered “last but by no means least” talks about how to embed information skills in the curriculum, and the technical and pedagogical aspects of successful VLEs. Irmgard warned against setting expectations too high, pointing out that end-users of VLEs have many issues and barriers to overcome, which must be taken into account when planning online courses. The “digital natives” are still not as widespread as many policy makers seem to imagine, and even those who are technically confident may not have access to the necessary technology to support large files or non-standard formats. We were urged to consider access issues, technical support and to remember that not all users are skilled and confident IT users, but that LIS staff can help in number of ways. Once again, LIS staff have a role to play, with the National Qualifications Framework urging the need to “demonstrate progress in knowledge and skills development”.
Richard Persaud, Assistant Subject Librarian explained how the library staff at Oxford Brookes had “sold” themselves to teaching staff and become fully involved in delivering online information skills training through their VLE. He demonstrated some online quizzes, designed to help students access, evaluate and use resources, and reported proudly that among the feedback comments was one that said “I enjoyed the course so much that I’m considering becoming a Librarian”!
So, you’ve got a VLE – now what? Well, a lot of hard work, that’s what, and opportunities to build relationships with curriculum staff, develop our own skills, and for LIS staff to “take centre stage” and rule the entire known world / work with curriculum staff to connect “real world” skills with virtual learning.
Deborah Guest
Swindon College
Fit for purpose:
the training agenda for LIS workers
University of Reading, 3rd March 2005
Training is an issue important to everyone involved in LIS at all levels, so it was no surprise that a great variety of people from all sorts of backgrounds attended this event. The day's sessions likewise approached training from a variety of perspectives.
Barbara Chivers from UCE started the day by giving her take on the role of university education in training LIS workers. Her introduction to the history of LIS education was both interesting and informative, particularly the insight that courses are coming full circle from their origins as more and more people take up distance learning opportunities. Barbara emphasised the important role universities have to play in education and the unique learning opportunities that they allow, which makes the news that the course at UCE is to be discontinued all the more disappointing. How other university LIS courses will cope with the current demands being placed on them remains to be seen.
Next up was Michael Martin from CILIP with a session entitled Enhancing opportunities, rewarding achievement. He was, of course, talking about CILIP's new qualifications framework, and in particular the revalidation process that we've all been hearing about. An enlightening practical had us scribbling down our ideas for items which could be included as evidence in our revalidation portfolios. The exercise was also useful for Chartership candidates like myself, as Martin made us think about the aims and requirements of portfolio evidence. Everyone attending surely left the event with a few more ideas on their list of things they might include.
After an excellent buffet lunch, Kathy Patterson introduced us to Reading University Library's staff development hour, a weekly hour long session in which members of staff can choose from a variety of learning experiences. Unbelievably, as well as finding up to five topics for attendees to choose from every week, the scheme manages to provide around fifteen completely new sessions every term! These include technical computer issues, introductions to different online resources, various management issues... the list goes on. From an outsider's point of view, it was interesting to hear about Reading's approach to staff development and the broad spectrum of opportunities that are on offer for library workers.
The staff development hour isn't of course the only staff training that goes on at Reading, so following on, Gordon Connell and Katherine Battley gave a presentation on their Chartership scheme. While Gordon gave us the supervisor's perspective, Katherine told about her experiences as a Chartership candidate. The scheme at Reading involves a well structured training programme focused on the New professional's handbook, and it certainly seems to have been successful. Gordon and Katherine both spoke enthusiastically and gave the impression that the programme is working well. As a Chartership candidate this was an interesting opportunity for me to see how the training is approached in other institutions. The presentation was informative for all the trainees and supervisors in attendance, and no doubt inspirational for anyone yet to take the plunge.
To wrap up the day, Liz Annette spoke about NVQs for LIS workers. This was a great explanation of how NVQs work for those of us hitherto in the dark, though it wasn't a surprise to discover they involve yet more portfolios... Liz's presentation fitted in well with Michael Martin's talk on the framework for qualifications, ensuring that the day fully addressed training at all levels.
By the time Liz' presentation was over, everybody had learned a great deal from this superbly organised event. A good time was had by all and everyone left more knowledgeable about the variety of training available in the LIS world - definitely a successful day.
Lynette Dobson
Senior Library Assistant
Corpus Christi College, Oxford
As a librarian who is currently seeking work I have been asking a few questions about my choice of career and the purpose that I am fit for. My experience in this profession as well as a master’s degree in library studies is not enough in itself to guarantee a role in the library and information profession. In attending the “Fit for Purpose” event I sought to reassure myself that I could find a purpose for my fitness.
The event commenced with the registration of around 20 people from an array of diverse backgrounds and experience in Further and Higher Education libraries.
The first speaker of the day, Barbara Chivers, a Senior Lecturer in the School of Computing and Information at the University of Central England in Birmingham, gave a keynote speech on “Education and training-a university perspective”. This included a description of how the university curriculum in the provision of library courses at masters level is adapting to the changing needs of the library profession. The paper provided an interesting insight into the evolution of Information and Library Studies Education. This covered undergraduate and postgraduate courses from the first correspondence courses at the turn of the 20th century to distance learning courses which had become fashionable by the end of the century and into the new millennium.
Barbara also discussed the changing needs of ILS students in the 21st century and the reason why people are attracted to pursuing a career in librarianship and the idiosyncrasies of those enrolling on Master's level library studies courses. She gave reasons such as “wanting to make a difference”and “the allure of public service” and referring to characteristics of the students said they are “really nice people” and “people you want as your friends”. I found these perceptions to be similar to mine as I have made many friends during my time as a library assistant and more recently as a librarian.
After having been provided with such a positive profile of the Library Studies student I was eager to hear what Barbara had to say about the benefits of such courses. She gave a number of examples such as “universities provide a safe zone to develop new knowledge...by doing so help objectivity and raise confidence” . I felt this to be apposite as this was what drew me to the idea of taking a career break to study for my masters in Information Management and Library Studies many years ago.
The talk concluded with a less optimistic look at the future role of higher education in library course provision. She mentioned that the higher cost of courses in tandem with a reduction in employers' library training budgets will probably lead to fewer courses being offered by universities to full time students. However, Barbara concluded by suggesting that universities may offer more part-time and distance learning courses, thereby taking the university back to the days of correspondence courses and perhaps “back to the future”.
After a short break for coffee, Michael Martin of CILIP gave a short presentation on the changes to CILIP's Framework of Qualifications. He managed to unravel the complexities in less than half an hour. This included an examination of the new certification scheme for para-professionals and subtle changes to the route to Chartership and Fellowship. He emphasised the importance of keeping records of achievements in library work and that work undertaken outside the domain of librarianship may also be of importance when applying for a CILIP award. At this point we were asked to take part in a practical exercise.
This entailed being split up into 5 groups of 4. Each member of the group listed a recent task that they had undertaken at work along with how they could prove that it was done. The evidence could be in any media from a photograph of one’s presence at an event to an e-mail acknowledging a task. The lists were jotted down on a sheet taken from a flip chart. This didn't take long. Michael presented each sheet to the whole group and discussed the merits of each one. Each group relayed different experiences and gave varying degrees of evidence of achievement. This exercise I found to be reassuring as it enabled me to think more positively about the contributions I had made during my career to the various libraries I have worked in.
It was now lunchtime and I could see that the morning's keep fit exercises had given me an appetite. A delicious lunch was provided in a pleasant, tastefully furnished room thereby encouraging the conversation to thrive. This gave the attendees a chance to meet informally to exchange news and views with each other about libraries or perhaps other matters.
Following lunch Kathy Paterson gave a talk about Staff Development and the Workplace. She described the staff development hour at Reading University Library from its origins seven years ago and its evolution into an effective instrument for training both library and non library staff. This talk was delivered with a show of enthusiasm and she stressed that one of the reasons for the success was that "people love visits because they love to learn". She also emphasised that people from other departments in the university have attended the training hour from the Vice Chancellor to cleaning staff with the result that it has given library staff the opportunity to gain recognition for the work that they do.
Next up, before tea, were Gordon Connell (supervisor) and Katherine Battley (trainee) who are involved in the Chartership programme at Reading University. Gordon gave a talk on Chartership through the eyes of a supervisor whilst Katherine gave the trainee's perspective. This was done very amicably and with an injection of wit . The double act was effective in explaining succinctly and clearly the complicated business of chartering.
The final Act of the day belonged to Liz Annetts focusing on Non-professional opportunities. This involved a short talk about the process of National Vocational Qualifications (NVQ's) and the City and Guilds. She stressed the contribution that these qualifications have made in enabling library assistants and non-professional library staff to gain recognition for the work that they did. She also discussed the new opportunities being offered by CILIP's Framework for Qualifications. This pleased me as during my time as a library assistant many years ago no such scheme existed. The only door that was open to me was to go to library school. The session was brought to a close with a simple practical exercise. Each member of the group was asked to jot down on a post-it note the processes involved in issuing, discharging or renewing a library book. We were given a few minutes to scratch our heads and think about this before sticking them onto the flip chart at the front of the room. The results surprised me; as many as twenty processes were identified from money handling to manual handling!
This was an entertaining end to a day packed with information. The presentations and handouts were first class and helped to maintain an air of positive energy throughout the whole event. The only reservation I had about the event was that more time could have been given for a small debate following Barbara Chivers's Keynote Speech.
This aside I can honestly say that I feel much fitter for having attended this event and will be maintaining my training in order to fit whatever purpose awaits me in the intrepid world of libraries.
Geoff Morgan
Access Now! Disability and equality awareness for academic librarians.
Rewley House, Oxford University, 4 December 2003
A group of librarians from academic institutions scattered throughout what can loosely be termed “the midlands” gathered in the University of Oxford Department for Continuing Education in Rewley House at the start of December. Eschewing the temptations of Christmas shopping we were there to clarify our thinking on our provision for disabled students.
Chatting to other people it seemed that most had some experience of trying to apply disability legislation, and all were enthusiastic about the need to provide services for disabled library users on equal terms with other students.
The first speaker, Laura Selbekk, is a registered access consultant and she spoke with some degree of humour about part 3 of the Disability Discrimination Act. As she is a disabled person, the humour was not misplaced. Part 3 of the Act outlaws discrimination against disabled people in recruitment, employment and in the provision of goods, facilities and services. This is the bit of the Act that applies to academic libraries that are open to the public, and places on us an obligation to make “reasonable adjustments” so that disabled library users can enjoy the same facilities as everybody else. We were given the opportunity to laugh at photographic evidence of other people’s poor efforts to comply with the Act and to feel a glow of satisfaction and confidence that we – or at least, our institutions - would not do anything so crass. Would we?
But leaving aside the buildings themselves, one of Laura’s points was that much can be achieved at little or no expense by reviewing the attitudes and practices of staff, a position developed in the afternoon by Chris Porter from Birmingham University Library. This theme that buildings were not the problem was amply illustrated by the fact that we were in Oxford University, where many of the buildings are listed and cannot be physically adapted. This does not mean that one of our great seats of learning is condemned to be in contravention of the DDA. It is the people who work in the buildings who can make the adjustments necessary for disabled people to receive a service on an equal basis.
The second speaker was Jocelyn Goddard from SEMLAC, the new regional development agency for the Museum, Library & Archive sector in the South East. It seems that the South East must at certain points overlap with the mid-west! Part of SEMLAC’s remit is to help museums, libraries and archives in their area to develop accessible and inclusive collections. “Accessible and inclusive” embraces cultural diversity, disability and social inclusion issues, and SEMLAC can advise on initiatives in these areas. More information is available on their website at http://www.semlac.org.uk
There followed the usual attractions of a Rewley House lunch, which must be a useful marketing tool when publicising events!
After lunch the first speaker was Lawrie Phipps from TechDis, a JISC funded organisation which aims to improve provision for disabled staff and students in FE and HE through technology. He took a critical look at websites displaying a logo such as the Bobby logo, which is intended to show that the website is accessible. His conclusion was that many websites with an accessibility logo were not really entitled to display one and had misunderstood the requirements. Confused? Worried that your institution might be one of the offenders? TechDis can help you solve your web accessibility problems through their online database, their email help desk and their staff development programme: http://www.techdis.ac.uk/
Finally Chris Porter from Birmingham University Library talked about practical issues for academic librarians with regard to Part 4 of the DDA, which extends the Act to cover education. Once again we looked at what are “reasonable adjustments”. Those suggested included: ensuring that information about library facilities should be available in alternative formats; that staff should help readers to get books from inaccessible shelves and should advertise the fact that they are willing to do so; that disabled students’ assistants should be allowed to take out books on their behalf and that disabled students should not have to repeatedly identify themselves in order to get a particular service.
Chris’s list of references was particularly useful, and these websites should become familiar to all librarians who are trying not to discriminate against disabled students:
Disability Rights Commission http://www.drc-gb.org
Learning & Skills Council: http://www.lsc.gov.uk/National/Partners/
DisabilityDiscriminationAct
Skill (National Bureau For Students With Disabilities) http://www.skill.org.uk
Claud (Librarians in HE working to improve library access for disabled users in the south & south west of England: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/claud
The whole day was interesting, thought provoking and contained masses of useful information.
Angela Brady
Brunel University
CoHFE Mid-West Summer visit to the National Monuments Record Centre
NMRC, Swindon, 12th June 2003
It must have been the warmest day of the year, and the modern Perspex bus-shelter languished, incongruous and desolate, on the edge of the courtyard, dwarfed by the impressive backdrop of Swindon's former railway works. Was this a poignant metaphor for the difficulties besetting current public transport planners as they grapple with the legacies of the past and the conflicting demands of the present, I wondered sombrely…….
We, a group of HE and FE librarians, had descended on Swindon for the afternoon to attend the CoFHE Mid-West AGM and to be given a tour of the National Monuments Record Centre, part of English Heritage, in their imposing premises, a stone's throw (well, if you are an Olympic shot-putter that is!) from Swindon railway itself. Here we were, in glorious sunshine, on the second leg of our tour, under the instructive and informed tutelage of Elaine Davis - NMR Outreach and Education Officer and an archaeologist and local historian by training - awed by both the stature and yet deceptive simplicity of these buildings which had once housed the designers, engineers and officials of the GWR, in a style befitting the architects of God's Wonderful Railway. These buildings were constructed, it was said, from the stone extracted from the tunnel (a tunnel which seemed so long to those first rail passengers, that some of them refused to travel down it) cut through Box Hill in order to complete, in 1841, the last section of the London to Bristol line, under the inspired direction of a certain Isambard Kingdom Brunel.
The first phase of our tour had begun half an hour earlier in what had been the Chief Mechanical Engineer's office, where we had been privileged to view a fascinating array of photographs from the NMR's collections - pictures of St Giles' Fair in 1907; May-Day celebrations from the same period, by Taunt; aerial photographs of Stonehenge and Avebury; and the well-known photograph of Holland Park Public Library in the Blitz, with several, apparently unperturbed, readers, scanning the bookshelves amidst the rubble and chaos.
Now outside the building, we could admire its handsome proportions and the contrasting textures of the stonework and learn to spot, from the subtly differing shades of the materials, where, at a slightly later stage, an extra floor had been inserted into the top of the building, under a pitched roof with enormous skylights let into it to give as much natural light as possible, in order to accommodate the designers of the carriages and locomotives. We could also admire, by contrast, the new, modern, windowless extension where the archive of old and valuable material is today kept at a steady temperature of 8 degrees Celsius and 23 percent humidity, with special 'slow oven' facilities to bring any material needed for consultation up to normal room temperate over a period of 24 hours. We also learnt, in passing , that Swindon had made railway history in another sense too - when it had installed the first ever refreshment rooms for the public, being at a suitable mid-point between London and Bristol.
Back inside the building again now for the third part of our tour, we could turn our admiration to the elegant curves of the banisters and their supporting balustrades, as well as ponder the changing attitudes and responses to health and safety concerns over the years. The balustrades, which are rather widely spaced, now have protective glass panels in front to stop anyone falling through, and yet the knobs, which were originally positioned at intervals along the banisters to stop the post-boys from sliding down them, have been removed, as they have been deemed a safety hazard in their own right. However, even the most intrepid of us did not rise to this obvious challenge, tempting though it was! Whilst still on the subject of health and safety, we also learnt that the railway works prided themselves on their self-sufficiency. Nothing was imported ready-made, everything was manufactured on the site from raw materials, even, rather soberingly, right down to the replacement limbs for injured workers.
Having climbed the stairs to the top floor extension, our attention was drawn to the the cunning draught-snafflers, or glass window shields which rise at a tangent from the window sills, original features allowing ventilation to penetrate the rooms without sending all the paperwork flying, and again we contemplated gems of social history as we were encouraged to compare the expansive fireplace in the Chief Engineer's office with the inevitably puny and inferior ones provided in these design halls.
The top floor where once the carriage designers sat and worked is now home to the public access 'red box' collection, containing 500,000 photographs of buildings ranging in date from the 1870's to the 1980's and derived from various sources. 400,000 oblique aerial photographs of locations throughout England are also on open access in Swindon and there are 2,400,000 vertical aerial photographs of England, including near-complete coverage taken by the RAF in 1946-48. There is also a library, which is open to the public for reference purposes ( and housed in the former locomotive design section of the building). The library has an extensive archaeology and architecture collection, with 196 current journal subscriptions and 800 new items added every year. There is also a set of Pevsner and Victoria County History volumes, including the new edition of Pevsner, currently being published by Yale University Press, some of whose images have been provided by the NMR.
Increasingly material from the collections is being made available on the Internet, including the PastScape website of archaeological sites and historic buildings in England (www.pastscape.org.uk) and the Images of England website, a photographic record of England's listed buildings (www.imagesofengland.org.uk).
But finally back to that undistinguished bus-shelter. No, it's not a mocking monument to current transport endeavours, but more a symbol of today's over-fastidious obsession and preoccupation with health and safety. This is not in fact a bus-shelter at all, but a modern-day workers' sin bin. The cigarette bin, in the corner, with an empty coffee cup on top, says it all.
Many thanks to everyone who helped make this day so very enjoyable and informative, including the weatherman!
Sue Palmer
Oxford Brookes University Library
Here to be heard: negotiating and advocacy skills for librarians.
Reading College, 3 April 2003
Held at Reading College, this day event aimed to encourage librarians and other information professionals to use advocacy and negotiating skills to achieve various goals. Chief amongst these was the ability to influence the people that count in our oganisations
Lyndsay Rees-Jones from CILIP in her introductory presentation gave her definition of advocacy and outlined its importance for us all in the workplace. She emphasised the support that CILIP is able to provide to practitioners in a variety of ways. Importantly, Lyndsay stressed the importance of using techniques from marketing and sales in order to raise the profile of libraries, to ensure that their key role in organisations is taken seriously.
Tessa Shaw from Queens College Oxford led an interesting interactive workshop on negotiating skills. Tessa’s insights into strategies for successful influencing, with her excellent clear handouts provided the audience with much to think about and take back to use in the workplace.
From a different perspective, Mark Taylor talked of his experience managing change with LIS when Windsor and Maidenhead became a unitary authority in 1998. Mark gave us an incisive and interesting insight into further strategies for influencing people that count when he talked through his own case study. Many of the strategies he discussed could be usefully applied to different situations in a variety of organisations.
Ruth Smith from Unison talked about the role of advocacy and negotiating from another perspective. She drew attention to the services that Unison offers which actively assist and support members, some of whom are in isolated posts in the education sector including libraries.
Andy Turner then talked about his own experience at Reading College of advocacy and negotiation when the new learning resources centre was being planned and then put in place. This was followed by an interesting tour of the new LRC.
Attendees came from a wide variety of backgrounds in the profession, reflecting the level of interest in advocacy and negotiating skills. The opportunity to network with colleagues from a variety of organisations was an additional bonus to an excellent event.
Jenny Rutt, Queen Mary's College Basingstoke
Teaching Real Skills Virtually: Information Skills Training via Virtual Learning Environments.
Black Horse House, University of Reading, Tuesday 3rd December 2002
Armed with my pen and paper, I set off for the joint UC&R Berks, Bucks and Oxon and CoFHE Mid-West Circle annual event! I was lucky, I literally had to step out of the backdoor of the Main Library on the Whiteknights campus at Reading University and I had arrived! Others, however, travelling from as far a field as Glasgow, had to persevere with the horrendous clogged up roads of Reading or the delayed trains (no change there then!). With all of the travelling stories and the obligatory coffee and biscuits behind us, we took to our seats, waiting to hear a packed programme that we hoped would change the way we deliver our information skills forever…
I had only one expectation of the day and that was that all those who would be speaking would be from the Further or Higher Education sector, how wrong could I be? Alan Noble, the Head of Adult Learning for Bucks County Council, kicked off the day in tremendous style with a presentation on blended learning alone at home. In a struggling financial position it was refreshing to see that Public Libraries are taking on board the need to educate their readers. What was more impressive was their vision to do this electronically through VLEs, to help support those who otherwise might be cut off. Alan gave an inspiring talk not only about the implementation of VLEs, but also about the cultural change that he had to introduce at a staff level, to get them on board and to help them play a part in a “truly learner centric organization.”
Richard Everett, the Head of ICT at Oaklands College, St Albans, took to the stage next to present a case study on the MLE, or Making Learning Exciting strategy as he referred to it, in place within this Further Education institution. Richard reinforced much of what Alan had said, particularly in relation to adopting a collaborative approach to the management and utilisation of an MLE. This was further enhanced by the presence of his ‘right hand lady’, Carol Howard, who is the MLE co-ordinator at the college. Both talked of the need for teamwork, the importance of a steering group and also the idea that cultural change needs to take place, identifying that this is a slow process to achieve. Using a series of screen dumps helped the audience to see some practical examples of the development of their virtual environment.
After some questions, Dr Mandy Bentham, a Lecturer and Curriculum Advisor at the School of Oriental and African Studies, wowed the audience with her personal experiences of setting up a VLE for students taking her course. Mandy gave a lecturers perspective on how to use VLEs to support teaching, which was based and had grown out of trial and error. The use of a virtual environment for teaching is something that is particularly relevant to Mandy’s subject area, which is based on fast moving current affairs, reinforcing the importance of web-based resources. Mandy also picked up on the significance of the discussion board facility. She believes this enables students to communicate their ideas in a better way than in face-to-face situations, by posing questions to each other and sharing personal experiences. This enabled Mandy to take a backseat in her role as their lecturer and provided interesting reading, helping her to understand her students more!
During the lunch break, Sue Egleton, the event organiser and Learning Support Co-ordinator at Reading University Library, took people over to the Main Library for a hands-on session of her Blackboard course. This allowed for more practical questions to be asked about implementing a virtual environment for teaching and learning, and it provided an opportunity to show off our new ICT facilities including the ‘Class in a Box’ laptop computers.
After lunch, Dr Susannah Quinsee, a Lecturer in the Educational Development Centre at City University, gave a presentation on her experiences of supporting students and staff who are using VLEs. Many of her examples were based on distance learners, noting both the benefits and the problems of flexibility brought on by e-learning, including overcoming the isolation factor through discussion boards. Susannah also stressed the need for development and not just training when using such technologies. She also reinforced the need for any virtual environment to be responsive and flexible to meet the needs of different groups of users, whether they are members of staff or students.
The final speaker to take to the stage was Jo Parker, the Information Literacy Unit Manager for the Open University. Jo’s presentation focused upon VLEs already in place at the OU, namely MOSAIC: information skills for distance learning students and Safari (Skills in Accessing, Finding and Reviewing Information). Jo argued that delivering information skills to OU students could only be done virtually due to the underlying principles of the OU. The Safari package has been underway for some time now, but efforts are continuing to develop MOSAIC, particularly as it is a very generic package and it is a stand-alone specialist course. MOSAIC, Jo believes, gives information literacy a status in its own right, particularly as completion of the course counts towards ten points at level one of an OU course! A fantastic achievement for Jo and her team and surely a milestone for the recognition of the importance of information literacy by the academic world.
It was a fantastic day and I thoroughly enjoyed it! Sue and her team did an excellent job of organising it. It was great to hear from such a range of speakers who have had different experiences and are at different stages, all of which is helping to raise the profile of information skills training via VLEs.
Kim Sherwin (Liaison Librarian at Reading University)
SaiL away! Student access to independent learning
University of Reading, Thursday 27 June 2002
The CoFHE Mid-West Circle 2002 AGM and summer event was attended by 35 people. Having located the library after a pleasant ramble through the attractive Whiteknights campus, we assembled in the Finzi Book Room on the fifth floor. This room contains the literature collection of musician Gerald Finzi (1901-56), and provided an interesting contrast to the main focus of the afternoon, the Centre for Student Access to Independent Learning Facilities.
After registration and refreshments Julia Munro, Reading University Librarian, gave a welcome address and this was followed by the AGM and open forum. Celia Ayres, Head of Systems at Reading, then gave a presentation on “Plotting the right course”, outlining how the ‘S@iL’ Study Centre was planned and implemented within the main library while still offering the normal service. She listed a number of questions that anyone thinking of setting up a similar facility might ask, starting with “Where do you want to go?” - which might seem obvious, but was a useful warning against forging eagerly ahead without fully considering the desired outcome! The most crucial question, she felt, was probably “Whose help do you need to get there?” Other useful tips included “Learn how to manage your managers – they don’t always know best!” and “You can never have too much communication with stakeholders”.
The next presentation was by Dr.Julia Phelps, Development Officer for Teaching and Learning, on how ‘S@iL’ is contributing to the University’s teaching and learning strategy. Teaching staff had been consulted about what they would like to see in the Centre, and the team responsible for developing it had looked at what other universities are doing as well as investigating the latest technology relating to teaching and learning. Consideration was made of providing facilities relevant to the needs of a wider range of students from a variety of social and educational backgrounds, and of the limitations imposed by space and by the money available, the latter thanks to a substantial grant from HEFCE.
After further refreshments, Celia and Julia took two groups on a guided tour of the Centre, which proved to be a hive of industry. The project is now well under way and provides a drop-in PC area with over 75 machines plus printers, scanners, DVD and CD drives; a study advice office; presentation facilities; special needs equipment; a laptop docking area and a help desk staffed during core opening times. The Centre aims to support independent student learning and to help staff take advantage of electronic media and communication tools in their teaching.
I’m sure many of us were envious of the facilities offered at Reading, and admiring of the teamwork that had gone into enabling its implementation and success. Thanks to the staff involved in hosting what was a useful and enjoyable event.
Chris Keable
"Stressed out" or "stress, out!!": How to stop worrying and love your job
CoFHE (Mid-West) Circle and UC&R (BBO Section)
Rewley House, Oxford, Tuesday 27 November 2001
The programme note: "The workshop sessions will be highly interactive. Delegates are advised to wear casual attire" filled me with a mixture of trepidation and anticipation before we piled into the room and made our bleary-eyed way to the coffee (well, I did). The event was - as managementspeak would have it - multi-faceted, with four speakers who tackled the subject of work-related stress in a multitude of ways.
First off was Olivia Pearson, a subject librarian for Business and Management at the University of Westminster, who reported on her PhD research into librarian-student interaction in academic libraries. There is not much literature about dealing with customers in the HE/FE environment, and the findings of Olivia's research were centred on the deliverers (that's us!) rather than the customers. She had collected her data from two focus groups and a questionnaire sent to the Lis-link maillist, and read out some shocking examples. The findings could be divided into three main areas: organisational factors, role-based factors, and individual status-based factors. Organisational factors include disciplinary procedures and the role of management, which both have a significant bearing on how customers value librarians' work. Role-based factors include enforcing rules away from the desk, negotiating rules at the desk and teaching. Individual factors are gender, race, age, and status. 17.3% of the responses referred to students questioning the librarian's status. One was even told she "should be glad for a job". I would have had difficulty with that one.. Olivia concluded that stress is not just a state of mind, as it is impossible to wish away a lack of organisational support, or an expanded student population. However, whilst the great majority of reported encounters were negative, only 7% would really like to have the face-to-face contact removed. How interesting!
Andrew Lees, a freelance management consultant, stood up next and asked us if we were stressed.. that is, whether we found the "interactive environment" comfortable. He then turned the situation around by asking us what stress factors would be affecting him as a speaker. After explaining the prehistoric provenance, biochemistry and physiology of stress, he asked us to list what we considered stressful in our work and its detectable signs. We worked through what we had written, and thought of practical ways of handling the listed causes and effects. We listed interruptions, miserable people and meetings (amongst other things), and the overriding sign of stress as a change of character. Coping mechanisms include knowing your own stress-signals, looking for your own ways to relax, looking for variety in what you do and understanding how you may stress others. Andrew had a relaxed and friendly manner, which complemented his obvious experience of leading interactive workshops on the