View Project

G2S Project Code: 2022-NH-91785
State: New Hampshire
Fiscal Year: 2022
Grantee
New Hampshire State Library

Project Director
Director Name: Bobbilee Slossar
Director Phone: 603-271-2143
Director Email: bobbi.l.slossar@dncr.nh.gov
General Information
Title: Technology Resources for Public Librarians
State Project Code:
Start Date: 09/01/2022
End Date: 09/30/2023
Abstract: NHSL introduced innovative technologies to public librarians and lent equipment to libraries for STEM programming purposes. The collection of lendable items ranges from educational STEM toys for children to 3D printers and robot arms. The Technology Consultant provided the necessary training for the use of printers and robots.
State Goal: Equity of Innovation
Budget Information
LSTA
MATCH-State
MATCH-Other
Total
$12,501.87
$0.00
$0.00
$12,501.87
Intent(s)
Improve the library workforce.
Digital Literacy
Library Skills
Activities
Activity Details
Title: Programming with Robots
Narrative: This program allows NH public libraries to borrow an assortment of educational toys and functional STEM tools from NHSL to introduce new technologies to their patrons. The Technology Consultant provides direct in-person training to the public librarians, and the librarians take the skills they learned to introduce the activity to the children of their community. Throughout the reporting period, the Technology Consultant provided 3 training sessions to 11 librarians over the course of 7 hours on operating and designing with a 3D printer. She provided 18 sessions on coding and operating the robot arms to 84 librarians over 55 contact hours. Additionally, she offered two Scratch programming workshops to 30 participants (5 contact hours) to help librarians prepare for the programming language used with the robot arms. For librarians providing STEM programming for younger children, the Technology Consult provided 9 Computational Thinking workshops reaching 89 librarians over 17 contact hours. One librarian from each participating library received a Indi Learning Robot to encourage children to practice computational thinking with the goal of teaching children the basics of computer programming and beginning problem solving.
Intent: Improve the library workforce.

Activity: Instruction
Mode: Program
Format: In-person


Quantity
Session length (minutes): 90
Number of sessions in program: 10
Average number in attendance per session: 2
Number of times program administered: 10


Partner Information
Organization Type of Partner Organization(s):
Libraries: Yes
Historical Societies or Organizations: No
Museums: No
Archives: No
Cultural Heritage Organization Multi-type: No
Preschools: No
Schools: No
Adult Education: No
Human Service Organizations: No
Other: No


Legal Type of Partner Organization(s):
Federal Government: No
State Government: No
Local Government (excluding school districts): No
School District: No
Non-Profit: No
Private Sector: No
Tribe/Native Hawaiian Organization: No


Beneficiaries
Is the activity directed at the library workforce: Yes
For a targeted group or for the general population: General


Locale
Is the activity state-wide: Yes
Specific Locations: No
Library Types
Public Libraries: 234
Academic Libraries: 0
SLAA: 0
Consortia: 0
Special Libraries: 0
School Libraries: 0
Other: 0
Question 1: I learned something by participating in this library activity.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 2: I feel more confident about what I just learned.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 3: I intend to apply what I just learned.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 4: Applying what I learned will help improve library services to the public.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Project Outcomes
Project Outcomes
List any important outcomes or findings not previously reported:
As librarians we want the public library to have an impact on all children, but not all are interested in books or traditional programming. The Technology Consultant received many success stories from librarians who used the Indi Learning Robot to make a positive impact on a child’s experience at the library: “A couple of weeks ago, during my Thinker Thursday group, one of the boys didn't want to be there and was not interested in the activity, but had to stay because his sister was there. After listening to him grumble for a few minutes I thought to show him the Indi Learning Robot and see what he thought of it. He LOVED it and it completely changed his attitude; he went from miserable to not wanting to leave the library. The following week on Thursday, he immediately asked to use the car again and even taught two other kids how to use it on his own! It was such a great moment to watch him transform and be excited about the library again, so I just wanted to thank you for giving me the tools to make that happen!”
Please briefly describe the importance of these outcomes and findings for future program planning:
It is important to remember that people have different interest and offering a variety of programs, tools, and activities increases the library’s ability to meet the educational needs and interests of our users.
Explain one or two of the most significant lessons learned for others wanting to adopt any facets of this project:
Not all libraries are able to purchase STEM educational toys or tools for their libraries and being able to borrow an item from a state library collection is very helpful to them. And for the more complicated tools, such as 3D printers and robot arms, having in-person librarian train is vitally important to help build the confidence of some librarians who would otherwise feel overwhelmed by the technology.
Do you anticipate continuing this project after the current reporting period ends:
Yes
Do you anticipate any change in level of effort in managing this project:
No
Explain:

Do you anticipate changing the types of activities and objectives addressed by the project:
No
Explain:

Was an evaluation conducted for this project:
No
Was a final written evaluation report produced:
No
Can the final written evaluation report be shared publicly on the IMLS website:
No
Was the evaluation conducted by project staff (either SLAA or local library) or by a third-party evaluator:
Third-Party
What data collection tools were used for any report outcomes and outputs:
Did you collect any media for the data:
What types of methods were used to analyze collected data:
Other:
How were participants (or items) selected:
What type of research design did you use to compare the value for any reported output or outcome:
Exemplary: Yes
Exemplary Narrative
Project Tags: Technology, Consulting