Last week I attended #OpenEd24 as a virtual attendee (and presenter! Link in the last post) at a hybrid conference. A few thoughts: 🧵
(1/x)
* Virtual hosts for hybrid sessions did an excellent job of including virtual and in-person attendees. It felt balanced. Job well done.
My colleagues and I presented preliminary results from developing a validated survey examining academic librarians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices on OER. Watch our lightning talk at the link below!
(3/3)
* "Open" and accessible information is highly valuable to all attendees and presenters. While I am focusing more on #openresearch more wholistically as opposed to #OER , it is nice to be among like-minded colleagues. I don't need to worry about missing quality content, even with many amazing concurrent sessions.
(2/x)
Last week I attended #OpenEd24 as a virtual attendee (and presenter! Link in the last post) at a hybrid conference. A few thoughts: 🧵
(1/x)
Did you see this article?
Levay, P., & Craven, J. (2023). Systematic Searching in a Post-Pandemic World: New Directions for Methods, Technology, and People. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 18(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30415
See the "Developing Search Strategies" section on PDF page 4.
Interested to hear your thoughts, and other #medlibs
Made a friend in Bechtel Park.
Follow up.
Please tell me this review is not the standard that is being accepted in scientific journals. The methods were poorly conducted, poorly reported, and not following best practice. Ironically, their search *was* copy/paste-able into the database mentioned which is good, however it was FAR from comprehensive.
This journal has an open peer review policy, so perhaps I'll come back and link to my review if it posts.