By: Jeremy B. Williams, Universitas 21 Global and Joanne Jacobs, Queensland University of TechnologyCitation: Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol 20, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 232-247
The article that I read for this assignment is a bit older but I found it had great relevancy both to the topic of blogging and to the topic that Jay and I are writing on for the Organization and Administration class. The topic we are addressing for that project deals with critical thinking and reflection. The part that blogging played in allowing students to apply these skills was particularly important for the instructors in the study.
The authors of this article were looking at blogging in the 2004 timeframe when it was projected that there would be 10 million blogs by the end of the year. In 2009, Pingdom, an online resource, reported that there were about 126 million blogs on the internet. At the time of the writing of this article however, blogging was still being explored as a tool in the classroom and this paper was a report on the use of blogging in only a couple of classes within the MBA program at Harvard.
The article includes several tables which were designed to weed out those that participated and those that didn’t and why, but didn’t always do so because students defined their own meaning of participation. By this I mean, and this was the interesting note from this first set of data, many students felt they were participating by “lurking”. This was what they meant by lurking.
“Reading what other people were writing was valuable. It was therefore not so much a choice of not participating, it was more a choice not to contribute. I viewed myself as having participated, and will therefore answer the rest of the questions.”
The survey questions went on to identify whether the students involved felt they gained from the experience, would do it again, what the benefits were. Some bottom lines from the experience were:
1) Provided a good medium for intellectual exchanges
2) Provided additional time for discussion on topics that classroom did not
3) Allowed students to formulate answers prior to putting them “out there” (critical thinking and reflection)
4) Allowed for a deeper understanding of the topic material
Some issues that I saw with the evaluation of the blogging experience were:
1) It was offered online—so the evaluation only reached the same demographic as those that blogged
2) The response was 50% (very good for a survey—CGSS would love to get this type of response), however, still doesn’t get at 50% (that is why the survey that K-State does that has everyone respond at the end of class is much better
3) So what this means is when you say 50% saw utility in something—it is really 50% of 50% and do you make changes in curriculum based on what is 25% or less—when the 50% is a combination of several categories from the likkert scale?
This study was beginning to get at where the educational field was headed with blogging and made a case for those that don’t get actively involved. It did not say, however, what to do about those “participant-lurkers”. It was forward thinking and addressed the areas of critical thinking and reflection that blogging allows for some students. All in all this was a good article and study. The students were very positive considering the early phase of blogging and indicated that they would blog whether they were getting graded for it or not, although I think it would be interesting to see the demographic breakdown on some of this data.
http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/01/22/internet-2009-in-numbers/
Monday, July 12, 2010
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests
By: Haya Ajjana and Richard Hartshorne
Citation “The Internet and Higher Education, Vol 11, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 71-80”
In 2008, Ajjan and Hartshorne conducted a study at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte to determine if there was a relation between teacher behavior and use of Web 2.0 technology in the classroom. The researchers used the decomposed theory of planned behavior as the theoretical foundation for the study. In the study the researchers created a survey to determine the impact of attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control of the teachers on their use of Web 2.0 technology in their classroom.
Regarding the attitude of teachers the researchers looked at three components: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and compatibility. Their literature review drew them to the hypothesis that as the ease of use, usefulness, and compatibility increase, the attitude toward using the technology is likely to become more positive.
To decompose teacher subjective norms the researchers asked questions to determine how the teachers felt their superiors, peers and students regarded use of technology in the classroom. Their literature review led them to conclude that while superiors might feel that adopting Web 2.0 technology may improve student's learning or ratings, other faculty might feel that it requires an undesired change in the current process. Regarding students, the researchers believed that they would be more supportive given their high level of self efficacy using Web 2.0 technologies.
With respect to perceived behavioral control the researchers examined self efficacy and facilitating conditions, for example the availability of resources. In this element of the study the researchers felt that a greater self-efficacy to use technological applications on the part of the teacher was likely to lead to higher level of using Web 2.0 technologies. Unfortunately, their research indicated that the absence of facilitating conditions would negatively impact their use of technology.
Ultimately the “purpose of the study was to assess faculty's awareness of the potential of Web 2.0 technologies to supplement the classroom learning and to assess their adoption of such technologies using the decomposed theory of planned behavior as the theoretical foundation.”
The strengths of the article was the simple yet thorough explanation of the study, the justification to use the decomposition theory of planned behavior, and the listing of questions in the survey and their relation to determining the impact of attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control.
While I am at a lack to identify weaknesses of the article, they would likely be the opposite perception of the value of simple and concise. Overall the article may be seen to lack depth of analysis and could be sited for not fully developing the theory or theorist whose work they relied upon to form the hypothetical questions and construct the survey.
Given that I am currently not instructing I have few experiences against which to imagine uses of Web 2.0 technologies in the classroom other than those we have witnessed Dr Collins use. The researchers in their literature review, however, provided some solid recommendations for the integration of technology into the classroom and I agree with their recommendations.
Their study focused on four types of Web 2.0 collaboration tools: blogs, wikis, social networking, and social bookmarking. Their research indicated that using Web 2.0 technologies was consistent with the constructivist theorists who advocate that learning is a social process and that learning occurs through interactions and sharing information.
In supporting interaction wikis and social networks could supplement in-class instructions by creating an interactive, collaborative learning experience for students. Blogs could be included in researching, tracking, interpreting, and evaluating political commentary, cultural events, business, or other news especially when there is an interest in examining changes over time.
From the individual student perspective wikis could be used to support individualized learning, allowing for more socially defined search structures. From the group perspective the wikis promote collaboration through group editing and peer review.
I was particularly surprised by the idea that educators could use social bookmarking to facilitate collaborative information discovery. Students could create a social bookmarking page to save important pages about a topic. Students could also collaborate on group projects using bookmarking sites, sharing links, and uploading resources discovered, while educators could follow their students bookmark pages to gain insight on their research process and progress
Citation “The Internet and Higher Education, Vol 11, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 71-80”
In 2008, Ajjan and Hartshorne conducted a study at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte to determine if there was a relation between teacher behavior and use of Web 2.0 technology in the classroom. The researchers used the decomposed theory of planned behavior as the theoretical foundation for the study. In the study the researchers created a survey to determine the impact of attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control of the teachers on their use of Web 2.0 technology in their classroom.
Regarding the attitude of teachers the researchers looked at three components: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and compatibility. Their literature review drew them to the hypothesis that as the ease of use, usefulness, and compatibility increase, the attitude toward using the technology is likely to become more positive.
To decompose teacher subjective norms the researchers asked questions to determine how the teachers felt their superiors, peers and students regarded use of technology in the classroom. Their literature review led them to conclude that while superiors might feel that adopting Web 2.0 technology may improve student's learning or ratings, other faculty might feel that it requires an undesired change in the current process. Regarding students, the researchers believed that they would be more supportive given their high level of self efficacy using Web 2.0 technologies.
With respect to perceived behavioral control the researchers examined self efficacy and facilitating conditions, for example the availability of resources. In this element of the study the researchers felt that a greater self-efficacy to use technological applications on the part of the teacher was likely to lead to higher level of using Web 2.0 technologies. Unfortunately, their research indicated that the absence of facilitating conditions would negatively impact their use of technology.
Ultimately the “purpose of the study was to assess faculty's awareness of the potential of Web 2.0 technologies to supplement the classroom learning and to assess their adoption of such technologies using the decomposed theory of planned behavior as the theoretical foundation.”
The strengths of the article was the simple yet thorough explanation of the study, the justification to use the decomposition theory of planned behavior, and the listing of questions in the survey and their relation to determining the impact of attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control.
While I am at a lack to identify weaknesses of the article, they would likely be the opposite perception of the value of simple and concise. Overall the article may be seen to lack depth of analysis and could be sited for not fully developing the theory or theorist whose work they relied upon to form the hypothetical questions and construct the survey.
Given that I am currently not instructing I have few experiences against which to imagine uses of Web 2.0 technologies in the classroom other than those we have witnessed Dr Collins use. The researchers in their literature review, however, provided some solid recommendations for the integration of technology into the classroom and I agree with their recommendations.
Their study focused on four types of Web 2.0 collaboration tools: blogs, wikis, social networking, and social bookmarking. Their research indicated that using Web 2.0 technologies was consistent with the constructivist theorists who advocate that learning is a social process and that learning occurs through interactions and sharing information.
In supporting interaction wikis and social networks could supplement in-class instructions by creating an interactive, collaborative learning experience for students. Blogs could be included in researching, tracking, interpreting, and evaluating political commentary, cultural events, business, or other news especially when there is an interest in examining changes over time.
From the individual student perspective wikis could be used to support individualized learning, allowing for more socially defined search structures. From the group perspective the wikis promote collaboration through group editing and peer review.
I was particularly surprised by the idea that educators could use social bookmarking to facilitate collaborative information discovery. Students could create a social bookmarking page to save important pages about a topic. Students could also collaborate on group projects using bookmarking sites, sharing links, and uploading resources discovered, while educators could follow their students bookmark pages to gain insight on their research process and progress
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
"Giving Reluctant Students a Voice" by Reynold Redekopp and Elizabeth Bourbniere
The authors, two English teachers from Manitoba, Canada, introduced blogging into the curriculum for 10th grade AP English students in an attempt to enhance classroom participation. Students were assigned 12 possible questions relating to both Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night" and Harper Lee's To Kill A Mockingbird. Students were randomly assigned an identifier such as Student #1, etc. Online Forum Standards were established to include: respectful dialogue, constructive criticism of ideas not people, appropriate language usage, anonymity of postings, post limitation of 150 words, and teacher approval.
Redekopp and Bourbniere, with 20 years of teaching experience, recognized that while small group (cooperative) instruction generated more classroom participation, it did not enable shared understanding for the whole class. In an effort to promote communication that engaged whole group reading, reflection, and response, the teachers introduced blogging.
The premise for blogging was based on the belief that "interesting and valuable contributions can occur with change of time, space, anonymity, and voice". Redekopp and Bourbniere, prior to the introduction of blogging, had categorized their students according the following four levels: 1) frequently participates in class discussion, 2) occasionally participates, 3) rarely joins in discussion, and 4) participates under extreme duress.
In the article, the authors provided examples of the 12 aforementioned questions and the responses to them according to the participation level of the students. Interestingly, level 2, 3, and 4 students posted analytical, insightful responses that often led to further "deep" reflections by their fellow classmates. Before the opportunity to blog, one of the level 4 students had explained his reticence to share ideas in class by saying, "By the time I think of them and figure out how I want to say my ideas, the discussion is over or has moved on, and I would look stupid if I tried to share". Altering the variables of time, space, and anonymity gave this student his 'voice'.
Two strengths of this article are its illustration of how motivating blogging can be when used in a culturally responsive classroom and how blogging aligns itself with Vygotsky's theory of social constructivist learning. The level 2, 3, and 4 students facilitated the social construction of knowldege amongst their peers only through blogging. They played their part in reaching for the "zone of proximal development". Blogging provided an opportunity not only for the students for whom participation was challenging, but also for the shared understanding of the whole class.
A weakness of this article would be its brevity and the shortness of the application of blogging in the classroom.
This article was found under International Society for Technology in Education, 2009.
Redekopp and Bourbniere, with 20 years of teaching experience, recognized that while small group (cooperative) instruction generated more classroom participation, it did not enable shared understanding for the whole class. In an effort to promote communication that engaged whole group reading, reflection, and response, the teachers introduced blogging.
The premise for blogging was based on the belief that "interesting and valuable contributions can occur with change of time, space, anonymity, and voice". Redekopp and Bourbniere, prior to the introduction of blogging, had categorized their students according the following four levels: 1) frequently participates in class discussion, 2) occasionally participates, 3) rarely joins in discussion, and 4) participates under extreme duress.
In the article, the authors provided examples of the 12 aforementioned questions and the responses to them according to the participation level of the students. Interestingly, level 2, 3, and 4 students posted analytical, insightful responses that often led to further "deep" reflections by their fellow classmates. Before the opportunity to blog, one of the level 4 students had explained his reticence to share ideas in class by saying, "By the time I think of them and figure out how I want to say my ideas, the discussion is over or has moved on, and I would look stupid if I tried to share". Altering the variables of time, space, and anonymity gave this student his 'voice'.
Two strengths of this article are its illustration of how motivating blogging can be when used in a culturally responsive classroom and how blogging aligns itself with Vygotsky's theory of social constructivist learning. The level 2, 3, and 4 students facilitated the social construction of knowldege amongst their peers only through blogging. They played their part in reaching for the "zone of proximal development". Blogging provided an opportunity not only for the students for whom participation was challenging, but also for the shared understanding of the whole class.
A weakness of this article would be its brevity and the shortness of the application of blogging in the classroom.
This article was found under International Society for Technology in Education, 2009.
Article Evaluation - "Educational applications of Web 2.0: Using blogs to support teaching and learning.
Daniel Churchill provides an interesting, brief review of leveraging blogging in the classroom setting and how it applies to individual student’s perception of learning. He conducted his research on one class of post-graduate students at a University in Hong Kong over the course of one semester.
The study was developed to seek out answers to, as Churchill stated, “(the) fundamental guiding question: in what ways does a blog environment supplement classroom teaching and lead to an improved learning experience?” A blog was utilized for student access to course materials, posting of reflections, feedback forum and basic participation throughout the semester. Data was collected throughout the course of the semester through observations of activities, personal reflection by the course instructor as well as interviews and a survey (Churchill, 2009).
The findings from the study concluded that the students participating in the blogging agreed that the act of blogging contributed to their learning and through blog use the course instructor appeared to be more involved in their learning (Churchill, 2009). It was exciting to see a study that showed direct correlation between blogging and the perception of knowledge and facilitator interaction. One of the strengths were that the author also provided personal feedback regarding the experience. Churchill stated that he “believed that the blogs added a new dimension to teaching effectiveness…” He also stated that there were disadvantages to this particular study in that each individual student was blogging on an independent blog and that it was time consuming for him to read and provide feedback to each individuals post. He leveraged RSS feeds as an effective tool to manage student’s postings. His personal feedback was almost as valuable as the results gathered. He also inadvertently captured all of the activities occurring in the course’s blogs throughout the semester to assist with managing the process and it was interesting to see all of the classroom activities being performed directly in the blog.
There were a few opportunities with this particular study, the first being that there was an opportunity to share more information regarding the class size, demographics, etc. In regards to his survey, he hand-selected participants to complete, potentially providing skewed feedback. However, the addition of his personal experience and knowledge were very valuable.
This is my first experience with utilizing a blog in the classroom and I think it is a stimulating way to collaborate on different topics. It is also engaging, I have already read all of the other postings prior to even finishing my own! As I continue to work on course development, I think that there is a great opportunity to incorporate blogging and other Web 2.0 tools into courses, both for professional development as well as distance delivered KSU courses.
Churchill, D. (2009). Educational applications of Web 2.0: Using blogs to support teaching and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 179-183.
The study was developed to seek out answers to, as Churchill stated, “(the) fundamental guiding question: in what ways does a blog environment supplement classroom teaching and lead to an improved learning experience?” A blog was utilized for student access to course materials, posting of reflections, feedback forum and basic participation throughout the semester. Data was collected throughout the course of the semester through observations of activities, personal reflection by the course instructor as well as interviews and a survey (Churchill, 2009).
The findings from the study concluded that the students participating in the blogging agreed that the act of blogging contributed to their learning and through blog use the course instructor appeared to be more involved in their learning (Churchill, 2009). It was exciting to see a study that showed direct correlation between blogging and the perception of knowledge and facilitator interaction. One of the strengths were that the author also provided personal feedback regarding the experience. Churchill stated that he “believed that the blogs added a new dimension to teaching effectiveness…” He also stated that there were disadvantages to this particular study in that each individual student was blogging on an independent blog and that it was time consuming for him to read and provide feedback to each individuals post. He leveraged RSS feeds as an effective tool to manage student’s postings. His personal feedback was almost as valuable as the results gathered. He also inadvertently captured all of the activities occurring in the course’s blogs throughout the semester to assist with managing the process and it was interesting to see all of the classroom activities being performed directly in the blog.
There were a few opportunities with this particular study, the first being that there was an opportunity to share more information regarding the class size, demographics, etc. In regards to his survey, he hand-selected participants to complete, potentially providing skewed feedback. However, the addition of his personal experience and knowledge were very valuable.
This is my first experience with utilizing a blog in the classroom and I think it is a stimulating way to collaborate on different topics. It is also engaging, I have already read all of the other postings prior to even finishing my own! As I continue to work on course development, I think that there is a great opportunity to incorporate blogging and other Web 2.0 tools into courses, both for professional development as well as distance delivered KSU courses.
Churchill, D. (2009). Educational applications of Web 2.0: Using blogs to support teaching and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 179-183.
Using Blogs to Integrate Technology in the Classroom by Mollie Crie
In October 2006, Mollie Crie wrote the article cited above on using blogs in the classroom. The article is geared towards teachers, and she explained what a blog is and how it might support the classroom environment by incorporating technology.
She described the educational benefits of blogs: motivating students especially those who might not participate in the classroom, provide opportunities for students to read and write, provide forums for collaboration and discussion, and to enable scaffolding learning and mentoring. She further explained how blogs can be used in the classroom. The four basic functions were classroom management, collaboration, discussions, and student portfolios. She also discussed risks to consider and steps for teachers that will help them get started.
This was a short, clear, and concise article. The author could have expanded the article ot include more precise instructions to implement procedures in the classroom. Examples could have been provided to make understanding more complete for unfamiliar users.
The Department of the Army’s Civilian Education System,for which I teach, currently uses Blackboard as our primary means of managing the Army Management Staff College’s Basic Course. Classroom requirements, handouts, and homework assignments are posted there. Blackboard has become more expensive and we may move to another system. Blogs / blogging could be considered a possibility to support some of our needs for the distant learning module and the two-week resident course.
Posted by Buddy Wooten
She described the educational benefits of blogs: motivating students especially those who might not participate in the classroom, provide opportunities for students to read and write, provide forums for collaboration and discussion, and to enable scaffolding learning and mentoring. She further explained how blogs can be used in the classroom. The four basic functions were classroom management, collaboration, discussions, and student portfolios. She also discussed risks to consider and steps for teachers that will help them get started.
This was a short, clear, and concise article. The author could have expanded the article ot include more precise instructions to implement procedures in the classroom. Examples could have been provided to make understanding more complete for unfamiliar users.
The Department of the Army’s Civilian Education System,for which I teach, currently uses Blackboard as our primary means of managing the Army Management Staff College’s Basic Course. Classroom requirements, handouts, and homework assignments are posted there. Blackboard has become more expensive and we may move to another system. Blogs / blogging could be considered a possibility to support some of our needs for the distant learning module and the two-week resident course.
Posted by Buddy Wooten
Monday, July 5, 2010
Outcome-Driven Experiential Learning with Web 2.0
Derrick Huang and Ravi S. Behara provided a detailed discussion of their findings concerning the use of Web 2.0 technologies as they related to experiential learning. Their research focused on the use of new technologies to achieve outcome-based learning objectives when teaching MBA students.
The purpose of the article was to explain how the use of Web 2.0 technologies could change course design and structure. The authors provided information on how Web 2.0 technologies helped to facilitate a shift in course design. Specifically, Web 2.0 allowed instructors to focus more on experiential learning and desired learning outcomes. Their assumption was that traditional, non-Web 2.0 course design was encumbered by instructional formats (Huang and Behara, 2007).
The authors began by providing a general overview of Web 2.0 technologies that would help inform instructors new to the technology. They also provided two detailed case studies to help explain the linkage between experiential learning and Web 2.0. The first case study on e-commerce illustrated how students used many of the Web 2.0 technologies to design a fictitious e-commerce company. The second case study on operations management required students to explore social networking and simulations. Both case studies provided sufficient context to improve the reader’s understanding of the potential use of Web 2.0 technologies in experiential learning environments (Huang and Behara, 2007).
Unfortunately, the article is limited in that Huang and Behara provided only a modest overview of outcome-based learning and only briefly mentioned the techniques to link games, simulations, consulting projects, and business plans to experiential learning. Another limitation was that the authors only minimally mentioned the limitations of experiential learning and only within the context required to justify their research (Huang and Behara, 2007).
The strength of the article was Huang and Behara’s discussion of the benefits and limitations of using Web 2.0 technologies. The authors sited one important advantage as the ability to use the technology to touch upon all four stages of experiential learning as defined by Kolb. The other advantages discussed included the importance of the instructor and the adaptability of the technology to support different teaching formats. The important limitations discussed include time, instructor experience, and the students’ abilities to adapt to using experiential learning technologies (Huang and Behara, 2007). Readers will likely find the discussion of the benefits and limitations as the most beneficial portion of the article.
Overall, Outcome-Driven Experiential Learning with Web 2.0 provided a good, albeit basic, introduction to the use of Web 2.0 technologies in an experiential learning environment. This article is well suited for instructors who are just beginning to use Web 2.0 or who are beginning to redesign a course and want to use Web 2.0 to enhance their students’ abilities to achieve outcome based experiential learning objectives.
Huang, C., & Behara, R.. (2007). Outcome-Driven Experiential Learning with Web 2.0. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(3), 329-336.
The purpose of the article was to explain how the use of Web 2.0 technologies could change course design and structure. The authors provided information on how Web 2.0 technologies helped to facilitate a shift in course design. Specifically, Web 2.0 allowed instructors to focus more on experiential learning and desired learning outcomes. Their assumption was that traditional, non-Web 2.0 course design was encumbered by instructional formats (Huang and Behara, 2007).
The authors began by providing a general overview of Web 2.0 technologies that would help inform instructors new to the technology. They also provided two detailed case studies to help explain the linkage between experiential learning and Web 2.0. The first case study on e-commerce illustrated how students used many of the Web 2.0 technologies to design a fictitious e-commerce company. The second case study on operations management required students to explore social networking and simulations. Both case studies provided sufficient context to improve the reader’s understanding of the potential use of Web 2.0 technologies in experiential learning environments (Huang and Behara, 2007).
Unfortunately, the article is limited in that Huang and Behara provided only a modest overview of outcome-based learning and only briefly mentioned the techniques to link games, simulations, consulting projects, and business plans to experiential learning. Another limitation was that the authors only minimally mentioned the limitations of experiential learning and only within the context required to justify their research (Huang and Behara, 2007).
The strength of the article was Huang and Behara’s discussion of the benefits and limitations of using Web 2.0 technologies. The authors sited one important advantage as the ability to use the technology to touch upon all four stages of experiential learning as defined by Kolb. The other advantages discussed included the importance of the instructor and the adaptability of the technology to support different teaching formats. The important limitations discussed include time, instructor experience, and the students’ abilities to adapt to using experiential learning technologies (Huang and Behara, 2007). Readers will likely find the discussion of the benefits and limitations as the most beneficial portion of the article.
Overall, Outcome-Driven Experiential Learning with Web 2.0 provided a good, albeit basic, introduction to the use of Web 2.0 technologies in an experiential learning environment. This article is well suited for instructors who are just beginning to use Web 2.0 or who are beginning to redesign a course and want to use Web 2.0 to enhance their students’ abilities to achieve outcome based experiential learning objectives.
Huang, C., & Behara, R.. (2007). Outcome-Driven Experiential Learning with Web 2.0. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(3), 329-336.
Integrating Web 2.0
Hanson, Thackeray, Barnes, Neiger, and McIntyre (2008) provide a comprehensive article on the usefulness of Web 2.0 tools, and the necessity for health professionals to embrace technology reaching patients, colleagues, and the general public with health information. The authors provide a brief overview of recent media trends noting the explosion of social networking sites and the downward reality of print and radio media. With this introduction the authors turn to providing applications “for health education” (p. 160) and describe how the applications are applicable to the community of health professionals.
Strengths of the article. This author believes Hanson, Thackeray, Barnes, Neiger, and McIntyre (2008) do a very good job of describing Web 2.0 applications for the layperson. If a reader is not familiar with the tools and the benefits they provide, then the article will introduce the reader to the most common Web 2.0 applications. Hanson, Thackeray, Barnes, Neiger, and McIntyre (2008) also provide URLs to sites for additional information on particular types of Web 2.0 tools. Unless the reader categorizes themselves as a closet geek, the article provides useful information for the average person familiar with many of the Web 2.0 and social networking sites available today.
Weakness of the article. The abstract leads the reader to believe there is a significant portion dedicated to higher education applications for Web 2.0 tools. This is not the case. There is some discussion about introducing health profession students (doctors, nurses, practitioners) to the tools during their education, but it lacks concrete recommendations for implementing the tools into the classroom. However, the ease of the article and its content should allow a person to determine applicability in the learning environment.
Opinion of Web 2.0 tools. Get over it and get into the 21st century. Web 2.0 tools open up the classroom to possibilities beyond the traditional brick and mortar environment. The challenge is harnessing these capabilities and effectively incorporating the tools into the curriculum. Done haphazardly, and it could jaundice the student. Integrated successfully, and the student leaves the course with a positive outlook and functional ability to use the tools in future courses, or in the work environment. The adult educator must keep pace with technology, or risk losing relativity to future generations of adult learners.
References
Hanson, C., Thackeray, R., Barnes, M., Neiger, B., & McIntyre, E. (2008). Integrating web 2.0 in health education preparation and practice. American Journal of Health Education, 39(3), 157-166. Retrieved, July 5, 2010, from ERIC database.
Strengths of the article. This author believes Hanson, Thackeray, Barnes, Neiger, and McIntyre (2008) do a very good job of describing Web 2.0 applications for the layperson. If a reader is not familiar with the tools and the benefits they provide, then the article will introduce the reader to the most common Web 2.0 applications. Hanson, Thackeray, Barnes, Neiger, and McIntyre (2008) also provide URLs to sites for additional information on particular types of Web 2.0 tools. Unless the reader categorizes themselves as a closet geek, the article provides useful information for the average person familiar with many of the Web 2.0 and social networking sites available today.
Weakness of the article. The abstract leads the reader to believe there is a significant portion dedicated to higher education applications for Web 2.0 tools. This is not the case. There is some discussion about introducing health profession students (doctors, nurses, practitioners) to the tools during their education, but it lacks concrete recommendations for implementing the tools into the classroom. However, the ease of the article and its content should allow a person to determine applicability in the learning environment.
Opinion of Web 2.0 tools. Get over it and get into the 21st century. Web 2.0 tools open up the classroom to possibilities beyond the traditional brick and mortar environment. The challenge is harnessing these capabilities and effectively incorporating the tools into the curriculum. Done haphazardly, and it could jaundice the student. Integrated successfully, and the student leaves the course with a positive outlook and functional ability to use the tools in future courses, or in the work environment. The adult educator must keep pace with technology, or risk losing relativity to future generations of adult learners.
References
Hanson, C., Thackeray, R., Barnes, M., Neiger, B., & McIntyre, E. (2008). Integrating web 2.0 in health education preparation and practice. American Journal of Health Education, 39(3), 157-166. Retrieved, July 5, 2010, from ERIC database.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)