Using Web 2.

0 Tools to Information Sharing in an Online Learning Environment
Annotated Bibliography by Jennifer Spann

This body of research is intended to explore the use of Web 2.0 tools in online classes for information sharing. It was done with the hopes of moving beyond the static one to many aspect of Web 1.0 to a more dynamic learning model of many to many. In today’s world where most young people are already taking advantage of these collaboration tools in everyday life for entertainment purposes, education needs to keep up to keep interest. So how does that work?

Introduction

Research Papers/Reports
Summary

Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71-80. This research paper focuses on the reluctance of higher education instructors to use Web 2.0 in the physical classroom. Though instructors are aware of the benefits of this technology they are reluctant to use them in their instruction. The author found that training these instructors may have a positive impact on their use of the Web 2.0 applications such as Wikis, Blogs, and social networking.

Critique

Though the focus of this paper has to do with the physical classroom, there are gems of information that impact online learning. There are still online courses, such as the Yale Course that my group studied, that do not employ any Web 2.0 technology that would encourage communication between students and students and teachers.

Bawden, D. (2007). Towards Curriculum 2.0: library/information education for a Web 2.0 world. Library and information Research, 31(99), 14-25.

Summary

This article discusses the changes in curriculum content and the methods of teaching and learning using Web 2.0 applications. One of the things the authors focus on how a communications class adapts to online learning using wikis, blogs, Flickr, and other such tools. One of the conclusions drawn is that introduction into teaching is best done incrementally, focusing on particular courses or topics and building on skills gained through experience.

Critique

This article is useful in that it focuses on how to implement and use web 2.0 in different courses. Most of the methods of implementation and use of these applications discussed in this article can be implemented in almost any curriculum. The article also brings in the concept of folksonomies, which a classification system that brings in the concept of tags and keywords to annotate and describe a website. The name is derived from folks and taxonomy.

Boulos, M., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Webbased tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC medical education, 6(1), 41. This document discusses the use of blogs, wikis, and podcasts in the online educational community, specifically medical students. This technology does allow for “anytime, anyplace” learning in a world that is getting increasingly busy. It discusses the advantages of these tools, such as using pod- and vodcasts for students who are auditory and visual learners, and the cost of hosting these tools; as well as the disadvantages, such as the fact that wikis and blogs do not always offer up information that can be supported with facts or can be vandalized by others. As the reading continues, it suggests solutions to the disadvantages such as “rolling back” the blog to a point before the vandalism happened or moderating a discussion board.

Summary

Critique

This reading supports the use of web 2.0 applications for interaction and information sharing in online education. It gives pretty specific issues to watch out for when using this technology in the classroom. I’m particularly satisfied with the remedies suggested by the article to offset the disadvantages of the web 2.0 environment.

Dohn, N. B. (2008). Web 2.0-mediated competence-Implicit educational demands on learners. In The 7th European Conference on E-Learning:[hosted by the University of Cyprus]: Grecian Bay Hotel, Agia Napia, Cyprus, 6-7 November 2008 (p. 308). Academic Conferences Limited.

Summary

This research paper investigates how using Web 2.0 tools in an educational setting stresses the learner due to cognitive load issues. The author suggests that a student who is required to create a wiki to demonstrate knowledge of a particular topic can be cognitively stressed out having to use a new technology as well as having to demonstrate knowledge of a new concept. The initial issue is that the student may very well be graded on the creation of the vehicle of presentation of the concept (the wiki) as well and having learned the concept.

Critique

Though I can see the point of the article (I have been there, having to use an unfamiliar web 2.0 tool to demonstrate a new concept or knowledge I have acquired), I believe that this will be less

and less the case as our children grow up in this web 2.0 world. We, the current students, grew up in a web 1.0 (or no web in some cases) world; so there is a learning curve to much of what we do in this course. Other programs see students who are not so comfortable with the computer and all the technologies contained. An instructor who wishes to use such tools should be mindful of the students they teach and offer supports such as YouTube or personally created videos to help with the cognitive load of the student as well as maybe some written instruction.

Gooding, J. (2008). Web 2.0: A vehicle for transforming education. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education (IJICTE), 4(2), 44-53. This research paper explores how web 2.0 tools are changing the way that learning is done on the Internet. The authors tie web 2.0 back to The Partnership for 21st Century Skill by saying that it allows a space creativity, “collaboration, conversation, and interaction that is highly flexible and adaptable”. The article first defines web 2.0 in a general sense and compares it to Web 1.0, then goes on to discuss how teachers have reacted to the technology. Some Web 2.0 tools are defined and the use of each is described in a general way bringing in examples of each type of tool.

Summary

Critique

This article was very helpful in that it discussed some of the more popular tools found on the Internet and give specific examples of them. It discussed general ways that the tools are used leaving specifics up the imagination of the audience. My favorite tool discussed in this article was the social bookmarking because this section talked about folksonomy and gave examples of them. I looked at a few and even created an account with Blink.com to try it out!

Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age Web 2.0 and Classroom Research: What Path Should We Take Now?. Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246-259.

Summary

This article discusses the nature of the web and the technical skills we want our students to acquire in the course of learning. It also considers the changes we want to see in what is seen as a traditional classroom. There is a need to focus more research on how students access web 2.0 tools both inside and outside of the classroom. The author challenges researchers to embrace many of the changes and create an online identity in an effort to enhance their professional development.

Critique

I appreciate the message of this research article, suggesting that until educators are willing to immerse themselves in the technology and learn about it, how it works, and truly understand how it interacts with other tools; they will not be able to use it effectively in the classroom. I

can see how the research suggested by the author can further the understanding of information sharing for the use of online education.

Grosseck, G. (2009). To use or not to use web 2.0 in higher education?. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 478-482.

Summary

This research paper discusses how widespread web 2.0 tools have become and the potential for use in both education in general and in teaching activities in specific. The article gives several good examples of how each tool (blogging, wikis, slide sharing, social bookmarking, etc.) can be employed in learning activities. The author noted that these innovations offer features that allow information sharing and collaboration. Though the author discusses ways that web 2.0 can be used in the classroom and gives specific examples that give the reader a great place to start incorporating the technology into learning activities, legalities and ethics are overlooked. She does not directly mention copyrights or being able to support information sharing with research. Overall, however, I felt this paper held some really good ideas.

Critique

Kesim, E., & Agaoglu, E. (2007). A paradigm shift in distance education: Web 2.0 and social software. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(3), 66-75.

Summary

This research article discusses the shift in how classes are taught from traditional learning to what the article calls digitized formats. The formats that the authors discussed are wikis, podcasting, blogs, and RSS comparing them to their web 1.0 counterparts. It offered a timeline of the evolution of learning technologies from the 1960’s where instruction was instructor led to the 2000’s and the birth of e-learning. The fact is that for information sharing, the rapid developments in social software technologies, such as wikis, means better collaboration amongst students which means better learning.

Critique

This article brings to bear that which many of my other articles did: that with web 2.0 tools, the job of instructions shifts from instructor driven to instructor led and student driven. Students can share knowledge and understandings that will allow them to further broaden their understanding of the material offered. My only real issue with this article is the number of grammatical errors that distracted me from what is being said.

Kop, R. (2008, June). Web 2.0 Technologies: Disruptive or Liberating for Adult Education?. In Adult Education Research Conference (pp. 5-7).

Summary

This article discusses the dichotomy between adult education and learning technologies. A more flexible model of adult education can be created to minimize the dichotomy. Students who have grown up with technology all their lives are more likely to use the technology than more traditional students, and adult educators are comfortable with the new technologies due to a lack of experience with them. If the learner’s world does not mirror education, the learner will attain learning elsewhere. Adult educators need to follow the developments of Web 2.0 and explore them so that they can use them creatively. This is an older article but it still holds a lot of truths. Many educators who have many years experience teaching non-technical classes are not comfortable with technology. If they wish to move up to 21st century learning and teach students courses online, they need to start by immersing themselves in the tools of the trade so that they can inspire confidence in their pupils. Further, if the students of these older generation teachers sense that the instructor is not confident in the technology , there is every reason to believe that they will not have confidence in the instructor.

Critique

Mills, L. A., Knezek, G., & Khaddage, F. (2012). Aligning Learner Preferences for Information Seeking, Information Sharing and Mobile Technologies. International Association for Development of the Information Society.

Summary

The purpose of this study was to report on new information communication technologies such as web 2.0. The survey instrument was intended to see how what students thought of mobile learning and how knowledge is acquired using various methods online. It was found that students preferred the use of tools that allowed for more freedom of use. The author noted that the challenge with these tools is implementing them effectively in a way that will engage the students. I agree with the author of this study. I enjoy using tools that I can access from anywhere using any device (cell phone, iPad, tablet). The challenge for any instructor, regardless the medium being used, is using it effectively in a manner that would engage students. This, at least, is not a new issue. Very good article.

Critique

Robertson, R. (2012). Using knowledge networks to teach online writing skills in the professional writing classroom. Engaging students with learning technologies, 167.

Summary

Students with little to no experience struggled with the use of Google docs to find and share knowledge for the class. They were able to successfully produce a good collaboration of a high standard by using this tool. By using a variety of online tools such as Google Docs, BlackBoard Groups, and e-mail, the students in the study have a number of ways to collaborate on their work, thus allowing for a better overall product.

Critique

This article was actually based on the experiences of a particular online class in professional writing. It did, however, show that with the right support and encouragement students with limited experience online can still be very successful. This would be more difficult if the whole class has similarly low experience, otherwise it would make sense to group these students with student who have more experience with the online tools.

Safran, C., Helic, D., & Gütl, C. (2007). E-Learning practices and Web 2.0. In Proceedings of the International Conference of'Interactive computer aided learning'ICL2007: EPortofolio and Quality in e-Learning. This article discusses how changes in e-learning due to the inception of web 2.0 tools have been summarized as e-Learning 2.0. Concepts of e-Learning 2.0 were summarized in the article and included examples such as a tool called Virtual Project-Management Room that allows learners to work on real-life projects. Wikis and blogs are considered enduring technologies that allow users to share information and collaborate learning. Educations benefits include: the promotion of critical and analytical thinking, the promotion of creative, intuitive, and associational thinking, the promotion of analogical thinking, and the exposure to quality information.

Summary

Critique

Though this article is an older one, it still has some really valid information in it about the use of Web 2.0 tools. The author shows concern about the age of the student and finding web 2.0 applications that are appropriate for education.

Selwyn, N. (2007, October). Web 2.0 applications as alternative environments for informal learning-a critical review. In Paper for CERI-KERIS International Expert Meeting on ICT and Educational Performance (pp. 16-17).

Summary

The article states that there is a clear limitation to the quality and quantity (in 2007) of research conducted to show the effectiveness of web 2.0 applications in education. It is thought that informal learning is important to learners of all ages and that “informal learning is caught and not taught”. The value of the a web activity is dependent on the number of people collaborating on it and would not have as much value if only one person constructed it. It is

important for an instructor to carefully consider a tool before employing it in a class environment for instruction. The tool should add educational value. Another consideration for using a web tool is e-safety, and ensuring that users are being safe in their sharing of information. Many young people understand safety issues and opportunities and tend to share the same concerns as their adult counterparts.

Critique

Again, this is an older article but it offers some good advice. It used to be said that too many cooks spoil the brew but in the case of online learning that is really not always the case. Learning online often works better when students collaborate what they are learning. However, instructor must be sure that students working online are sharing valid information and following rules that will keep them safe.

Ullrich, C., Borau, K., Luo, H., Tan, X., Shen, L., & Shen, R. (2008, April). Why web 2.0 is good for learning and for research: principles and prototypes. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web (pp. 705-714). ACM. Previous to this study there has not been a lot of analysis of the relationship between web 2.0 tools and teaching and learning. This article looks at the principles of web 2.0 and describes the pedagogical impact on learning. From research, it is decided that web 2.0 is great for constructivist and social learning. Many web 2.0 allows for assembly of understandings in a limited amount of time with the use of social bookmarking and microblogging. Web 2.0 offers high levels of functionality in the terms of sharing information.

Summary

Critique

This article is close in age to the Selwyn article above, however it shows more of what is possible with Web 2.0 tools. Through this program I’ve discovered many ways to incorporate collaboration and I’ve found that I’ve learned more that way. This is an excellent article for framing the positive aspects of using web 2.0 tools to collaborate on information sharing and dissemination.

Scholarly Papers/Articles/Resources
Summary

Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning?. Educause review, 41(2), 32. Many web 2.0 tools offer a social writing platform that allows asynchronous writing, groupwork, and other forms of collaboration. Social bookmarking is used for storing and sharing bookmarks that can be used later for projects. Teachers can use social book marking to create a

list for professional use either for their own uses or with their students, or for staff professional development. The article further discusses how search engines pull information from blogs and wikis to share with other users. This article brings up the question of schools redesigning their webpages to make them more accessible for students. Web 2.0 has lowered the barrier for entry by allowing for more interactive information sharing. I have been using BlackBoard since I was working on my PACE certification in 2004. Although BlackBoard has, undoubtedly, upgraded and updated the web 2.0 tools and functionality that it has offered since that time, I still see places where it could improve. I personally believe that having a more animated discussion board that looks more like the Facebook page would make it more interactive and interesting to the students who use it. Or, USC could just go ahead and create an Edmodo domain?

Critique

Brown, J. S., & Adler, R. P. (2008). Open education, the long tail, and learning 2.0. Educause review, 43(1), 16-20.

Summary

According to the article social learning is based on the concept that understanding of content is socially constructed through interactions about the content with others with a focus on how we learn. Another consideration of social learning involves being a full participant in the field of learning. Wikipedia illustrates this idea since many initial entries are written by amateurs, then read and commented on by professional scholars and researchers. All discuss the article and work to create a final piece that is much better than the original. Online social interactions can also be done by utilizing virtual environments such as Second Life, a virtual world that can be used for instruction, including group breakout session to allow students to group together and discuss new material.

Critique

This article is a gold mine of information and ideas. It is well written and has tons of examples and graphics to give the readers a better idea of what is being expressed. The article is well organized leading the reader through each idea in a logical progression. There was a lot of new information for me and more importantly, an aha moment when it occurred to me that information sharing did not have to necessarily be written.

Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2008). Web 2.0 tools and processes in higher education: Quality perspectives. Educational Media International, 45(2), 93-106.

Summary

This article starts by discussing how Web technology is changing and being used at the time that the article is written. It talks about how students are using the new technologies outside of academia but that the educational forums are not yet taking advantage of these new tools

offered. The article goes on to discuss the educational potential of web 2.0. Information sharing ideas brought forth in this paper include: developing a web-based environment for a local audience to share ideas, student created podcasts where they share their new learning with each other, student created portfolios highlighting learner content and then peer commented, students collaborating on a base document or image, students creating and sharing blogs and wikis, students saving and sharing searches using RSS feeds, and student contributing to build digital collections of information. In order for Web 2.0 tools and processes to be included in instruction, teachers and students must value instruction where learner participation and contribution is balanced with learning. Teachers need to ensure that all web 2.0 tools are used to allow students to create their own learning resources. Finally, products created by students should be part of the overall course assessment practices.

Critique

This article reminds us that we need to make sure that any tool we use should be supported by theory and best practices. Students should create their learning and explore, guided, but on their own, the information they are expected to know. Again, some good information and ideas shared in this article.

Harris, A. L., & Rea, A. (2009). Web 2.0 and virtual world technologies: A growing impact on IS education. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2), 137.

Summary

The article goes into great depth discussing the advantages and disadvantages of using web 2.0 tools such as wikis and blogs to share information in an online class. These tools are becoming more widespread in the IS classroom and students should expect classes to mirror their interactive life at home. The article speculates that there will be an increased use of virtual worlds for entertainment, socializing, and education. It is the hope of the authors that instructors continue to make use of the capabilities of web 2.0 tools to engage students in learning.

Critique

This article had some much good information including a gold mine of ways to use many tools in learning.

McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. (2007). Social software and participatory learning: Pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007 (pp. 664-675).

Summary

Social software gives students control over the learning they are acquiring and these tools can be mediated by the use of other tools. There are many forms that can be employed in education to great effect and are quite free to use. These free tools allow for students to use

collective wisdom within a rich atmosphere of dynamic social environment. As many other articles found here have done, this article has supplied a vast number of examples of tools in use; however, this article also includes examples of the pedagogy employed by the use of these tools and where the tools are used specifically.

Critique

This article defines something called Pedagogy 2.0 that goes hand in hand with web 2.0 and learning 2.0. I like the real world examples given of distance education utilizing these tools. It shows the reality of the tools.

Thompson, J. (2007). Is Education 1.0 ready for Web 2.0 students?. Innovate Journal of Online Education, 3(4), 6. Ready or not, here comes web 2.0 in the virtual classroom. The article states that in order for use to move educational practices into the 21st century we need to understand our learners and the things they do. We need to be willing to experiment with the way we teach our classes and encourage our students to take advantage of the skills offered by collaborators with diverse backgrounds. The leaders of learning groups need to appreciate the differences in their team and ensure they are valued by all members.

Summary

Critique

This article supports collaboration and teamwork on the internet using web 2.0 tools and careful planning by the teacher. I agree that teachers need to plan activities with the students’ abilities in mind ensuring that supports are in place for those who need it.

Many of my articles are older (2009 and back) but the common themes that I noticed in the articles seemed to be that the tools were great as long as careful planning was employed when using them with any class (online or traditional), and that instructors need to ensure that there is some support in place for students with limited understanding/experience of the tools. One of the new things l learned while working this research has to do with folksonomies. I’ve been using a web 2.0 tool for over a year and did not realize that it was a folksonomy. It was interesting to learn that. I also realized that this was a tool that I could probably employ in my classroom with careful planning. I was also impressed with the sheer number of web 2.0 tools available for use in collaboration. I walked into this research thinking of information sharing being limited (more or less) to wikis and Google docs. I had an a-ha moment when I realized that it could go further than that to having a podcast and people giving feedback on it or using a tool such a Voice Thread to get people (students)

Research Summary & Conclusion

talking about things. Edmodo (a tool I’ve used with great gusto in the past) is an awesome tool for information sharing and collaboration among students, planned or not. Though I came into this assignment with definite ideas as to what I expected to find, I’ve really enjoyed many aspects of the “treasure hunt” I conducted and the “hidden jewels” I was able to unearth.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful