The Libraries are happy to announce our second round of OpenHawks funding, available to any faculty member or graduate student who is interested in using or developing Open Educational Resources (OER) for a UI course. If you are concerned about the cost or quality of your existing textbooks and would like to explore OER, this might be the nudge you need!
We’re offering a range of awards, depending on the type of project you’d like to complete.
|Award Type||Award Range||Requirements|
|Adoption||$500-$1,000||Use an existing open textbook for a course with no editing and minimal course adaptation required.|
|Remixing||$750-$2,000||Adapt, update, combine, or improve existing OER to replace a currently used textbook. Use of library-licensed materials may also be considered.|
|Support Materials||$1,000-$3,000||Develop test bank questions, teaching support materials, quizzes, interactive learning aids, or other support materials for existing OER.|
|Course Redesign||Up to $5,000||Redesign a course around the use of OER.|
|OER Creation||Up to $10,000||Create an original Open Educational Resource to be used in a course and shared under an open license.|
To find out more, visit the OpenHawks website. Here, you’ll find the Call for Proposals, as well as general information about OER, training materials, and more. Applications are due on April 24, 2020.
OpenHawks is a program funded by the Provost’s Innovation Fund (PIF) and UI Student Government.
By clinical education librarians at UI Libraries’ Hardin Library for the Health Sciences Jennifer DeBerg and Heather Healy
Since 2011, Hardin Library for the Health Sciences has provided a systematic review service to support research across the health sciences. Systematic reviews, a critical component of evidence-based clinical practice, follow a specific research methodology that attempts to identify, select, assess, and synthesize all the studies related to a specific question to guide decision making. Related review types include meta-analyses and meta-syntheses. All these review types need to follow a process that minimizes bias to ensure the results are valid.
ROLES FOR LIBRARIANS
Unfortunately, not all systematic reviews are conducted using a bias-minimizing methodology, which can have significant implications for decision making in healthcare. Several efforts have focused on improving the quality of systematic reviews that are developed and published.
Published in 2009, PRISMA—Preferred Reporting Items in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis—is a framework of reporting standards that addresses problems observed in methodology quality. Parts of the standards relate to conducting rigorous and systematic searches of the literature to locate the relevant studies and to reporting specific details of the searching process. Two important elements of the framework are the PRISMA flow diagram and the PRISMA checklist.
In 2011, the Health and Medicine Division (formerly the Institute of Medicine) of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine in the report Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews states that a librarian or other information professional should be included in developing the systematic review search plan. Additionally, a 2014 article by Rethlefsen, Murad, and Livingston from the Journal of the American Medical Association indicates that gaining assistance from librarians helps ensure thoroughness and reproducibility.
The primary role for health sciences librarians is to help develop and conduct highly sensitive bibliographic database search strategies that capture all the published evidence related to the research question. Hardin librarians have each attended formal systematic review training to learn the specialized literature searching process.
The training also covers the methodology for the whole review, as well as the reporting standards for reviews. Other roles librarians play can include
project manager, reference manager, reference screener, consultant for the team, and others.
The roles Hardin librarians play varies based on what the researchers need and may range from something simple, such as training the researchers how to manage records in EndNote, a citation management tool, or a thorough review of already-completed search strategies. More often, however, researchers request the most complete service, which may include all or a combination of the following: assistance with the development of the review protocol (the research plan); deciding which bibliographic databases to search; design of bibliographic database search strategies (including identifying and testing potential search terms); removing duplicates from the search results; finding missing abstracts; accessing full text of articles from the search results; and writing the search methods for reporting in the article or other end product. Sometimes, researchers request help with searching for grey or non-traditionally published literature, another part of review methodology that helps minimize bias.
Systematic reviews that demand the most extensive level of service require between 20 and 100 hours of librarian time. The total amount of time depends on many variables, such as the organization and communication of the research team, the nature of the topic, the number of databases to be searched, particularities of the databases, including subject heading availability and the quality of the indexed records. When this level of service is provided librarians request co-authorship on the resulting article because this level of contribution meets the standards for authorship recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. When lesser but still substantial assistance has been provided, librarians may request a formal acknowledgment rather than co-authorship.
Not all requests for assistance result in a published systematic review. In consultation with librarians, some researchers discover their project idea is not a good fit for the systematic review methodology, and so their project takes another direction. Systematic reviews require significant time and work, frequently taking a year or more to complete. In some cases, projects may be started but not completed due to the researchers’ time constraints, inability to secure a project team, lack of methodological expertise, or other reasons. Some projects are completed but are reported at conferences with no intent to publish the results as an article.
GROWTH OF THIS SERVICE
Between 2011 and 2016, the small team of Hardin librarians initiating and developing the service created a two-part workshop to help train faculty, staff, and students about developing search strategies for systematic reviews. They also developed a hard copy intake form and created an online guide that allow researchers to request assistance and to provide resources to help with their process. In this timeframe, the service received about 25 requests for assistance.
In 2016, several new staff joined the team and helped make important improvements to the service, including a redesign of the online guide (see link at the bottom of page 23) development of an online intake form and other documents needed to support workflow, implementation of an improved file structure for organizing projects, revisions to workshop materials, and regular meetings to discuss service changes and ongoing learning opportunities in this specialty area. Since these changes were enacted in early 2017, the service has received 109 requests for support from researchers. The total for the full duration of the service is approximately 170 requests for assistance.
Recently published systematic reviews have been completed with support from Hardin librarians, including Chris Childs, Jen DeBerg, Janna Lawrence, and Heather Healy. Reviews cover a wide range of research topics and appear journals such as World Journal of Gastroenterology, The Journal of Arthroplasty, Clinical Infectious Diseases, and Journal of General Internal Medicine.
ASSESSING THE SERVICE
For the past few years, a team at Hardin has worked to assess the impact of the systematic review service on reviews authored by health sciences faculty at the UI. Hardin librarians have co-authored or been formally acknowledged in 50 published systematic reviews.
The team has also examined whether the systematic reviews authored by UI health sciences faculty (whether they included a librarian or not) met standards detailed by the PRISMA checklist. The team found that approximately 75% of reviews include the PRISMA flow diagram, an important signifier of the quality of the review process. The inclusion of this diagram, however, does not reflect the quality of the literature search. The team’s findings indicate that measures of the inclusion of a replicable search strategy, which provides transparency for the search process, are around 40% and inclusion of both subject heading and keywords in the search strategies, a signifier of search comprehensiveness, are around 30%.
Hardin librarians are continuing to discuss how to improve the reach of the systematic review service in sustainable ways that might include further development of general training workshops or redesign of the online guide to help increase awareness of systematic review standards among faculty. The librarian team is small and expanding the service to increase the amount of direct involvement of librarians in systematic reviews is not feasible currently. Furthermore, increased awareness and use of the standards relies not only efforts by librarians and researchers but also on the awareness of the standards by journal editors and journal peer reviewers.
The assessment team is analyzing which departments publish systematic reviews most often and which are most likely to benefit from assistance. Hardin librarians are hopeful that as they extend education to those who need it most, they can continue to positively influence the quality of the methodology for systematic reviews in the health sciences.
FOR FURTHER READING
Visit guides.lib.uiowa.edu/systematicreviews for an online guide to the service.
The following list provides a sampling of recently published systematic reviews that were completed with support from HLHS librarians, including Chris Childs, Jen DeBerg, Janna Lawrence, and Heather Healy:
Ashat, M., Arora, S., Klair, J. S., Childs, C. A., Murali, A. R., & Johlin, F. C. (2019). Bilateral vs unilateral placement of metal stents for inoperable high-grade hilar biliary strictures: A systemic review and meta-analysis. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 25(34), 5210–5219. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i34.5210
Bedard, N. A., DeMik, D. E., Owens, J. M., Glass, N. A., DeBerg, J., & Callaghan, J. J. (2019). Tobacco use and risk of wound complications and periprosthetic joint infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis of primary total joint arthroplasty procedures. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 34(2), 385–396.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.09.089
Puig-Asensio, M., Braun, B. I., Seaman, A. T., Chitavi, S., Rasinski, K. A., Nair, R., Perencevich, E. N., Lawrence, J. C., Hartley, M., & Schweizer, M. L. (2019). Perceived benefits and challenges of Ebola preparation among hospitals in developed countries: A systematic literature review. Clinical Infectious Diseases. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciz757
Seaman, A. T., Steffen, M., Doo, T., Healy, H. S., & Solimeo, S. L. (2018). Metasynthesis of patient attitudes toward bone densitometry. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 33(10), 1796–1804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-018-4587-3
Got research data? Have you shared it?
Other researchers, funders, publishers, and the public want to know:
The public – A Pew research survey found that open access to data and independent review inspire more trust in research findings by the public.
Research participants – Many clinical trial participants understand and support data sharing (within confidentiality and privacy protections) in order to advance medical research and improve patient outcomes.
Funders – Research funders strongly encourage or require data sharing, and require that research proposals include data management plans describing data sharing.
Other researchers – Many research disciplines and related professional societies and associations require data to be shared in support of reproducibility, transparency, and accelerating research. For example: American Geophysical Union, earth and space sciences, social sciences, and American Psychological Association.
Journals/Publishers – Many journals also have requirements that data be shared and preserved via repositories. For example: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, PLOS, Wiley, Nature, and Sage.
Preparing for data sharing
Good data management and curation practices will make it easier for you to preserve and share your data.
Graduate students are often responsible for many of the data management tasks associated with their research, and these practices may be new to them. These changing expectations and requirements may also be unfamiliar to faculty and staff. In order to assist with these tasks, the libraries provides instruction, consultations, and infrastructure to help researchers across the university with data management and curation.
In Spring 2020, we will be offering a 1-credit course on research data management.
This course is intended to build knowledge and expertise in essential best practices that students can immediately apply in their own research settings. We’ll focus on active-learning, with readings and discussion-based explorations of how to apply good data management to planning, active research, and preserving and sharing data.
The course is appropriate for any researcher who deals with quantitative data. We hope to see you there!
Course Title: Managing Data to Facilitate Your Research
Time and Location: 9:30 am – 10:20 am, Mondays, in 1100 UCC
Instructors: Brian Westra, Marina Zhang
If you have any questions, please contact Brian Westra, firstname.lastname@example.org
Allexis Mahanna, a UI senior majoring in global health studies, won the inaugural Undergraduate Library Research Award (ULRA) offered by the University of Iowa Libraries. Mahanna was selected from a competitive pool of undergraduate researchers who applied for the award and presented their work at the University of Iowa’s Fall Undergraduate Research Festival held November 13, 2019.
Mahanna’s research focuses on the differences in migration policies between the autonomous community of Catalonia and the local municipality of Barcelona, Spain. She evaluated the local migration policies of Barcelona through a case study framework analyzing country-wide policies and community perceptions of migrants.
Her research integrated library resources—including databases such as Web of Science, SAGE research methods, and services in SEAM—with specialized instruction on coding methods from SEAM Graduate Student Megan Dial-Lapcewich. Mahanna also met with librarians Brett Cloyd and Cathy Cranston and sought poster design assistance from Nikki White in the Libraries’ Digital Scholarship & Publishing Studio in preparation for presenting at the Fall Undergraduate Research Festival.
The Undergraduate Library Research Award was established this year by Jenay Solomon, librarian in the UI Libraries’ Undergraduate Engagement Department, who collaborated with Bob Kirby and Melinda Licht of the Iowa Center for Undergraduate Research (ICRU) to integrate the new award into the Fall Undergraduate Research Festival.
The award carries a $500 prize, which is funded by the Friends of the University of Iowa Libraries. The Libraries will offer the award again at the UI’s Spring Undergraduate Research Festival. The award is open to any undergraduate student in any year or discipline who demonstrates creative or innovative research skills in the selection, integration, and synthesis of resources, services, and materials from the UI Libraries.
Special thanks to UI librarians who served on the Fall 2019 ULRA review committee: Conrad Bendixen (from the Sciences Library and Main Library Liaison Services in Humanities and Social Sciences) and Kelly Hangauer (from Main Library Liaison Services in Humanities and Social Sciences), Heather Healy (from the Hardin Library for the Health Sciences), and Laurie Neuerburg (from the Sciences Library). Committee members helped create an assessment rubric for evaluating applicants and assisted in selecting this semester’s winner.
John Culshaw, the Jack B. King University Librarian at the University of Iowa, has been elected to serve as incoming vice president/president-elect for the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Culshaw will become ARL president on October 7, 2020.
The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) is a nonprofit organization of 124 research libraries in Canada and the US whose mission is to advance research, learning, and scholarly communication. The Association fosters the open exchange of ideas and expertise, promotes equity and diversity, and pursues advocacy and public policy efforts that reflect the values of the library, scholarly, and higher education communities. ARL forges partnerships and catalyzes the collective efforts of research libraries to enable knowledge creation and to achieve enduring and barrier-free access to information.
“John’s leadership, both on campus and with national organizations, emphasizes collaborative efforts, empowering our librarians and scholars to work together to find and share research in ways that build pathways to new knowledge,” says Montserrat Fuentes, UI executive vice president and provost.
Culshaw has served as the university librarian at Iowa since 2013, leading the UI Libraries in providing information services, collections, and spaces to the university community and beyond. In addition to his campus duties, he has served in leadership roles with the HathiTrust Digital Library and Association of College and Research Libraries. Culshaw has played an active role with the Big Ten Academic Alliance Library Initiatives, which recently announced the BIG Collection, an effort to create collaborative processes for building a networked collective collection to benefit Big Ten scholars.
During his tenure at Iowa, Culshaw has overseen several new building projects including the Rita Benton Music Library, a climate controlled, high-density materials storage facility, and a state-of-the-art exhibition gallery. He established a scholarship program for library student employees which to date has awarded more than $53,000 to undergraduate and graduate students.
With his direction and support, UI Libraries staff garnered a grant to become the National Network of Libraries of Medicine Greater Midwest Regional Office; strengthened partnerships with the UI’s Center for the Book and the Iowa City UNESCO City of Literature; merged the Studio, a collaborative incubator for digital scholarship and publishing, into Libraries operations; and brought important new research collections to Iowa including the Sackner Archive of Concrete and Visual Poetry. In 2018, Culshaw was invested as the first Jack B. King University Librarian Chair.
Culshaw received a BA in history from the University of Wisconsin-Parkside and holds an MS in information studies from Drexel University. He received UW-Parkside’s Traditions of Excellence Distinguished Alumni Award in 2015. Prior to Iowa, he held positions at the University of Colorado Boulder.
The Ithaka S+R University of Iowa Faculty Survey on Library services and space will help the Libraries evaluate faculty use of our facilities, resources and services.
All UI faculty are invited to participate in an important study designed to inform the University of Iowa Libraries’ strategic decision-making as it moves forward with plans to engage campus, provide resources and services, and renovate the Hardin and Main Libraries. The study, conducted by Ithaka S+R on behalf of the University Libraries, asks faculty about their perspectives on the Libraries’ resources, services, and spaces. The survey is completely anonymous, and the results will be reported only in the aggregate.
Faculty members will have received a link to the survey in an email from Ithaka S+R. During the week of November 18, 2019, faculty will receive another link to the survey in a second email.
Q: Why is the University of Iowa Libraries participating in this survey?
A: This survey is designed to inform the University of Iowa Libraries’ strategic decision-making as we move forward with plans to engage campus, provide resources and services, and renovate the Hardin and Main Libraries.
Q: What kinds of questions will be on the survey?
A: The survey will ask faculty their perspectives on a range of topics, including how you engage with and perceive the Libraries’ resources, services, and current spaces, as well as how we can best meet your current and future needs by altering the Libraries’ infrastructure. The survey is completely anonymous, and the results will only be reported in the aggregate.
Q: What will be the impact of the survey?
A: The survey will help shape the future of the University of Iowa Libraries’ resources, services, and spaces, including but not limited to the renovation of the Hardin and Main Libraries. Additionally, The University Libraries will donate $2 per completed survey to ComUnity Crisis Services and Food Bank. Your participation will help support community members in need.
Q: Who designed the survey?
A: Ithaka S+R designed the survey. Ithaka S+R is a research consulting service that helps academic, cultural, and publishing organizations consider how to shift their policies, services, and holdings to meet the needs of the digital future. Ithaka S+R is a part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit organization that also includes JSTOR and Portico. Their survey was reviewed by the University of Iowa’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) and given exempt status.
Q: Will a summary of the survey’s findings be shared publicly?
Q: How long does the survey take to complete?
A: 15-30 minutes.
Q: Is the survey compatible with mobile devices?
A: Yes. The survey is responsive to device type. Our survey platform can detect respondents’ devices and automatically adjust the questionnaire and questions into an appropriate format.
Q: Can participants stop and later continue their survey from the same point?
A: Respondents will be able to save their responses and continue later by clicking on their individualized link, even if they close their browser, use a different browser, or use a different device.
Q: Can participants back up and change their responses?
A: No. Because the survey may branch based on participants’ responses, allowing respondents to back up and change their responses will confuse the survey software.
Q: Is the survey accessible to respondents using screen savers or other Accessibility technology, such as JAWS?
A: Yes. The survey questions we use in our platform have been tested for compliance with the accessibility standards contained in Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and are compatible with screen readers and similar software.
Q: Who should I contact if I have additional questions?
A: Please contact Linda Walton, Associate University Librarian, at email@example.com.
The University Libraries is seeking nominations for the Arthur Benton University Librarian’s Award for Excellence. Funded by a generous endowment, this prestigious award acknowledges a library staff member’s professional contributions in the practice of librarianship, service to the profession, scholarship, or leadership which has had a significant impact or innovation to the operations of the Libraries or the University of Iowa.
The $1,500 award may be used to support professional development activity expenses for conferences or workshops in support of research projects and publications related to services, or it may be taken as a cash award. Any member of the University of Iowa community may make a nomination, or self-nominations are also accepted. The nomination form is available at: http://www.lib.uiowa.edu/admin/bentonaward/ . The due date is Wednesday, October 30.
By Elizabeth Cox, head of cataloging-metadata at the UI Libraries
When you think of diversity issues at a university, you probably think of faculty and student representation, or maybe course topics. Rarely do people, perhaps even librarians, think of the online catalog or those who put information in it: the catalogers.
Catalogers are highly trained, detail-oriented librarians and staff who succinctly describe the library’s materials for students, faculty, and staff to find and use. We have particular databases and many sets of rules and guidelines to follow, from local to international. We provide subject headings or descriptors to every item in the online catalog (at the UI Libraries, our online catalog is called InfoHawk+).
For decades, librarians at the national and international levels have determined “authorized” headings. By using these headings, a library user can go into almost any library and find material on a particular subject, because most libraries use the same headings. In the United States, most academic and research libraries use the Library of Congress subject headings list.
Because the burden of standardizing these headings lies with a single organization (the Library of Congress), it can take time for the headings to catch up with the culture. Over the years, catalogers have raised questions about this process, noting the importance of balancing the use of historical terminology against the need to adopt new terminology. In some instances, new terminology can reflect changing societal views and prevent the proliferation of outdated ideas.
In 2016, subject headings hit the national news. A group of Dartmouth College students, Dartmouth librarians, and the Coalition for Immigration Reform, Equality and DREAMers (CoFIRED) petitioned the Library of Congress to remove “Illegal aliens” as a subject heading. At first, the Library of Congress denied the request, citing use of the term in “authoritative sources for legal terminology.”
However, members of the American Library Association collaborated with the Library of Congress, forming a working group to review the issue. The group reached a compromise, agreeing to replace the term “aliens” with “noncitizens” and to replace “illegal aliens” with “undocumented immigrants.” Members of the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee introduced a bill (H.R. 4926 – Stopping Partisan Policy at the Library of Congress Act) calling for retention of the headings “aliens” and “illegal aliens.” In April 2016, the bill was referred to the Committee on House Administration, but it went no further. The Library of Congress continues to use the terms “aliens” and “illegal aliens” as subject headings.
This is just one example of the lack of diversity, equity, and inclusion in subject headings. Sadly, there are many others, and the majority of them don’t get the same attention as this. The chart to the right shows an inconsistent application of subject headings regarding gender. All of the words and phrases in this chart are authorized headings. Using the currently approved subject headings, a book can be labeled as one about nurses generally, about female nurses, or about male nurses. A book can be labeled as one about librarians generally or about women librarians, but a book cannot be labeled as one about male librarians.
Catalogers have also noted concerns with headings related to people with disabilities, as well as biases related to culture, class, or country of origin. This hits very close to home in Iowa when searching for the nearby community of the Meskwaki Nation, the Sac and Fox Tribe of the Mississippi. A search of the Library of Congress database for “Meskwaki” refers you to the heading, “Fox Indians,” listing “Meskwaki Indians” as a variant or unused term. Not only does it fail to refer to the Sac Tribe, but it uses the old terminology “Indians” rather than “Native Americans.”
Catalogers wonder what to do in situations such as these. The Library of Congress makes available a procedure to recommend addition or revision of a Library of Congress subject heading and provides a number of tips and instructions to assist in the process. Although the process is not onerous, it can be tedious and requires research on the part of the librarian, who must provide proof that the word or phrase is used in one or more resource. Each month, the Library of Congress publishes a list of proposed headings and invites comments. After considering the proposals and comments, the Library of Congress publishes its decisions along with its rationale in cases of rejection.
The Library of Congress does not give a time estimate for this process. As of April 2019, the Library of Congress had published a list of approximately 200 proposed headings. Of those, only seven have been approved and three proposals have been deemed incomplete.
Simply being aware of these issues is a good start, but librarians can be more vigilant about noticing the discrepancies in online catalogs and be more proactive in making positive changes to reflect the diverse world around us and provide more equitable, inclusive, and diverse databases for our library users.
Adler, Melissa, Jeffrey T. Huber, and A. Tyler Nix. 2017. “Stigmatizing disability: Library classifications and the marking and marginalization of books about people with disabilities.” Library Quarterly, April: 117-135.
Aguilera, Jasmine. 2016. “Another word for ‘Illegal alien’ at the Library of Congress: Contentious.” New York Times, July 22. Accessed February 7, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/another-word-for-illegal-alien-at-the-library-of-congress-contentious.html?_r=0.
Berman, Sanford. 2017. “Berman’s Bag: Omissions and Distortions in Libraries, Too: LCSH Proposals.” Unabashed Librarian (185): 19-22.
—. 1971. Prejudices and antipathies: a tract on the LC subject heads concerning people. Metuchen, New Jersey: Scarecrow Press.
Diao, Junli, and Haiyun Cao. 2016. “Chronology in cataloging Chinese archaeological reports: An investigation of cultural bias in the Library of Congress classification.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 244-262.
Library of Congress. n.d. Library of Congress Subject Headings. Accessed March 5, 2019. http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects.html.
—. n.d. Process for Adding and Revising Library of Congress Subject Headings. Accessed March 6, 2019. http://www.loc.gov/aba/cataloging/subject/lcsh-process.html.
Peet, Lisa. 2016. “Library of Congress Drops Illegal Alien Subject Heading, Provokes Backlash Legislation.” Library Journal. Accessed March 6, 2019. https://www.libraryjournal.com/?detailStory=library-of-congress-drops-illegal-alien-subject-heading-provokes-backlash-legislation.
Ros, Amanda. n.d. “The bias in your library’s catalog.” Texas A&M University. Accessed February 7, 2019. http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/166418/Bias%20Poster%20NCORE.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y.
Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa. 2017. Meskwaki Nation. Accessed March 11, 2019. https://meskwaki.org/.
Students will benefit from Open Educational Resource (OER) projects
The University of Iowa Libraries has awarded fifteen grants to eighteen faculty for Open Educational Resource (OER) projects for the 2019-2020 academic year. OpenHawks is a campus-wide grant program that funds faculty efforts to replace their current textbooks with OERs for enhanced student success.
OpenHawks is one of five innovative, interdisciplinary initiatives funded by the annual Provost Investment Fund (PIF) from the UI Office of the Provost. The PIF will provide OpenHawks projects with funds totaling $87,288 for AY 2020. The funded OER projects, which were selected through a competitive application process, will benefit students in the College of Education, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, College of Medicine, and Tippie College of Business.
OER (such as textbooks, videos, assessment tools, lab books, research materials or interactive course modules) are free for students and carry legal permission for open use. The open licenses under which these items are released allow users to create, reuse, and redistribute copies of the resources.
Removing cost barriers to course materials opens student access and positively impacts learning. OER provide further benefit when faculty fully integrate free resources into their curricula by “remixing” or tailoring materials to enhance specific learning objectives.
The next call for proposals will be in the spring of 2020. For more information, visit www.lib.uiowa.edu/openhawks
Mercedes Bern-Klug, faculty in the School of Social Work in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $7,000. For this project, Dr. Bern-Klug will create an OER textbook on global aging. By replacing the textbook with up-to-date readings and resources from different sources, Bern-Klug ensures students will learn the material from organizations and authors with a track record of producing high-quality materials germane to global aging.
Stephen Cummings, faculty in the School of Social Work in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $1,400 for Human Behavior in the Social Environment. Cummings will develop an OER textbook on human behavior in social settings for an online, graduate-level course in Social Work. Students will benefit from the vibrant content of this textbook, reflecting current events and engagement for a more dynamic learning environment. The OER resource is projected to save students money, as it will replace a $55 textbook.
Hannah Givler, lecturer in the School of Art and Art History in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $9,000 for Woodworking: Theory and Practice in Studio Arts. Givier will create an OER textbook that combines theory and practice, illuminating the material behaviors of wood. The resource will include foundational and experimental techniques for bending, joining, and framing. The textbook will be used by students in her wood-bending and wood-joinery courses in the School of Art and Art History. It will provide students with the narratives and experiences of contemporary artists working conceptually with wood materials—a perspective missing from currently available textbook resources.
Julia Kleinschmit, faculty in the School of Social Work in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $1,300 for her OER project, Computer Lab: statistics with less pain – in your wallet. Students taking a required one-semester-hour statistics course will benefit from this resource. Kleinschmit will remix existing OER resources to replace existing textbooks and eliminate expensive software purchases, saving students nearly $150 each.
Mouna Maalouf, lecturer in Chemistry in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $4,000 for Principles of Chemistry II—Lab Manual in pressbook. The goal of this project is to create an OER lab manual for the freshman chemistry laboratory, replacing lab manuals from publishers that range in cost from $10 to $40. The born-digital lab manual will be easier for students to access and navigate. In addition, the digital resource will be easier for the instructor to update frequently.
Kate Magsamen-Conrad, faculty in Communication Studies in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $10,000 to create no-cost, accessible, engaging, tailored resources for UI students. The project, Introduction to Social Scientific Communication Research Methods, will include a textbook, study guides, presentation materials, and class activities developed in collaboration with UI librarians, the UI Human Subjects Office, and other campus partners. Conrad is replacing an $125 textbook with content tailored for UI students.
Emilia Illana Mahiques, faculty in Spanish & Portuguese in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $1,000 for an OER project titled Aligning peer review, assessments, and learning objectives in SPAN:2000 based on the framework resulting from her research study on peer review. Through this project, Mahiques will create a bank of activities instructors can use to train students on effective, efficient peer review processes aimed at improving students’ abilities to write in their second language. She will also create peer review guidelines and corresponding assessment rubrics according to the curricular requirements of the Spanish Writing course.
Brandon Myers, lecturer in computer science in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $2,999 for a project titled Guided Inquiry Activities for Advanced Computer Science. Myers will create OER learning activities using an instruction strategy shown to improve student engagement and learning called Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL). In POGIL, students cooperate in teams to construct and apply concepts in carefully designed activities. Unfortunately, such activities are not readily available to computer science instructors. In this project, Myers aims to create, pilot, revise, and share four to six POGIL activities to support two courses, Database Systems and Programming Languages. The activities will be shared with a Creative Commons license on the CS-POGIL project website (http://cspogil.org).
Ted Neal, professor of Teaching and Learning in the College of Education, has been awarded $10,000 to create an OER titled Earth and Space Science for Elementary Teachers. Neal will develop an OER textbook, in cooperation with students, that will cover broad topic areas as mandated by the State of Iowa’s new science curriculum for which adequate teaching resources do not yet exist. Under Neal’s direction, students will develop this comprehensive resource, providing future elementary science teachers with concise, accurate, and centralized resources for K-12 instruction in earth and space science.
Marc A. Pizzimenti, faculty in Anatomy and Cell Biology in the Carver College of Medicine, has been awarded $9,859 for Online Physical Examination Skills Modules with Integrated Basic Science Review. These instructional modules will help students learn basic physical examination (PE) skills by creating efficient, timely, scalable, easily accessible resources that will assist in training, but will also serve as the primary resource for students learning the basics of PE.
Jacob B. Priest, faculty in Psychological and Quantitative Foundations in the College of Education, and Rachel Williams, faculty in Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies in the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences, have been awarded $8,000 for their project titled Heathy Relationship OER. Priest and Williams will create an OER to replace a $141 textbook on relationships. Their resource will be designed to enhance relationship communication and skills so students can make and maintain healthy relationships. Rather than providing statistics about relationships, this OER will help students learn actual relationship skills and apply them to different relationship situations.
Steven Stong, faculty in economics in the Tippie College of Business, has been awarded $1,000 for Test bank and clicker questions for Principles of Microeconomics 2e openstax. This project involves creating a 100-question bank of exam and quiz questions designed to help students develop a better theoretical understanding of economics and also gain the analytical skills they need to apply the theories to solve real-world economic problems. Strong is developing these questions to supplement an OER textbook that he is already using for Microeconomics.
Christine Wingate, faculty in English as a Second Language (ESL) in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, has been awarded $7,730 for American English Sounds, an online resource already under development for courses focused on ESL speaking skills. Pronunciation is a vital part of these courses, and students need more time to practice and improve pronunciation than is possible during class. Wingate’s OER will help students practice pronunciation independently as directed by the teacher with tutorials, which will be accessible online through a computer or mobile device. Each tutorial will provide explanation, examples, and practice activities, including activities that could be recorded and submitted for teacher feedback.
Sang-Seok Yoon and Joung-A Park, faculty in Asian & Slavic Languages in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, have been awarded $5,000 for First Year Korean: First Semester. Yoon and Park will create an OER workbook for students studying the Korean language. This workbook will improve on the currently used commercial text by incorporating stronger content in conversations, listening comprehension, and Korean culture. The resource will reduce expenses for students while providing a more engaging and effective learning tool for UI students, with a special focus on preparing students for specific study abroad and work experiences in Korea.
Giovanni Zimotti, lecturer in Spanish & Portuguese, and Fernando Castro Ortiz, lecturer in Spanish and director of the Spanish Speaking, Writing, and Conversation Center in the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences, have been awarded $9,000 for Intermediate Spanish II: Spanish for Educators, a new UI course designed specifically for educators. Commercially available textbooks for this course are pedagogically outdated, very expensive for the students, and lack a well-developed online component. Zimotti and Castro Ortiz will create an OER textbook customized to fulfill the educational needs of UI students taking this new course, integrate content and technology already available at our institution and/or online, create self-assessment materials to supplement the OER textbook and classroom instruction, test and teach a pilot course using the content created in this project, and promote this new OER resource at national conferences and other professional venues.