A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools

AliteraturereviewoftheuseofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation

AreportcommissionedbytheHigherEducationAcademy

Prof.GráinneConoleandDr.PanagiotaAlevizou

[email protected];[email protected]

August2010

TheOpenUniversity

WaltonHall,MiltonKeynes

UK

2

TableofContents

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

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

Methodology ........................................................................................................................................5

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

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

Strategiesforsupportingtheuseoftechnologies................................................................ 22Barrierstouptakeandlackofimpact ................................................................................................ 22Digital,networkedandmultiliteracies............................................................................................. 23Successfactorsandstrategiesforchange ......................................................................................... 25

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

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

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

Appendices:FurtherissuesrelatingtotheadoptionofWeb2.0inHE:detailsfromtheresearchfield.................................................................................................................. 45Appendix1:AnopenapproachtoliteraturereviewsusingCloudworks............................... 46Appendix2:AtypologyofWeb2.0tools ........................................................................................... 47Mediasharing..........................................................................................................................................................47Mediamanipulationandmash‐ups ...............................................................................................................47InstantMessaging,chatandconversationalarenas ...............................................................................48Onlinegamesandvirtualworlds ....................................................................................................................49Socialnetworking..................................................................................................................................................49Blogging .....................................................................................................................................................................50Socialbookmarking ..............................................................................................................................................51Recommendersystems .......................................................................................................................................51Wikisandcollaborativeeditingtools ...........................................................................................................52Syndication................................................................................................................................................................53

Appendix3:Areviewofelearningmodelsandframeworks .................................................... 54Appendix4:Paradoxescreatedbythenetworkedanddigital .................................................. 57Knowledgeexpansion..........................................................................................................................................58Nohierarchyorcontrol.......................................................................................................................................58Networkedversusboundedspaces?.............................................................................................................58

3

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

Appendix6:Barrierstochange ............................................................................................................ 64Access,accessibility,andconcernsonauthorityandtrivialisation.................................................64Literacyissues.........................................................................................................................................................65Qualityandeffectiveness ...................................................................................................................................65Legacysystems .......................................................................................................................................................65Pedagogicalrethinking........................................................................................................................................66

Appendix7:Differentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchange................... 66Design‐basedresearch ........................................................................................................................................66Promotingchangethroughthetechnologies ............................................................................................67

Appendix8:OpenEducationalResources ........................................................................................ 70Fromlearningobjectstoopeneducationalresources ..........................................................................70Educators’motivationsandOERteachingpractices..............................................................................75OERclassroomcommunities............................................................................................................................78Repurposingandreflecting:designingresources,designingcollaborativecommunities ....80

Appendix9:Issuesraisedbytheintroductionofnewtechnologies........................................ 84Institutionalarrangements ...............................................................................................................................84Theeducators’role ...............................................................................................................................................85Theattitudesandrolesofstudents ...............................................................................................................87Tensionsaroundtheconceptofopenness .................................................................................................87Assessmentpractices...........................................................................................................................................88

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

4

IntroductionThisreviewfocusesontheuseofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation.Itprovidesasynthesisoftheresearchliteratureinthefieldandaseriesofillustrativeexamplesofhowthesetoolsarebeingusedinlearningandteaching.Itdrawsoutthebenefitsthatthesenewtechnologiesappeartooffer,andhighlightssomeofthechallengesandissuessurroundingtheiruse.ThereviewformsthebasisforaHEAcademyfundedproject,‘PearlsintheCloud’,whichisexploringhowWeb2.0toolscanbeusedtosupportevidence‐basedpracticesinlearningandteaching.Theprojecthasalsoproducedtwoin‐depthcasestudies,whicharereportedelsewhere(Galleyetal.,2010,Alevizouetal.,2010).Thecasestudiesfocusonevaluationofarecentlydevelopedsiteforlearningandteaching,Cloudworks,whichharnessesWeb2.0functionalitytofacilitatethesharinganddiscussionofeducationalpractice.ThecasestudiesexploretheextenttowhichtheWeb2.0affordancesofthesitearesuccessfullypromotingthesharingofideas,aswellasscholarlyreflections,onlearningandteaching.

Ouraiminthisreviewistodrawontheexistingbodyofinternationalliteratureinthisfield.ItsynthesisessomeempiricalevidenceonthepatternsofuseofWeb2.0toolsandsocialmediainhighereducationandstructuresfindingsinthemesrelevanttocommunitiesofeducators.AlthoughevidenceexistsregardingthebenefitsofWeb2.0ininformallearningenvironments,andwithinadministrativecontexts,resultsfromlongitudinalstudiesshowingthedepthofchangeinpedagogicalpracticeineithertertiaryorpost‐tertiaryeducationareeitherscarceorfarfromconsensual.Andwhileanemergingbodyofliteraturefocusesonexperiencesoflearners,structuredevidenceregardingtheissuessurroundingintegrationinformaleducation,suchasthoseoutlinedabove,isonlyslowlyemerging.Thenextsectiondescribesourmethodologyforthestudy.Thereportisdividedintothefollowingsections:

• Introduction• Methodology• Changingtechnologies• Changinglearningandlearners• Changingteachingandteachers• Strategiesforpromotingtheuseoftechnology• Contextualexamples• Conclusion• Appendices

o Appendix1:AnopenapproachtoliteraturereviewsusingCloudworkso Appendix2:AtypologyofWeb2.0toolso Appendix3:Areviewofe‐learningmodelsandframeworkso Appendix4:Paradoxescreatedbythenetworkedanddigital

o Appendix5:FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0inHigherEducation

o Appendix6:Barrierstochange

5

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

• References

MethodologyWehavedrawnonexistingevidencefromlargerandsmallerscalereports,anecdotalaccountsofinnovativepracticesofmainstreamWeb2.0ineducation,andconferencepapersandjournalarticlestoidentifyandsurfacetrends,experiencesandchallengesregardingthetakeupanduseofWeb2.0informallearningcontexts.WehavealsoscrutinisedaccountsofcollaborativeprojectsregardingthepedagogicalintegrationofWeb2.0withinHEcontexts,andsearchedforrecordedexperiencesofpracticefromrelevantedu‐blogsandestablishednetworksonscholarshipineducation,aswellaspeer‐reviewedpapers.Beingreflectiveandexperimentalinourresearch,wesoughttoopenupthedebate,solicitinsightsandshareresourcesinapublicspace.Thereviewwasinformedbysecondaryresearchpointingtotheimpactofsocialmedia/softwareandWeb2.0inlearningandteaching.ThefocushasbeenonemergingtrendsandevidenceonpracticesandchallengesinthefieldofhighereducationinOECDcountries.FollowinganinitialreviewofexistingrelevantreportswithaUK,USoraninternationalfocus(e.g.BECTA,2008;2009;NSFCyberlearning,2008;FranklingandArmstrong,2008;Ala‐Mutkaetal.,2009;JISC,2009;Redecker,2009;OECD,2009),wedevisedaninitialstructureandsetofsub‐categoriesandstartedperformingsearchesoneachtopicinprogressivelymoredetail,reducingthesetuntilalistingofthemesregardingtrends,projectsandevidencerelatingtopracticesandchallengeswasselected.

Inordertocollectevidencefromresearchpublications(peerreviewedjournalarticles,booksandbookchapters)weperformedsearcheswithspecialisedjournalandconferenceproceedingsdatabasesincluding:

• ERIC • Igentaconnect • Sagejournalsonline • Communicationandmassmediacomplete • ElearningandTEL • Informaworld • Relevante‐learningconferences,suchasALT‐C,ASCILITEandNetworkedlearning

AdditionalGooglescholarsearcheswereperformed,usingkeywordandbooleansearchesontermsincluding:‘Web2.0’‘socialmedia’‘socialnetworking’‘highereducation’‘learning2.0’‘virtualwords’,‘sociallearning’‘participatorylearning’'teachingpractices''reflection'and'teaching'.Finally,specialisednetworkingandcommunitysitesweresearched(includeECAR,EDUCAUSE,EvidenceNet,ELSIG,JISC,HigherEducationAcademysubjectcentresandCloudworks).Asthesecondcasestudywithinthe‘PearlsintheClouds’projectfocusesontheuseofCloudworksforsupportingpracticesanddiscussionsaroundOpenEducational

6

Resources(OER),moretargetedsearchesregardingopennessandOERwerealsoperformedintheabovedatabasesandinspecialisedsitesthroughBooleanoperators.

Itwasclearfromthisinitialroundofsearchesthatthereislittleinthewayofmeta‐reviewsandempirically‐groundedorlongitudinalstudies.TherearehowevermanycasestudiesonspecificuseofWeb2.0toolsandarichbodyofevidenceinvestigatingthelearners’voice.Thislearnervoiceresearchisgivingvaluableinsightsabouttheexperiencesandexpectationsthatlearnershaveaboutusingtechnologiestosupportlearning.Researchlookingatthe‘teachervoice’andtheirexpectationsandexperiencesissmaller.Similarly,thereisadearthofevidencelookingatthewaysinwhichthesenewtechnologiesareorcouldchangelearningandteachingpractice.Thelargestbodyofevidencecomesfromscholarsandeducationaltechnologistswhoareinvolvedine‐learninganddistancelearningandfromproponentsofopenlearningandOER.

Inadditiontothetraditionalliteraturereviewstrategyoutlinedabove,wealsoconductedwhatwearelabellingan‘openreview’usingtheCloudworkssite.Wedefinean‘openreview’asonethatusesasocialnetworkingspacetoaggregateandcollectivelydiscussanevolvingbodyofliteraturearoundasetofcoreresearchquestions.Toinitiatetheopenreviewacloudscapewassetup1.ThenatureoftheprojectwasdescribedandanoutlineofhowweplannedtouseCloudworkstoconducttheopenreview:

WeareusingCloudworksasaplacetoshareawarenessof,andcriticallyevaluaterelevantliterature,butalsotoelicitviews,ideas,andexperiencessurroundingtheuseofWeb2.0inHigherEducation.TheresultantCloudscapewillbereferencedinthefinalreporttotheHEAandinappreciationofyourcontributions,youwillbeacknowledgedexplicitlyinthereportintheformofquotations.AllcommentswillbesubjecttoaCreativeCommonsAttributionlicence.Inpart,thisisaself‐reflectiveexerciseinthatwewanttoseehowthiscloudscapeevolvesasanexampleofWeb2.0practiceintheHEcontext.Theinitialcloudrepresentingthestateofthereviewandsomeinitialreferencesisbelow.

AdetailedoverviewofhowCloudworkswasusedtosupportanopenreviewisprovidedinthefirstin‐depthcasestudy,partofthe'PearlsintheClouds'project.The way that the site was 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 Cloudworks’2. Asummaryexplanationisprovidedhereforcompleteness.

Fivespaces(‘clouds’)weresetuparoundcorequestionsassociatedwiththereview,asameansofstimulatingthedebate:

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

1 Reviewing 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

Inadditionweadoptedan‘open’approachtotheliteraturereview,usingCloudworksasaspacetoaggregateanddiscussresourcesandreferences.ThenatureoftheCloudworkssiteisthatitactsasameansofcollectivelyaggregatingresources,aswellasaspaceforshareddiscussion.Itcombinessomeofthefeaturesofcollectiveblogging,coupledwithadiscussionforumandsocialbookmarking.Ascreenshotofpartoftheliteraturereviewcloudillustratesthis.Afteradescriptionofwhatthefocusofthecloudis,underneathcanbeseenthestartofadiscussionthreadandanaggregationoflinksandacademicreferences(seecontributetabbelow,inFigure1below).

Morerelevantcloudswereaddedtothecloudscapeonanad‐hocbasis,bothbyusastheliteraturereviewresearchers,aswellasthebroaderCloudworkscommunity.Someoftheclouds(includingthoseoutlinedabove)focusedspecificallyontheliteraturereview,butinadditioncloudswereaddedthattouchedontopicsofrelevancetothereviewwhichwerealreadyavailableonthesiteorbecameavailableduringthereview.Theseincludedcloudsonnewliteracies,Web2.0pedagogies,andtheuseofspecificWeb2.0toolsineducation(suchasTwitterandblogs).Thespaceactedasameansofharnessingabroadrangeofviewsontopicsrelatedtothefocusofthereviewandactedasaconduitforsharingofrelevantresources,academicreferencesandemergingdiscussions.Afewcontributorsputforwardempiricallybasedstudiesaswellasanecdotalevidencetosupporttheirarguments.

TheaimofusingCloudworksasasupplementarytoolinresearchingforthisreviewwastogetbroaderinputintotheconsultationthanwouldhavebeenpossiblewithdeskresearchalone.Itwasalsoasanexperimenttoworktowardsdevelopingamodelforsocialscholarshipthatcouldsupportthedevelopmentofcollectivewisdomaspartofthebroaderin‐depthcasestudywork.Thishasworkedtoanextent,andthoughmostcloudsillustrate‘outbursts’ofexpressionandcontributionforshortperiods(seeforexample‘Usingtwitterwithstudents’3).Sustainedinteractionisalsoevidentbyafewusersincloudssuchastheoneentitled‘literaturereview’.

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

8

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

9

Anumberofothersourcesofevidencewerereviewed.Inparticular,alotiswrittenonthistopicthroughpersonalblogs,self‐publishedessaysandreflectivediaries.Thisincludesreflectionsontheimplicationsofnewtechnologiesforlearningandteaching,strategiesformoreeffectivetakeupoftechnology,identificationofbarriersanddriverstoadoption,andcritiquesofimpactonlearnerexperienceandteachingpractices.Althoughthesesoftersourcesofevidencearenotsubjectedtothestandardpeerreviewprocess,theycanoffervaluableinsightsintotheperceivedstateofthelandscapeofWeb2.0inHigherEducation;insomewaystheyareevidenceof‘practicingwhatyoupreach’,i.e.useofthemediumtounderstandthenatureofthemedium.Althoughasystematiccategorisationoftheseresourceswasbeyondthescopeofthisreview,weincludeaselectionofrelevantreflectionsinthesectionthatoutlinesthecontextualexamples.

ChangingtechnologiesThetechnologicalenvironmentwithinwhichmoderneducationoperatesisbecomingincreasinglycomplex;offeringnewpossibilitiesbutalsogivingrisetochallenges.WehaveseenacontinualevolutionoftechnologiesandhowtheyareusedsincetheintroductionoftheInternet.Web2.0tools,virtualworlds,simulations,hapticsandmobiletechnologiescontinuethistrendofco‐evolutionandweareonlybeginningtodevelopanunderstandingofwhatthetrajectoryofthisco‐evolutionwillbe.DeFreitasandConole(2010)suggestfivebroadtechnologicaltrendsthatarelikelytohaveasignificantimpactoneducation:

• Ashifttowardsubiquitousandnetworkedtechnologies • Theemergenceofcontextandlocationawaredevices • Theincreasinglyrichanddiversedifferentformsofrepresentationsandstimulatory

environmentspossible • Atrendstowardsmoremobileandadaptiveandadaptivedevices • Atechnologicalinfrastructurewhichisglobal,distributedandinteroperable

TheemergenceofWeb2.0toolsAppendix2offersadetailedtypologyofWeb2.0tools,categorisingthemaccordingtothewaysinwhichtheyareused.Thissectionconsiderssomeofthekeyfeaturesofthesetools.Itconcludesbydescribingsomeoftheoverarchingfeaturesandpatternsofbehaviourthatareemergingthroughuseofthesetools.

Theterm‘Web2.0’isattributedtoTimO’Reilly(2005).Sincethenithasgainedwidespreaduse,penetratingalsothediscourseoflearningandteaching.Relatedtermssuchasthe‘readandwriteweb’andthe‘socialweb’giveanindicationthatthetermreferstoashiftinwebtoolsandpracticestowardsmoreparticipatory,userinteraction.Althoughthetermhasnosingledefinition,thereisawidespreadagreementthatitappliestoawidesetoffunctionalcharacteristics,withinthecontextofcomputer‐mediatedcommunicationandnetworkeddigitalmedia.Thesenotonlypointtotheincreasedpossibilitiesforpublication(comparedtoearliergenerationsoftheweb),butalsoencourage,andaresupportiveof,userparticipationintheuploadingandsharingofdigitalartefacts.

10

Inthelastfewyearsmuchhasbeenwrittenaboutthewaysinwhichthesetoolsarechangingpractices;practicesthatinvolveshiftingfromthewebasacontentrepositoryandinformationretrievalmechanismtoawebthatenablesmoresocialmediationandusergenerationofcontent.Newpracticesareemerging:

• sharingofimages,videosanddocuments(asisevidentwithsitessuchasFlckr,YouTubeandSlideshare)

• mechanismsforcontentproduction,communicationandcollaboration(throughblogs,wikisandmicro‐bloggingservicessuchasTwitterandsocialsiteslikeFacebook,ElggandNing)

• opportunitiestointeractinnewwaysthroughimmersivevirtualworlds(suchasSecondLife).

ThesocialinterfaceofWeb2.0offersnovelwaysforconnectingpeopleandsharinganddiscussingideas.Itcanbeusedtosupportandenhanceexistingcommunitiesortofosterthedevelopmentofnewcommunitiesofinquiryandexploration.Thereseemstobeatantalisingalignmentbetweentheaffordancesofdigitalnetworkedmedia(thefocusonuser‐generatedcontent,theemphasisoncommunicationandcollectivecollaboration)andthefundamentalsofwhatisperceivedtobegoodpedagogy(socio‐constructivistapproaches,personalisedandexperientiallearning)(ConoleandMcAndrew,forthcoming:2).

TheemergenceofWeb2.0toolssitswithinabroadercontextofcontinualtechnologicalchange.The2010HorizonReportidentifiesfourtrendsaskeydriversoftechnologyadoptioninhighereducationfortheperiod2010through2015:

• Theabundanceofonlineresourcesandrelationshipsinvitingarethinkoftheeducators’roleinsense‐making,coachingandcredentialing.

• Anincreasedemphasison,andexpectationof,ubiquitous,just‐in‐time,augmented,personalisedandinformallearning.

• TheincreaseduseofcloudcomputingchallengesexistinginstitutionalITinfrastructures,leadingtonotionsofITsupportbecomingmoredecentralised.

• Theworkofstudentsbeingseenasmorecollaborativeinnatureandthereforethereispotentialformoreintra‐andinter‐institutionalcollaboration(Johnsonetal.,2010).

WhiletheHorizonseriesofannualreportshavecontributedtoresearchintofuturetrendsandemergingprioritieswithinaUScontext(seeforexampletheNSFCyberlearningReport,2008),severalotherreportshavealsooutlinedrecentanddevelopinginternationalpracticeregardingthepatternsofadoptionand/oruseofWeb2.0ineducation(seeforexample,ArmstrongandFranklin,2008;OECD,NewMilleniumLearners,2008;OECD‐CERI,2009).Inparticular,Redecker(2009)andAla‐Mutkaetal.(2009)reportfindingsfromaEuropeanperspectivefocusingonformalandinformaleducationrespectively.IntheUK,BECTA’s EmergingTrendsoftechnologyinEducationandHarnessingTechnology:NextGenerationLearning20082014,aswellasJISC'sLearnerExperienceprogrammeshaveproducednumerouscasestudiesandreports(seeBECTA/Crooketal.,2008;DaviesandGood,2009).JISC’smostrecentcomparativereportlooksintothestrategicandpolicyimplicationsforhighereducationoftheexperiencesandexpectationsoflearnersinthe

11

lightoftheirincreasinguseofWeb2.0technologies(JISC,2009).EngagementinWeb2.0environmentsprovides,ithasbeenargued,moreavenuesforself‐representation,expressionorreflectionandmoreorganizedformsofcollaborationandknowledgebuilding.Re‐generationofcontentthroughremixingandrepurposing,aswellasnetworkingandgroup‐interactionarecommonactivities.

Whileactivitiessuchasthesewerealsoevidentinearliergenerationsofnetworkedcomputingandonlineservices(forexampleUsenetgroups,bulletinboardsanddiscussionforums, Multi‐UserDomainsandMOOs,useofInstantMessagingprotocols,personalandinstitutionalwebpagestopromoteindividualorproject‐basedactivitiesandinterests;seeBECTA/Crooketal.,2008), ‘Web2.0’markedawatershedintermsofasignificantshiftinpractices.Anumberoffactorscontributedtothisshift.Theseinclude:advancementsinthetechnologicalinfrastructure,increasedInternetandbroadbandadoption,anduser‐friendlierinterfacesfornavigating,archiving,communicatingandcollaboratingontheweb.Together,thesehavecontributedtoscalingupuseraccessandinvolvement.IntheOECDcountries(OECD,2009)webservicesarebecominglessexpensive,faster,andincreasinglybasedonwirelesstechnology.Advancementsinaccessandspeedhavebeenaccompaniedbyasimilarlevelofadvancementintermsofdevelopmentsinsoftwareanddatamanagement.Atitssimplest,familiarwebbrowsershavebecomemoreversatile,allowingnotonlyawiderrangeofuserinteractions,butalsointeroperabilitywithnumerousdesktopapplications.

AtypologyofWeb2.0toolsThefollowingcategorisationofWeb2.0activitiesisderivedfromaBECTA‐commissionedreviewofWeb2.0toolsinschools(Crooketal.,2008):

• Mediasharing.Creatingandexchangingmediawithpeersorwideraudiences. • Mediamanipulationanddata/webmashups.Usingweb‐accessibletoolstodesign

andeditdigitalmediafilesandcombiningdatafrommultiplesourcestocreateanewapplication,toolorservice.

• Instantmessaging,chatandconversationalarenas.One‐to‐oneorone‐to‐manyconversationsbetweenInternetusers.

• Onlinegamesandvirtualworlds.Rule‐governedgamesorthemedenvironmentsthatinviteliveinteractionwithotherInternetusers.

• Socialnetworking.Websitesthatstructuresocialinteractionbetweenmemberswhoformsubgroupsof'friends'.

• Blogging.AnInternet‐basedjournalordiaryinwhichausercanposttextanddigitalmaterialwhileotherscancomment.

• Socialbookmarking.Userssubmittheirbookmarkedwebpagestoacentralsitewheretheycanbetaggedandfoundbyotherusers.

• Recommendersystems.Websitesthataggregateandtaguserpreferencesforitemsinsomedomainandtherebymakenovelrecommendations.

• Wikisandcollaborativeeditingtools.Web‐basedservicesthatallowusersunrestrictedaccesstocreate,editandlinkpages.

• Syndication.Userscan‘subscribe’toRSSfeedenabledwebsitessothattheyareautomaticallynotifiedofanychangesorupdatesincontentviaanaggregator.

12

Appendix2(‘AtypologyofWeb2.0tools’)providesamoredetaileddescriptionofeachoftheseandsomespecificexamples.

ItisimportanttonotethatthecurrentwaveofWeb2.0toolshaveevolvedfromearliertoolsforsharingandcommunication(seealsoboydandEllison,2007).HoweverthefunctionalityofWeb2.0toolsmeansthatpreviouslydiverseonlineservicesandnichesocialnetworkscanbeintegratedmoreeffectively.Commonfeaturesincludetagging,commenting,rating,syndicationandthedevelopmentofrelationships(or‘friendships’).Thenetworkisseenasaplatformfordialogueandcollaborationanduser‐generatedcontentasamutuallyaddedvaluecomponentforcommunitybuilding.Inadditiontothevastecologyofinformal,professional,educationalorblendedcrowd‐sourced,openandsemi‐openprojects,thereexistcommunity‐basedscientificresourcesitesandsitesthatemergefromthecollaborationofpublicinstitutions,museumsandcharities;thesedependonparticipatoryexchanges,culturalandscientificcitizenshiptoscalecontributoryinterpretationsandusergeneratedcontent(seeVonHippel,citedinNSFCyberlearning,2008:28).Themultiplicityoftoolsandmediatedavenuesforcreativityandsocialisationthusnotonlycontributestoaboundarycrossingbetweenprofessionalcommunitiesandgroupsconcernedwithrecreationalandfandom4activities,butalso,havegivenrisetonovelwaysforinformationorganization,knowledgegenerationandlearningfacilitation.Inthereviewofsocialsoftwareforlearning,Grantetal.(2006)suggestatleastthreefundamentalshiftsinthinkingabouttherelationshipamongknowledge,culture,learningandpedagogy.First,theynotethatthemodesofinquiryencouragedbyWeb2.0practicestendtobelessorientedtothetraditionaldisciplinaryboundariesofknowledge.Instead,thelearnerisinvitedtoadoptaconceptionofknowledgeassomethingavailabletobepersonalisedorre‐appropriated.Second,Web2.0encouragesengagementwithknowledgeinnewways.Forinstance,itencouragesamoreanimatedbrowsingandscanningorientation.Third,practicesofknowledgeproductionarebeingaltered.Inparticular,learnersarebeingdrawnintoinquirymethodsthataremorecollaborativeandlesssolitary.Thecollaborativespiritandopenethosoftheactivitiesoutlinedabove,andmanyotherslikethem,areoftencombinedintoaprevailingsensethatWeb2.0‘hascreatedgreateropportunitiesforaccess,debateandtransparencyinthepursuitofknowledgethaneverbefore’(Wales,2008:np).ArecurrentdiscoursearoundtheapplicationofWeb2.0technologiesinaneducationalcontextpointstothenotionsofevolutionandtransformation;transformation,intermsoftranscendingformaleducationalcontexts;evolutionintermsoffacilitatingmoreinformalandnon‐formallearningcontextswhichblurtheboundariesbetweencategoriesoflearners(student,adult‐learner,orinformallearner,autodidact).Theargumentsforthisalsocentresaroundthenotionthatlearnersarenowabletobecomemoreactiveproducers,authors,evaluatorsandcommentatorswithinthelearningarenatheyareengagedwith.Thequestionthendirectsattentiontothenovelparadigmsoflearningandforknowledge4Fandom(fromthenounfanandtheaffixdom,asinkingdom,freedom,etc.)isatermusedtorefertoasubculturecomposedoffanscharacterisedbyafeelingofsympathyandcamaraderiewithotherswhoshareacommoninterest (Wikipedia, Entry on Fandom: ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fandom)

13

building,butalsotofoundationalissuesthatwillaffecteducationalinstitutionsandpracticeforthefuture.

Changinglearningandlearners

TheoriesoflearningThissectionconsidersdifferentpedagogicalapproachesspecificallyinrelationtoWeb2.0practices.Viewsoncategorisationoflearningtheoriesarestronglycontestedanddefinitionsfordifferentaspectsarenotclear‐cut.Furthermore,whilsttheoriesoflearninghaveneverbeenstatic,arguablythe‘fluidity’andcomplexityofnewonlinespacesandthewaysinwhichtheyarebeingusedtosupportdifferentformsoflearningmeansthatthedistinctionbetweenpedagogicalapproaches(suchasbehavioural,cognitive,developmentalandcriticalpedagogy)isbeingeroded.Nonetheless,itispossibletodrawoutsomepatternsastowhatconstitutesgoodpedagogy,irrespectiveoftheunderlyingepistemologicalbeliefsthatdifferenttheoristsandschoolsofthoughthold.Thissectionprovidesareviewofcurrenttheoriesoflearninginthecontextoftheirapplicationtoexploitationofnewtechnologiesforlearning.

MayesanddeFreitas(2004)groupedlearningtheoriesintothreecategories: • Associative(learningasactivitythroughstructuredtasks) • Cognitive(learningthroughunderstanding) • Situative(learningassocialpractice).

InadditiontothecategorisationprovidedbyMayesandDeFreitas,anumberofotherauthorshavewrittenaboutlearningtheoriesandhowtheyrelatetoe‐learning.Conoleetal.reviewedlearningtheoriesandmappedthemagainstapedagogicalframework(Conole,etal.,2004).Dykeetal.(2007)builtonthisworkbyprovidinganoverviewofthemainlearningtheoryperspectivesalongwithanindicationofthekindsofe‐learningpracticetheymostobviouslysupport.Ravenscroft(2003)linkedpedagogicaltheorytospecificexamplesofe‐learninginnovation.Learningtheoriesarefrequentlycapturedinpedagogicalmodelsorframeworksthatemphasiseaparticularapproach.Arecentreviewofthekeymodelsorframeworksthathavebeenusedine‐learningdescribedtwentycommonmodelsorframeworksacrossthedifferenttheoreticalperspectives(Conole,2010).Appendix3(‘Areviewofe‐learningmodelsandframeworks’)providesasummaryofthiswork.

Alotofearlyapplicationofe‐learningwasessentiallybehaviouristinnature.This‘pageturning’mentallyhasbeencriticisedresultinginresearchersexploringthewaysinwhichmoreinteractional,student‐centredandsociallymediatedapproachesmightbeapplied.Manyarguethatbehaviouristapproaches,whichfocusonprescriptiveshapingandsystematicguidanceofthelearnertowardsinscribedgoalsareinappropriateforWeb2.0environments.NonethelessWeb2.0toolscansupportassociativepedagogiesandbeusedeffectivelyintermsofprovidingstructuredguidancethroughtasksandthroughprovisionofeffectiveandtimelyfeedback.Thismightincludetheadaptionofalearner’spersonallearningenvironmenttoprovideastructuredlearningpathway,usinginteractivee‐

14

assessmentactivities,aggregationofresourcesaroundlearningthemesoreffectiveuseofcollectiveintelligencetailoredtoindividuallearningneeds.

Cognitivismemphasisesthemetaphorof‘informationprocessing’toexpressthedevelopmentofthinkingandargumentation.Thisincludesreflectionofone’sownthinkingandoutwardarticulationororchestrationofseveraldifferenttypesoflearningactivities(i.e.attention,selection,reasoning,prediction,andreviewing).Thereisgoodevidencethatoutwardlyarticulatingone’slearningcanenableself‐awareness(e.g.Chi,2000).Processesofself‐publishingandreflectivebloggingcansupportthistypeofmetacognition.Mejias(2006)describestheuseofsocialnetworkstofacilitatedistributedresearch.Hearguesthatsocialnetworkshavetheadvantageofbothengagingstudentsinscaffoldingexperiencesanddevelopingthepracticalresearchskillsneededtomakebestuseofonlineinformationnetworks.Hepointsoutthatthe‘powerofmany’exposesanindividualtofarmoreresearch,resourcesandideasthantheycouldpossiblygenerateontheirown.

Constructivismhasbeenakeystrandofeducationaldiscourseformorethantwentyyears.Technologieshavebeenseenasameansofenablingnewapproachestoconstructivism,bothintermsofenablingthelearnertotakecontroloftheirlearningandintermsofenhancingthesocialdimensionsoflearning.Dalsgaard(2006)arguesthatsocialsoftwaretoolscansupportasocialconstructivistapproachtoe‐learningbyprovidingstudentswithpersonaltoolsandbyengagingtheminsocialnetworks,thusallowinglearnerstodirecttheirownproblem‐solvingprocess.AgoodexampleofaframeworkthatpromotesconstructivismisonethatwasdevelopedbyJonassenetal.(1999;2003).ItcanbeusedasaguidelinetodevelopConstructivistLearningEnvironments(CLEs).Tointegratethesocialdimensionintothepedagogyofonlinelearningenvironments,Felix(2005)hasproposedthesynthesisofthecognitiveconstructivistandsocialconstructivistapproaches.Inthecognitiveconstructivistapproach,thefocusisoncognitionthatoccursinthemindoftheindividual,withthelearnermakingintellectualsenseofthematerialsontheirown.Thesocialconstructivistapproachemphasisesthesociallyandculturallysituatedcontextofcognition,inwhichknowledgeisconstructedthroughsharedendeavours.Theinteractionsintheonlineenvironment,forexamplethroughcollaborationsordiscussionsusingforums,orinwikisandblogs,enableknowledgetobeconstructedindividually,butmediatedsocially(seeforexampleMinocha2009:12forarecentexample).Theinter‐subjectivelyrich,opendialoguesthattheseenvironmentscanfacilitatearevaluableresourcesthatcanhelpshapethetrajectoryoflearningasanexchangeofstrategicguidance(Crooketal.,2008:31).

SocialtoolsandinteractiveWeb2.0environmentsenablelearnerstoadoptexploratoryandcreativepositions,withoutoverlookingthesocialdimensionoforchestrationanddesign(orindeedgovernanceifacommunityspaceisenabled).Buildingonthistheme,socialconstructivismemphasisestheimportanceofthelearnerbeingactivelyinvolvedinthelearningprocess.Whilethecognitiveapproachisconcernedmorewithknowledgearchitectureandmapping,theoriessuchasconnectivismanddistributedcognitionemphasisethenegotiated,networkedanddistributednatureoflearningacrossphysicalandvirtualspaces.MasonandRennie(2008)acceptSiemens'(2004)propositionthatWeb2.0methodsandtoolspermittheeducationalprocesstotranscendconstructivetheoriesbymovingfromisolated,individualactivitiestointeractiveexchangesamongstacommunity

15

ofcollaboratinglearners(i.e.,collaborativeconstructivism‚orconnectivism‚putsanincreasedemphasisoninvolvingthestudentinactiveparticipationandintheprocessoflearning).Siemens(2006)placesthenetworkandnetworkinginthecentreofthelearningprocess.This'net‐centric'perspectiveseesknowledgenotnecessarilyasaprogressiveaccumulation,butratherasaprocessforbuilding,maintainingandutilisingconnections.Incontrast,Ackermann(2004)emphasisestheexperientialandactiveapproachtolearningandknowledgebuilding,pointingtotheprocessthatbuildsonbothindividualandcollectiveendeavours.

Socio‐culturalperspectivesemphasisethesocially‐situatedandculturaldimensionsoflearning,thatarearguablymissingfromtheotherperspectives.Acrosstheirlongculturalhistory,humanbeingshaveconstructedresourcesallowingthemtodrivecognitionfromtheprivateormentalworldof'thinking'intothepublicandexternalworldofactingwithtoolsandartefacts(e.g.diSessa,2001).Thiscollectionofresourcesforproblemsolvingandreasoningisattheheartofwhatismeantby'culture'.Withthisperspectiveoflearning,whatgetsdoneismainlyorganisedintheexternallydesignedspaceofaction(ratherthanjusttheinternalspaceofthementalworld).Thispromotestheviewoflearningasacculturationratherthanacquisition.Thesocialiscentrallylocatedinthescaffoldingapproachofculturalappropriation.Mediationofthelearningexperienceis,accordingtoVygotsky(1971),aformofintervention(aformofauxiliarystimulus).Byfocusingonexperienceduringtheprocessesofthinkingandlearning(metacognition),mediatingartefacts(suchaslinguisticmodesofaddressandtoolsthatenablereflectionanddialogue)cancontributetoeffectivelearningbehaviour.Usingmediatingartefacts,expertsandnovicescanco‐constructideasforproblemsolvinganddecisionmaking.Conoleconsidersthiswithrespecttotherangeofmediatingartefactsteachers,learneranddevelopersusedtosupportthedesignanddeliveryoflearning(Conole,2008).Personalisedlearningenvironmentsputlearnersincontrol,particularlyregardingmotivationaroundinterfacesoflearning.Participationincollaborativeactivities,andlearningcontextsasacommunityofpractice,isseenasanothercomponentintheprocessoflearningbeyondacquisition.

LaveandWenger’sworkonCommunitiesofPractice(CoP)(LaveandWenger,2001;seealsoWenger,1998)hasbeendrawnonextensivelyinthisfield.WengerdefinesaCoPasincorporatingimportantmechanismsformeaningnegotiation,learningandidentitybuilding.Participationinsharedgoals,andthroughsharedresources,canbeseenasaprocessofappropriationofsocialandculturalaspectsofknowledge,wherebythelearnerbecomespreparedforparticipationthroughtheprocessofparticipationitself(Rogoffetal.,2003).Althoughthenotionofinscribedgoals,boundaries,rules,monitoringpossibilitiesandsanctioningarecorecharacteristicsofcommunitysustainability(seeKoperetal.,2004),socialinteraction,co‐evolutionofactivitiesandtasksandhumourarealsocorecomponentsofsuccessandeffectiveness(seeKesteret.al,2006;Engstrom,2007).Mediatingartefactsplayanimportantroleandthesocio‐culturalapproachesmovethefocusawayfromthematerialityofthetoolsthemselves,towardstheactions/contextsinwhichthemediaareused.Ifthesocialwebshiftsmodelsofteachingfromtransmissiontodialogueandisindeedcapableofenableindividualstoconstructknowledgemedia(Dalsgaard,2009),theiruseinthemeaningmakingprocessiscore.

16

Selwyn(2009)arguesthateducationalpracticesthatareconcernedwiththeexploratoryandsocial,thereflectiveorimmersiveaspectsofknowledgebuildingwillfindWeb2.0toolsandsocialmediapowerful.Atthesametime,itisalsoassumedthatthecoreaffordancesofWeb2.0toolsblurtheboundariesbetweenproductionanduse(BrunsandHumphreys,2007).Thiscaninturnhaveanimpactonallfourprincipleaspectsofthelearnerexperience:thecognitive,theconstructive,thesocialandthesituative(seealsoMayesanddeFreitas,2007).

NewformsoflearningHaving 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 new forms of learning, namely: • Inquiry-based and exploratory learning • Newformsofcommunicationandcollaboration • Newformsofcreativity,co‐creationandproduction • Richercontextualisationoflearning

Web2.0technologiesandpracticesprovidenewmechanismsforinquiry‐basedandexploratorylearning.Distributedcollectionofdataispossible,asarenewwaysoforganisingandrepresentingmultipledatasources.Newtoolsareemergingforinterrogatingandanalysingdata,alongwithrichsocialandinformationenvironmentstosupportresearchcommunities.Inthisrespect,cognitively,Web2.0invitesuserstofamiliarisethemselvesanddevelopconfidenceinnewmodesofinquiry.Italsobringschallengestobothlearnersandteachersintermsofablurringoftheboundariesofcontrolinthesecontexts,aswellasraisingissuesaboutthelegitimacyofinformationinthesenewdistributed,mixed‐environments(e.g.Keen,2007).

Theephemeralnatureofwebknowledgeisnotonlyanassetenablingmultiplelocations,usersandre‐mixing,butalsoaliability,whichcanleadtocognitiveoverload,confusedauthorshipandlossofcredibility.Newformsofmediaandinformationliteracyforfiltering,navigating,organizingandmanipulatingrelevantcontent(foramoredevelopeddiscussionofliteracy,seebelow)arerequired.

Socialnetworksenablenewformsofcommunicationandcollaboration.Theimportanceofcollaborationisacommoningredientinmanyofthelearningperspectives,asitisgenerallyconsideredtobeanimportantmeansofdevelopingunderstandingthroughshareddialogueandco‐construction.Anecologyofsocialnetworkshasnowdeveloped,rangingfromthosecongregatingaroundcommoninterestsorkinship,throughtothoseassociatedwithmoreformalcommunitycontexts(suchasformallearningcontextsorprofessionalnetworks).Theseecologiesarefacilitatedbyarangeofprocessesofengagementinstantiatedthroughthenewtechnologies,makingpeerguidance,reflectionandsupportpossibleinavarietyofnewwaysandatascalenotseenbefore.Forexample,theabilitytoopenlycommentuponandcritiqueotherpeople’sworkhasbecomeastandardpracticewithintheblogosphereandhasbeentakenupbyacademics(throughself‐reflectiveblogsforteachinganddigitalscholarship)andresearchers.Inteachingcontexts,studentscansocialisewithpeersthroughsocialnetworks,providingmutualsupportandaforumforshareddialogue.

17

Typicalactivitiesinthesespacescanincludepracticingwritingskills,contributingtocollectivecohortblogs,orcritiquingeachother’spersonalportfolios(EllisonandWu,2008).Assuchsharedperspectivesorcrowdsourcingpracticeshavebecomemorecommon‐place,thereisagrowingargumentthatthesepracticesarekeytoinnovativethinkingandproblemsolving(Leadbetter,2008;Surowiecki,2004).Useofsuchsocialnetworksbetweenstudentsandteachershasbeenarguablylesssuccessful,withstudentsoftenseeingthisasanintrusionintotheirmorepersonal,learningandsocialspaces(Farmer,2006).

Similarly,creativityandnewformsofco‐creationandpublicationarealsopossible.ThedistributednatureofWeb2.0technologiesmeansthatlearnersmayhaveeasieraccesstotheexpertiseofothers,toauthenticenvironmentsandtodistributedaudiences.Thecreationofanaudienceforlearnerscanbemotivationalinanumberofrespects:asameansofprovidinganoutletfordemonstratingtheirlearningandasamechanismforgettingfeedback.Web2.0technologiesnotonlyblurtheboundariesbetweenlearnersandteachers,butalsobetweenteachingandresearch,meaningthatlearnerscanparticipateinandcontributetorealresearchwork.Atthesametime,participationandcoordinationinonlinesocialandcreativespacescanappearinvaryingdegreesofscaleanddepth,includingmoresophisticatedlevelsofinterpersonaldialogueanddeliberation(Farmeretal.,2008;Kim,2008).Suchnetworksandenvironmentsneedtobecarefullyconstructed;itisimportanttobuildcapacityforcollaborativeengagementunderfluid,heterarchicalstructures.Similarly,participants(boththelearnersandtheteachers)needtodeveloptherelevantsetofskillstobeabletobeeffectiveco‐creators.Keycharacteristicsinsuchcontextsincludetheabilitytotakeflexibleroles(learnerasteacherandviceversaforexample),aswellasthedevelopmentofanindividualandcollectivesenseofresponsibilityandpride(Burgess,2006;EllisonandWu,2008;seealsoBrunsandHumphreys,2007inrelationtowikis).Suchnotionsofco‐dependence,constructionandfluidityhowevermayclashwithideasaboutownershipandinaformaleducationalcontextraisingfundamentalissuesaboutwhattypesofassessmentareappropriateandmeaningful.

Sociallysituativelearningperspectivesemphasisethecontextwithinwhichlearningoccurs.Web2.0toolsprovideparticularopportunitiesforpersonalisingandcontextualisinglearning.Itisnowpossibletodeconstructresources,toolsandactivitiessothattheycanberecombinedorremixedaccordingtoindividualpreference(i.e.theeducationalapplicationofthenotionof‘mashups’describedearlier).Learnerscanalsocreatetheirowncontentandresources,enablingincreasedcreativityandflexibilitywithinthecurriculum.Suchpersonalisationandre‐appropriationofexistingresourcesalsohasclearpotentialtosupportbetterformsofindependentstudyandtofacilitatepersonalresourcemanagement.Suchuser‐centredapproaches,manybelieve,areimportant,notleastbecauseoftheaffectiveandmotivationalbenefitsderivedfromtheabilitytopersonalise,butalsobecausetheprocessofappropriationbydefaultleadstothelearnerdevelopingtheirdigitalliteracyskillsandfostersparticipatorylearning.

PatternsoftechnologyuseandthecharacteristicsoflearnersAccordingtothe2008ECARsurveyofstudents’useofcomputers,studentsareusingtechnologiesbothforacademicpurposesandforsocialactivities.Similarly,theOECEreport

18

onMillenniumLearners(OECD,2009)listsaccesstothelibrarywebsite(93.4%)andtheuseofcoursemanagementsystems/VLEs(82.3%severaltimesaweek)asthetwolargestusesoftechnologiesforacademicpurposes.ThesignificantuseofVLEsdemonstratesthattheyarebecomingincreasinglyamandatorycampuscommodity(OECD,2009:14).Oftheentertainment‐relatedandnetworkingactivities,useofsocialnetworkingsites(daily85.2%),InstantMessaging(73.8%daily)andmusic/videodownloads(77,3%weekly)wasalsohigh.AnIpsosMorisurveyrevealedthat79%ofBritishfirst‐yearstudents(IpsosMori,2008)accesscourse‐specificmaterialsatleastonceaweekand97%ofthisgroupfoundituseful.Amongtheentertainment‐relatedactivities,useofsocialnetworkingsitessuchasFacebookisincreasingonanannualbasis.AsimilarpicturecanbeseeninAustralia,whereasignificantnumberofstudentsfrequentlyusetheuniversitylearningmanagementsystemtoaccesscourse/relatedmaterials(81%;Kennedyetal.,2006).

TheconvictionthatWeb2.0applicationswouldtransformInternetusersincreasinglyintocontentproducers(OECD,2007)isalsoconfirmedonthebasisofthisdata.Forexample,morethanone‐fifthofUShighereducationstudentsareactivelycontributingcontenttoblogs,wikis,photoorvideowebsitesand18%contributeregularlytoatleastthreeofthese.However,39%declarenottohavecontributedtoanyofthese(OECD,2009:15).ThepatternofAustralianandBritishstudentsseemstobesimilartotheoneintheUnitedStates(Kennedy,etal.,2006,JonesandCross,2009).AstudyfromPewInternetandAmericanLifefoundthatintheUnitedStatesmorethanhalfofthe12millionteensonlinecreateoriginalmaterialfortheweb,withoriginalartwork,photosorvideo(Lenhart,Madden,RankinMacgill,andSmith,2007citedinOECD,2009:p.21).

AlthoughstudentsintheOECDcountriesappeartobeheavyusersofsocialmediaandnewtechnologiesingeneral,theprofileofstudentsisnotuniform;theintensityofattachmentwithtechnologiesaswellasthepatternsofusesbearssocio‐demographicandgendervariation.Thefiguresforparticipationinrole‐playinggames(MMORPGs)islowerthanmightbeexpectedandgenderedusesareevident:moremalesusersthanfemales.Similarlytheuseofvirtualworlds,suchasSecondLife,islow;intheUSlessthan9%ofstudentsareusing3D‐virtualworldsinhighereducation(OECD,2009:15).Thisisdespitetheperceivedbenefitstheseenvironmentsofferpedagogicallyandthehighexpectationsintermsoftheirvalueforhighereducation(ChittaroandRanon,2007;DeLucia,Francese,Passero,andTortora,2009;DiBlasandPoggi,2007).

TheprevioussectionreviewedthewaysinwhichnewtechnologiesmightsupportmoreWeb2.0‐orientatedformsoflearning;emphasisingtheiruser‐generated,participatoryandsituativenatureinparticular.Abodyofresearchhasemergedinrecentyears,whichhasbeenfocusingspecificallyoncollatingevidenceoftheextentthisistrue.Theinitialdiscoursearoundlearnerstendedtoforegroundthepositives;apicturewaspaintedofanewgenerationoflearnerswhoweredigitallysavvyandtechnologicalimmersed,termssuchas‘digitalnatives’,‘millenniumkids’andthe‘netgeneration’pepperedthisdiscourse.Howeverasthesub‐fieldhasmaturedandalargerbodyofevidencehasbeengathered,thegeneralconsensushasbecomemoreconsideredandrealistic.So,althoughitistruethatmanyyoungerlearnershavegrownupinatechnology‐mediatedenvironment,thisdoesnotmeantheyhavethenecessaryskillstobeabletoharnesstheseforacademicandlearningpurposes.Itisalsotruethatthereisawidespectrumoflearners,withdifferent

19

preferencesinthewaystheyliketolearn,thedegreetowhichtheywishtoengagewithtechnologiesandthestandardoftheirgeneralstudyskillsandacademicperformance.

SomeoftheoriginalrhetoricaroundtechnologiesbeingassociatedwithsignificantshiftsinthenatureofcontemporarylearnerscanbetracedbacktotheworkofresearcherslikeOblingerandPrensky.Prenskycoinedthephrase‘digitalnatives’(Prensky,2001)todescribeagenerationoflearnerswhohavegrownupinaworldofcomputers,mobilephonesandtheweb;i.e.agenerationreliantupondigitalmediaandtools.Prenskyandothersarguedthatthesedigitalnativesareseentostandinstarkcontrasttooldergenerationsof‘digitalimmigrants’,whoadopteddigitalmedialateronintheirlives.Termssuchas‘Internetgeneration’,‘generationM’(media),‘generationV’(virtual),‘googlegeneration’(Brabazon,2007),‘generationC’,‘Nintendokids’,‘Millennials’(OECD,2008)typifythismovement(see,forexample,OblingerandOblinger,2005;Tapscott,1998;andKennedyetal.,2008amongothers,foranempiricallygroundedcritiqueofsuchrhetoric).

CertainlyOblingerandOblinger's(2005)book,‘EducatingtheNetGeneration’,providesausefulstartingpointforrecentresearchexploringstudents’useoftechnologies.Itprovidesakindofwatershedintermsoftuningintotheincreasingresearchinterestinstudyinghowlearnersareinteractingwithnewtools,andhowthismightbechangingthewaysinwhichtheyarelearning.Intheirintroduction,OblingerandOblingernote,‘wehopethisbookwillhelpeducatorsmakesenseofthemanypatternsandbehaviorsthatweseeintheNetGenerationbutdon’tquiteunderstand’(2005:7). Constantlyevolvingtechnologyliesattheheartofmobile,connected,andasBauman(2005)andUrry(2007)havecalledit'liquidlifestyles'.Thesedigitalnativesarethoughttoexpecttechnologytoassistfluidityinallaspectsoftheirlives,includingthewaysinwhichtheylearnandareeducated.Theyarethoughttohavedistinctexpectationsofeducationthatinvolvelearningwhichispersonalised,accessibleon‐demand,andavailableatanytime,anyplace,oranypaceandareoftencontrastedwithteachersandparents,whoarelabelledasbeing‘digitalimmigrants’or'visitors'(White,2009).

Theuniformityofsuchlearners,andindeedtherhetoricalarticulationofthetechnologicallydeterministic,generational,regionalortemporaldefinitionshavebeenwidelycontested(DavisandGood,2009;JonesandCross,2009;White,2009;Buckingham,2006),andthemultipledimensionsofthedigitaldividehaverepeatedlybeenaddressed.Increasedconnectedness,immediacy,multitasking,mediaandcriticalliteracy,networkedskills,butalso,emotionality,timemanagementandindeedlearnerdifferencesandtutorinfluencesaresomeofthethemesewhichhavebeenconsideredacrossarangeofin‐depthcasestudiesandsurveys(Richardson,2008;Sharpeetal.,2008;Thorpeetal.,2008). Oneofthemainreasonscitedbystudentsforusing technologiesintheircoursesisconvenience.Technologiesareseenasaddingvaluetocourses,notasmechanismsforradicaltransformation. For example, CarusoandKvavik(2006)foundthatthemostcommonlycitedreasongivenforusingtechnologyincourseswasconvenience(51%ofstudents),followedbytheabilitytomanagecourseactivitieseasily(19%),andtoamuchlesserextenttheopportunitiestoenhancelearning(15%)ortocommunicatewithpeersandteachers(11%).Thisissupportedbyacomparativeanalysisonexistingstudiesaspart

20

oftheJISC’slearners’experiencesprogramme(JISC,2009,seealso,SharpeandBeetham,2010).Fromthestudentperspective,technologyisnotnecessarilyasubstitute,butatoolforaddedconvenienceandcontrol(OECD,2009).AstheauthorsoftheJISC(2009)reportnote,‘imaginingWeb2.0forsocialpurposesinastudycontext,presentsconceptualdifficultiestolearnersaswellasachallengetotheirnotionsofspace.Theyneeddemonstration,persuasionandroomtoexperimentinthiscontext'. SharpeandBeetham(2010)capturetheessenceoffindingsemergingfromlearnerexperienceresearchintheirintroductiontoarecenteditedcollectiononresearchinthefield:

Whatbecomesclearistheextenttowhichlearnersarebecomingactiveparticipantsintheirlearningexperiencesandareshapingtheirowneducationalenvironments[…]Learnersarecreatingtheirownblendsofphysicalandvirtualenvironmentsandofinformalandformallearningcontexts.

ThechangingroleofteachingandteachersHavingdiscussedthechangingnatureoflearningandlearnersintheprevioussection,thissectionconsiderstheimplicationsforteaching.AstheOECDreportonNewMillenniumLearninginHigherEducation(2009:28)notes,theassumptionthatmostteachersinhighereducationaredigitalimmigrantsmightbetrueonthebasisoftheirage,butiscertainlynottruewithrespecttotheirtechnologyskillsandcompetences.Asearlyas2003,aEuropaeumsurveyidentifiedhighadoptionratesoftechnologyintermsofcommunicatingresearchfindingsandnetworking(FlatherandHuggins,2004,citedinOECD,2009:28).AnAustraliansurvey(EducationNetworkAustralia,2008)foundoutthat90%ofhighereducationteachersconsideredtheInternetveryimportantfortheirwork.Interestinglytheystatedthatthiswasnotonlyforresearchpurposes,butalso,forimprovingteachingandlearningopportunitiesandresourcesforstudents.Over10%ofteachingstaffmadeaclearreferencetotheuseandintegrationofdigitallearningobjects.JustoveronethirdofAustralianhighereducationteacherswhorespondedtothesurveyareconvincedthattheyalreadypossesstheICTcapabilitiesrequiredtotransformpractice,especiallybymeansofintroducingnewwaysofengagingstudents(29%),orareproficientandconfidentintheuseofICTtosupportlearning(37%).Yet,thereappearstobeagapbetweentheexpertiseofteachersincontinentalEuropeandinAnglo‐Saxoncountries.Masteryofdigitallibrariesanddatabasesarecorecompetencesforacademicresearchers;mostusewordprocessorsandpresentationsoftwareforwritingpapersandpresentingfindings,manyusereferencemanagementtoolsandtoolsfordataanalysis.Blogsandwikisarealsousedtosomeextent–asameansofdisseminatingresearchandcollectivewriting.ForcollaborativeresearchprojectstherearearangeofWeb2.0environmentsenablingthesharinganddiscussionofresearchfindings.

Downesoffersanearlyreviewofthepotentialofthesetechnologiesforlearning(Downes2005)andAlexanderprovidesoneofthefirsttextbooksexploringtheuseofthesetoolsforteachingandlearning(Alexander2006).Bothoutlinemoreopen,participatoryandheterarchicalstructuresinteachingmethods.Reviewingtheuseofsocialmedialikeblogsandwikis,BrunsandHumphreys(2007)alsoarguethatthe(co‐)productionofcontentbytheuser(‘produsage’)requiresashiftinchangingteachingmethodstowardsapproachesthatsupportcommunitybuildingthroughcollaboration,heterarchicalstructuresofengagement,mentoring,fosteringcreativityandcriticalliteracycapacities.Siemens(2009),consideringthisfromtheperspectiveofnetworkedlearningandconnectivism,reflectsonroleoftheacademicteachingmethods:

21

Giventhatcoherenceandlucidityarekeytounderstandingourworld,howdoeducatorsteachinnetworks?Foreducators,controlisbeingreplacedwithinfluence.Insteadofcontrollingaclassroom,ateachernowinfluencesorshapesanetwork.

Siemenssuggeststhefollowasalistofthenewrolesthatteachersneedtoadoptinnetworkedlearningenvironments:

• Amplifying • Curating • Way‐findingandsocially‐drivensensemaking • Aggregating • Filtering • Modelling • Persistentpresence(Siemens,2009:np)

Scalinguptothemajoritywillrequiredifferentapproaches,morestrategiccoordinationandstaffdevelopmentandsupport.Todate,onthewhole,onlyaminorityofenthusiasticteachersandthosewitharesearchinterestinthelearningsciences,educationaltechnologyornewmedia,haveundertakenexperimentationwithnewinnovationsinpedagogyandexplorationoftheuseofnewtechnologies.EmbracingWeb2.0approacheswillrequireradicallydifferentstrategiesintermsofdesigning,supportingandassessinglearning.

Essentially,thecreativechangeinthepracticesmayleadtodeliberateandsystemicinnovation–bothparamounttoknowledge‐creatingorganizations(Bereiter,2002),suchashighereducationinstitutions.ThelearningpotentialofWeb2.0isseentoderivefromtheco‐constructionofknowledgeandthecollaborativeethosinself‐organisednetworkedandvirtualspaces.Itisnecessarytoacknowledgethewebsofknowledgecreatedinthesocialprocessofteachingandlearning(Ruddetal.,2006b).ThoughitseemsunlikelythatWeb2.0willfundamentallydisplace‘teaching’perse,itisclearthatembracingWeb2.0practiceswillmeanthatmoreemphasisisplacedonteachingprocessesbeingsituatedasactive‘co‐learning’experiences.Adoptionofamorescholarlyandreflectiveapproachtoteachingpracticeisclearlyalogicalstrategytohelpachievethisshift.

DespitetherelativelysophisticatedtechnologicalinfrastructurethatisnowinplaceintheUKandotherAnglo‐saxonorOECDcountries,deploymentofsocialmediaatthecoreofthecurriculumwithinfurtherandthehighereducationismostlyatanexperimentalstage(seeOECD,2009).Educators’confidenceinandexperiencewithsocialmediaisstillperceivedasabarrierforsuccessfulimplementationwithinteachingandlearninginHighereducationcontexts.AlthoughstudiesinOECDcountriesshowthatteachersmayindeedbeamongstthemostskilledtechnologyusers,itappearsthattheyareunabletotakeadvantageoftheircompetenceandapplyittothewaytheyteach(OECD,2008:seealsoBlinandMunro,2008;Zang,2009).AccordingtotheOECD(2008)threereasonsemergeasthemostsalientforexplainingthisparadox:

• Theabsenceofappropriateincentivestousetechnologyintheclassroomand,moregenerally,gettinginvolvedinanyinnovationregardingteaching.

22

• Thedominantcultureintheteachingprofessionisoneofappliedpractice,whichdoesnotrelyverymuchonresearch‐basedevidencetoidentifygoodteachingmethodologiesandstrategies.

• Theobservationthatacademicteacherslackthevisionandthepersonalexperienceofwhatatechnology‐enhancedteachingcouldlooklike.

Thelasttworeasonssuggestthatinitialteachertraininghastoberevisedandthatthereneedstobeanoverallchangeinthesocialandculturalcontextsurroundingteachingpractices.

StrategiesforsupportingtheuseoftechnologiesTheprevioussectionspaintapictureofavibrantlandscapeofresearchactivitiesanddevelopments,ofclustersofcommunitiesaggregatingaroundcommoninterestsandthemes.Onewouldassumethatcollectivelytheseactivitiesshouldhaveasignificantimpactonpractice,buttheydonot.Thesecommunitiessitalongsideactualteachingpracticesandrarelyinformthemtoanygreatextent.Theredoesnotyetappeartobeanevidence‐basedethostolearningandteachingpractice.However,initiativessuchastheHigherEducationAcademy‐fundedEvidenceNet5areattemptingtochangethisandsiteslikeCloudworks,whicharespecificallyharnessingWeb2.0approachestoencourageeducationaldebate,areindicatorsthatthingsarebeginningtochange.

BarrierstouptakeandlackofimpactDespitethepotentialapplicationoftechnologiesinaneducationalcontext,theirusealsoraisessomefundamentalparadoxes(SeeAppendix4‘Paradoxescreatedbythenetworkedanddigital’foramoredetaileddiscussion).SurveysontheuseofWeb2.0withineducationgiveanindicationofthelevelofuptake(seeforexampletheJISCIpsosMORIpolls,2008;theannualECARsurveys;alsoEducationNetworkAustralia,2008;LamandRitzen,2008).Collectivelytheysuggestthatuptakeisoccurring,butthatitisnotyetextensiveacrossallaspectsoflearningandteachingprovision.Itisimportanttocautionagainstover‐generalisationsfromthesesurveysintermsofextrapolatingtheuptakeofboth‘formal’and‘informal’Web2.0toolsasitisdifficulttodrawcomparativeconclusionssystematicallyfromsurveysthatusedifferentresearchinstruments.

InarecentpaperConoleconsidersthebarrierstouptakeoftechnologies,drawingonthebroaderliteratureonresistancetochangeandinnovation(Conole2010)(SeeAppendix5‘FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0inHigherEducation’andAppendix6‘Barrierstochange’).Conoleidentifiesthefollowingascommonlycitedreasonsforlackofadoption:

‘Ihaven’tgottime’,‘Myresearchismoreimportant’,‘What’sinitforme?’,‘Whereismyreward?’,‘Idon’thavetheskillstodothis’,and‘Idon’tbelieveinthis,itwon’twork’.Commonresistancestrategiesincludesayingyes(anddoingnothing)orunderminingtheinitiativeand/orthepeopleinvolved.Depressinglyclassicmistakesarerepeatedoverandoveragain:anoveremphasisonthe

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

23

technologiesandnotthepeopleandprocesses;fundingforthetechnologydevelopmentsbutnotuseandsupport.

Inadditiontothislist,therearealsobarriersaroundthechangingnatureofprivacyandownershipintechnologicalenvironments.Thereisalackofunderstandingoftheimplicationsofadoptingmoreopenapproachesandindeednegativeattitudesandfearofopenness.Identificationandunderstandingofthebarrierstobroaderuptakeisessentialsothatstrategiescanbedevisedtoovercomethem.Greenhowetal.(2009a)discussthreeideasthatillustratethetensionsbetweenthepotentialadvantagesofweb‐enabledpracticesandthechallengesofimplementation:a)developingteachers’professionalscholarshipandpractice;b)buildingcapacitiesforqualityscholarship,andc)bridgingdisciplinarydivides.Strategiestoovercometheseissueswillneedtoincludemechanismsforgivingteacherstimetoexperimentwithnewtechnologies,supportandguidancetoenablethemtodevelopthenewskillsneededtoembracethesenewtechnologiesandashiftinthinkingtowardsmorescholarlyandreflectiveapproachestoteaching.

ToexplorethisinalittlemoredepthsomeexamplesofdifferentapproachesthatcanbeadoptedtoenablethisshiftinthinkingaredescribedinAppendix7(‘Differentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchange’).Thefirstisaroundapplicationofideasfromdesign‐basedresearchasamechanismforengagingteachersinmorereflectivepractice.Thesecondfocusesonwaysinwhichchangesinpracticearoundtheuseoftechnologiescanbeachieved.

Digital,networkedandmulti‐literaciesNewtechnologiesarebothchallengingexistingteacherpracticeandrequiringnewskillsandwaysofthinking.LankshearandKnobelprovideausefulsummaryofthewayinwhichtheterm‘digitalliteracies’isbeingused(LankshearandKnobel,2006).Exactdefinitionsaroundthetermdigitalliteraciesvary;however,Gilster’sdefinitionofdigialliteracies,whichpointsto‘theabilitytounderstandanduseinformationinmultipleformatsfromawidevarietyofsourceswhenitispresentedviacomputers’,isinclusiveofsomethesedefinitions(Gilster,citedinLanksearandKnoble,2006;seealsoKress,2003).

Literacynowhastobestretchedtoencompassotherformsofrepresentationalfluencythanthoseassociatedwiththeprintedword.‘Digitalandnetworkedliteracies’aremuchmorethansimplybeingaboutunderstandinginformationavailableinadigitalcontext.Theyarealsoaboutskillsofinterpretationofmultiplerepresentations,theabilitytodevelopaholisticandinterconnectedperspectiveandtounderstandhowtobepartofandinteractwithawiderparticipatorycommunity.AslearnersengagewithdigitalartefactsthroughWeb2.0,sothecurriculummustaddressthechallengeofdevelopingtheirconfidencewithnewliteraciesandtheirincreasedpotentialforcreativity.Goodfellowsummarisesthecomplexityofthefieldbyarguingthatliteraciesaremulti‐faceted…

…withstrandsandtribeslike:multiliteracies,situatedliteracies,newliteracystudies,academicliteracies,digitalliteracies,etc.etc.(Seebroaderdiscussion,ofwhichthisispart,athttp://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2669).

Jenkinsetal.(2006)arguethattherearetwelveskillsneededforfullengagementintoday'sparticipatoryculture:

24

• Play‐thecapacitytoexperimentwithone’ssurroundingsasaformofproblem‐solving • Performance‐theabilitytoadoptalternativeidentitiesforthepurposeof

improvisationanddiscovery • Simulation‐theabilitytointerpretandconstructdynamicmodelsofreal‐world

processes • Appropriation‐theabilitytomeaningfullysampleandremixmediacontent • Multitasking‐theabilitytoscanone’senvironmentandshiftfocusasneededtosalient

details • DistributedCognition‐theabilitytointeractmeaningfullywithtoolsthatexpand

mentalcapacities • CollectiveIntelligence‐theabilitytopoolknowledgeandcomparenoteswithothers

towardacommongoal • Judgment‐theabilitytoevaluatethereliabilityandcredibilityofdifferentinformation

sources • TransmediaNavigation‐theabilitytofollowtheflowofstoriesandinformationacross

multiplemodalities • Networking‐theabilitytosearchfor,synthesize,anddisseminateinformation • Negotiation‐theabilitytotravelacrossdiversecommunities,discerningand

respectingmultipleperspectives,andgraspingandfollowingalternativenorms • Visualization‐theabilitytointerpretandcreatedatarepresentationsforthepurposes

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

Thislistshowsthemultifacetednatureofdigitalliteracies.Jenkinsetal.(2006)defineparticipatorycultureasbeingaboutinvolvementandparticipation,aboutbeingabletocreateandshareworkandaboutpeermentorshipandsupport.Theygoontosuggestthatthishasimmensepotentialeducationally;providingopportunitiesforpeer‐to‐peerlearning,diverseculturalexpression,skillsdevelopmentacrossdifferentcontextsandachangingattitudetothenotionsofopenness,ownership,intellectualproperty.

Manyfactorsmayspecificallyinfluencetheuseofresources,andengagementwithsocialmedia,includingculturalperceptionsregarding‘learning’and‘information’;perceptionsregardingthevalueofwrittenresourcesandevaluationofinformation,butalsocompetencesinusingmediaandcomputersortocriticallyreflectoninformationresources.Usesmayalsobeshapedbyotheractivitiesconductedonline–expectationsregardinginteractivity,hypertext,‘Internetliteracy’developedacrossonlinesitesandservicesand,possibly,conventionsregardingauthorship,citationandplagiarism(Livingstone,2008,MetzerandFlanagin,2008;RiehandHilligoss,2008).Alsoimportantarethetensionsassociatedwiththeblurringboundariesbetweenproductionanduse,ownershipandauthorship,expertauthorityandamateurcreativity,opennessandcompleteness,aswellasformalandinformallearning(e.g.Jamesetal,2008;McPherson,2008).

Basedonanextensivereviewoftheliterature,Beethametal.(2009)provideacomprehensiveframeworkoftypesofliteraciesrelatingtosocialandsituatedpractices(includingmeaningmakingandsituatedknowledge);technologicalandmedialiteracies(includingmultimodalskills,informationandcriticalliteracy);andscaffoldedandmeta‐cognitiveliteracies(includingthenewpedagogiesassociatedwithmediatedlearning).Such

25

frameworkscanbeappliednotonlytoyounglearners,buttoallthatareinvolvedinthelearningprocessandmediaeducation.Astheynote:

Thesocialandeconomicagendasofupskillingmoreofthepopulation,wideningparticipation,andsupportinglifelonglearning,meanthatuniversityandcollegelearnersaremorediversethaneverbefore,withawiderrangeofeducationalandICTexperience.Sinceliteracyprovisionideallystartswithlearners'existingpracticesandconceptions,itneedstobecomemorewide‐ranging,moreflexible,andmorepro‐active.Italsoneedstorecognisethattheprocessofdevelopmentwillbeincremental,andchallenging.Learnersneedscaffolding,directionandmodellinginthefirstinstance,followedbypracticeandpersonalisation,givingwaytounstructuredtasksthroughwhichtheycanlearntochoosestrategiesandtechnologiestosuitdifferentsituationsandtheirownpreferredwaysofworking.(Beethametal,2009:67)

SuccessfactorsandstrategiesforchangeStrategiesforencouraginggreateruseoftechnologiesandsharingofresourcesandgoodpracticehaverangedfromsimplymakingteachingresourcesavailable(suchaslearningobjectsandOpenEducationalResources,orOERs)throughtomorespecificcasestudiesdescribingpracticeorcommunity‐basedsupportmechanismsandnetworks.Inadditionanumberofinitiativeshaveattemptedtopromotingsharingandcommunitybuildingamongstteachers;forexample,theinitiativeClassroom2.06andtheInternationalSocietyforTechnologyinEducationinEducationIslandinSecondLife.Theseinitiativesaregivingusinsightsintowhatmethodsworkintermsofsupportingbettersharingofgoodpracticesandmechanismsforfosteringtransformationinteachingpractice.Howevertheimpactofsuchworksofarissmall,andthesecommunitiesarenotwithoutdesignflawsorchallenges(seeEvansetal.,2008citedinGreehowetal.,2009b:281).Inaddition,thereareanumberofrelatedprofessionalanddisciplinespecificnetworksthathavearoleinpromotingandsupportinggoodteachingpractices(andhencealsoeffectiveuseoftechnologies).TheseincludethenowwellestablishedHigherEducationAcademysubjectcentrenetwork7,HEFCE'sCentresofExcellenceforTeachingandLearning8andthemorerecentlyestablishedHigherEducationAcademyEvidenceNet9.Despiteallthis,theimpactonactualpracticeispoor.Takencollectively,theimpactofthenowlargebodyoffreeresourcesandoutputsandfindingsfromprojectsinnovatingintheuseoftechnologyislow.ThereisstillnoclearevidencethattherehasbeenasubstantialchangeinteachingmethodsnoristhereevidencethattherehasbeenasubstantialincreaseintheuseoftechnologiesandOER.

ThereisastrongcollectivevoicethatarguesthatsocialmediaandWeb2.0toolscouldenableuniversitiesto‘reinvent’themselves.ThisencompassesashiftinthinkingaboutICTsolelyintermsoftheirrepresentationalcapabilities(i.e.,theirabilitytorepresentcommoditisedinformationaldeliverymodesofhighereducation)toavisionofthemfacilitatingmorediscursive,relationalandcollaborativeapproachestolearning(seePedro,2003;Selwyn,2007:91;FranklinandvanHarmelen,2007;Armstrongetal.,2008;Dalsgaard,2008;Redecker,2009).Apartfromitsroleinfacilitatingknowledgetransferand6Classroom2.0http://www.classroom.2.0.com;InternationalSocietyforTechnologyinEducationinEducationIslandinSecondLife:www.iste.org/secondlife7http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/subjectcentres8http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/tinits/cetl/9http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/evidencenet

26

collaborativeactivities,Web2.0isoftenpresentedasalsohavingthepotentialtofacilitateinnovationsinprofessionaldevelopment,teachertrainingandteachingpractices,aswellasimprovementsinthequalityofstudentlearningandexperiences.

Evidenceofaconcertedeffortwithininstitutionstosystematicembeddingoftechnologiesanditsuseforlearningandteaching,canbetracedbacktotheearlytomid2000s.Institutionsbegantohavemoreexplicitpoliciesonhowtechnologieswerebeingusedtosupporttheircoreactivities.Websitesweredevelopedandusedexplicitlyformarketingpurposesandformaintainingalumnirelations.VLEswereintroducedtosupportthedeliveryofonlineteachingandpresentationofmaterials.ThepopularisationofWeb2.0technologiesfrom2005begantoextendtheinformation‐focuseduseofthetechnologiesandenabledtheemergenceofinformalcommunitiesandcommunicationalongsidethe‘formalprovision’withininstitutions(FranklinandvanHarmelen,2007;Ala‐Mutkaetal.,2009).Arangeofe‐learninginitiativeswasfundedwhichprovidemechanismstoexperimentwiththesenewtechnologies.Theserangedfromsmall‐scaleprojectsfocusingonlocalpractice(forexampleexplorationofaparticulartoolinaparticularteachingpractice),throughmoreinstitutionallyfocusedinitiatives(forexampletheJISC’sManagedLearningEnvironmentprogramme)throughtointernationalcollaborations(suchastheNSF/JISCdigitallibraryprogrammeandtheHewlett‐fundedOERinitiatives).Collectivelythesecanbeseenasprimarilybottom‐up,oftendrivenbyindividualinterests,althoughfundingbodiesdoprovideasteerandvisionfortheoverallfocusanddirectionofinnovations(e.g.JISC,2009;OECD,2009;seealsoArmstrongetal.,2008:15).ForexampleintheUK,severale‐learninginitiativeshavebeenalignedtotheHEFCEe‐learningstrategy(HEFCE,2009).JISC’sprogrammeofactivitieshasdirectlyderivedfromandiscloselyalignedtoHEFCE’se‐learningstrategy(seeJISC,2009b).

Table1providesasummaryofsomeofthestrategiesforchangesthathavebeenadopted.Evidencefromtheliteraturegivesanindicatorofthefactorsforsuccess:

• Scaffoldingandguidancetoteachers.Amongstthemostimportantfactorsistheneedtoensurethatthereisappropriate‘scaffolding’andsupportofhowWeb2.0toolsareembeddedincourses.Thisincludesguidanceandsupportonthedesignofcourses,thenatureofactivitiesandtheroleoftheteacher. Itrequiresteacherstorethinktheirpositionfromoneofexperttofacilitator.

• Strategicalignment.Anotherareaofimportanceisensuringthatappropriatestrategiesareinplacetosupportthisshift.

• Understandingthestudentexperience.Carefulconsiderationofthestudentperspectiveisneeded,particularconsiderationofaffectiveissues.Whatarethekeyfactorsthatmotivatestudents,thatwillensuretheirengagement?

• Appropriatesupportstructures.Althoughcloselyalignedtoconsiderationsaroundateacher’sroleandthedesignofthecourse,theneedforeffectivesupportstructurescannotbeunderestimated.Thisinvolvesensuringthataccesstomaterialsiseasy,thatthestructureandroleoftheonlineenvironmentisclearandhavinginplacecontingencyplansifthereareproblems.

• Staffincentivesandrewards.Theprojectsthathavebeenmostsuccessfularethosewherecarefulconsiderationhasbeengiventostaffmotivation.Ensuringthatstaffareawareofthevisionofwhythesenewtechnologiesarebeingintroducedandgetting

27

themonboardiskey.Theyneedtofeelasenseofownershipandcontroloftheirownteachingpractice.

• Sharingofgoodpractice.Finallyifwearetobuildcollectivelyonexperiences,mechanismsareneedtosharegoodpracticeandenableteacherstoadoptmorescholarlyapproaches.

Table1:Summaryofdifferentstrategiesforchange

Nationallevels BroadgovernmentstrategiesthatincludetheuseofWeb2.0andprovideincentivestodeliverintegratedservices(e.g.forstudentretention,innovationinteachingandlearningsuchastheAustraliaLearningPerformanceFund(DEEWR,2008)orinvestmentintoinfrastructureandtraining.

HEfundingagenciesandpolicymakerswhocanprovidedriversforinstitutionsthroughspecificmandates,someofwhichinvolvetheadoptionofsocialmedia(intheUK,JISCharnessingtechnologyforlearningprogrammes/CETISOERprogramme;HEA[inparticularEvidenceNetandELESIGNing].

Centralinvestmentinagenciesthatpromote–oftenthroughfunding–thedevelopmentofinnovationsthroughresearchprojects,deliverytools,resourcesandinfrastructureforcommunitiesofpractice(Australia/Edna;US(LibraryofCongress;NSF;TheLearningFederation).

Intergovernmentalagenciesandnonprofitfundingagencies

IntegratedpoliciesandfundingstrategiestosupportresearchonthewaysinwhichICTsarechangingthewaysthatpeoplelearn,playorparticipationincivicactivities(e.g.UNESCOIIEP;OECDCERI;OECD’sEducationManagementandInfrastructureDivision(DirectorateforEducation).AlsointermsofpromotinginnovationandcollaborationforthedevelopmentofdigitalliteracycurriculaandOpenEducationResources(OERs).Projectsfocusingonunderstandingtheimpactofwidespreaduseofdigitalmediainyouthlearning(seeforexample,MacArthur;Carnegie,Hewlett;NSF,EDUCAUSE,NationalInstituteforTechnologyandLiberalEducation(NITLE)intheUS;ESRC,EPSCR,AHRC,BECTAintheUK).

Institutionalstrategies

Institutionalstrategicplansandsupport:SomeHEinstitutionsaredevelopingmoreintegratedstrategiesthroughadministrative,marketingandpedagogicalmandates(forexampleWarwick,Edinburgh,OpenUniversityintheUK)andformoreeffectiveuseofWeb2.0.Regulatory,legal,securityandethicalfactorsaredrivingconcerns.Positiveinstitutionaldriversappeartobemoreprominentin:distancelearningandlife‐longlearningcontexts.

Professionalmotivations

(academic/administrator)

Thereisnowasignificantbodyofevidencearoundtechnologyinterventions.Theseprojectsareprovidingrichdataonthebarriersandenablerstosuccessfulintegrationoftechnologies;aswellasdataontheattitudesofstaffandwiderpatternsoftechnologicaladoption.Aspectrumofusersisemerging(e.g.earlyadopters;‘digitalresidents’,etc.).Explorationoftheopportunitiesforcommunication,sharingandcollaborationacrossbordersoftenfitswithspecificpedagogicalorcommunicationstrategies.Popularpatternsofmotivationinclude:a)sustainableresourcesbeyondcourse/degreeduration(e.g.alumnirelations;studentrecruitment;lifelonglearningcommitments);b)professionaldrivestoenhanceteachingpractices;andc)extensiontonewformsofknowledgeande‐scholarship.

Curricularneedsandelearning

Technologyuptakeanduseisdifferentindifferentsubject.Forexamplemedia,computerscienceandinformationsciencecoursesappeartobemoreopentoadoptingWeb2.0practices.Thefunctionalitiesoftoolsemployed,theirsuitabilityfor

28

chosentasksandthelearners’familiarityand/oracceptanceofthesetoolswithinthecurriculumarekeyinterrelateddriversforeffectiveuse.Students’positiveattitudestosocialcomputingisnotonlydependentonfamiliarity[thoughdifferencesintypesofusesareevidentincountriesOECDcountries],butalsouponperceptionssurroundingthedegreeofautonomyandtheabilitytoappropriateorpersonalizetoolstospecificneeds.E‐collaborationandopencommunication/publicationisseenasakeyskillforprofessionaldevelopmentandconductwithinHEsectors.

Scaffoldedpedagogicalapproachesandfosteringpedagogicalinnovation

ConstructivismandconnectivismarethetwopedagogicalapproachesthatalignmostcloselywithWeb2.0practice.Thefocusisonenhancingthestudentexperienceandmaximisingthepotentialrecreationalorcreativeuses.Networkedinteractionliteraciesandawarenessofmediatedlearningstructuresandhierarchiesarealsoimportant.

ContextualexamplesTheprevioussectionsofferedperspectivesonthekeytheoreticalandempiricaldimensionsthatemergefromevidence.Inthissectionwefocusonspecificcasestudiesfromexistingpracticesthathighlighttheseaspectsinparticularcontexts.Ouroverallimpressionfromthecasestudiesisthatthereisrelativelylittlereportingofactuallearningprocesses,orindeedteachingpractices.Occasionallyacomparisonpointhelpsevaluatetheimpactofinterventionsrelativetoalternativelearningstructures,butthisisrare.Peer‐reviewedjournalandconferencepapersofferevaluativereportsandare,occasionally,richonempiricaldetail,buttherearemanyquestionsthatneedtobeaskedregardingthelikelyconditionsthatcontributedtosuccessintheseareas.Amultitudeofblogsandreflexiveaccountsfromacademicteachersofferrichperspectives,butmoresystematiccontentanalysisisrequired.Thesocialnetworkingsiteforlearningandteaching,Cloudworks,hasalsogeneratedarichbodyofknowledgeonrelevantperspectivesthroughsolicitationofexperiencesinthefield.

Weincludecasestudiesthataddresssomeofthewaysinwhichlearningandteachingpracticeshavebeenimproved.Wehavelookedforevidenceoftheextendtowhichlearning2.0practicesarepresent:participatorylearning,co‐creationoflearningartefacts,peercritiqueleadingtoiterativeindividual‘improvement’andgroupunderstanding.Wearealsointerestedinseeingtheextenttowhichthisisinfluencingtheteacher’spractice:isthereevidencethattheyareadoptingdifferentrolesinthelearningprocess,suchasbecomingco‐learners?WealsowanttoseewherethereisevidencethatWeb2.0approachesarebeingusedtofosterandpromoteteachingscholarshipandwherethereareexamplesofteachersaslearningcommunities,i.e.inwhatwaysareWeb2.0technologiesbeinguseda)forreflectivepracticesandinteractionwithlearners;b)aspartofengagementinwidercommunitiesofpractitionersengaginginscholarlypracticearoundtheirteaching.Thestudiesaregroupedintothreebroadcategories:i)blogs,wikisandsocialtagging,ii)socialnetworkingandmicrobloggingandiii)immersiveworldsandsecondlife.Appendix8focusesonOpenEducationalResources(OER).AdetaileddiscussionisprovidedtherewithrespecttoOER,partlybecausepracticesaroundOERwithintheCloudworkssocialnetworkingsiteisthemainfocusofCaseStudy2forthe‘PearlsintheClouds’project.

29

Finally,Appendix9(‘IssuesraisedbytheintroductionofWeb2.0technologies’)providesadiscussionofanddetailedempiricalinsightintosomeofthetensionsthatariseasaresultoftheintroductionofWeb2.0technologiesandinparticular,theirimpactonorganisationalstructuresandprocesses,aswellasonteachers’andlearners’individualroles,identitiesandperceptions.

Blogs,wikisandsocialtaggingTheexamplesfromtheliteratureprovidedhereillustrateprojectswhereblogsandwikishavebeenintegratedintocurriculardesign.Theyillustratearangeofpedagogicapproachesandgiveanindicationofstudentandteacherperceptionsandattitudestowardsusingthesetypesofsites.

Blogshaveevolvedfromtheconceptofa‘personalhomepage’andhencehavebeenreferredtoaspersonalpublishingspaces.Blogshavealsobeenlabelledreflexivediariesorlearningjournals;bothnamesemphasisethepersonal,chronologicalreflectiveelementofsharingideas.AsDownesnotes:‘theynowformonepartinamuchmorediverselandscape’[ofWeb2.0content].Allegiancestoparticulartechnologiesshiftovertimeandsomepeoplewhoformerlywroteblogs,nowusesocialnetworkingsitessuchasMySpaceorFacebookinstead.Othersuse‘microblogging'servicessuchasTwitter.Textualblogshaveevolvedintoothermediaforms,sothatitispossiblenowtohavebothaudioblogs(alsoknownas‘podcasts’)andvideoblogs(‘vlogs').Blogsareoftenlinkedtoarangeofmultimediarepositoryservices(suchasFlickrforphotos,Deviantartforartwork,YouTubeforvideosandSlideShareforslideshowsordocumentfiles).Itisalsopossibletouseembedfunctionswithmanyofthesesothattheyappearwithinthecontextofanindividualblogposting.Blogshavebeenusedforavarietyofeducationalpurposes,forexampleasplatformsforcourseannouncements,asmechanismstogatherorgeneratefeedbackandasacollectivepeersupportvehicleamongdifferentgroups(ofteachers,researchersand/orstudents).Theycanbeusedasamotivationaltooltoengagediscussionsinblendedlearningcontexts.Alternativelytheycanoffermorescaffoldedapproachestodistributedresearch.Finally,theycanbeusedasamechanismforaggregatingresources,i.e.asaformofe‐portfolioforuseeitherwithinformalcoursesoraspartofprofessionaldevelopment.InaBeCTAreviewof'Web2.0practicesineducation'Crooketal.(2008)statedthatthecleararticulationofthepurposesofblogswithineducationalcontextsandappropriateintegrationwithinformalassessmentshouldbeseenasbothafundamentalandimportantmotivationaltool.

Downes(2010)hasidentifiednearlyfiftypedagogicalusesofblogsinformallearning,themajorityofwhichcanbeorhavebeenusedwithinhighereducationcourses.Commonlycitedadvantagesofblogsineducationemphasisethecommunicative,motivationalandparticipatorybenefits(Farmeretal.,2008;Kim,2008).Somehighlightthefactthatblogsenableindividuallearnerstoexpresstheiruniqueauthorialvoicesandidentity(Burgess,2006;EllisonandWu,2008)andalsothattheycanencourageasenseofresponsibilityandpride(Farmeretal.,2008).Othersforegroundthemeaningfulinteractionswithothersandarguethatpeercritiquingcanfosterbothpsychosocialneedsandthedevelopmentofcriticalliteracyandcivicengagementskills.Over400,000educationalblogsarehostedby

30

edublogs10alone.Teachershavebeenusingthemtosupportstudentlearningandalsoasavehicletoreflectontheirownpracticesinceabout2004(Downes,2004).

TheintegrationofbloggingandsocialnetworkingisevidentinsitessuchasNing11andElgg12.Thiskindofintegration,alongsidewiththeemergenceofmicroblogging,hasshiftedtheroleofblogsfromself‐publishingandrepresentationtowardssharing,peerreviewingandcollaborating.Thepurposeandfocusofeducationalblogsvaries.Someareonlyopenwithinacoursecohort,whilstothersmaybeviewablebyanyone.Someformanintegralpartofacourse,beingaformalpartofcourseactivitiesoractuallyformingpartoftheassessableoutput.Inothercasestheyareoptional.Suchvariedpracticesintermsofthedegreeofcurricularintegrationorassessmentgeneratetensionsregardingtherepresentationofhybrididentities,trustandauthorship(Hemmieetal.,2009).Davis(2007:np)arguesthatblogs:

aremorethanatoolforregularorirregularwritingtasks,andforthatreasonteachersneedtorememberthatbloggingissuigeneris[uniqueinitscharacteristics]–notonlinediary,nore‐portfolio,noronlinenewspaper,nore‐exercisebook,thoughitcanbeusedinanyofthoseways–andassertthemannerinwhichtheyexpecttheblogtobeused.

Similarly,thepotentialofwikisforfacilitatingcooperativelearninginaconstructivistenvironmentandforfosteringcommunitiesofpracticehasbeenargued.Wikisareconsideredtobeidealtoolsforcollaborativewritingandforscaffoldinggroupprojects.Examplesofuseincludeusingwikisasameansofcreatingcollectivestudyguidesandtextbooks,asamechanismforcreatingannotatedreadinglistsorsimplyascollective,subjectspecificrepositories.Anumberofstudiesdemonstrateinterestingempiricalfindingspointingtoanumberofobservablebenefits.Forexample,fora)fosteringactivelearning(AnsonandMiller‐Cochran,2009;ParkerandChao,2007;Augar,RaitmanandZhao,2004)b)facilitatingcreativityandsocialization(BrunsandHumphreys,2007)orc)asmechanismstofosterthedevelopmentofhigherordercognitiveskills.Theycanenablestudentstobecomeco‐creatorsofcoursecontentanddesign.Socialdimensionsofcooperation,suchastrustandconsensus,governanceandcontrolaredeemedimportantinself‐organisingcommunities,suchasWikipedia.Successfulimplementationofwikisinaneducationalcontextalsorequiresacleararticulationofthepurposeofthewikiandclearexplanationofitsproposedbenefitforlearners.Carefullyconstructedtutormoderationandguidanceisalsooftenneeded,particularlyatthestart,beforestudents’gainasenseofcontrol,ownershipofthespaceandacollectivesenseofcommunity(seeforexampleAnsonetal.,2009;Augaretal.,2004;Beachetal.,2008;Bruns,2008;Notari,2006).

Dimensionsofreflexivityandcollaborationarealsoattachedtosocialtaggingandbookmarking,collectivelyknownasfolksonomies.Folksonomiesarewordsormeaningsthatusersgenerateandthenattachtoparticularcontent.Theycanbecontrastedwithmorecontrolledpre‐definedvocabularies,whichunderpinnedmanyweb1.0repositoriesanddigitallibraries.Differentsocialbookmarkingsitesencouragedifferentuses:somesites

10www.edublogs.org11www.ning.com 12 http://elgg.org/

31

encouragemoreplayfulandpersonaltagging(forexampleFlickrthephotographicrepositorysite),whilstothersaffordamoredeliberatestyleoftaggingwithaveryclearideaofaspecificaudience(suchasthebibliographicandacademicsiteslikeConnoteaorCiteULike).

Evidencefromformaleducationalusesprovidesexamplesofteachersinvitingstudentstorate,comment,contributeand/orbuildupcollectionsofresourcesbysharingpersonalcollectionsandalsoexamplesofwherestudentareencouragedtofiltercollaborativelythroughRSSfeedsinblogsandpersonale‐portfolios(seeFranklinandvanHarmelen,2007;Vuorikari,2007).

Hemmietal.(2009)offerempiricalinsightsfromstudentandteacheruseofWeb2.0technologiesinthreeformaldegreeprogrammesspanningundergraduateandpostgraduatelevelsintwolargeScottishuniversities.Theseprogrammesincludedfull‐timeundergraduatestudentsinDivinityandDesignEngineeringandpart‐timepostgraduatedistancelearnersatMasterslevel.Abroadlyvirtualethnographicapproachwastaken,inwhichtheresearchersontheprojectwereimmersedintheday‐to‐dayonlineandoff‐lineinteractionsoflearners.Dataweredrawnfromstudentweblogs,wikisandcoursediscussionboardsgeneratedthroughinterviewswithstudentsandteachers.TheEngineeringDesigncourseprovidedexamplesofvisuallyrichwikiteachingandlearningpracticeswithundergraduatestudents.TheDivinitycourseincludedtheuseofblogstoincreaseparticipatorycontributionsasapromptforclassroomdiscussionwithundergraduates.ThetworesidentialcourseswerebasedonablendedlearningmodelandtheMastersprogrammeonelearningcoveredamoreextensiveuseofWeb2.0technologies,includingfacebook,bibsonomies,SecondLife,wikis,andblogs.Theauthorsconsideredthepedagogicalappropriationsbybothlearnersandteachers.Theythenfocusedona)students'presentationoftheselfandidentityandnegotiationofself‐hoodthroughblogsandb)explorationoftheissuesaroundanonymity,etiquetteandgroupresponsibility,whicharoseasaresultofuseofblogandwikispaces.Theyalsoraiseimportantquestionsregardingassessmentandprivacy.

TwitterAsurveyconductedbyFacultyFocus(2009)intheUS,revealedthatlessthanhalfofthe2,000teacherssurveyedhadeverusedTwitter(44.6%),andofthe30.7%thatclaimedtobeactiveusers,onlyhalfhaveuseditasclassroomtool,ortocommunicatewithstudents.DespitethislowuptakeanumberofcommentatorsintheblogospherewriteaboutitspotentialuseinHE(seeGordon,2009;Hart,2009;Wheeler,2009).Earlypilotsontheuseofthistooloffervaluableinsightsintothewaysinwhichitcanbeintegratedintomorecoherentpedagogicalmodels.Someeducatorshaveuseditasanadditionalbroadcast,announcementordistributionavenueforsharingresources.Inasensethisisevidenceoftheuseofthetooltopromoteacontent‐orteacher‐centricapproach,nonethelessitdoesprovideamarkerforitsmoreextensiveandbroaderusewithincourses(Ramsden,2009).

Themostcommontypesofusesoftwitterineducationthathavebeenreportedthusfarinclude:• Useasabroadcastmedium.Opinionsharinganddistributionordispersalof

information,self‐promotionandcampaigning,publicrelationsandmarketing

32

• Opinionsharingaboutevents,sharingofideas,informationandcommentary• Backchannelsatconferencesorevents(audiencechannels,serendipity/typesofreview

andreflection)• Crowd‐sourcingofnewsandevidencefromtheground• Amechanismforsurveyingandgatheringopinions.

Althoughfewempiricallygroundedstudieshavebeendocumentedsofar,severalsmall‐scaleevaluativestudiesofferinterestinginsights.McNeill(2009)hascollatedaninterestingcohortofsuchstudies:

DrRankinhasusedTwitterasameansofencouraginggreaterstudentparticipationinlarge‐groupclassesofaround90students.Herintentionwastopullmorestudentsintoaclassdiscussionwhich[she]wouldn'tordinarilybeabletodowiththatmanypeople.(McNeil,2009:10).

Reflectionsfromthiscasesupportclaimsthat,inspiteoftheissueofitbeinganaddedbackground‘noise’andthatasaninterfaceitisnotreallyconducivetoconversationaluse,short,dyadicexchangesoccurwithmultipleparticipantsthatcanbesurprisinglycoherent(HoneycuttandHerring2009).AsMcNeill(2009:10)reports:

Tweetedcommentsandquestionsalsowentsomeway,accordingtothestudentsfeatured,inmilitatingagainstsomeofthefactorsthatinhibitstudentparticipationinlarge‐groupdiscussion,namely'feedbacklag',orthesuppressionofquestionsduetothepaceofthelecture,'studentapprehension',orthefearofspeakingduetothesizeorclimateoftheclassandthe'single‐speakerparadigm'orassumptionthatonlyoneperson(usuallythelecturer)speaks(Andersonetal.2003).

Twitterhasalsobeenusedtoenhancesocialpresence.AcasestudyfromtheUniversityofColoradoDenverfocusesontheuseofTwitterinamoduleonaninstructionaldesignandtechnologycourse(DunlapandLowenthal2009).TheauthorsencouragedtheirstudentstouseTwitterinavarietyofways:topostquestionsandqueriestooneanotherortothecourseteam,tosendstudent‐to‐studentdirectmessages,totweetcommentsonrelevantnewsevents,toshareresources,toreportsonconferencesattended,tolinktostudentblogpostingsandtoexchangepersonalinformation.TheauthorsclaimthattheuseofTwittercanenhancestudents'perceptionofasenseof'socialpresence',animportantqualitythathelpspromotestudentinvolvement,commitmentandretention.TheyconcludethatTwitterisgoodforsharing,collaboration,brainstorming,problemsolving,andcreatingwithinthecontextofmoment‐to‐momentexperiences(DunlapandLowenthal2009).ThiscasestudyillustratessomethingoftheflexibilityofTwittertoenablearangeofinteractionsfromprivatemessagesbetweenpeers,tolightweightTwitter‐basedtutorials,or'twittorials'thatengagethewholecohort.TheevaluationalsosupportsthesocialnetworkingdimensionofTwitter,withstudentsclearlycomfortablewiththevarietiesofinformationexchangeandtheheightenedperceptionofbelongingandofsocialconnectiontobothteachingstaffandfellowstudents.

BradshowreportsontheuseofTwitterinjournalismcourses(Bradshow,2008).Hedescribesthedifficultyofengagingstudentswhohavenotusedsocialmediabefore.PartofhisaspirationwastoexposestudentstoTwitterasameansofhelpingthemseetheimplicationsofnewtechnologiesforthejournalismprofession.Hearguesthatteachingstudentsaboutthetools,throughthetools,willhelpthemhaveabetterunderstandingofthebroaderimplicationsofthesetechnologiesforjournalism.

33

WhilstthereareevidentchallengessurroundingtheuseofTwitter,thereisalsobroadconsensusintheliteraturethatitcanfacilitatenewformsofengagementandgivestudentsaccesstoawideraudienceofparticipation.ThereisanecdotalevidencewhereuseofTwitterhasledtoincreasedmotivationamongststudentsandthereisagenuineexcitementformanyofitsincreasingpotentialineducation.However,oneimportantquestiontoconsideriswhethertheinterestinandrhetoricaroundTwitterisjustapassingfad.Whathappenswhenthenoveltyhaswornoff?DiscussionsonCloudworkssuggestthatthisisnotthecase.Infact,discussionssurroundingitsuseinacademiccontextsandwithintheHEcurriculasparkedoffseveraltimes,andcommentswereratherinsightful.The‘Usingtwitterwithstudents’cloudinCloudworks13aggregatedavarietyofcommentsandreferencesaroundtheuseofTwitterincoursesandtosupportdifferentformsoflearning.Someexamplesweregivenofembryonicexperimentationwiththetool.Anumberofpositiveeffectsforlearningwerecited,butlowlevelsofengagementwerealsoraisedasanissue.Therealsoappeartobeanumberofchallengesingettingawholeclassofactiveusers.Oneparticipantinthediscussionshasmixedviewsonitsvalue:

'Whilst twitter usage is high amongst the 'converted', I wonder how many actually use it withinlearningandteaching.Myusehasvariedquiteabit(seeblogposthttp://bit.ly/37ASy2),andIthinktherecouldbeconsiderablechallengesingettingawholeclassofactiveusers‐anythingelsewouldsurelyraisequestionsaroundequalityofexperiences'.

Otherchallengesraisedincludewhatconstitutesanappropriate‘styleofcommunication’inTwitter;issuesaroundhowitcanbeintegratedwithinaninstitutionalVLE,theextenttowhichitformspartofthestudent’sPLE,andtowhatdegreeitisformallyintegratedintolearningintentions.OneparticipantremarksonthewaysinwhichTwitterwasbeingusedtobuildcommunitiesandasanalternativesocialspace:

‘Ithinkabouthalftooktoit,thosethatdidn'thadtheusualreservations.WhatIthinkhasbeeninterestingisthatafewhavestayedactivebeyondthecourseandtwitterisamuchbetterwayofmaintainingthisnetworkthanhavingtocommittousingforumssay.It'salsoaverydemocratisingspace‐Ioftenforgetwhoarestudentsandwhoarepeers,whichIthinkisgreat.ForstudentsIthinkifweencouragedthemtogetgoingatthestartoftheirundergradstudies,thinkofthenetworktheywouldhaveestablishedbytheendoftheirstudies.Thisinitselfisavaluableoutcomeofadegree’.

Oneparticipantreflectsuponengagementinrelationtorecordingreflectionsanditsimpactonteachingpractice(monitoringandencouragingindividualstudents)andonlearningpractices:

‘Ithinkthebenefitsaretwo‐fold.Firstly,recorded,shortburstsofreflectionarebetterthannoreflectionatall.ItismyintentionthatthestudentswillutilisetheaggregatedTweflectionsasthebasisofalongerreflectiveessayattheendoftheunit.Secondly,Icanmonitorindividualstudentsandencouragethosewhoarenotparticipating.Icanalsoprovidesummativefeedbackwhereappropriate.’

AnotherparticipanttrialledtheuseofTwitterinmedia,culturalstudiesandEnglishliteraturecourses.Heaimedatexperimentingwithre‐enactmentsofShakespearean

13 http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2398

34

dialoguesandatengagingstudentsinidentifyinglinkswithpopularculture.Heexperiencedreluctanceandextremelylowlevelsofuptakeorenthusiasmbystudents:

‘Thismaychangebutit'sclearthatthestudents‐mediaandculturalstudiesandEng.LitandPopularculture‐aren'tperceivingtherelevanceoftheactivitiesandtechnologytotheirlearninginthesamewayastheirtutorsdo.’

Othercommentsinthiscloudandrelatedclouds(e.g.‘Twitterinacademia’‘isTwitterkillingblogging’,‘Twitterforteachingandlearning’)revolvearoundtoolstoarchiveTwitterconversations,andmechanismsforlinkingTwitterthreadsintospecificcourses.Alsotherearereflectionsabouteffectiveteachingpractices,andalternativemeansofencouragingusewithoutresortingtocoercion.Severalparticipantscommentthataggregatingshortburstsoftextandcapturingtheserendipityofthemomentisapowerfulfeatureofblogging.Otherscitedthevalueofmicro‐bloggingasamechanismforsharinginterestinglinksandreferences.

Thewayinwhichuncertaintiesontheuseofsuchtoolsisdealtwithdependslargelyonthewaysinwhichtheteacherintroducesandpromotesthetool.TeacherswhohavebeensuccessfulwiththeuseofthesetoolstendtobethosethatareactivelyusingTwittermorebroadlyaspartoftheirprofessionalpractice.ThisisacommonpatternofWeb2.0tools,i.e.thatreallythesetoolsneedtobeappropriatedandusedpro‐activelybeforetheycanbeincorporatedintoacoursedesignandusedinalearningcontext.Thisisadistinctshiftfromearliertechnologies,wherehowthetoolscouldbeusedwasmoreself‐evident.Forexample,personaluseofaninteractivecomputerpackagewasnotnecessarybeforeateachercouldmakeajudgmentaboutitsuseintheirteaching.ThedifferenceliesintheextenttowhichWeb2.0toolsareindeedusedfornetworking,sharingandsocialising;henceunderstandingwhatconstitutesproductivebehaviourinthesespacesissomethingonelearnsbydoing.

ParrydescribestheuseofTwitterinhisclassandidentifiesthefollowingaskeyfactorstoconsideratthelearningdesignstage(seeBriggs,2008):

• Createasenseofclassroomcommunity.• Familiarisestudentswithbothdisciplinaryandprofessionaldiscourses.• Conductjust‐in‐timecasestudiesandencouragethemtobereflexiveabouttheirown

communicativepractices,throughthesharingofideasandnegotiation.• Developasocialandubiquitouspresence:AsParrynotes,‘Ithinkpeopleendupbeinga

lotmorecomfortablewithclassroomdiscourseandgetasensethat[theinstructor]isn'tjustsomeonewhocomesinandtalksforanhourand30minutestwiceaweek.Ithastheverypositiveeffectofalteringtheclassroomstatetonotjustbecontainedbythefourwalls,andbymeetingtwiceaweek.’(citedinBriggs,2008:n.p.).

• Usingbackchannelstogenerateinstantfeedbackwithinlecturesisanotherfactorforpotentialsuccess.ThisisconsistentwithYardi(2008:145)whonotesthat:

Onlinebackchannelchatroomsofferthepotentialtotransformclassroomlearninginunexpectedandpowerfulways.However,thespecificwaysinwhichtheycaninfluenceteachingpedagogyandlearningopportunitiesarelesswellunderstood.Activitiesinabackchannelmayincludethedisseminationofideas,knowledgebuilding,askingandansweringquestions,engagingincriticaldiscourse,andsharinginformationandresources.

35

• Inbothclassroomsituationsandresearch‐ledteaching,usingsocialnetworkingandmicrobloggingtoconnecttotheepistemologyofdisciplinessuchasnewmediawithwritingorcriticalliteracyskillscanbefruitful:

We'realwaystryingtoteachstudents,especiallyinwriting,thatcontextdeterminesmeaning.AndbecauseTwitterhasveryrefinedrulesaboutwhatyoucando‐‐only140characters,forexample‐‐it'sdevelopeditsownsortofdiscursivegrammarset;thatcanserveasanexampleofhowrulescanbeproductiveforcommunicationandcanlimitcommunication.(ParrycitedinBriggs,2008:n.p.).

AnotherinterestingexampleoftheuseofTwitterasaconversationmediumforin‐classroomandpost‐lectureinteractionisdescribebyDrMonicaRankin,ahistorylecturerattheUniversityofTexasatDallas.HerpilotuseofTwitterisdocumentedinashortvideo,‘TheTwitterExperiment’,createdbyastudent14.

SocialnetworkingThereisagrowingbodyofevidenceontheuseofsocialnetworkingwithinhighereducationcurricula(seeforexample,EbnerandMaurer,2008;GrosseckandHolotescu,2008;Ebneretal.,2010;Ramsden,2009).Theseincludestudieslookingatarangeoflearningcontexts,includinginformalandprocessorientedlearning.

Theconversationalandcommunalqualitiesofsocialnetworkingservicesareconsideredbysometo‘mirrormuchofwhatweknowtobegoodmodelsoflearning,inthattheyarecollaborativeandencourageactiveparticipatoryroleforusers’(Maloney,2007:B26).Oneofthecorepromisesofsocialnetworkinganditsapplicationinformaleducationalcontextsliesinitssupportforinteractionbetweenlearners,forpeersupportintermsofthedevelopmentofsharedunderstandingsandmutualsupportanddiscussionspacestoaddressdilemmasabouttheirstudies(Madgeetal.,2009;Selwyn,2009).Anotherisitspotentialusetosupportthedevelopmentofteacherpractice,tohelpthemdevelopstrategiesforusingnewtechnologiestoaugment‘conventional’interactionsanddialoguewiththeirstudents.TheuseofSNSbyeducatorsintheirpedagogicpracticehasbeenreportedbyMason(2006),andMazer,Murphy,andSimonds(2007;2009).Moregenerallyitisabouttransferringthepracticesthatareevidentinwhatiscommonlyknownas'socialising'(informalknowledgebuilding,mutualpeersupport,discussionsonsharedinterests)toformaleducationalcontexts.

Selwyn(2009)exploredstudents'useofFacebooktosupporttheirformalstudies.Heusedanon‐participantvirtualethnographyapproach,drawingonGoffman'snotionsofself‐representationand'faceworking'toanalysethecommentsfromanumberofuniversitystudentsandcounsels:

Facebookappearstoprovideareadyspacewherethe'roleconflict'thatstudentsoftenexperienceintheirrelationshipswithuniversitywork,teachingstaff,academicconventionsandexpectationscanbeworkedthroughinarelativelyclosed'backstage'area'.[….]Itwasactingasareadyspaceforresistanceandthecontestationoftheasymmetricalpowerrelationshipbuiltintotheestablishedofflinepositionsofuniversity,studentandlecturer(BourdieuandPasseron1977).Thiswasperhapsmostclearlyevidentintheplayfulandoftenironicrejectionofdominantuniversitydiscoursesthroughouttheposts,

14TheTwitterExperiment:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WPVWDkF7U8

36

withthestudentscertainlynotconfirmingtothepassiveandsilencedundergraduaterolesoftheseminarroomorlecturetheatre.(2009:170‐1)

Fitzgerald,Steeleetal.(2009)reportontheDigitalLearningCommunitiesprojectfundedbytheAustralianLearningandTeachingCouncil.Theyfocusedontheroleofsocialsoftwareandnetworkinginthreeuniversities.Asetofsevenpilotcoursesusingreflexiveblogging,wikis,folksonomies,collectivetaggingandmediasharingandaspecializedsocialnetworkingsiteforanimation(MyToons)wereevaluated.Twointerimsurveyswereconductedtocorrelateresultsfromtheevaluativepilotstowiderattitudesandvaluestowardsandcomparativeculturesonsharingandnetworking.ThestudiesrevealedthatstaffmotivationforexperimentationwithWeb2.0washigherintheseprojectsthanisnormallyfound,becauseitwasmorecloselytiedtoresearchandscholarlyagendas.ThepilotsincludedacohortofcoursesinNewmediaandInformationsystems,andacourseinAppliedEcology.Theintegrationofsocialmediawithinthecurriculumwasdeployedinordertoadvancefutureprofessionalpractice,andmorespecifically,toequipstudentswithindustry‐ready,creativeandcriticalliteracyskills.Educatorsintheinformationsystemsandmedia‐relatedcoursesdesignedthecurriculumpurposefullyandwitharangeofactivitiesusingparticularWeb2.0technologiessothattheywouldintroducingstudentstoauthenticandhands‐onissuesofcopyrightandmediapracticewhileinvitingself‐representationandcreativityaswritersandmediapractitioners.

TheiCampprojectisanexampleofaprojectthatisattemptingtouseWeb2.0technologiesinacross‐bordercollaborativeproblem‐basedlearningproject.Inthefirsttrialgraduateandpost‐graduatestudentsfromfourdifferentpartneruniversitiesinTurkey,Poland,EstoniaandLituaniaparticipated.Eightcross‐culturalgroupsoffourorfivestudentswereformed.TheiCampeducationalinterventionmodelisdesignedtosupportcompetencedevelopmentinself‐organisedintentionallearningprojectsindigitallymediatedenvironments.Theprojectsusedarichsetoftoolsincludingsharedworkspaces,InstantMessaging,videoconferencing,acontentrepositoryandane‐portfoliotool(forafullsetofinterventionsandseeKieslinger,2009).Theresearchteamadoptedadesign‐basedresearchapproach,withastrongfocusondesigningcoursesforreallifetrials,gettingfeedbackfrompractitionersandfeedingthisknowledgeintoadvancedpedagogicalconceptsandnewtechnologicaldevelopments.Althoughanumberofchallengeswerecitedregardingculturalvariationinteachingandlearningstyles,thebenefitstheenvironmentprovidedintermsoffacilitatingengagementacrossculturalcontextswasdeemedtoenhanceinnovativeteachingandlearningpractices.Thefindingsfromtheprojecthighlightedthebenefitsofexperientialapproachesandpeerlearningandthewaysinwhichtechnologiescouldbeusedtosupportthese.

Väljataga(2009),describinganonlinecoursefromanEstonianuniversitythatparticipatedintheiCampproject,reportedthatthefacilitatorsgainedalotbybeinginvolved,includinganunderstandingofthebenefitsofsocialmediatoolsandserviceswithintheirteachingpractices.Theexperiencehighlightedtherecognitionthattherewasaneedforadifferenttypeofroleintheseenvironments,onethatsimulatesmentoringratherthantop‐downteachingapproaches.InthesecondiCamptrial(involvingfacultyandstudentsinthefourinstitutions),LawandNguyen‐Ngoc(2008)demonstratethatalthoughthecollaborativelearningenvironmentcansupportself‐directedlearningforsomestudents,otherstudents

37

mayactuallybecomemarginalised.Criticalsuccessfactorsincludepayingattentiontothestudents’intrinsicmotivationandputtinginplacemechanismstolowertheirinitialanxietyaboutthelearningsituations.Suchclearpedagogicalprofilesandrepresentationallearningdesignsareneededattheoutset.

ImmersiveenvironmentsandvirtualworldsAlthoughstillaperipheralactivity,virtualworldsareincreasinglybeingusedinhighereducation.Over250HEinstitutionsworldwidearenowteachingusingSecondLife,oneofthemostpopularVirtualWorlds.Such3‐Dworldsaresuitedtomirroringrealpracticeandenablethesettingupofauthenticandscenario‐basedlearningcontexts.Environmentsthatmimicreal‐lifesettingscanbecreated,suchasanArchaeologicaldigoraMedicalward.Theseenvironmentscanbeusedasthebasisforproblem‐basedlearningactivities(forexamplegettinglearnerstoinvestigatearchaeologicalartefactsfoundonadigsiteorgettingthemtoparticipateinaroleplayactivitydealingwithamedicalemergencyonaward).Theavatarswithintheseworldscanassumedifferentidentitiesandroles.TheyhavealsobeenusedinArts,topresentvirtualArtexhibitionsorpoetryreadings.RunningthesekindsofeventsinSecondLifemeansthattheinvitationtoparticipateorobservecangobeyondtheclassroomstudents,enablinginternationalexpertsinthefieldtocritiquethestudents’work.Theseenvironmentshavealsobeenusedtosupportprofessionaldevelopmentactivities,throughtheestablishmentofspecialisedislandsandtherunningofvirtualeventstofosterdiscussionandsharing.

OneofthereasonswhySecondLifeissopopularisthatitisarelativelystable,accessibleandinexpensive.Inaddition,thefactthatasignificantnumberofinstitutionshavenowsetupspacesinSecondLifemeansthereisacriticalmassofothereducatorsandlearnerstointeractwith.Thespacecanbeusedinavarietyofways,sothatitispossibletobuildbothsimulationsormimicspecificreal‐lifeprocesses(forexamplegeographical,biological,health,legal)orahabitat(seeCarr,2009;JISC,2009a).AcomprehensivecollectionofcommentsandinsightsfromdifferentUKeducatorsispresentedinseriesof‘snapshots’preparedbyKirriemuir(2008).SecondLifeisnotwithoutitschallenges.Therearetechnicalproblemsandissuesarounddevelopingtheappropriatesetofskillsneededtointeractinthespace.Alsodespitesomegoodexamplesofuseofthespaceforlearning,whichharnesstheuniqueaffordancesofthetechnologicalenvironment,therearemanyexamplesofbadteachingpractice;forexamplethemechanisticreplicationofPowerpointpresentationsintheserich3D‐spacesis,arguably,notusingthemtotheirfullpotential.Learnershavemixedviewsaboutthevaluesuchspacesoffer,manyinparticularareconcernedabouthowtimeconsuminginteractinginvirtualworldscanbe.Institutionsarealsoconcernedaboutwhatpoliciesneedtobeinplacearoundtheuseofsuchenvironments.Towhatdegreeshouldinstitutionallyownedspacesbepolicedorprotected?Kirriemuir’sreporthoweverdoesalsoindicateanumberofpositivereflectionsfromteachersaboutusingSecondLife(seealsoWhite,2009):

• Theimportanceofbeingcreativeandthinkingdifferently.Usingthespacetopromotediscussion,demonstrationandactiveco‐creationofartefacts,ratherthanreplicatingface‐to‐facelecturing.

38

• Theneedtotakeadvantageoftheuniquepropertiesofthespace,enablingpeopletohaveexperiencesthattheymightnototherwisebeabletohaveorprovidingamechanismforthemtoconnectwithandinteractwithpeopletheymightnototherwisehavemet.

• Teachersneedtoadjusttheirthinkingwithintheseenvironments.Thelocusofcontrolisnolongerwiththemandthereisanevidentblurringofboundaries.Teachersneedtobecomfortablewiththisshiftandthinkabouthowtouseittobesteffect.

• ThebestuseofSecondLifeisnottoreplicatethedynamicsoftheclassroom,butrathertoinnovatewithnewwaysofteachingandattempttopassovertheactivityoflearningtoourstudents.

• SecondLifeappearstobeparticularlygoodforanumberofconstructivistpedagogies–suchasdiscoverylearning,learningthroughtrialanderror,problem‐basedlearning,scenario‐basedlearningandauthenticlearning.

• SecondLifeisalsoideallysuitedtosupportingplayfullearning

ApioneeringexampleofSecondLifebeingusedinlegaleducationis'CyberOne:Lawinthecourtofpublicopinion',amoduleofferedatHarvardLawSchoolduring2006.15AspartofthemoduleamocktrialwasheldonBerkmanIsland,theSecondLifepresenceofHarvard'sBerkmanCenterforInternetandSociety.Similarly,theGlasgowGraduateSchoolofLaw(GGSL)attheUniversityofStrathclydesetupthevirtualtownofArdcalloch,withtheobjectivetofacilitatethetransitionfromacademiclawstudiestovocationallegalpracticeinScotland.ItallowslearnerstotakeuptheroleoflegalpractitionersoperatinginArdcalloch,supportedbydatabasesoflegaldocumentsandtemplates,forumsfordiscussionwithpractitionersastutors,videocourselecturesandotheradditionalmultimediatools.Initiallystudentshadsomeconcernswiththedeparturefromtheconventionalmethodsofteachingandlearning.However,studentfeedbackismostlypositive,indicatingthatstudentsappreciatethetools'valueinsupporting‘transactionallearning’oractionlearning.Thus,immersioncanbeusedasabasisfor3D‐realworldsimulationsthatassistinintegratingscientificpracticeintotheoreticalandvocationaltraining(ChittaroandRanon,2007).

BrombyandJones(2009)describetheirexperienceofusingSecondLifeinlegaleducation.OneissueforthemwashowstudentswouldreacttotheimmersiveenvironmentinSecondLifeandhowthismightimpactonlearning.McCallumetal.(2009)designedamoduleforthedevelopmentofnon‐technicalskillssuchasdecision‐makinginnursingeducationatGlasgowCaledonianSchoolofHealth,usingascenario‐basedlearningactivity.Althoughonlyasmallnumberofstudentscompletedthestudy,itrevealsthatbothstudentsandstaffwerereflectiveaboutoutcomesandsimulatoryexperienceofparticipatinginSecondLife.Theextenttowhichlearnersandteachersarealreadyfamiliarwiththesekindofgameplayinganddecision‐makingactivitiesthroughrealsituationsandgamingworldsisimportantandhasanimpactontheirperceptionsandtheperceivedvalueofthesekindsofscenarios.Teachingstylesandthekindsofsupportofferedneedtobedifferentinthesecontext,sosupportforparticipationisimportant,asisunderstandingtheimmediacyand

15 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/cyberone/

39

immersivenatureoftheenvironment.Bothteachersandlearnersneedsupportindevelopingconfidenceintermsofparticipatingwithintheseworldsandintermsofestablishingpatternsofpeersupport.

ResearchersattheLondonKnowledgeLabhavetaughtclassesinSecondLifeonvarioustopics,includingInternetresearchethicsandvirtualworldresearch.Distancelearnerswerefoundtobeverypositiveaboutthereal‐time,socialaspectsofthesessions.ThefacilitatorsalsofoundthattheobviouslyconstructednatureofSecondLiferenderedsessiondesignvisibletostudents,whoproceededtoquestionandreflectonteachingpractices.Themovetoavirtualworldwasfoundtoupsetsomeparticipants’preconceptionsofonlinepopulations,aswellastheirassumptionsabouttherelationshipbetweena‘researcher’andthe‘researched’.AsCarr(2009)reportsthesekindsofambiguitiesanddisruptionscanbehighlyproductive.However,judginganyaffectiveaspectsofthestudentexperienceinrealtimeinSecondLifecanbedifficult:

SecondLifesessionscanbeintenseandpotentiallyconfusingexperiencesforparticipantswhoareunfamiliarwithonlineworlds.Somestudentsmaystrugglewiththeinterfaceorwithcommunications,whetherbytextorvoice.StudentswhohaveplayedonlinegamesmaybedisappointedbythegraphicsandtherelativeemptinessofSecondLife.Whilevirtualworldsmayinviteexperimentalpedagogy,students’familiaritywiththeinterfaceandin‐worldsocialpracticesstillneedtobeconsidered,asdotheirexpectationsofwhatconstituteslearningandteaching(Carr,2009:15).

Thereisaparadoxaroundtheseenvironments.Ontheonehand,suchimmersiveenvironmentscanbehighlymotivating,offeringalternative,authenticlearningcontexts.Ontheotherhandthereareanumberofsignificantculturalandperceptualbarriers:issuesaroundidentitiesandrolesinthesespaces,thelackofcontrolorstructure,andadangerofreplicatingrealworldstereotypesandprejudicesinthevirtualspace.Therearealsoforsomenegativeperceptionsaroundtheblurringofboundarieswithinthesespaces.Somefindsuchinteractionsinfantile,superficialorindeeddismissive(Childs,2008)resultinginadangerofcreatingadigitaldisconnect.

Clearlyalotmoreempiricalresearchisneededtounderstandfullyhowthesespacescanbeusedforlearningpurposes,andwhatkindsoflearningdesignsareneededtoensureeffectiveuse.Researchonthepatternsofsocialinteractionwithinthesespacesisslowlyemerging,givingusabetterunderstandingofhowindividualsarebehavingandinteractinginthesespaces.Thereareanumberofactivewikis,mailinglistsandblogsdiscussingtheuseofvirtualworldsineducation,howevermuchreportingremainsexploratoryinrelationtoteachingandthechangingofteachingexperience.

AspecificexamplethatisworthmentioningistheresourceforteachersusingSecondLifesetupbytheNewMediaConsortium16.Asdescribedabove,SecondLifelendsitselftoconstructivistpedagogiesandthereisaneedtoappropriatetheextensivebodyofliteraturethatexistsonsociallearning,playfullearning,theuseofdrama,roleplaysandsimulations,learningbydoingandpracticalexperimentationandworkontheformationofcommunitiesofpractice.Virtualworldsalsopresenteducatorswithanopportunitytorevisitquestionsof‘presence’,‘identity’and‘immersion’.Againmuchcouldbegainedbyrevisitingearlier16http://sl.nmc.org/category/teachers‐buzz/

40

researchon‘virtualreality’studies.Althoughdrawingonthisolderandbroadereducationalresearchworkisimportant,itisalsoimportanttorecognisethatthesenewenvironmentsalsochallengeexistingconceptsandtheoriesandindeedthesemightneedtobealteredwhenappliedtovirtualworlds.AsCarr(2009)notesitisalreadypossibletopointtogapsintheliteratureandsuggestthefollowingasareasforfutureresearchinthisfield:i)explorationofnewapproachestopedagogyandcurriculardesign,ii)betterunderstandingofthefactorsinvolvedinsupportingsociallearninginthesespaces,iii)identificationofviablealternativestoSecondLife,iv)addressingqualityandaccessissuesinrelationtodisabilityorbroadband,forexample,andv)identificationofwhatinstitutionalpolicywillneedtobeputinplace.

SummingupThecontextualexamplesdescribedintheprevioussectionillustratethewaysinwhichWeb2.0toolsarebeingusedinspecificcontexts.Thesereinforcethegeneralconsensusthatthesetechnologiesprovidenewandexcitingopportunitiesforeducation,providingstudentswithnewwaystointeractwithmaterialsandwithothers.Inparticularthereappearstobeagoodmatchbetweenwhatisconsideredtobe‘goodpedagogy’andthegeneralpropertiesofthesevarioustools.Table2demonstrateshowsomeoftheexamplesdiscussedheremaptodifferenttypesoflearningandteachingapproaches.Thetableshowshowthereisalsoamatchintermsofmechanismforsupportingteacherpractice,intermsoffacilitatingascholarly,reflectiveapproachandmechanismsforsharingandcritiquingpractice

Table2:ExamplesoftheuseofWeb2.0toolsindifferentcontexts

Typesoflearningandteachingpractices

Web2.0toolandapproaches Examples

Personallearning Theabilitytoadapt,customiseandpersonalise,useofRSSfeeds,mashupsandAPIs.

TheDigitalLearningCommunitiesproject

Situatedlearning,experientiallearning,problem‐basedlearning,scenario‐basedlearning,roleplay

Useoflocationawarefunctionality,immersive3D‐worlds.Useofsearchenginesandotheronlineresourcesassourcesofevidence,connectionwithpeersandexpertsviasocialnetworkingtools.Scenario‐basedandauthentictasksinvirtualworlds,applicationofgamingtechnologiesforeducationalpurposes

TheiCampproject,UseofSecondLifetosupportdifferentdisciplines(Kirriemuir).Cyberonelawrole‐play.

Inquirylearning,Resource‐basedlearning

Toolstosupportuser‐generatedcontentandfacilitatingeasilysharinganddiscussingthese.Theseincludemediarepositories(Flckr,YouTube,SlideShare),socialbookmarkingsites(Delicious),digitalrepositoriesandtoolsforcontentcreation.Useofsearchengines,participationindistributed,virtualcommunities,Useoffolksonomicesand

TheOpenEducationalResourcemovementandassociatedtoolsandrepositories.

WikiversityandWikieducator.

41

socialbookmarkingasmechanismsforfindingandorganizingresources.

Reflectiveanddialogiclearning,peerlearning

Toolsforfosteringpeerreflectionsuchasblogsande‐portfolios.Commentingonotherstudents’blogposts,co‐creationoflearningartefactsinwikis.

Digitallearningcommunities,Peer‐to‐peermentoringframework(McLoughlinetal.)

CommunitiesofPractice

Useofsocialnetworkingtoolstoparticipateincommunitiesoflearningand/oreducators.

ApplicationoftoolssuchasFacebook,NingandElggtosupportinformalsocialinteractionsbetweenstudentsorasspacesforreflectiononprofessionalpracticearoundasharedinterest(eg.TheElesigcommunityinNing)

Scholarlypracticeandthesharingofdesignsandgoodpractice

UseofWeb2.0toolstoparticipateinadistributednetworkofeducatorsandresearchers.Useofblogsandwikistoco‐createknowledgeandunderstandingandtocritiquepractice.TheuseofblogsandTwittertoshareprofessionalpractice

Edublogs,LeMills

ConclusionsAsthisreporthasindicated,Web2.0toolsoffercharacteristicsthathaveclearpotentialinaneducationalcontexttosupportarangeofpedagogicalapproaches.ThereportdescribesillustrativeempiricalaccountsthatdemonstratethewaysinwhichWeb2.0technologieshaveindeedbeenusedtosupportinnovativeapproachestosupportingandfacilitatinglearning.However,anumberofchallengesremainintermsofgettinggreateradoptionofthesetoolsineducation.AlthoughnationalvariationsregardingthedeploymentandpervasivenessofWeb2.0exist,severalcommonthemesemerge:

• ThekeytheoreticalandpolicyunderpinningsforusingWeb2.0methodsandtoolsinhighereducation.Technologicalinnovationandparticipatorylearningculturescanonlybeimplementedeffectivelyinhighereducationiftheyaresupportedbyappropriatenationalpolicies.Theseneedtoensurethatinstitutionalstructuresareinplacetotakeadvantageofthesenewtechnologies,butalsolinktoawidervisionofinnovationinacademicinstitutions.WhileadoptionofWeb2.0inteachingandlearningisgrowingintheHEsector,theneedtoaddresstheseissuesinasystematicwayisparamount(e.g.JISC,2009;OECD,2009). Web2.0toolsprovidenewopportunitiesforlearning,whichcomplementsthegeneralshiftawayfromdidactictoconstructivistapproachesthatdominatescurrentdiscourseoneducation.Firstly,theyhavethepotentialtoprovidenewformsofimmersionthroughforexample3D‐environmentslikeSecondLife.Secondly,theyofferarangeofnewwaysinwhichknowledgecanberepresented,discussedandshared.Thirdly,theyofferarangeofwaysinwhichcollaborativelearningactivitiescanbesupported.Fourthly,theysupportreflectivepracticeandmechanismsforpeercritiquing.However,thereisalsoahostofassociated

42

challengeswithtryingtoembedsuchpracticesininstitutionalsystems.PromotingWeb2.0approacheschallengestraditionalformsofassessmentandcurrentvalidationmechanisms.Weaddressthesequestionsinrelationtoexistingevidenceregardingdriversforadoptioninhighereducationatinternationalandinstitutionallevels.

• Teachersandlearners;teachingversuslearning.Thereisnowasignificantbodyofresearchonlearnerexperiencesandtheiruseoftechnologies.Whatisevidentisthatlearnersandteachersarenothomogeneous.Inaddition,thereisagapbetweentheexpectations/promiseoftheuseoftechnologiesandtheactualexperiencesanduses.Thedigitaldivideisstillevident;withinthestudentbody,butalsobetweentutorsandlearners.Aswenotedearlier,theexpansivelearningdomainchallengestraditionalteachingpractices,yetevidencealsosuggeststhatexpertguidanceisrequired(JISC,2009;IpsosMori,2008;OECD,2009)andthatamoreexplicit,learningdesignbasedapproachtothecreationofcoursesisneeded.Thisraisesasetoffundamentalquestions.Whataretheimplicationsofshiftingfromthenotionofteacherasinstructortoteacherasfacilitator?Whatarethebarriersforlowlevelsofexperimentation?Whatinstitutionalinfrastructuresandsupportmechanismswillberequiredtoshifttogreateruseoftechnology?Moreimportantly,whatarethewaysinwhichnewtechnologiescanenhancetheprocessofresearchintoteachingandasresult,teachingmethodologiesandstrategies?

• Skills,media,informationandnetworkedliteracies.Newliteraciesareneededtomakesenseofandtoparticipatewiththesenewtechnologies.Yet,despitewidespreadagreementabouttheimpotranceofdigitalliteracies,integrationoftrainingprogrammesinthefieldofhighereducationremainsscant.Whileacademictutorsneedtoensuretechnicalproficiency,reflectiononapproachestoteachingandlearning,e‐pedagogy(learningwithand/orthroughtechnology)isalsoparamount. Multi‐located/fragmentedcontentandthepotentialformultiplepathwaysthroughcontenthaveanimpactonhoweducationalinterventionsaredesigned.Andalthoughsuchmultiplicityoffersincreasedchoiceinaneducationalcontext,thisalsohasthepotentialtoleadtoconfusion.Howfamiliararelearnersandeducationpractitionerswiththetoolsofeditingandblendingdigitalmaterial?Whatarethenovelperceptionsofcreativityandoriginality?Whatisthescaleoftheresponsibilitiesthatthenuancesofliteracybringstoeducators?Istherearepresentationofthewiderliteraciesininstitutionsandintheprojectstheypursue?

• Theneedforabetterconnectionbetweenresearch,policyandpractice.ThereisnowasignificantbodyofresearchexploringtechnologiesandhowtheycanbeusedtosupportallaspectsofHigherEducationpractice–learningandteaching,research,andadministration.E‐scienceande‐socialscienceresearchisgivingfascinatinginsightsintoexploitationoflarge,distributedresearchdatasetsandmorerecentlyintotheuseofcloudcomputing.Opennessisbecomingatrend,bothintermsoftheproductionandsharingofeducationalmaterials,aswellasmakingresearchpublications(andevenresearchdata)freelyavailable.However,asConole(forthcoming)hasargued,thisresearchisneitherfeedingproperlyintopoliciesontheuseoftechnology,norisitimpactingonactualteachingpractice.

• Thechallengesoftryingtochangeembeddedpracticeandculture.DespiteincreasingevidenceonthebenefitsofWeb2.0insupportingconstructivistandsituativelearningapproaches,asthisreportreviews,thechallengeoftranslatingthis

43

acrossthehighereducationsectorremains.Thereasonsarecomplexandmultifold:educationalrulesandrestrictionsindifferentcountries,access,technicalresources,ICTliteracy,teachingcapacity,andteachingculturesarewidelycited(e.g.OECD/Pedro,2009;Redecker,2009).Onekeyissueisconcernedwithculturalissues,teachers'beliefsystemsandtheirdaytodaypractice.Teacherpracticeisstillpredominatelybuiltaroundanotionofteacherasexpertandstudentasrecipient.Despitetheshiftineducationalthinkingtowardsmoreconstructivistandsituativelearningapproaches,behavouristanddidacticdiscoursesarestillevident.Teachersdrawonpastexperienceratherthanactualempiricalevidenceandresearchliterature.Despitethebenefitsandneedformorescholarlyactivities,thereislittleevidencethatthisactuallyoccurs.Arguablythereisaneedtoshifttomorescholarlyapproachesifthepotentialoftechnologiesistoberealised.Thevisionisoneinwhicheducatorsareco‐innovatorsinunderstandingthekeypossibilitiesintherelationshipbetweentechnologyandpedagogy,leadingtowardsaco‐evolvedprofessionalknowledgebasethatstemsfromreflectivepracticesthataremediatedandshared;apracticethatfeedsintothedevelopmentofcurriculardesignsthatcanactualiseeducationalvisions(seeZhang,2009:278).

WhilethereissignificantrhetoricaboutthepotentialofWeb2.0technologiesforhighereducation,theevidenceofactualandsituatedpracticesontheeffectiveuseofWeb2.0inthesectorisfragmented.Empiricalevidenceisslowlyemergingtosupportthenotionthatstudents’useoftechnologyanddigitalmediahasimplicationsforthewaytheylearn,aswellastheirbroadersocialvaluesandlifestyles.Thisalsolinkstotheirperceptionofhowtheywilllearninahighereducationcontextandhowtechnologieswillbeusedtofacilitatethis.Benefitsareoftenviewedinrelationtoaddedconvenience,perceivedautonomyandincreasedproductivitygainsinacademicwork.Althoughnetworkingandtheespousalofdiversityareseenaskeycomponentsfororganizationalandpedagogicalinnovation,lessevidenceexistsofthewaysinwhichdigitalnetworkedtechnologiesaresociallyshaped.However,thelandscapeoflearningemergingfromideasaboutsocialproduction(seeEngeström,2007)hasaffectedteachingscholarshipandmethodologies.DespitetheincreasinglevelsofuptakeintheUKandOECDcountries,thedisjuncturebetweenWeb2.0technologiesandcurrenteducationalsystemsorteachingpracticespersists;thisleadstopeoplereplicating–toalargeextent–face‐to‐facepracticesinanonlinecontext.Thequestionthenremains:howcanadvancesinthelearningsciencesandemergingresearchineducationaltechnologybeincorporatedwhenauthoringcurriculum,assessmentandresourcestoappropriatelyscaffoldlearningprocesses?

Toconclude,effectiveuseofnewtechnologiesrequiresaradicalrethinkofthecorelearningandteachingdesignprocess;ashiftfromdesignasaninternalised,implicitandindividuallycraftedprocesstoonethatisexternalised,explicitandshareablewithothers.Changeinpracticemayindeedinvolvetheuseofrevisedmaterials,newteachingstrategiesandbeliefs–allinrelationto‘educationalinnovation’(Conole,2010).Zhang(2009:277)alsounderscoresthispoint.Henotesthatsustainedinnovationanddeepreformineducationrequiresthedevelopmentofinnovativecommunitiesofeducators,whiledevelopinginparallelaneducationalresearchcyberinfrastructurethatcanbeharnessedtosupportprofessionalscholarshipandpractice.Heconsidersthisasfacilitatingthree

44

aspects:a)thesharingofexperiencesandcontinuallearning;b)deliberateinvestigationandreflection;c)collaboratinginthedevelopmentofresearch‐basedscholarshipandco‐createddesigns,instructionalapproachesorlearningopportunitiesforstudents(seealsoGreenhowetal.,2009b).

Ouraiminthisreviewwastodrawontheexistingbodyofliteraturefromtheinternationalterrain;itsynthesisessomeempiricalevidenceonthepatternsofuseofWeb2.0toolsandsocialmediainhighereducationandstructuresfindingsinthemesrelevanttocommunitiesofeducators.Althoughevidenceexistsregardingthebenefitsininformallearningenvironments,andwithinadministrativecontexts,resultsfromlongitudinalstudiesshowingthedepthofchangeinpedagogicalpracticeineithertertiaryorpost‐tertiaryeducationareeitherscarceorfarfromconsensual.Andwhileanemergingbodyofliteraturefocusesonexperiencesoflearners,structuredevidenceregardingtheissuessurroundingintegrationinformaleducation,suchasthoseoutlinedaboveisslowlyemerging.

Thefocusofthe‘PearlsintheClouds’projectistoexploretowhatextentWeb2.0toolsmightbeusedtopromoteandsupportevidence‐basedapproachesinlearningandteaching.ThisreviewhasprovidedadetailedaccountofthenatureofWeb2.0toolsandexamplesofhowtheyarebeingtosupportlearningandteaching.Asdiscussedelsewhereinthisreporttheboundariesbetweentraditionalroles(teacherandlearner)andfunctions(teachingandlearning)areblurring.‘Teachers’needtobelearnersinordertomakesenseofandtakeaccountofnewtechnologiesintheirpractices.Adoptinganevidence‐basedapproach,throughscholarlypracticeandreflectionharnessingthepowerfulaffordancesofthetechnologiesthemselvesseemsalogicalmeansofachievingthis.Thein‐depthcasestudiesthatfollowwithinthisprojectwillprovidemorespecificevidenceoftheextenttowhichthisistrue.

AcknowledgementsWearegratefultotheHigherEducationAcademyforfundingtosupportthiswork.ThisworksitsalongsideanexistingbodyofresearchwithintheOpenUniversity,notablytheOULearningDesignInitiativeandOLnet.

45

Appendices:FurtherissuesrelatingtotheadoptionofWeb2.0inHE:detailsfromtheresearchfield

46

Appendix1:AnopenapproachtoliteraturereviewsusingCloudworksInadditiontothestandardstrategiesfordoingaliteraturereview,weoptedtotakean‘open’approachtothereview.ThisinvolvedpostingourresearchquestionsontheCloudworkssiteandusingitasabasistoaggregaterelevantresourcesandactasaspacetopromotewiderdiscussion.

Wealsosawevidenceofcross‐communicationbetweenCloudworksandothertools.Inparticular,thereseemstobeacomplementaryuseofTwitterasameansofshortdisseminationorcommunication,withthisthenspillingoverintoCloudworksasacollectivespacefordiscussionandaggregationandthenontoindividualspacesforpersonalreflectiononthetopicsbeingconsidered.Anumberoftypesofparticipationwereevident.Theresearchteamplayedanumberofroles,primarilypointingtoinitiationoftopics,facilitationofdiscussion,andsummarisingatkeypoints.SomeCloudworksusersconcentratedmainlyonparticipatinginthediscussionsassociatedwitheachcloud,whereasothersfocusedonaddingrelevantlinksandreferences.Somewereclearlyinterestedinfollowingastheyweredoingrelatedactivitiesandcouldthereforepointtothisotherworkorcopyaspectsofthecloudscapeintotheirownspaces.InadditiontoactiveparticipantsthestatisticsshowthattheCloudsintheCloudscapewereactivelybeingviewedbyasignificantnumberofpeople.Asof20May2010theliteraturereviewCloudalonehasgenerate1050uniqueviews;ManyoftheCloudswithintheCloudscapehaveappearedconsistentlywithinthetoptenmostactiveCloudslistonthehomepage.Therehasbeenasenseinthesecommentsofsharedownershipwithinthereview.Participantsdescribedhowthisworkrelatedtotheirowninterestsandexperiencesandaddedrelevantlinkstosupportthis.

Thereissomeevidencethat–overtime‐thisspaceenabledaspectrumofdialogicalpracticestobeharnessed;sharingreflections,practicesandscholarlyresources.Cloudworksofferedaspecialisedsocialnetworkingspace,toenablescholarlydiscoursearoundlearningandteachingpracticestooccur.

47

Appendix2:AtypologyofWeb2.0tools

MediasharingMediasharinghasbecomeanimportantexampleofWeb2.0practicethathasemergedinthelastfiveyearsorso.UserscandownloadanduploadavarietyofdifferenttypesofmediaobjectstotheInternet.Forexamplemusicfanshavebeenquicktousecentralisedwebsitesasameansofswappingdigitalfilesoftheirmusiccollections.Thepracticeofmusic‐sharinghastendedonthewholetobeonusers'copyingcommercialmaterial(oftenillegally).Incontrastphoto‐sharing(viasitessuchasFlickr)andartwork(forexampledeviantart)tendstoinvolveuser‐generatedcontent.Video‐sharing(viasiteslikeYouTube)tendstobeacombinationofboth,i.e.amixtureoforiginalorre‐appropriatedfilm/TVandhomemadeclips.AspecificlearningandteachingexampleistheeducationgrouponYouTube‘Reteachers’and'TeacherTube'.EducationalmediaofvideoandpresentationsarealsosharedinZentation.AcademiclecturesandconferencepresentationsareoftenhostedinspecialisedsitessuchasAcademicEarthandVideoLectures.net.TheseprovideaccesstovideoOERandaimtoengageusersusingsocialnetworkingandratingtools.Personalisedversionsalsoexistforindividualbroadcasting(Castpost).Othervisualmediathatarepopularforsharingincludeslideshowpresentations(viaSlideshare)andsketches(viaSketchfu).Sitesalsoexisttopackageandpresentthevariousshareablemediacreationsofindividuals(forexampleLoudblog).Manyofthesesitesnowincorporatemechanismsforpeerratingandcommentaryfromusers.

http://www.flickr.com

http://www.youtube.com

http://youtube.com/group/reteachers

http://www.teachertube.com/

http://videolectures.net/

http://academicearth.org/

http://www.castpost.com

http://www.slideshare.net

http://sketchfu.com

http://www.loudblog.com

Mediamanipulationandmash‐upsMediaenabledweb‐basedtoolstoproduceandrefinethefilestobeshared.Forexample,webtoolsareavailableforeditingphotographs(Splashup,Fotoflexer).Othertoolsfacilitatethecreationandsharingofcomicstrips(Toondoo),simpleanimationofimagesforwebpages(Gifup)orthecreationofpersonalwebpages(Protopage).Similareditingcanbeappliedtosoundfiles(Soundjunction).Imagesandvideoclipscanbeannotatedwithsoundorwithvisualnotes(Voicethread).Collectionsofimagescanbeconstructedintosequentialvideoclipswithmusic(Animoto)orbroadcastasTV‐stylevideo(MakeInternettv).Moreelaboratemixingofvisualdigitalmaterialintomontagesor'mashups'isalsopossible(Popfly).Sectionsofwebpagesthemselvescanbeselectedandpastedintosuchmontages(Kwout).

Servicesexistforcreatingandsharingdiagrams(Gliffy)andpresentationtoolsthatallowintegrationandinteroperabilitywithinabrowser(Thumbstacks).Sectionsof

48

webpagescanbeextractedandfashionedintoanewwebrepresentation(Yoono).Suchcloningofresourcesenablesthecreationofeducationalmashups.Locationscanalsobeindicatedso,forexample,itispossibletolinkliteraturetolocations(Googlelittrips).Datacanalsobeaddedtomapstogivecoordinateposition(Frappr).

Typicallymashupshavebeenaboutdatavisualisation,suchasoverlayinggeo‐taggedphotosononlinemaps.However,themashupconceptmaymoveintothebusinessapplicationspace,allowingrapiddevelopmentandintegrationofapplications.Mashupsneedsometechnicalskilltocreateandtendtorelyonopenapplicationprogramminginterfaces(APIs).ToolssuchasMicrosoft’sPopfly,Google’smashupengineandYahooPipeshavemadetheprocessmorestraightforward.

http://www.splashup.com

http://fotoflexer.com

http://www.toondoo.com

http://gifup.com

http://protopage.com

http://www.soundjunction.org

http://www.ccmixter.org

http://voicethread.com

http://animoto.com

http://makeInternettv.org

http://www.gliffy.com

http://www.thumbstacks.com

http://www.yoono.com

http://www.googlelittrips.com

http://www.frappr.com

http://www.popfly.com

http://code.google.com/gme

http://pipes.yahoo.com/pipes

InstantMessaging,chatandconversationalarenasNewserviceshavebuiltontheoriginalconceptofthediscussionforum,enablingusersto'post'theircontributionstoatopic‐centredexchange(livingwithstyle.com).Withlargenumbersofusersonlineandwithfasternetworks,thereisnowacriticalmasstomakereal‐timeconversationpossibleandworthwhile.Toolsfortextexchange(instantmessagingandchatrooms),makeiteasiertocreatedistinctivespacesforInternet,text‐basedconversation.Someservicesextendtextchatintohigherfidelityexperiencesthatincludevideolinksbetweenusers(Paltalk,Oovoo).Otherservicescreateamoregame‐likeatmosphere,wherebyexchangesarethroughscreen‐basedavatarcharactersthatuserscandesignandcontrol(Imvu).Othersfocusondeliberationanddebatingaroundspecifictopics–oftencombiningconceptmappingandsensemakingactivities(Deliberatorium,Argumentum).Teachersalsocanlinkthroughdiscussionforumsaroundspecificdisciplines(e.g.Schoolhistory).

http://livingwithstyle.com

http://www.msn.com

http://www.paltalk.com

http://www.oovoo.com

http://www.imvu.com

49

http://franc2.mit.edu:8000/ci/[Deliberatorium]

http://arg.umentum.com/

http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/forumOnlinegamesandvirtualworldsBeingabletointeractwithotherusersisalsopossibleinonlinegames.Oftenusersarestrangersandsothegamerulesneedtoavoidassumingmutualfamiliarity.Asimpleexampleisagamebasedaroundnamingasketchdrawnbysomeoneelse(Isketch).Asimilarideaisagamebasedonhavinganinvisibleuser/partnersuggestlabelsforrandomphotographs.Thishasadualpurposeinthatitenablesautomaticmetadatataggingthatcanthenbeusedbysearchengines(Imagelabeler).Moretraditionalpartner‐basedelectronicgamesarepossiblewithInternetconnectionsbetweenplayers(WorldofWarcraft).'Virtualworlds'createscreenenvironmentsthatallowuserstonavigatearoundthevirtualspaceandinteractwithothersthroughavatars.ThebestknownoftheseisSecondLife,aneducationalexampleistheUniversityofEdinburgh’sVue.Theydonotdemandgame‐likerulesbutpromotetheopportunityforsimulatoryexperiences.Thesehaveclearpotentialforlearningandhavebeenusedtogoodeffecttosimulatemedicalenvironmentsforexampleortosetupsimulationsaroundtheeconomiesfortradinggoodsorservices.Althoughbasicuseofthesesitesisoftenfree,manyhaveaneconomicmodelaswell,enablingthebuyingandsellingofobjects(suchasclothes,islandsorbuildings)inthevirtualspace.AnewOpenSourceproject,“Sloodle”aimstointegratetheSecondLifemulti‐uservirtualenvironmentwiththepopularMoodleVirtualLearningEnvironment(VLE).SecondLifeGridisanotherexampleofanumbrellagroupforsupportingeducatorsusingWeb2.0toolsinthecurriculum.Otherexamplestakeecology,climateorhumanrightsastopics(Powerupthegame,Gamesforchange).

http://www.isketch.net

http://images.google.com/imagelabeler

http://www.worldofwarcraftWorldofWarcraft.com

http://secondlifeSecondLife.com

http://www.habbo.com

http://www.virtualibiza.com

http://vue.ed.ac.uk/

http://www/sloodle/org

http://secondlifeSecondLifegrid.net/programs/education

http://www.powerupthegame.org

http://www.gamesforchange.org/

SocialnetworkingAnearlyformofInternetsocialinteractionwasbasedonthedatingagencyprinciple(Match).Recentsitesorganiserealworldmeetingsbetweenmembers,suchasmeetingforSaturdaybreakfasts(Fruehstueckstreff)orbytrackingmobilephonelocation(Dodgeball).Othersitesconvenedmembersonlinebasedonalumnirelations(Friendsreunited)oraroundbusinessprofiles(Linkedin).However,thegreatestsuccesshasbeeninsitesthatallowuserstocreatedigitalspacesintowhichtheycaninvite'friends'tosharemessages,texts,videosortoplaygames.Somehaveastrongstudentbase(Facebook),othersaremoremedia‐oriented(Myspace),andsomeareaimedatteenagers(Bebo).Somespecificallycreatesociallinksbasedon

50

userstaggingtheirpersonalgoals(43things),ordeclaringthemedinterests,suchasgreenpolitics(Care2)orclubbing(Dontstayin).Finally,toolsexistforspecialinterestgroupstodesigntheirownsocialnetworksites(Ning,Elgg).Aspecificexampleofrelevancetolearningandteachingisthening‐siteforsupportingresearchersinterestedinlookingatstudents’useoftechnologies(Elesig).Thesocialnetworkingsite,Cloudworks,whichisthefocusofthePearlsintheCloudscasestudiesisspecificallydesignedtofosterthesharinganddiscussionoflearningandteachingideasanddesigns.Itisobject‐centredratherthanego‐centered.Mostofthemainstreamsocialnetworkingsitestypicallyincludeeducation‐orientedfriendshipgroups.Therearealsositesfocusingonteachers(Learnhub).Severalapplicationswithinthesesitesexisttoenableinstitutionalhostingortheestablishmentoftheirowncollege‐basedcommunitiesorcourseprofiles(Mynewport,OUcourseprofiles).Others(suchasElggandCloudworks)arespecificallyfocusedonknowledgeaccretionaroundlearningandteachingtopics.Othersitesprovideamoreexplicitlychild‐orienteddesignandsecurityserviceforcross‐sitecollaboration(Schoolnetglobal)orsimplycasualexchangearoundschoolinterests(Goldstarcafe).

http://match.com

http://www.fruehstueckstreff.org

http://www.dodgeball.com

http://www.friendsreunited.com

http://www.linkedin.com

http://www.facebook.com

http://www.myspace.com

http://www.bebo.com

http://www.43things.com

http://www.care2.com

http://www.dontstayin.com

http://www.ning.com

http://elgg.com

http://apps.facebook.com/mynewport

http://ouseful.open.ac.uk/blogarchive/010855.html

http://elgg.net

http://www.cloudworks.ac.uk

http://www.schoolnetglobal.com

http://www.goldstarcafe.net

http://learnhub.com

http://elesig.ning.com

BloggingTherearenowavarietyofwebservicesthatofferusersspaceandtoolstolaunchtheirown'blog'(blogger).Blogscanbeusedforarangeofpurposes.Someactaspersonal,reflectivejournals,othersaspromotionalsitesorasaconduitfordisseminatinginformation.Someencourageinteractionaroundthemedconcernsandthusresemblesocialnetworkingsites(Livejournal).Searchenginesexistforthe'blogosphere'ofblogpostingsandincludeindicatorsoftheperceived‘value’ofthesitebasedonthenumberofconnectionsandcross‐referencing(Technorati).Shorter,morewhimsicalandmultimediapostingsarealsopossible(Tumblr).Therearesomededicatedbloghostingsitesforstudentsandteachers(Edublogs).Insome

51

cases,studentblogcollectionsarepublicallyreadable,inotherinstancestheyareonlyavailabletothosealsoenrolledonthecourse.Micro‐bloggingsites(suchasTwitter)onlyallowveryshortentries,buthavebecomeverypopularinthelastcoupleofyears.Themessages(Tweets)canbesenteitherfromawebpageorfrommobiledevices.CombiningtheseshortTweetswithlonger,morereflectiveblogpostsisnowcommonpractice.Anumberofconventionshavedevelopedaroundthesetools,suchastheuseofhash‐tagstoalignwithandaggregatearoundaparticulartopicoruseof@nametoindicateamessageisdirectedtosomeonespecifically.Twitterhasgainedenormousuptakeforcrowdsourcedjournalism,asabackchannelforconferences,andhasbeenusedsuccessfullyasatoolforengagingdiscussionsineducationalcontexts,especiallyindisciplinessuchasjournalismandlanguagelearning.Thesesitestendtothriveonbuildingacommunityofsigned‐up'followers'fortheirauthors.

https://www.blogger.com/start

http://www.livejournal.com

http://technorati.com

http://www.tumblr.com

http://twitter.com

http://edublogs.org

SocialbookmarkingSomesitescollectandaggregatetagsonbookmarksthatusershaveshared(Del.icio.us).Thisenablesorganisedsearchingbasedonpersonaltagsora'folksonomy'(oftendesignedspecificallyforeducationlikebibsonomy).Othersincorporateuserannotationswiththetagging(Diigo).Servicesexisttoextendthisbeyondwebpages,forinstanceallowinguserstoshare,tagandsearchonbooksthattheyarereading(Librarything).Suchactivityencouragesfolksonomiesorprivateoruser‐definedcategorisationschemesratherthanthemoretraditionalhierarchicalandconstrainedtaxonomies(Zotero).

http://del.icio.us

http://www.diigo.com

http://www.librarything.com

http://www.bibsonomy.orghttp://www.citeulike.org

http://www.zotero.org

RecommendersystemsRecommendersystemsenableuserstovoteonitemstodeterminewhichgetprioritisedinpublicationsornewsstories(Digg).Insuchsystems,'socialfiltering'encouragesindividualstofind'friends'withreliableselections.Oruserscansubmittheirowncollectionsoffavouritesbasedonplacesorregions(Backofmyhand).Sitesthatcalculaterecommendationsbasedonlookingatcollectionsthatusershavemadevisiblehavebeenparticularlysuccessful.ForexamplethesiteLast.fm,whichisbasedaroundmusiccollections.Thisprocessmaybebaseduponcollaborativefilteringwherebycomplementaryoverlapsinthetaggingchoicesofindividualusersformthebasisofrecommendations(Stumbleupon)

http://www.backofmyhand.com

http://digg.com

http://www.last.fm

http://www.stumbleupon.com

52

WikisandcollaborativeeditingtoolsWikisenabletheco‐constructionofcontent.Thewikiconstructionprocessisbestknownthroughthepublic,collaborativeencyclopaediaWikipedia.Similarventuresexistformorefocusedinterestssuchastravel(Wikitravel.org.en)ortelevisionknowledge(Tviv).Userscanalsousethewikiconcepttodesignandmaintainapersonalorganiser(Tiddlywiki).Otherwebtoolsareusedcollaborativelytodesign,constructanddistributedigitalproducts.Forexampletherearesitesthatallowusersscatteredacrosslargedistancestocollaborateinmakingasingleentitysuchasafilm(Aswarmofangels).Bycentralisingdocumentsonasharedwebserver,agroupofusersmayeditthosedocumentsratherthanholdmanyindividualcopies(Docs.google).Morestructuredsitesallowtheproductionofcollaborativeartefactssuchasnovels(Glypho).Otherwebsitesincorporatemorevisualtoolsforcollaborators(Thinkature),andsomeemphasiscollectivemindmapsforbrainstorming(Bubbl.us)orwhiteboardsimulations(Virtualwhiteboard).Thesetoolscanalsobeusedfosterinternationalconnections,forexamplebylinkingclassroomsfromdifferentcountriestogether(Etwinning,Skoolaborate).Popularwikisarewellestablishedthathaveaneducationalemphasis(Wikiversity,Wikieducator)orwithmaterialformorespecialistinterests(Knowhomeschooling).

http://www.wikipedia.org

http://wikitravel.org/en/

http://tviv.org

http://www.tiddlywiki.com

http://aswarmofangels.com

http://docs.google.com

http://www.glypho.com

http://thinkature.com

http://www.bubbl.us

http://www.virtual‐whiteboard.co.uk

http://www.britishcouncil.org/etwinning.htm

http://www.skoolaborate.com

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki

http://www.wikieducator.org

SyndicationRSSfeeds(orsyndication)enableuserstotailortheinformationtheyreceivefromasiteandmeanthattheinformationcanbedeliveredtothemintheformattheywantratherthanhavingtogototheoriginalsite.RSSbuttonsareacommonfeatureonmostsitesnowadays,allowinguserstosubscribetoandthusbepostedupdatedmaterial.Othersitesexisttoeasethesubscriptionprocessandallowuserstoselectaprofileoffeeds(Bloglines).However,thebestknownandperhapsusedformofthistypeoffeedingistheuseofpodcasts:audioorvideofilesthatcanbedeliveredtosubscribedsites.Websitesactasportalstofindingthesepodcastingsources(Podcast.net).http://www.bloglines.comhttp://www.podcast.net

54

Appendix3:Areviewofe‐learningmodelsandframeworksLearningtheoriesarefrequentlycapturedinpedagogicalmodelsorframeworksthatemphasiseaparticularapproach.Arecentreviewofthekeymodelsorframeworksthathavebeenusedine‐learningdescribedtwentycommonmodelsorframeworksacrossthedifferenttheoreticalperspectives(Conole,2010).Inthereviewtheterms‘models’and‘frameworks’wereconsideredtogether,becausethesetermsarecontestedandappeartobeusedfairlyinterchangeablyinaneducationalcontext.Thetablebelowcomesfromthereview.Itarticulatestherelationshipbetweenlearningtheoriesandpractice.Perspectivesrelatetothefundamentalassumptionsabouttheprocessesandoutcomesthatconstitutelearning.MayesanddeFreitas’threeperspectivesdescribedearlier:associative(learningasactivity),cognitive(learningthroughunderstanding)andsituative(learningassocialpractice),canbesub‐dividedintoanumberofdifferentapproaches,eachemphasisingdifferentaspectsoflearning.Atafinerlevelofdetailitispossibletoidentifyanumberofapproacheswithinthethreeperspectives.ForexamplethecognitiveperspectiveincludesarangeofapproachestolearningsuchasProblem‐BasedLearning,Inquiry‐BasedLearningandDialogicLearning.Thecharacteristicsofeachoftheseapproachesisdescribed,alongwithexamplesofhowthesearereflectedinane‐learningcontext.Finallyindividualapproachescanthenbetranslatedintospecificframeworksormodels.

Table:Learningtheories,modelsandframeworks(derivedfromConole,2010)

PerspectiveApproach Characteristics ElearningapplicationModelsand

frameworks

Associative

Behaviourism

Instructionaldesign

Intelligenttutoring

Didactic

E‐training

Focusesonbehaviourmodification,viastimulus‐responsepairs;Controlledandadaptiveresponseandobservableoutcomes;

Learningthroughassociationandreinforcement

Contentdeliveryplusinteractivitylinkeddirectlytoassessmentandfeedback

1.Merrill’sinstructionaldesignprinciples

2.Ageneralmodelofdirectinstruction

55

Cognitive

Constructivism

Constructionism

Reflective

Problem‐basedlearning

Inquiry‐learning

Dialogic‐learning

Experientiallearning

Learningastransformationsininternalcognitivestructures;

Learnersbuildownmentalstructures;Task‐orientated,self‐directedactivities;

Languageasatoolforjointconstructionofknowledge;

Learningasthetransformationofexperienceintoknowledge,skill,attitudes,andvaluesemotions.

Developmentofintelligentlearningsystems&personalisedagents;

Structuredlearningenvironments(simulatedworlds);

Supportsystemsthatguideusers;

Accesstoresourcesandexpertisetodevelopmoreengagingactive,authenticlearningenvironments;

Asynchronousandsynchronoustoolsofferpotentialforricherformsofdialogue/interaction;

Useofarchiveresourcesforvicariouslearning;

3.Kolb’slearningcycle

4.Laurillard’sconversationalframework

5.CommunityofInquiryframework

6.Jonassen’setal.constructivistmodel

7.N‐Quiremodel

Situative

Cognitiveapprenticeship

Case‐basedlearning

Scenario‐basedlearning

Vicariouslearning

Collaborativelearning

Socialconstructionism

Takesocialinteractionsintoaccount;

Learningassocialparticipation;

Withinawidersocio‐culturalcontextofrulesandcommunity;

Newformsofdistributionarchivingandretrievalofferpotentialforsharedknowledgebanks;

Adaptationinresponsetobothdiscursiveandactivefeedback;

Emphasisonsociallearning&communication/collaboration;

Accesstoexpertise;

Potentialfornewformsofcommunitiesofpracticeorenhancingexistingcommunities

8.ActivityTheory

9.Wenger’sCommunityofPractice

10.Salmon’s5‐stagee‐moderatingmodel

11.Connectivism

12.Preece’sframeworkforonlinecommunity

Assessment Focusisonfeedbackandassessment(internalreflectiononlearning,andalsodiagnostic,formativeandsummativeassessment)

E‐learningapplicationsrangefromin‐textinteractivequestions,throughmultiplechoicequestionsuptosophisticatedautomatictextmarkingsystems

13.GibbsandBoudmodels

14.NicolandtheREAPframework

Generic Donotaligntoanyparticularpedagogicalperspectivebutprovideausefuloverview

Oftentranslatedintounderpinningontologiesorlearningsystemsarchitectures

15.TheOU(SOL)model

16.TheOULD&CourseBusinessModels

17.The3D

56

pedagogyframework

18.Bigg’sconstructivealignment

19.TheHybridLearningmodel

20.Gee’saffinitymodel

57

Appendix4:ParadoxescreatedbythenetworkedanddigitalTheenthusiasmthatcurrentlysurroundsWeb2.0andlearningistemperedbyahostofmisgivingsandrealchallenges.Zhang(2009),amongothers,remindsusasresearchers,educators,anddesignersthatthepotentialadvantagesassociatedwitheducationalusesoftheWeb(e.g.,generativesocialinteractionsandsharing,adaptability,interactivity,dynamicupdating,richnessofinformation,publicaccessibility)canalsopointtochallengesforthewaysinwhichthedifferentpropertiesofWeb2.0are'transferred'intoaneducationalcontext:openandsharedpracticesalsodirecttoephemeralandchangingcontexts,andunstructuredrelationships.Sowhilesomecelebratetheexpansionofknowledge,arguingthatcollectiveaggregationofinformationcanleadtobetterdecisionsthanthoseanyindividualmightmake(Surowiecki,2004),orenablecognitiveimprovement(Levy,1997;TapscottandWilliams,2006),andotherscautionagainstthe'cultoftheamateur',arguingthatWeb2.0createsademocratisationofknowledgewhichmayunhelpfullyflattenexpertise,decimate‚culturalgatekeepers(critics,teachers,editors,journalists),engenderself‐promotion,disorientresearchersandencourageplagiarism(Keen2007).Likewisethechangingsocio‐technicalspacesoftheWebchallengeinterpretation,synthesis,andexplicitevolutionofideasorthestructurednatureofformaleducation.ThesefactorsunderscorethetensionbetweencontrolandfreedomthatcharacterisesmuchofthedebatesurroundingtheuseofWeb2.0insociety(includingdebatesaboutcopyrightandintellectualproperty(Lessig,2004),autonomy,andprivacy).

ThefollowingisadaptedfromaKeynotepresentationandpaperattheAsciliteconference,200917,thetablebelowlistsfivecommoneffectsassociatedwithdigitalnetworkedmediaandsuggestssomeoftheconsequencesorparadoxesthatariseasaresult.

Table:Causeandeffectindigitalandnetworkedspaces

Cause Effect

Expansiveknowledgedomain Deathofexpertise/everyoneanexpert

Hierarchy & control less meaningful, contentcanbedistributedandlocatedindifferentways

Multiple (co‐)locations/loss of contentintegrity

Increasinglycomplexdigitallandscape Beyond ‘digital space’/New metaphorsneeded

Powerofthecollective,collectiveintelligence Socialcollective/digitalindividualism

Freecontent&tools,openAPIsandmashups Issuesre:ownership,value,businessmodels

17http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2735

58

Knowledgeexpansion.Aswementionedbefore,digitaltechnologieshaveanamplificationeffectintermsofknowledgeexpansioninanumberofrespectsl)theyprovideeasyaccesstoinformation,ii)newwaysofaggregatingresourcesandiii)enablemultiplewaysofdisassemblingandrecombininginformation.Inaworldofincreasingcomplexityandknowledge,itisnolongerpossibletoknoweverythingaboutadomain.WhereasacenturyagoaprofessionalChemistcouldhaveaprettygoodgraspacrossallthemainsub‐domainsofChemistry,today‚achemiststrugglestokeepupwiththeirownspecialism.Somecelebratethisexpansion,pointingtothewisdomofthecrowdswhereeveryonehadthepotentialtobeanexpert,toaccessanduseknowledge.Surowieckicoinedtheterm'wisdomofthecrowds'(Surowiecki2004)arguingthatcollectiveaggregationofinformationcanleadtobetterdecisionsthanthoseanyindividualmightmake.Otherscautionagainstthis,lamentingthedeathofexpertise.Keeninparticularcautionsagainstthe'cultoftheamateur'(Keen2007:17):

Icallitthegreatseduction.TheWeb2.0revolutionhaspeddledthepromiseofbringingmoretruthtomorepeople,moredepthofinformation,moreglobalperspective,moreunbiasedopinionfromdispassionateobserves.Butthisisallasmokescreen.WhattheWeb2.0revolutionisreallydeliveringissuperficialobservationsoftheworldaroundusratherthandeepanalysis,shrillopinionratherthanconsideredjudgement.

NohierarchyorcontrolItisalsonotlongerpossible(oradvisable)totryandcategoriseandcontrol.Thelongheldtraditionofcataloguesisbeingeroded.Somearguethatrigidhierachicalcategorisationnolongerhasmeaningorvalueinafragmenteddigitalspace.Weinberger'sbookEverythingisMiscellaneous(Weinberger2007)typifiessomeoftheseviewsanddescribeshowwehaveshiftedfromphysicalobjects,whichrequirespaceandauniquelocation,todigitalobjects,whichcanbefragmentedandmulti‐located.Soforexampleaphysicalbookhastobestoredinoneplace,ononeshelfatanyonetime,thedigitalequivalentcannotonlybelocatedinmultipleplaces,butcanbedisaggregatedandindeedpartiallycombinedwithotherdigitalartefacts.Althoughthisoffersgreaterflexibilityinhowabook,canbeused,taggedorlocated,thisalsobringsincreasedcomplexity:contentmayloseitsintegrity,itmaybecomede‐contextualisedandmayleadtomis‐interpretations.

Networkedversusboundedspaces?Theincreasinglycomplexdigitallandscapeischallengingourexistingvocabulariesandmeansofdescription.Theverytermsdigitalspacesandnetworkedlandscapesharkbacktoatimewhenthedigitalwasconsideredasamereextensionoftherealworld.Termssuchas'virtualuniversities'and'virtualcafes'givetheimpressionofthedigitalasa'boundedplace',whereasthekindsofpatternsofbehaviourwearenowseeinginthedigitalrealm,thedistributionofcontentandtools,themulti‐facetedandinter‐connectednatureofthedigitalmeansthatthevocabularyof'time'and'space'maynolongeradequate.Weneednewvocabulariesandmetaphorstodescribewhatishappening.

NewformsofsensemakingandcommunitiesofinterestareemerginginWeb2.0environments.Boundariesareblurring,withdifferenttechnologiesofferingoverlappingfunctionalityandtransient,associatedcommunities.Forexample,'spaces'canbecategorisedasfollows:personalspaces(email,IM,etc.),groupspaces(SNSforexample),or

59

publishingspace(blogs,andsharingspaceslikeyoutube).Eachoftheserequiredifferentmodesofinteractionandrolesintermsofcommunicating,organisinginformation,contributingcontent,developingrelationshipsandthedegreetowhichtheindividualiscollaboratinginpublicspaces.CardonandAquiton(2007)arguethatthesuccessofWeb2.0servicesdemonstratesusers'hybridmotivations,wheretheindividualisationoftheuser'sgoalsmeetstheopportunityofsharingpersonalexpressionandtheperformanceofcreativityinapublicspace.RybergandLarsen(2008)arguethatthetrendtowards'networkedindividualism'isacontradictorytrend;i.e.althoughpersonalisationandindividualisationareintensified,usersareincreasinglymutuallydependenton,andconnectedto,eachotherforformsofcreditandrecognition(seealso,Wellman,2001).

CollectiveownershipversuscommodificationFinallytheapparentlyutopiandrivetowardsanInternetwheretoolsandcontentarefree,andwhereopensourceprinciples,ApplicationProfileInitiatives(APIs)andmashupsappeartoofferanevolving,collectivelyimprovedsetofcontentandtools,whichcanbeusedinamultitudeofways,maynotbeallthatclearcut.Suchpracticeschallengeexistingideasaroundqualityandownershipanddonotfitinwithcurrentbusinessmodelsforrepurposingknowledge.Thissuggeststhereisfarmoretodointermsofunderstandingsuchmodelsandredefiningourideasaroundownership,qualityandsustainability.

Theabovegivesrisetoaseriesofspecificeducationaldilemmas.ArecurrentrhetoricaroundtheapplicationofWeb2.0technologiesinaneducationalcontextisthenotionofhowthesecanbetransformativeintermsoftranscendingformaleducationalcontexts;thattheyfacilitatemoreinformalandnon‐formallearningcontextsandblurtheboundariesbetweencategoriesoflearners(student,adult‐learner,orthoseundertakingtrainingorprofessionaldevelopment).Theargumentsforthiscentrearoundthenotionthattheselearnersareempoweredtobemoreactiveproducers,authors,evaluatorsandcommentatorswithinthelearningarenatheyareengagedwith.Atthesametime,theboundariesofprofessionalandpersonalidentitiesareblurringandmediatedperformanceoccurseitherinindividualisticspacesvialooselyboundandoftentransitorycollectivesthroughtomoreestablishedandclearlydefinedcommunities(seeSiemens,2008;DronandAnderson,2007foradiscussionofcollectives,networksandgroupsinsocialnetworkingfore‐learning;seeRuddetal.,2006aontheblurringofboundariesbetweenteacher/expertandstudent/noviceroles).

Totakethisastepfurther,somedebatesontheeducationalnatureofWeb2.0pointtothedispensationofthecentralortraditionalroleoftheteacher.Theexpansionoftheknowledgedomainandtheconsequentialdiscourseonthe'deathoftheexpert'naturallychallengesthetraditionalroleofateacher.Itcannolongerbeassumedthattheteacherisexpertorthatthefocusshouldbeontransmissionofknowledge.Somearguethatsocietywillbe'de‐schooled'throughtheemergenceofcommunitylearningsites(suchas43things,SchoolofEverything,Wikiversity18;seeLeadbetter,2008).Othersarguethattheroleofformaleducationalinstitutionswillshifttoprovidingpersonalisedlearningenvironments,

1843things:www.43things.com;Schoolofeverything:www.schoolofeverything.com;Wikiversity:www.en.wikiversity.org

60

whichputthelearnerincontroloftheirownlearning.Manyassumptionsarehiddeninsuchscenarios,particularlyinrelationtothemotivationoflearning.However,althoughitisunlikelythatWeb2.0willfundamentallydisplacethatimportantrelationship,thescaffoldingperspectiveonlearningdrawsattentiontothespecialforcethatarisesfromjointactivities.

Multi‐located/fragmentedcontentandthepotentialformultiplepathwaysthroughcontenthaveanimpactonhoweducationalinterventionsaredesigned.Andalthoughsuchmultiplicityoffersincreasedchoice,inaneducationalcontextthisalsohasthepotentialtoleadtoconfusion.Hencethereisanopportunityforteacherstoplayanimportantnewroleintermsofprovidingpedagogicallygroundedlearningpathways,tohelplearnersnavigatetheirwaythroughthiscomplexity.Thedigitaldivide(Norris,2001)haslongbeenaprominenttopicofdebateineducationaltechnologyresearch(SealeandBishop,2009;Kennedyetal,2007;Warschauer2004;Norrisetal.2003).Howeverwiththeincreasinglycomplexityofthedigitallandscapethegapbetweenthe'techsavvy'teachersandstudents,'non‐users'orthosewhoarenotengagedmaybecomedeeper.Thetablebelowreconsidersthefivefactorsconsidershereandliststheeducationaldilemmasthatariseasaresult.

Table:Educationaldilemmasarisingasaconsequenceofnewtechnologies

Cause Educationaldilemma

Expansiveknowledgedomain Challengestheroleoftheteacher

Hierarchy and control lessmeaningful, contentcanbedistributedandlocatedindifferentways

Needtorethinkthedesignprocess,offersthepotentialfornewlearnerpathways

Increasinglycomplexdigitallandscape Widening skills gap between ‘techsavy’/others

Powerofthecollective,collectiveintelligence Potential for new forms of learning; digitalandnetworkedliteracies

Appendix5:FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation

TherearefourmainreasonsaccordingtotheOCEDreport(2009)forgapsregardingpositiveperceptionsorcapacitiesforadoptingnovelICTsforteachingandlearningandactualimplementation:i)thestateofreadinessofthetechnologicalinfrastructure,ii)theinvestingcapacityofinstitutions,iii)competenceandiv)predominantapproachestoteachingandlearning.

LevelsofmaturityFirstly,thereisacorrelationbetweenthematurityofthetechnologicalinfrastructuretolevelsofadoptionandpopulationdigitalliteracyskills.E‐learning‐readiness(seeSibis,2002)positionstheUSatthetop,followedbytheUK,DenmarkandFinlandinEurope.Similarpatternsareevidentfromrelatedresearch(TheEconomistIntelligenceUnit,2003citedinOECD,2009:32).

61

NationalstrategiesSecondly,thenatureandscaleofnationalstrategiesregardinginvestmentsininfrastructure,theuseoftechnologyandthepromotionofe‐learningintheeducationisrecognisedasanimportantdriver.NationalinstitutionsliketheJISCintheUKandtheSURFFoundationintheNetherlandsactascontextualdriversandcatalysts.Similarlytheroleofstrategydocumentsisimportant,suchastheHEFCE’sStrategyfore‐learningintheUK(HEFCE,2009),theNSF’sCyberlearningreportintheUS(Borgemanetal.,2008),Australia’sLearningPerformanceFundandtheCampusNumériqueinFrance.Thesenationaldirectiveshaveplayedaveryimportantroleincoordinatingandinitiatinglarge‐scaleprojectsthatpromoteinnovation,butalsoprovidemechanismsfortrainingandsupportandforfacilitatingthesharingofgoodpractice.Amorelocalexamplewastheestablishmentof‘TheEvaluationofLearners’ExperienceofE‐learningSpecialInterestGroup’(ELESIG).ThiswasfundedbytheUK’sHigherEducationAcademy,tobringtogetherthoseworkingonpathfinderprojectsregardinglearners’experience.Sinceit’sinceptionin2008,ithasevolvedasaninternationalcommunityofover800members,‘workingtogethertoshareknowledgeandpracticeandtodevelopasharedrepertoireofresources,whichwillofbenefittothesector’(ELESIG,2009).AreviewoftheprojectsundertheELESIGumbrella(Sharpe,2009)showsthatlearnerexperienceresearchisaimingtohaveatransformativeimpactregardinga)theevaluationofinfluenceofnewtoolsandenvironments,includingWeb2.0,onstudentexperience(e.g.projectssuchastheUCLPathfinderprojectandELP2);andb)producingstrategicguidelines(e.g.e‐learningstrategiesininternationalenvironments).Likewise,broaderstrategiessupportedbyfundingagenciesatnationallevelsandinternationalorganizationsthatpromoteresearch,innovationandwideningparticipationthroughopeneducationhavealsoplayedanimportantrole.

MarketingandstudentrecruitmentThirdly,Anglo‐SaxonuniversitiesseemtocompetemoreforattractingstudentsthanthoseincontinentalEuropeandthusdeploymoreinnovativestrategiesforbothmarketing,pre‐entryorientation,aswellasexperimentationwithregardstoteachingandlearning.ExamplesincludeearlyadoptersexperimentingwiththeuseofWeb2.0technologiestoprovideasocialspaceforstaffandstudents,suchasWarwick,Leeds,EdinburghandtheOpenUniversityintheUK.Someoftheperceivedadvantagesincluded:theflexibilityofthetools,theireaseofuseandtheircompatibilitywithotherservicesofferedbytheUniversity.

AsArmstrongandFranklin(2008)havenoted,positiveinstitutionaldriversaremoreprominentinHEIswhereubiquitous,distancelearningandlife‐longlearningcontextsareprominentandininstitutionsthatrecognisethatopportunitiesforcollaborationandcommunicationalignwithbothpedagogicandmarketingstrategies.Whileregulatory,legal,securityandethicalfactorscontinuetobekeyconcerns,factorsthatareconsideredtotranscendtraditionalHEboundariesinclude:a)pre‐serviceandcontinuityofresources;b)lifelonglearningandprofessionalnetworkinginunder‐andpost‐graduatecourses;c)extendingthewaysinwhichnewformsofknowledgeareproduced,publishedandassessed.ManyhighereducationinstitutionsinEuropenowprovidesocialnetworkingtoolsalongsidetheirvirtuallearningenvironment,withtheaimoffosteringmoreinformationcommunitiesandnetworksalongsidetheformalteachingprovision.The

62

UniversityofBrighton,forexample,setup'Community@Brighton',networkingsystemforstudentsandstaff,asaplacetoshareacademicinterest,personaldevelopmentplanning,andcreatee‐Portfolios.Similarly,theUniversityofLeedsusesElggtobuildacommunityofstaffandstudentsbasedonthecreationofpersonalandcommunityblogs.‘MyOUstory’isafacebookapplicationdevelopedbyteamsattheOpenUniversity,enablingprospectivestudentstoconnectandexchangeknowledgeandexperiencesurroundingspecificcourses.‘Connect’,arecentinitiativeattheUniversityofWestminsterprovidesasocialnetworkingspaceforstudentsandstaff.RedeckerlistsanumberofsimilarinitiativeswithincontinentalEurope(Redecker,2009:55‐58and89‐93).

Yet,despitetherhetoricaboutthewaysinwhichtheseinitiativescanbebeneficialintermsofenhancingstudentenrolmentormaintenanceofalumnirelations(FranklinandvanHarmelen,2007),obstaclesandchallengestotheiruseanduptakeremain.TheUniversityofBrighton’sexperiencesunderlinesomeofthemainchallengesforthedeploymentofsocialnetworkingapplicationsasplatformsforinstitutionalnetworksineducation.Oneofthemainobstaclesisalackofinterest.Whileallstaffandstudentshaveaccounts,onlyasmallproportionareactive.EvaluationstaffattheUniversityofWarwicknoticedthatitsbloggingsystemhaspositivelychangedsocialinteraction,butuptakeforteachinghasnotfollowed.Thisis,inpart,becauseteachingstaffhavenotintegratedthesetoolsintotheirteachingandhencetheiruseremainsaperipheralactivity.InthecaseoftheUniversityofLeedstheintroductionofsuchtoolswasstaff‐led,andsostudentsdidnotperceivethemaspartoftheirlearningandteachingenvironment.AsRedeckernotes,take‐upanduseseemtobeinfluencedbymanydifferentfactors(2009:57).Drawingonethnographicobservationsofstudents’fromaUKRussellgroupuniversity,Selwyn(2009)reportsonnegativestudentperceptionsoftheblurringofboundariesbetweenformalrelationstotutorsandinformallearningspacesonfacebook(seealsoMadgeetal.,2009andBoonandSinclair,2009onundesiredblurringofidentities,ownershipandingeneralcodesofpractice).

Surveyingthefindingsfromacrossprojectsandinitiatives,itisclearthattherelationshipbetweentheuseoftechnologyandcurrentteachingculturesremainsunbalanced.Useoftechnologiesneedstobecarefullyintegratedintotheexistingcurricularpractices.Staffneedconvincingofthebenefitsofthesenewapproachesandevidenceregardingenhancementofthestudentexperienceneedstobeclearlydemonstrated.Similarlythepatternofuptakeislikelytobedifferentacrossdisciplines.Forexamplesomecoursessuchasmediastudies,journalism,informationsystems,e‐learningandcomputerscienceorthosethatareprimarilydistance‐basedlearningaremoreamenabletosuccessfulintegration(seeArmstrongandFranklin,2008;Fitzgerald,Steeleetal.,2009).Inotherinstances,individualscandriveuptakeanduse,forexampleeducatorswhoseetheuseofWeb2.0toolsasameansofpromotingconstructivistbeliefsorenablingmorepersonalisedandstudent‐centeredlearning.Similarlymanyaredrivenbytheviewthatsuchtechnologiescanfostercreativity,providingavaluableopportunitytoequipstudentswithdigitalandcriticalinformationskillsforuseinfutureemploymentandprofessionalpractice(seeArmstrongandFranklin,2008,Fitzgerald,Steeleetal,2009,2008;Minocha,2009).

Minocha(2009)conductedstudieswith21initiativesin18institutionsintheUKhigherandfurthereducationsectorsandcollectedevidenceregardingtheuseofsocialsoftwarein

63

supportingandenhancingstudentlearningandengagementintheeducationalprocess.Thestudyexaminesavarietyofsocialsoftwaretoolsandinscribedpedagogiesandexaminesthewaysinwhichthesewereembeddedincurriculumdesign.Althoughthefindingsmainlypointtoseveralbenefitsandpositiveprojectionsregardingenhancedstudentexperiences(e.g.personalisationandcontrol;peersupport,teambuildingandcommunityskills,developmentofdigitalliteracyskills),highlevelsofstaffmotivationandimprovementofteachingmethodsiscorrelatedwithinstitutionalprovisionandtechnicalfacilitation(e.g.easeofintegrationofopensourcetoolswithVLEs)aswellaspersonaltechnicalproficiency.Manystudentsacrossthecasestudiesreportpositivelyontheinterrelationofthepublicvisibilityofartefactsandthescaffoldedlearningprocessofworkingwithsocialmedia:structuringthecontentwithmultimediaassets‘mirrorstheprocessoflearning’(Minocha,2009:31).Blendedlearningandinteractioninitiativesandtheabilitytoenhanceintra‐andcross‐institutionalcollaborationinteachingandlearningwerealsoconsideredveryusefulbyacademicstuffwhowhereotherwisescepticalaboutWeb2.0learninginitiatives.

ThisconnectstothefinalpointraisedbytheOECDreport,regardingteachingcultures.Accordingtothereport(2009:33),despitetheeffortsmadesofarundertheframeworkoftheBolognaprocesstoharmoniseamoreintegrativeteachingcultureamongEuropeanuniversities,thepredominantapproachisstillmoreaboutlecturingthaninteraction.Thisdidactic‐perspectiveisseenasnotonlybeingasaresultofteachers'preferredstyleof‘teaching’,butisalsoafactorofinstitutionalstructures(forexampletimetablesessionsinlargelecturerooms)andassessmentdrivers(knowledgerecalltoapredefinedsubjectcurriculum).AnumberofEU‐fundedProjectsareattemptingtochangethis.Forexample:theiCamp19(project,whichismakinguseofnewmediaforcross‐culturalcollaboration,theEnhancingStudentMobilitythroughOnlineSupport(ESMOS)project20andVITAE21aprojectdedicatedtofacilitatingexchangeandWeb2.0TeacherTrainingacrossEurope.Theseprojectsareprovidingvaluableinsightsintothepromotionofknowledgebuildingcommunities,emphasisingmentoringsupportasareplacementtoauthoritativeandhierarchicalteachingapproaches(seeKeeganandFox,2009;KeeganandLisewsk,2009;Väljataga(2009).

19 http://www.icamp.eu/ 20 http://www.esmos.eu/ 21 http://www.vitae‐project.eu/

64

Appendix6:BarrierstochangeSomeofthespecificbarriersevidentfromtheliteratureinclude:concernsaboutexpectations,experiencesandcompetenceswithrespecttousingWeb2.0technologies,theperceptionthatengagementinusingthesetoolshasanassociatedtimeinvestment;amismatchbetweenthecurrentsocialandculturalcontextofteachingpracticesandWeb2.0approaches(seealsoBlinandMunro,2008),alackofconfidencethatappropriateinstructionalstructuresareinplacetosupporttheseactivitiesandaninherentscepticismastowhetherornotthesetechnologieswillactuallymakeadifference.MoreontheseissuescanbefoundinanonlinediscussionaroundaresearchquestionweincludedinCloudworks‘whyhasgeneralWeb2.0practicenottranslatedwell/extensivelywithinaHEcontext?’22.Finally,thereareissuesaroundtheworkloadimplicationsofthesenewapproaches;bothforteachersandstudents.

Access,accessibility,andconcernsonauthorityandtrivialisationFirstly,therearearangeofissuesaroundnotionsofaccessandaccessibility.Accessibilityremainsamajorobstacletoequalopportunitiesandakeyproblemforinclusion(seeforexampleDaviesandCranston,2008).Furthermore,therearedifferencesinthefamiliaritywithICTingeneral,andinsocialcomputinginparticularamongdifferentlearnersandlearnergroups,givingrisetoa‘participationdivide’(HargittaiandWalejko,2008).SimilarlyarecentreportbyJISCsuggeststhatinformationliteraciesrepresentagrowingdeficitareaamongHElearners(JISC,2009).Therearealsonegativeperceptionsabouttheblurringofboundariesthatarisethoughinteractionwiththesetechnologiesandinparticulartheblurringofworkandsocialspheresofinteraction,aswellasinvasionofpersonalorprivatespaces.Manyareconcernedaboutshiftingtomoreopenapproachesandmakingcontentfreelyavailable,fearingitwillleadtoanerosionintheircompetitiveness(OECD,2007;Minocha,2009),whileissuesofauthority,authorshipandtrivialisationareevidenttoo.Aspecificexamplehelpstoillustratesomeoftheseissues.ArecentsurveyconductedbyFacultyFocus(2009)aggregated2000responsesfromeducatorsintheUS,andisasignificantsourceofdataregardingpractitioners’attitudestotheuseofTwitterinundergraduateandpostgraduateeducation.WhatwassignificantaboutthefindingswerethereservationsmanyexpressedaboutTwitter'ssuitabilityinhighereducation.Theperceptionoftrivialitypersistsinrelationtotimeconsumptionandrealengagement,leavingtoonesidequestionsaboutprivacy,securityandfaddism.MorespecificallypedagogicorintellectualconcernsemergedfromthedatathatfocusedontheperceiveddeleteriousinfluenceofTwitteronstudents'academicliteracypractices,withquoteslike‘logicalargumentscannotbedeliveredwellinshortbursts’or‘[It]perpetuatespoorwrittenandoralcommunicationskills'.TherewerealsoconcernsthatTwittercanencouragecommentwithoutthoughtandthatthisdoesnotencourageorenablethestudentstoadequatelyreflectonthecontentandconceptstheyarebeingpresentedwith;i.e.arguablytheantithesisoflearning‚(FocusFaculty:2009:13).Thereisasimilaritybetweensomeofthesecommentsandearlieranxietiesaboutthenegativeinfluenceof

22 http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2394

65

'txtspk',thatresearchershavesinceproventobeunfounded(Carrington2005;Crystal2008;seeJenkinsetal.,2006).

LiteracyissuesSecondly,thereareliteracyissuesintermsofwhetherstudentsandteachershavethenecessaryskillstomakemosteffectiveuseofnewtechnologies.Trainingandsupporttoenableteachersandstudentstodeveloptherightsortsofliteracyskillspresentsrealchallenges.Youdon’tjust‘get’Web2.0byattendingaworkshoporreadingasupportguide.Youneedtoactivelyengagewithittofindareasonforappropriatingthetechnologiestoyourworkingpracticeandintegratethemwithyourprofessionalorteachingpractice.FurthermorethemajorityofWeb2.0technologiesareaboutconnectivityandnetworks,andhenceengagementrequiresindividualstobeactivelyparticipatinginappropriatecommunitiesofpractice.Web2.0approacheshaveinfiltratedtheteachingandtheresearchpracticesofacademicstodifferentextents.Likewise,althoughsomeeducators’familiaritywithWeb2.0toolsforpersonalandrecreationactivitiesgeneratesenthusiasmregardingpotentialexperimentationinateachingcontext,thismaynotbematchedbytheprofileofthestudents(whomaynotseethevalueofusingWeb2.0toolsormaylackthenecessarycompetencestousethem).

QualityandeffectivenessThirdly,concernshavebeenraisedaboutthequalityandeffectivenessofWeb2.0environments.Studiesfromformaleducationshowsthatthereareissuesaroundtheperceivedlearningvalueincollaborativeactivities.Benbunan‐FichandArbaugh(2006)foundthatthelearningperceptionofstudentsconstructingknowledgewithcollaborativeassignmentswaslowerthenstudentsadoptingatraditionalknowledgeacquisitionmodel,butthiswasalsoatoddswiththeknowledgedemonstratedinthefinalresults.Additionalchallengesincludethetypesofcriticalliteracyneededinevaluatingreliabilitythroughcross‐referencingandfiltering(Seeforexamplethe‘Literacyinthedigitaluniversity’project23).

LegacysystemsFourthly,Web2.0technologieschallengeexistinglegacysystemsandsothereareanumberofissuesaroundlonger‐termtechnologicalcohesion.CurrentinstitutionalstructurespresentabarriertoeffectiveuptakeofWeb2.0technologiesacrossthesector.ForexamplenotallinstitutionsallowWeb2.0toolstoworkontheirnetworkedsystems.SomeinstitutionalITmanagersarescepticalorunwillingtoallowlinkingtonon‐institutionallyownedandmaintainedsystems.Whilstthereisevidencethattheseattitudesarechangingandagrowinginterestinexplorationofcloudcomputingwithininstitutions,thereisstillasignificantresistance(seealsoArmstrongetal.,2008,Minocha,2009).Thepaceofchangeoftechnologyandtheinvestmentrequiredtoadapttoinstitutionalsystemsalsocausesproblems:balancinganexistingportfolioofsystemswithmigrationtonewonesisanongoingchallenge.Thereisagrowingdividebetweenthosethataresupportiveofcontinuingtoinvestininstitutionalsystemsandthosewhoadvocateamoreopen

23http://lidu.open.ac.uk/

66

approach.ThisdivideisparticularlyprevalentindiscoursearoundVirtualLearningEnvironmentsversusPersonalLearningEnvironments24.

PedagogicalrethinkingFifthlyWeb2.0approachesrequirepedagogicalrethinking.Theychallengeexistingapproachestocurriculumdesign,deliveryandassessment.ForexamplethereisaclearclashbetweentheparticipatoryandcollaborativenatureofWeb2.0learningandcurrentstructuresofformalassessment.Thisraisestheoreticalquestionsaboutwhatconstitutesagoodorinnovativepedagogy.MinochaarguesthatuseofWeb2.0technologiesneedsthoughtfulintegrationandalignmentwithbothlearningoutcomesandassessmentstrategies(2009:34‐7).Shepointstoissuesaboutprivacyintheseopenspaces,butalsoraisesconcernsaboutunequalparticipation,distrustinpeerfeedbackandissuesofownership.ShecitesanexampleofwherestudentswereuncomfortableaboutuploadingontoFlickrthephotographstheyweretakingonthecourse,astheyfeltthattheyhadnocontrolaboutwhowaslookingatthephotographsandusingthem.Theconcernaboutsharingresourceswasraisedparticularlywherestudentswereaskedtosharereflectionswithagroupofpeoplewhowerepotentiallygoingtocommentonwhathadbeenwritten;commentingonothers’reflectionswasalsoconsidereduncomfortablebythestudents.Relatedstudies(Cole,2009)revealthatstudentsarenotpreparedtoparticipateinsuchactivitiesiftheyseeitasanadditional(albeitformative)task,especiallywhenneithertherewardnorlearningbenefits/outcomesareclear.Minocha(2009:44)foundthatmostoftheWeb2.0integratedactivitieswereusedaspartofformativeassessment.Therewereissuesraisedaboutattributionandidentification;performanceoncoursesandusesofsometoolswaspositivelyco‐related,butnosystematicevidencefromthestudies,norevidenceofsystematicassessmentofsuchco‐relation,exist.

Asdiscussedthroughoutthereview,thereareclearopportunitiestoenhanceeducationalpracticewiththespiritofWeb2.0.However,asthisappendixhashighlightedthisisnotwithoutitschallenges.Fundamentallytheshiftisaboutdevelopingwaysofteachingandlearningthataremorealignedwithasenseofplay,expression,reflectionandexploration,andaboveall,creatingratherthanconsumingcontent.IntroducingWeb2.0practiceshasaknockoneffect.IfWeb2.0supportslearningthroughcollaboration,publication,multipleliteraciesandinquiry,thewaythatlearnerslearnandaretaughtwillchange.Thecontentandassessmentoftheirlearningwillchangeaswell.ThiswillrequireeducatorsandeducationalinstitutionstoconfrontthehiddenchallengesthatWeb2.0toolspresent.

Appendix7:DifferentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchangeTwoexamplesofthewaysinwhichchangesinpracticeandculturecanbepromotedaredescribedhere.

Design‐basedresearchThefirstexamplelooksathowapplicationofdifferentresearchmethodologiesmightprovidenewwaysofguidingteacherpractice.Action‐basedresearchhasastrongfollowing

24 Seeforexamplearecentdebateandassociatedlinksonthistopichttp://cloudworks.ac.uk/index.php/cloud/view/2162

67

ineducation,andhasbeenusedextensivelyasanapproachtotrialandevaluateeducationalinterventionsontheuseoftechnologies.Researchfromdesignsciencemayprovideanalternativemechanismforsupportingscholarlyapproaches.Zang(2009)forexample,articulatesanumberofchallengesaroundtheuseofWeb2.0environmentstosupportknowledgecreationandthewaysinwhichsuchtechnologiesmightbeusedtosupportteacherlearningandinnovation.Integraltohisdiscussionisadesignscienceperspectivethatfocusesonidentifyingchallenges,envisioningnewpossibilities,andtestingimprovedlearningenvironmentsandinterventions.Theapproachinvolvesreflectivepractice,wherebyformativeresearchfindingsarefedbackintoongoingcyclesofinnovativedesign(Bereiter,2002).Zangarguesthatdesign‐basedresearchprovidesanapproachtodevelopingandtestinglearningenvironmentdesignthatistheoreticallyinformed.Design‐basedresearchcanputeducationalresearchersandpractitionersintoproactivepositions,sothattheycanactivelycontributetoevidence‐informedchangesinlearningenvironments(Zang,2009:274).Itmightalsoprovideamechanismforguidingteachersintheuseofnewtechnologiesandhelpdeveloptheirunderstandingofhowthesetechnologiescanbeused.Professionalwisdom,asdescribedbyDede(2009),isthereforepossiblewithsuchanapproach,asgettingpractitionerstoactivelyengageinonlinespacesandexplicitlyreflectontheirexperiences,willhelpthemacquirenewknowledgeandgivethemanunderstandingofhowtoapplyittonewteachingcontextcontexts.Anevaluativeapproachisinherentindesign‐basedresearchandprovidesamechanismforteacherstoformalisetheirunderstanding,alongsidemoreinformalmechanismsofsharingtheirknowledge‐in‐practice.

PromotingchangethroughthetechnologiesThesecondexampleexploreshowpracticecanbechangedthroughthenewtechnologies,usingthemtofacilitatethesharingofgoodpractice.Therehavebeenalotofstudiesandprojectsaroundmechanismsforsharingpractice.Theseincludeinitiativesthathavefocussedoncross‐institutionalsharing,thosethatexplorehowtoadoptmoreevidence‐basedapproachesandcollaborationoneducationalresearchactivitiesandsubject‐specificinitiatives.Someexampleswillbegivenaroundthefollowingapproaches:

• Professionalnetworksandsupportcentres • Promotionoflearningdesignasamechanismforarticulatingandrepresentingpractice • Useofpedagogicalpatterns • ThedevelopmentandfosteringofOERcommunities • EmergentcommunitiesaroundeducationaltoolssuchasLearnerManagementSystems • Research‐basedcommunities

Professional networks and support centres

Overthepasttenyearsorsoarangeofprofessionalnetworksandsupportcentreshaveemergedwhichhaveaspartoftheirremitaroleinpromotinggoodpractice.Somehaveaspecificfocusontechnologies25,othersareeitherfocusedoneducationalpractices26orsubjectdisciplines(theHigherEducationAcademysubjectcentres).Thesenetworksand25 See for example, forexampleALT,http://www.alt.ac.uk/ 26 Seeforexample,SEDA,http://www.seda.ac.uk/

68

supportcentresprovidearangeofmechanismsforsupportingpractice–facilitationofworkshopsandconferences,onlineeventsanddiscussionsspaces,repositoriesofresourcesandcasestudiesofgoodpractice.

Learning design

Muchofthelearningdesignresearchisconcernedwithmechanismsforarticulatingandsharingpractice,andinparticularthewaysinwhichdesignscanberepresented.Lockyeretal.(2008)andBeethamandSharpe(2007)haveproducededitedcollectionsonworkinthisarea.TheAUTClearningdesignprojectwasoneofthefirstmajorpiecesofworkaroundthis27.Itpresentsacomprehensivesuiteofdesignsacrossdifferenttypesofpedagogy.JISChasfundedanumberofprojectsinthisareaunderitsdesignforlearningprogramme28andmorerecentlytheCurriculumdesignanddeliveryprogrammes29.AslightlytangentialapproachhasbeenadoptedbytheUniversityofAlbanyKnowledgeNetworkforInnovationsinTeachingandLearning30.Theirgoalis‘touseourknowledgeofinstructionaldesignandlearningtechnologytoproduceasuiteofprofessionaldevelopmentresources,organizedasanopenWikisite,thatcanhelpteachersofdifferentlevelstounderstandnewlearningapproachesandenvironmentsandworktowardsinnovativeclassroompractices’.

Pedagogical patterns

Acloselyrelatedbodyofworktolearningdesignisresearchintothedevelopmentanduseofpedagogicalpatterns.DerivedfromAlexander’sworkinArchitecture,pedagogicalpatternsisanapproachtodevelopingstructuredcasestudiesofgoodpractice(SeeforexampleGoodyear,2005foranoutlineofthefield).AnexampleofaninitiativethattriedtofosteracommunityaroundthecreationanduseofpatternsisthePedagogicalPatternsproject31.

Open Educational Resources

WiththeriseoftheOpenEducationalResourcesmovementinrecentyearsnotsurprisinglyanumberofsupportcentresandcommunitysiteshaveemerged.OpenLearn32,alongsideitsrepositoryofOER,createdLabspacewhichprovidesarangeoftoolsforfosteringcommunityengagement,suchasafreetoolforvideoconferencing(flashmeeting)andatoolforvisualisation(Compendium).TheaimistoprovideanenvironmentforsharingofgoodpracticeandpromotingthereuseofOER.LeMillisaweb‐basedcommunityforfinding,authoringandsharingopeneducationalpractices33.Similarly,Connexions34providesaspaceforeducatorsandlearnertouseandreuseOER.CarnegieMellon,throughitsOpen

27 AUTClearningdesignproject:http://www.learningdesigns.uow.edu.au 28 JISC Design for Learning Programme: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearningpedagogy/designlearn.aspx 29 JISC Curriculum Design and Delivery Programme: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/curriculumdesign.aspx 30 UniversityofAlbanyKnowledgeNetworkforInnovationsinTeachingandLearning:http://tccl.rit.albany.edu/knilt 31 Pedagogical Patterns: http://www.pedagogicalpatterns.org/ 32 http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/ 33 http://lemill.net/ 34 http://cnx.org/

69

LearningInitiative35,adoptsamoreevidence‐basedapproach.CarnegieMellonandtheOpenUniversityintheUKaredevelopingaglobalnetworkofsupportforresearchersandusersofOER,throughOlnet36.Therehasbeenashifttowardsfocusingonthepracticesaroundthecreation,useandmanagementofOER.TheOPALprojecthasrecentlyundertakenareviewofover60casestudiesofOERinitiativesandfromtheseabstractedeightdimensionsofOpenEducationalPractice37.Atthetimeofwritinganonlineconsultationandvalidationprocessaroundtheseisunderway.

Learner management systems

WiththeemergenceofLearnerManagementSystems(LMSs)/VirtualLearningEnvironments(VLEs)inthelasttenyears,anumberofsatellitecommunitieshavedeveloped.Theopensourcetool,Moodle38,hasaveryactivecommunitybutthefocusisprimarilyondevelopmentissuesratherthanthewaysinwhichMoodleisactuallybeingusedinteaching.TheLAMScommunity39isarguablymoresuccessfulintermsofconcentratingoneducationalaspectsandhasover500LAMSdesignsequencesavailableonline.Inaddition,manyinstitutionsinstigatedstaffdevelopmentprogrammeslinkedtotheirVLE,topromoteitsuseanduptake.

Research-based communities

Inadditiontothepractitioner‐orientatedsitesandcommunitiesdescribedaboveitisworthtouchinguponanumberofthemoreresearch‐focusedcommunities.Ase‐learninghasdevelopedasaresearchfield,arangeofprofessionalbodies,specialisedconferencesandjournalshavearisen.Inaddition,communitiesandassociatedactivitiestendtospontaneouslyarisearoundfundinginitiativesinthisarea,forexampleprojectssupportedbytheJISCandAcademyormoreresearch‐focussedinitiativessuchasthecurrentESRC/EPRSCTLRPTechnology‐enhancedlearningprogramme40.Similarpatternsofbehaviourareevidentaroundinternationalcollaboration,althoughunderstandablythisismorecomplex.ForexampleinEuropetheStellarNetworkofExcellence41aimsto‘buildupon,synergiseandextendthevaluableworkwehavestartedbysignificantlybuildingcapacityinTELresearchwithinEurope’.Onespecificexample,relevanttothediscussionhere,includestheELESIG(EvaluationofLearners'Experiencesofe‐learningSpecialInterestGroup)community42.Thisconsistsofover800membersinterestedinlookingatstudents'usesof,andexperiencewith,technologies.Elesigrunsarangeofeventsandhasaning‐basedonlinesiteandalsoonCloudworks.

35 http://oli.web.cmu.edu/openlearning/ 36 http://olnet.org 37 http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloudscape/view/2019 38 http://moodle.org/community/, 39 http://www.lamscommunity.org/ 40 ESRC/EPRSCTLRPTechnology‐enhancedlearningprogramme: http://www.tlrp.org/tel/ 41 EuropetheStellarNetworkofExcellence(http://www.stellarnet.eu/ 42 ELESIG: http://elesig.ning.com/ ; ELESIG team on Cloudworks: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/user/view/1973

70

Appendix8:OpenEducationalResourcesOurfocusinthisappendixhasbeenonreviewingasnapshotofcurrentissuesrelatingtoeducators’motivationsandexperiencesaroundsharingandteachinginanOERcontext.ThecorenotionofopennessandcollectivebenefitthatarekeyprinciplesassociatedwithWeb2.0practicesalignwiththeprinciplesinherentinopensourceinitiatives.Inaneducationalcontext,themostprominentistheOpenEducationalResourcemovement,whichhasgainedscaleanddepthsincetheearly2000s.Atkinsetal.(2008)articulateasharedvisionthateducationalmaterialsshouldbemadefreelyavailable,sothattheycanbesharedandreusedbyothers.Aperceptionthatsuchsharingiseconomicallyviable,andwillleadtowardssharingofgoodpedagogicalpracticesineducationhasalsobeenarticulated(IiyoshiandKumar,2008).

Severalwell‐known–yetdistinct–initiativeswithintheOERworldcontinuetopurportamissionofeducationasa‘publicgood’.Inadditioncurrentthinkingaswellasemergingpolicyagendasoneducationareshiftingfromtheideaofsimplyprovidingaccesstocontent,towardsthenotionofcreating‘openparticipatorylearningecosystems’(cf.SmithandCasserly,2006;Seely‐Brown2007;Seely‐BrownandAdler2008).WebeginthissectionwithabriefoverviewofOERanddefinitionssurroundingsharingopencontentandeducationalpractices.

WebeginwithanoverviewofemergingresearchinthefieldandmorespecificallywefocusuponevidenceofopenpracticesdevelopedinrelationtotheuseofOERhaveanimpactonteachingandlearning.WedrawonsomeoftheemergingliteraturecomingfromourresearchaspartoftheOlnetinitiative43.Inparticular,wefocusonhowtheserelatetothedeploymentofOERandtomotivationsandexperiencesofeducatorsforaccessing,sharingandreflectinginteaching.AspartofadevelopingresearchportfoliowehavebeenconductinginterviewswithinnovatorsinopenaccessandtheworldofOER.TheframeworkforliteraturereviewedandforempiricalinsightsoutlinedinthelatersectionshasbeenbeendevisedbyPanagiotaAlevizouandhasbeenreviewedextensivelyinanumberofconferences(seeAlevizou,2009;Alevizou,2009a;Alevizou,2010;Alevizou,WilsonandMcAndrew,2010;AlevizouandForte,2010).

FromlearningobjectstoopeneducationalresourcesTheterm‘learningobject’,definedas‘adigitalresourcewhichhasanelementofintentionallearning’becamepopularinthe1990s(Littlejohn,2003;Wileyetal.,2002).SincetheestablishmentoftheMERLOTdatabase44,oneoftheearliestavailableontheweb,anumberofotherrepositoriesgainedprominenceduringthe1990s,atbothinstitutionaland

43www.olnet.org.Olnet,fundedbyTheWilliamandFloraHewlettFoundation,buildsonthebasisofworkonOERinitiativesatCarnegieMellonUniversity(theOpenLearningInitiative),togetherwithOpenLearnattheOpenUniversity.44http://www.merlot.org

71

national‐levels.Examplesinclude:JORUM45WISC‐online46andGEM47.GLOBE48providesameta‐searchfacilityacrossotherlearningobjectrepositories.TheReusableLearningObjectCETL49hasaspecificfocusonthedevelopmentanduseoflearningobjects.

ThetermOpenEducationalResources(OER)emergedintheearly2000s;sincethenOERshavegainedincreasedattentionfortheirpotentialtoobviatedemographic,economicandculturaleducationalboundaries,throughfreeaccess,redistributionandreuse.AlthoughtheoriginsofthemovementcanbetracedtoRichardStallman’sFreeSoftwareFoundation,itbegantomaterialisein2002,withacoalitionformedbyUNESCO,theHewlettfoundationandMIT.In2002HewlettinitiatedanextensiveOERprogramme,thechiefaimofwhichwasto‘catalyzeuniversalaccesstoanduseofhigh‐qualityacademiccontentonaglobalscale’(Atkinsetal.,2007:1).AlthoughtheexactdefinitionofOERhasbeencontested,twoprincipaldefinitionshavegainedprominence:

Theopenprovisionofeducationalresources,enabledbyICTs,forconsultation,useandadaptationbyacommunityofusersfornon‐commercialpurposes(UNESCO,2002:n.p.)

Digitizedmaterialsofferedfreelyandopenlyforeducators,studentsandself‐learnerstouseandreuseforteaching,learningandresearch(OECD/Hylén,andSchuller,2007:133).

MIT,withtheirOpenCourseWareinitiative50arecreditedwithbeingthefirsttodeclarethattheyweregoingtomakeasignificantamountoftheircontentfreelyavailable,resultinginaswathofrhetoricabouttheimportanceandpotentialofOER(Caswelletal.2008;SmithandCasserly2006).In2006theOpenUniversity,UKfollowedsuitwithitsOpenLearninitiative51.

FundingforthesetypesofinitiativeshasbeensupportedinparticularbytheWilliamandFloraHewlettfoundationbutalsobyOECDandUNESCO.Morerecently,intheUK,theHigherEducationAcademy(HEA)andtheJointInformationSystemsCommittee(JISC)haveinitiatedalarge‐scalecallforthedevelopmentofOER52,buildingonexistinginitiativessuchasJORUMandOpenLearn.Theprogrammecurrentlycontains29projects.

AccordingtodatafromtheOECD(OECD/Hylén,andSchuller,2007)over300universitiesworldwideareengagedinthedevelopmentofOERwithmorethan3000openaccesscourses.Threeyearson,thenumbersaregrowing:200universitieshavesignedwiththeOpenCoursewareConsortiumalone,offeringmaterialsfrommorethan13,000courses,availablethroughtheConsortium’ssite(Carson,2010).Othersimilarinitiativesinclude:

45http://www.jorum.ac.uk),46http://www.wisc‐online.com/,47http://www.thegateway.org/.48http://www.globe‐info.org/49http://www.rlo‐cetl.ac.uk/joomla/index.php50http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/home/home/index.htm51http://openlearn.open.ac.uk52http://www.jisc.ac.uk/oer

72

TheChinaOpenResourcesforEducation(CORE)consortium53;theJapaneseOCWConsortium54,theParisTechOCWproject55andtheIrishIREL‐Openinitiative56Atthesametime,Web2.0technologiesandsocialmediahaveacceleratedusergeneratedcontentandcollaborativeresources,manyofwhich(e.g.Wikipedia,Flckr,etc)havegainedlegitimacywithintheOERmovement(seeHewlett,2009)andanumberofonlinecollaborativecommunityprojects‐beyondmainstreameducationalinstitutions–haveemergedtofacilitateengagementinlearningwith,andthrough,openresources(e.g.Wikieducator,Wikiversity,thePeertoPeeruniversity,Smarthistory,etc)57.

Openeducationalresourcesthen,includelearningcontentatdifferentlevelsofgranularityforstudentsandteachersatalllevelsoflearning.Thisincludesvideos,books,lessonplans,games,simulations,fullcoursesandopen‐accesscontent;open‐sourcesoftwaretoolsthatsupportthecreation,delivery,use,andimprovementofopenlearningcontent,includingsearchingandorganizationofcontent;contentandlearningmanagementsystems(e.g.,Moodle,Sakai);onlinelearningcommunities;andintellectualpropertylicenses(e.g.,CreativeCommons)topromoteopenmaterialspublishing,designprinciples,andcontentlocalization.Open‐sourcecoursemanagementsystemsarebeingdeployedwidelyinuniversities,andtosomeextentinK–12.Whilenumerousrepositoriesandaggregatorsexist(seeforexampleOERCommons58),recentendeavorshavefocusedattentiononraisingawarenessanddevelopingguidelinesandtutorialsforfinding,producing,licensingandremixingOERs(seeforexampleWikieducator’sOERhandbook59)andUNESCO’sOERtoolkit60.Atthesametime,anumberoftoolsandplatformrepositories,licensingbodies,bestpracticesprojectsandimplementationprojects,aswellasresourceshaveemerged.Thefigurebelowdrawson,andexpandsfrom,Margulies'(2005)andConoleandWeller’s(2008)taxonomies(tools,content,implementation)tomaptheOERlandscape.

53http://www.core.org.cn/cn/jpkc/index_en.html54http://www.jocw.jp55http://graduateschool.paristech.org/56http://www.irel‐open.ie/57http://wikieducator.org/,http://en.wikiversity.org,http://p2pu.org/,http://www.smarthistory.org/58www.oercommons.org59www.wikieducator.org/OER_Handbook60http://oerwiki.iiep‐unesco.org/index.php?title=UNESCO_OER_Toolkit).

73

Figure3:ConceptualMapofOER:ExpandedfromMarguliers(2005)(seeAlevizou,2010;seealsoOECD,2007,ConoleandWeller,2008)

ThreekeyreportsprovideacomprehensivereviewofthedevelopmentoftheOERmovement,describingmanyofthemajorinitiativesinthefieldandsomeofthekeyachievements(Atkinsetal.,2007;HylénandSchuller/OECD2007;Gaser,2007).AcollectioneditedbyIiyosh,KumarandSeelyBrown(2008),considersthewidernotionof‘openness’andwhatitmightmeaninaneducationalcontext.TheabilityofOERtoserveasequitableandaccessiblealternativestoincreasedcostsandcommercialisationofeducation(IshiiandLutterbeck,2001)continuestobeacentralroleforincentivisingindividualsandmobilisingactivists,advocacygroupsaswellasfundingandpolicyorganizations.Popularargumentsreviewedintheliterature–thoughmostlyspeculative–pointtothepossibilitythatOERproliferationmayfacilitatemeetingmorepersonalisedteachingandlearningrequirements;toopportunitiesforcollaborationamongpeersinthedevelop,useandreuseopenmaterialsgloballyandacrossdifferentdisciplines.Suchpossibilitiesmayultimatelypositivelyinfluencebothacademicendeavoursandthescholarshipofteachingandlearning.Yettwocoreissuesemergeregardingthenatureofopenness,peersharingandmodificationandarerequirefurtherempiricalexploration.ThefirstrelatestothedegreethatengagementinlearningthroughOER,meansalsoengagingindevelopingmoretransparentpedagogies;thesecondrelatestotherelationshipandtensionsbetweenaccessandtracingofre‐use.

74

AsIiyoshandKumarargue'thekeytenetofopeneducationisthateducationcanbeimprovedbymakingeducationalassetsvisibleandaccessibleandbyharnessingthecollectivewisdomofacommunityofpracticeandreflection'(IiyoshandKumar,2008:10,emphasisadded).OpenEducationithasbeenarguednotonlycreatesavenuesfora)engagingeducatorsaroundtheworldandb)offeringadditionalresourcesforclassroomstudents;butalso,c)assupportforindependentlearners,auto‐didactsandself‐learners.Participation,whetherasaneducatororcasuallearnerisoftenframedasanopportunityforexperimentingandgaininginformation,digital,networkingandmedialiteracyskills,through,andwithin,thefieldofcurriculardesignandinstruction.Itistooframedasanopportunityfordevelopingasupportivedialoguefortherepresentationofpedagogiesandpedagogicalknowledge.InarecentdiscussionbetweenStephenDownesandDavidWiley–bothadvocates,scholarsandpractitionersinOER–whatwassuggestedwasthat:

Institutionsare invitedtoexploretheeffectivenessandviabilityofopensolutionstoaddresslarge‐scaleeducational reform.Teacher trainingand facultydevelopmenteffortsareareasofparticularinterest,alongwithopportunitiesforcontinuouseducation.[…]‘ifopeneducationalresources are to represent a rich tapestryof theways inwhichwemanifest ourselves – thewaysinwhichweimmerseourselvesinmultiplecreativities–theytooofferaninviting,lower‐riskand lower‐costplatform forbeingexperimentaland innovative in the fieldofeducation'(paraphrased from the Wiley‐Downes discussion at the OpenEd preconference, Alevizou,2009).

IndeedabodyofliteraturehasemergedfromresearchintoOERsthatcomefromconventionaluniversitiesandpointstowardsthesedirections(PetridesandJimes,2006;Petridesetal.,2008;Kanchanaraksaetal.,2009;SchuwerandMulder,2009).McAndrewetal.(2009)notethattheOpenLearninitiativehasprovidednewmeansofworkingwithbothformalpartnershipsandtobuildalsolessformalpartnershipsandcollaborations.Ithasalsohelpedtowardsexaminingandimprovingorganizationalstructuresandprocesses,aswellaspedagogicalphilosophiesamongeducatorsthatsharedtheirmaterialsinanOERform.Anotherstrandintheliteraturepointstoinformallearningcommunitiesformingaroundopeneducationalresources(Bourbules,2007;Ala‐Mutka,2009).Burbulesfocusesonwhathedescribesas'self‐educatingcommunities'groupsengagedinformal,informal,ornon‐formalteachingandlearningactivitiesamongstthemselves.Hisprimaryinterestiswithonlineself‐educatingcommunities,usingthewebasaneducationalmedium.Heoffersatypologyofthekindsofonlinenetworksof‘improvement’andco‐education.Healsodiscussestheinternalpracticesandnormsthatallowthesenetworkstoactsuccessfullyasself‐educatingcommunities,andpointstotheareasinwhichthesepracticesproducetensionsandcontradictions.

Whiletensionsbetweeninformalenvironmentsandgivenandmeasuredtasks(suchasaccreditation)needtoberecognized,establishingpresenceininformalspaceshelpsinstitutionstogetvisibility.Italsoenablesinstitutionstoconnectwithprospectivestudentsandself‐learnersthathavethepotentialtocontributetodevelopingpedagogicalinnovationscomingfrompeoplefromwithininstitutionsandexternalcommunities(GurleyandLane,2009).Community,creativeparticipationandcollaborationinbothformalandinformalcontextsarecentraltotheeffectivenessandsustainabilityofOER.

75

Understandingthenatureandinterfaceofopennessinthecontextofarapidlychangingeducationalcontext,isimportantfromaresearchperspective,butalsohasanumberoftangibleandpracticalbenefits.Firstly,itislikelytoleadtobetterunderstandingofhowOERcanbedesignedandrepurposed,whichultimatelymayleadtoagreateruptakeanduse.Secondly,adoptingmoreopenapproachestothedesignprocesscouldleadtobetterunderstandingoflearningandteachingideasaswellthecreationofavibrantcommunityofscholarshiparoundlearningandteaching(Conole,2009/LearninginanOpenWorldVisionStatement61).

Educators’motivationsandOERteachingpracticesAsignificantbodyofresearchisnowavailableonhoweducatorsandlearnersareaccessingandusingOERmaterials(WileyandHenson,2006;Harleyetal,.2006;Hylen,2006)McAndrewetal.,2009).Inasurveyof452collegeinstructorsconductedin2007Petridesetal.(2008a)foundthat92%hadsearchedforcourse‐relatedmaterialsontheInternet.Reasonsincluded:

• thedesiretointegratenewmaterialsintotheircourses• toimprovetheirteachingmethodsandknowledge• toconnectwithcolleagueswhohadsimilarteachinginterests(Petridis,etal.2008a

citedinPetridisetal,2008:100).

TheseresultsareonparwithMIT’sconsecutiveevaluationreportsofitsOCWcollection,whichtoorevealthateducatorsareaccessingOERtosupporttheircourseplanningandpreparationandtoenhancetheirpersonalknowledge(MIT,2006;2009a).

Thesharingofone’sownmaterialsandthereuseofothers’OERsislessexpansive(seeHarleyetal.,2006;Hatakka,2009).InPetridesetal's(2008a)studyofonlineinstructors,evidencedirectstothefollowing:while67%ofthosesurveyedwerewillingtosharetheircoursematerialswithothersovertheInternet,only25%werewillingorintendingtomaketheircoursematerialsavailableinanOERform.Evidentintheliteratureandinourownresearchisthatissuesofownership,confidence,relevanceandqualityareprominentinhibitors,alongsideissuesrelatingtolegalconstraintsandtechnicalliteracy,lackofprofessionalincentivesandaculture(orexpertise)insharingandremixingopenly.Thelasttwoaspectsarecloselyassociatedwithawarenessraisingstrategies,policyandinstitutionalsupport.Asseveralintervieweesthatparticipatedinourstudy‘oncollaborationandcontextinOER’(seeAlevizou,2009a)note:

Theonethingistheuseofthetechnology,newtechnologyandwikis.Antheotherisopeningtotheworld,right.Sothat,thatbarrierhasbeenwelldiscussedIthink.It’sanemotionalthingIthink,cosplay it out rationally, its advantageous to teachers largely, and researchers. But emotionally it’sscary, they are unprepared, their resources aren’t good enough, they think there might becommercialgains(Wikieducator,Interviewee,13/08/09).

61http://cloudworks.ac.uk/index.php/cloud/view/2804

76

Thereishighqualitythresholdandself‐censorshipthatisimposedbyteachersthemselves;andthat’sconsideredasbarrierforcreatingadditionalcoursesfortheOERplatform…Additionalawardsshouldmotivatepeople(OpenERInterviewee,24/07/09).

WeneedtomakesurethatOERsarenotstandaloneprojectswithininstitutions…Whenpeopleinvesttimeandresources,theyneedtoseeatangiblebenefit:thiscouldrelatetostudentsfeelingthattheyarebettereducated;inabetterway,inadifferentway.Butitalsodependsontheinstitutionhavingcreatedapolicyenvironmentthatissupportingfacultyhavingdedicatedtheirtimeandenergy(OERAfricaInterviewee,12/08/09).

Despitethesebarriersthereisevidencethatovertime,positiveattitudesregardingmotivationexistandarecognitionof–amongthosethatparticipateinrelevantinitiatives–positiveinfluenceinresearch,teachingandlearningpractices.AccordingtothemostrecentevaluationsurveysconductedbyMITOCW(2009a),17%ofeducatorscomingtothesitehavereusedcontentand32%expecttodosointhefuture,47%ofthetotalcohortofeducationscombineOCWmaterialswithothercontent;30%adaptcoursesyllabi;30%adaptassignmentsorexams.

Mostimportantly,evidencesuggeststhatteacherswhoindeedpublishinanOERplatformformenjoythebenefitsoflocalisedandglobalexposurewithrespecttoscholarlyandscientificcommunities,engagebetterwiththeirstudents(prospective,currentandalumni)andimprovetheirteachingpracticesandexperimentation.AsoneintervieweefromMITOCWputsit:

Facultyhaveaboutahalfdozenthingstheycarryaroundintheirhead,thatthey’dliketodototheircourseiftheyfoundtimetodoit,andpublishingopenlyprovidesthemtheoccasiontomakethosechangestheywereplanningtomake.AndsoaboutathirdoftheFacultytellusthey’veimprovedtheircoursematerialsthroughthepublicationprocess.Andanotherthirdsaythey’vebecomemorecomfortableinusingthewebasateachingtool,urthroughpublication.ThenwhenFacultyaregoingtoproducetheirowncourses,orgettheirowncoursesreadyforteachinghereoncampus,about80%gototheOpenCourseWaresitetofindmaterialstolookatwhattheircolleaguesareteaching,lookathowothercoursesarestructured(MITOCWInterviewee,08/08/2009).

ConnexionsandWikieducatorhavealsobeenusedasplatformsforeducatorstoexperimentwithandpublishwidelyinavarietyoffieldsforalllevelsofeducationincludingvocationaleducationandteachertraining;Thesitesservesasanapprenticeshipplatformforeducatorsbyallowingthemtoobservehowothersintheirrespectivefieldscommunicatewitheachotherandalsotopublishtheirowncontributions,orimproveothers’content,whichcanberelativelysmall–echoing‘legitimateperipheralparticipation'(LaveandWenger,1991)thatischaracteristicofopensourcecommunities:

Ithink,generally,wefitnicelyintothosemodelswhereyouhavenowtheopportunitytore‐use,infactteachersaregoing,‘oh…,youmeanIdon’thavetotakethisbookasitis,Icanre‐arrangethechapters’…That’sthefirstone,andthenthesecondoneis‘ohyoumeanIcanputmyownworkinthere,oh…’.Andsothose,thoseareevolutionsthattakeplace.Thenthey’lltrymore,andsomewillbeadopters,somewon’tbe…(ConnexionsInterviewee,10/08/09).

Thisallowseducatorsto'learntobe'open,co‐creators;inthisinstancebyperipherallyparticipatingin‘improving’andaddingtheirownperspectivesandexperiencesfromusing

77

resourcesinrespectivecontexts.Suchperipheralparticipationcanresultinacycleofmoreexperimentationandengagementwithpeersandhencecontributetoagradualtransformationofdepartmental,andeventually,institutionalcultures.Insomeways,assomeofourintervieweesputit,theadoptionofanOERmindsetamongstfaculty,followsaclassicexampleofdiffusionofinnovations(Rogers,1962):

Weputsurveysinthefieldtostudents,toalumni,tofaculty,andwetriedtogetthatinformationoutsothatitbecamecleartothecommunitywhatthebenefitswereforMITinparticipating.ButoverallIthinkwhatwesawwasreallykindofaclassicdiffusionofinnovationoccur.Whereyouknow,wegottheearlyadoptersonboard,wegotthemtobecomeourbestadvocates,andsotheygotthenextgroupandthenextgroup,anditsortofledtoapointwherethequestiononcampusbecame‘whyhaven’tyoupublished’,ratherthan‘whywouldyoupublish’.AndIthinkthatstudentswerereallyimportantindrivingthat,becauseoncethestudentsbegantoseeitasatremendousresource,theywouldgoandlookforaparticularfacultymembersmaterials,iftheywouldn’tfindit,they’dgoandfindthefacultymemberandsaywellwhyhaven’tyoupublishedonOpenCourseWare(MITOCWInterviewee,08/08/2009).

Variationsinhighereducationinstitutionsregarding‘OER‐readiness’exist,withuniversitieswithexpertisein,andpre‐existingstructuresto,supportdistancelearninghavingacompetitiveadvantageoverresidentialinstitutions,bothintermsofinfrastructureandinstitutionalsupport.Buthavingandmaintainingastrongvision,alongwithadvocacyandinclusivestrategiesforsupportingteachersandstudents,isalsodeemedparamount,inbothdistanceandresidentialuniversities.Increasedengagementwithcontentforprospectiveandhomestudentsiscitedasacommonincentiveatbothinstitutionalandfacultylevels.Thisincreasestheopportunitiesforpre‐practicumandpersonalizedlearning.Inaddition,makingstudentcontributions(suchasseminarnotes,labreportsandpersonalreflectionsthroughblogging)alsoavailableinaopen‐coursewareform,isseenbyeducatorsasanimportantfactorforimprovingteachingandlearningandforcreatingmoreopenandparticipatorycultures.Assomeintervieweesnoted,involvingthestudentsintheOERmovementhasanumberofbenefitsandcancontributetobringingaboutchangesinculturalattitudesandthewayinwhichlearningandteachingisundertaken.Forothers,teachingusingOERhasbecomepartoftheirprofessionalpractice.BelowweprovidesomeexampleswherebyengagementwithOERcontentintersectswithteachingpracticesinanOERfashion.

AnewEU‐fundedinitiative,OPAL62isarticulatinghowOpenEducationalPracticesarecurrentlylocatedwithinthedevelopmentanduseofOER.ItsaimistoexplorewaystoimprovethequalityofOERandspiralinnovationaroundOER.HowmightWeb2.0technologiesbeusedasaformof‘pedagogicalwraparound’topromotediscussionaboutOER?IndeedOERresearchanddevelopmentactivitiesprovideusefulgroundsforexploringnewapproachesinlearningandteaching.Thisworkhasenabledtheteachingcommunitytoexperiment,toexplorehowtheseresourcesmightbeusedindifferentcontextsandhowtheycanbesharedandrepurposed,asisevidentbythediversityofOERinitiativesworldwide.Theserangefromwhole‐scaleinstitutionalprojects,tocross‐sectordisciplineinitiatives,aswellasindividualprojectswhichfocusonuseofOERforcollaborationand62OPAL:http://qualityoer.pbworks.com/FrontPage

78

peerlearning.Thesamecanalsobesaidofothercrowd‐sourcedprojectssuchasWikieducator,Wikiversity,DeviantArtandSmarthistory.

OERclassroomcommunitiesGeorgeSiemensandStephenDownescreatedanambitiouscourseanddelivereditforthefirsttimein2009–notonlywerethetoolsandresourcestheyusedinthecoursefree,butsowastheexpertise.(SeethisblogpostforareflectionontheexperimentbyGeorgeSiemens63)Thetwelve‐weekcoursewascalled‘ConnectivismandConnectiveKnowledgeOnlineCourse’64TheydescribedthecourseasaMOOG(MassiveOpenOnlineCourse).Thecontent,deliveryandsupportforthecoursewastotallyfree,anyonecouldjoinandanimpressive2400did,althoughtheactualnumberofveryactiveparticipantswassmaller(ca.200).Thecourseprovidesaniceexampleofanextensionoftheopenmovement,movingastepbeyondtheOpenEducationalResourcemovementtoprovidingatotallyfreecourse.Siemens,reflectingonthecoursesaidthefollowing:

Didwechangetheworld?No.Notyet.Butwe(andImeanallcourseparticipants,notjustStephenandI)managedtoexplorewhatispossibleonline.Peopleself‐organizedintheirpreferredspaces.Theyetchedawayatthehallowedplaqueof“whatitmeanstobeanexpert”.Theylearnedintransparentenvironments,andintheprocess,becameteacherstoothers.Thosethatobserved(orlurkedasisthemorecommonterm),hopefullyfoundvalueinthecourseaswell.Perhapslifecircumstances,personalschedule,motivationforparticipating,confidence,familiaritywiththeonlineenvironment,ornumerousotherfactors,impactedtheirabilitytocontribute.Whilewecan’t“measurethem”thewayI’vetriedtodowithblogandmoodleparticipants,theircontinuedsubscriptiontoTheDailyandthecommentsencounteredinF2Fconferencessuggesttheyalsofoundsomevalueinthecourse65.

DavidWiley,AssociateProfessorofInstructionalTechnologyanddirectoroftheCenterforOpenandSustainableLearning(COSL)atUtahStateUniversityisawell‐knownresearcherintheareaofLearningObjectsandOpencontent.Usingwikisandblogs,herunsacourseentitled,“IntroductiontoOpenEducation”66.Thenoveltyofthecourse(launchedin2007)wasthatitwasfreeandofferedtoanyoneintheworld.Theonlyrequirementwastheavailabilityofablog,tobeusedtopublishweeklypostsonthevarioustopicsofthecourse.Thecoursecouldbeattendedindifferentways:

• credit:studentswhoneededcredithadtosignupforanindependentstudyattheiruniversityandfindasupervisortowhomtheinstructorshouldsendagradeattheendoftheterm,

• noncredit:studentscouldattendthecoursewithoutanygradingfromtheinstructor.Iftheycompletedittheycouldgetacertificateattheendofthecoursestatingitssuccessfulconclusion,

• informal:fullynon‐creditattendanceoftheactivities.

63http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/connectivism/?p=182 64 http://e4innovation.com/?p=370 - _ftn1 65http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/connectivism/?p=182 66http://open.byu.edu/ipt692r‐wiley/

79

Thecoreobjectivesofthecourseweretoofferafirmgroundinginthecurrentstateofthefieldofopeneducation,includingrelatedtopicslikecopyright,licensing,andsustainability,andtogetparticipantsthinking,writing,anddebatingaboutcurrentpracticesandpossiblealternativesinopeneducation.Usingparticipantobservationasamethodologicalapproachtostudysocialinteractionwithincourse,Finietal.(n.d.)offeranumberofinterestinginsights.Whiletheinitialdidacticstructureofthecoursepromotedindividuallearningmodalitiesforreadingandstructuringreflections,duringcoursedelivery,peerparticipantstookwereencouragedtotakemorecontrolovercurriculardesignandactivities,.Theauthorsnotedthattightconnectionsbetweencontentandusersweregraduallydeveloped,andthatcreativeandcollaborativedimensionswerealsoevident.Respondingtoanetworkofparticipants,theinstructorrestructuredthedevelopmentofthecourseproposingafinalversion,whichwasmodifiedandbroadenedonthebasisofthelearners’observations.Attheendofthecourse,startingfromthelearningmaterialproducedbytheparticipants,theteacherextrapolatedanewpatternofrenewalthatwasgoingtobeusedinthenewversionsofthecourse.Indescribingthecoursedesign,WileyoutlinesawholephilosophyforteachinginOERfashion:

Therearetwowaystodescribethedesignofthiscourse,andbothareequallyvalid.Ontheonehand,thiscourseisamixofdirectskillsinstructioncombinedwithproject‐basedlearningandcollaborativeproblemsolving.Thecourseemploysaprogressionofincreasinglycomplexproblemswithsupportiveinformation,andrequiresstudentstosynthesizehundredsofpagesofliterature,interviewdata,andtheirowndesignintuitiontoproducemeaningfulartifactsbothindividuallyandaspartofhighlyinter‐dependentteams.Theideaofteach‐reteach(characterizedbyGong’sdescriptionoftheThreePersonProblem)isattheheartofthestudents’day‐to‐daylearningexperiences(Wiley,200967):

SimilarendeavourshavebeenundertakenwithintheWikiversityplatformforacourseentitled'Composingfreeandopenonlineeducationalresources'68.Leinonenetal.(2009)notethattheexperimentwasdesignedsothatthecoursecouldmodelteachingandlearning—thatis,combiningelementsfromacquisition,participationandknowledge–buildingmetaphorsoflearning.Fromtheorganizationalperspective,thecoursereliedinmanywaysonconventionscommoninfreeadulteducation,andoutlinebothopportunitiesandchallengesinthefieldandinteachingandlearningwithwikis.

Exploringtheintersectionsamongteaching,learningcommunitiesandresearch,Ferreira(2009)outlinestwo‘PilotLearningProjects’,oneinthesubjectof'EthicsandTechnology',andtheotherintheareaofDesign.BothwererunintheOpenLearnplatform,usingcommunicationtoolsandcommunityinLabSpace–OpenLearn’sinteractiveplatform.Coreaimsofthepilotsweretoexplorea)waysinwhichOpenLearncancontributetocoursedevelopmentattheOUbyprovidingaplatformforexperimentationandtrialofnewideas;andb)todocumentandreflectontheopportunitiesaffordedattheboundarybetweenformal/informallearningattheinterfacebetweentheOUandOpenLearn(Ferreira,2009:20).Ferreiraoffersinterestingperspectivesthatbringtolighttensionsthathavealreadybeendiscussedinthisreport:67 'Course Description: http://open.byu.edu/ipt692r-wiley/syllabus/) 68http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Composing_free_and_open_online_educational_resource

80

Despitethewidespreadmarketingandmediadiscoursesaroundtheideathat‘contentisfree;it’samatterofeditorialising’,commentssuchasthesearerepresentativeofapositionmorewidelysharedamongstthosewhoteach:‘Withoutateacher,learningisdifficultand,often,impossible’.‘IttookmesixmonthstofindmywayaroundsomethingIcouldhavelearntinaweek,ifIhadsomesteppingstones’.‘Evenstronglymotivatedgroupsoflearnersquicklycollapsewithoutateacher’.Whilstsomeoftheunderlyingconcernsamongstsomecolleaguesseemtorevolvearoundviewsthatconstrue‘openness’asapotentiallydestabilisingelement,lessreactionaryviewsrevolvearoundconcernswith‘quality’assomethingthatcanbeassessed,measured,andusedasevidenceof‘success’:‘quality’oflearningresources,‘quality’ofthelearningexperienceaffordedbytheinvolvementofateacherand‘quality’oftheindividualsproducedbysuchexperiences.Butaretheseconcernsrootedonlyinpoliticsanditsquestionsofpower?[...]Fromthisperspective,amajorareaofimpactofOERsisthattheiravailabilityisnotonlycreatingnewchallengesbutalsobringingtolightpreviouslyveiledtensionsandquestionsregardingidentityandboundaries,andthisprovidesafascinatingareaforfurtherinvestigation(Ferreira,2009:48‐9).

Repurposingandreflecting:designingresources,designingcollaborativecommunitiesMotivationsforcontributioninOERplatformsorOpenCoursewarerepositoriesfollowsimilarpatternstoopenpublishing.Petridesetal.(2008)offerusefulinsightsregarding‘author’useandreuseinOER.TheyfocusedontheConnexionsplatformandperformedarigorousstatisticalanalysisoflogfilesofactivityoverafive‐yearperiod,alongwithfollowupinterviewswithaselectionofparticipantswithintheplatform.Whilethequalitativedataprovidedinsightsintouseandreusepractices,thequalitativedataaddeddepthtothefindingsbydelvingintothe‘why’andthe‘how’thatgoesbehinduseandreusepractices,collaborativeauthorship,aswellaschallengesanddiscontinuationofuseandreuse.Amongthefactorsinfluencingcontributionandcontinuoususecitedinthefindingswere:

• priorfamiliaritywithpublishingonlinecontent• asenseofimprovementofteachingpractices• andsupportinprofessionaldevelopment,whichhelpedfeedacontinuuminpublishing,

augmentingandre‐usingcontent.

Astheauthorsnote:‘Usersexplainedthatasteachingprofessionalstheyhadaheightenedneedfortimelycontentfortheirstudentsandcolleagues’(Petridesetal.,2008:112).Incentivesforpersistentusersincludedideology,technicalknow‐howandarecognitionthatthistypeofengagementhelpedtheirprofessionaldevelopment;theyalsosawitasusefulforconnectingwithsubject‐specificinstructorsandteachingscholarsacrossgeographicalboundaries.However,intermittentandeventualnon‐users(someofwhomwerealsoeducators)weredisincentivisedbylackoftechnicalskills,relevanceofcontent,andreluctancetotheideaofgroupauthorship(seebelowformoreaboutcollaborativeco‐authorshipandcommunitystructures).

Certainly,educators’priorknowledgeandfamiliaritywithWeb2.0ortechnicalskills,aswellasmotivationstowardsopennessandcrowdsourcededucation,arekeycomponentsforthesustainabilityandsuccessoftheOERmovement(seeforexample,Downes,2007).

Asresearchinthefieldhasindicated,educators’concernsoverrelevanceandqualityhinderuseandreuse.Therelevanceofcontentincorporatesseverallayers,e.g.

81

examplesfromdevelopedcountriesmaynotberelevantforstudentsoriginatingfromothercultures,thepedagogyusedmaynotbeappropriate,orthelevelofthecontentmaynotbeappropriate(Albright,2005;Unwin,2005;Selinger2004).Qualitycanmeandifferentthings(includingthelegacyofthehostinstitutionoftheeducator/OERproducerinquestion);however,commonqualityissuesincludeaccuracyoftheinformationandknowledgedistributedinthecontent.Justbecausecontentis'correct'itdoesnot,however,meanthatitisappropriatetouseineverycontext(AttwellandPumilia,2007;Albright2005).Qualityisalsoamatteroftrust:theusershavetotrusttheinformationprovidediftheyaretouseit(D’Antoni2006,Hylén2006).Analysingthreeinterpretivecasestudies(TeachersinBlangadesh,ContentdevelopersinSriLanka,UNESCOOTP’susers),Hattaka(2009)revealshownotonlyfactorsrelatedtocontentissues(suchasquality,relevance)butalsolanguageaffecttheactualreuseofOERs.Furthermoreeducationalrulesandrestrictionsindifferentcountries,access,technicalresources,intellectualproperty,awareness,computerliteracy,teachingcapacity,andteachingculturesplayaroleinlimitingtheadoptionofopencontent.Amongthereportedfindings,forinstance,teachers“seethecontentdevelopmentprocessasself‐development”(Hattaka,2009:7,13)andareoftenreluctanttomerelycopymaterialsprovidedbyothers.Moreover,finding,assessingandmodifyingmaterialsontheInternetisconsideredtimeconsumingandexcessivelycomplex.Educatorswouldfinditeasiertoutilisematerialswithafinergranularity.Anadditionalissuedealswiththelackoftrusttowardsopencontentnotprovidedbyrecognizedinstitutions.ThisimpliesalimittotheideaofWeb2.0communitiesasaccreditedproducersofeducationalopencontent.Issuesofquality,technicalexpertise,notionsofownershipandtimeconsiderations(evenwheninstitutionalsupportinenablingreuseisprovided)areconsistentwithfindingsreportedbyotherresearchers(seealsoWilsonandMcAndrew,2009).

Otherbarriersincludethetensionsaroundcontextualisation.DuringaBlendedLearningDesignworkshopatBrunelUniversity(aspartoftheOU'sLearningDesignInitiative69),wehostedastallonOERtoassistwithraisingawarenessaboutOERsandfindingrelevantresources70.Someeducatorsmentionedthattheywouldbedelightedtosharetheirownresources,butwerealsoscepticalofcontext‐independentresources.Thissuggeststhatifresourcesneedtobe'granular'sotheycanbefoundeasily,theyalsoneedtoofferexplicitlearningdesigns,andaninteractiveinterfacetoenablefeedbackand/ordialogueabout'reuse'inothercontexts.Licensingregimesareanotherissue.Indeed,issuesrelatedtocontextualizationarekeyconcerns.SomenotethathighlydecontextualisedOERsarereusableatlargerscalesandforagreaternumberoflearningsituations;yetthismeansthattheyaremoreexpensivetoproduceanddifficulttolocaliseandpersonalise.Thisisbecausesuchresources(e.g.learningobjects)bynatureoftheirhighlevelofgranularityaredevoidofthecontextthatmaybeneededtomakethemcomprehensible(e.g.CalverleyandShephard,2003).Giventhatincorporationintoinstructionalactivitieshasbeenidentifiedasacentralfeatureofreuse(Reckeretal.,2004),enablingthecontextualisationofOERacrossvariousteachingandlearningsituationsisvitaltosupportthisprocess.Conoleand

69 http://ouldi.open.ac.uk 70 http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2556

82

Weller(2008)arguethatadoptingalearningdesignmethodologymayprovideavehicleforenablingbetterdesignandreuse.AligningwithCantoni,whoadvocatesthatthecommunityofuseandthecontextwithinwhichOERsarecreatedarekey,ConoleandWeller(2008)arguethatOERsinthemselvesaresimplyresources,whichhavepotentialthatisonlyunlockedinuse.

Intermsofmakingamoreexplicitconnectionbetweenthelearningdesignandworkonpedagogicalpatterns,ConoleandJonesdescribeacasestudythatisrepresentedbothasapedagogicalpatternandavisuallearningdesign(ConoleandJones,2010).Morerecently,viatheOlnetinitiative,workhasbeenundertakentoexploretheconnectionbetweenlinkingOER,learningdesignandpedagogicalpatterns(Dimitriadisetal.,2009;Conoleetal.,2010).Thereareanumberofhypothesesbeingtestedwiththisnewwork..Firstly,thattheapplicationofmethodologiesfromworkonLearningDesignandPedagogicalPatternsmayhelpthedesignandreuseofOER.Secondly,thatOERhaveimplicitdesignsandthatifthesearemadeexplicit,theycanbeshared(andhencerepurposed)moreeasily.Thirdly,thatactiverepresentationofthedesignprocessthroughavisualisationtool(likeCompendiumLD)thatdrawsonexistingresources(suchasOpenEducationalResourcerepositories),togetherwithdesignmethods(fromlearningdesignandpedagogicalpatternsresearch),canhelpguideandinformthedesignprocess.Theoutputsofthedesignprocess(anOERandanassociateddesign)canthenbesharedwiththecommunityviaappropriaterepositories(suchasOpenLearn)andsocialnetworkingsites(suchasCloudworks).

AcultureofsharingandbuildingmorecontextaroundOERswasperceivedascriticaltomeetingtheneedsofstudents,accordingtofortyleadersinopeneducationandtechnologywhometinBarcelonaonOctober19‐20,2009,attheOpenEdTechSummitsponsoredbytheOpenUniversityofCatalunyaandtheNewMediaConsortium.CreatingtheuniversityofthefuturewasthetitleofthesummitandthefocalquestionfortheeventwaswhetherOpenEducationalResources(OERs)areexamplesofcreativeuseofWeb2.0inahighereducationcontext.TheCalltoActionsummarises71themajorfindingsofthe2009OpenEdTechSummit;Ofthose,point5isofparticularinterest:

Contentproducersandusersalikemustembracestrategies(reflectiveblogging,metadata,documentationofprocess,visualizationoflearning,etc.)forlinkingcontentgenerationto"pedagogicalwraparounds"thatembedcontextwithineffectivelearningpractices.Suchstrategieswouldensurethatthefocusremainsonlearningobjectivesandprocess,ratherthanonthetechnologyusedtodeliverthelearningmaterials.

Alongsidethedevelopmentofacommunity,aninfrastructureforauthoring,collaborationandrepurposingisdeemednecessaryforenablingthecreationofacriticalmassofcontentthatcanbecontinuouslyimprovedupon.OpenLearn’sLabSpacesectionisspecificallydesigntoencourageeducatorsto'collaboratewithothersandpublishnewversionsoflearningmaterialstosharewiththeworld'.IneachOER,the'Versions'blockincludes

71http://oet.wiki.nmc.org/CallToAction

83

'Uploadthisunit'and'Makeacopyforrevising'.TheConnexionssiteoffersvariablecontentandstructurecomplicateenmassoperations,butindividualmodulesandcollectionsareaccessible,structured,andsupportedforreuse/remixwiththemostliberalCreativeCommonslicense.Intermsofprovidingasocialandcommunityinterface,thesiteissimilartoOpenLearn’sLabSpace,providingnotonlypackagedcontentbutalsoresourcesandtoolstofacilitatereuse,remixing,andrepublishingOERs.Connexionsenablesmemberstocreateonlinecontentindividualaswellascollaboratively;authoruserscancreateprivateworkareas,andversionsofmodulescreatedcanbeimprovedoraugmentedintheseareasorotherswhenpublished(attheauthor'sdiscretion).Authorscancreateonlinesharedworkgroupsandinviteotherstojoin.AsPetridesetal.note(2008:112),workgroupmemberscitedtheoverarchingstructuresofgroupsasanimportantfactorinmaintainingcollectiveefforts,alongsideclearroleassignationforensuringregularmaintenanceandupdating.Nonetheless,commontensionsandconflictsoftensurfacearoundattributionandownership.McAndrewatal.(2009:50‐4)offerseveralexamplesofcollaborationsandrepurposingwithinLabSpaceandclaimthemostcommonmotivationsforcollaborationarethefollowing:

• Benefitsfromaspaceinwhichtocreateandsupportacommunity• InformalassociationwiththeOpenUniversity• Researchingtoolsforteachingpurposes• Publishingownmaterials• Translationintodifferentlanguages

Withsophisticatedtechnicalcapabilitiesandcommunityarchitecturesinplace,theroleofmentorshipinfacilitatingrepurposing,comesforwardinmanyOERplatforms,asseveralofourintervieweesfromOpenLearn,Wikieducator,ConnexionsandWikiversitynote.Ontheotherhand,endorsingculturesofreflectionandconnectingthenodesinexistingnetworksofteacher‐learnersandstudents‐learnersisalsoseenasawaytocultivateexistingcommunitiesofinterestandpractice.AsSeelyBrownandAdler(2008)note:

‘Weneedtoconstructshared,distributed,reflectivepracticumsinwhichexperiencesarecollected,vetted,clustered,commentedon,andtriedoutinnewcontexts.Onemightcallthis“learningaboutlearning,”abootstrappingoperationinwhicheducators,alongwithstudents,arelearningamongandbetweenthemselves.Thiscanbecomealivingordynamicinfrastructure—itselfareflectivepracticum.’(n.p.).

Wearestartingtoseeexamplesofinitiativeswhichareexploringwaysofachievingthis.WithintheOU,wehavedevelopedCloudworks,whichprovidesaplatformforsharingideasanddesignsaboutteachingandlearning.AnotherexampleofsuchapracticumistheonlineTeachingandLearningCommons72launchedin2008bytheCarnegieFoundationfortheAdvancementofTeaching.TheCommonsisessentiallyanopenversionoftheFoundation’sGalleryofTeachingandLearning73whichhasbeenoperatingforthepastnineyears.TheGalleryprovidesanonlineshowcaseforcasestudiesofsuccessfulteachingandlearning

72http://commons.carnegiefoundation.org/73http://gallery.carnegiefoundation.org/,

84

projectsthathavebeensupportedbytheFoundation,alongwithasetofweb‐basedtools(theKEEPToolkit74)forcreatingthesecasestudies.TheCommonsisanopenforumwhereinstructorsatalllevels(andfromaroundtheworld)canposttheirownexamplesandcanparticipateinanongoingconversationabouteffectiveteachingpractices,asameansofsupportingaprocessof“creating/using/re‐mixing(orcreating/sharing/using).Researchintohowthesetypesofplatformscanbeusedtosupportsharinganddiscussionofpracticeisbeginningtoemerge(Alevizouetal,2010;ConoleandCulver,2009;ConoleandCulver,2010).AnumberofotherfieldsofenquiryincludingmotivationsandexperiencesoflearnersinanOERcontexthavegeneratedalotofattentionandaburgeoningbodyofliteratureisemerging.

Appendix9:IssuesraisedbytheintroductionofnewtechnologiesAnumberofkeyinsightsemergefromcomparativestudiesweoutlinedthroughoutthereview.Theseinclude:

• Institutionalarrangements• Theeducator'srole• Theattitudesandrolesofstudents• Tensionsaroundthenatureofopenness• Assessmentpractice

InstitutionalarrangementsTheintroductionofWeb2.0technologiesimpactsonexistingorganisationalstructures.Thereneedstobeabalanceofexperimentationbyindividualsandinstitutionalcoordination.Suchabalanceisnoteasyandofcoursethistensionaccompaniestheintroductionofanynewtechnology.HowevertheproblemisexacerbatedwithWeb2.0technologies,whichinmanyrespectsarefundamentallyatoddswithinstitutionalsystems.Appropriatesupportmechanismsarealsoneeded,andcleararticulationofthekindsofinstitutionalsupportprovidedisparamount.ForexampleifexternalsitessuchasFlckrareusedinacourse,theinstitutionneedstohaveaclearpolicystatementonwhathappensiftheFlckrsitegoesdown.Inclusionofspecialists(suchaseducationaltechnologistsandlearningdesigners)whohaveabroadunderstandingaboutWeb2.0technologiesisalsoimportantandshouldbeboughtintoanydiscussionsabouttheuseofWeb2.0technologiesatanearlystageinthedesignprocess.AsFitzgerald,Steeleetal.(2009)note,relyingonscholarlyenthusiasmisnotenoughtoensureeffectiveuse,otherfactorsneedtobeconsideredaswell.Therearealsodifferentviewsonthevalueofinstitutionalsystemsversesopensourceorexternaltoolsandservices.ManyarguethatexistingVLEsandWalledGardenmodelstobloggingorwikisareactuallytamingstaffandstudents’creativeexperimentation,andthatsuchprotectedspacesarenotfullyexploitingthepedagogicalpotentialofthesegenres(Hemmietal.,2009;SeealsoRoberston,2008;Elgort,2007;ChoyandNg,2007;ReimannandWeinel,2007,Minocha,2009,BECTA,2008).Howeveritisalsotruethattherearesignificantchallengesassociatedwiththetechnicalandfunctional

74http://www.cfkeep.org

85

integrationoftoolsthathavebeendevelopedandmaintainedexternallyandthisisasignificantbarriertoembracingthemforthosewithinstitutionalsupportresponsibilities.

Theeducators’roleIthasbeenarguedthatinteractioninWeb2.0environmentswillfacilitatetheshiftfromthetraditionalrolesof‘teacher’asexpertand‘learner’asrecipienttowardsbringinglearnerstothecoreofthelearningprocesses.MetrosandBennett(2002)reportontheresultsofaninformalweb‐basedsurveyconductedintheearly2000s.Thestudycovered97highereducationinstitutionsandfocusedonexploringthecreationofdigitalresources/learningobjects,andthekindsofsharingpracticesaroundthese.Thestudyfoundexamplesofeducatorsbeginningtoassigntheirstudentstheroleofco‐producersofdigitalcontent(seealsotheOERcasestudiesbelowandthenotionsofco‐creation).Thisearlyworkpointstowardsatrendforde‐hierarchisingtheroleoftheteacherasthesolecreatorsorpurveyorofknowledgeandstudentsbecomingco‐creatorsincurriculardesignandcontentcreation.Thistrendhasbeenamplifiedwiththeintroductionofsocialmedia(seeCollisandMoonen,2006),whereuser‐generatedcontentiscommonplaceandwherethereisavarietyoftoolsforsharinganddiscussingdigitalartefacts.Usingwikisasexamples,PalloffandPratt(2005)arguefortheneedforcurriculardesignsandpedagogicalinstructionfocusedaroundtheroleoftheteachersasmediatedfacilitators,ratherthanauthoritativeinstructors.Siemen’slistofthenewrolesthatteachersneedtoadoptinnetworkedlearningenvironmentsdescribedinthemainreportareinsightfulinthattheyprovideaframeworkforthinkingabouthowrolesarechangingandwhatmechanismsmightbeneededtohelpshiftpracticeinthisdirection.Successfuluseoftoolssuchaswikisorblogsincoursesisdependentonanumberoffactors.Firstly,learningoutcomesneedtobeclearlymappedtocourseactivitiesandassessments.Secondly,supportisneededtoprovideteacherswiththeskillstheyneedtointegratethesetoolsintotheircourses–skillsaroundeffectivedesignaswellasdelivery.Intermsofdesignteachersneedtogainaclearerunderstandingofwhatthesetechnologiescandoandhowtheycanbeintegratedwiththeotheraspectsofthecourse.Itisalsoaboutenablingthemtothinkabouthowtocreatethenecessarycourseconditionsandclimatetosupporttheestablishmentofanonlinecommunity.Intermsofdeliveryitisabouthelpingthemtoadoptmoreofafacilitativerole,helpingthemtoengageinandsupportstudent‐ledactivities.Thirdly,thestartingpointneedstobebasedaroundtheeducators’prioruseofandfamiliaritywithnewmedia.Similarlyitisimportanttounderstandthenatureofthestudentsinvolvedandtheirpriorexperienceofthesetools.

Boweretal.(2006)andRobertson(2008)describeempiricalresultsaroundagroupofHEteachersusingwikis.Theyobservethattwofactorsareimportanttoensuresuccess.Firstly,anappropriateinductionprogrammeforteachersontheuseofsocialmedia.Secondly,continuousassistanceatboththetechnicalandthepedagogicallevels.Bruns(inFitgzerlald,Steeleetal.,2009),ChoyandNg(2007)andBoweretal.(2006)allarguethatthedesignoflearningtasksaffectsboththestudents'motivationtoparticipateandtheirlearningexperience.Alltheseresearchersnotethatalthoughthereisaninherentassumptionthatwikisaresuitedtotasksthatrequirenegotiatedmeaning,thetaskauthenticitytoocanhaveanimpactonstudentcontributions.Integratingshort‐termorsmall‐scalegroupprojectsor

86

problem‐basedtaskscanbeapromisingwaytoexploreandutilisethepedagogicalpotentialofthewikiapplications.Tooptimisetheeffectivenessofthelearningexperience,academicsshouldanticipatethecollaborativerequirementsofthetasksbeingprescribed,andthenmakeeveryefforttoensurethatthetoolsprovidedmeetthoserequirements.Bruns(2008)andFitzgerald,Steeleetal.(2009)reportthatpeerskillsdevelopgradually(throughpreviouscritiques,developmentofstudents’ownportfoliosanddevelopmentincollaborationinasmallteams).Buildingnetworkingskillstoinvolvebothplanningandmaintainingaspace,arekeystrategiestoalleviaterisks.Astagedshiftfromcollaborationinsmallteamstocollaborationinlargerteamsallowsforthegradualdevelopmentofcreativeandteambuildingskills.

Likewise,mediatedinteractionispartofrevisingideasaboutteaching.Fitzgerald,Steeleetal.(2009)reportonthewaysinwhichtutorwikiswereusedtoenableonlineresourcesharingandreflectiononteachingscholarship.Theyfoundthatdiscussionsaboutpedagogieswereembeddedinthesesubjects.Closesupportfromalearningdesigner,whocouldoffercurriculumdesignadviceandmentortutors,wasakeyfactorforsuccess.Inaddition,inthisstudyawikiwasalsousedtoassisttheface‐to‐facejointcurriculumwriting,documentationandreflectionactivities,undertakenbytheteam.

Hemmietal.(2009)describetheuseofwikisandblogginginmoreconventionalface‐to‐facesettings(i.e.inaDivinitycourseataresidentialuniversityinScotland).Herethefocuswasonuseoftheseasmotivationaltoolsfordiscussionandclasscollaboration.Theywereusedtoencourageprogressivepeerinteractionandthereflectivecommentsenabledtutorstore‐assesstheirrolesmoreasfacilitators,ratherthanas‘authoritativesources’.Hemmietal.andothers(Fitzerlard,Steeleetal.,2009;PallofandPratt,2005;Bruns,2008,ChoyandNg,2007,Boweretal.,2006)havereportedthebenefitsoftheuseofthesetoolsintermsofenablingtutorstocontinuallyrevisetheirteaching.Alsothesetutorswereadaptingtheirdiscoursestyleastheybecamemoreaccustomedtoworkingwithinthewikiandblogenvironmentsandastheybegantousetheseascollaborative‘classroom’environments.Alongsidetheseevidentshiftsinactualpractice,theparticipationinevitablyalsoincreasedtheteachers’levelofscholarlyreflection.

Thesespacescanbeusedtopromotesituativelearningapproaches,wheretheparticipants(bothlearnersandteachers)haveasenseofbelongingtoacommunityofpractice,andwheretheroleoftheeducatorisexplicitlyspelledoutasfacilitatorandhelper(e.g.ChoyandNg,2007;Siemens,2009).Whilemanyresearchersnotethatmoreworkisneededtoenablestudentstoestablishasenseofbelongingtotheirdisciplinecommunity,existingevidenceinthefieldofteachereducationsuggeststhatuseofthesetoolstofacilitatecommunitybelongingisoccurring.McLoughlinetal.(2007)reportonthewaysinwhichtheimplementationofWeb2.0(reflexiveandcollaborativebloggingandpodcasting/voicediscussionboard)withintheinstitutionalLMSwasusedtoenableastructured,peer‐to‐peere‐mentoringframeworkforaGraduateDiplomaofSecondaryEducationattheCanberracampusoftheAustralianCatholicUniversity(ACUNational).Empiricaldatacollectedfromblogposts,podcastsandinterviewswithbothstudentsandteachers,demonstratedthatthee‐mentoringapproachwaseffectiveforemotionalandpsychosocialsupport.Italsoprovidedameansofgivingfeedbackandencouragementinthedevelopmentofprofessionallycenteredconversationsamongstudents.Itwasalsovaluable

87

foreducatorsintermsofreviewinginnovativepedagogiesandrevisingtheirtheoreticalthinkingandpedagogicalpractices.Theenvironmentactedasaspaceformutuallyevolvingskillsandacollectivecommunityofreflectivepractitioners.Theauthorsofthepaperacknowledgethemultiplicityoffreeandpubliclyaccessibleonlinementoringandnetworkingsitesacrossarangeofprofessionalgroupsineducation,andarguethattheirembedednesswithinstructuredlearningenvironmentshasfosteredcross‐institutionalcollaborationsandthedevelopmentofprofessional‘learningcommunities’beyondtheinstitutionalordegreeboundaries.

TheattitudesandrolesofstudentsThemismatchbetweenstudents’expectationsandactualexperienceintheircoursesiswidelyreportedintheliterature,andinparticular,thetensionbetweendidacticandmorestudent‐centeredapproaches,andthebalanceofexpertguidanceandindividualizedsupport.Students’priorknowledgeandfamiliaritywithWeb2.0toolsinfluencestheirreadinesstoadopttoolseffectivelywithinthecurriculum,evenwhentheuseofthesetoolsisanintegratedpartofthelearningdesign(e.g.Fitzgerald,Steeleetal.,2009;Bruns,2008;CollisandMoonen,2008;Roberston,2008;Elgort,2007;Boweretal.,2006;JISC,2009).

TensionsaroundtheconceptofopennessThepedagogicalambivalencesurroundingthenatureofsharing,self‐representation,identitynegotiationandformalrequirementsofassessmentiswidelyreported.AsHemmietal.(2009:25‐26)noteforexample,withstudentsswitchingbetweenvirtualandrealidentities,issuesofmanipulationandself‐promotiontranspire(seealsoMinocha,2009).Whileself‐reflectionandthe‘informalnatureofselfexpression’inapublicspaceisseenasapositivecomponent,theintegrationoftheblog–indeedapublic,fragmentedand‘slippery’formofwriting–withinformalassessmentstructuresgeneratedbothpositiveandnegativereactionsamongtutorsandstudents.Intheirstudytheynotedthatthesenseofanexpandedaudience(beyondthetutor),wascomplementedbythesenseofanexistingaudience.Thisalsofedintothenegotiationoftheframingofstudentwritingforanintendedaudience.Useofblogsactedasaspaceforthenegotiationofselfintermsoftheirstyleofwritingandstudents’positionsaslearners.Somestudentswereconcernedabouttheexpectationsonassessmentandthestylisticdifferencesaroundwritingas‘students’andwritingas‘bloggers’.Thiswasparticularlyevidentwithstudentsthathadpriorexperienceinblogging.Thewidercontextofcoursedesign,learningintentionsandoutcomesandalsoaspectsofdigitalliteracyandexperienceofstudentsperforming‘digitalpersonas’arefundamentalcomponentsthatrequirefurtherstudyregardingnegotiationandeffectiveness.AsHemmietal.(2009)arguethat:

(T)henegotiationofidentityinthecontextofnewwritingenvironmentsisinterestingbothforthewayinwhichithighlightsissuesaroundthe‘offlineandonlineversionsoftheself’,andalso–particularlywithinthecontextofassessment–thewayinwhichithighlightsthesignificanceoftheexerciseofpowerthroughtheproductionofknowledge.…Confessionenablesindividualstoactivelyparticipateindisciplinaryregimesbyinvestingtheirownidentity,subjectivityanddesireswiththoseascribedtothemthroughcertainknowledgeablediscourse(Edwards1997:9).Assessedblogswithafocusonreflectioncanbelikenedtoaconfessionalspaceforstudentstoexplore,andregulate,theirownsubjectivitythroughlearning.Thiscanbeproductiveaswellasproblematic–somekindsofidentityworkmayenablestudentstolearnmore,orlearndifferently(Hemmietal.,2009:25‐6).

88

Theabilitytocollaborativelyco‐creatematerialsdissolvestraditionaldistinctionsaboutcontentgenerationandownership(whocreatesitandhowitisused).Makingsenseofthisintermsofdesigning,deliveringandassessingcoursesrequiresnewnegotiationandnetworkedliteracyskills(seeFitzgerald,Steeleetal.,2009;Beethametal.,2009;Jenkinsetal.,2006).Manyreportontheuseofwikismoreasvehiclesforpromotingcommunicationandsharing,ratherthanasgenuinelycollaborativeandconstructivistplatforms(seeforexampleAnsonetal.,2009).Issuesoftrust,authorship/ownershipattribution,etiquette,confidenceandtransparentcollaborationindealingwithothers’contributionsandlast,butnotleast,groupcohesionandtensionsbetweenanonymityandrewardareamongthemostproductiveandproblematicissuesarounduseofblogs,butmorespecificallywithwikis(seeArafehandSong,2009;RamanauandGeng2009;Fitzgerald,Steeleetal.,2009;Beachetal.,2008;Elgort,2007;Boweretal.,2006).AsHemmietal.note(2009:28),whilesomestudentsrelishedtheless‘disciplined’natureofthewiki,othersfounditstrangelylonely,lessinteractiveandlessofa‘community’spacethantheconventionaldiscussionboard.Questionsofattributionandetiquettewithinparticularlearningcontextswerealsovoiced.Acommonconcernthatwasexpressedamongstudentsrelatestoissuesofownership('tamperingwithothers’contributionswouldoffendco‐participants'somestudentspointedout)andnegotiationofconsensuswithinparticularassignments.

AssessmentpracticesCollisandMoonen(2007)discusssomeoftheissuesaffectinginstructorswhoimplementacontribution‐orientedpedagogyintheircourses.Anumberofissuessurface,inparticulartheworkloadandmanagementburdensthisentails,assessment‐relatedissues,intellectual‐propertyconsiderationsandthedifficultyof,andneedto,shiftmindsets.Intermsofmanagementissues,akeycharacteristicofcontribution‐typeactivitiesisthattheinstructordoesnotknowinadvancewhatthestudentswillcontribute.Thus,iftheinstructionsgiventothelearnersarenotclearandexplicitintermsofwhatisexpected,themanagementburdenfortheinstructorcanbecomeoverwhelming.Assessmentisamajorchallengeincontribution‐orientedandcollaborativepedagogicalapproaches.CollisandMoonen(2008)arguethatstudentsare,understandably,highlysensitivetopotentialambiguitiesingradingandmarking.Toensurethequalityoflearningfromboththeeducators’andlearners'perspectivesandthereforeabetterchanceofembeddingWeb2.0toolssuccessfully,anumberoffactorsneedtobeinplace(CollisandMoonen,2008:100).Firstly,bothinstructorsandstudentsmustvalueaneducationalapproachwherelearnerparticipationandcontributionarebalancedwithacquisition.Secondly,apedagogicalapproachmustbeusedthatreflectscontribution‐orientedactivitieswherestudentscreateatleastsomeoftheirownlearningresources.Thirdly,theapproachmustbescaffoldedinpracticebyinterlinkedsupportresourcesforbothinstructorsandstudents.Uncertaintymustbereducedasmuchaspossibleforthestudentsintermsofwhatisexpectedofthem,andtowhatstandard.Finally,theprocesses,aswellastheproductsproducedbythestudents,mustbeassessedaspartofoverallcourseassessmentpractices.

89

ReferencesAckermann,E.K.(2004)‘Constructingknowledgeandtransformingtheworld’.IN:Tokoro,M.andSteels,L.(Eds.)Alearningzoneofone'sown:Sharingrepresentationsandflowincollaborativelearningenvironments.Amsterdam,Berlin,Oxford,Tokyo,Washington,DC.IOSPress.pp.15‐37

Ala‐Mutka,K.(2009).ReviewofLearninginICTenabledNetworksandCommunities(JRCScientificandTechnicalReportstoappear).Seville:EuropeanCommission‐JointResearchCentre‐InstituteforProspectiveTechnologicalStudies.

Ala‐Mutka,K.,(2009a).LearninginandfromICTenabledNetworksandCommunities.FinalreportofthestudyonInnovationsinNewICT‐enabledLearningCommunities,Seville:IPTS.

Ala‐Mutka,K.,Bacigalupo,M.,Kluzer,S.,Pascu,C.,Punie,Y.,andRedecker,C.(2009).Learning2.0:TheImpactofWeb2.0InnovationonEducationandTraininginEurope(JRCScientificandTechnicalReportsEUR23786EN).Seville:EuropeanCommission‐JointResearchCentre‐InstituteforProspectiveTechnologicalStudies.http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=2139

Albright,P.(2005)/UNESCO(IIEP):Finalforumreport.2008‐09‐01,http://learn.creativecommons.org/wpcontent/uploads/2008/03/oerforumfinalreport.pdf

Alevizou,P.(2010)'Mediatingopeneducation:populardiscourses,situatedpoliciesandinstitutionalpracticesforparticipatorylearning'paperpresentedattheMedia,CommunicationsandCulturalStudiesAssociation(MeCCSA)AnnualConference.London,LondonSchoolofEconomicsandPoliticalScience,6‐8January2010.Accessibleathttp://www.slideshare.net/giotita/alevizou‐meccsa‐2010presentation

Alevizou,P.,Wilson,T.andMcAndrew,P.(2010)‘ConceptualisingcollaborativeparticipationandengagementforlearningandcreativityinOERcommunities’.INOER10ConferenceProceedings,Cambridge22‐24March2010.http://www.ucel.ac.uk/oer10/presentations/OER1020.ppt

Alevizou,P.andForte,A.(2010)‘EngagingwithOpenEducation’ProceedingsIn6thInternationalSymposiumonWikisandOpenCollaboration(WikiSym'10),GdanskPoland,7‐9July2010.ISBN:978‐1‐4503‐0056‐8http://tiny.cc/r859r

Alevizou,P.,Conole,G.,Culver,J.andGalley,R.(2010)'Ritualperformancesandcollectiveintelligence:theoreticalframeworksforanalysingemergingactivitypatternsinCloudworks'.Proceedingsofthe7thinternationalconferenceinNetworkedLearning.Aalborg,Denmark,3‐5May2010.

90

http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/PDFs/Alevizou.pdfISBN978‐1‐86220‐225‐2.

Alevizou,P.,Conole,G.andGalley,R.(2010)a‘CaseStudy:UsingCloudworkstosupportOERactivities’CaseStudyfortheHEA‐funded‘PerlsintheClouds’Project.MiltonKeynes:OpenUniversity.

Alevizou,P.(2009)'ThoughtsonOpenEd09Conference'OpenUniversity:OLnetblogposthttp://olnet.org/node/45

Alevizou,P.(2009)a'CollaborationandContentinOpenEducationalResources:InternationalPerspectives'http://olnet.org/node/103

Alexander,B.(2008)'SocialNetworkinginHigherEducation'.InR.Katz,(ed.)(2008)TheTowerandtheCloud,EduCausehttp://www.educause.edu/thetowerandthecloudAnderson,C.(2006)TheLongTail:WhythefutureofBusinessisSellingLessofMore;NewYork:Hyperion.Anderson,P.(2007).WhatisWeb2.0?Ideas,technologiesandimplicationsforeducationJISCTechnologyandStandardsWatch[lastaccessed19/11/09]http://www.jisc.org.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdAnderson,R.J.,Anderson,R.,Vandegrift,T.,Wolfman,T.andYasuhara,K.(2003).'Promotinginteractioninlargeclasseswithcomputer‐mediatedfeedbackindesigningforchangeinnetworkedlearningenvironments'.ProceedingsofCSCL.http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~rea9x/papers/cscl2003‐cfs‐sp.pdfAnson,C.M.andMiller‐Cochran,S.K.(2009).‘Contrailsoflearning:Usingnewtechnologiesforverticalknowledge‐building’.ComputersandComposition,Vol26:38‐48.Armstrong,J.andFranklin,T.(2008).Areviewofcurrentanddevelopinginternationalpracticeintheuseofsocialnetworking(Web2.0)inhighereducation.AreportcommissionedbytheCommitteeofenquiryintotheChangingLearnerExperience.http://www.franklin‐consulting.co.uk/

Atkins,D.E.,Brown‐Seely,J.andHammond,A.L.,(2007).Areviewoftheopeneducationalresources(OER)movement:Achievements,challenges,andnewopportunities.ReporttoTheWilliamandFloraHewlettFoundation.Accessibleonlineathttp://www.oerderves.org/wp‐content/uploads/2007/03/a‐review‐of‐the‐open‐educational‐resources‐oer‐movement_final.pdf

Attwell,G.andPumilia,P.M.(2007)'TheNewPedagogyofOpenContent:BringingTogetherProduction,Knowledge,Development,andLearning'.DataScienceJournal,6,211‐21.

91

Augar,N.,Raitman,R.andZhou,W.(2004)‘Teachingandlearningonlinewithwikis’.In'Beyondthecomfortzone'.ProceedingsASCILITEPerth2004.http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/augar.htmlBarnettR.(2005)‘Recapturingtheuniversalintheuniversity’.EducationalPhilosophyandTheory37,785–797.Bauman,Z.(2005)Liquidlife.Cambridge:Polity.Bawden,D.,Robinson,L.(2009)‘Thedarksideofinformation:overload,anxietyandotherparadoxesandpathologies’JournalofInformationScienceVol35:180‐191.Becta(2008)Analysisofemergingtrendsaffectingtheuseoftechnologyineducation.Coventry:Bectahttp://research.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rhandcatcode=_re_rp_02andrid=1644Beach,R.,Anson,C.,Breuch,L.K.,andSwiss,T.(2008).Teachingwritingusingblogs,wikis,andotherdigitaltools.Norwood,MA:Christopher‐Gordon.Benbunan‐Fich,R.andArbaugh,J.B.(2006).’Separatingtheeffectsofknowledgeconstructionandgroupcollaborationinlearningoutcomesofweb‐basedcourses’.InformationandManagement.Vol43:778–793.Bereiter,C(2002).'Designresearchforsustainedinnovation'.BulletinoftheJapaneseCognitiveScienceSociety.Vol9:321–327.Bereiter,C.(2002b).KnowledgeandMindintheKnowledgeAge.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.Beetham,H.andDeFreitas,S.(Eds.)(2010)Rethinkinglearningforthedigitalage:howlearnersshapetheirownexperiences.London:Routledge.BeethamH.andSharpeR.(eds)(2007)Rethinkingpedagogyinthedigitalage.London:Routledge.Beetham,H.,McGill,L.andLittlejohn,A.(2009)Thrivinginthe21stCentury:LearningLiteraciesfortheDigitalAge(LLiDAProjectReport).www.academy.gcal.ac.uk/llida/LLiDAReportJune2009.pdfBiggs,J.(1999)'Whatthestudentdoes:teachingforenhancedlearning'.HigherEducationResearchandDevelopment.18(1):57–75.Biggs,J.(1999)Teachingforqualitylearningatuniversity.Buckingham:SocietyforResearchinHigherEducation.MiltonKeynes:OpenUniversityPress.

92

Blin,FrançoiseandMoragMunro(2008)'Whyhasn’tTechnologyDisruptedDcademics’TeachingPractices?UnderstandingResistancetoChangethroughtheLensofActivityTheory'.ComputersandEducation,50(2):475‐490.Boon,S.andSinclair,C.(2009)‘AworldIdon'tinhabit:disquietandidentityinSecondLifeandFacebook’Source:EducationalMediaInternational.46(2):99‐110(12)boyd,D.M..,andEllison,N.B.(2007).'Socialnetworksites:Definition,history,andscholarship'.JournalofComputerMediatedCommunication,13(1),article11.http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.htmlBower,M.,Woo,K.,Roberts,M.andWatters,P.(2006).'Wikipedagogy:Ataleoftwowikis.TheInternationalConferenceonInformationTechnologyBasedHigherEducationandTraining(ITHET)'.UniversityofTechnology,Sydney,Australia,10‐13July2006.Bowers,K.,Ragas,M.,andNeely,J.(2009).‘AssessingtheValueofVirtualWorldsforPostsecondaryInstructors’.ConferencePapers‐‐InternationalCommunicationAssociation,1.RetrievedfromCommunicationandMassMediaCompletedatabase.

Brabazon,T.(2007)TheGooglegeneration.Aldershot:Ashgate

Bradshow,P.(2008)'TeachingStudentstotwitter:thegood,thebadandtheugly'Blogpost15/02/2008http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2008/02/15/teaching‐students‐to‐twitter‐the‐good‐the‐bad‐and‐the‐ugly/

Bromby,M.andJones,M.(2009)‘Secondguessing:isthereacontextforSecondLifeinlegaleducation?’TheHigherEducationAcademyUKCentreforLegalEducationLearninginLawAnnualConference(LILAC)2009,UniversityofWarwick,23‐24Jan2009http://www.ukcle.ac.uk/newsevents/lilac/2009/papers/bromby.html

Brown,R.E.(2001).‘Theprocessofcommunity‐buildingindistancelearningclasses’.JournalofAnsynchronousLearningNetworks5(2)(2001),18‐35.

Briggs,L.L.(2008)‘MicroBloggingwithTwitter:AQandAwithDavidParry,assistantprofessorofEmergingMediaattheUniversityofTexasatDallas’CampusTechnology,05/03/2008,http://campustechnology.com/Articles/2008/03/Micro‐Blogging‐with‐Twitter.aspx?Page=1

Bruns,A.(2008)Blogs,Wikipedia,SecondLife,andBeyond:FromProductiontoProdusage.PeterLang:NewYork.

Bruns,A.andHumphreys,S.(2007)‘Buildingcollaborativecapacitiesinlearners:theM/cyclopediaprojectrevisited’.Proceedingsofthe2ndInternationalSymposiumonWikis,2007,1‐10,http://portal.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=1296952andtype=pdfandcoll=ACManddl=ACMandCFID=66282364andCFTOKEN=27663776.

93

Buckingham,D.(2006)'IsthereaDigitalGeneration'INBuckingham,D.andWillett,R.(2006)DigitalGenerations:Children,YoungPeople.London:Routledge.pp.1‐18

Burbules,N.C.(2006)'Self‐EducatingCommunities:CollaborationandLearningThroughouttheInternet'.INBekerman,Z.,Burbules,C.N.andSilberman‐Keller,D.(2006)(eds)LearninginPlaces:TheInformalEducationReader.NewYork:PeterLang.pp.273–284.

Burgess,J.(2006).'Bloggingtolearn,learningtoblog.In:A.BrunsandJ.Jacobs(Eds.),Usesofblogs.NewYork:PeterLang,2006,105‐114.

Calverley,G.andShephard,K(2003)‘Assistingtheuptakeofon‐lineresources:whygoodlearningresourcesarenotenough’,ComputersandEducation,Vol.41:205–224.

Cantoni,L.(2008),‘OER–OpenEducationalResources:problems,opportunitiesandchallenges',Keynotepresentation,11thAnnualELCNETConference,ELearningCampusZurich,UniversityofZurich,25thJanuary2008.

Cardon,D.andAguiton,C.(2007).’TheStrengthofWeakCooperation:anAttempttoUnderstandtheMeaningofWeb2.0’.CommunicationsandStrategiesVol65:51‐65.

Carr,D.(2009)‘LearningandVirtualWorlds’INSelwynN.(2009a)(ed.)Education2.0?DesigningtheWebforTeachingandLearning:ACommentarybytheTechnologyEnhancedLearningphaseoftheTeachingandLearningResearchProgramme.London:LondonKnowledgeLab,UniversityofLondon.

Carrington,V.(2005).'Txting:Theendofcivilization(again)'.CambridgeJournalofEducation.Vol35(2):161‐175.

Carson,S.(2010)‘LeadingglobaluniversitiesmakecommitmentstoOpenCourseWare’sfuture’TheOCWBlog1March2010http://ocwblog.org/2010/03/01/leading‐global‐universities‐make‐commitments‐to‐opencoursewares‐future/

Caruso,J.B.,andKvavik,R.B.(2005).ECARStudyofStudentsandInformationTechnology,2005:Convenience,Connection,Control,andLearning.Washington,DC:EducauseCenterforAppliedResearch.

Caswell,T.etal.,2008.'Openeducationalresources:Enablinguniversaleducation'.InternationalReviewofResearchinOpenandDistanceLearning,9(1),1–4.

Chi,M.T.H.(2000),'Self‐explaining:Thedualprocessesofgeneratinginferenceandrepairingmentalmodels.'InR.Glaser(Ed.),Advancesininstructionalpsychology:Educationaldesignandcognitivescience.Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum.pp.161–238.

Childs,M.(2008)‘UsingaMediatedEnvironmentsReferenceModeltoevaluatelearners’experiencesofSecondLife’,INHodgson,V.,Jones,C.,Kargidis,T.,McConnell,D.,Retalis,S.,

94

Stamatis,D.andZenios,M.(eds)ProceedingsoftheSixthInternationalConferenceonNetworkedLearning,5thand6thMay,2008,Halkidiki,Greece.,38‐45

Chittaro,L.,andRanon,R.(2007)'Web3Dtechnologiesinlearning,educationandtraining:Motivations,issues,opportunities'.ComputersandEducation.49(1):3‐18.

Choy,S.O.andNg,K.C.(2007)'Implementingwikisoftwareforsupplementingonlinelearning'.AustralasianJournalofEducationalTechnology.23(2):209‐226.http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet23/choy.html

Cole,M.(2009)‘UsingWikitechnologytosupportstudentengagement:Lessonsfromthetrenches’.ComputersandEducation.52:141‐146.

Collis,B.,andMoonen,J.(2006).‘Thecontributingstudent:Learnersasco‐developersoflearningresourcesforreuseinWebenvironments’.InD.HungandM.S.Khine(Eds.)Engagedlearningwithemergingtechnologies(pp.49‐68).Dordrecht:SpringerScience+BusinessMedia.

Collis,B.,andMoonen,J.(2008)'Web2.0toolsandprocessesinhighereducation:qualityperspectives'.EducationalMediaInternational45(2),93‐106.doi:10.1080/09523980802107179.

Conole,G.(2010)'Steppingovertheedge:theimplicationsofnewtechnologiesforeducation'.InM.LeeandC.McLoughin(forthcoming),Web2.0basedelearning:applyingsocialinformaticsfortertiaryteaching,Hersey,PA:ICIGlobal.

Conole,G.(2010)Anoverviewofdesignrepresentations,TheInternationalConferenceinNetworkedLearningInAalborg,Denmark,May3‐52010.

Conole,G.andCulver,J.(2010)'ThedesignofCloudworks:applyingsocialnetworkingpracticetofostertheexchangeoflearningandteachingideasanddesigns'ComputersandEducation,54(2):679‐692.

ConoleandCulver(2009)'Cloudworks:socialnetworkingforlearningdesign'.AustralianJournalofEducationalTechnology.25(5),pp.763–782,http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet25/conole.html.

Conole,G.(2008)‘Capturingpractice:theroleofmediatingartefactsinlearningdesign’,INL.Lockyer,S.Bennett,S.Agostinho,andBHarper(Eds),HandbookofResearchonLearningDesignandLearningObjects:Issues,ApplicationsandTechnologies.HerseyPA:IGIGlobal.pp.187‐207.

Conole,G.andMcAndrew,P.(2010/inpress)‘ANewApproachtoSupportingtheDesignandUseofOER:HarnessingthePowerofWeb2.0’,InM.EbnerandM.Schiefner(Eds)LookingtowardtheFutureofTechnologyEnhancedEducation:UbiquitousLearningandtheDigitalNature.http://jime.open.ac.uk/2008/05

95

Conole,G.andJones,C.(2010).'Sharingpractice,problemsandsolutionsforinstitutionalchange–comparingdifferentformsofrepresentation'.InP.GoodyearandS.Retalis(Eds)Technologyenhancedlearning:DesignPatternsandPatternLanguages.Rotterdam,TheNetherlands.:SensePublishersB.V.

Conole,G.,McAndrew,P.andDimitriadis,Y.(2010/forthcoming).'TheroleofCSCLpedagogicalpatternsasmediatingartefactsforrepurposingOpenEducationalResources’.InF.PozziandD.Persico(Eds)TechniquesforFosteringCollaborationinOnlineLearningCommunities:TheoreticalandPractical.

Conole,G.(2010)'Reviewofpedagogicalmodelsandtheiruseine‐learning',availableonlineathttp://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2982[27/3/2010]

Conole,G.andWeller,M.(2008)'UsinglearningdesignasaframeworkforsupportingthedesignandreuseofOER'.JournalofInteractiveMediainEducation,Vol.5.www.jime.open.ac.uk/2008/05/jime‐2008‐05.pdfConole,G.,Dyke,M.,Oliver,M.andSeale,J.(2004)‘Mappingpedagogyandtoolsforeffectivelearningdesign’.ComputersandEducation.43(1‐2):17‐33.

Crook,C.,Cummings,J.,Fisher,T.,Graber,R.,Harrison,C.,Lewin,C.,Logan,K.,Luckin,R.andOliver,M.(2008),Web2.0technologiesforlearning:thecurrentlandscape–opportunities,challengesandtensions,AReportBecta,http://partners.becta.org.uk/uploaddir/downloads/page_documents/research/web2_technologies_learning.pdf

Crystal,D.(2008).Txting:thegr8db8.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

DalsgaardC.(2006)‘SocialSoftware:E‐learningbeyondlearningmanagementsystems’EuropeanJournalofOpen,DistanceandELearning,Issue2006http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Christian_Dalsgaard.htm

DalsgaardC.(2009)‘FromTransmissiontoDialogue:PersonalizedandSocialKnowledgeMedia’MedieKultur:JournalofMediaandCommunicationResearch,SpecialIssueonMediatedLearning/LearningMedia,Vol46:18‐33,http://ojs.statsbiblioteket.dk/index.php/mediekultur/article/view/1333

D’Antoni,S.(2006)(ICDESCOP2006)OpenEducationalResources:DeliberationsofaCommunityofInterest.Lillehammer,Norway.

Davis,R.(2007),“AWeb2.0education”www.education.ed.ac.uk/e‐learning/gallery/davis_web2education.html#%5B%5BStart%20Here%5D%5D[blogpost]

Davis,C.andGood,J.(2009)Choosingtousetechnology:howlearnersconstructtheirlearninglivesintheirowncontexts,Keyfindingsfromthefirstyearofresearch.AReportfor

96

Becta.PartoftheHarnessingTechnology:TheLearnerandtheirContext.Oxford:UniversityofOxford.http://research.becta.org.uk/upload‐dir/downloads/page_documents/research/reports/ht_learner_context_key_findings.odt

Davies,T.andCranston,P.(2008).YouthWorkandSocialNetworking.Interimreport,May,2008.TheNationalYouthAgency:Leicester,UK.http://www.nya.org.uk/shared_asp_files/GFSR.asp?NodeID=111686.

DCMS(2009)DigitalBritain–finalreport.June2009,ReportcommissionedbytheDepartmentforBusinessInnovationandSkills,availableonlineathttp://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/broadcasting/5631.aspx/

Dede,C(2009)'Technologiesthatfacilitategeneratingknowledgeandpossiblywisdom'.EducationalResearcher,38(4):260–263.

DeFreitas,S.andConole,G.(2010).‘Learnersexperiences:howpervasiveandintegrativetoolsinfluenceexpectationsofstudy’.InSharpe,R.,Beetham,H.andDeFreitas,S.(Eds.)(2010)Rethinkinglearningforthedigitalage:howlearnersshapetheirownexperiences.London:Routledge.

DeLucia,A.,Francese,R.,Passero,I.,andTortora,G.(2009).DevelopmentandevaluationofavirtualcampusonSecondLife:ThecaseofSecondDMI.ComputersandEducation,52(1):220‐233.

DiBlas,N.,andPoggi,C.(2007).Europeanvirtualclassrooms:buildingeffective“virtual”educationalexperiences.VirtualReality,11(2):129‐143.

Dimitriadis,Y.etal.,2009.NewdesignapproachestorepurposingOpenEducationalResourcesforcollaborativelearningusingmediatingartefacts.InAuckland:ASCILITE.

diSessa,A.(2001)ChangingMinds:Computers,Learning,andLiteracy.CambridgeMA:MITPress.

Downes,S.(2009)‘BlogsinLearning’inStaffTrainingandResearchInstituteofDistanceEducation(STRIDE)888‐91January6,2010.

Downes,S.(2007),'Modelsforsustainableopeneducationalresources',InterdisciplinaryJournalofKnowledgeandLearningObjects,vol.3.Availablefrom:http://ijklo.org/Volume3/IJKLOv3p029‐044Downes.pdf

Downes,S.(2005).'E‐learning2.0'.ElearningMagazine,10/17/05.NewYork:AssociationforComputingMachinery.http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articlesandarticle=29‐1

Downes,S.(2004)EducationalBlogginghttp://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0450.pdf

97

Dovey,J.(2008)'Dinosaursandbutterflies–mediapracticeresearchinnewmediaecologies'.JournalofMediaPractice,9(3),243‐256.doi:10.1386/jmpr.9.3.243_1.

Dron,J.andAnderson,T.,2007.Collectives,networksandgroupsinsocialsoftwarefore‐Learning.InProceedingsofWorldConferenceonELearninginCorporate,Government,Healthcare,andHigherEducationQuebec.RetrievedFeb.p.2008.

Dyke,M.,Conole,G.,Ravenscroft,A.anddeFreitas,S.(2007),‘Learningtheoriesandtheirapplicationtoe‐learning’,InG.ConoleandM.Oliver(ed)Contemporaryperspectivesinelearningresearch:themes,methodsandimpactonpractice.Falmer:Routledge.

Ebner,M.,Lienhardt,C.,Rohs,M.andMeyer,I.(2010),‘MicroblogsinHigherEducation–achancetofacilitateinformalandprocessorientedlearning?ComputersandEducationhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VCJ‐4Y34W8F‐1/2/799ab0b1112d5696a251fca84be472c3

Ebner,M.andMaurer,H.(2008)'CanMicroblogsandWeblogschangetraditionalscientificwriting?'ProceedingsofELearn.LasVegas.http://lamp.tugraz.ac.at/~i203/ebner/publication/08_elearn01.pdfU

ECAR(2009)TheECARStudyofUndergraduateStudentsandInformationTechnology(ID:ERS0906)http://www.educause.edu/Resources/TheECARStudyofUndergraduateStu/187215

ECAR(2008)Salaway,G.,Caruso,J.B.,andNelson,M.R.(2008)TheECARStudyofUndergraduateStudentsandInformationTechnology(Vol.8).Boulder,CO:Educause.

EducationNetworkAustralia(2008)ICTandEducatorsMarketResearch.HigherEducation:Education.au.

Ellison,N.andWu,Y.(2008)'BloggingintheClassroom:APreliminaryExplorationofStudentAttitudesandImpactonComprehension'.JournalofEducationalMultimediaandHypermedia.Vol17:99‐122.

Elgort,I.(2007)'Usingwikisasalearningtoolinhighereducation.InICT:Providingchoicesforlearnersandlearning'.ProceedingsAsciliteSingapore2007.http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/elgort.pdf

Engeström,Y.(2007)‘FromcommunitiesofPracticetoMychorrhizae’.InJ.Hughes,N.JewsonandL.Unwin(eds.)CommunitiesofPractice:CriticalPerspectives.London:Routledge.

Farmer,B.,Yue,A.andBrooks,C.(2008)‘Usingbloggingforhigherorderlearninginlargecohortuniversityteaching:Acasestudy’,AustralasianJournalofEducationalTechnology.24(2):123‐136.

98

Farmer,J.(2006)‘BloggingtoBasics:HowBlogsAreBringingOnlineEducationBackfromtheBrink’,in:Bruns,A.andJacobs,J.(2006)(eds.).UsesofBlogs.PeterLang:NewYork.

Felix,U.(2005)‘e‐Learningpedagogyinthethirdmillennium:theneedforcombiningsocialandcognitive’,ReCALL,vol.17(1):pp.85–100.

Ferreira,G.(2009)Communicating,Learningandtheinbetween:astudyoftheimpactofopenaccess,informalonlinelearningenvironments.ProjectReport.http://www.open.ac.uk/colmsct/activities/details/detail.php?itemId=474446756caad

Fini,A.Formiconi,A.Giorni,A.Nuccia,S,Spadavecchia,E.andZibordi,E.(2008)OpenEducationandvirtualcommunities:anexperiencehttp://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.142.6896andrep=rep1andtype=pdf

Franklin,T.andvanHarmelen,M.(2007)'Web2.0forLearningandTeachinginHigherEducation'.London:TheObservatoryofborderlesshighereducation.http://www.obhe.ac.uk/documents/view_details?id=24

Gee, J.P. (2004)SituatedLanguageandLearning:ACritiqueofTraditionalSchooling.NewYork:Routledge.

Gibbs G. (1988) Learning by Doing: A Guide to Teaching and Learning Methods. Oxford:OxfordFurtherEducationUnit,OxfordPolytechnic

Jenkins,H.(2006)ConvergenceCulture:WhereOldandNewMediaCollide.NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress.

Jenkins,H.,Clinton,K.,Purushotma,R.,Robison,J.A.andWeigel,M.(2006)'ConfrontingtheChallengesofParticipatoryCulture:MediaEducationforthe21stCentury'WhitePaper,TheMacArthurDigitalMediaandLearningSeries.http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/download/nwp_file/10932/Confronting_the_Challenges_of_Participatory_Culture.pdf?x‐r=pcfile_d

Jones,C.andCross,S.(2009).'Isthereanetgenerationcomingtouniversity?'ProceedingsIndreamsbeginsresponsibility:Choice,evidenceandchange,ALT‐C2009,8‐10September2009,Manchester,UK.Availableat:http://oro.open.ac.uk/18468/

Johnson,L.F.,Levine,A.,andSmith,R.S.(2009)HorizonReport,Austin,TX:TheNewMediaConsortium.

FacultyFocus(2009)TwitterinHigherEducation:UsageHabitsandTrendsofToday‚CollegeFacultyhttp://www.facultyfocus.com/freereport/twitter‐in‐higher‐education‐usage‐habits‐and‐trends‐of‐todays‐college‐faculty/

99

Farmer,B.,Yue,A.andBrooks,C.(2008)‘Usingbloggingforhigherorderlearninginlargecohortuniversityteaching:Acasestudy’,AustralasianJournalofEducationalTechnology.24(2):123‐136.

Farmer,J.(2006)‘BloggingtoBasics:HowBlogsAreBringingOnlineEducationBackfromtheBrink’,in:AxelBrunsandJoanneJacobs(ed.):UsesofBlogs.PeterLang:NewYork.

Fitzgerald,R.andBarrass,S.,Campbell,J.Hinton,S.,Ryan,Y.andWhitelaw,M.andBruns,A.andMiles,A.andSteele,J.,andMcGinness,N.(2009)(2009).Digitallearningcommunities(DLC):Investigatingtheapplicationofsocialsoftwaretosupportnetworkedlearning.AustralianLearningandTeachingCouncil.ISBN:978‐1‐74088‐296‐5.52pp.Availablehttp://eprints.qut.edu.au/18476/1/c18476.pdf.

Galley,R.,Conole,G.andAlevizou,P.(2010)‘CaseStudy:UsingCloudworksforanOpenLiteratureReview’CaseStudyfortheHEA‐funded‘PerlsintheClouds’Project.MiltonKeynes:OpenUniversity.

Garrison,D.R.(2007)‘Onlinecommunityofinquiryreview:Social,cognitive,andteachingpresenceissues’.JournalofAsynchronousLearningNetworks.11(1):61‐72.

Garrison,D.R.andArbaugh,J.B.(2007)‘Researchingthecommunityofinquiryframework:Review,issues,andfuturedirections’.TheInternetandHigherEducation.10(3):157‐172.

Garrison,D.R.,andAnderson,T.(2003)E–Learninginthe21stcentury:Aframeworkforresearchandpractice.London:Routledge/Falmer.

Geser,G.(2007)(ed)OpenEducationalPracticesandResources.OLCOSRoadmap2012.,SalzburgResearch,EduMediaGroup.Salzburg,January2007http://www.olcos.org/english/roadmap/download/index.htm

Grant,L.,Owen,M.,Sayers,S.andFacer,K.(2006)Socialsoftwareandlearning.OpeningEducationReports.Bristol:Futurelab.http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/opening_education/Social_Software_report.pdf

Greenhow,C.,Robelia,B.,andHughes,J.(2009)‘Learning,Teaching,andScholarshipinaDigitalAge:Web2.0andClassroomResearch:WhatPathShouldWeTakeNow?’EducationalResearcher.38(4):246‐259.

Greenhow,C.,Robelia,B.,andHughes,J.(2009)Web2.0andclassroomresearch:Whatpathshouldwetakenow?EducationalResearcher.38(4),246–259

Greenhow,C.,Robelia,B.,andHughes,J.(2009b)‘ResponsetoComments:ResearchonLearningandTeachingWithWeb2.0:BridgingConversations’EducationalResearcher.38(4):280‐283.

100

Grosseck,G.andHolotescu,C.(2008).‘CanweuseTwitterforEducationalActivities?’ProceedingsinThe4thInternationalScientificConference.eLearningandSoftwareforEducation.Bucharest,April17‐18,2008.HUhttp://adl.unap.ro/else/papers/015.‐697.1.Grosseck%20Gabriela‐Can%20we%20use.pdfU

Hargittai,E.andWalejko,G.(2008)'TheParticipationDivide:ContentCreationandSharingintheDigitalAge'.Information,CommunicationandSociety.11(2)(2008):239‐256.

Harley,D.,Henke,J.,Lawrence,S.,Miller,I.,Perciali,I.andNasatir,D.(2006)UseandUsersofDigitalResources:AFocusonUndergraduateEducationintheHumanitiesandSocialSciences.Berkeley,CA:CenterforStudiesinHigherEducation,UCBerkeley,Availableat:http://cshe.berkeley.edu/research/digitalresourcestudy/report/digitalresourcestudy_final_report_text.pdf

Hatakka,M.(2009),‘Builditandtheywillcome?–Inhibitingfactorsforreuseofopencontentindevelopingcountries’,inEJISDC‐TheElectronicJournalofInformationSystemsinDevelopingCountriesVol.37(5):1‐16http://www.ejisdc.org/ojs2/index.php/ejisdc/article/view/545/279

HEFCE(2009)Enhancinglearningandteachingthroughtheuseoftechnology:ArevisedapproachtoHEFCE'sstrategyfore‐learning.Bristol:HEFCE.http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/hefce/2009/09_12/).

Hemmi,A.,BayneS.andLand,R.(2009)‘Theappropriationandrepurposingofsocialtechnologiesinhighereducation’JournalofComputerAssistedLearning(2009),Vol25:19–30.

Hewlett(2009)OpenEducationalResourcesInitiative.2009Reporthttp://www.hewlett.org/download?guid=773880cd‐54de‐102c‐ae2b‐0002b3e9a4de

Honeycutt,C.andHerring,S.C.(2009).'Beyondmicroblogging:ConversationandcollaborationviaTwitter'.ProceedingsoftheFortySecondHawaiiInternationalConference

Hylén,J.andSchuller,T.(2007)Givingknowledgeforfree.OECDObserver,263.http://www.oecd.org/document41/0,3343,en_2649_35845581_38659497_1_1_1_1,00.html

Hylén,J.(2006)OpenEducationalResources:OpportunitiesandChallenges.OECD’sCentreforEducationalResearchandInnovation,Jan,Paris,France,Availableat:http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/47/37351085.pdf

IpsosMori(2008)GreatExpectationsofICT.HowHigherEducationInstitutionsaremeasuringup.London:JointInformationSystemsCommittee(JISC).

James,C.,Davies,K.,Flores,A.,Francis,J.M.,Pettingill,L.,Rundle,M.andGardner,H.(2008)‘YoungPeople,Ethics,andtheNewDigitalMedia:ASynthesisfromtheGoodPlayProject’.

101

GoodWorkProjectReportSeries(N54).MacArthurFoundationandHarvardGraduateSchoolofEducation,RetrievedJuly12008fromhttp://www.pz.harvard.edu/eBookstore/PDFs/GoodWork54.pdf

Jenkins,H.,Clinton,K.,Purushotma,R.,Robison,A.J.,andWeigel,M.(2006)ConfrontingtheChallengesofParticipatoryCulture:MediaEducationforthe21stCentury.MacArthurFoundation.http://digitallearning.macfound.org/atf/cf/{7E45C7E0‐A3E0‐4B89‐AC9C‐E807E1B0AE4E}/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF

JISC(2009)HigherEducationinaWeb2.0Worldhttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/generalpublications/2009/heweb2.aspx#downloads

JISC(2009)aGettingStartedwithSecondLifehttp://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/generalpublications/2009/gettingstartedSecondLife.aspx

JISC(2009)bJISCStrategyreview20102012

Jones,C.,Cook,J.anddeLaat,M.(2007).'Collaboration'.In:Conole,G.andMartin,M.(eds.)Contemporaryperspectivesinelearningresearch:themes,methodsandimpactonpractice.London:Routledge.pp.174–189.

Johnson,L.F.,Levine,A.,andSmith,R.S.(2009)HorizonReport,Austin,TX:TheNewMediaConsortium,2009.

Iiyoshi,T.andKumar,M.S.V.(2008)'Introduction'INIiyoshi,T.andKumar,M.S.V.(eds.)OpeningUpEducation:TheCollectiveAdvancementofEducationthroughOpenTechnology,OpenContent,andOpenKnowledge.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress.

Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J. L., Moore, J. L., and Marra, R. M. (2003) Learning to SolveProblems with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey:MerrillPrenticeHall.

Kanchanaraksa,S.,Gooding,I.,Klaas,B.andYager,J.(2009)'JohnsHopkinsBloombergSchoolofPublicHealthOpenCourseWare',OpenLearning:TheJournalofOpenandDistanceLearning24(1):39‐46

Karimi,A.andSongH.S.Y.(2009)‘WhereisthewikiinWiki?’ProceedingsASCILITEAuckland,2009.http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland09/procs/karimi.pdf.

Keegan,H.andFox,A.(Eds.).(2009)Mentoringfor21stCenturySkills:It'sAllAboutTheLearning.EUEducationandCulture.ISBN978‐1905732791.http://www.vitae‐project.eu/material/handbook/VITAEMentoring%20for%2021st%20century%20skills.pdf

Keegan,H.andLisewski,B.(2007/2009)‘Living,teachingandlearningbysocialsoftware:someemergingthemesandpracticeissues’,InHatzipanagos,S.andWarburton,S.

102

(2007/2009)(ed).HandbookofResearchonSocialSoftwareandDevelopingCommunityOntologies.IGIGlobal.

Keen,A.(2007)TheCultoftheAmateur:HowToday'sInternetisKillingOurCulture.Doubleday

Kennedy,G.,Krause,K.L.,Judd,T.,Churchward,A.,andGray,K.(2006)'FirstYearStudents’ExperiencewithTechnology:AretheReallyDigitalNatives?'PreliminaryReportofFindings.Melbourne:CentreforStudyofHigherEducation,TheUniversityofMelbourne.

Kennedy,G.,Judd,T.,Churchward,A.,Gray,K.,andKrause,K.(2008)'Firstyearstudents’experienceswithtechnology:Aretheyreallydigitalnatives?'AustralasianJournalofEducationalTechnology.24(1),108‐122.

Kester,L.,Sloep,P.Brouns,F.VanRosmalen,P.DeVries,F.,DeCroock,M.andKoper,R.(2006)'EnhancingSocialInteractionandSpreadingTutorResponsibilitiesinBottom‐upOrganizedLearningNetworks'IADISInternationalConferenceWebBasedCommunities,2006,80‐87:http://www.iadis.net/dl/final_uploads/200602L011.pdf

Kieslinger(2009)'AnOpenVirtualLearningEnvironmentforEurope’sHigherEducation'iCampfinalreporthttp://www.icamp.eu/wpcontent/uploads/2009/01/icamp_final_public_report.pdf

Kim,H.N.(2008)'Thephenomenonofblogsandtheoreticalmodelofbloguseineducationalcontexts'.ComputersandEducation.Vol.51,pp.1342–1352

King,M.Loddington,S.,Manuel,S.andOppenheim,C.(2008)‘AnalysisofAcademicAttitudesandExistingProcessestoInformtheDesignofTeachingandLearningMaterialRepositories’,ActiveLearninginHigherEducation,vol.9:pp.103‐121.

Kirriemuir,J.(2008)ASpring2008‘snapshot’ofUKHigherandFurtherEducationdevelopmentsinSecondLife.http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/sl/uksnapshot052008

Kolb,D(1984)ExperientialLearning;ExperienceasthesourceoflearningandDevelopment.EnglewoodCliffN.J.:PrenticeHall

Koper,R.,Pannekeet,K.,Hendriks,M.,andHummel,H.(2004)‘Buildingcommunitiesfortheexchangeoflearningobjects:theoreticalfoundationsandrequirements’.ALTJ,ResearchinLearningTechnology12(2004),pp21‐35.

Koschmann,T.D.,Hall,R.andMiyake,N.(2002)CSCL2,Carryingforwardtheconversation.London:LawrenceErlbaum.

Kress,G.(2003)Literacyinthenewmediaage.London:Routledge

103

Lam,I.,andRitzen,M.(2008)Thene(x)tgenerationstudents:needsandexpectations.Bremen:UtrechtUniversity.IVLOS–InstituteofEducation.CentreforICTinEducation.

Lankshear,C.andKnobel,M.(2006)'Digitalliteracies:Policy,pedagogyandresearchconsiderationsforeducation'.NordicJournalofDigitalLiteracy,1(1),226.

Lave,J.,andWenger,E.(1991).Situatedlearning:Legitimateperipheralparticipation.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Laurillard,D.(2003)'Applicationandcontentdevelopmentanddeployment:Thechallengesofe‐learning,whyOpenSourcematters'.BECTAexpertseminarseries,availableonlineathttp://www.becta.org.uk/etseminars/presentations/presentation.cfm?seminar_id=12andsection=7_1andpresentation_id=8andid=2608

Laurillard,D.(2002)Rethinkinguniversityteaching;AFrameworkfortheEffectiveUseofEducationalTechnology(SecondEdition).Routledge,NewYork,USA.

Laurillard,D.(1993)RethinkingUniversityTeaching:AFrameworkfortheEffectiveUseofEducationalTechnology(FirstEdition).Routledge,NewYork,USA.http://www‐jime.open.ac.uk/98/2/marion‐98‐2‐21.html‐citation112

Leadbetter,C.(2008)WeThink.London:Profile

Lee,M.,Miller,C.,andNewnham,L.(2008)'RSSandcontentsyndicationinhighereducation:subscribingtoanewmodelofteachingandlearning'.EducationalMediaInternational,45(4):311‐322.

Leinonen,T.,Vadén,T.andSuoranta,J.(2009)'Learninginandwithanopenwikiproject:Wikiversity’spotentialinglobalcapacitybuilding'FirstMonday.14(2)‐2February2009http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2252/2093

Lévy,P.(1997)CollectiveIntelligence:Mankind'sEmergingWorldinCyberspace.Trans.RobertBononno,Cambridge,MA:PerseusBooks

Littlejohn,A.(2003)Reusingonlineresources:asustainableapproachtoelearning.Falmer:Routledge.

Livingstone,S.(2008)‘InternetLiteracy:YoungPeople’sNegotiationofNewOnlineOpportunities’inMcPherson,T.(ed.)(2008)DigitalYouth,Innovation,andtheUnexpected.TheJohnD.andCatherineT.MacArthurFoundationSeriesonDigitalMediaandLearning.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress.pp:101–122.

104

Lockyer,S.Bennett,S.Agostinho,andBHarper(Eds)(2008)HandbookofResearchonLearningDesignandLearningObjects:Issues,ApplicationsandTechnologies.HerseyPA:IGIGlobal.

MadgeC.Meek,J.Wellens,J.andHooley,T.(2009)‘Facebook,socialintegrationandinformallearningatuniversity:Itismoreforsocialisingandtalkingtofriendsaboutworkthanforactuallydoingwork'.Learning,MediaandTechnology.34(2):141‐155.

Maloney,E.(2007)‘WhatWeb2.0canteachusaboutlearning’TheChronicleofHigherEducation.53(18),January5th,p.B26.

Margulies,A.(2005),“MITOpencourseware–ANewModelforOpenSharing”,presentationattheOpenEdConferenceatUtahStateUniversity,September2005.

Mason,R.andRennie,F.(2008)ElearningandSocialNetworkingHandbook.London:Routledge.

Mason,R.2006.‘Learningtechnologiesforadultcontinuingeducation’.StudiesinContinuingEducation.28(2):121–33.

Mazer,J.,R.Murphy,andC.Simonds(2007)‘I’llseeyouon‘Facebook’:Theeffectsofcomputer‐mediatedteacherself‐disclosureonstudentmotivation,affectivelearning,andclassroomclimate’.CommunicationEducation56(1):1–17.

Mazer,J.,Murphy,R.andSimonds,C.(2009)‘TheEffectsofTeacherSelf‐DisclosureviaFacebookonTeacherCredibility’Learning,MediaandTechnology34(2):175‐183.

Mayes,T.anddeFreitas,S.(2007)‘Learningande‐Learning:Theroleoftheory’.InH.BeethamandR.Sharpe(eds)Rethinkingpedagogyinthedigitalage.London.Routledge.

McAndrew,P.;Santos,A.;Lane,A.;Godwin,S.;Okada,A.;Wilson,T.;Connolly,T.;Ferreira,G.;BuckinghamShum,S.;Bretts,J.andWebb,R.(2009).OpenLearnResearchReport20062008.TheOpenUniversity,MiltonKeynes,England.http://oro.open.ac.uk/17513/1/Researchfinal_low.pdf

McLoughlin,J.Brady,MJW.,andLee,R.(2007)‘Peer‐to‐peer:Ane‐mentoringapproachtodevelopingcommunity,mutualengagementandprofessionalidentityforpre‐serviceteachers’PaperpresentedattheAustralianAssociationforResearchinEducation(AARE)Conference.Fremantle,WesternAustralia,25‐29November2007http://www.aare.edu.au/07pap/mcl07393.pdf

McCallum,J.,Ness,V.,Price,T.andWhiteford,A.(2009)‘UsingaVirtualLearningEnvironment(SecondLife)todeliverSimulationEducation’Glasgow:GlasgowCalendonianUniversity,seehttp://caledonianblogs.net/soh‐SecondLife/

105

McNeill,T.(2009)'TwitterinHigherEducation',http://www.scribd.com/doc/20025500/Twitter‐in‐Higher‐Education

McPherson,T.(ed.)(2008)'DigitalYouth,Innovation,andtheUnexpected'.TheJohnD.andCatherineT.MacArthurFoundationSeriesonDigitalMediaandLearning.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress

MejiasU.(2006)‘TeachingSocialSoftwarewithSocialSoftware’.Innovate:JournalofOnlineEducation,Vol2,Issue5,June/July2006.

Merrill,M.D.(2002)'Firstprinciplesofinstruction'.EducationalTechnologyResearchandDevelopment,50(3):43–59.

Metzger,J.M.andFlanagin,J.A.(2008)‘Introduction’inMetzger,J.M.andFlanagin,J.A(eds.)(2008)DigitalMedia,YouthandCredibility.TheJohnD.andCatherine.MacArthurFoundationSeriesonDigitalMediaandLearning.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress:pp.1‐4.

Minocha,S.(2009)'AStudyoftheEffectiveUseofSocialSoftwarebyFurtherandHigherEducationintheUKtoSupportStudentLearningandteaching'http://kn.open.ac.uk/public/workspace.cfm?wpid=8655

MIT(2009)MITOCWSiteStatisticshttp://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/about/stats/index.htm

MIT(2009a)2009ProgramEvaluationFindingsReportwww.ocw.mit.edu/ans7870/global/09_Eval_Summary.pdf

MIT(2006)2005ProgramEvaluationFindingsReport,Availableathttp://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/FA49E066‐B838‐4985‐B548‐F85C40B538B8/0/05_Prog_Eval_Report_Final.pdf

Norris,P.(2001)DigitalDivide:CivicEngagment,InformationPovertyandtheInternetWorldwide.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Notari,M.(2006)'Howtousewikiineducation:Wikibasedeffectiveconstructivelearning'.InProceedingsofthe2006InternationalSymposiumonWikis(WIKISYM),Denmark.

NSFCyberlearning(2008)‘FosteringLearningintheNetworkedWorld:TheCyberlearningOpportunityandChallenge’.NationalScienceFoundationTaskForceonCyberlearninghttp://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf08204

Oblinger,D.G.andOblinger,J.L.(eds)(2005)EducatingtheNetGeneration[online],AnEducauseebookpublicationavailableathttp://routes.open.ac.uk/ixbin/hixclient.exe?_IXDB_=routesand_IXSPFX_=gandsubmitbutton=summaryand%24+with+res_id+is+res19283

106

OECD/CERI(2008)NewMillenniumLearners:InitialFindingsontheeffectsofDigitalTechnologiesonSchoolAgedLearners.Paris:CentreforEducationalResearchandInnovation.http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/39/51/40554230.pdf

OECD‐CERI/Pedró,F.(2009)NewMillenniumLearnersinHigherEducation:EvidenceandPolicyImplications.Paris:CentreforEducationalResearchandInnovation(CERI)DirectorateforEducation,OECDhttp://www.nml‐conference.be/wp‐content/uploads/2009/09/NML‐in‐Higher‐Education.pdf

Ofcom(2008)Tomorrow’swirelesstechnologies.Reportonfuturecommunicationstechnology,availableonlineathttp://www.ofcom.org.uk/research/technology/overview/randd0708/

Palloff,R.M.andPratt,K.(2005).Collaboratingonline:Learningtogetherincommunity.SanFrancisco:Jossey‐Bass.

Parker,K.R.,andChao,J.T.(2007)‘WikiasateachingTool’.InterdisciplinaryJournalofKnowledgeandLearningObjects,Vol3:57–72.

Pedró,F.(2003)'VirtualLearningEnvironmentsinHigherEducation:InstitutionalIssues'.InM.Barajas(Ed.).VirtualLearningEnvironmentsinHigherEducation:AEuropeanView.Barcelona:UniversitatdeBarcelona.pp.65‐69.

Petrides,L.,Nguyen,L.,Jimes,C.andKaraglani,A.(2008)'OpenEducationalResources:Inquiringintoauthoruseandreuse'.InternationalJournalofEnhancedLearning.1(1/2):98‐117.

Petrides, L. and Jimes, C. (2006) ‘Open educational resources: toward a new educationalparadigm’, iJournal Insight into Student Services, Vol. 14, Oct., Available at:http://www.ijournal.us/issue_14/ij_14_04_articleframe_Petrides_Jimes.html

Preece, J.(2001) 'Sociability and usability in online communities: determining andmeasuringsuccess'.InformationTechnologyJournal.20(5):347–365.

Preece,J.(2000)Onlinecommunities:designingusability,supportingsociability.Chichester:JohnWlieyandSons.

Prensky,M.(2001)‘Digitalnatives,digitalimmigrants’,OntheHorizonReport.NCBUniversityPress,vol.9,no.5;alsoavailableonlineathttp://pre2005.flexiblelearning.net.au/projects/resources/Digital_Natives_Digital_Immigrants.pdf

Ramanau,R.andGeng,F.(2009)'ResearchingtheuseofWikistofacilitategroupwork'.ProcediaSocialandBehavioralSciences,Vol1:2620‐2626.

107

Ramsden,A.,(2009).‘Usingmicro‐blogging(Twitter)inyourteachingandlearning:Anintroductoryguide’.DiscussionPaper.UniversityofBath.http://opus.bath.ac.uk/15319/1/intro_to_microblogging_09.pdf.

Recker, M., Dorward, J. and Nelson, L.M. (2004) ‘Discovery and use of online learningresources:casestudyfindings’.EducationalTechnologyandSociety.7(2):93–104.

Ravenscroft, A. (2003), ‘From conditioning to learning communities: implications of fiftyyearsofresearchine‐learninginteractiondesign’,ALTJ.11(3),4‐18.

Redecker,C.(2009)ReviewofLearning2.0Practices:StudyontheImpactofWeb2.0InnovationsonEducationandTraininginEurope(23664EN).Seville:EuropeanCommission‐JointResearchCentre‐InstituteforProspectiveTechnologicalStudies.

Redmond,P.andLock,J.V.(2006)‘AflexibleframeworkforonlinecollaborativeLearning’.InternetandHigherEducation9(2006),267–276.

Reimann,P.,Kate,T.andWeinel,M.(2007)'Collaborativelearningbymodelling:Observationsinanonlinesetting'.InICT:ProvidingchoicesforlearnersandlearningProceedingsAsciliteSingapore2007.http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/reimann.pdf

Richardson,J.T.E.(2006)‘Investigatingtherelationshipbetweenvariationsinstudents’perceptionsoftheiracademicenvironmentandvariationsinstudybehaviourindistanceeducation’.BritishJournalofEducationalPsychology,vol.76:867–93.

Rieh,S.Y.andHilligoss,B.(2008).‘CollegeStudents’CredibilityJudgmentsintheInformation‐SeekingProcess’inMetzger,J.M.andFlanagin,J.A.(2008)(eds.)DigitalMedia,Youth,andCredibility.TheJohnD.andCatherineT.MacArthurFoundationSeriesonDigitalMediaandLearning.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress.pp.49–72.

Rogers,E.M.(1962)DiffusionofInnovations.Glencoe:FreePress

Robertson,I.(2008)‘Learners'attitudestowikitechnologyinproblembased,blendedlearningforvocationalteachereducation’AustralasianJournalofEducationalTechnology.24(4):425‐441.http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet24/robertson.html

Rudd,T.,Gifford,C.,Morrison,J.andFacer,K.(2006a)Whatif…ReImaginingLearningSpaces.Bristol:FuturelabOpeningEducationReports.http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/opening_education/Learning_Spaces_report.pdf

Rudd,T.Sutch,D.andFacer,K.(2006c)Towardsnewlearningnetworks.Bristol:FuturelabOpeningEducationReports.http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/opening_education/Learning_Netorks_report.pdf

108

Ryberg,T.andLarsen,M.(2008)’Networkedidentities:understandingrelationshipsbetweenstrongandweaktiesinnetworkedenvironments’.JournalofComputerAssistedLearning.Vol24:103‐115.

Salmon, G. (2003)Emoderating: the key to teaching and learning online. London: KoganPress.

Schuwer,R.andMulder,F.(2009)‘OpenER,aDutchInitiativeinOpenEducationalResources’.OpenlearningJournal24(1):67‐76.

Seale, J. and Bishop, N. (2009). 'Listening With a Different Ear: Understanding DisabledStudents’RelationshipswithTechnologies'.InH.Beetham,R.SharpeandS.deFreitas(eds)Rethinkinglearninginthedigitalage.London:Routledge.

Selinger,M.(2004)‘CulturalandPedagogicalImplicationsofaGlobalE‐learningProgramme’.CambridgeJournalofEducation.34:223‐239.

Sharpe,R.(2009)‘TheImpactofLearnerExperienceResearchonTransformingInsitutionalPractices’.INMayes,T.,Morrison,D.,Mellar,H.,Bullen,P.andOliver,M.(2009)(eds.)TransformingHigherEducationthroughTechnologyEnhancedLearning.York:TheHigherEducationAcademy.Accessibleathttp://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/ourwork/learningandtech/transforming_he_through_technology_enhanced_learning

SharpeR.,BenfieldG.,RobertsG.andFrancisR.(2006)Theundergraduateexperienceofblendedelearning:areviewofUKliteratureandpractice,availableonlineathttp://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/research/literature_reviews/blended_elearning_full_review.pdf

SelwynN.(2009)'Faceworking:exploringstudents'education‐relateduseofFacebook'.Learning,MediaandTechnology.34(2):157‐174.

SelwynN.(2009a)(ed.)Education2.0?DesigningtheWebforTeachingandLearning:ACommentarybytheTechnologyEnhancedLearningphaseoftheTeachingandLearningResearchProgramme.London:LondonKnowledgeLab,UniversityofLondon.

Selwyn,N.(2007),'Theuseofcomputertechnologyinuniversityteachingandlearning:acriticalperspective.'JournalofComputerAssistedLearning.Vol.23:83‐94.

Siemens,G.(2004).‘Connectivism:Alearningtheoryforthedigitalage’.Elearnspaceeverythingelearning,http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Siemens,G.(2006)‘KnowingKnowledge’,Elearnspaceeverythingelearninghttp://www.elearnspace.org/KnowingKnowledge_LowRes.pdf

109

Siemens,G.(2009)'ConnectivismandConnectiveKnowledge',availableonlineathttp://ltc.umanitoba.ca/connectivism/?p=189

Siemens,G.(2009b)'Connectivismandtheroleoftheteacher'[blogpost](http://www.connectivism.ca/?p=220)

Smith,C.(2008)'TechnologiesforTranscendingaFocusonError:BlogsandDemocraticAspirationsinFirst‐YearComposition'.JournalofBasicWriting,27(1):35‐60.

Smith,M.S.andCasserly,C.M.(2006)'Thepromiseofopeneducationalresources'.Change:TheMagazineofHigherLearning.38(5):8–17.

Steeples,C.andJones,C.(2002)Networkedlearning:perspectivesandissues.SpringerVerlag.

Surowiecki,J.(2004)Thewisdomofcrowds:whythemanyaresmarterthanthefewandhowcollectivewisdomshapesbusiness,economies,societiesandnations.NewYork:LittleBrown.

Tapscott,D.(1998)GrowingupDigital:TheRiseoftheNetGeneration.NewYork:McGraw‐Hill.

Tapscott,D.andWilliams,A.D.(2006)Wikinomics:HowMassCollaborationChangesEverything.NewYork:Penguin

Thorpe,M.,Conole,G.andEdmunds,R.(2008)‘Learners’experiencesofblendedlearningenvironmentsinapracticecontext’[online],SixthInternationalNetworkedLearningConference,Greece,5–6May2008,http://kn.open.ac.uk/document.cfm?docid=12129.

Turney,D.Robinson,M.Lee,andA.Soutar(2009)‘Usingtechnologytodirectlearninginhighereducation:Thewayforward?’ActiveLearninginHigherEducation,vol.10:71‐83.

Unwin,T.(2005)'TowardsaFrameworkfortheUseofICTinTeacherTraininginAfrica'.OpenLearning.Vol20:113‐130.

Urry,J.(2007)Mobilities.London:Sage

Väljataga,T.(2009)‘IfaStudentTakesControl:Facilitator’sTasksandResponsibilities’inAdvancesinWebBasedLearning–ICWL20098thProceedingsoftheInternationalConference,Aachen,Germany,August19‐21,2009.Pp.390‐399Berlin/Heidelberg:SpringerDOI‐10.1007/978‐3‐642‐03426‐8_47http://www.springerlink.com/content/23V52409256W16U1

Vuorikari,R.(2007).“Folksonomies,SocialBookmarkingandTagging:State‐of‐the‐Art”.

110

EuropeanSchoolnetandInsightobservatoryfornewtechnologiesandeducation,http://events.cliro.unibo.it/file.php/5/moddata/forum/5/26/Specia_Report_Folksonomies.pdf

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978)Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Wales,J.(2008)‘It’sthenextbilliononlinewhowillchangethewaywethink’TheObserver,15thJune,p.23

Warschauer,M.(2003)TechnologyandSocialInclusion:RethinkingtheDigitalDivide.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.

Weinberger,D.(2007)Everythingismiscellaneous:Thepowerofthenewdigitaldisorder.NewYork:TimesBooks.

Wenger,E.(1998)CommunitiesofPractice:Learning,MeaningandIdentity.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Wiley,D.andHenson,H.(2006)'AninitialcharacterizationofengagementininformalsociallearningaroundMITOCW'Proceedingsofthe7thinternationalconferenceonLearningsciences,pp.832‐837ISBN:0‐8058‐6174‐2.

Wiley,D.A.(2002)(ed.)Theinstructionaluseoflearningobjects,AgencyforInstructionalTechnology.Bloomington:AgencyforInstructionalTechnology.

Wilson,T.andMcAndrew,P.(2009)'Evaluatinghowfivehighereducationinstituionsworldwideplantouseandadaptopeneducationalresources'ProceedingsofINTED2009Conference.9‐11March2009,Valencia,Spain.ISBN:978‐84‐612‐7578‐6

White,D.(2009)‘It’saniceplacetovisitbutIwouldn’twanttolivethere:usingthe‘Visitor‐Resident’principletoguideapproachestotheparticipatoryweb’.PaperpresentedattheALTCconference,Manchester,September2009.http://alt.conferenceservices.net/reports/template/onetextabstract.xml?xsl=template/ALTtextabstract.xslandconferenceID=1613andabstractID=299362presentationaccessibleathttp://prezi.com/x0nxciep_mlt/

Yardi,S.(2008)‘WhispersintheClassroom’INMcPherson,T.(2008)(ed.)DigitalYoung,Innovation,andtheUnexpected.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.pp.143‐164.Availableonlineat:http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/dmal.9780262633598.143

Zhang,J(2009).‘TowardacreativesocialWebforlearnersandteachers’.EducationalResearcher.38(4):274–279.

111

Documents

A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools