A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010

8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010

1/111

AliteraturereviewoftheuseofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation

AreportcommissionedbytheHigherEducationAcademy

Prof.GrinneConoleandDr.PanagiotaAlevizou

[email protected];[email protected]

August2010

TheOpenUniversity

WaltonHall,MiltonKeynes

UK


2/111

TableofContents

AliteraturereviewoftheuseofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation................................1

Introduction.........................................................................................................................................4

Methodology ........................................................................................................................................5Changingtechnologies......................................................................................................................9TheemergenceofWeb2.0tools..............................................................................................................9AtypologyofWeb2.0tools ....................................................................................................................11

Changinglearningandlearners.................................................................................................13Theoriesoflearning ................................................................................................................................. 13Newformsoflearning .............................................................................................................................. 16Patternsoftechnologyuseandthecharacteristicsoflearners................................................. 17Thechangingroleofteachingandteachers .....................................................................................20

Strategiesforsupportingtheuseoftechnologies................................................................ 22Barrierstouptakeandlackofimpact ................................................................................................ 22Digital,networkedandmulti-literacies............................................................................................. 23Successfactorsandstrategiesforchange ......................................................................................... 25

Contextualexamples......................................................................................................................28Blogs,wikisandsocialtagging.............................................................................................................. 29Twitter........................................................................................................................................................... 31Socialnetworking ...................................................................................................................................... 35Immersiveenvironmentsandvirtualworlds ..................................................................................37Summingup .................................................................................................................................................40

Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 41

Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................44

Appendices:FurtherissuesrelatingtotheadoptionofWeb2.0inHE:detailsfromtheresearchfield.................................................................................................................. 45Appendix1:AnopenapproachtoliteraturereviewsusingCloudworks............................... 46Appendix2:AtypologyofWeb2.0tools ........................................................................................... 47Mediasharing..........................................................................................................................................................47Mediamanipulationandmashups ...............................................................................................................47InstantMessaging,chatandconversationalarenas ...............................................................................48Onlinegamesandvirtualworlds....................................................................................................................49Socialnetworking..................................................................................................................................................49Blogging .....................................................................................................................................................................50Socialbookmarking ..............................................................................................................................................51

Recommendersystems.......................................................................................................................................51Wikisandcollaborativeeditingtools ...........................................................................................................52Syndication................................................................................................................................................................53

Appendix3:Areviewofe-learningmodelsandframeworks ....................................................54Appendix4:Paradoxescreatedbythenetworkedanddigital .................................................. 57Knowledgeexpansion..........................................................................................................................................58Nohierarchyorcontrol.......................................................................................................................................58Networkedversusboundedspaces?.............................................................................................................58


3/111

Collectiveownershipversuscommodification.........................................................................................59Appendix5:FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation60Levelsofmaturity..................................................................................................................................................60Nationalstrategies ................................................................................................................................................61Marketingandstudentrecruitment..............................................................................................................61

Appendix6:Barrierstochange ............................................................................................................ 64

Access,accessibility,andconcernsonauthorityandtrivialisation.................................................64Literacyissues.........................................................................................................................................................65Qualityandeffectiveness ...................................................................................................................................65Legacysystems.......................................................................................................................................................65Pedagogicalrethinking........................................................................................................................................66

Appendix7:Differentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchange................... 66Designbasedresearch ........................................................................................................................................66Promotingchangethroughthetechnologies ............................................................................................67

Appendix8:OpenEducationalResources ........................................................................................ 70Fromlearningobjectstoopeneducationalresources..........................................................................70EducatorsmotivationsandOERteachingpractices..............................................................................75OERclassroomcommunities............................................................................................................................78Repurposingandreflecting:designingresources,designingcollaborativecommunities....80

Appendix9:Issuesraisedbytheintroductionofnewtechnologies........................................ 84Institutionalarrangements ...............................................................................................................................84Theeducatorsrole ...............................................................................................................................................85Theattitudesandrolesofstudents ...............................................................................................................87Tensionsaroundtheconceptofopenness .................................................................................................87Assessmentpractices...........................................................................................................................................88

References ......................................................................................................................................... 89


4/111

IntroductionThisreviewfocusesontheuseofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation.Itprovidesasynthesisoftheresearchliteratureinthefieldandaseriesofillustrativeexamplesofhowthesetools

arebeingusedinlearningandteaching.Itdrawsoutthebenefitsthatthesenewtechnologiesappeartooffer,andhighlightssomeofthechallengesandissuessurroundingtheiruse.ThereviewformsthebasisforaHEAcademyfundedproject,PearlsintheCloud,

whichisexploringhowWeb2.0toolscanbeusedtosupportevidencebasedpracticesin

learningandteaching.Theprojecthasalsoproducedtwoindepthcasestudies,whicharereportedelsewhere(Galleyetal.,2010,Alevizouetal.,2010).Thecasestudiesfocuson

evaluationofarecentlydevelopedsiteforlearningandteaching,Cloudworks,whichharnessesWeb2.0functionalitytofacilitatethesharinganddiscussionofeducational

practice.ThecasestudiesexploretheextenttowhichtheWeb2.0affordancesofthesite

aresuccessfullypromotingthesharingofideas,aswellasscholarlyreflections,onlearningandteaching.

Ouraiminthisreviewistodrawontheexistingbodyofinternationalliteratureinthisfield.

ItsynthesisessomeempiricalevidenceonthepatternsofuseofWeb2.0toolsandsocial

mediainhighereducationandstructuresfindingsinthemesrelevanttocommunitiesofeducators.AlthoughevidenceexistsregardingthebenefitsofWeb2.0ininformallearning

environments,andwithinadministrativecontexts,resultsfromlongitudinalstudies

showingthedepthofchangeinpedagogicalpracticeineithertertiaryorposttertiaryeducationareeitherscarceorfarfromconsensual.Andwhileanemergingbodyof

literaturefocusesonexperiencesoflearners,structuredevidenceregardingtheissuessurroundingintegrationinformaleducation,suchasthoseoutlinedabove,isonlyslowly

emerging.Thenextsectiondescribesourmethodologyforthestudy.Thereportisdivided

intothefollowingsections:

Introduction Methodology Changingtechnologies Changinglearningandlearners Changingteachingandteachers Strategiesforpromotingtheuseoftechnology Contextualexamples Conclusion Appendices

oAppendix1:AnopenapproachtoliteraturereviewsusingCloudworks

o Appendix2:AtypologyofWeb2.0toolso Appendix3:Areviewofelearningmodelsandframeworkso Appendix4:Paradoxescreatedbythenetworkedanddigitalo Appendix5:FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0inHigherEducation

o Appendix6:Barrierstochange


5/111

o Appendix7:Differentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchangeo Appendix8:OpenEducationalResourceso Appendix9:IssuesraisedbytheintroductionofWeb2.0technologies

References

MethodologyWehavedrawnonexistingevidencefromlargerandsmallerscalereports,anecdotal

accountsofinnovativepracticesofmainstreamWeb2.0ineducation,andconference

papersandjournalarticlestoidentifyandsurfacetrends,experiencesandchallengesregardingthetakeupanduseofWeb2.0informallearningcontexts.Wehavealso

scrutinisedaccountsofcollaborativeprojectsregardingthepedagogicalintegrationofWeb2.0withinHEcontexts,andsearchedforrecordedexperiencesofpracticefromrelevant

edublogsandestablishednetworksonscholarshipineducation,aswellaspeerreviewed

papers.Beingreflectiveandexperimentalinourresearch,wesoughttoopenupthedebate,solicitinsightsandshareresourcesinapublicspace.Thereviewwasinformedby

secondaryresearchpointingtotheimpactofsocialmedia/softwareandWeb2.0inlearningandteaching.Thefocushasbeenonemergingtrendsandevidenceonpracticesand

challengesinthefieldofhighereducationinOECDcountries.Followinganinitialreviewof

existingrelevantreportswithaUK,USoraninternationalfocus(e.g.BECTA,2008;2009;NSFCyberlearning,2008;FranklingandArmstrong,2008;AlaMutkaetal.,2009;JISC,

2009;Redecker,2009;OECD,2009),wedevisedaninitialstructureandsetofsub

categoriesandstartedperformingsearchesoneachtopicinprogressivelymoredetail,reducingthesetuntilalistingofthemesregardingtrends,projectsandevidencerelatingto

practicesandchallengeswasselected.

Inordertocollectevidencefromresearchpublications(peerreviewedjournalarticles,

booksandbookchapters)weperformedsearcheswithspecialisedjournalandconferenceproceedingsdatabasesincluding:

ERIC Igentaconnect Sagejournalsonline Communicationandmassmediacomplete ElearningandTEL Informaworld Relevantelearningconferences,suchasALTC,ASCILITEandNetworkedlearningAdditionalGooglescholarsearcheswereperformed,usingkeywordandbooleansearchesontermsincluding:Web2.0socialmediasocialnetworkinghighereducationlearning2.0virtualwords,sociallearningparticipatorylearning'teachingpractices''reflection'

and'teaching'.Finally,specialisednetworkingandcommunitysitesweresearched(include

ECAR,EDUCAUSE,EvidenceNet,ELSIG,JISC,HigherEducationAcademysubjectcentresandCloudworks).AsthesecondcasestudywithinthePearlsintheCloudsprojectfocuseson

theuseofCloudworksforsupportingpracticesanddiscussionsaroundOpenEducational


6/111

Resources(OER),moretargetedsearchesregardingopennessandOERwerealso

performedintheabovedatabasesandinspecialisedsitesthroughBooleanoperators.

Itwasclearfromthisinitialroundofsearchesthatthereislittleinthewayofmetareviews

andempiricallygroundedorlongitudinalstudies.Therearehowevermanycasestudieson

specificuseofWeb2.0toolsandarichbodyofevidenceinvestigatingthelearnersvoice.Thislearnervoiceresearchisgivingvaluableinsightsabouttheexperiencesand

expectationsthatlearnershaveaboutusingtechnologiestosupportlearning.Researchlookingattheteachervoiceandtheirexpectationsandexperiencesissmaller.Similarly,

thereisadearthofevidencelookingatthewaysinwhichthesenewtechnologiesareor

couldchangelearningandteachingpractice.Thelargestbodyofevidencecomesfromscholarsandeducationaltechnologistswhoareinvolvedinelearninganddistancelearning

andfromproponentsofopenlearningandOER.

Inadditiontothetraditionalliteraturereviewstrategyoutlinedabove,wealsoconducted

whatwearelabellinganopenreviewusingtheCloudworkssite.Wedefineanopenreviewasonethatusesasocialnetworkingspacetoaggregateandcollectivelydiscussan

evolvingbodyofliteraturearoundasetofcoreresearchquestions.Toinitiatetheopenreviewacloudscapewassetup1.ThenatureoftheprojectwasdescribedandanoutlineofhowweplannedtouseCloudworkstoconducttheopenreview:

WeareusingCloudworksasaplacetoshareawarenessof,andcriticallyevaluaterelevantliterature,butalsotoelicitviews,ideas,andexperiencessurroundingtheuseofWeb2.0inHigherEducation.

TheresultantCloudscapewillbereferencedinthefinalreporttotheHEAandinappreciationofyour

contributions,youwillbeacknowledgedexplicitlyinthereportintheformofquotations.All

commentswillbesubjecttoaCreativeCommonsAttributionlicence.Inpart,thisisaselfreflective

exerciseinthatwewanttoseehowthiscloudscapeevolvesasanexampleofWeb2.0practiceinthe

HEcontext.Theinitialcloudrepresentingthestateofthereviewandsomeinitialreferencesisbelow.

AdetailedoverviewofhowCloudworkswasusedtosupportanopenreviewisprovidedinthefirstindepthcasestudy,partofthe'PearlsintheClouds'project.The way that the sitewas used to support the Web 2.0 review outlined here, is discussed in more detail in Appendix 1,

An open approach to literature reviews using Cloudworks2. Asummaryexplanationis

providedhereforcompleteness.

Fivespaces(clouds)weresetuparoundcorequestionsassociatedwiththereview,asameansofstimulatingthedebate:

IsthereevidenceofproductiveandcreativeuseofWeb2.0inHE? WhatarethebarriersandenablerstotheuseofWeb2.0inHE? Whatarethebarrierstosharingexperiencesandteachingideasinapublicspace? WhyhasgeneralWeb2.0practicesnottranslatedwell/extensivelyintoanHEcontext? Web2.0toolsforbuildingpedagogicalwraparoundsinOERs?

1Reviewing the use(s) of Web 2.0 in higher education: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloudscape/view/1895

2 Literature review of the uses of Web 2.0 in HE: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2294


7/111

Inadditionweadoptedanopenapproachtotheliteraturereview,usingCloudworksasa

spacetoaggregateanddiscussresourcesandreferences.ThenatureoftheCloudworkssite

isthatitactsasameansofcollectivelyaggregatingresources,aswellasaspaceforshareddiscussion.Itcombinessomeofthefeaturesofcollectiveblogging,coupledwitha

discussionforumandsocialbookmarking.Ascreenshotofpartoftheliteraturereview

cloudillustratesthis.Afteradescriptionofwhatthefocusofthecloudis,underneathcanbeseenthestartofadiscussionthreadandanaggregationoflinksandacademicreferences

(seecontributetabbelow,inFigure1below).

Morerelevantcloudswereaddedtothecloudscapeonanadhocbasis,bothbyusasthe

literaturereviewresearchers,aswellasthebroaderCloudworkscommunity.Someoftheclouds(includingthoseoutlinedabove)focusedspecificallyontheliteraturereview,butin

additioncloudswereaddedthattouchedontopicsofrelevancetothereviewwhichwere

alreadyavailableonthesiteorbecameavailableduringthereview.Theseincludedcloudsonnewliteracies,Web2.0pedagogies,andtheuseofspecificWeb2.0toolsineducation

(suchasTwitterandblogs).Thespaceactedasameansofharnessingabroadrangeof

viewsontopicsrelatedtothefocusofthereviewandactedasaconduitforsharingofrelevantresources,academicreferencesandemergingdiscussions.Afewcontributorsput

forwardempiricallybasedstudiesaswellasanecdotalevidencetosupporttheirarguments.

TheaimofusingCloudworksasasupplementarytoolinresearchingforthisreviewwasto

getbroaderinputintotheconsultationthanwouldhavebeenpossiblewithdeskresearch

alone.Itwasalsoasanexperimenttoworktowardsdevelopingamodelforsocialscholarshipthatcouldsupportthedevelopmentofcollectivewisdomaspartofthebroader

indepthcasestudywork.Thishasworkedtoanextent,andthoughmostcloudsillustrate

outburstsofexpressionandcontributionforshortperiods(seeforexampleUsingtwitterwithstudents3).Sustainedinteractionisalsoevidentbyafewusersincloudssuchasthe

oneentitledliteraturereview.

3 Using Twitter with students: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2398


8/111

Figure1:TheliteraturereviewinCloudworks(http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2294/)


9/111

Anumberofothersourcesofevidencewerereviewed.Inparticular,alotiswrittenonthistopicthroughpersonalblogs,selfpublishedessaysandreflectivediaries.Thisincludes

reflectionsontheimplicationsofnewtechnologiesforlearningandteaching,strategiesformoreeffectivetakeupoftechnology,identificationofbarriersanddriverstoadoption,and

critiquesofimpactonlearnerexperienceandteachingpractices.Althoughthesesofter

sourcesofevidencearenotsubjectedtothestandardpeerreviewprocess,theycanoffervaluableinsightsintotheperceivedstateofthelandscapeofWeb2.0inHigherEducation;

insomewaystheyareevidenceofpracticingwhatyoupreach,i.e.useofthemediumto

understandthenatureofthemedium.Althoughasystematiccategorisationoftheseresourceswasbeyondthescopeofthisreview,weincludeaselectionofrelevant

reflectionsinthesectionthatoutlinesthecontextualexamples.

Changingtechnologies

Thetechnologicalenvironmentwithinwhichmoderneducationoperatesisbecomingincreasinglycomplex;offeringnewpossibilitiesbutalsogivingrisetochallenges.Wehave

seenacontinualevolutionoftechnologiesandhowtheyareusedsincetheintroductionof

theInternet.Web2.0tools,virtualworlds,simulations,hapticsandmobiletechnologiescontinuethistrendofcoevolutionandweareonlybeginningtodevelopanunderstanding

ofwhatthetrajectoryofthiscoevolutionwillbe.DeFreitasandConole(2010)suggestfivebroadtechnologicaltrendsthatarelikelytohaveasignificantimpactoneducation:

Ashifttowardsubiquitousandnetworkedtechnologies Theemergenceofcontextandlocationawaredevices Theincreasinglyrichanddiversedifferentformsofrepresentationsandstimulatory

environmentspossible

Atrendstowardsmoremobileandadaptiveandadaptivedevices Atechnologicalinfrastructurewhichisglobal,distributedandinteroperableTheemergenceofWeb2.0tools

Appendix2offersadetailedtypologyofWeb2.0tools,categorisingthemaccordingtothe

waysinwhichtheyareused.Thissectionconsiderssomeofthekeyfeaturesofthesetools.Itconcludesbydescribingsomeoftheoverarchingfeaturesandpatternsofbehaviourthat

areemergingthroughuseofthesetools.

ThetermWeb2.0isattributedtoTimOReilly(2005).Sincethenithasgainedwidespread

use,penetratingalsothediscourseoflearningandteaching.Relatedtermssuchasthereadandwritewebandthesocialwebgiveanindicationthatthetermreferstoashiftinweb

toolsandpracticestowardsmoreparticipatory,userinteraction.Althoughthetermhasno

singledefinition,thereisawidespreadagreementthatitappliestoawidesetoffunctionalcharacteristics,withinthecontextofcomputermediatedcommunicationandnetworked

digitalmedia.Thesenotonlypointtotheincreasedpossibilitiesforpublication(comparedtoearliergenerationsoftheweb),butalsoencourage,andaresupportiveof,user

participationintheuploadingandsharingofdigitalartefacts.


10/111

Inthelastfewyearsmuchhasbeenwrittenaboutthewaysinwhichthesetoolsare

changingpractices;practicesthatinvolveshiftingfromthewebasacontentrepositoryand

informationretrievalmechanismtoawebthatenablesmoresocialmediationandusergenerationofcontent.Newpracticesareemerging:

sharingofimages,videosanddocuments(asisevidentwithsitessuchasFlckr,YouTubeandSlideshare)

mechanismsforcontentproduction,communicationandcollaboration(throughblogs,wikisandmicrobloggingservicessuchasTwitterandsocialsiteslikeFacebook,Elgg

andNing)

opportunitiestointeractinnewwaysthroughimmersivevirtualworlds(suchasSecondLife).

ThesocialinterfaceofWeb2.0offersnovelwaysforconnectingpeopleandsharingand

discussingideas.Itcanbeusedtosupportandenhanceexistingcommunitiesortofoster

thedevelopmentofnewcommunitiesofinquiryandexploration.Thereseemstobeatantalisingalignmentbetweentheaffordancesofdigitalnetworkedmedia(thefocuson

usergeneratedcontent,theemphasisoncommunicationandcollectivecollaboration)andthefundamentalsofwhatisperceivedtobegoodpedagogy(socioconstructivist

approaches,personalisedandexperientiallearning)(ConoleandMcAndrew,forthcoming:

2).

TheemergenceofWeb2.0toolssitswithinabroadercontextofcontinualtechnological

change.The2010HorizonReportidentifiesfourtrendsaskeydriversoftechnologyadoptioninhighereducationfortheperiod2010through2015:

Theabundanceofonlineresourcesandrelationshipsinvitingarethinkoftheeducatorsroleinsensemaking,coachingandcredentialing.

Anincreasedemphasison,andexpectationof,ubiquitous,justintime,augmented,personalisedandinformallearning.

TheincreaseduseofcloudcomputingchallengesexistinginstitutionalITinfrastructures,leadingtonotionsofITsupportbecomingmoredecentralised.

Theworkofstudentsbeingseenasmorecollaborativeinnatureandthereforethereispotentialformoreintraandinterinstitutionalcollaboration(Johnsonetal.,2010).

WhiletheHorizonseriesofannualreportshavecontributedtoresearchintofuturetrendsandemergingprioritieswithinaUScontext(seeforexampletheNSFCyberlearningReport,

2008),severalotherreportshavealsooutlinedrecentanddevelopinginternational

practiceregardingthepatternsofadoptionand/oruseofWeb2.0ineducation(seefor

example,ArmstrongandFranklin,2008;OECD,NewMilleniumLearners,2008;OECDCERI,2009).Inparticular,Redecker(2009)andAlaMutkaetal.(2009)reportfindingsfromaEuropeanperspectivefocusingonformalandinformaleducationrespectively.IntheUK,

BECTAsEmergingTrendsoftechnologyinEducationandHarnessingTechnology:Next

GenerationLearning2008-2014,aswellasJISC'sLearnerExperienceprogrammeshaveproducednumerouscasestudiesandreports(seeBECTA/Crooketal.,2008;Daviesand

Good,2009).JISCsmostrecentcomparativereportlooksintothestrategicandpolicy

implicationsforhighereducationoftheexperiencesandexpectationsoflearnersinthe


11/111

lightoftheirincreasinguseofWeb2.0technologies(JISC,2009).EngagementinWeb2.0

environmentsprovides,ithasbeenargued,moreavenuesforselfrepresentation,

expressionorreflectionandmoreorganizedformsofcollaborationandknowledgebuilding.Regenerationofcontentthroughremixingandrepurposing,aswellas

networkingandgroupinteractionarecommonactivities.

Whileactivitiessuchasthesewerealsoevidentinearliergenerationsofnetworked

computingandonlineservices(forexampleUsenetgroups,bulletinboardsanddiscussionforums,MultiUserDomainsandMOOs,useofInstantMessagingprotocols,personaland

institutionalwebpagestopromoteindividualorprojectbasedactivitiesandinterests;see

BECTA/Crooketal.,2008),Web2.0markedawatershedintermsofasignificantshiftinpractices.Anumberoffactorscontributedtothisshift.Theseinclude:advancementsinthe

technologicalinfrastructure,increasedInternetandbroadbandadoption,anduser

friendlierinterfacesfornavigating,archiving,communicatingandcollaboratingontheweb.Together,thesehavecontributedtoscalingupuseraccessandinvolvement.IntheOECD

countries(OECD,2009)webservicesarebecominglessexpensive,faster,andincreasingly

basedonwirelesstechnology.Advancementsinaccessandspeedhavebeenaccompaniedbyasimilarlevelofadvancementintermsofdevelopmentsinsoftwareanddata

management.Atitssimplest,familiarwebbrowsershavebecomemoreversatile,allowingnotonlyawiderrangeofuserinteractions,butalsointeroperabilitywithnumerous

desktopapplications.

AtypologyofWeb2.0tools

ThefollowingcategorisationofWeb2.0activitiesisderivedfromaBECTAcommissioned

reviewofWeb2.0toolsinschools(Crooketal.,2008):

Mediasharing.Creatingandexchangingmediawithpeersorwideraudiences. Mediamanipulationanddata/webmashups .Usingwebaccessibletoolstodesign

andeditdigitalmediafilesandcombiningdatafrommultiplesourcestocreateanewapplication,toolorservice.

Instantmessaging,chatandconversationalarenas .OnetooneoronetomanyconversationsbetweenInternetusers.

Onlinegamesandvirtualworlds.RulegovernedgamesorthemedenvironmentsthatinviteliveinteractionwithotherInternetusers.

Socialnetworking.Websitesthatstructuresocialinteractionbetweenmemberswhoformsubgroupsof'friends'.

Blogging.AnInternetbasedjournalordiaryinwhichausercanposttextanddigitalmaterialwhileotherscancomment.

Socialbookmarking.Userssubmittheirbookmarkedwebpagestoacentralsitewheretheycanbetaggedandfoundbyotherusers.

Recommendersystems.Websitesthataggregateandtaguserpreferencesforitemsinsomedomainandtherebymakenovelrecommendations.

Wikisandcollaborativeeditingtools.Webbasedservicesthatallowusersunrestrictedaccesstocreate,editandlinkpages.

Syndication.UserscansubscribetoRSSfeedenabledwebsitessothattheyareautomaticallynotifiedofanychangesorupdatesincontentviaanaggregator.


12/111

Appendix2(AtypologyofWeb2.0tools)providesamoredetaileddescriptionofeachof

theseandsomespecificexamples.

ItisimportanttonotethatthecurrentwaveofWeb2.0toolshaveevolvedfromearlier

toolsforsharingandcommunication(seealsoboydandEllison,2007).Howeverthe

functionalityofWeb2.0toolsmeansthatpreviouslydiverseonlineservicesandnichesocialnetworkscanbeintegratedmoreeffectively.Commonfeaturesincludetagging,

commenting,rating,syndicationandthedevelopmentofrelationships(orfriendships).Thenetworkisseenasaplatformfordialogueandcollaborationandusergenerated

contentasamutuallyaddedvaluecomponentforcommunitybuilding.Inadditiontothe

vastecologyofinformal,professional,educationalorblendedcrowdsourced,openandsemiopenprojects,thereexistcommunitybasedscientificresourcesitesandsitesthat

emergefromthecollaborationofpublicinstitutions,museumsandcharities;thesedepend

onparticipatoryexchanges,culturalandscientificcitizenshiptoscalecontributoryinterpretationsandusergeneratedcontent(seeVonHippel,citedinNSFCyberlearning,

2008:28).

Themultiplicityoftoolsandmediatedavenuesforcreativityandsocialisationthusnotonly

contributestoaboundarycrossingbetweenprofessionalcommunitiesandgroupsconcernedwithrecreationalandfandom4activities,butalso,havegivenrisetonovelways

forinformationorganization,knowledgegenerationandlearningfacilitation.Inthereviewofsocialsoftwareforlearning,Grantetal.(2006)suggestatleastthreefundamentalshifts

inthinkingabouttherelationshipamongknowledge,culture,learningandpedagogy.First,

theynotethatthemodesofinquiryencouragedbyWeb2.0practicestendtobelessorientedtothetraditionaldisciplinaryboundariesofknowledge.Instead,thelearneris

invitedtoadoptaconceptionofknowledgeassomethingavailabletobepersonalisedorre

appropriated.Second,Web2.0encouragesengagementwithknowledgeinnewways.For

instance,itencouragesamoreanimatedbrowsingandscanningorientation.Third,practicesofknowledgeproductionarebeingaltered.Inparticular,learnersarebeingdrawnintoinquirymethodsthataremorecollaborativeandlesssolitary.Thecollaborative

spiritandopenethosoftheactivitiesoutlinedabove,andmanyotherslikethem,areoften

combinedintoaprevailingsensethatWeb2.0hascreatedgreateropportunitiesforaccess,debateandtransparencyinthepursuitofknowledgethaneverbefore(Wales,2008:np).

ArecurrentdiscoursearoundtheapplicationofWeb2.0technologiesinaneducational

contextpointstothenotionsofevolutionandtransformation;transformation,intermsof

transcendingformaleducationalcontexts;evolutionintermsoffacilitatingmoreinformalandnonformallearningcontextswhichblurtheboundariesbetweencategoriesoflearners

(student,adultlearner,orinformallearner,autodidact).Theargumentsforthisalsocentresaroundthenotionthatlearnersarenowabletobecomemoreactiveproducers,authors,evaluatorsandcommentatorswithinthelearningarenatheyareengagedwith.The

questionthendirectsattentiontothenovelparadigmsoflearningandforknowledge

4Fandom(fromthenounfanandtheaffix-dom,asinkingdom,freedom,etc.)isatermusedtorefertoasubculturecomposedoffanscharacterisedbyafeelingofsympathyandcamaraderiewithotherswhoshare

acommoninterest (Wikipedia, Entry on Fandom: ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fandom)


13/111

building,butalsotofoundationalissuesthatwillaffecteducationalinstitutionsandpractice

forthefuture.

Changinglearningandlearners

Theoriesoflearning

ThissectionconsidersdifferentpedagogicalapproachesspecificallyinrelationtoWeb2.0practices.Viewsoncategorisationoflearningtheoriesarestronglycontestedand

definitionsfordifferentaspectsarenotclearcut.Furthermore,whilsttheoriesoflearning

haveneverbeenstatic,arguablythefluidityandcomplexityofnewonlinespacesandthewaysinwhichtheyarebeingusedtosupportdifferentformsoflearningmeansthatthe

distinctionbetweenpedagogicalapproaches(suchasbehavioural,cognitive,developmental

andcriticalpedagogy)isbeingeroded.Nonetheless,itispossibletodrawoutsomepatternsastowhatconstitutesgoodpedagogy,irrespectiveoftheunderlyingepistemologicalbeliefs

thatdifferenttheoristsandschoolsofthoughthold.Thissectionprovidesareviewof

currenttheoriesoflearninginthecontextoftheirapplicationtoexploitationofnewtechnologiesforlearning.

MayesanddeFreitas(2004)groupedlearningtheoriesintothreecategories:

Associative(learningasactivitythroughstructuredtasks) Cognitive(learningthroughunderstanding) Situative(learningassocialpractice).InadditiontothecategorisationprovidedbyMayesandDeFreitas,anumberofother

authorshavewrittenaboutlearningtheoriesandhowtheyrelatetoelearning.Conoleetal.reviewedlearningtheoriesandmappedthemagainstapedagogicalframework(Conole,et

al.,2004).Dykeetal.(2007)builtonthisworkbyprovidinganoverviewofthemainlearningtheoryperspectivesalongwithanindicationofthekindsofelearningpracticetheymostobviouslysupport.Ravenscroft(2003)linkedpedagogicaltheorytospecific

examplesofelearninginnovation.Learningtheoriesarefrequentlycapturedinpedagogicalmodelsorframeworksthatemphasiseaparticularapproach.Arecentreview

ofthekeymodelsorframeworksthathavebeenusedinelearningdescribedtwenty

commonmodelsorframeworksacrossthedifferenttheoreticalperspectives(Conole,2010).Appendix3(Areviewofelearningmodelsandframeworks)providesasummary

ofthiswork.

Alotofearlyapplicationofelearningwasessentiallybehaviouristinnature.Thispage

turningmentallyhasbeencriticisedresultinginresearchersexploringthewaysinwhichmoreinteractional,studentcentredandsociallymediatedapproachesmightbeapplied.

Manyarguethatbehaviouristapproaches,whichfocusonprescriptiveshapingand

systematicguidanceofthelearnertowardsinscribedgoalsareinappropriateforWeb2.0environments.NonethelessWeb2.0toolscansupportassociativepedagogiesandbeused

effectivelyintermsofprovidingstructuredguidancethroughtasksandthroughprovision

ofeffectiveandtimelyfeedback.Thismightincludetheadaptionofalearnerspersonallearningenvironmenttoprovideastructuredlearningpathway,usinginteractivee


14/111

assessmentactivities,aggregationofresourcesaroundlearningthemesoreffectiveuseof

collectiveintelligencetailoredtoindividuallearningneeds.

Cognitivismemphasisesthemetaphorofinformationprocessingtoexpressthe

developmentofthinkingandargumentation.Thisincludesreflectionofonesownthinking

andoutwardarticulationororchestrationofseveraldifferenttypesoflearningactivities(i.e.attention,selection,reasoning,prediction,andreviewing).Thereisgoodevidencethat

outwardlyarticulatingoneslearningcanenableselfawareness(e.g.Chi,2000).Processesofselfpublishingandreflectivebloggingcansupportthistypeofmetacognition.Mejias

(2006)describestheuseofsocialnetworkstofacilitatedistributedresearch.Hearguesthat

socialnetworkshavetheadvantageofbothengagingstudentsinscaffoldingexperiencesanddevelopingthepracticalresearchskillsneededtomakebestuseofonlineinformation

networks.Hepointsoutthatthepowerofmanyexposesanindividualtofarmore

research,resourcesandideasthantheycouldpossiblygenerateontheirown.

Constructivismhasbeenakeystrandofeducationaldiscourseformorethantwentyyears.Technologieshavebeenseenasameansofenablingnewapproachestoconstructivism,

bothintermsofenablingthelearnertotakecontroloftheirlearningandintermsofenhancingthesocialdimensionsoflearning.Dalsgaard(2006)arguesthatsocialsoftwaretoolscansupportasocialconstructivistapproachtoelearningbyprovidingstudentswith

personaltoolsandbyengagingtheminsocialnetworks,thusallowinglearnerstodirecttheirownproblemsolvingprocess.Agoodexampleofaframeworkthatpromotes

constructivismisonethatwasdevelopedbyJonassenetal.(1999;2003).Itcanbeusedasa

guidelinetodevelopConstructivistLearningEnvironments(CLEs).Tointegratethesocialdimensionintothepedagogyofonlinelearningenvironments,Felix(2005)hasproposed

thesynthesisofthecognitiveconstructivistandsocialconstructivistapproaches.Inthe

cognitiveconstructivistapproach,thefocusisoncognitionthatoccursinthemindoftheindividual,withthelearnermakingintellectualsenseofthematerialsontheirown.The

socialconstructivistapproachemphasisesthesociallyandculturallysituatedcontextofcognition,inwhichknowledgeisconstructedthroughsharedendeavours.Theinteractions

intheonlineenvironment,forexamplethroughcollaborationsordiscussionsusingforums,

orinwikisandblogs,enableknowledgetobeconstructedindividually,butmediatedsocially(seeforexampleMinocha2009:12forarecentexample).Theintersubjectively

rich,opendialoguesthattheseenvironmentscanfacilitatearevaluableresourcesthatcan

helpshapethetrajectoryoflearningasanexchangeofstrategicguidance(Crooketal.,2008:31).

SocialtoolsandinteractiveWeb2.0environmentsenablelearnerstoadoptexploratoryand

creativepositions,withoutoverlookingthesocialdimensionoforchestrationanddesign(or

indeedgovernanceifacommunityspaceisenabled).Buildingonthistheme,socialconstructivismemphasisestheimportanceofthelearnerbeingactivelyinvolvedinthe

learningprocess.Whilethecognitiveapproachisconcernedmorewithknowledge

architectureandmapping,theoriessuchasconnectivismanddistributedcognitionemphasisethenegotiated,networkedanddistributednatureoflearningacrossphysical

andvirtualspaces.MasonandRennie(2008)acceptSiemens'(2004)propositionthatWeb2.0methodsandtoolspermittheeducationalprocesstotranscendconstructivetheoriesby

movingfromisolated,individualactivitiestointeractiveexchangesamongstacommunity


15/111

ofcollaboratinglearners(i.e.,collaborativeconstructivismorconnectivismputsan

increasedemphasisoninvolvingthestudentinactiveparticipationandintheprocessof

learning).Siemens(2006)placesthenetworkandnetworkinginthecentreofthelearningprocess.This'netcentric'perspectiveseesknowledgenotnecessarilyasaprogressive

accumulation,butratherasaprocessforbuilding,maintainingandutilisingconnections.In

contrast,Ackermann(2004)emphasisestheexperientialandactiveapproachtolearningandknowledgebuilding,pointingtotheprocessthatbuildsonbothindividualand

collectiveendeavours.

Socioculturalperspectivesemphasisethesociallysituatedandculturaldimensionsof

learning,thatarearguablymissingfromtheotherperspectives.Acrosstheirlongculturalhistory,humanbeingshaveconstructedresourcesallowingthemtodrivecognitionfrom

theprivateormentalworldof'thinking'intothepublicandexternalworldofactingwith

toolsandartefacts(e.g.diSessa,2001).Thiscollectionofresourcesforproblemsolvingandreasoningisattheheartofwhatismeantby'culture'.Withthisperspectiveoflearning,

whatgetsdoneismainlyorganisedintheexternallydesignedspaceofaction(ratherthan

justtheinternalspaceofthementalworld).Thispromotestheviewoflearningasacculturationratherthanacquisition.Thesocialiscentrallylocatedinthescaffolding

approachofculturalappropriation.Mediationofthelearningexperienceis,accordingtoVygotsky(1971),aformofintervention(aformofauxiliarystimulus).Byfocusingon

experienceduringtheprocessesofthinkingandlearning(metacognition),mediatingartefacts(suchaslinguisticmodesofaddressandtoolsthatenablereflectionanddialogue)

cancontributetoeffectivelearningbehaviour.Usingmediatingartefacts,expertsand

novicescancoconstructideasforproblemsolvinganddecisionmaking.Conoleconsidersthiswithrespecttotherangeofmediatingartefactsteachers,learneranddevelopersused

tosupportthedesignanddeliveryoflearning(Conole,2008).Personalisedlearning

environmentsputlearnersincontrol,particularlyregardingmotivationaroundinterfaces

oflearning.Participationincollaborativeactivities,andlearningcontextsasacommunityofpractice,isseenasanothercomponentintheprocessoflearningbeyondacquisition.

LaveandWengersworkonCommunitiesofPractice(CoP)(LaveandWenger,2001;see

alsoWenger,1998)hasbeendrawnonextensivelyinthisfield.WengerdefinesaCoPasincorporatingimportantmechanismsformeaningnegotiation,learningandidentity

building.Participationinsharedgoals,andthroughsharedresources,canbeseenasa

processofappropriationofsocialandculturalaspectsofknowledge,wherebythelearnerbecomespreparedforparticipationthroughtheprocessofparticipationitself(Rogoffetal.,

2003).Althoughthenotionofinscribedgoals,boundaries,rules,monitoringpossibilitiesandsanctioningarecorecharacteristicsofcommunitysustainability(seeKoperetal.,

2004),socialinteraction,coevolutionofactivitiesandtasksandhumourarealsocorecomponentsofsuccessandeffectiveness(seeKesteret.al,2006;Engstrom,2007).Mediatingartefactsplayanimportantroleandthesocioculturalapproachesmovethe

focusawayfromthematerialityofthetoolsthemselves,towardstheactions/contextsinwhichthemediaareused.Ifthesocialwebshiftsmodelsofteachingfromtransmissionto

dialogueandisindeedcapableofenableindividualstoconstructknowledgemedia

(Dalsgaard,2009),theiruseinthemeaningmakingprocessiscore.


16/111

Selwyn(2009)arguesthateducationalpracticesthatareconcernedwiththeexploratory

andsocial,thereflectiveorimmersiveaspectsofknowledgebuildingwillfindWeb2.0tools

andsocialmediapowerful.Atthesametime,itisalsoassumedthatthecoreaffordancesofWeb2.0toolsblurtheboundariesbetweenproductionanduse(BrunsandHumphreys,

2007).Thiscaninturnhaveanimpactonallfourprincipleaspectsofthelearner

experience:thecognitive,theconstructive,thesocialandthesituative(seealsoMayesanddeFreitas,2007).

Newformsoflearning

Having provided a general discussion of learning theories and their relationship to Web 2.0 tools,

this section describes four specific examples of the ways in which these tools might promote newforms of learning, namely:

Inquiry-based and exploratory learning Newformsofcommunicationandcollaboration Newformsofcreativity,cocreationandproduction RichercontextualisationoflearningWeb2.0technologiesandpracticesprovidenewmechanismsforinquirybasedand

exploratorylearning.Distributedcollectionofdataispossible,asarenewwaysof

organisingandrepresentingmultipledatasources.Newtoolsareemergingforinterrogatingandanalysingdata,alongwithrichsocialandinformationenvironmentsto

supportresearchcommunities.Inthisrespect,cognitively,Web2.0invitesuserstofamiliarisethemselvesanddevelopconfidenceinnewmodesofinquiry.Italsobrings

challengestobothlearnersandteachersintermsofablurringoftheboundariesofcontrol

inthesecontexts,aswellasraisingissuesaboutthelegitimacyofinformationinthesenewdistributed,mixedenvironments(e.g.Keen,2007).

Theephemeralnatureofwebknowledgeisnotonlyanassetenablingmultiplelocations,usersandremixing,butalsoaliability,whichcanleadtocognitiveoverload,confused

authorshipandlossofcredibility.Newformsofmediaandinformationliteracyforfiltering,navigating,organizingandmanipulatingrelevantcontent(foramoredevelopeddiscussion

ofliteracy,seebelow)arerequired.

Socialnetworksenablenewformsofcommunicationandcollaboration.Theimportanceof

collaborationisacommoningredientinmanyofthelearningperspectives,asitisgenerally

consideredtobeanimportantmeansofdevelopingunderstandingthroughshareddialogueandcoconstruction.Anecologyofsocialnetworkshasnowdeveloped,rangingfromthose

congregatingaroundcommoninterestsorkinship,throughtothoseassociatedwithmore

formalcommunitycontexts(suchasformallearningcontextsorprofessionalnetworks).Theseecologiesarefacilitatedbyarangeofprocessesofengagementinstantiatedthrough

thenewtechnologies,makingpeerguidance,reflectionandsupportpossibleinavarietyofnewwaysandatascalenotseenbefore.Forexample,theabilitytoopenlycommentupon

andcritiqueotherpeoplesworkhasbecomeastandardpracticewithintheblogosphere

andhasbeentakenupbyacademics(throughselfreflectiveblogsforteachinganddigitalscholarship)andresearchers.Inteachingcontexts,studentscansocialisewithpeers

throughsocialnetworks,providingmutualsupportandaforumforshareddialogue.


17/111

Typicalactivitiesinthesespacescanincludepracticingwritingskills,contributingto

collectivecohortblogs,orcritiquingeachotherspersonalportfolios(EllisonandWu,

2008).Assuchsharedperspectivesorcrowdsourcingpracticeshavebecomemorecommonplace,thereisagrowingargumentthatthesepracticesarekeytoinnovative

thinkingandproblemsolving(Leadbetter,2008;Surowiecki,2004).Useofsuchsocial

networksbetweenstudentsandteachershasbeenarguablylesssuccessful,withstudentsoftenseeingthisasanintrusionintotheirmorepersonal,learningandsocialspaces

(Farmer,2006).

Similarly,creativityandnewformsofcocreationandpublicationarealsopossible.The

distributednatureofWeb2.0technologiesmeansthatlearnersmayhaveeasieraccesstotheexpertiseofothers,toauthenticenvironmentsandtodistributedaudiences.The

creationofanaudienceforlearnerscanbemotivationalinanumberofrespects:asameans

ofprovidinganoutletfordemonstratingtheirlearningandasamechanismforgettingfeedback.Web2.0technologiesnotonlyblurtheboundariesbetweenlearnersand

teachers,butalsobetweenteachingandresearch,meaningthatlearnerscanparticipatein

andcontributetorealresearchwork.Atthesametime,participationandcoordinationinonlinesocialandcreativespacescanappearinvaryingdegreesofscaleanddepth,

includingmoresophisticatedlevelsofinterpersonaldialogueanddeliberation(Farmeretal.,2008;Kim,2008).Suchnetworksandenvironmentsneedtobecarefullyconstructed;it

isimportanttobuildcapacityforcollaborativeengagementunderfluid,heterarchicalstructures.Similarly,participants(boththelearnersandtheteachers)needtodevelopthe

relevantsetofskillstobeabletobeeffectivecocreators.Keycharacteristicsinsuch

contextsincludetheabilitytotakeflexibleroles(learnerasteacherandviceversaforexample),aswellasthedevelopmentofanindividualandcollectivesenseofresponsibility

andpride(Burgess,2006;EllisonandWu,2008;seealsoBrunsandHumphreys,2007in

relationtowikis).Suchnotionsofcodependence,constructionandfluidityhowevermay

clashwithideasaboutownershipandinaformaleducationalcontextraisingfundamentalissuesaboutwhattypesofassessmentareappropriateandmeaningful.

Sociallysituativelearningperspectivesemphasisethecontextwithinwhichlearningoccurs.

Web2.0toolsprovideparticularopportunitiesforpersonalisingandcontextualisinglearning.Itisnowpossibletodeconstructresources,toolsandactivitiessothattheycanbe

recombinedorremixedaccordingtoindividualpreference(i.e.theeducationalapplication

ofthenotionofmashupsdescribedearlier).Learnerscanalsocreatetheirowncontentandresources,enablingincreasedcreativityandflexibilitywithinthecurriculum.Such

personalisationandreappropriationofexistingresourcesalsohasclearpotentialtosupportbetterformsofindependentstudyandtofacilitatepersonalresourcemanagement.

Suchusercentredapproaches,manybelieve,areimportant,notleastbecauseoftheaffectiveandmotivationalbenefitsderivedfromtheabilitytopersonalise,butalsobecausetheprocessofappropriationbydefaultleadstothelearnerdevelopingtheirdigitalliteracy

skillsandfostersparticipatorylearning.

Patternsoftechnologyuseandthecharacteristicsoflearners

Accordingtothe2008ECARsurveyofstudentsuseofcomputers,studentsareusing

technologiesbothforacademicpurposesandforsocialactivities.Similarly,theOECEreport


18/111

onMillenniumLearners(OECD,2009)listsaccesstothelibrarywebsite(93.4%)andthe

useofcoursemanagementsystems/VLEs(82.3%severaltimesaweek)asthetwolargest

usesoftechnologiesforacademicpurposes.ThesignificantuseofVLEsdemonstratesthattheyarebecomingincreasinglyamandatorycampuscommodity(OECD,2009:14).Ofthe

entertainmentrelatedandnetworkingactivities,useofsocialnetworkingsites(daily

85.2%),InstantMessaging(73.8%daily)andmusic/videodownloads(77,3%weekly)wasalsohigh.AnIpsosMorisurveyrevealedthat79%ofBritishfirstyearstudents(IpsosMori,

2008)accesscoursespecificmaterialsatleastonceaweekand97%ofthisgroupfoundituseful.Amongtheentertainmentrelatedactivities,useofsocialnetworkingsitessuchas

Facebookisincreasingonanannualbasis.AsimilarpicturecanbeseeninAustralia,where

asignificantnumberofstudentsfrequentlyusetheuniversitylearningmanagementsystemtoaccesscourse/relatedmaterials(81%;Kennedyetal.,2006).

TheconvictionthatWeb2.0applicationswouldtransformInternetusersincreasinglyintocontentproducers(OECD,2007)isalsoconfirmedonthebasisofthisdata.Forexample,

morethanonefifthofUShighereducationstudentsareactivelycontributingcontentto

blogs,wikis,photoorvideowebsitesand18%contributeregularlytoatleastthreeofthese.However,39%declarenottohavecontributedtoanyofthese(OECD,2009:15).The

patternofAustralianandBritishstudentsseemstobesimilartotheoneintheUnitedStates(Kennedy,etal.,2006,JonesandCross,2009).AstudyfromPewInternetand

AmericanLifefoundthatintheUnitedStatesmorethanhalfofthe12millionteensonlinecreateoriginalmaterialfortheweb,withoriginalartwork,photosorvideo(Lenhart,

Madden,RankinMacgill,andSmith,2007citedinOECD,2009:p.21).

AlthoughstudentsintheOECDcountriesappeartobeheavyusersofsocialmediaandnew

technologiesingeneral,theprofileofstudentsisnotuniform;theintensityofattachment

withtechnologiesaswellasthepatternsofusesbearssociodemographicandgendervariation.Thefiguresforparticipationinroleplayinggames(MMORPGs)islowerthan

mightbeexpectedandgenderedusesareevident:moremalesusersthanfemales.Similarlytheuseofvirtualworlds,suchasSecondLife,islow;intheUSlessthan9%ofstudentsare

using3Dvirtualworldsinhighereducation(OECD,2009:15).Thisisdespitetheperceived

benefitstheseenvironmentsofferpedagogicallyandthehighexpectationsintermsoftheirvalueforhighereducation(ChittaroandRanon,2007;DeLucia,Francese,Passero,and

Tortora,2009;DiBlasandPoggi,2007).

Theprevioussectionreviewedthewaysinwhichnewtechnologiesmightsupportmore

Web2.0orientatedformsoflearning;emphasisingtheirusergenerated,participatoryandsituativenatureinparticular.Abodyofresearchhasemergedinrecentyears,whichhas

beenfocusingspecificallyoncollatingevidenceoftheextentthisistrue.Theinitial

discoursearoundlearnerstendedtoforegroundthepositives;apicturewaspaintedofanewgenerationoflearnerswhoweredigitallysavvyandtechnologicalimmersed,terms

suchasdigitalnatives,millenniumkidsandthenetgenerationpepperedthisdiscourse.

Howeverasthesubfieldhasmaturedandalargerbodyofevidencehasbeengathered,thegeneralconsensushasbecomemoreconsideredandrealistic.So,althoughitistruethat

manyyoungerlearnershavegrownupinatechnologymediatedenvironment,thisdoesnotmeantheyhavethenecessaryskillstobeabletoharnesstheseforacademicand

learningpurposes.Itisalsotruethatthereisawidespectrumoflearners,withdifferent


19/111

preferencesinthewaystheyliketolearn,thedegreetowhichtheywishtoengagewith

technologiesandthestandardoftheirgeneralstudyskillsandacademicperformance.

Someoftheoriginalrhetoricaroundtechnologiesbeingassociatedwithsignificantshiftsin

thenatureofcontemporarylearnerscanbetracedbacktotheworkofresearcherslike

OblingerandPrensky.Prenskycoinedthephrasedigitalnatives(Prensky,2001)todescribeagenerationoflearnerswhohavegrownupinaworldofcomputers,mobile

phonesandtheweb;i.e.agenerationreliantupondigitalmediaandtools.Prenskyandothersarguedthatthesedigitalnativesareseentostandinstarkcontrasttoolder

generationsofdigitalimmigrants,whoadopteddigitalmedialateronintheirlives.Terms

suchasInternetgeneration,generationM(media),generationV(virtual),googlegeneration(Brabazon,2007),generationC,Nintendokids,Millennials(OECD,2008)

typifythismovement(see,forexample,OblingerandOblinger,2005;Tapscott,1998;and

Kennedyetal.,2008amongothers,foranempiricallygroundedcritiqueofsuchrhetoric).

CertainlyOblingerandOblinger's(2005)book,EducatingtheNetGeneration,providesausefulstartingpointforrecentresearchexploringstudentsuseoftechnologies.Itprovides

akindofwatershedintermsoftuningintotheincreasingresearchinterestinstudyinghowlearnersareinteractingwithnewtools,andhowthismightbechangingthewaysinwhichtheyarelearning.Intheirintroduction,OblingerandOblingernote,wehopethisbookwill

helpeducatorsmakesenseofthemanypatternsandbehaviorsthatweseeintheNetGenerationbutdontquiteunderstand(2005:7).

Constantlyevolvingtechnologyliesattheheartofmobile,connected,andasBauman(2005)andUrry(2007)havecalledit'liquidlifestyles'.Thesedigitalnativesarethoughtto

expecttechnologytoassistfluidityinallaspectsoftheirlives,includingthewaysinwhichtheylearnandareeducated.Theyarethoughttohavedistinctexpectationsofeducation

thatinvolvelearningwhichispersonalised,accessibleondemand,andavailableatany

time,anyplace,oranypaceandareoftencontrastedwithteachersandparents,whoarelabelledasbeingdigitalimmigrantsor'visitors'(White,2009).

Theuniformityofsuchlearners,andindeedtherhetoricalarticulationofthetechnologicallydeterministic,generational,regionalortemporaldefinitionshavebeen

widelycontested(DavisandGood,2009;JonesandCross,2009;White,2009;Buckingham,2006),andthemultipledimensionsofthedigitaldividehaverepeatedlybeenaddressed.

Increasedconnectedness,immediacy,multitasking,mediaandcriticalliteracy,networked

skills,butalso,emotionality,timemanagementandindeedlearnerdifferencesandtutorinfluencesaresomeofthethemesewhichhavebeenconsideredacrossarangeofindepth

casestudiesandsurveys(Richardson,2008;Sharpeetal.,2008;Thorpeetal.,2008).

Oneofthemainreasonscitedbystudentsforusingtechnologiesintheircoursesis

convenience.Technologiesareseenasaddingvaluetocourses,notasmechanismsforradicaltransformation.For example, CarusoandKvavik(2006)foundthatthemost

commonlycitedreasongivenforusingtechnologyincourseswasconvenience(51%of

students),followedbytheabilitytomanagecourseactivitieseasily(19%),andtoamuchlesserextenttheopportunitiestoenhancelearning(15%)ortocommunicatewithpeers

andteachers(11%).Thisissupportedbyacomparativeanalysisonexistingstudiesaspart


20/111

oftheJISCslearnersexperiencesprogramme(JISC,2009,seealso,SharpeandBeetham,

2010).Fromthestudentperspective,technologyisnotnecessarilyasubstitute,butatool

foraddedconvenienceandcontrol(OECD,2009).AstheauthorsoftheJISC(2009)reportnote,imaginingWeb2.0forsocialpurposesinastudycontext,presentsconceptual

difficultiestolearnersaswellasachallengetotheirnotionsofspace.Theyneed

demonstration,persuasionandroomtoexperimentinthiscontext'. SharpeandBeetham(2010)capturetheessenceoffindingsemergingfromlearnerexperienceresearchintheir

introductiontoarecenteditedcollectiononresearchinthefield:Whatbecomesclearistheextenttowhichlearnersarebecomingactiveparticipantsintheirlearning

experiencesandareshapingtheirowneducationalenvironments[]Learnersarecreatingtheirown

blendsofphysicalandvirtualenvironmentsandofinformalandformallearningcontexts.

Thechangingroleofteachingandteachers

Havingdiscussedthechangingnatureoflearningandlearnersintheprevioussection,thissectionconsiderstheimplicationsforteaching.AstheOECDreportonNewMillennium

LearninginHigherEducation(2009:28)notes,theassumptionthatmostteachersinhigher

educationaredigitalimmigrantsmightbetrueonthebasisoftheirage,butiscertainlynot

truewithrespecttotheirtechnologyskillsandcompetences.Asearlyas2003,aEuropaeumsurveyidentifiedhighadoptionratesoftechnologyintermsofcommunicatingresearchfindingsandnetworking(FlatherandHuggins,2004,citedinOECD,2009:28).An

Australiansurvey(EducationNetworkAustralia,2008)foundoutthat90%ofhigher

educationteachersconsideredtheInternetveryimportantfortheirwork.Interestinglytheystatedthatthiswasnotonlyforresearchpurposes,butalso,forimprovingteaching

andlearningopportunitiesandresourcesforstudents.Over10%ofteachingstaffmadeaclearreferencetotheuseandintegrationofdigitallearningobjects.Justoveronethirdof

Australianhighereducationteacherswhorespondedtothesurveyareconvincedthatthey

alreadypossesstheICTcapabilitiesrequiredtotransformpractice,especiallybymeansofintroducingnewwaysofengagingstudents(29%),orareproficientandconfidentinthe

useofICTtosupportlearning(37%).Yet,thereappearstobeagapbetweentheexpertiseofteachersincontinentalEuropeandinAngloSaxoncountries.Masteryofdigitallibrariesanddatabasesarecorecompetencesforacademicresearchers;mostusewordprocessors

andpresentationsoftwareforwritingpapersandpresentingfindings,manyusereferencemanagementtoolsandtoolsfordataanalysis.Blogsandwikisarealsousedtosomeextent

asameansofdisseminatingresearchandcollectivewriting.Forcollaborativeresearch

projectstherearearangeofWeb2.0environmentsenablingthesharinganddiscussionofresearchfindings.

Downesoffersanearlyreviewofthepotentialofthesetechnologiesforlearning(Downes2005)andAlexanderprovidesoneofthefirsttextbooksexploringtheuseofthesetoolsfor

teachingandlearning(Alexander2006).Bothoutlinemoreopen,participatoryandheterarchicalstructuresinteachingmethods.Reviewingtheuseofsocialmedialikeblogs

andwikis,BrunsandHumphreys(2007)alsoarguethatthe(co)productionofcontentby

theuser(produsage)requiresashiftinchangingteachingmethodstowardsapproachesthatsupportcommunitybuildingthroughcollaboration,heterarchicalstructuresof

engagement,mentoring,fosteringcreativityandcriticalliteracycapacities.Siemens(2009),

consideringthisfromtheperspectiveofnetworkedlearningandconnectivism,reflectsonroleoftheacademicteachingmethods:


21/111

Giventhatcoherenceandlucidityarekeytounderstandingourworld,howdoeducatorsteachin

networks?Foreducators,controlisbeingreplacedwithinfluence.Insteadofcontrollingaclassroom,

ateachernowinfluencesorshapesanetwork.

Siemenssuggeststhefollowasalistofthenewrolesthatteachersneedtoadoptinnetworkedlearningenvironments:

Amplifying Curating Wayfindingandsociallydrivensensemaking Aggregating Filtering Modelling Persistentpresence(Siemens,2009:np)

Scalinguptothemajoritywillrequiredifferentapproaches,morestrategiccoordination

andstaffdevelopmentandsupport.Todate,onthewhole,onlyaminorityofenthusiastic

teachersandthosewitharesearchinterestinthelearningsciences,educationaltechnologyornewmedia,haveundertakenexperimentationwithnewinnovationsinpedagogyand

explorationoftheuseofnewtechnologies.EmbracingWeb2.0approacheswillrequireradicallydifferentstrategiesintermsofdesigning,supportingandassessinglearning.

Essentially,thecreativechangeinthepracticesmayleadtodeliberateandsystemicinnovationbothparamounttoknowledgecreatingorganizations(Bereiter,2002),suchas

highereducationinstitutions.ThelearningpotentialofWeb2.0isseentoderivefromthecoconstructionofknowledgeandthecollaborativeethosinselforganisednetworkedand

virtualspaces.Itisnecessarytoacknowledgethewebsofknowledgecreatedinthesocial

processofteachingandlearning(Ruddetal.,2006b).ThoughitseemsunlikelythatWeb

2.0willfundamentallydisplaceteachingperse,itisclearthatembracingWeb2.0practiceswillmeanthatmoreemphasisisplacedonteachingprocessesbeingsituatedasactiveco

learningexperiences.Adoptionofamorescholarlyandreflectiveapproachtoteachingpracticeisclearlyalogicalstrategytohelpachievethisshift.

Despitetherelativelysophisticatedtechnologicalinfrastructurethatisnowinplaceinthe

UKandotherAnglosaxonorOECDcountries,deploymentofsocialmediaatthecoreofthe

curriculumwithinfurtherandthehighereducationismostlyatanexperimentalstage(seeOECD,2009).Educatorsconfidenceinandexperiencewithsocialmediaisstillperceivedas

abarrierforsuccessfulimplementationwithinteachingandlearninginHighereducation

contexts.AlthoughstudiesinOECDcountriesshowthatteachersmayindeedbeamongstthemostskilledtechnologyusers,itappearsthattheyareunabletotakeadvantageoftheir

competenceandapplyittothewaytheyteach(OECD,2008:seealsoBlinandMunro,2008;Zang,2009).AccordingtotheOECD(2008)threereasonsemergeasthemostsalientfor

explainingthisparadox:

Theabsenceofappropriateincentivestousetechnologyintheclassroomand,moregenerally,gettinginvolvedinanyinnovationregardingteaching.


22/111

Thedominantcultureintheteachingprofessionisoneofappliedpractice,whichdoesnotrelyverymuchonresearchbasedevidencetoidentifygoodteaching

methodologiesandstrategies. Theobservationthatacademicteacherslackthevisionandthepersonalexperienceof

whatatechnologyenhancedteachingcouldlooklike.

Thelasttworeasonssuggestthatinitialteachertraininghastoberevisedandthatthereneedstobeanoverallchangeinthesocialandculturalcontextsurroundingteaching

practices.

StrategiesforsupportingtheuseoftechnologiesTheprevioussectionspaintapictureofavibrantlandscapeofresearchactivitiesand

developments,ofclustersofcommunitiesaggregatingaroundcommoninterestsandthemes.Onewouldassumethatcollectivelytheseactivitiesshouldhaveasignificantimpact

onpractice,buttheydonot.Thesecommunitiessitalongsideactualteachingpracticesand

rarelyinformthemtoanygreatextent.Theredoesnotyetappeartobeanevidencebasedethostolearningandteachingpractice.However,initiativessuchastheHigherEducation

AcademyfundedEvidenceNet5areattemptingtochangethisandsiteslikeCloudworks,whicharespecificallyharnessingWeb2.0approachestoencourageeducationaldebate,are

indicatorsthatthingsarebeginningtochange.

Barrierstouptakeandlackofimpact

Despitethepotentialapplicationoftechnologiesinaneducationalcontext,theirusealso

raisessomefundamentalparadoxes(SeeAppendix4Paradoxescreatedbythenetworked

anddigitalforamoredetaileddiscussion).SurveysontheuseofWeb2.0withineducationgiveanindicationofthelevelofuptake(seeforexampletheJISCIpsosMORIpolls,2008;

theannualECARsurveys;alsoEducationNetworkAustralia,2008;LamandRitzen,2008).Collectivelytheysuggestthatuptakeisoccurring,butthatitisnotyetextensiveacrossallaspectsoflearningandteachingprovision.Itisimportanttocautionagainstover

generalisationsfromthesesurveysintermsofextrapolatingtheuptakeofbothformalandinformalWeb2.0toolsasitisdifficulttodrawcomparativeconclusionssystematically

fromsurveysthatusedifferentresearchinstruments.

InarecentpaperConoleconsidersthebarrierstouptakeoftechnologies,drawingonthe

broaderliteratureonresistancetochangeandinnovation(Conole2010)(SeeAppendix5

FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0inHigherEducationandAppendix6Barrierstochange).Conoleidentifiesthefollowingascommonlycitedreasonsforlackof

adoption:

Ihaventgottime,Myresearchismoreimportant,Whatsinitforme?,Whereismyreward?,I

donthavetheskillstodothis,andIdontbelieveinthis,itwontwork.Commonresistance

strategiesincludesayingyes(anddoingnothing)orunderminingtheinitiativeand/orthepeople

involved.Depressinglyclassicmistakesarerepeatedoverandoveragain:anoveremphasisonthe

5http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/evidencenet


23/111

technologiesandnotthepeopleandprocesses;fundingforthetechnologydevelopmentsbutnotuse

andsupport.

Inadditiontothislist,therearealsobarriersaroundthechangingnatureofprivacyandownershipintechnologicalenvironments.Thereisalackofunderstandingofthe

implicationsofadoptingmoreopenapproachesandindeednegativeattitudesandfearof

openness.Identificationandunderstandingofthebarrierstobroaderuptakeisessentialsothatstrategiescanbedevisedtoovercomethem.Greenhowetal.(2009a)discussthree

ideasthatillustratethetensionsbetweenthepotentialadvantagesofwebenabledpracticesandthechallengesofimplementation:a)developingteachersprofessional

scholarshipandpractice;b)buildingcapacitiesforqualityscholarship,andc)bridging

disciplinarydivides.Strategiestoovercometheseissueswillneedtoincludemechanismsforgivingteacherstimetoexperimentwithnewtechnologies,supportandguidanceto

enablethemtodevelopthenewskillsneededtoembracethesenewtechnologiesanda

shiftinthinkingtowardsmorescholarlyandreflectiveapproachestoteaching.

Toexplorethisinalittlemoredepthsomeexamplesofdifferentapproachesthatcanbe

adoptedtoenablethisshiftinthinkingaredescribedinAppendix7(Differentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchange).Thefirstisaroundapplicationofideasfrom

designbasedresearchasamechanismforengagingteachersinmorereflectivepractice.Thesecondfocusesonwaysinwhichchangesinpracticearoundtheuseoftechnologies

canbeachieved.

Digital,networkedandmultiliteracies

Newtechnologiesarebothchallengingexistingteacherpracticeandrequiringnewskills

andwaysofthinking.LankshearandKnobelprovideausefulsummaryofthewayinwhichthetermdigitalliteraciesisbeingused(LankshearandKnobel,2006).Exactdefinitions

aroundthetermdigitalliteraciesvary;however,Gilstersdefinitionofdigialliteracies,

whichpointstotheabilitytounderstandanduseinformationinmultipleformatsfromawidevarietyofsourceswhenitispresentedviacomputers,isinclusiveofsomethese

definitions(Gilster,citedinLanksearandKnoble,2006;seealsoKress,2003).

Literacynowhastobestretchedtoencompassotherformsofrepresentationalfluencythan

thoseassociatedwiththeprintedword.Digitalandnetworkedliteraciesaremuchmorethansimplybeingaboutunderstandinginformationavailableinadigitalcontext.Theyare

alsoaboutskillsofinterpretationofmultiplerepresentations,theabilitytodevelopaholisticandinterconnectedperspectiveandtounderstandhowtobepartofandinteract

withawiderparticipatorycommunity.Aslearnersengagewithdigitalartefactsthrough

Web2.0,sothecurriculummustaddressthechallengeofdevelopingtheirconfidencewith

newliteraciesandtheirincreasedpotentialforcreativity.Goodfellowsummarisesthecomplexityofthefieldbyarguingthatliteraciesaremultifaceted

withstrandsandtribeslike:multiliteracies,situatedliteracies,newliteracystudies,academic

literacies,digitalliteracies,etc.etc.(Seebroaderdiscussion,ofwhichthisispart,at

http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2669).

Jenkinsetal.(2006)arguethattherearetwelveskillsneededforfullengagementintoday's

participatoryculture:


24/111

Playthecapacitytoexperimentwithonessurroundingsasaformofproblemsolving Performancetheabilitytoadoptalternativeidentitiesforthepurposeof

improvisationanddiscovery Simulationtheabilitytointerpretandconstructdynamicmodelsofrealworld

processes

Appropriationtheabilitytomeaningfullysampleandremixmediacontent

Multitaskingtheabilitytoscanonesenvironmentandshiftfocusasneededtosalientdetails

DistributedCognitiontheabilitytointeractmeaningfullywithtoolsthatexpandmentalcapacities

CollectiveIntelligencetheabilitytopoolknowledgeandcomparenoteswithotherstowardacommongoal

Judgmenttheabilitytoevaluatethereliabilityandcredibilityofdifferentinformationsources

TransmediaNavigationtheabilitytofollowtheflowofstoriesandinformationacrossmultiplemodalities

Networkingtheabilitytosearchfor,synthesize,anddisseminateinformation Negotiationtheabilitytotravelacrossdiversecommunities,discerningand

respectingmultipleperspectives,andgraspingandfollowingalternativenorms Visualizationtheabilitytointerpretandcreatedatarepresentationsforthepurposes

ofexpressingideas,findingpatterns,andidentifyingtrends(Jenkinsetal.,2006:np.)

Thislistshowsthemultifacetednatureofdigitalliteracies.Jenkinsetal.(2006)defineparticipatorycultureasbeingaboutinvolvementandparticipation,aboutbeingableto

createandshareworkandaboutpeermentorshipandsupport.Theygoontosuggestthat

thishasimmensepotentialeducationally;providingopportunitiesforpeertopeerlearning,diverseculturalexpression,skillsdevelopmentacrossdifferentcontextsanda

changingattitudetothenotionsofopenness,ownership,intellectualproperty.

Manyfactorsmayspecificallyinfluencetheuseofresources,andengagementwithsocial

media,includingculturalperceptionsregardinglearningandinformation;perceptionsregardingthevalueofwrittenresourcesandevaluationofinformation,butalso

competencesinusingmediaandcomputersortocriticallyreflectoninformationresources.

Usesmayalsobeshapedbyotheractivitiesconductedonlineexpectationsregardinginteractivity,hypertext,Internetliteracydevelopedacrossonlinesitesandservicesand,

possibly,conventionsregardingauthorship,citationandplagiarism(Livingstone,2008,MetzerandFlanagin,2008;RiehandHilligoss,2008).Alsoimportantarethetensions

associatedwiththeblurringboundariesbetweenproductionanduse,ownershipand

authorship,expertauthorityandamateurcreativity,opennessandcompleteness,aswellasformalandinformallearning(e.g.Jamesetal,2008;McPherson,2008).

Basedonanextensivereviewoftheliterature,Beethametal.(2009)provideacomprehensiveframeworkoftypesofliteraciesrelatingtosocialandsituatedpractices

(includingmeaningmakingandsituatedknowledge);technologicalandmedialiteracies(includingmultimodalskills,informationandcriticalliteracy);andscaffoldedandmeta

cognitiveliteracies(includingthenewpedagogiesassociatedwithmediatedlearning).Such


25/111

frameworkscanbeappliednotonlytoyounglearners,buttoallthatareinvolvedinthe

learningprocessandmediaeducation.Astheynote:

Thesocialandeconomicagendasofupskillingmoreofthepopulation,wideningparticipation,

andsupportinglifelonglearning,meanthatuniversityandcollegelearnersaremorediverse

thaneverbefore,withawiderrangeofeducationalandICTexperience.Sinceliteracyprovision

ideallystartswithlearners'existingpracticesandconceptions,itneedstobecomemorewideranging,moreflexible,andmoreproactive.Italsoneedstorecognisethattheprocessof

developmentwillbeincremental,andchallenging.Learnersneedscaffolding,directionand

modellinginthefirstinstance,followedbypracticeandpersonalisation,givingwayto

unstructuredtasksthroughwhichtheycanlearntochoosestrategiesandtechnologiestosuit

differentsituationsandtheirownpreferredwaysofworking.(Beethametal,2009:67)

Successfactorsandstrategiesforchange

Strategiesforencouraginggreateruseoftechnologiesandsharingofresourcesandgood

practicehaverangedfromsimplymakingteachingresourcesavailable(suchaslearning

objectsandOpenEducationalResources,orOERs)throughtomorespecificcasestudiesdescribingpracticeorcommunitybasedsupportmechanismsandnetworks.Inadditiona

numberofinitiativeshaveattemptedtopromotingsharingandcommunitybuildingamongstteachers;forexample,theinitiativeClassroom2.06andtheInternationalSocietyforTechnologyinEducationinEducationIslandinSecondLife.Theseinitiativesaregiving

usinsightsintowhatmethodsworkintermsofsupportingbettersharingofgoodpracticesandmechanismsforfosteringtransformationinteachingpractice.Howevertheimpactof

suchworksofarissmall,andthesecommunitiesarenotwithoutdesignflawsorchallenges

(seeEvansetal.,2008citedinGreehowetal.,2009b:281).Inaddition,thereareanumberofrelatedprofessionalanddisciplinespecificnetworksthathavearoleinpromotingand

supportinggoodteachingpractices(andhencealsoeffectiveuseoftechnologies).TheseincludethenowwellestablishedHigherEducationAcademysubjectcentrenetwork7,

HEFCE'sCentresofExcellenceforTeachingandLearning8andthemorerecently

establishedHigherEducationAcademyEvidenceNet9.Despiteallthis,theimpactonactualpracticeispoor.Takencollectively,theimpactofthenowlargebodyoffreeresourcesand

outputsandfindingsfromprojectsinnovatingintheuseoftechnologyislow.Thereisstill

noclearevidencethattherehasbeenasubstantialchangeinteachingmethodsnoristhereevidencethattherehasbeenasubstantialincreaseintheuseoftechnologiesandOER.

ThereisastrongcollectivevoicethatarguesthatsocialmediaandWeb2.0toolscould

enableuniversitiestoreinventthemselves.ThisencompassesashiftinthinkingaboutICT

solelyintermsoftheirrepresentationalcapabilities(i.e.,theirabilitytorepresentcommoditisedinformationaldeliverymodesofhighereducation)toavisionofthem

facilitatingmorediscursive,relationalandcollaborativeapproachestolearning(seePedro,

2003;Selwyn,2007:91;FranklinandvanHarmelen,2007;Armstrongetal.,2008;Dalsgaard,2008;Redecker,2009).Apartfromitsroleinfacilitatingknowledgetransferand

6Classroom2.0http://www.classroom.2.0.com;InternationalSocietyforTechnologyinEducationin

EducationIslandinSecondLife:www.iste.org/secondlife7http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/subjectcentres8http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/tinits/cetl/ 9http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/evidencenet


26/111

collaborativeactivities,Web2.0isoftenpresentedasalsohavingthepotentialtofacilitate

innovationsinprofessionaldevelopment,teachertrainingandteachingpractices,aswellas

improvementsinthequalityofstudentlearningandexperiences.

Evidenceofaconcertedeffortwithininstitutionstosystematicembeddingoftechnologies

anditsuseforlearningandteaching,canbetracedbacktotheearlytomid2000s.Institutionsbegantohavemoreexplicitpoliciesonhowtechnologieswerebeingusedto

supporttheircoreactivities.Websitesweredevelopedandusedexplicitlyformarketingpurposesandformaintainingalumnirelations.VLEswereintroducedtosupportthe

deliveryofonlineteachingandpresentationofmaterials.ThepopularisationofWeb2.0

technologiesfrom2005begantoextendtheinformationfocuseduseofthetechnologiesandenabledtheemergenceofinformalcommunitiesandcommunicationalongsidethe

formalprovisionwithininstitutions(FranklinandvanHarmelen,2007;AlaMutkaetal.,

2009).Arangeofelearninginitiativeswasfundedwhichprovidemechanismstoexperimentwiththesenewtechnologies.Theserangedfromsmallscaleprojectsfocusing

onlocalpractice(forexampleexplorationofaparticulartoolinaparticularteaching

practice),throughmoreinstitutionallyfocusedinitiatives(forexampletheJISCsManagedLearningEnvironmentprogramme)throughtointernationalcollaborations(suchasthe

NSF/JISCdigitallibraryprogrammeandtheHewlettfundedOERinitiatives).Collectivelythesecanbeseenasprimarilybottomup,oftendrivenbyindividualinterests,although

fundingbodiesdoprovideasteerandvisionfortheoverallfocusanddirectionofinnovations(e.g.JISC,2009;OECD,2009;seealsoArmstrongetal.,2008:15).Forexample

intheUK,severalelearninginitiativeshavebeenalignedtotheHEFCEelearningstrategy

(HEFCE,2009).JISCsprogrammeofactivitieshasdirectlyderivedfromandiscloselyalignedtoHEFCEselearningstrategy(seeJISC,2009b).

Table1providesasummaryofsomeofthestrategiesforchangesthathavebeenadopted.Evidencefromtheliteraturegivesanindicatorofthefactorsforsuccess:

Scaffoldingandguidancetoteachers.AmongstthemostimportantfactorsistheneedtoensurethatthereisappropriatescaffoldingandsupportofhowWeb2.0tools

areembeddedincourses.Thisincludesguidanceandsupportonthedesignofcourses,thenatureofactivitiesandtheroleoftheteacher.Itrequiresteacherstorethinktheir

positionfromoneofexperttofacilitator.

Strategicalignment.Anotherareaofimportanceisensuringthatappropriatestrategiesareinplacetosupportthisshift.

Understandingthestudentexperience.Carefulconsiderationofthestudentperspectiveisneeded,particularconsiderationofaffectiveissues.Whatarethekey

factorsthatmotivatestudents,thatwillensuretheirengagement?

Appropriatesupportstructures.Althoughcloselyalignedtoconsiderationsaroundateachersroleandthedesignofthecourse,theneedforeffectivesupportstructures

cannotbeunderestimated.Thisinvolvesensuringthataccesstomaterialsiseasy,that

thestructureandroleoftheonlineenvironmentisclearandhavinginplacecontingencyplansifthereareproblems.

Staffincentivesandrewards.Theprojectsthathavebeenmostsuccessfularethosewherecarefulconsiderationhasbeengiventostaffmotivation.Ensuringthatstaffare

awareofthevisionofwhythesenewtechnologiesarebeingintroducedandgetting


27/111

themonboardiskey.Theyneedtofeelasenseofownershipandcontroloftheirown

teachingpractice.

Sharingofgoodpractice .Finallyifwearetobuildcollectivelyonexperiences,mechanismsareneedtosharegoodpracticeandenableteacherstoadoptmore

scholarlyapproaches.

Table1:Summaryofdifferentstrategiesforchange

Nationallevels BroadgovernmentstrategiesthatincludetheuseofWeb2.0 andprovideincentivestodeliverintegratedservices(e.g.forstudentretention,innovationin

teachingandlearningsuchastheAustraliaLearningPerformanceFund(DEEWR,

2008)orinvestmentintoinfrastructureandtraining.

HEfundingagenciesandpolicymakers whocanprovidedriversforinstitutionsthroughspecificmandates,someofwhichinvolvetheadoptionofsocialmedia(inthe

UK,JISCharnessingtechnologyforlearningprogrammes/CETISOERprogramme;

HEA[inparticularEvidenceNetandELESIGNing].

Centralinvestmentinagenciesthatpromoteoftenthroughfundingthe

developmentofinnovationsthroughresearchprojects,deliverytools,resourcesand

infrastructureforcommunitiesofpractice(Australia/Edna;US(LibraryofCongress;

NSF;TheLearningFederation).

Intergovernmentalagenciesandnon-profit

fundingagencies

Integratedpoliciesandfundingstrategies tosupportresearchonthewaysin

whichICTsarechangingthewaysthatpeoplelearn,playorparticipationincivic

activities(e.g.UNESCOIIEP;OECDCERI;OECDsEducationManagementand

InfrastructureDivision(DirectorateforEducation).Alsointermsofpromoting

innovationandcollaborationforthedevelopmentofdigitalliteracycurriculaand

OpenEducationResources(OERs).Projectsfocusingonunderstandingtheimpactof

widespreaduseofdigitalmediainyouthlearning(seeforexample,MacArthur;

Carnegie,Hewlett;NSF,EDUCAUSE,NationalInstituteforTechnologyandLiberal

Education(NITLE)intheUS;ESRC,EPSCR,AHRC,BECTAintheUK).

Institutionalstrategies

Institutionalstrategicplansandsupport:SomeHEinstitutionsaredeveloping

moreintegratedstrategiesthroughadministrative,marketingandpedagogical

mandates(forexampleWarwick,Edinburgh,OpenUniversityintheUK)andformore

effectiveuseofWeb2.0.Regulatory,legal,securityandethicalfactorsaredriving

concerns.Positiveinstitutionaldriversappeartobemoreprominentin:distance

learningandlifelonglearningcontexts.

Professional

motivations

(academic/adminis

trator)

Thereisnowasignificantbodyofevidencearoundtechnologyinterventions.These

projectsareprovidingrichdataonthebarriersandenablerstosuccessfulintegration

oftechnologies;aswellasdataontheattitudesofstaffandwiderpatternsoftechnologicaladoption.Aspectrumofusersisemerging(e.g.earlyadopters;digital

residents,etc.).Explorationoftheopportunitiesforcommunication,sharingand

collaborationacrossbordersoftenfitswithspecificpedagogicalorcommunicationstrategies.Popularpatternsofmotivationinclude:a)sustainableresourcesbeyond

course/degreeduration(e.g.alumnirelations;studentrecruitment;lifelonglearning

commitments);b)professionaldrivestoenhanceteachingpractices;andc)extension

tonewformsofknowledgeandescholarship.

Curricularneeds

andelearningTechnologyuptakeanduseisdifferentindifferentsubject.Forexamplemedia,

computerscienceandinformationsciencecoursesappeartobemoreopento

adoptingWeb2.0practices.Thefunctionalitiesoftoolsemployed,theirsuitabilityfor


28/111

chosentasksandthelearnersfamiliarityand/oracceptanceofthesetoolswithinthe

curriculumarekeyinterrelateddriversforeffectiveuse. Studentspositiveattitudestosocialcomputingisnotonlydependentonfamiliarity[thoughdifferencesintypes

ofusesareevidentincountriesOECDcountries],butalsouponperceptions

surroundingthedegreeofautonomyandtheabilitytoappropriateorpersonalize

toolstospecificneeds.Ecollaborationandopencommunication/publicationisseen

asakeyskillforprofessionaldevelopmentandconductwithinHEsectors. Scaffoldedpedagogical

approachesand

fosteringpedagogicalinnovation

Constructivismandconnectivismarethetwopedagogicalapproachesthatalignmost

closelywithWeb2.0practice.Thefocusisonenhancingthestudentexperienceand

maximisingthepotentialrecreationalorcreativeuses.Networkedinteraction

literaciesandawarenessofmediatedlearningstructuresandhierarchiesarealso

important.

ContextualexamplesTheprevioussectionsofferedperspectivesonthekeytheoreticalandempiricaldimensionsthatemergefromevidence.Inthissectionwefocusonspecificcasestudiesfromexistingpracticesthathighlighttheseaspectsinparticularcontexts.Ouroverallimpressionfrom

thecasestudiesisthatthereisrelativelylittlereportingofactuallearningprocesses,orindeedteachingpractices.Occasionallyacomparisonpointhelpsevaluatetheimpactof

interventionsrelativetoalternativelearningstructures,butthisisrare.Peerreviewed

journalandconferencepapersofferevaluativereportsandare,occasionally,richonempiricaldetail,buttherearemanyquestionsthatneedtobeaskedregardingthelikely

conditionsthatcontributedtosuccessintheseareas.Amultitudeofblogsandreflexive

accountsfromacademicteachersofferrichperspectives,butmoresystematiccontentanalysisisrequired.Thesocialnetworkingsiteforlearningandteaching,Cloudworks,has

alsogeneratedarichbodyofknowledgeonrelevantperspectivesthroughsolicitationofexperiencesinthefield.

Weincludecasestudiesthataddresssomeofthewaysinwhichlearningandteachingpracticeshavebeenimproved.Wehavelookedforevidenceoftheextendtowhichlearning

2.0practicesarepresent:participatorylearning,cocreationoflearningartefacts,peer

critiqueleadingtoiterativeindividualimprovementandgroupunderstanding.Wearealsointerestedinseeingtheextenttowhichthisisinfluencingtheteacherspractice:isthere

evidencethattheyareadoptingdifferentrolesinthelearningprocess,suchasbecomingcolearners?WealsowanttoseewherethereisevidencethatWeb2.0approachesarebeing

usedtofosterandpromoteteachingscholarshipandwherethereareexamplesofteachers

aslearningcommunities,i.e.inwhatwaysareWeb2.0technologiesbeinguseda)forreflectivepracticesandinteractionwithlearners;b)aspartofengagementinwider

communitiesofpractitionersengaginginscholarlypracticearoundtheirteaching.Thestudiesaregroupedintothreebroadcategories:i)blogs,wikisandsocialtagging,ii)social

networkingandmicrobloggingandiii)immersiveworldsandsecondlife.Appendix8

focusesonOpenEducationalResources(OER).AdetaileddiscussionisprovidedtherewithrespecttoOER,partlybecausepracticesaroundOERwithintheCloudworkssocial

networkingsiteisthemainfocusofCaseStudy2forthePearlsintheCloudsproject.


29/111

Finally,Appendix9(IssuesraisedbytheintroductionofWeb2.0technologies)providesa

discussionofanddetailedempiricalinsightintosomeofthetensionsthatariseasaresult

oftheintroductionofWeb2.0technologiesandinparticular,theirimpactonorganisationalstructuresandprocesses,aswellasonteachersandlearnersindividualroles,identities

andperceptions.

Blogs,wikisandsocialtagging

Theexamplesfromtheliteratureprovidedhereillustrateprojectswhereblogsandwikis

havebeenintegratedintocurriculardesign.Theyillustratearangeofpedagogic

approachesandgiveanindicationofstudentandteacherperceptionsandattitudestowardsusingthesetypesofsites.

Blogshaveevolvedfromtheconceptofapersonalhomepageandhencehavebeen

referredtoaspersonalpublishingspaces.Blogshavealsobeenlabelledreflexivediariesor

learningjournals;bothnamesemphasisethepersonal,chronologicalreflectiveelementofsharingideas.AsDownesnotes:theynowformonepartinamuchmorediverselandscape

[ofWeb2.0content].Allegiancestoparticulartechnologiesshiftovertimeandsomepeople

whoformerlywroteblogs,nowusesocialnetworkingsitessuchasMySpaceorFacebookinstead.Othersusemicroblogging'servicessuchasTwitter.Textualblogshaveevolved

intoothermediaforms,sothatitispossiblenowtohavebothaudioblogs(alsoknownaspodcasts)andvideoblogs(vlogs').Blogsareoftenlinkedtoarangeofmultimedia

repositoryservices(suchasFlickrforphotos,Deviantartforartwork,YouTubeforvideos

andSlideShareforslideshowsordocumentfiles).Itisalsopossibletouseembedfunctionswithmanyofthesesothattheyappearwithinthecontextofanindividualblogposting.

Blogshavebeenusedforavarietyofeducationalpurposes,forexampleasplatformsforcourseannouncements,asmechanismstogatherorgeneratefeedbackandasacollective

peersupportvehicleamongdifferentgroups(ofteachers,researchersand/orstudents).

Theycanbeusedasamotivationaltooltoengagediscussionsinblendedlearningcontexts.Alternativelytheycanoffermorescaffoldedapproachestodistributedresearch.Finally,

theycanbeusedasamechanismforaggregatingresources,i.e.asaformofeportfoliofor

useeitherwithinformalcoursesoraspartofprofessionaldevelopment.InaBeCTAreviewof'Web2.0practicesineducation'Crooketal.(2008)statedthatthecleararticulationof

thepurposesofblogswithineducationalcontextsandappropriateintegrationwithinformalassessmentshouldbeseenasbothafundamentalandimportantmotivationaltool.

Downes(2010)hasidentifiednearlyfiftypedagogicalusesofblogsinformallearning,themajorityofwhichcanbeorhavebeenusedwithinhighereducationcourses.Commonly

citedadvantagesofblogsineducationemphasisethecommunicative,motivationaland

participatorybenefits(Farmeretal.,2008;Kim,2008).Somehighlightthefactthatblogsenableindividuallearnerstoexpresstheiruniqueauthorialvoicesandidentity(Burgess,

2006;EllisonandWu,2008)andalsothattheycanencourageasenseofresponsibilityandpride(Farmeretal.,2008).Othersforegroundthemeaningfulinteractionswithothersand

arguethatpeercritiquingcanfosterbothpsychosocialneedsandthedevelopmentof

criticalliteracyandcivicengagementskills.Over400,000educationalblogsarehostedby


30/111

edublogs10alone.Teachershavebeenusingthemtosupportstudentlearningandalsoasa

vehicletoreflectontheirownpracticesinceabout2004(Downes,2004).

TheintegrationofbloggingandsocialnetworkingisevidentinsitessuchasNing11and

Elgg12.Thiskindofintegration,alongsidewiththeemergenceofmicroblogging,hasshifted

theroleofblogsfromselfpublishingandrepresentationtowardssharing,peerreviewingandcollaborating.Thepurposeandfocusofeducationalblogsvaries.Someareonlyopen

withinacoursecohort,whilstothersmaybeviewablebyanyone.Someformanintegralpartofacourse,beingaformalpartofcourseactivitiesoractuallyformingpartofthe

assessableoutput.Inothercasestheyareoptional.Suchvariedpracticesinterm

A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010

Documents

Transcript of A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010