Collaborative Learning: Interactive Debates using Padlet in a higher

education institution

D. DeWitt, Norlidah Alias & Saedah Siraj, Department of Curriculum & Instructional Technology,

Faculty of Education, University Malaya

Kuala Lumpur

Paper presented at:International Educational Technology Conference  (IETC 2015)Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey27 - 29   May 2015.

1. Introduction2. Problem Statement3. Purpose of the Study4. Method5. Results and Discussion6. Conclusions and Implications

ContentTeacher, can I

have the internet password. I need

to check my email.

I thought he wanted to go to the toilet

Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015 - 2025 (Higher Education) Innovative students

◦ mastery of core subjects ◦ mastery of general knowledge about the world◦ solve problems by applying, creating, and

connecting knowledge, ◦ use experiential and technology-enabled learning

models for personalised and engaging learning experiences

Introduction

Higher level thinkingTeach facts and conceptsMore importantly skills:• acquiring• Internalizing• applying and• creating new knowledge (Ronen

& Pasher, 2011).

Research ObjectivesIn this study an instructional model using a collaborative learning tool Padlet is implemented to determine if it can be used for creating new knowledge. The following research questions: To what extend does the processes of acquiring,

internalization, creation, sharing and application of knowledge occur during instruction?

What are the participants’ perceptions of the interactive debate on Padlet?

Purpose

Innovative students

Problem Statement

Higher level thinkingTeach facts and conceptsMore importantly skills:• acquiring• Internalizing• applying and• creating new knowledge

(Ronen & Pasher, 2011).

Cognitive and social processes during interactions

Need new Models of instruction for collaboration and knowledge creation in higher education

Padlet Virtual Wall

Padlet Virtual Walls: Examples

Design of the Study

METHOD

Introduction to Padlet

Instruction on design of virtual

interactive debate

Implementation Debate on Virtual Wall, Padlet:

10 minutes: Proposers; 10

minutes : rebuttals; 10 minutes:

proposers again; 10 minutes : final

rebuttals.

Questionnaire (KMQ and SSQ),

Interviews Content Analysis of written Communications

Sample40 First-year undergraduates volunteers in a public university

The task: To identify the advantages and disadvantages of ICT. Students divided into 2 groups. An interactive debate on a virtual wall, Padlet, between the 2

groups to list advantages, and disadvantages of ICT in an interesting and meaning way manner.

Tasks were done online synchronously in the computer laboratory during the class.

METHOD

. Data collection Data collected on completion of the tasks through surveys using

questionnaires: Triangulation of data from the interviews and the content

analysis of the written documentation of the tasks

METHOD

Knowledge Management Process (Kappes & Thomas,1993)

Description

Knowledge AcquisitionSelection of accurate and suitable information, from internet search or otherwise, to be included in the documentation

Knowledge Internalization Reference to prior knowledge made; organizing and reorganizing the information

Knowledge CreationIdeas and ways of using the technology for counseling that is not copied from other sources, but may be innovated from others

Knowledge Sharing The information is not hidden but shared with others freely

Knowledge ApplicationKnowledge of the use of the tool is applied specifically to the counseling consultation and work environment

Instrument The Knowledge Management Questionnaire (KMQ)

Application of KM processes in interactive debate on Padlet (Biasutti & El-Deghaidy, 2012). 5-point Likert Scale KMQ was reliable above the 0.70 standard of reliability, with a total Cronbach alpha of 0.86.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

All of the students (digital natives) have never used a virtual wall like Padlet.

All had succeeded in using Padlet for the task.

Background information on participants’ experience with wiki

All participants were ‘digital natives’ who use social media tools (all of them use the microblog, Facebook).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Domain Mean Std. Deviation

Knowledge Acquisition 4.2750 .57926

Knowledge Internalization 4.1750 .50630

Knowledge Creation 4.1000 .76962

Knowledge Sharing 4.6875 .46254

Knowledge Application 4.4286 .57492

Table 1: Min and standard deviation on Knowledge domains

RQ 1: To what extend does the processes of acquiring, internalization, creation, sharing and application of knowledge occur during instruction?

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONRQ 1: To what extend does the processes of acquiring, internalization, creation, sharing and application of knowledge occur during instruction?

Domain Evidence

Knowledge Acquisition

“I got to learn new knowledge that was useful”.“Many things I did not know, until my friends shared on the wall”. “Got to know a variety of ideas that was shared.”Observation showed that the students were actively searching for knowledge using search engines such as Google. This included pictures, text, web pages and videos.As the students searched for information, they had to evaluate to determine if the information and materials were relevant.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONRQ 1: What knowledge management processes occurred during the solution of the task?

Domain Evidence

Knowledge Internalization

“I am able to express my ideas better”“ Able to get others viewpoint and broaden my knowledge.”Observation:This knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of ICT had to be internalized so that new knowledge could be created among the students. Students had to use their internalized knowledge to summarize the information acquired, or to depict it in graphic form.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONRQ 1: What knowledge management processes occurred during the solution of the task?

Domain Evidence

Knowledge Creation

“Generated new ideas”“I thought out of the box, creatively and critically, got to train my mind to think fast and accurately.”

This was However, most of the new knowledge created was shown through different ways of displaying the knowledge acquired. The community of learners, the first-year counseling students, were also learning new things by observing their friends posts.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONRQ 1: What knowledge management processes occurred during the solution of the task?

Domain Evidence

Knowledge Sharing

“exchanged opinions” ; “Shared opinions openly and positively with friends.”

“Sharing encouraged better and stronger ideas among us”.

“Information was rapidly shared directly with the group”The sharing gave the learner a responsibility to ensure

information posted was accurate and well-organized.

Knowledge Application

“ With Padlet I am able to learn to think fast”“ The sharing with my friends enabled me to understand

the issues from different perspectives”“I am able to connect all the information from my friends

post to come up with important information.”The processes led to the internalization and application

of knowledge:

New ICT tool

Knowledge sharing for community

Interaction and Collaboration on wall

New Knowledge created

New application in practice

Disadvantages of ICT

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONRQ 2: What are the participants’ perceptions of the interactive debate on Padlet?

Table 2: Min and standard deviation on Student Satisfaction

Items Mean S. D.

I like to see my friends comments on Padlet 4.5385 0.5970

Padlet enables me to share ideas with my friends 4.7436 0.4385

Because of Padlet, my class members are able to reach an agreement

4.3077 0.7579

I developed new ideas from the activities on Padlet 4.7436 0.4935

I learned new concepts from the other posts on Padlet 4.4872 0.5991

I learned through collaborative learning with Padlet 4.5128 0.6789

The materials posted on Padlet were clear 3.9744 0.6405

The materials posted on Padlet were useful 4.2564 0.6400

The activity on Padlet was challenging 3.5641 1.0595

I got ideas on the advantages and disadvantages of ICT from the materials posted on Padlet

4.5128 0.5057

Students were satisfied as it was an interesting way to share ideas

Students developed new ideas, and were learning

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Padlet can be used for an interactive debate for learners to create new knowledge.

Interactive debates using a web 2.0 tool for collaboration enabled the KM processes of acquiring, internalizing, sharing and applying knowledge to generate new knowledge.

The generation of new knowledge encouraged higher level cognitive processes.

Design of instruction using Padlet for interactive debates was useful for collaboration and creating new knowledge

Collaboration and sharing information for generation of knowledge enabled processes such as modeling

Encourages creativity and innovation

Combination with other web 2.0 tools and new instructional models needs to be investigated

Thank you