Top

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

Published in:

20-05-2019

Preservice teachers’ Web 2.0 experiences and perceptions on Web 2.0 as a personal learning environment

Authors: Jieun Lim, Timothy J. Newby

Published in: Journal of Computing in Higher Education | Issue 2/2020

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

To explore students’ use of Web 2.0 tools and their perceptions of using Web 2.0 as a personal learning environment (PLE), quantitative surveys (n = 113) and interviews (n = 12) were conducted. In the survey, we identified that students already have familiarity with using Web 2.0 tools, as well as a positive attitude toward using Web 2.0 for learning. However, in the interview, students referenced challenges with using Web 2.0 in their PLE. The results imply that there are gaps between students’ perceived comfort and familiarity with using Web 2.0 tools and their readiness to be an active and successful designer for Web 2.0-based PLEs. This research also identified that there may be other factors influencing students’ building PLEs with Web 2.0 tools including the knowledge of different tools, the abilities of identifying learning objectives and learning styles, access to the tools, motivation, and knowing how to locate the correct information through students’ interviews.

previous article The acceptance of a personal learning environment based on Google apps: the role of subjective norms and social image

next article Managing in-lecture media use: the feasibility and value of a split-class policy

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Archee, R. (2012). Reflections on personal learning environments: Theory and practice. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,55, 419–428.CrossRef

Armatas, C., Spratt, C., & Vincent, A. (2014). Putting connectivist principles into practice: A case study of an online tertiary course. American Journal of Distance Education,28(2), 81–91.CrossRef

Attwell, G. (2007). Personal learning environments—The future of e-learning? E-Learning Papers,1(2), 1–14.

Attwell, G., Castañeda, L., & Buchem, I. (2013). Special issue from the personal learning environments 2011 conference. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments,4(4), 1–4.CrossRef

Barrio-García, S., Arquero, J. L., & Romero-Frías, E. (2015). Personal learning environments acceptance model: The role of need for cognition, e-learning satisfaction and students’ perceptions. Educational Technology and Society,18(3), 129–141.

Bassani, P. B. S., & Barbosa, D. N. F. (2018). Experiences with Web 2.0 in school settings: A framework to foster educational practices based on a personal learning environment perspective. Educação em Revista,34, 1–27.CrossRef

Bellini, C. G. P., Isoni Filho, M. M., de Moura Junior, P. J., & de Faria Pereira, R. D. C. (2016). Self-efficacy and anxiety of digital natives in face of compulsory computer-mediated tasks: A study about digital capabilities and limitations. Computers in Human Behavior,59, 49–57.CrossRef

Bennett, S., Bishop, A., Dalgarno, B., Waycott, J., & Kennedy, G. (2012). Implementing Web 2.0 technologies in higher education: A collective case study. Computers & Education,59(2), 524–534.CrossRef

Brown, S. A. (2012). Seeing Web 2.0 in context: A study of academic perceptions. The Internet and Higher Education,15(1), 50–57.CrossRef

Butler, J. (2012). Grappling with change: Web 2.0 and teacher education. In D. Polly, C. Mims, & K. A. Persichitte (Eds.), Developing technology-rich teacher education programs: Key issues (pp. 135–150). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRef

Chen, J., Shih, T., Wang, C., Yeh, S., & Lee, C. (2008). Combine personal blog functionalities with LMS using tools interoperability architecture. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on advanced information networking and applications (pp. 146–151). https://doi.org/10.1109/aina.2008.43.

Conde, M. A., García-Peñalvo, F. J., Rodríguez-Conde, M. J., Alier, M., Casany, M. J., & Piguillem, J. (2014). An evolving learning management system for new educational environments using 2.0 tools. Interactive Learning Environments,22(2), 188–204.CrossRef

Conole, G. (2009). Personalisation through technology-enhanced learning. In J. O’Donoghue (Ed.), Technology-supported environments for personalized learning: Methods and case studies (pp. 1–15). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-884-0.ch001.CrossRef

Craig, E. M. (2007). Changing paradigms: Managed learning environments and Web 2.0. Campus-Wide Information Systems,24(3), 152–161.CrossRef

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Cych, L., Williams, L., & Younie, S. (2018). Using Web 2.0 technologies to enhance learning and teaching. In S. Younie & P. Bradshaw (Eds.), Debates in computing and ICT education (pp. 97–113). New York, NY: Routledge.

Czerkawski, B., & Gonzales, D. P. (2014). Major trends, issues, and challenges with learning management systems. In Handbook of research on emerging priorities and trends in distance education: Communication, pedagogy, and technology (pp. 318–331). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-5162-3.ch022.

Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education,15(1), 3–8.CrossRef

Dabbagh, N., Kitsantas, A., Al-Freih, M., & Fake, H. (2015). Using social media to develop personal learning environments and self-regulated learning skills: A case study. International Journal of Social Media and Interactive Learning Environments,3(3), 163–183.CrossRef

Davidson, P. L. (2017). Personal learning environments and the diversity of digital natives. Open Access Library Journal,4(5), 1–7.

DePietro, P. (2013). Tool literacy. Counterpoints,435, 15–25.

Dignath-van Ewijk, C., & van der Werf, G. (2012). What teachers think about self-regulated learning: Investigating teacher beliefs and teacher behavior of enhancing students’ self-regulation. Education Research International,2012, 1–10.CrossRef

Dogoriti, E., Pange, J., & Anderson, G. S. (2014). The use of social networking and learning management systems in English language teaching in higher education. Campus-Wide Information Systems,31(4), 254–263.CrossRef

Dohn, N. B. (2009). Web 2.0: Inherent tensions and evident challenges for education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning,4(3), 343–363.CrossRef

Educause Learning Initiative (ELI). (2009). The seven things you should know about personal learning environments. Retrieved March 13, 2019 from https://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7049.pdf.

Ertmer, P. A., Newby, T. J., Yu, J. H., Liu, W., Tomory, A., Lee, Y. M., et al. (2011). Facilitating students’ global perspectives: Collaborating with international partners using Web 2.0 technologies. The Internet and Higher Education,14(4), 251–261.CrossRef

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics,5(1), 1–4.CrossRef

Eyyam, R., Menevi, I., & Dogruer, N. (2011). Perceptions of teacher candidates towards Web 2.0 technologies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,15, 2663–2666.CrossRef

Faizi, R., Chiheb, R., & El Afia, A. (2015). Students’ perceptions towards using Web 2.0 technologies in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning,10(6), 32–36.CrossRef

Fiedler, S., & Valjataga, T. (2011). Personal learning environments: Concept or technology? International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE),2(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4018/jvple.2011100101.CrossRef

Fiedler, S., & Väljataga, T. (2013). Personal learning environments: A conceptual landscape revisited. E-Learning Papers,35, 1–16.

Gillet, D. (2013). Personal learning environments as enablers for connectivist MOOCs. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on information technology based higher education and training (pp. 1–5), Antalya, Turkey. Retrieved March 13, 2019 fromhttps://doi.org/10.1109/ithet.2013.6671026.

Godwin-Jones, R. (2012). Challenging hegemonies in online learning. Language Learning and Technology,16(2), 4–13.

Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,11(3), 255–274.CrossRef

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

Halimi, K., Seridi-Bouchelaghem, H., & Faron-Zucker, C. (2014). An enhanced personal learning environment using social semantic web technologies. Interactive Learning Environments,22(2), 165–187.CrossRef

Harmelen, M. (2008). Design trajectories: Four experiments in PLE implementation. Interactive Learning Environments,16(1), 35–46.CrossRef

Haworth, R. (2016). Personal learning environments: A solution for self-directed learners. TechTrends,60(4), 359–364.CrossRef

Hughes, K. (2011, September). The wiki way: Supporting collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the Irish academy of management conference, Dublin, Ireland. Retrieved April 2, 2019 from https://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1059&context=buschmarcon.

Ivanova, M., & Chatti, M. A. (2011). Toward a model for the conceptual understanding of personal learning environments: A case study. Journal of Educational Technology Systems,39(4), 419–439.CrossRef

Järvelä, S. (2006). Personalised learning? New insights into fostering learning capacity. In OECD-CERI (Ed.), Personalising education (pp. 31–46). Paris: OECD/CERI.

Judd, T. (2018). The rise and fall (?) of the digital natives. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,34(5), 99–119.CrossRef

Koltay, T., Špiranec, S., & Karvalics, L. Z. (2015). The shift of information literacy towards research 2.0. The Journal of Academic Librarianship,41(1), 87–93.CrossRef

Kompen, R. T., Edirisingha, P., Canaleta, X., Alsina, M., & Monguet, J. M. (2019). Personal learning environments based on Web 2.0 services in higher education. Telematics and Informatics,38, 194–206.CrossRef

Kompen, R.T., Edirisingha, P., & Mobbs, R. (2008). Building Web 2.0-based personal learning environments: A conceptual framework. Paper presented at the European distance and e-learning network conference, Paris, France. Retrieved April 2, 2019 from http://hdl.handle.net/2381/4398.

Kompen, R. T., Edirisingha, P., & Monguet, J. M. (2009). Using Web 2.0 applications as supporting tools for personal learning environments. In M. D. Lytras, P. Ordóñez de Pablos, E. Damiani, D. Avison, A. Naeve, & D. G. Horner (Eds.), Best practices for the knowledge society. Knowledge, learning, development and technology for all (pp. 33–40). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRef

Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning on open online networks: Learning experiences during a massive open online course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,12(3), 19–38.CrossRef

Kop, R., & Fournier, H. (2013). Developing a framework for research on personal learning environments. Elearning Papers, 35, 1–16. Retrieved February 23, 2016 from www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/elearningpapers.

Korhonen, A. M., Ruhalahti, S., & Veermans, M. (2019). The online learning process and scaffolding in student teachers’ personal learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 24(1), 755–779.CrossRef

Lee, M. J., Miller, C., & Newnham, L. (2008). RSS and content syndication in higher education: Subscribing to a new model of teaching and learning. Educational Media International,45(4), 311–322.CrossRef

Lin, W. J., Yueh, H. P., Liu, Y. L., Murakami, M., Kakusho, K., & Minoh, M. (2006, July). Blog as a tool to develop e-learning experience in an international distance course. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on advanced learning technologies (pp. 290–292), Kerkrade, Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1109/icalt.2006.1652426.

Luckin, R., Clark, W., Graber, R., Logan, K., Mee, A., & Oliver, M. (2009). Do Web 2.0 tools really open the door to learning? Practices, perceptions and profiles of 11–16-year-old students. Learning, Media and Technology,34(2), 87–104.CrossRef

Luo, Y. (2014). Use of Web 2.0 technologies: A virtual ethnographic and phenomenological study of first-year engineering students’ experiences (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses @ CIC Institutions (1615399917).

Martindale, T., & Dowdy, M. (2016). Issues in research, design, and development of personal learning environments. In T. Anderson (Ed.), Emergence and innovation in digital learning (pp. 119–142). Edmonton: Athabasca University.

McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. (2010). Personalised and self-regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,26(1), 28–43.CrossRef

McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Mitchell, G. W., Wohleb, E. C., & Skinner, L. B. (2016). Perceptions of public educators regarding accessibility to technology and the importance of integrating technology across the curriculum. The Journal of Research in Business Education,57(2), 14–25.

Mödritscher, F., Krumay, B., El Helou, S., Gillet, D., Nussbaumer, A., Albert, D., et al. (2011). May I suggest? Comparing three PLE recommender strategies. Digital Education Review,20, 1–13.

Muhammad, A. H., & Musbah, K. T. (2013). Improvement quality of LMS through application of social networking sites. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning,8(3), 48–51.CrossRef

Muscarà, M., & Beercock, S. (2010). The wiki—A virtual home base for constructivist blended learning courses. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,2(2), 2885–2889.CrossRef

O’Connell, T. S., & Dyment, J. E. (2016). ‘I’m just not that comfortable with technology’: Student perceptions of and preferences for Web 2.0 technologies in reflective journals. Journal of Further and Higher Education,40(3), 392–411.CrossRef

Olivier, B., & Liber, O. (2001). Lifelong learning: The need for portable personal learning environments and supporting interoperability standards. Retrieved October 20, 2007 from http://wiki.cetis.ac.uk/uploads/6/67/Olivierandliber2001.doc.

Patterson, C., Stephens, M., Chiang, V., Price, A. M., Work, F., & Snelgrove-Clarke, E. (2017). The significance of personal learning environments (PLEs) in nursing education: Extending current conceptualizations. Nurse Education Today,48, 99–105.CrossRef

Perera, M. U., Gardner, L., & Peiris, A. (2016, December). Investigating the interrelationship between undergraduates’ digital literacy and self-regulated learning skills. Paper presented at the 37th International Conference on Information Systems, Dublin, Ireland.

Prendes Espinosa, M. P., Castañeda, L., Gutierrez, I., & Román, M. (2016). Still far from personal learning: Key aspects and emergent topics about how future professionals’ PLEs are. Digital Education Review,29, 15–30.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon,9(5), 1–6.CrossRef

Rahimi, E., Berg, J., & Veen, W. (2014a). A pedagogy-driven framework for integrating Web 2.0 tools into educational practices and building personal learning environments. Journal of Literacy and Technology,15(2), 54–79.

Rahimi, E., Berg, J., & Veen, W. (2014b). A learning model for enhancing the student’s control in educational process using Web 2.0 personal learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology,46(4), 780–792.CrossRef

Rahimi, E., Berg, J., & Veen, W. (2015). Facilitating student-driven constructing of learning environments using Web 2.0 personal learning environments. Computers & Education,81, 235–246.CrossRef

Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2012). Exploring pre-service teachers’ beliefs about using Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 classroom. Computers & Education,59(3), 937–945.CrossRef

Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2016). An investigation of the factors that influence preservice teachers’ intentions and integration of Web 2.0 tools. Educational Technology Research and Development,64(1), 37–64.CrossRef

Schaffert, S., & Hilzensauer, W. (2008). On the way towards personal learning environments: Seven crucial aspects. Elearning Papers, 9(2), 1–11.

Seufert, S., Stanoevska-Slabeva, K., Müller, S., & Scheffler, N. (2015). The design of personal learning environments with scope on information literacy in high school. In L. Uden, D. Liberona, & T. Welzer (Eds.), Learning technology for education in cloud (pp. 148–163). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRef

Shaikh, Z. A., & Khoja, S. A. (2014). Personal learning environments and university teacher roles explored using Delphi. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,30(2), 202–226.CrossRef

Sie, R. L., Pataraia, N., Boursinou, E., Rajagopal, K., Margaryan, A., Falconer, I., et al. (2013). Goals, motivation for, and outcomes of personal learning through networks: Results of a tweetstorm. Educational Technology and Society,16(3), 59–75.

Siemens, G., Downes, S., Cormier, D., & Kop, R. (2010, September 1). PLENK 2010–Personal learning environments, networks and knowledge. Retrieved March 13, 2019 from https://www.islandscholar.ca/islandora/object/ir:20500.

Smith, E.E., Kahlke, R. & Judd, T. (2018). From digital natives to digital literacy: Anchoring digital practices through learning design. In Proceedings of the Australasian society for computers in learning in tertiary education conference (pp. 510–515).

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education,52(2), 302–312.CrossRef

Thompson, P. (2015). How digital native learners describe themselves. Education and Information Technologies,20(3), 467–484.CrossRef

Togia, A., Korobili, S., Malliari, A., & Nitsos, I. (2015). Teachers’ views of information literacy practices in secondary education: A qualitative study in the Greek educational setting. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science,47(3), 226–241.CrossRef

Tu, C. H., Sujo-Montes, L., Yen, C. J., Chan, J. Y., & Blocher, M. (2012). The integration of personal learning environments and open network learning environments. TechTrends,56(3), 13–19.CrossRef

Tu, C. H., Yen, C. J., & Sujo-Montes, L. E. (2015). Personal learning environments and self-regulated learning. In R. Papa (Ed.), Media rich instruction (pp. 35–48). New York, NY: Springer.

Tu, C. H., Yen, C. J., Sujo-Montes, L., & Sealander, K. (2018). Digital lifelong-learning literacy. In R. Papa & S. W. Armfield (Eds.), The wiley handbook of educational policy (pp. 531–550). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons Inc.CrossRef

Väljataga, T., Pata, K., & Tammets, K. (2010). Considering learners’ perspectives to personal learning environments in course design. In M. J. W. Lee & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Web 2.0-based e-learning: Applying social informatics for tertiary teaching (pp. 85–108). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Valtonen, T., Hacklin, S., Dillon, P., Vesisenaho, M., Kukkonen, J., & Hietanen, A. (2012). Perspectives on personal learning environments held by vocational students. Computers & Education,58(2), 732–739.CrossRef

Virtanen, J., & Rasi, P. (2017). Integrating Web 2.0 Technologies into face-to-face PBL to support producing, storing, and sharing content in a higher education course. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning,11(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1613.CrossRef

Wilson, S., Liber, O., Johnson, M. W., Beauvoir, P., Sharples, P., & Milligan, C. D. (2007). Personal learning environments: Challenging the dominant design of educational systems. Journal of E-learning and Knowledge Society,3(2), 27–38.

Yen, C. J., Tu, C. H., Sujo-Montes, L., & Sealander, K. (2016). A predictor for PLE management: Impacts of self-regulated online learning on students’ learning skills. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange,9(1), 29–48.CrossRef

Zhou, H. (2013, March). Understanding personal learning environment: A literature review on elements of the concept. In Proceedings of the society for information technology and teacher education international conference (pp. 1161–1164), New Orleans, LA, USA.

Title: Preservice teachers’ Web 2.0 experiences and perceptions on Web 2.0 as a personal learning environment
Authors: Jieun Lim
Timothy J. Newby
Publication date: 20-05-2019
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Computing in Higher Education / Issue 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1042-1726
Electronic ISSN: 1867-1233
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09227-w

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 2/2020

Managing in-lecture media use: the feasibility and value of a split-class policy

Using digital badges as goal-setting facilitators: a multiple case study

Factors affecting student dropout in MOOCs: a cause and effect decision‐making model

Virtual interactive consulting agent to support freshman students in transition to higher education

The acceptance of a personal learning environment based on Google apps: the role of subjective norms and social image

What do participants think of today’s MOOCs: an updated look at the benefits and challenges of MOOCs designed for working professionals

Premium Partner