Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Journal of Computing in Higher Education
Erschienen in: Journal of Computing in Higher Education 2/2020

20.05.2019

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

verfasst von: Jieun Lim, Timothy J. Newby

Erschienen in: Journal of Computing in Higher Education | Ausgabe 2/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

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.
Vorheriger Artikel The acceptance of a personal learning environment based on Google apps: the role of subjective norms and social image
Nächster Artikel Managing in-lecture media use: the feasibility and value of a split-class policy

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
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
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
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., & 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
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
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
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.
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
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.
Metadaten
Titel
Preservice teachers’ Web 2.0 experiences and perceptions on Web 2.0 as a personal learning environment
verfasst von
Jieun Lim
Timothy J. Newby
Publikationsdatum
20.05.2019
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of Computing in Higher Education / Ausgabe 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1042-1726
Elektronische ISSN: 1867-1233
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-019-09227-w

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2020

Journal of Computing in Higher Education 2/2020 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

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

OriginalPaper

Models to provide guidance in flipped classes using online activity

OriginalPaper

What can completion time of quizzes tell us about students’ motivations and learning strategies?

OriginalPaper

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

OriginalPaper

How lecturers neutralize resistance to the implementation of learning management systems in higher education

OriginalPaper

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

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise