Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
in self-organizing communities by creating and sharing knowledge. Web 2.0 sup-
ports learning “based on the premise that our understanding of content is socially
constructed through conversations about that content and through grounded interac-
tions, especially with others, around problems or actions” (Brown & Adler, 2008,
p. 18). Web 2.0 technologies reflect contribution-oriented activities and empower
learners by enabling them to share in the creation of their own learning resources
(Collis & Moonen, 2008). By providing opportunities for connecting the learn-
ing sciences with knowledge building web 2.0 significantly advances and extends
learning activities from classroom into society 2.0 at large.
Web 2.0 technologies support not only cognitive processes but also socio-
emotional processes by involving students in “getting to know each other, com-
mitting to social relationships, developing trust and belonging, and building a sense
of on-line community” (Kreijns, Kirschner, & Jochems, 2003, p. 342). Web 2.0
technologies not only address the educational needs of learners, but their social
and psychological needs as well because communities of practice are affectively,
cognitively, and socially structured. Building affective structures entail processes
of “affiliation, impression formation, and interpersonal attraction to induce and
promote social relationships and group cohesion” (Kreijns et al., 2003, p. 342).
Web 2.0 technologies support learning environments that require new skills such
as searching, sorting., and synthesizing wide varieties of information. “Working in
virtual reality also requires a variety of new skills, as one
becomes an agent in its
creation, or at least collaborating with others in shaping it” (Moore, 2007, p. 180).
Unfortunately, web 2.0 does not come with a manual, telling learners how to use
it to its fullest potential. Recent and ongoing research has succeeded in identifying
a few guidelines for use and in identifying a number of unsuccessful applications.
For instance, blog-enabled conversations are distributed and fragmented and there
are no tools enabling learners to keep track of the flow of arguments (Efimova &
de Moor, 2005). Interaction through hyperlinking and commenting on blogs are
limited and asymmetrical (Hsu, 2007; Nardi et al., 2004). Lack of organization and
structure in wikis can result in unmanageable outputs (Ebner, Kickmeier-Rust, &
Holzinger, 2008; Hsu, 2007), and anonymous contributions can discourage feel-
ings of authorship and pose problems for evaluating the quality of wiki content
(Boulos, Maramba, &Wheeler, 2006). Social bookmarking and tagging are plagued
by uncontrolled vocabularies which can cause ambiguity and chaos in the system.
Users may use the same tag in different ways or different tags in the same way
(Mathes, 2004; Yew et al., 2006).
How can researchers and educators work together to motivate and support
students in building knowledge in society 2.0? While the design of learning tech-
nologies in the past was based on fixed models and theories, the design of web
2.0 technologies is based on openness and flexibility and can overcome the con-
straints of space and time, context, and hierarchy, thereby allowing learners to
participate more actively in building knowledge together. However, greater free-
doms and opportunities carry greater risks and greater responsibilities Research and
evidence from the classroom reveal that lack of structure and guidance can cause
these applications to fail (Cole, 2009; Ebner et al., 2008; Wheeler et al., 2008). How
...
