Talk:Module 1-b: History of digital libraries and library automation
From DL Curriculum Project
Instructions
1. Click an 'edit' link to type in your comments. Your evaluation may cover general issues concerning the module or a section of it, or you may make more fine-grained comments (e.g., on a particular section by referring to the section number or on a particular point by referring to the page and line number).
2. Add four '~' (without quotations) at the end of each comment. Your id, date and time will show up later.
3. Click the 'Save page' button on the bottom of the 'edit' page.
Module Objectives: Are the objectives appropriate for the topic?
Are the objectives observable? Will students be able to achieve the objectives, given the content in the body of knowledge?
Your objectives are good and through class discussion they should be observable. Is class discussion going to be through a wiki or threaded discussion board? I sometimes despair how students just seem to parrot one another in both of those media. Chat makes it a little more obvious whether they have read and comprehended what is being taught. Looking at his again, I assume this is a face-to-face class, not a web or distance one, correct? In that case classroom discussion should be sufficient. Gregoryv 16:28, 12 December 2007 (EST)
Since this module is laying the foundation, I wouldn't worry too much about students "parroting" each other...this is background that they all need and I wouldn't expect much original analysis here. I believe this would work in an online course.Hahnt 17:26, 27 December 2007 (EST)
I find that factual information does not always make for good web-based discussion as students, if they are required to post, simply repeat the same thing over and over. In the classroom the instructor can by asking supplementary questions move the discussion along much better than in a web-class.Gregoryv 18:21, 28 December 2007 (EST)
As I look at the objectives again, I'm not sure that students will be ready at this stage to "describe ways in which areas of research and development that fed into early digital work affect current digital library library." I think that is a worthy goal, but perhaps won't be realized until later in the course.
Hahnt 18:00, 27 December 2007 (EST)
I agree with the statements that people in online discussions tend to repeat each other... :-) It's also difficult to get a good discussion going in asynchronous email, since people have to wait too long for a reply. More seriously, though, this is only supposed to cover 4.5 hours work - it is a bit much to think that students are going to have a really good grasp of the development of digital libraries.
My worry is about the amount of content compared with the total time of 4.5 hours. There are,
for example, 28 items on the reading list, some of which are web pages pointing off to dozens
of other pages. Even just taking these items, at 3 hours for 28 items, the students have about
seven minutes to read each paper. Leskm 11:41, 1 January 2008 (EST)
Body of Knowledge: Does the module address all areas of the topic that need to be addressed?
Will the body of knowledge enable students to achieve the objectives? Are there any topics that you think are critical to add to the body of knowledge? Are there any topics on that you would remove from the body of knowledge?
I think you have addressed about as much as is possible in the beginning unit. I might cut, but I would not add to it. Gregoryv 16:18, 12 December 2007 (EST)
I am a little puzzled by the title of this module: History of Digital Libraries and Library Automation...this is not about library automation as I understand it, except to the extent that OPACs and library automation are one of the research (and development) streams that fed digital libraries.
The section on funding sources for digital libraries (9.e) is quite detailed. While it is all relevant, I wouldn't expect it to take up too much space in this course, nor do I think the three readings are necessary. There are some other sections that have no corresponding readings...consider deleting some of the multiple readings associated with this section and adding at least one reading in the sections that don't have them. Hahnt 17:36, 27 December 2007 (EST)
Under the question of past work that helped push digital libraries along, you don't mention library preservation and microfilming. I think you spend too much space on internal Federal government organizational issues (the exact composition of DLI-1 and DLI-2, for example). You seem to have nothing about non-United States projects -- is this intentional? Leskm 16:52, 2 January 2008 (EST)
Readings: Are the readings the best and most appropriate for the topic?
Are there any readings that you think are critical to add to the list? Are there any readings on the list that you would remove?
I have taught digital libraries at USF at least 4 times. I have used some of the readings that you list and have found that the more "humanities-oriented" students have problems with the D-Lib readings. They commented on class evaluations that the readings were too difficult in the beginning weeks of the class. I have used John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid's book to ease them into the dicussion of digital libraries. Of course, the computer savvy are sometimes bored as a result. It is a hard call given the diversity of the students in a LIS program. Gregoryv 16:16, 12 December 2007 (EST)
I suggest the book Digital Library Development; the View from Kanazawa, ed. Deanna Marcum and Gerald George, Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2006. 269p. $68 (ISBN 1-59158-244-X) Hahnt 17:48, 27 December 2007 (EST)
Another book that might be used as a textbook to cover many of the background topics is: Digital Libraries: Principles and Practice in a Global Environment by Lucy A. Tedd and Andrew Large, 2005, K.G. Saur: Munich, 280pp, £57.53,ISBN 3 598 11627 6. Hahnt 17:54, 27 December 2007 (EST)
Since the list is too long already, I'm hesitant to add anything, although the Project Intrex report cries out for inclusion. How about cutting back to Vannevar Bush, "Readings in Information Retrieval" by Karen Sparck Jones, and "The Anatomy of a Search Engine" by Page & Brin. Otherwise, just tell people to look at the websites of a dozen DL projects. Leskm 16:53, 2 January 2008 (EST)
Learning Activities: Are the activities appropriate for the topic?
Will students be able to accomplish the activities, given the content in the body of knowledge? Will the activities enable students to achieve the objectives? Can you think of any other class activities appropriate for this module?
I did not see any activities per se for this modeule -- just classroom discussion. I have students do a short mini-paper on one of the digital libraries pioneers ( I know they are young for the word "pioneer.") or DL projects just to force every student to learn a bit more in depth about at least one individual or project. Gregoryv 16:34, 12 December 2007 (EST)
I agree that asking students to explore one historical development--in the form of projects or pioneers, and then sharing that with other students might be an appropriate activity, especially this early in the course. Hahnt 17:55, 27 December 2007 (EST)
The module is very big for one class session. I'd limit things to "have each student pick one DL project and explain why it is interesting." Leskm 16:54, 2 January 2008 (EST)
Level of Effort and Prerequisites: Is it feasible to teach the module as it is currently constructed?
Is the level of effort required in class appropriate to the scope of the body of knowledge? Is the level of effort required prior to class appropriate? Is the prerequisite knowledge required sufficient for students to comprehend the body of knowledge?
It is certainly feasble to teach the unit as it stands. It will be a lot of students to comprehend who have no background in digital libraries. Depends a lot on your students' backgrounds and experience.
I agree that a lot of jammed into this module. The only way to cover this breadth would be to do it fairly superficially. But that's probably OK, given that all the students need this broad background. If there is time, it might be better to break it up into more than one module. Hahnt 17:58, 27 December 2007 (EST)
I think there is too much material to be covered in the time available. Leskm 16:55, 2 January 2008 (EST)
Overall Structure of the Module: Is the current module well structured?
Can the topics and their corresponding resources be easily divided? Is there a clear mapping between the objectives and the content of the body of knowledge section? If not, how could the objectives be mapped to the body of knowledge more clearly?
I like the overall structure of the modeule, and I think there is a clear relationship between the objectives and the body. Gregoryv 16:10, 12 December 2007 (EST)
I don't know whether other modules will address the current funding available for digital library initiatives, but if not, then that would be important to talk about here. Recent developments at NSF, with NDIIP, etc. are confusing and disturbing. It's not clear where the funding will come from, and for what.
Otherwise, this module does a good job of threading together many streams of development that brought us to where we are today. Hahnt 18:15, 27 December 2007 (EST)
Additional Comments
As far as I can see, this process is not a good argument for online discussion. We've each just made separate comments.
There does seem to be general agreement that the outline is very ambitious. Is there going to be a cut-down revised version? - Michael
