Learning, Unlearning, and Relearning - E-Infrastructures and Technologies for Lifelong Learning - page 312

skills and dispositions needed to be effective
lifelong learners. Specifically, educators can use
these technologies to help students develop au-
tonomy, responsibility, and intentionality; encour-
age student reflection; enculturate students into
a community of practice; and enjoin students to
participate in discourse and collaboration. These
fundamental skills are needed to engage in the self-
directed learning and metacognitive processing
that is at the heart of effective lifelong learning.
There is little doubt in our minds that current
and yet-to-be-realized Web 2.0 technologies and
tools can be used by postsecondary educators to
support student learning in powerful and meaning-
ful ways, while at the same time address head-on
the emerging trends and challenges facing postsec-
ondary education today. To realize the potential of
Learning 2.0, we as postsecondary educators need
to continue our exploration of Web 2.0 technolo-
gies for teaching and learning, discovering new
ways these tools can help us achieve our instruc-
tional goals and objectives; and, in the process,
help students develop the mandatory skills that
will enable them to perpetually learn, unlearn, and
relearn as the world shifts beneath them.

Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching
to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate
education. Change , 27 , 12-25.

Barrows, H. (1985). How to design a problem-
based curriculum for the preclinical years . New
York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

Bauerlein, M. (2008). The dumbest generation:
How the digital age stupefies young Americans
and jeopardizes our future (Or, don't trust anyone
under 30) . New York, NY: Penguin Group.

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1985). Cogni-
tive coping strategies and the problem of inert
knowledge. In Chipman, S., Segal, J., & Glaser,
R. (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Current
research and open questions ( Vol. 2 , pp. 65-80).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional
learning as a goal of instruction. In Resnick, L. B.
(Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays
in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 361-392). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Biggs, J., & Moore, P. (1993). The process of
learning . New York, NY: Prentice-Hall.

Blakey, E., & Spence, S. (1990). Thinking for
the future. Emergency Librarian , 17 (5), 11-14.

REFERENCES

Boggs, G. R. (1999). What the learning paradigm
means for faculty. AAHE Bulletin , 51 (5), 3-5.

Angeles, M. (2004). Features - using a Wiki for
documentation and collaborative authoring .
Retrieved from http://www.llrx.com/features/
librarywikis.htm

Boyd, D. (2008). Facebook's privacy trainwreck:
Exposure, invasion, and social convergence.
Convergence , 14 (1), 13-20. Retrieved from
http://www.danah.org/papers/FacebookPrivacy-
Trainwreck.pdf.

Antonelli, P. (2009). Make, share, find: Web 2.0
and informal learning. In Lowenthal, P., Thomas,
D., Yuhnke, B., & Thai, A. (Eds.), The CU Online
handbook: Teach differently: Create and collabo-
rate (pp. 25-28). Raleigh, NC: Lulu.

Boyd, D. (2009a). MySpace vs. Facebook: A
digital enactment of class-based social categories
amongst American teenagers . Presentation given
at the International Communications Association,
Chicago, IL. Retrieved from http://www.danah.
org/papers/talks/ICA2009.html

Barnes, C., & Tynan, B. (2007). The adventures
of Miranda in the brave new world: Learning in a
Web 2.0 millennium. ALT-J . Research in Learning
Technology , 15 (3), 189-200.