Project Objectives:
To avoid teaching to the tool, a set of objectives were developed to use the technology to help students “think like an archivist” by 1) increasing students understanding of and facility using archival information content management, 2) using the technology to transform metadata and provide a platform for evaluation of the results, 3) strengthening students’ critical thinking about options for archival cataloging and access for researchers, and 4) increasing students’ proficiency as the result of reflecting on their work, as well as doing it.
Project Achievements:
Overall, I think the project was a success. I was able to craft a more coherent course that addressed the concerns students had previously expressed when using the technologies in this course. Much of the success of the project is tied to the help and support of CRLT. CRLT’s guidance was crucial in three areas: articulating learning objectives, increasing student reflection, and better structuring the help process. Learning objectives: CRLT helped me to better articulate a set of learning objectives and then carry out learning objectives through the readings, assignments, lectures, and in-class exercises over the course of the term. These were clearly stated not only in the syllabus but in the assignments to keep awareness of these in the front of my and my students’ minds. This consistency provided a glue and coherence that had been missing from the course. Reflection: I had previously not used reflection in assignments. SO this was a new experience for me and a very positive one. CRLT staff also assisted me in crafting assignments that balanced doing and reflection. Adding reflective components helped me to assess learning and to address spots where students were not synthesizing and making the appropriate connections. For me, this was also an opportunity to see students’ progress toward ‘thinking like an archivist.” Help and Support: One of the challenges in dealing with ‘rough’ open source technology is the amount of support needed to get and keep students up and running with the technology. I brainstormed with CRLT staff on how to better structure the help. As a result I implemented online office hours through CTools in the evening and constructed better help documentation. The CRLT-led mid-term evaluation was also important in getting student feedback and fine tuning assignments and help for the last part of the term. CRLT also suggested being up front about the difficulties of the programs (which worked well) and encouraging students to help each other (which was not done systematically enough nor was this behavior rewarded and therefore did not work. This year I plan to do two things to enhance the course: 1) Better integrate social media, particularly developing a series of help pages in CTools using the forums or wiki, and try to support the students to support each other better and 2) Create a rewards system for students helping each other.
Continuation:
Yes, Access Systems for Archival Materials is taught yearly and I will be teaching this course again in the fall of 2012. As previously noted, I have some modifications regarding the help documentation and encouraging student to student mentoring that I want to introduce this fall. I also plan to take the pedagogical techniques of modeling functions and reflection into the other courses which I teach involving archival and preservation technologies. So I feel that I can transfer what I learned to other courses employing different technologies.
Dissemination:
Data collected as part of this project and related projects in the archival and preservation specializations at SI will be written up in formal journal articles and the syllabi, assignments, and discussion of the integration of technology in this course will be posted on our website http://virtualarchvieslab.org.
Advice to your Colleagues:
The support of CRLT staff was critical!