Post on 06-Apr-2018
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
1/111
AliteraturereviewoftheuseofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation
AreportcommissionedbytheHigherEducationAcademy
Prof.GrinneConoleandDr.PanagiotaAlevizou
g.c.conole@open.ac.uk;p.alevizou@open.ac.uk
August2010
TheOpenUniversity
WaltonHall,MiltonKeynes
UK
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
2/111
TableofContents
AliteraturereviewoftheuseofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation................................1
Introduction.........................................................................................................................................4
Methodology ........................................................................................................................................5Changingtechnologies......................................................................................................................9TheemergenceofWeb2.0tools..............................................................................................................9AtypologyofWeb2.0tools ....................................................................................................................11
Changinglearningandlearners.................................................................................................13Theoriesoflearning ................................................................................................................................. 13Newformsoflearning .............................................................................................................................. 16Patternsoftechnologyuseandthecharacteristicsoflearners................................................. 17Thechangingroleofteachingandteachers .....................................................................................20
Strategiesforsupportingtheuseoftechnologies................................................................ 22Barrierstouptakeandlackofimpact ................................................................................................ 22Digital,networkedandmulti-literacies............................................................................................. 23Successfactorsandstrategiesforchange ......................................................................................... 25
Contextualexamples......................................................................................................................28Blogs,wikisandsocialtagging.............................................................................................................. 29Twitter........................................................................................................................................................... 31Socialnetworking ...................................................................................................................................... 35Immersiveenvironmentsandvirtualworlds ..................................................................................37Summingup .................................................................................................................................................40
Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................44
Appendices:FurtherissuesrelatingtotheadoptionofWeb2.0inHE:detailsfromtheresearchfield.................................................................................................................. 45Appendix1:AnopenapproachtoliteraturereviewsusingCloudworks............................... 46Appendix2:AtypologyofWeb2.0tools ........................................................................................... 47Mediasharing..........................................................................................................................................................47Mediamanipulationandmashups ...............................................................................................................47InstantMessaging,chatandconversationalarenas ...............................................................................48Onlinegamesandvirtualworlds....................................................................................................................49Socialnetworking..................................................................................................................................................49Blogging .....................................................................................................................................................................50Socialbookmarking ..............................................................................................................................................51
Recommendersystems.......................................................................................................................................51Wikisandcollaborativeeditingtools ...........................................................................................................52Syndication................................................................................................................................................................53
Appendix3:Areviewofe-learningmodelsandframeworks ....................................................54Appendix4:Paradoxescreatedbythenetworkedanddigital .................................................. 57Knowledgeexpansion..........................................................................................................................................58Nohierarchyorcontrol.......................................................................................................................................58Networkedversusboundedspaces?.............................................................................................................58
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
3/111
Collectiveownershipversuscommodification.........................................................................................59Appendix5:FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation60Levelsofmaturity..................................................................................................................................................60Nationalstrategies ................................................................................................................................................61Marketingandstudentrecruitment..............................................................................................................61
Appendix6:Barrierstochange ............................................................................................................ 64
Access,accessibility,andconcernsonauthorityandtrivialisation.................................................64Literacyissues.........................................................................................................................................................65Qualityandeffectiveness ...................................................................................................................................65Legacysystems.......................................................................................................................................................65Pedagogicalrethinking........................................................................................................................................66
Appendix7:Differentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchange................... 66Designbasedresearch ........................................................................................................................................66Promotingchangethroughthetechnologies ............................................................................................67
Appendix8:OpenEducationalResources ........................................................................................ 70Fromlearningobjectstoopeneducationalresources..........................................................................70EducatorsmotivationsandOERteachingpractices..............................................................................75OERclassroomcommunities............................................................................................................................78Repurposingandreflecting:designingresources,designingcollaborativecommunities....80
Appendix9:Issuesraisedbytheintroductionofnewtechnologies........................................ 84Institutionalarrangements ...............................................................................................................................84Theeducatorsrole ...............................................................................................................................................85Theattitudesandrolesofstudents ...............................................................................................................87Tensionsaroundtheconceptofopenness .................................................................................................87Assessmentpractices...........................................................................................................................................88
References ......................................................................................................................................... 89
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
4/111
IntroductionThisreviewfocusesontheuseofWeb2.0toolsinHigherEducation.Itprovidesasynthesisoftheresearchliteratureinthefieldandaseriesofillustrativeexamplesofhowthesetools
arebeingusedinlearningandteaching.Itdrawsoutthebenefitsthatthesenewtechnologiesappeartooffer,andhighlightssomeofthechallengesandissuessurroundingtheiruse.ThereviewformsthebasisforaHEAcademyfundedproject,PearlsintheCloud,
whichisexploringhowWeb2.0toolscanbeusedtosupportevidencebasedpracticesin
learningandteaching.Theprojecthasalsoproducedtwoindepthcasestudies,whicharereportedelsewhere(Galleyetal.,2010,Alevizouetal.,2010).Thecasestudiesfocuson
evaluationofarecentlydevelopedsiteforlearningandteaching,Cloudworks,whichharnessesWeb2.0functionalitytofacilitatethesharinganddiscussionofeducational
practice.ThecasestudiesexploretheextenttowhichtheWeb2.0affordancesofthesite
aresuccessfullypromotingthesharingofideas,aswellasscholarlyreflections,onlearningandteaching.
Ouraiminthisreviewistodrawontheexistingbodyofinternationalliteratureinthisfield.
ItsynthesisessomeempiricalevidenceonthepatternsofuseofWeb2.0toolsandsocial
mediainhighereducationandstructuresfindingsinthemesrelevanttocommunitiesofeducators.AlthoughevidenceexistsregardingthebenefitsofWeb2.0ininformallearning
environments,andwithinadministrativecontexts,resultsfromlongitudinalstudies
showingthedepthofchangeinpedagogicalpracticeineithertertiaryorposttertiaryeducationareeitherscarceorfarfromconsensual.Andwhileanemergingbodyof
literaturefocusesonexperiencesoflearners,structuredevidenceregardingtheissuessurroundingintegrationinformaleducation,suchasthoseoutlinedabove,isonlyslowly
emerging.Thenextsectiondescribesourmethodologyforthestudy.Thereportisdivided
intothefollowingsections:
Introduction Methodology Changingtechnologies Changinglearningandlearners Changingteachingandteachers Strategiesforpromotingtheuseoftechnology Contextualexamples Conclusion Appendices
oAppendix1:AnopenapproachtoliteraturereviewsusingCloudworks
o Appendix2:AtypologyofWeb2.0toolso Appendix3:Areviewofelearningmodelsandframeworkso Appendix4:Paradoxescreatedbythenetworkedanddigitalo Appendix5:FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0inHigherEducation
o Appendix6:Barrierstochange
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
5/111
o Appendix7:Differentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchangeo Appendix8:OpenEducationalResourceso Appendix9:IssuesraisedbytheintroductionofWeb2.0technologies
References
MethodologyWehavedrawnonexistingevidencefromlargerandsmallerscalereports,anecdotal
accountsofinnovativepracticesofmainstreamWeb2.0ineducation,andconference
papersandjournalarticlestoidentifyandsurfacetrends,experiencesandchallengesregardingthetakeupanduseofWeb2.0informallearningcontexts.Wehavealso
scrutinisedaccountsofcollaborativeprojectsregardingthepedagogicalintegrationofWeb2.0withinHEcontexts,andsearchedforrecordedexperiencesofpracticefromrelevant
edublogsandestablishednetworksonscholarshipineducation,aswellaspeerreviewed
papers.Beingreflectiveandexperimentalinourresearch,wesoughttoopenupthedebate,solicitinsightsandshareresourcesinapublicspace.Thereviewwasinformedby
secondaryresearchpointingtotheimpactofsocialmedia/softwareandWeb2.0inlearningandteaching.Thefocushasbeenonemergingtrendsandevidenceonpracticesand
challengesinthefieldofhighereducationinOECDcountries.Followinganinitialreviewof
existingrelevantreportswithaUK,USoraninternationalfocus(e.g.BECTA,2008;2009;NSFCyberlearning,2008;FranklingandArmstrong,2008;AlaMutkaetal.,2009;JISC,
2009;Redecker,2009;OECD,2009),wedevisedaninitialstructureandsetofsub
categoriesandstartedperformingsearchesoneachtopicinprogressivelymoredetail,reducingthesetuntilalistingofthemesregardingtrends,projectsandevidencerelatingto
practicesandchallengeswasselected.
Inordertocollectevidencefromresearchpublications(peerreviewedjournalarticles,
booksandbookchapters)weperformedsearcheswithspecialisedjournalandconferenceproceedingsdatabasesincluding:
ERIC Igentaconnect Sagejournalsonline Communicationandmassmediacomplete ElearningandTEL Informaworld Relevantelearningconferences,suchasALTC,ASCILITEandNetworkedlearningAdditionalGooglescholarsearcheswereperformed,usingkeywordandbooleansearchesontermsincluding:Web2.0socialmediasocialnetworkinghighereducationlearning2.0virtualwords,sociallearningparticipatorylearning'teachingpractices''reflection'
and'teaching'.Finally,specialisednetworkingandcommunitysitesweresearched(include
ECAR,EDUCAUSE,EvidenceNet,ELSIG,JISC,HigherEducationAcademysubjectcentresandCloudworks).AsthesecondcasestudywithinthePearlsintheCloudsprojectfocuseson
theuseofCloudworksforsupportingpracticesanddiscussionsaroundOpenEducational
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
6/111
Resources(OER),moretargetedsearchesregardingopennessandOERwerealso
performedintheabovedatabasesandinspecialisedsitesthroughBooleanoperators.
Itwasclearfromthisinitialroundofsearchesthatthereislittleinthewayofmetareviews
andempiricallygroundedorlongitudinalstudies.Therearehowevermanycasestudieson
specificuseofWeb2.0toolsandarichbodyofevidenceinvestigatingthelearnersvoice.Thislearnervoiceresearchisgivingvaluableinsightsabouttheexperiencesand
expectationsthatlearnershaveaboutusingtechnologiestosupportlearning.Researchlookingattheteachervoiceandtheirexpectationsandexperiencesissmaller.Similarly,
thereisadearthofevidencelookingatthewaysinwhichthesenewtechnologiesareor
couldchangelearningandteachingpractice.Thelargestbodyofevidencecomesfromscholarsandeducationaltechnologistswhoareinvolvedinelearninganddistancelearning
andfromproponentsofopenlearningandOER.
Inadditiontothetraditionalliteraturereviewstrategyoutlinedabove,wealsoconducted
whatwearelabellinganopenreviewusingtheCloudworkssite.Wedefineanopenreviewasonethatusesasocialnetworkingspacetoaggregateandcollectivelydiscussan
evolvingbodyofliteraturearoundasetofcoreresearchquestions.Toinitiatetheopenreviewacloudscapewassetup1.ThenatureoftheprojectwasdescribedandanoutlineofhowweplannedtouseCloudworkstoconducttheopenreview:
WeareusingCloudworksasaplacetoshareawarenessof,andcriticallyevaluaterelevantliterature,butalsotoelicitviews,ideas,andexperiencessurroundingtheuseofWeb2.0inHigherEducation.
TheresultantCloudscapewillbereferencedinthefinalreporttotheHEAandinappreciationofyour
contributions,youwillbeacknowledgedexplicitlyinthereportintheformofquotations.All
commentswillbesubjecttoaCreativeCommonsAttributionlicence.Inpart,thisisaselfreflective
exerciseinthatwewanttoseehowthiscloudscapeevolvesasanexampleofWeb2.0practiceinthe
HEcontext.Theinitialcloudrepresentingthestateofthereviewandsomeinitialreferencesisbelow.
AdetailedoverviewofhowCloudworkswasusedtosupportanopenreviewisprovidedinthefirstindepthcasestudy,partofthe'PearlsintheClouds'project.The way that the sitewas used to support the Web 2.0 review outlined here, is discussed in more detail in Appendix 1,
An open approach to literature reviews using Cloudworks2. Asummaryexplanationis
providedhereforcompleteness.
Fivespaces(clouds)weresetuparoundcorequestionsassociatedwiththereview,asameansofstimulatingthedebate:
IsthereevidenceofproductiveandcreativeuseofWeb2.0inHE? WhatarethebarriersandenablerstotheuseofWeb2.0inHE? Whatarethebarrierstosharingexperiencesandteachingideasinapublicspace? WhyhasgeneralWeb2.0practicesnottranslatedwell/extensivelyintoanHEcontext? Web2.0toolsforbuildingpedagogicalwraparoundsinOERs?
1Reviewing the use(s) of Web 2.0 in higher education: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloudscape/view/1895
2 Literature review of the uses of Web 2.0 in HE: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2294
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
7/111
Inadditionweadoptedanopenapproachtotheliteraturereview,usingCloudworksasa
spacetoaggregateanddiscussresourcesandreferences.ThenatureoftheCloudworkssite
isthatitactsasameansofcollectivelyaggregatingresources,aswellasaspaceforshareddiscussion.Itcombinessomeofthefeaturesofcollectiveblogging,coupledwitha
discussionforumandsocialbookmarking.Ascreenshotofpartoftheliteraturereview
cloudillustratesthis.Afteradescriptionofwhatthefocusofthecloudis,underneathcanbeseenthestartofadiscussionthreadandanaggregationoflinksandacademicreferences
(seecontributetabbelow,inFigure1below).
Morerelevantcloudswereaddedtothecloudscapeonanadhocbasis,bothbyusasthe
literaturereviewresearchers,aswellasthebroaderCloudworkscommunity.Someoftheclouds(includingthoseoutlinedabove)focusedspecificallyontheliteraturereview,butin
additioncloudswereaddedthattouchedontopicsofrelevancetothereviewwhichwere
alreadyavailableonthesiteorbecameavailableduringthereview.Theseincludedcloudsonnewliteracies,Web2.0pedagogies,andtheuseofspecificWeb2.0toolsineducation
(suchasTwitterandblogs).Thespaceactedasameansofharnessingabroadrangeof
viewsontopicsrelatedtothefocusofthereviewandactedasaconduitforsharingofrelevantresources,academicreferencesandemergingdiscussions.Afewcontributorsput
forwardempiricallybasedstudiesaswellasanecdotalevidencetosupporttheirarguments.
TheaimofusingCloudworksasasupplementarytoolinresearchingforthisreviewwasto
getbroaderinputintotheconsultationthanwouldhavebeenpossiblewithdeskresearch
alone.Itwasalsoasanexperimenttoworktowardsdevelopingamodelforsocialscholarshipthatcouldsupportthedevelopmentofcollectivewisdomaspartofthebroader
indepthcasestudywork.Thishasworkedtoanextent,andthoughmostcloudsillustrate
outburstsofexpressionandcontributionforshortperiods(seeforexampleUsingtwitterwithstudents3).Sustainedinteractionisalsoevidentbyafewusersincloudssuchasthe
oneentitledliteraturereview.
3 Using Twitter with students: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2398
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
8/111
Figure1:TheliteraturereviewinCloudworks(http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2294/)
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
9/111
Anumberofothersourcesofevidencewerereviewed.Inparticular,alotiswrittenonthistopicthroughpersonalblogs,selfpublishedessaysandreflectivediaries.Thisincludes
reflectionsontheimplicationsofnewtechnologiesforlearningandteaching,strategiesformoreeffectivetakeupoftechnology,identificationofbarriersanddriverstoadoption,and
critiquesofimpactonlearnerexperienceandteachingpractices.Althoughthesesofter
sourcesofevidencearenotsubjectedtothestandardpeerreviewprocess,theycanoffervaluableinsightsintotheperceivedstateofthelandscapeofWeb2.0inHigherEducation;
insomewaystheyareevidenceofpracticingwhatyoupreach,i.e.useofthemediumto
understandthenatureofthemedium.Althoughasystematiccategorisationoftheseresourceswasbeyondthescopeofthisreview,weincludeaselectionofrelevant
reflectionsinthesectionthatoutlinesthecontextualexamples.
Changingtechnologies
Thetechnologicalenvironmentwithinwhichmoderneducationoperatesisbecomingincreasinglycomplex;offeringnewpossibilitiesbutalsogivingrisetochallenges.Wehave
seenacontinualevolutionoftechnologiesandhowtheyareusedsincetheintroductionof
theInternet.Web2.0tools,virtualworlds,simulations,hapticsandmobiletechnologiescontinuethistrendofcoevolutionandweareonlybeginningtodevelopanunderstanding
ofwhatthetrajectoryofthiscoevolutionwillbe.DeFreitasandConole(2010)suggestfivebroadtechnologicaltrendsthatarelikelytohaveasignificantimpactoneducation:
Ashifttowardsubiquitousandnetworkedtechnologies Theemergenceofcontextandlocationawaredevices Theincreasinglyrichanddiversedifferentformsofrepresentationsandstimulatory
environmentspossible
Atrendstowardsmoremobileandadaptiveandadaptivedevices Atechnologicalinfrastructurewhichisglobal,distributedandinteroperableTheemergenceofWeb2.0tools
Appendix2offersadetailedtypologyofWeb2.0tools,categorisingthemaccordingtothe
waysinwhichtheyareused.Thissectionconsiderssomeofthekeyfeaturesofthesetools.Itconcludesbydescribingsomeoftheoverarchingfeaturesandpatternsofbehaviourthat
areemergingthroughuseofthesetools.
ThetermWeb2.0isattributedtoTimOReilly(2005).Sincethenithasgainedwidespread
use,penetratingalsothediscourseoflearningandteaching.Relatedtermssuchasthereadandwritewebandthesocialwebgiveanindicationthatthetermreferstoashiftinweb
toolsandpracticestowardsmoreparticipatory,userinteraction.Althoughthetermhasno
singledefinition,thereisawidespreadagreementthatitappliestoawidesetoffunctionalcharacteristics,withinthecontextofcomputermediatedcommunicationandnetworked
digitalmedia.Thesenotonlypointtotheincreasedpossibilitiesforpublication(comparedtoearliergenerationsoftheweb),butalsoencourage,andaresupportiveof,user
participationintheuploadingandsharingofdigitalartefacts.
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
10/111
Inthelastfewyearsmuchhasbeenwrittenaboutthewaysinwhichthesetoolsare
changingpractices;practicesthatinvolveshiftingfromthewebasacontentrepositoryand
informationretrievalmechanismtoawebthatenablesmoresocialmediationandusergenerationofcontent.Newpracticesareemerging:
sharingofimages,videosanddocuments(asisevidentwithsitessuchasFlckr,YouTubeandSlideshare)
mechanismsforcontentproduction,communicationandcollaboration(throughblogs,wikisandmicrobloggingservicessuchasTwitterandsocialsiteslikeFacebook,Elgg
andNing)
opportunitiestointeractinnewwaysthroughimmersivevirtualworlds(suchasSecondLife).
ThesocialinterfaceofWeb2.0offersnovelwaysforconnectingpeopleandsharingand
discussingideas.Itcanbeusedtosupportandenhanceexistingcommunitiesortofoster
thedevelopmentofnewcommunitiesofinquiryandexploration.Thereseemstobeatantalisingalignmentbetweentheaffordancesofdigitalnetworkedmedia(thefocuson
usergeneratedcontent,theemphasisoncommunicationandcollectivecollaboration)andthefundamentalsofwhatisperceivedtobegoodpedagogy(socioconstructivist
approaches,personalisedandexperientiallearning)(ConoleandMcAndrew,forthcoming:
2).
TheemergenceofWeb2.0toolssitswithinabroadercontextofcontinualtechnological
change.The2010HorizonReportidentifiesfourtrendsaskeydriversoftechnologyadoptioninhighereducationfortheperiod2010through2015:
Theabundanceofonlineresourcesandrelationshipsinvitingarethinkoftheeducatorsroleinsensemaking,coachingandcredentialing.
Anincreasedemphasison,andexpectationof,ubiquitous,justintime,augmented,personalisedandinformallearning.
TheincreaseduseofcloudcomputingchallengesexistinginstitutionalITinfrastructures,leadingtonotionsofITsupportbecomingmoredecentralised.
Theworkofstudentsbeingseenasmorecollaborativeinnatureandthereforethereispotentialformoreintraandinterinstitutionalcollaboration(Johnsonetal.,2010).
WhiletheHorizonseriesofannualreportshavecontributedtoresearchintofuturetrendsandemergingprioritieswithinaUScontext(seeforexampletheNSFCyberlearningReport,
2008),severalotherreportshavealsooutlinedrecentanddevelopinginternational
practiceregardingthepatternsofadoptionand/oruseofWeb2.0ineducation(seefor
example,ArmstrongandFranklin,2008;OECD,NewMilleniumLearners,2008;OECDCERI,2009).Inparticular,Redecker(2009)andAlaMutkaetal.(2009)reportfindingsfromaEuropeanperspectivefocusingonformalandinformaleducationrespectively.IntheUK,
BECTAsEmergingTrendsoftechnologyinEducationandHarnessingTechnology:Next
GenerationLearning2008-2014,aswellasJISC'sLearnerExperienceprogrammeshaveproducednumerouscasestudiesandreports(seeBECTA/Crooketal.,2008;Daviesand
Good,2009).JISCsmostrecentcomparativereportlooksintothestrategicandpolicy
implicationsforhighereducationoftheexperiencesandexpectationsoflearnersinthe
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
11/111
lightoftheirincreasinguseofWeb2.0technologies(JISC,2009).EngagementinWeb2.0
environmentsprovides,ithasbeenargued,moreavenuesforselfrepresentation,
expressionorreflectionandmoreorganizedformsofcollaborationandknowledgebuilding.Regenerationofcontentthroughremixingandrepurposing,aswellas
networkingandgroupinteractionarecommonactivities.
Whileactivitiessuchasthesewerealsoevidentinearliergenerationsofnetworked
computingandonlineservices(forexampleUsenetgroups,bulletinboardsanddiscussionforums,MultiUserDomainsandMOOs,useofInstantMessagingprotocols,personaland
institutionalwebpagestopromoteindividualorprojectbasedactivitiesandinterests;see
BECTA/Crooketal.,2008),Web2.0markedawatershedintermsofasignificantshiftinpractices.Anumberoffactorscontributedtothisshift.Theseinclude:advancementsinthe
technologicalinfrastructure,increasedInternetandbroadbandadoption,anduser
friendlierinterfacesfornavigating,archiving,communicatingandcollaboratingontheweb.Together,thesehavecontributedtoscalingupuseraccessandinvolvement.IntheOECD
countries(OECD,2009)webservicesarebecominglessexpensive,faster,andincreasingly
basedonwirelesstechnology.Advancementsinaccessandspeedhavebeenaccompaniedbyasimilarlevelofadvancementintermsofdevelopmentsinsoftwareanddata
management.Atitssimplest,familiarwebbrowsershavebecomemoreversatile,allowingnotonlyawiderrangeofuserinteractions,butalsointeroperabilitywithnumerous
desktopapplications.
AtypologyofWeb2.0tools
ThefollowingcategorisationofWeb2.0activitiesisderivedfromaBECTAcommissioned
reviewofWeb2.0toolsinschools(Crooketal.,2008):
Mediasharing.Creatingandexchangingmediawithpeersorwideraudiences. Mediamanipulationanddata/webmashups .Usingwebaccessibletoolstodesign
andeditdigitalmediafilesandcombiningdatafrommultiplesourcestocreateanewapplication,toolorservice.
Instantmessaging,chatandconversationalarenas .OnetooneoronetomanyconversationsbetweenInternetusers.
Onlinegamesandvirtualworlds.RulegovernedgamesorthemedenvironmentsthatinviteliveinteractionwithotherInternetusers.
Socialnetworking.Websitesthatstructuresocialinteractionbetweenmemberswhoformsubgroupsof'friends'.
Blogging.AnInternetbasedjournalordiaryinwhichausercanposttextanddigitalmaterialwhileotherscancomment.
Socialbookmarking.Userssubmittheirbookmarkedwebpagestoacentralsitewheretheycanbetaggedandfoundbyotherusers.
Recommendersystems.Websitesthataggregateandtaguserpreferencesforitemsinsomedomainandtherebymakenovelrecommendations.
Wikisandcollaborativeeditingtools.Webbasedservicesthatallowusersunrestrictedaccesstocreate,editandlinkpages.
Syndication.UserscansubscribetoRSSfeedenabledwebsitessothattheyareautomaticallynotifiedofanychangesorupdatesincontentviaanaggregator.
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
12/111
Appendix2(AtypologyofWeb2.0tools)providesamoredetaileddescriptionofeachof
theseandsomespecificexamples.
ItisimportanttonotethatthecurrentwaveofWeb2.0toolshaveevolvedfromearlier
toolsforsharingandcommunication(seealsoboydandEllison,2007).Howeverthe
functionalityofWeb2.0toolsmeansthatpreviouslydiverseonlineservicesandnichesocialnetworkscanbeintegratedmoreeffectively.Commonfeaturesincludetagging,
commenting,rating,syndicationandthedevelopmentofrelationships(orfriendships).Thenetworkisseenasaplatformfordialogueandcollaborationandusergenerated
contentasamutuallyaddedvaluecomponentforcommunitybuilding.Inadditiontothe
vastecologyofinformal,professional,educationalorblendedcrowdsourced,openandsemiopenprojects,thereexistcommunitybasedscientificresourcesitesandsitesthat
emergefromthecollaborationofpublicinstitutions,museumsandcharities;thesedepend
onparticipatoryexchanges,culturalandscientificcitizenshiptoscalecontributoryinterpretationsandusergeneratedcontent(seeVonHippel,citedinNSFCyberlearning,
2008:28).
Themultiplicityoftoolsandmediatedavenuesforcreativityandsocialisationthusnotonly
contributestoaboundarycrossingbetweenprofessionalcommunitiesandgroupsconcernedwithrecreationalandfandom4activities,butalso,havegivenrisetonovelways
forinformationorganization,knowledgegenerationandlearningfacilitation.Inthereviewofsocialsoftwareforlearning,Grantetal.(2006)suggestatleastthreefundamentalshifts
inthinkingabouttherelationshipamongknowledge,culture,learningandpedagogy.First,
theynotethatthemodesofinquiryencouragedbyWeb2.0practicestendtobelessorientedtothetraditionaldisciplinaryboundariesofknowledge.Instead,thelearneris
invitedtoadoptaconceptionofknowledgeassomethingavailabletobepersonalisedorre
appropriated.Second,Web2.0encouragesengagementwithknowledgeinnewways.For
instance,itencouragesamoreanimatedbrowsingandscanningorientation.Third,practicesofknowledgeproductionarebeingaltered.Inparticular,learnersarebeingdrawnintoinquirymethodsthataremorecollaborativeandlesssolitary.Thecollaborative
spiritandopenethosoftheactivitiesoutlinedabove,andmanyotherslikethem,areoften
combinedintoaprevailingsensethatWeb2.0hascreatedgreateropportunitiesforaccess,debateandtransparencyinthepursuitofknowledgethaneverbefore(Wales,2008:np).
ArecurrentdiscoursearoundtheapplicationofWeb2.0technologiesinaneducational
contextpointstothenotionsofevolutionandtransformation;transformation,intermsof
transcendingformaleducationalcontexts;evolutionintermsoffacilitatingmoreinformalandnonformallearningcontextswhichblurtheboundariesbetweencategoriesoflearners
(student,adultlearner,orinformallearner,autodidact).Theargumentsforthisalsocentresaroundthenotionthatlearnersarenowabletobecomemoreactiveproducers,authors,evaluatorsandcommentatorswithinthelearningarenatheyareengagedwith.The
questionthendirectsattentiontothenovelparadigmsoflearningandforknowledge
4Fandom(fromthenounfanandtheaffix-dom,asinkingdom,freedom,etc.)isatermusedtorefertoasubculturecomposedoffanscharacterisedbyafeelingofsympathyandcamaraderiewithotherswhoshare
acommoninterest (Wikipedia, Entry on Fandom: ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fandom)
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
13/111
building,butalsotofoundationalissuesthatwillaffecteducationalinstitutionsandpractice
forthefuture.
Changinglearningandlearners
Theoriesoflearning
ThissectionconsidersdifferentpedagogicalapproachesspecificallyinrelationtoWeb2.0practices.Viewsoncategorisationoflearningtheoriesarestronglycontestedand
definitionsfordifferentaspectsarenotclearcut.Furthermore,whilsttheoriesoflearning
haveneverbeenstatic,arguablythefluidityandcomplexityofnewonlinespacesandthewaysinwhichtheyarebeingusedtosupportdifferentformsoflearningmeansthatthe
distinctionbetweenpedagogicalapproaches(suchasbehavioural,cognitive,developmental
andcriticalpedagogy)isbeingeroded.Nonetheless,itispossibletodrawoutsomepatternsastowhatconstitutesgoodpedagogy,irrespectiveoftheunderlyingepistemologicalbeliefs
thatdifferenttheoristsandschoolsofthoughthold.Thissectionprovidesareviewof
currenttheoriesoflearninginthecontextoftheirapplicationtoexploitationofnewtechnologiesforlearning.
MayesanddeFreitas(2004)groupedlearningtheoriesintothreecategories:
Associative(learningasactivitythroughstructuredtasks) Cognitive(learningthroughunderstanding) Situative(learningassocialpractice).InadditiontothecategorisationprovidedbyMayesandDeFreitas,anumberofother
authorshavewrittenaboutlearningtheoriesandhowtheyrelatetoelearning.Conoleetal.reviewedlearningtheoriesandmappedthemagainstapedagogicalframework(Conole,et
al.,2004).Dykeetal.(2007)builtonthisworkbyprovidinganoverviewofthemainlearningtheoryperspectivesalongwithanindicationofthekindsofelearningpracticetheymostobviouslysupport.Ravenscroft(2003)linkedpedagogicaltheorytospecific
examplesofelearninginnovation.Learningtheoriesarefrequentlycapturedinpedagogicalmodelsorframeworksthatemphasiseaparticularapproach.Arecentreview
ofthekeymodelsorframeworksthathavebeenusedinelearningdescribedtwenty
commonmodelsorframeworksacrossthedifferenttheoreticalperspectives(Conole,2010).Appendix3(Areviewofelearningmodelsandframeworks)providesasummary
ofthiswork.
Alotofearlyapplicationofelearningwasessentiallybehaviouristinnature.Thispage
turningmentallyhasbeencriticisedresultinginresearchersexploringthewaysinwhichmoreinteractional,studentcentredandsociallymediatedapproachesmightbeapplied.
Manyarguethatbehaviouristapproaches,whichfocusonprescriptiveshapingand
systematicguidanceofthelearnertowardsinscribedgoalsareinappropriateforWeb2.0environments.NonethelessWeb2.0toolscansupportassociativepedagogiesandbeused
effectivelyintermsofprovidingstructuredguidancethroughtasksandthroughprovision
ofeffectiveandtimelyfeedback.Thismightincludetheadaptionofalearnerspersonallearningenvironmenttoprovideastructuredlearningpathway,usinginteractivee
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
14/111
assessmentactivities,aggregationofresourcesaroundlearningthemesoreffectiveuseof
collectiveintelligencetailoredtoindividuallearningneeds.
Cognitivismemphasisesthemetaphorofinformationprocessingtoexpressthe
developmentofthinkingandargumentation.Thisincludesreflectionofonesownthinking
andoutwardarticulationororchestrationofseveraldifferenttypesoflearningactivities(i.e.attention,selection,reasoning,prediction,andreviewing).Thereisgoodevidencethat
outwardlyarticulatingoneslearningcanenableselfawareness(e.g.Chi,2000).Processesofselfpublishingandreflectivebloggingcansupportthistypeofmetacognition.Mejias
(2006)describestheuseofsocialnetworkstofacilitatedistributedresearch.Hearguesthat
socialnetworkshavetheadvantageofbothengagingstudentsinscaffoldingexperiencesanddevelopingthepracticalresearchskillsneededtomakebestuseofonlineinformation
networks.Hepointsoutthatthepowerofmanyexposesanindividualtofarmore
research,resourcesandideasthantheycouldpossiblygenerateontheirown.
Constructivismhasbeenakeystrandofeducationaldiscourseformorethantwentyyears.Technologieshavebeenseenasameansofenablingnewapproachestoconstructivism,
bothintermsofenablingthelearnertotakecontroloftheirlearningandintermsofenhancingthesocialdimensionsoflearning.Dalsgaard(2006)arguesthatsocialsoftwaretoolscansupportasocialconstructivistapproachtoelearningbyprovidingstudentswith
personaltoolsandbyengagingtheminsocialnetworks,thusallowinglearnerstodirecttheirownproblemsolvingprocess.Agoodexampleofaframeworkthatpromotes
constructivismisonethatwasdevelopedbyJonassenetal.(1999;2003).Itcanbeusedasa
guidelinetodevelopConstructivistLearningEnvironments(CLEs).Tointegratethesocialdimensionintothepedagogyofonlinelearningenvironments,Felix(2005)hasproposed
thesynthesisofthecognitiveconstructivistandsocialconstructivistapproaches.Inthe
cognitiveconstructivistapproach,thefocusisoncognitionthatoccursinthemindoftheindividual,withthelearnermakingintellectualsenseofthematerialsontheirown.The
socialconstructivistapproachemphasisesthesociallyandculturallysituatedcontextofcognition,inwhichknowledgeisconstructedthroughsharedendeavours.Theinteractions
intheonlineenvironment,forexamplethroughcollaborationsordiscussionsusingforums,
orinwikisandblogs,enableknowledgetobeconstructedindividually,butmediatedsocially(seeforexampleMinocha2009:12forarecentexample).Theintersubjectively
rich,opendialoguesthattheseenvironmentscanfacilitatearevaluableresourcesthatcan
helpshapethetrajectoryoflearningasanexchangeofstrategicguidance(Crooketal.,2008:31).
SocialtoolsandinteractiveWeb2.0environmentsenablelearnerstoadoptexploratoryand
creativepositions,withoutoverlookingthesocialdimensionoforchestrationanddesign(or
indeedgovernanceifacommunityspaceisenabled).Buildingonthistheme,socialconstructivismemphasisestheimportanceofthelearnerbeingactivelyinvolvedinthe
learningprocess.Whilethecognitiveapproachisconcernedmorewithknowledge
architectureandmapping,theoriessuchasconnectivismanddistributedcognitionemphasisethenegotiated,networkedanddistributednatureoflearningacrossphysical
andvirtualspaces.MasonandRennie(2008)acceptSiemens'(2004)propositionthatWeb2.0methodsandtoolspermittheeducationalprocesstotranscendconstructivetheoriesby
movingfromisolated,individualactivitiestointeractiveexchangesamongstacommunity
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
15/111
ofcollaboratinglearners(i.e.,collaborativeconstructivismorconnectivismputsan
increasedemphasisoninvolvingthestudentinactiveparticipationandintheprocessof
learning).Siemens(2006)placesthenetworkandnetworkinginthecentreofthelearningprocess.This'netcentric'perspectiveseesknowledgenotnecessarilyasaprogressive
accumulation,butratherasaprocessforbuilding,maintainingandutilisingconnections.In
contrast,Ackermann(2004)emphasisestheexperientialandactiveapproachtolearningandknowledgebuilding,pointingtotheprocessthatbuildsonbothindividualand
collectiveendeavours.
Socioculturalperspectivesemphasisethesociallysituatedandculturaldimensionsof
learning,thatarearguablymissingfromtheotherperspectives.Acrosstheirlongculturalhistory,humanbeingshaveconstructedresourcesallowingthemtodrivecognitionfrom
theprivateormentalworldof'thinking'intothepublicandexternalworldofactingwith
toolsandartefacts(e.g.diSessa,2001).Thiscollectionofresourcesforproblemsolvingandreasoningisattheheartofwhatismeantby'culture'.Withthisperspectiveoflearning,
whatgetsdoneismainlyorganisedintheexternallydesignedspaceofaction(ratherthan
justtheinternalspaceofthementalworld).Thispromotestheviewoflearningasacculturationratherthanacquisition.Thesocialiscentrallylocatedinthescaffolding
approachofculturalappropriation.Mediationofthelearningexperienceis,accordingtoVygotsky(1971),aformofintervention(aformofauxiliarystimulus).Byfocusingon
experienceduringtheprocessesofthinkingandlearning(metacognition),mediatingartefacts(suchaslinguisticmodesofaddressandtoolsthatenablereflectionanddialogue)
cancontributetoeffectivelearningbehaviour.Usingmediatingartefacts,expertsand
novicescancoconstructideasforproblemsolvinganddecisionmaking.Conoleconsidersthiswithrespecttotherangeofmediatingartefactsteachers,learneranddevelopersused
tosupportthedesignanddeliveryoflearning(Conole,2008).Personalisedlearning
environmentsputlearnersincontrol,particularlyregardingmotivationaroundinterfaces
oflearning.Participationincollaborativeactivities,andlearningcontextsasacommunityofpractice,isseenasanothercomponentintheprocessoflearningbeyondacquisition.
LaveandWengersworkonCommunitiesofPractice(CoP)(LaveandWenger,2001;see
alsoWenger,1998)hasbeendrawnonextensivelyinthisfield.WengerdefinesaCoPasincorporatingimportantmechanismsformeaningnegotiation,learningandidentity
building.Participationinsharedgoals,andthroughsharedresources,canbeseenasa
processofappropriationofsocialandculturalaspectsofknowledge,wherebythelearnerbecomespreparedforparticipationthroughtheprocessofparticipationitself(Rogoffetal.,
2003).Althoughthenotionofinscribedgoals,boundaries,rules,monitoringpossibilitiesandsanctioningarecorecharacteristicsofcommunitysustainability(seeKoperetal.,
2004),socialinteraction,coevolutionofactivitiesandtasksandhumourarealsocorecomponentsofsuccessandeffectiveness(seeKesteret.al,2006;Engstrom,2007).Mediatingartefactsplayanimportantroleandthesocioculturalapproachesmovethe
focusawayfromthematerialityofthetoolsthemselves,towardstheactions/contextsinwhichthemediaareused.Ifthesocialwebshiftsmodelsofteachingfromtransmissionto
dialogueandisindeedcapableofenableindividualstoconstructknowledgemedia
(Dalsgaard,2009),theiruseinthemeaningmakingprocessiscore.
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
16/111
Selwyn(2009)arguesthateducationalpracticesthatareconcernedwiththeexploratory
andsocial,thereflectiveorimmersiveaspectsofknowledgebuildingwillfindWeb2.0tools
andsocialmediapowerful.Atthesametime,itisalsoassumedthatthecoreaffordancesofWeb2.0toolsblurtheboundariesbetweenproductionanduse(BrunsandHumphreys,
2007).Thiscaninturnhaveanimpactonallfourprincipleaspectsofthelearner
experience:thecognitive,theconstructive,thesocialandthesituative(seealsoMayesanddeFreitas,2007).
Newformsoflearning
Having provided a general discussion of learning theories and their relationship to Web 2.0 tools,
this section describes four specific examples of the ways in which these tools might promote newforms of learning, namely:
Inquiry-based and exploratory learning Newformsofcommunicationandcollaboration Newformsofcreativity,cocreationandproduction RichercontextualisationoflearningWeb2.0technologiesandpracticesprovidenewmechanismsforinquirybasedand
exploratorylearning.Distributedcollectionofdataispossible,asarenewwaysof
organisingandrepresentingmultipledatasources.Newtoolsareemergingforinterrogatingandanalysingdata,alongwithrichsocialandinformationenvironmentsto
supportresearchcommunities.Inthisrespect,cognitively,Web2.0invitesuserstofamiliarisethemselvesanddevelopconfidenceinnewmodesofinquiry.Italsobrings
challengestobothlearnersandteachersintermsofablurringoftheboundariesofcontrol
inthesecontexts,aswellasraisingissuesaboutthelegitimacyofinformationinthesenewdistributed,mixedenvironments(e.g.Keen,2007).
Theephemeralnatureofwebknowledgeisnotonlyanassetenablingmultiplelocations,usersandremixing,butalsoaliability,whichcanleadtocognitiveoverload,confused
authorshipandlossofcredibility.Newformsofmediaandinformationliteracyforfiltering,navigating,organizingandmanipulatingrelevantcontent(foramoredevelopeddiscussion
ofliteracy,seebelow)arerequired.
Socialnetworksenablenewformsofcommunicationandcollaboration.Theimportanceof
collaborationisacommoningredientinmanyofthelearningperspectives,asitisgenerally
consideredtobeanimportantmeansofdevelopingunderstandingthroughshareddialogueandcoconstruction.Anecologyofsocialnetworkshasnowdeveloped,rangingfromthose
congregatingaroundcommoninterestsorkinship,throughtothoseassociatedwithmore
formalcommunitycontexts(suchasformallearningcontextsorprofessionalnetworks).Theseecologiesarefacilitatedbyarangeofprocessesofengagementinstantiatedthrough
thenewtechnologies,makingpeerguidance,reflectionandsupportpossibleinavarietyofnewwaysandatascalenotseenbefore.Forexample,theabilitytoopenlycommentupon
andcritiqueotherpeoplesworkhasbecomeastandardpracticewithintheblogosphere
andhasbeentakenupbyacademics(throughselfreflectiveblogsforteachinganddigitalscholarship)andresearchers.Inteachingcontexts,studentscansocialisewithpeers
throughsocialnetworks,providingmutualsupportandaforumforshareddialogue.
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
17/111
Typicalactivitiesinthesespacescanincludepracticingwritingskills,contributingto
collectivecohortblogs,orcritiquingeachotherspersonalportfolios(EllisonandWu,
2008).Assuchsharedperspectivesorcrowdsourcingpracticeshavebecomemorecommonplace,thereisagrowingargumentthatthesepracticesarekeytoinnovative
thinkingandproblemsolving(Leadbetter,2008;Surowiecki,2004).Useofsuchsocial
networksbetweenstudentsandteachershasbeenarguablylesssuccessful,withstudentsoftenseeingthisasanintrusionintotheirmorepersonal,learningandsocialspaces
(Farmer,2006).
Similarly,creativityandnewformsofcocreationandpublicationarealsopossible.The
distributednatureofWeb2.0technologiesmeansthatlearnersmayhaveeasieraccesstotheexpertiseofothers,toauthenticenvironmentsandtodistributedaudiences.The
creationofanaudienceforlearnerscanbemotivationalinanumberofrespects:asameans
ofprovidinganoutletfordemonstratingtheirlearningandasamechanismforgettingfeedback.Web2.0technologiesnotonlyblurtheboundariesbetweenlearnersand
teachers,butalsobetweenteachingandresearch,meaningthatlearnerscanparticipatein
andcontributetorealresearchwork.Atthesametime,participationandcoordinationinonlinesocialandcreativespacescanappearinvaryingdegreesofscaleanddepth,
includingmoresophisticatedlevelsofinterpersonaldialogueanddeliberation(Farmeretal.,2008;Kim,2008).Suchnetworksandenvironmentsneedtobecarefullyconstructed;it
isimportanttobuildcapacityforcollaborativeengagementunderfluid,heterarchicalstructures.Similarly,participants(boththelearnersandtheteachers)needtodevelopthe
relevantsetofskillstobeabletobeeffectivecocreators.Keycharacteristicsinsuch
contextsincludetheabilitytotakeflexibleroles(learnerasteacherandviceversaforexample),aswellasthedevelopmentofanindividualandcollectivesenseofresponsibility
andpride(Burgess,2006;EllisonandWu,2008;seealsoBrunsandHumphreys,2007in
relationtowikis).Suchnotionsofcodependence,constructionandfluidityhowevermay
clashwithideasaboutownershipandinaformaleducationalcontextraisingfundamentalissuesaboutwhattypesofassessmentareappropriateandmeaningful.
Sociallysituativelearningperspectivesemphasisethecontextwithinwhichlearningoccurs.
Web2.0toolsprovideparticularopportunitiesforpersonalisingandcontextualisinglearning.Itisnowpossibletodeconstructresources,toolsandactivitiessothattheycanbe
recombinedorremixedaccordingtoindividualpreference(i.e.theeducationalapplication
ofthenotionofmashupsdescribedearlier).Learnerscanalsocreatetheirowncontentandresources,enablingincreasedcreativityandflexibilitywithinthecurriculum.Such
personalisationandreappropriationofexistingresourcesalsohasclearpotentialtosupportbetterformsofindependentstudyandtofacilitatepersonalresourcemanagement.
Suchusercentredapproaches,manybelieve,areimportant,notleastbecauseoftheaffectiveandmotivationalbenefitsderivedfromtheabilitytopersonalise,butalsobecausetheprocessofappropriationbydefaultleadstothelearnerdevelopingtheirdigitalliteracy
skillsandfostersparticipatorylearning.
Patternsoftechnologyuseandthecharacteristicsoflearners
Accordingtothe2008ECARsurveyofstudentsuseofcomputers,studentsareusing
technologiesbothforacademicpurposesandforsocialactivities.Similarly,theOECEreport
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
18/111
onMillenniumLearners(OECD,2009)listsaccesstothelibrarywebsite(93.4%)andthe
useofcoursemanagementsystems/VLEs(82.3%severaltimesaweek)asthetwolargest
usesoftechnologiesforacademicpurposes.ThesignificantuseofVLEsdemonstratesthattheyarebecomingincreasinglyamandatorycampuscommodity(OECD,2009:14).Ofthe
entertainmentrelatedandnetworkingactivities,useofsocialnetworkingsites(daily
85.2%),InstantMessaging(73.8%daily)andmusic/videodownloads(77,3%weekly)wasalsohigh.AnIpsosMorisurveyrevealedthat79%ofBritishfirstyearstudents(IpsosMori,
2008)accesscoursespecificmaterialsatleastonceaweekand97%ofthisgroupfoundituseful.Amongtheentertainmentrelatedactivities,useofsocialnetworkingsitessuchas
Facebookisincreasingonanannualbasis.AsimilarpicturecanbeseeninAustralia,where
asignificantnumberofstudentsfrequentlyusetheuniversitylearningmanagementsystemtoaccesscourse/relatedmaterials(81%;Kennedyetal.,2006).
TheconvictionthatWeb2.0applicationswouldtransformInternetusersincreasinglyintocontentproducers(OECD,2007)isalsoconfirmedonthebasisofthisdata.Forexample,
morethanonefifthofUShighereducationstudentsareactivelycontributingcontentto
blogs,wikis,photoorvideowebsitesand18%contributeregularlytoatleastthreeofthese.However,39%declarenottohavecontributedtoanyofthese(OECD,2009:15).The
patternofAustralianandBritishstudentsseemstobesimilartotheoneintheUnitedStates(Kennedy,etal.,2006,JonesandCross,2009).AstudyfromPewInternetand
AmericanLifefoundthatintheUnitedStatesmorethanhalfofthe12millionteensonlinecreateoriginalmaterialfortheweb,withoriginalartwork,photosorvideo(Lenhart,
Madden,RankinMacgill,andSmith,2007citedinOECD,2009:p.21).
AlthoughstudentsintheOECDcountriesappeartobeheavyusersofsocialmediaandnew
technologiesingeneral,theprofileofstudentsisnotuniform;theintensityofattachment
withtechnologiesaswellasthepatternsofusesbearssociodemographicandgendervariation.Thefiguresforparticipationinroleplayinggames(MMORPGs)islowerthan
mightbeexpectedandgenderedusesareevident:moremalesusersthanfemales.Similarlytheuseofvirtualworlds,suchasSecondLife,islow;intheUSlessthan9%ofstudentsare
using3Dvirtualworldsinhighereducation(OECD,2009:15).Thisisdespitetheperceived
benefitstheseenvironmentsofferpedagogicallyandthehighexpectationsintermsoftheirvalueforhighereducation(ChittaroandRanon,2007;DeLucia,Francese,Passero,and
Tortora,2009;DiBlasandPoggi,2007).
Theprevioussectionreviewedthewaysinwhichnewtechnologiesmightsupportmore
Web2.0orientatedformsoflearning;emphasisingtheirusergenerated,participatoryandsituativenatureinparticular.Abodyofresearchhasemergedinrecentyears,whichhas
beenfocusingspecificallyoncollatingevidenceoftheextentthisistrue.Theinitial
discoursearoundlearnerstendedtoforegroundthepositives;apicturewaspaintedofanewgenerationoflearnerswhoweredigitallysavvyandtechnologicalimmersed,terms
suchasdigitalnatives,millenniumkidsandthenetgenerationpepperedthisdiscourse.
Howeverasthesubfieldhasmaturedandalargerbodyofevidencehasbeengathered,thegeneralconsensushasbecomemoreconsideredandrealistic.So,althoughitistruethat
manyyoungerlearnershavegrownupinatechnologymediatedenvironment,thisdoesnotmeantheyhavethenecessaryskillstobeabletoharnesstheseforacademicand
learningpurposes.Itisalsotruethatthereisawidespectrumoflearners,withdifferent
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
19/111
preferencesinthewaystheyliketolearn,thedegreetowhichtheywishtoengagewith
technologiesandthestandardoftheirgeneralstudyskillsandacademicperformance.
Someoftheoriginalrhetoricaroundtechnologiesbeingassociatedwithsignificantshiftsin
thenatureofcontemporarylearnerscanbetracedbacktotheworkofresearcherslike
OblingerandPrensky.Prenskycoinedthephrasedigitalnatives(Prensky,2001)todescribeagenerationoflearnerswhohavegrownupinaworldofcomputers,mobile
phonesandtheweb;i.e.agenerationreliantupondigitalmediaandtools.Prenskyandothersarguedthatthesedigitalnativesareseentostandinstarkcontrasttoolder
generationsofdigitalimmigrants,whoadopteddigitalmedialateronintheirlives.Terms
suchasInternetgeneration,generationM(media),generationV(virtual),googlegeneration(Brabazon,2007),generationC,Nintendokids,Millennials(OECD,2008)
typifythismovement(see,forexample,OblingerandOblinger,2005;Tapscott,1998;and
Kennedyetal.,2008amongothers,foranempiricallygroundedcritiqueofsuchrhetoric).
CertainlyOblingerandOblinger's(2005)book,EducatingtheNetGeneration,providesausefulstartingpointforrecentresearchexploringstudentsuseoftechnologies.Itprovides
akindofwatershedintermsoftuningintotheincreasingresearchinterestinstudyinghowlearnersareinteractingwithnewtools,andhowthismightbechangingthewaysinwhichtheyarelearning.Intheirintroduction,OblingerandOblingernote,wehopethisbookwill
helpeducatorsmakesenseofthemanypatternsandbehaviorsthatweseeintheNetGenerationbutdontquiteunderstand(2005:7).
Constantlyevolvingtechnologyliesattheheartofmobile,connected,andasBauman(2005)andUrry(2007)havecalledit'liquidlifestyles'.Thesedigitalnativesarethoughtto
expecttechnologytoassistfluidityinallaspectsoftheirlives,includingthewaysinwhichtheylearnandareeducated.Theyarethoughttohavedistinctexpectationsofeducation
thatinvolvelearningwhichispersonalised,accessibleondemand,andavailableatany
time,anyplace,oranypaceandareoftencontrastedwithteachersandparents,whoarelabelledasbeingdigitalimmigrantsor'visitors'(White,2009).
Theuniformityofsuchlearners,andindeedtherhetoricalarticulationofthetechnologicallydeterministic,generational,regionalortemporaldefinitionshavebeen
widelycontested(DavisandGood,2009;JonesandCross,2009;White,2009;Buckingham,2006),andthemultipledimensionsofthedigitaldividehaverepeatedlybeenaddressed.
Increasedconnectedness,immediacy,multitasking,mediaandcriticalliteracy,networked
skills,butalso,emotionality,timemanagementandindeedlearnerdifferencesandtutorinfluencesaresomeofthethemesewhichhavebeenconsideredacrossarangeofindepth
casestudiesandsurveys(Richardson,2008;Sharpeetal.,2008;Thorpeetal.,2008).
Oneofthemainreasonscitedbystudentsforusingtechnologiesintheircoursesis
convenience.Technologiesareseenasaddingvaluetocourses,notasmechanismsforradicaltransformation.For example, CarusoandKvavik(2006)foundthatthemost
commonlycitedreasongivenforusingtechnologyincourseswasconvenience(51%of
students),followedbytheabilitytomanagecourseactivitieseasily(19%),andtoamuchlesserextenttheopportunitiestoenhancelearning(15%)ortocommunicatewithpeers
andteachers(11%).Thisissupportedbyacomparativeanalysisonexistingstudiesaspart
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
20/111
oftheJISCslearnersexperiencesprogramme(JISC,2009,seealso,SharpeandBeetham,
2010).Fromthestudentperspective,technologyisnotnecessarilyasubstitute,butatool
foraddedconvenienceandcontrol(OECD,2009).AstheauthorsoftheJISC(2009)reportnote,imaginingWeb2.0forsocialpurposesinastudycontext,presentsconceptual
difficultiestolearnersaswellasachallengetotheirnotionsofspace.Theyneed
demonstration,persuasionandroomtoexperimentinthiscontext'. SharpeandBeetham(2010)capturetheessenceoffindingsemergingfromlearnerexperienceresearchintheir
introductiontoarecenteditedcollectiononresearchinthefield:Whatbecomesclearistheextenttowhichlearnersarebecomingactiveparticipantsintheirlearning
experiencesandareshapingtheirowneducationalenvironments[]Learnersarecreatingtheirown
blendsofphysicalandvirtualenvironmentsandofinformalandformallearningcontexts.
Thechangingroleofteachingandteachers
Havingdiscussedthechangingnatureoflearningandlearnersintheprevioussection,thissectionconsiderstheimplicationsforteaching.AstheOECDreportonNewMillennium
LearninginHigherEducation(2009:28)notes,theassumptionthatmostteachersinhigher
educationaredigitalimmigrantsmightbetrueonthebasisoftheirage,butiscertainlynot
truewithrespecttotheirtechnologyskillsandcompetences.Asearlyas2003,aEuropaeumsurveyidentifiedhighadoptionratesoftechnologyintermsofcommunicatingresearchfindingsandnetworking(FlatherandHuggins,2004,citedinOECD,2009:28).An
Australiansurvey(EducationNetworkAustralia,2008)foundoutthat90%ofhigher
educationteachersconsideredtheInternetveryimportantfortheirwork.Interestinglytheystatedthatthiswasnotonlyforresearchpurposes,butalso,forimprovingteaching
andlearningopportunitiesandresourcesforstudents.Over10%ofteachingstaffmadeaclearreferencetotheuseandintegrationofdigitallearningobjects.Justoveronethirdof
Australianhighereducationteacherswhorespondedtothesurveyareconvincedthatthey
alreadypossesstheICTcapabilitiesrequiredtotransformpractice,especiallybymeansofintroducingnewwaysofengagingstudents(29%),orareproficientandconfidentinthe
useofICTtosupportlearning(37%).Yet,thereappearstobeagapbetweentheexpertiseofteachersincontinentalEuropeandinAngloSaxoncountries.Masteryofdigitallibrariesanddatabasesarecorecompetencesforacademicresearchers;mostusewordprocessors
andpresentationsoftwareforwritingpapersandpresentingfindings,manyusereferencemanagementtoolsandtoolsfordataanalysis.Blogsandwikisarealsousedtosomeextent
asameansofdisseminatingresearchandcollectivewriting.Forcollaborativeresearch
projectstherearearangeofWeb2.0environmentsenablingthesharinganddiscussionofresearchfindings.
Downesoffersanearlyreviewofthepotentialofthesetechnologiesforlearning(Downes2005)andAlexanderprovidesoneofthefirsttextbooksexploringtheuseofthesetoolsfor
teachingandlearning(Alexander2006).Bothoutlinemoreopen,participatoryandheterarchicalstructuresinteachingmethods.Reviewingtheuseofsocialmedialikeblogs
andwikis,BrunsandHumphreys(2007)alsoarguethatthe(co)productionofcontentby
theuser(produsage)requiresashiftinchangingteachingmethodstowardsapproachesthatsupportcommunitybuildingthroughcollaboration,heterarchicalstructuresof
engagement,mentoring,fosteringcreativityandcriticalliteracycapacities.Siemens(2009),
consideringthisfromtheperspectiveofnetworkedlearningandconnectivism,reflectsonroleoftheacademicteachingmethods:
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
21/111
Giventhatcoherenceandlucidityarekeytounderstandingourworld,howdoeducatorsteachin
networks?Foreducators,controlisbeingreplacedwithinfluence.Insteadofcontrollingaclassroom,
ateachernowinfluencesorshapesanetwork.
Siemenssuggeststhefollowasalistofthenewrolesthatteachersneedtoadoptinnetworkedlearningenvironments:
Amplifying Curating Wayfindingandsociallydrivensensemaking Aggregating Filtering Modelling Persistentpresence(Siemens,2009:np)
Scalinguptothemajoritywillrequiredifferentapproaches,morestrategiccoordination
andstaffdevelopmentandsupport.Todate,onthewhole,onlyaminorityofenthusiastic
teachersandthosewitharesearchinterestinthelearningsciences,educationaltechnologyornewmedia,haveundertakenexperimentationwithnewinnovationsinpedagogyand
explorationoftheuseofnewtechnologies.EmbracingWeb2.0approacheswillrequireradicallydifferentstrategiesintermsofdesigning,supportingandassessinglearning.
Essentially,thecreativechangeinthepracticesmayleadtodeliberateandsystemicinnovationbothparamounttoknowledgecreatingorganizations(Bereiter,2002),suchas
highereducationinstitutions.ThelearningpotentialofWeb2.0isseentoderivefromthecoconstructionofknowledgeandthecollaborativeethosinselforganisednetworkedand
virtualspaces.Itisnecessarytoacknowledgethewebsofknowledgecreatedinthesocial
processofteachingandlearning(Ruddetal.,2006b).ThoughitseemsunlikelythatWeb
2.0willfundamentallydisplaceteachingperse,itisclearthatembracingWeb2.0practiceswillmeanthatmoreemphasisisplacedonteachingprocessesbeingsituatedasactiveco
learningexperiences.Adoptionofamorescholarlyandreflectiveapproachtoteachingpracticeisclearlyalogicalstrategytohelpachievethisshift.
Despitetherelativelysophisticatedtechnologicalinfrastructurethatisnowinplaceinthe
UKandotherAnglosaxonorOECDcountries,deploymentofsocialmediaatthecoreofthe
curriculumwithinfurtherandthehighereducationismostlyatanexperimentalstage(seeOECD,2009).Educatorsconfidenceinandexperiencewithsocialmediaisstillperceivedas
abarrierforsuccessfulimplementationwithinteachingandlearninginHighereducation
contexts.AlthoughstudiesinOECDcountriesshowthatteachersmayindeedbeamongstthemostskilledtechnologyusers,itappearsthattheyareunabletotakeadvantageoftheir
competenceandapplyittothewaytheyteach(OECD,2008:seealsoBlinandMunro,2008;Zang,2009).AccordingtotheOECD(2008)threereasonsemergeasthemostsalientfor
explainingthisparadox:
Theabsenceofappropriateincentivestousetechnologyintheclassroomand,moregenerally,gettinginvolvedinanyinnovationregardingteaching.
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
22/111
Thedominantcultureintheteachingprofessionisoneofappliedpractice,whichdoesnotrelyverymuchonresearchbasedevidencetoidentifygoodteaching
methodologiesandstrategies. Theobservationthatacademicteacherslackthevisionandthepersonalexperienceof
whatatechnologyenhancedteachingcouldlooklike.
Thelasttworeasonssuggestthatinitialteachertraininghastoberevisedandthatthereneedstobeanoverallchangeinthesocialandculturalcontextsurroundingteaching
practices.
StrategiesforsupportingtheuseoftechnologiesTheprevioussectionspaintapictureofavibrantlandscapeofresearchactivitiesand
developments,ofclustersofcommunitiesaggregatingaroundcommoninterestsandthemes.Onewouldassumethatcollectivelytheseactivitiesshouldhaveasignificantimpact
onpractice,buttheydonot.Thesecommunitiessitalongsideactualteachingpracticesand
rarelyinformthemtoanygreatextent.Theredoesnotyetappeartobeanevidencebasedethostolearningandteachingpractice.However,initiativessuchastheHigherEducation
AcademyfundedEvidenceNet5areattemptingtochangethisandsiteslikeCloudworks,whicharespecificallyharnessingWeb2.0approachestoencourageeducationaldebate,are
indicatorsthatthingsarebeginningtochange.
Barrierstouptakeandlackofimpact
Despitethepotentialapplicationoftechnologiesinaneducationalcontext,theirusealso
raisessomefundamentalparadoxes(SeeAppendix4Paradoxescreatedbythenetworked
anddigitalforamoredetaileddiscussion).SurveysontheuseofWeb2.0withineducationgiveanindicationofthelevelofuptake(seeforexampletheJISCIpsosMORIpolls,2008;
theannualECARsurveys;alsoEducationNetworkAustralia,2008;LamandRitzen,2008).Collectivelytheysuggestthatuptakeisoccurring,butthatitisnotyetextensiveacrossallaspectsoflearningandteachingprovision.Itisimportanttocautionagainstover
generalisationsfromthesesurveysintermsofextrapolatingtheuptakeofbothformalandinformalWeb2.0toolsasitisdifficulttodrawcomparativeconclusionssystematically
fromsurveysthatusedifferentresearchinstruments.
InarecentpaperConoleconsidersthebarrierstouptakeoftechnologies,drawingonthe
broaderliteratureonresistancetochangeandinnovation(Conole2010)(SeeAppendix5
FactorsinfluencingthelackofuptakeofWeb2.0inHigherEducationandAppendix6Barrierstochange).Conoleidentifiesthefollowingascommonlycitedreasonsforlackof
adoption:
Ihaventgottime,Myresearchismoreimportant,Whatsinitforme?,Whereismyreward?,I
donthavetheskillstodothis,andIdontbelieveinthis,itwontwork.Commonresistance
strategiesincludesayingyes(anddoingnothing)orunderminingtheinitiativeand/orthepeople
involved.Depressinglyclassicmistakesarerepeatedoverandoveragain:anoveremphasisonthe
5http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/evidencenet
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
23/111
technologiesandnotthepeopleandprocesses;fundingforthetechnologydevelopmentsbutnotuse
andsupport.
Inadditiontothislist,therearealsobarriersaroundthechangingnatureofprivacyandownershipintechnologicalenvironments.Thereisalackofunderstandingofthe
implicationsofadoptingmoreopenapproachesandindeednegativeattitudesandfearof
openness.Identificationandunderstandingofthebarrierstobroaderuptakeisessentialsothatstrategiescanbedevisedtoovercomethem.Greenhowetal.(2009a)discussthree
ideasthatillustratethetensionsbetweenthepotentialadvantagesofwebenabledpracticesandthechallengesofimplementation:a)developingteachersprofessional
scholarshipandpractice;b)buildingcapacitiesforqualityscholarship,andc)bridging
disciplinarydivides.Strategiestoovercometheseissueswillneedtoincludemechanismsforgivingteacherstimetoexperimentwithnewtechnologies,supportandguidanceto
enablethemtodevelopthenewskillsneededtoembracethesenewtechnologiesanda
shiftinthinkingtowardsmorescholarlyandreflectiveapproachestoteaching.
Toexplorethisinalittlemoredepthsomeexamplesofdifferentapproachesthatcanbe
adoptedtoenablethisshiftinthinkingaredescribedinAppendix7(Differentapproachestoshiftingthinkingandpromotingchange).Thefirstisaroundapplicationofideasfrom
designbasedresearchasamechanismforengagingteachersinmorereflectivepractice.Thesecondfocusesonwaysinwhichchangesinpracticearoundtheuseoftechnologies
canbeachieved.
Digital,networkedandmultiliteracies
Newtechnologiesarebothchallengingexistingteacherpracticeandrequiringnewskills
andwaysofthinking.LankshearandKnobelprovideausefulsummaryofthewayinwhichthetermdigitalliteraciesisbeingused(LankshearandKnobel,2006).Exactdefinitions
aroundthetermdigitalliteraciesvary;however,Gilstersdefinitionofdigialliteracies,
whichpointstotheabilitytounderstandanduseinformationinmultipleformatsfromawidevarietyofsourceswhenitispresentedviacomputers,isinclusiveofsomethese
definitions(Gilster,citedinLanksearandKnoble,2006;seealsoKress,2003).
Literacynowhastobestretchedtoencompassotherformsofrepresentationalfluencythan
thoseassociatedwiththeprintedword.Digitalandnetworkedliteraciesaremuchmorethansimplybeingaboutunderstandinginformationavailableinadigitalcontext.Theyare
alsoaboutskillsofinterpretationofmultiplerepresentations,theabilitytodevelopaholisticandinterconnectedperspectiveandtounderstandhowtobepartofandinteract
withawiderparticipatorycommunity.Aslearnersengagewithdigitalartefactsthrough
Web2.0,sothecurriculummustaddressthechallengeofdevelopingtheirconfidencewith
newliteraciesandtheirincreasedpotentialforcreativity.Goodfellowsummarisesthecomplexityofthefieldbyarguingthatliteraciesaremultifaceted
withstrandsandtribeslike:multiliteracies,situatedliteracies,newliteracystudies,academic
literacies,digitalliteracies,etc.etc.(Seebroaderdiscussion,ofwhichthisispart,at
http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/2669).
Jenkinsetal.(2006)arguethattherearetwelveskillsneededforfullengagementintoday's
participatoryculture:
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
24/111
Playthecapacitytoexperimentwithonessurroundingsasaformofproblemsolving Performancetheabilitytoadoptalternativeidentitiesforthepurposeof
improvisationanddiscovery Simulationtheabilitytointerpretandconstructdynamicmodelsofrealworld
processes
Appropriationtheabilitytomeaningfullysampleandremixmediacontent
Multitaskingtheabilitytoscanonesenvironmentandshiftfocusasneededtosalientdetails
DistributedCognitiontheabilitytointeractmeaningfullywithtoolsthatexpandmentalcapacities
CollectiveIntelligencetheabilitytopoolknowledgeandcomparenoteswithotherstowardacommongoal
Judgmenttheabilitytoevaluatethereliabilityandcredibilityofdifferentinformationsources
TransmediaNavigationtheabilitytofollowtheflowofstoriesandinformationacrossmultiplemodalities
Networkingtheabilitytosearchfor,synthesize,anddisseminateinformation Negotiationtheabilitytotravelacrossdiversecommunities,discerningand
respectingmultipleperspectives,andgraspingandfollowingalternativenorms Visualizationtheabilitytointerpretandcreatedatarepresentationsforthepurposes
ofexpressingideas,findingpatterns,andidentifyingtrends(Jenkinsetal.,2006:np.)
Thislistshowsthemultifacetednatureofdigitalliteracies.Jenkinsetal.(2006)defineparticipatorycultureasbeingaboutinvolvementandparticipation,aboutbeingableto
createandshareworkandaboutpeermentorshipandsupport.Theygoontosuggestthat
thishasimmensepotentialeducationally;providingopportunitiesforpeertopeerlearning,diverseculturalexpression,skillsdevelopmentacrossdifferentcontextsanda
changingattitudetothenotionsofopenness,ownership,intellectualproperty.
Manyfactorsmayspecificallyinfluencetheuseofresources,andengagementwithsocial
media,includingculturalperceptionsregardinglearningandinformation;perceptionsregardingthevalueofwrittenresourcesandevaluationofinformation,butalso
competencesinusingmediaandcomputersortocriticallyreflectoninformationresources.
Usesmayalsobeshapedbyotheractivitiesconductedonlineexpectationsregardinginteractivity,hypertext,Internetliteracydevelopedacrossonlinesitesandservicesand,
possibly,conventionsregardingauthorship,citationandplagiarism(Livingstone,2008,MetzerandFlanagin,2008;RiehandHilligoss,2008).Alsoimportantarethetensions
associatedwiththeblurringboundariesbetweenproductionanduse,ownershipand
authorship,expertauthorityandamateurcreativity,opennessandcompleteness,aswellasformalandinformallearning(e.g.Jamesetal,2008;McPherson,2008).
Basedonanextensivereviewoftheliterature,Beethametal.(2009)provideacomprehensiveframeworkoftypesofliteraciesrelatingtosocialandsituatedpractices
(includingmeaningmakingandsituatedknowledge);technologicalandmedialiteracies(includingmultimodalskills,informationandcriticalliteracy);andscaffoldedandmeta
cognitiveliteracies(includingthenewpedagogiesassociatedwithmediatedlearning).Such
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
25/111
frameworkscanbeappliednotonlytoyounglearners,buttoallthatareinvolvedinthe
learningprocessandmediaeducation.Astheynote:
Thesocialandeconomicagendasofupskillingmoreofthepopulation,wideningparticipation,
andsupportinglifelonglearning,meanthatuniversityandcollegelearnersaremorediverse
thaneverbefore,withawiderrangeofeducationalandICTexperience.Sinceliteracyprovision
ideallystartswithlearners'existingpracticesandconceptions,itneedstobecomemorewideranging,moreflexible,andmoreproactive.Italsoneedstorecognisethattheprocessof
developmentwillbeincremental,andchallenging.Learnersneedscaffolding,directionand
modellinginthefirstinstance,followedbypracticeandpersonalisation,givingwayto
unstructuredtasksthroughwhichtheycanlearntochoosestrategiesandtechnologiestosuit
differentsituationsandtheirownpreferredwaysofworking.(Beethametal,2009:67)
Successfactorsandstrategiesforchange
Strategiesforencouraginggreateruseoftechnologiesandsharingofresourcesandgood
practicehaverangedfromsimplymakingteachingresourcesavailable(suchaslearning
objectsandOpenEducationalResources,orOERs)throughtomorespecificcasestudiesdescribingpracticeorcommunitybasedsupportmechanismsandnetworks.Inadditiona
numberofinitiativeshaveattemptedtopromotingsharingandcommunitybuildingamongstteachers;forexample,theinitiativeClassroom2.06andtheInternationalSocietyforTechnologyinEducationinEducationIslandinSecondLife.Theseinitiativesaregiving
usinsightsintowhatmethodsworkintermsofsupportingbettersharingofgoodpracticesandmechanismsforfosteringtransformationinteachingpractice.Howevertheimpactof
suchworksofarissmall,andthesecommunitiesarenotwithoutdesignflawsorchallenges
(seeEvansetal.,2008citedinGreehowetal.,2009b:281).Inaddition,thereareanumberofrelatedprofessionalanddisciplinespecificnetworksthathavearoleinpromotingand
supportinggoodteachingpractices(andhencealsoeffectiveuseoftechnologies).TheseincludethenowwellestablishedHigherEducationAcademysubjectcentrenetwork7,
HEFCE'sCentresofExcellenceforTeachingandLearning8andthemorerecently
establishedHigherEducationAcademyEvidenceNet9.Despiteallthis,theimpactonactualpracticeispoor.Takencollectively,theimpactofthenowlargebodyoffreeresourcesand
outputsandfindingsfromprojectsinnovatingintheuseoftechnologyislow.Thereisstill
noclearevidencethattherehasbeenasubstantialchangeinteachingmethodsnoristhereevidencethattherehasbeenasubstantialincreaseintheuseoftechnologiesandOER.
ThereisastrongcollectivevoicethatarguesthatsocialmediaandWeb2.0toolscould
enableuniversitiestoreinventthemselves.ThisencompassesashiftinthinkingaboutICT
solelyintermsoftheirrepresentationalcapabilities(i.e.,theirabilitytorepresentcommoditisedinformationaldeliverymodesofhighereducation)toavisionofthem
facilitatingmorediscursive,relationalandcollaborativeapproachestolearning(seePedro,
2003;Selwyn,2007:91;FranklinandvanHarmelen,2007;Armstrongetal.,2008;Dalsgaard,2008;Redecker,2009).Apartfromitsroleinfacilitatingknowledgetransferand
6Classroom2.0http://www.classroom.2.0.com;InternationalSocietyforTechnologyinEducationin
EducationIslandinSecondLife:www.iste.org/secondlife7http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/subjectcentres8http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/tinits/cetl/ 9http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/evidencenet
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
26/111
collaborativeactivities,Web2.0isoftenpresentedasalsohavingthepotentialtofacilitate
innovationsinprofessionaldevelopment,teachertrainingandteachingpractices,aswellas
improvementsinthequalityofstudentlearningandexperiences.
Evidenceofaconcertedeffortwithininstitutionstosystematicembeddingoftechnologies
anditsuseforlearningandteaching,canbetracedbacktotheearlytomid2000s.Institutionsbegantohavemoreexplicitpoliciesonhowtechnologieswerebeingusedto
supporttheircoreactivities.Websitesweredevelopedandusedexplicitlyformarketingpurposesandformaintainingalumnirelations.VLEswereintroducedtosupportthe
deliveryofonlineteachingandpresentationofmaterials.ThepopularisationofWeb2.0
technologiesfrom2005begantoextendtheinformationfocuseduseofthetechnologiesandenabledtheemergenceofinformalcommunitiesandcommunicationalongsidethe
formalprovisionwithininstitutions(FranklinandvanHarmelen,2007;AlaMutkaetal.,
2009).Arangeofelearninginitiativeswasfundedwhichprovidemechanismstoexperimentwiththesenewtechnologies.Theserangedfromsmallscaleprojectsfocusing
onlocalpractice(forexampleexplorationofaparticulartoolinaparticularteaching
practice),throughmoreinstitutionallyfocusedinitiatives(forexampletheJISCsManagedLearningEnvironmentprogramme)throughtointernationalcollaborations(suchasthe
NSF/JISCdigitallibraryprogrammeandtheHewlettfundedOERinitiatives).Collectivelythesecanbeseenasprimarilybottomup,oftendrivenbyindividualinterests,although
fundingbodiesdoprovideasteerandvisionfortheoverallfocusanddirectionofinnovations(e.g.JISC,2009;OECD,2009;seealsoArmstrongetal.,2008:15).Forexample
intheUK,severalelearninginitiativeshavebeenalignedtotheHEFCEelearningstrategy
(HEFCE,2009).JISCsprogrammeofactivitieshasdirectlyderivedfromandiscloselyalignedtoHEFCEselearningstrategy(seeJISC,2009b).
Table1providesasummaryofsomeofthestrategiesforchangesthathavebeenadopted.Evidencefromtheliteraturegivesanindicatorofthefactorsforsuccess:
Scaffoldingandguidancetoteachers.AmongstthemostimportantfactorsistheneedtoensurethatthereisappropriatescaffoldingandsupportofhowWeb2.0tools
areembeddedincourses.Thisincludesguidanceandsupportonthedesignofcourses,thenatureofactivitiesandtheroleoftheteacher.Itrequiresteacherstorethinktheir
positionfromoneofexperttofacilitator.
Strategicalignment.Anotherareaofimportanceisensuringthatappropriatestrategiesareinplacetosupportthisshift.
Understandingthestudentexperience.Carefulconsiderationofthestudentperspectiveisneeded,particularconsiderationofaffectiveissues.Whatarethekey
factorsthatmotivatestudents,thatwillensuretheirengagement?
Appropriatesupportstructures.Althoughcloselyalignedtoconsiderationsaroundateachersroleandthedesignofthecourse,theneedforeffectivesupportstructures
cannotbeunderestimated.Thisinvolvesensuringthataccesstomaterialsiseasy,that
thestructureandroleoftheonlineenvironmentisclearandhavinginplacecontingencyplansifthereareproblems.
Staffincentivesandrewards.Theprojectsthathavebeenmostsuccessfularethosewherecarefulconsiderationhasbeengiventostaffmotivation.Ensuringthatstaffare
awareofthevisionofwhythesenewtechnologiesarebeingintroducedandgetting
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
27/111
themonboardiskey.Theyneedtofeelasenseofownershipandcontroloftheirown
teachingpractice.
Sharingofgoodpractice .Finallyifwearetobuildcollectivelyonexperiences,mechanismsareneedtosharegoodpracticeandenableteacherstoadoptmore
scholarlyapproaches.
Table1:Summaryofdifferentstrategiesforchange
Nationallevels BroadgovernmentstrategiesthatincludetheuseofWeb2.0 andprovideincentivestodeliverintegratedservices(e.g.forstudentretention,innovationin
teachingandlearningsuchastheAustraliaLearningPerformanceFund(DEEWR,
2008)orinvestmentintoinfrastructureandtraining.
HEfundingagenciesandpolicymakers whocanprovidedriversforinstitutionsthroughspecificmandates,someofwhichinvolvetheadoptionofsocialmedia(inthe
UK,JISCharnessingtechnologyforlearningprogrammes/CETISOERprogramme;
HEA[inparticularEvidenceNetandELESIGNing].
Centralinvestmentinagenciesthatpromoteoftenthroughfundingthe
developmentofinnovationsthroughresearchprojects,deliverytools,resourcesand
infrastructureforcommunitiesofpractice(Australia/Edna;US(LibraryofCongress;
NSF;TheLearningFederation).
Intergovernmentalagenciesandnon-profit
fundingagencies
Integratedpoliciesandfundingstrategies tosupportresearchonthewaysin
whichICTsarechangingthewaysthatpeoplelearn,playorparticipationincivic
activities(e.g.UNESCOIIEP;OECDCERI;OECDsEducationManagementand
InfrastructureDivision(DirectorateforEducation).Alsointermsofpromoting
innovationandcollaborationforthedevelopmentofdigitalliteracycurriculaand
OpenEducationResources(OERs).Projectsfocusingonunderstandingtheimpactof
widespreaduseofdigitalmediainyouthlearning(seeforexample,MacArthur;
Carnegie,Hewlett;NSF,EDUCAUSE,NationalInstituteforTechnologyandLiberal
Education(NITLE)intheUS;ESRC,EPSCR,AHRC,BECTAintheUK).
Institutionalstrategies
Institutionalstrategicplansandsupport:SomeHEinstitutionsaredeveloping
moreintegratedstrategiesthroughadministrative,marketingandpedagogical
mandates(forexampleWarwick,Edinburgh,OpenUniversityintheUK)andformore
effectiveuseofWeb2.0.Regulatory,legal,securityandethicalfactorsaredriving
concerns.Positiveinstitutionaldriversappeartobemoreprominentin:distance
learningandlifelonglearningcontexts.
Professional
motivations
(academic/adminis
trator)
Thereisnowasignificantbodyofevidencearoundtechnologyinterventions.These
projectsareprovidingrichdataonthebarriersandenablerstosuccessfulintegration
oftechnologies;aswellasdataontheattitudesofstaffandwiderpatternsoftechnologicaladoption.Aspectrumofusersisemerging(e.g.earlyadopters;digital
residents,etc.).Explorationoftheopportunitiesforcommunication,sharingand
collaborationacrossbordersoftenfitswithspecificpedagogicalorcommunicationstrategies.Popularpatternsofmotivationinclude:a)sustainableresourcesbeyond
course/degreeduration(e.g.alumnirelations;studentrecruitment;lifelonglearning
commitments);b)professionaldrivestoenhanceteachingpractices;andc)extension
tonewformsofknowledgeandescholarship.
Curricularneeds
andelearningTechnologyuptakeanduseisdifferentindifferentsubject.Forexamplemedia,
computerscienceandinformationsciencecoursesappeartobemoreopento
adoptingWeb2.0practices.Thefunctionalitiesoftoolsemployed,theirsuitabilityfor
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
28/111
chosentasksandthelearnersfamiliarityand/oracceptanceofthesetoolswithinthe
curriculumarekeyinterrelateddriversforeffectiveuse. Studentspositiveattitudestosocialcomputingisnotonlydependentonfamiliarity[thoughdifferencesintypes
ofusesareevidentincountriesOECDcountries],butalsouponperceptions
surroundingthedegreeofautonomyandtheabilitytoappropriateorpersonalize
toolstospecificneeds.Ecollaborationandopencommunication/publicationisseen
asakeyskillforprofessionaldevelopmentandconductwithinHEsectors. Scaffoldedpedagogical
approachesand
fosteringpedagogicalinnovation
Constructivismandconnectivismarethetwopedagogicalapproachesthatalignmost
closelywithWeb2.0practice.Thefocusisonenhancingthestudentexperienceand
maximisingthepotentialrecreationalorcreativeuses.Networkedinteraction
literaciesandawarenessofmediatedlearningstructuresandhierarchiesarealso
important.
ContextualexamplesTheprevioussectionsofferedperspectivesonthekeytheoreticalandempiricaldimensionsthatemergefromevidence.Inthissectionwefocusonspecificcasestudiesfromexistingpracticesthathighlighttheseaspectsinparticularcontexts.Ouroverallimpressionfrom
thecasestudiesisthatthereisrelativelylittlereportingofactuallearningprocesses,orindeedteachingpractices.Occasionallyacomparisonpointhelpsevaluatetheimpactof
interventionsrelativetoalternativelearningstructures,butthisisrare.Peerreviewed
journalandconferencepapersofferevaluativereportsandare,occasionally,richonempiricaldetail,buttherearemanyquestionsthatneedtobeaskedregardingthelikely
conditionsthatcontributedtosuccessintheseareas.Amultitudeofblogsandreflexive
accountsfromacademicteachersofferrichperspectives,butmoresystematiccontentanalysisisrequired.Thesocialnetworkingsiteforlearningandteaching,Cloudworks,has
alsogeneratedarichbodyofknowledgeonrelevantperspectivesthroughsolicitationofexperiencesinthefield.
Weincludecasestudiesthataddresssomeofthewaysinwhichlearningandteachingpracticeshavebeenimproved.Wehavelookedforevidenceoftheextendtowhichlearning
2.0practicesarepresent:participatorylearning,cocreationoflearningartefacts,peer
critiqueleadingtoiterativeindividualimprovementandgroupunderstanding.Wearealsointerestedinseeingtheextenttowhichthisisinfluencingtheteacherspractice:isthere
evidencethattheyareadoptingdifferentrolesinthelearningprocess,suchasbecomingcolearners?WealsowanttoseewherethereisevidencethatWeb2.0approachesarebeing
usedtofosterandpromoteteachingscholarshipandwherethereareexamplesofteachers
aslearningcommunities,i.e.inwhatwaysareWeb2.0technologiesbeinguseda)forreflectivepracticesandinteractionwithlearners;b)aspartofengagementinwider
communitiesofpractitionersengaginginscholarlypracticearoundtheirteaching.Thestudiesaregroupedintothreebroadcategories:i)blogs,wikisandsocialtagging,ii)social
networkingandmicrobloggingandiii)immersiveworldsandsecondlife.Appendix8
focusesonOpenEducationalResources(OER).AdetaileddiscussionisprovidedtherewithrespecttoOER,partlybecausepracticesaroundOERwithintheCloudworkssocial
networkingsiteisthemainfocusofCaseStudy2forthePearlsintheCloudsproject.
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
29/111
Finally,Appendix9(IssuesraisedbytheintroductionofWeb2.0technologies)providesa
discussionofanddetailedempiricalinsightintosomeofthetensionsthatariseasaresult
oftheintroductionofWeb2.0technologiesandinparticular,theirimpactonorganisationalstructuresandprocesses,aswellasonteachersandlearnersindividualroles,identities
andperceptions.
Blogs,wikisandsocialtagging
Theexamplesfromtheliteratureprovidedhereillustrateprojectswhereblogsandwikis
havebeenintegratedintocurriculardesign.Theyillustratearangeofpedagogic
approachesandgiveanindicationofstudentandteacherperceptionsandattitudestowardsusingthesetypesofsites.
Blogshaveevolvedfromtheconceptofapersonalhomepageandhencehavebeen
referredtoaspersonalpublishingspaces.Blogshavealsobeenlabelledreflexivediariesor
learningjournals;bothnamesemphasisethepersonal,chronologicalreflectiveelementofsharingideas.AsDownesnotes:theynowformonepartinamuchmorediverselandscape
[ofWeb2.0content].Allegiancestoparticulartechnologiesshiftovertimeandsomepeople
whoformerlywroteblogs,nowusesocialnetworkingsitessuchasMySpaceorFacebookinstead.Othersusemicroblogging'servicessuchasTwitter.Textualblogshaveevolved
intoothermediaforms,sothatitispossiblenowtohavebothaudioblogs(alsoknownaspodcasts)andvideoblogs(vlogs').Blogsareoftenlinkedtoarangeofmultimedia
repositoryservices(suchasFlickrforphotos,Deviantartforartwork,YouTubeforvideos
andSlideShareforslideshowsordocumentfiles).Itisalsopossibletouseembedfunctionswithmanyofthesesothattheyappearwithinthecontextofanindividualblogposting.
Blogshavebeenusedforavarietyofeducationalpurposes,forexampleasplatformsforcourseannouncements,asmechanismstogatherorgeneratefeedbackandasacollective
peersupportvehicleamongdifferentgroups(ofteachers,researchersand/orstudents).
Theycanbeusedasamotivationaltooltoengagediscussionsinblendedlearningcontexts.Alternativelytheycanoffermorescaffoldedapproachestodistributedresearch.Finally,
theycanbeusedasamechanismforaggregatingresources,i.e.asaformofeportfoliofor
useeitherwithinformalcoursesoraspartofprofessionaldevelopment.InaBeCTAreviewof'Web2.0practicesineducation'Crooketal.(2008)statedthatthecleararticulationof
thepurposesofblogswithineducationalcontextsandappropriateintegrationwithinformalassessmentshouldbeseenasbothafundamentalandimportantmotivationaltool.
Downes(2010)hasidentifiednearlyfiftypedagogicalusesofblogsinformallearning,themajorityofwhichcanbeorhavebeenusedwithinhighereducationcourses.Commonly
citedadvantagesofblogsineducationemphasisethecommunicative,motivationaland
participatorybenefits(Farmeretal.,2008;Kim,2008).Somehighlightthefactthatblogsenableindividuallearnerstoexpresstheiruniqueauthorialvoicesandidentity(Burgess,
2006;EllisonandWu,2008)andalsothattheycanencourageasenseofresponsibilityandpride(Farmeretal.,2008).Othersforegroundthemeaningfulinteractionswithothersand
arguethatpeercritiquingcanfosterbothpsychosocialneedsandthedevelopmentof
criticalliteracyandcivicengagementskills.Over400,000educationalblogsarehostedby
8/3/2019 A Literature Review of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education by Conole_Alevizou_2010
30/111
edublogs10alone.Teachershavebeenusingthemtosupportstudentlearningandalsoasa
vehicletoreflectontheirownpracticesinceabout2004(Downes,2004).
TheintegrationofbloggingandsocialnetworkingisevidentinsitessuchasNing11and
Elgg12.Thiskindofintegration,alongsidewiththeemergenceofmicroblogging,hasshifted
theroleofblogsfromselfpublishingandrepresentationtowardssharing,peerreviewingandcollaborating.Thepurposeandfocusofeducationalblogsvaries.Someareonlyopen
withinacoursecohort,whilstothersmaybeviewablebyanyone.Someformanintegralpartofacourse,beingaformalpartofcourseactivitiesoractuallyformingpartofthe
assessableoutput.Inothercasestheyareoptional.Suchvariedpracticesinterm