Pull quote: “As librarians, the best use of our energy and our resources is to support the development of open educational resources of all kinds in order to make the digital environment a richer, more robust place for students and scholars. We should be what most traditional publishers are not in a position to be—guides through the digital wilderness, of course, but also the homesteaders who will build new structures for digital learning and publishing that simultaneously tame part of that wilderness and use its possibilities and potential to the fullest.”

Pull quote: “In the meantime, there are a few things the district—and other flailing school districts in America—can do. Stop giving standardized tests that are inextricably tied to specific sets of books. At the very least, stop using test scores to evaluate teacher performance without providing the items each teacher needs to do his or her job. Most of all, avoid basing an entire education system on materials so costly that big, urban districts can’t afford to buy them.”

Pull quote: “My primary use for this was my preconference: I was bringing data sets with me that I wanted my preconference attendees to download and use on that day. I have been to too many conferences and watched wifi crash too often to trust that I could rely on the convention center internet, so I loaded everything onto my LibraryBox, which was as simple as plugging the content USB into my laptop and creating a new folder. On that day, my attendees just needed to connect and download.”

Pull quote: “Map your library’s programs and services to the mission of the university and you will be seen as an essential strategic partner, not just another piece of costly infrastructure.”

Pull quote: “Net-neutrality advocates worried then that the new rules, if unchanged, could prove detrimental to cybereducation and research collaboration, among other uses of the Internet.”

Pull quote: “Now that people have several devices at work—a laptop, a phone, a tablet—they’re finding their way to a similar trick, where they use each piece of hardware for a different purpose. Consider it a new way to manage all the digital demands on our attention: Instead of putting different tasks in different windows, people are starting to put them on different devices.”

Pull quote: “We wanted to examine how student impressions and expectations of instruction librarians impact successful teaching and student learning, and likewise, how faculty impressions of us impact our interactions with faculty and resulting effects in the classroom.”

Pull quote: “There seems (to me) to be an unreasonable focus on creating learning spaces IN libraries (maker spaces, after school programs, writing programs) when libraries are embedded in communities where there are existing, active and credible examples of all of these already. Why recreate learning spaces in libraries? Why not get libraries and library resources embedded in those other spaces? I think this is particularly true for maker spaces, which require equipment, expertise and space that may not be found in the library.”

Pull quote: “Our overall approach is that we want to work alongside students (something that we’ve done before in our personalisation research) in a model that draws a lot of inspiration from a co-design approach. Instead of building something and then usability testing it with students at the end we want to involve students at a much earlier stage in the process so for example they can help to draw up the functional specification.”

Pull quote about threshold concepts: “These concepts, when grasped, so profoundly change the way students think that they are transformative and irreversible. Meyers and Land also believe them to be integrative, yet uniquely tied to a particular discipline. This last characteristic has become troublesome for librarians, since many of us don’t believe the transformative concepts that we want students to grasp are specific to our discipline. The experiences we are most interested in transcend disciplinary knowledge and can be applied to any number of post-graduate experiences in which being able to use information and create knowledge matters.”

Pull quote: “Referencing should connect readers as far as possible to open access sources, and scholars should in all cases and in every possible way treat the open access versions of texts as the primary source. Versions of the text that depend upon paid access (buying the book, or subscribing to the journal) should be relegated to the status of secondary sources, supplementary information for status-conscious academics (or their promotion committees), but not forming part of the core information about a text.”

Pull quote: “I found it interesting to work through the process that they went through, from realising that most users were starting their search elsewhere than the library (mainly Google Scholar) and so deciding to focus on making it easier for users to access library content through that route, instead of trying to focus on getting users to come to the library, to a library search tool. It recognises that other players (i.e. the big search engines) may do discovery better than libraries.”

Pull quote: “Mr. Asher is familiar with the criticisms of Google Scholar. After all, his own study listed them: ‘limited advanced search functionality, incomplete or inaccurate metadata, inflated citation counts, lack of usage statistics, and inconsistent coverage across disciplines.’ Perhaps for this reason, he sounded a bit sheepish admitting his preference. ‘I kind of hate to say it, since I am a librarian,’ he says. ‘We pay a lot of money for discovery tools. And then I go off and just use Google Scholar.’”

Pull quote: “This then got me thinking about how database interfaces are just plain awful. They are not intuitive. I like to think that if they were, then we wouldn’t need to have classes on how to use them in the first place. Secondly, databases may not necessarily engage the user in a meaningful way. Look at Wikipedia for instance. Wikipedia links its pages back and forth throughout the site. If there is a term that a user sees on a Wikipedia page, 9 times out 10, a user can gain more information about that term and read about it. I feel there are very few resources that allow one to do that. I also feel that the database pages are so overwhelming. There are numerous fields, check mark boxes, and jargon labels that it can be a bit much for an incoming freshman who’s experience with online research may just be Google.com. What’s the solution? Already, it seems that APIs may be the best way to go. If there’s a coder who can construct a better interface, or even better yet, tailor it to a particular audience, then we don’t need the boring, overwhelming front-end of x database. I’ve also seen more databases, APIs and discovery services that are using the one search box form of interface that students who have grown with the Internet are accustom to.”

Pull quote: “Dear [Name]: Thank you for sending the publishing agreement for Johns Hopkins University Press and portal. I’m very pleased to see that I will retain the right to post a copy of the article on my personal or institutional repository or online site. Retaining the copyright to my professional work is also important to me, so I’m wondering if there is an alternate agreement, or if the current agreement can be altered, so that I retain the copyright but the Press still has the ability to do what it needs to do with the content. If not, the current agreement is fine and I will happily sign, [etc.]. But if an alternate agreement is possible, I would prefer to pursue that option. Sincerely, etc.”