A presentation by Franklyn Tancock, Plant Collections Curator, National Trust, at CILIP in London.
Franklyn Tancock’s career has ranged from the National Trust to private gardens, from market gardening to ornamental gardening, and from Devon to Scotland. He is ideally placed to be the National Trust’s Plant Collections Curator and the man responsible for the introduction of new computer based recording methods.
The National Trust (NT) has grown spectacularly in the years since the 1950s, with property and garden acquisition that must be unprecedented since the dissolution of the monasteries. The NT now has in its care 133 listed properties. These have been acquired because of their historical associations, their architectural significance, the importance of their gardens, or all three.
Plant cataloguing began at the NT in 1976 with the Conifer Survey. The gardeners were issued with paper forms, showing the garden divided into sections on which the species present and any changes made could be recorded. The system was a Paradox database, which generated enormous report matrices and queries were a major exercise. All the computing was undertaken centrally, input and output was all on the basis of paper forms and reports.
In 2003 the National Council for the Conservation of Plants (now Plant Heritage) gained lottery funding for a database for their national collections. The NT invested in the scheme to produce the Demeter database. The large number of fields, and the fact that the database could not be networked led to a desire to streamline the system.
Franklyn Tancock was given a 12 months secondment to work with IT staff to produce a revised database. This involved reducing the content to some 30 to 35 fields per plant. International standards of data transfer were implemented and the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) plant finder was used as the authority for establishing plant names. The data is based on a hierarchy of garden areas. This system now hosts 130,000 records. Records can be unlinked for correction and can be propagated to create child records. Plant accession numbers are used to generate tag numbers (to be attached to the plants themselves). An intranet version is available for all staff, although it works slowly, and is searchable by location and by plant. Reports are pre-defined and pre-generated by Discoverer software from outside the database, and can be made available on paper. The system was designed for 1 million records.
The database is a management tool. Priority plant propagation as part of the plant conservation program is one undertaking. Another project is the Millennium Seed Bank at Kew, where seeds of authenticated species are stored. Lastly the RHS want herbarium specimens of known first introductions of garden plants to act as a standard and control for future nomenclature and identification. These are all part of a global strategy for plant conservation. One important feature is that the value of the plants can be recorded – an original introduction or a veteran tree for example
The Yorkshire Bank has given £1.5m over 3 years for the project. £450,000 is for plant recording: photographing and identifying plants at 80 properties over 3 years, and employing both contractors and volunteers.The funding has provided for the use of sophisticated GIS technology, where a range finder can be linked to a Magellan GPS machine to accurately log the position of a plant, with the complete database available on that machine.. From this data a map can be produced, which can reveal details of the plantings. These surveys can also be linked with aerial photographs. 22 GPS machines are in use, 2 in each NT region and 20 volunteers are involved in data inputting.
Currently the Chicago Botanic Garden has invited the NT to be its European partner in an extended worldwide system, using Google Earth. This Oracle database will be usable in real time to manage the plant collections.
Registered users can choose from a drop down list of gardens and all this information can be entered on a single page. Plants which are not in the RHS system, usually plants not available commercially, can be added by the user. There is a GIS browser which will be useful for overall property management, and plants can be added via this module.
The system will deliver an inventory of the NT’s plant assets; better plant management; better achievement of conservation needs; planning facilities for replenishment of aged stock; easier addition of new specimens. It will be available to a wider audience and promote dialogue in the areas of identification and nomenclature, and the sharing of knowledge. It should widen engagement with the NT’s plant collections.
771 words
Wednesday, 27 May 2009
Dinosaur necks
The tail of the Diplodocus at the NHM has gone up and down over the years depending on whether it was a sluggish reptilian failure due to be replaced with the new mammal model. or a hot blooded cutting edge innovation in herbivory.
Now the neck is following the tail.
I wonder if the angle of elevation of the extremities of the beast reflect the FTSE in some arcane way?
Now the neck is following the tail.
I wonder if the angle of elevation of the extremities of the beast reflect the FTSE in some arcane way?
Wednesday, 15 April 2009
Digital natives - myth and reality
Presented by Neil Selwyn at CILIP in London
Neil Selwyn is Senior Lecturer at the multidisciplinary London Knowledge Lab part of the Institute of Education, where his work focuses on the sociology of technology. He is the author of 'Young people and their information needs in the context of the information society' Brussels, Directorate of Youth and Sport of the Council of Europe/ European Agency for Youth Information and Counselling, published in 2007.
Digital natives have grown up with digital technology; they are immersed in it. Reading or watching TV is too slow and boring. The web is the next step in brain evolution (Homo zapiens with one finger always on the button). This is a seductive image, but how realistic is it?
The aim is to consider the realities of IT, not the potential. We need to consider what we really know about young people and IT. And we need to use that knowledge to help young people.
The concept of the digital native is highly persuasive particularly to policy makers. The key ideas are outlined (repeatedly) by Mark Prensky, Don Tapscott, and Mark Zuckerberg. Those born since 1980 have innate confidence with technology, all types of ICT are part of their being, and the digital landscape is all immersive.
This can lead to unrealistic expectations for young people, and for the institutions with which they interact, and the debate around the concept is highly polarised.
The positive view is that young people are empowered. They are autonomous creators and critics who can create alternative institutions and social structures bypassing traditional social controls. Youngsters can handle information differently; learning is scaffolded by technologies a million times more powerful than the human brain.
The negative view is that young people are disadvantaged by technology. The ICT universe is full of risk and danger, physical, emotional, and sexual - a more engrossing concern in the UK and USA than elsewhere. Andrew Keen believes we are creating a dumbed down generation. Tara Brabazon believes that students doing research are just repeating the first things they find on the Internet (instead of repeating their professors?). Susan Greenfield, a neuroscientist, is afraid that children will lose their ability to empathise. A minor strand in all of this is that old friend, the idea of alienation: that self broadcasting has replaced listening.
What role can there be for adults and for institutions in this World 2.0? All are disempowered, they are digital immigrants not natives and they retain a characteristic accent. Even to talk about “the Internet” is part of a pre digital dialect. Digital technology is a means of escape beyond the grasp of the non-native.
Some argue that we need to redesign institutions, and remix the content. Others that we need to control access to the resources. But both these arguments are flawed. In ‘Young People and New Media’ Sonia Livingston argues this is another moral panic. Why should an essentialist view of these social phenomena be only applied to technology? The Web 2.0 agendas piled onto the museums, libraries and archives sector need careful assessment in view of the tensions between a demand led and a supply led web resource.
Reality is messier. Though 67% of people have web access, a seriously large minority of 33% don’t. This is digital exclusion writ large; the major correlate for creating or consuming web resources is the parental education level of the young people concerned. Class, and age cohort defines web use. Research shows that consumers vastly outnumber creators, and the creators may well be the old Web 1.0 creators in disguise. Club Penguin for children aged 6 – 14 is a wonderful resource, created by that digital dinosaur Disney!
The real fascination is with non-users. Dana Boyd from Microsoft Research New England found that large swathes of young people didn’t use networking sites. The non-users consisted of the disenfranchised (can’t) and the disaffected (won’t). For instance, sexual education websites have proved unpopular (and frequently blocked). The usual sources of information, for better or worse, are the family network (I can talk to my Nan about anything) and mates. Pew Internet and American Life project international found that hard to talk about topics were the least preferred for research online. Information and reassurance should never be confused.
Context is always the key to technology use. For some young people computers represent a resented dependency at school, some old people are too busy to bother themselves with computers.
What are the challenges and opportunities for us?
Neil Selwyn is Senior Lecturer at the multidisciplinary London Knowledge Lab part of the Institute of Education, where his work focuses on the sociology of technology. He is the author of 'Young people and their information needs in the context of the information society' Brussels, Directorate of Youth and Sport of the Council of Europe/ European Agency for Youth Information and Counselling, published in 2007.
Digital natives have grown up with digital technology; they are immersed in it. Reading or watching TV is too slow and boring. The web is the next step in brain evolution (Homo zapiens with one finger always on the button). This is a seductive image, but how realistic is it?
The aim is to consider the realities of IT, not the potential. We need to consider what we really know about young people and IT. And we need to use that knowledge to help young people.
The concept of the digital native is highly persuasive particularly to policy makers. The key ideas are outlined (repeatedly) by Mark Prensky, Don Tapscott, and Mark Zuckerberg. Those born since 1980 have innate confidence with technology, all types of ICT are part of their being, and the digital landscape is all immersive.
This can lead to unrealistic expectations for young people, and for the institutions with which they interact, and the debate around the concept is highly polarised.
The positive view is that young people are empowered. They are autonomous creators and critics who can create alternative institutions and social structures bypassing traditional social controls. Youngsters can handle information differently; learning is scaffolded by technologies a million times more powerful than the human brain.
The negative view is that young people are disadvantaged by technology. The ICT universe is full of risk and danger, physical, emotional, and sexual - a more engrossing concern in the UK and USA than elsewhere. Andrew Keen believes we are creating a dumbed down generation. Tara Brabazon believes that students doing research are just repeating the first things they find on the Internet (instead of repeating their professors?). Susan Greenfield, a neuroscientist, is afraid that children will lose their ability to empathise. A minor strand in all of this is that old friend, the idea of alienation: that self broadcasting has replaced listening.
What role can there be for adults and for institutions in this World 2.0? All are disempowered, they are digital immigrants not natives and they retain a characteristic accent. Even to talk about “the Internet” is part of a pre digital dialect. Digital technology is a means of escape beyond the grasp of the non-native.
Some argue that we need to redesign institutions, and remix the content. Others that we need to control access to the resources. But both these arguments are flawed. In ‘Young People and New Media’ Sonia Livingston argues this is another moral panic. Why should an essentialist view of these social phenomena be only applied to technology? The Web 2.0 agendas piled onto the museums, libraries and archives sector need careful assessment in view of the tensions between a demand led and a supply led web resource.
Reality is messier. Though 67% of people have web access, a seriously large minority of 33% don’t. This is digital exclusion writ large; the major correlate for creating or consuming web resources is the parental education level of the young people concerned. Class, and age cohort defines web use. Research shows that consumers vastly outnumber creators, and the creators may well be the old Web 1.0 creators in disguise. Club Penguin for children aged 6 – 14 is a wonderful resource, created by that digital dinosaur Disney!
The real fascination is with non-users. Dana Boyd from Microsoft Research New England found that large swathes of young people didn’t use networking sites. The non-users consisted of the disenfranchised (can’t) and the disaffected (won’t). For instance, sexual education websites have proved unpopular (and frequently blocked). The usual sources of information, for better or worse, are the family network (I can talk to my Nan about anything) and mates. Pew Internet and American Life project international found that hard to talk about topics were the least preferred for research online. Information and reassurance should never be confused.
Context is always the key to technology use. For some young people computers represent a resented dependency at school, some old people are too busy to bother themselves with computers.
What are the challenges and opportunities for us?
- We must provide access to digital resources in public institutions
- Access is both hardware and connectivity, and access must be sustainable
- We must provide support in the creation of content
- We must encourage young people to develop critical digital literacy.
- We must accept that one to one personalised support is needed to establish an overall level of skill.
- Adults need to manage young people’s experience and orchestrate it.
- We must retain focus on a formal framework – there are more continuities than discontinuities
- There are many agendas represented in the discourse, neo liberal attempts to remove government responsibility for education not least.
- Young people need adults and adult institutions more than ever.
Thursday, 15 January 2009
Firecrests
From the High Street / Stamford Hill main entrance,
walk c50 metres and take the first left. Walk another
c25 metres to the bench, with a bin next to it. The
birds have been feeding within about 10 metres of this
point, in all directions. From the Church Street
entrance, bear right along the main perimeter path
until reaching the same point.
walk c50 metres and take the first left. Walk another
c25 metres to the bench, with a bin next to it. The
birds have been feeding within about 10 metres of this
point, in all directions. From the Church Street
entrance, bear right along the main perimeter path
until reaching the same point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
