Using New Media for Educational Support in Higher Education: A Comparative Analysis of Thai and American Professors
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Using New Media for Educational Support in Higher Education: A Comparative Analysis of Thai and American Professors

on

  • 413 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
413
Views on SlideShare
413
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Using New Media for Educational Support in Higher Education: A Comparative Analysis of Thai and American Professors Using New Media for Educational Support in Higher Education: A Comparative Analysis of Thai and American Professors Document Transcript

  • 1 9th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences 2013 (IC-HUSO2013) At Khon Kaen University, Thailand Using New Media for Educational Support in Higher Education: A Comparative Analysis of Thai and American Professors Suthin Rojprasert: 53501815@st.kmutt.ac.th, suthin.roj@dpu.ac.th Ph.D.student, Learning Innovation and Technology Program, Jariya Neanchaleay: jariya.nea@kmutt.ac.th Surapon Boonlue: surapon.boo@kmutt.ac.th Faculty of Industrial Education and Technology, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok Thailand ----------------------------------------------- Abstract This paper presented the using of new media on web to support teaching of instructors who supplied forms and content in social media approaching in course at the higher education level of California State University, Sacramento (CSUS) in the United States and the professors of Universities in Thailand. The implementation with new media on Web 2.0 tools, including the integrated form digital learning innovation of instructors in higher education. There had been widely used to facilitate online learning in the social activity of learning. The development from the synthesis of self-directed learning model with constructionism in the environment of new media and the follow up information collected followed by opinions of experts in learning activities, preparation of a learning environment, and learning assessment. The results revealed that there were differences of designing new learning environments to support web applications in context and social technologies which could support the online learning activities, which the use of new media in online instruction of the characteristics of difference based on country has statistically significant difference and the integrated form of digital learning technology and new media must be built to guide in the production of new design education. Keywords: New Media, Web 2.0 Tools, Higher Education 1. Introduction The learning innovation and online communications are dominant forces in students’ lives and a majority of teachers use new media in their subjects, and the adoption of online instruction continues to increase in higher education. Electronic Learning Management Systems (LMS) can also be linked to the Course Management System (CMS), providing an instructor with a central electronic platform to monitor student performance. In the midst of this connectivity, it has been reported that students today demand more autonomy, connectivity, interaction, and socio-experiential learning opportunities (McLoughlin, 2007). Furthermore, software development program of web tools to support activities, and teachers are using technology to access traditional resources, such as lesson plans, videos and images, and including interactive simulations with online learning which instruction and content are delivered primarily via the social media. Whereas, there are reference the technology medium or context with used display and online learning by stating that one uses the technology as access to learning experiences via the use of some technology (Benson, 2002; Carliner, 2004; Conrad, 2002; Dalsgaard, 2006) argues that social software tools can support a social
  • 2 constructivist approach to e‐learning by providing students with personal tools and by engaging them in social networks, thus allowing learners to direct their own problem‐solving process. The performance is an achieved through a variety learning experiences, that are tailored to the environment and situation in which students find themselves. It may require a different mix of learning experiences and select instructional technologies that store and deliver the learning experiences effectively. These are the several reasons everyone would like to use new media in higher education, and efforts to provide teachers with the best support for their work in 21st Century. 1.1 New media for educational The digital era in 2013 of new media brings the innovation. New technology will directly face the diversity and the possibility of unlimited. For the definition of New Media, refers to the many forms of electronic communication made possible by computer technology, including recreational, informational, social, cultural, pedagogical, and commercial applications that are manipulable and networkable. Examples of new media include computer and video games (both casual and serious types), virtual reality environments, social networks, websites, mobile devices, blogs, and podcasts (Feldman, 1997; Hartley, 2002). Internet technologies have integrated into our lives as essential from communication, and social media is defined as “forms of electronic communication, such as websites for social networking and micro-blogging, through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content, such as videos and other various media" (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 2012). The use of social media implies, for example, that learners should be ‘active co-producers’ of knowledge rather than ‘passive consumers’ of content, and that learning should be a ‘participatory, social process’ supporting personal life goals and needs (Lee and McLoughlin, 2010). Therefore, social media such as Facebook and Twitter; and includes community sites, blogs, bookmarking sites, photo sites, sharing tools, audio and video tools, and some advanced tools that are used in conjunction with one another to have online experience. Whereas people may log on to websites for social networking and applications that rely on openly shared digital content and re-configured by users and experience use this of new media excited students and motivated to go through the content of course was supported by new media. New media could facilitate a change of paradigm in learning from focused in teachers and established knowledge to a networked approach to become coaches and facilitators of the learning process. Involve participatory and collective activity are reflected in higher education institutions of the used to social media applications and use often described learning in terms of the collaboration, conviviality and creativity. 1.2 Web 2.0 tools / applications for Education The recent interest in Web 2.0 technologies in education and beginning of a revolution social learning are emphasizing the context within which learning occurs and the continued evolution of technologies and how they are used since the introduction of the Internet. Tim O’Reilly (2005) definition of Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices, and Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an “architecture of participation”, and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences. Web 2.0 applications could facilitate and enhance lifelong learning experience by connecting in collaborative environments. Web 2.0 applications, might be prominent to enable educators to create
  • 3 personalized, active, participatory, and cooperative learning environments. In turn, educators can provide extensive opportunities for students who have various needs to enhance their learning experiences through enriched interactions and collaborations in Web 2.0 applications (Bryant, 2006; McLoughlin & Lee, 2007). Fuchs (2011) have been discussed Web 2.0 platforms such as YouTube, MySpace, Facebook, Flickr, and Twitter that focus on data sharing; communication, community, and co-production have become very popular, which hundreds of Web 2.0 tools have been developed over the past few years, allowing users to become active creators of Web content (Oliver, 2010). Such tools can be used to develop Learning 2.0 strategies that can enhance student motivation, improve participation, facilitate learning and social skills, stimulate higher order cognitive skills, and increase self-directed learning (Redecker et al., 2009). Therefore, emphasized that Web 2.0 applications or Web 2.0 tools provide particular for self-learning and contextual learning. Learners can also create their own content and resources, enabling increased creativity and flexibility within the learning, and some of the most commonly cited tools are wikis and blogs. Web 2.0 is the term for applications where users can write as well as read on the Web with the context of online learning has been transformed by the advent of Web 2.0. While universities have started to use Web 2.0 applications, these applications already exist in the students’ personal and popularity can be credited to highly utilized services like blogging, video sharing and social networking sites, and the purposes of blended learning model was combining online and face to face video-based blogs. Therefore Web 2.0 applications encourage greater participation and interaction between learners and teachers, which helps with building communities of learning, supports better feedback provisions, and facilitates more active learning engagement (Turban & Volonino, 2010; Selwyn, 2007; Boulos & Wheeler, 2007; Shih, 2010). Web 2.0 applications, might be prominent to enable educators to create personalized, active, participatory, and cooperative learning environments, and assert how students using Web 2.0 tools will likely become proficient in “some or all of the following”: digital competencies that focus on creativity and performance; strategies for meta-learning, including learner-designed learning; inductive and creative models of reasoning and problem-solving; learner-driven content creation and collaborative knowledgebuilding; and horizontal (peer-to-peer) learning and contribution to communities of learning (McLoughlin & Lee, 2007; 2008) Silius et al.(2009) in a study of Students’ Motivations for Social Media Enhanced Studying and Learning, say that using Web 2.0 based social media services such as Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. have recently become well known especially among young people. There is clearly something appealing in web-based social services. In social networking sites a user can participate intensively in activities in the service, share contents, debate and share opinions and create different kinds of groups for different needs. Social networking sites such as MySpace, Facebook, Bebo and Ning are websites used to build online networks and communities. However, online learning in Web 2.0 was processes to become embedded in teaching of instructor in higher education and can be used to support teaching and learning. The case studies focus on evaluation of site for learning and teaching which Web 2.0 functional to facilitate and several elements influence students’ satisfaction in the online environment and successfully promoting the sharing of ideas and discussion of educational practice. Web 2.0 Tools presents challenges and opportunities for education, how to prepare teachers to use Web 2.0 tools in their own teaching and to take advantage of what it has to offer for immediate application in course. Having considered some of the general implications of Web 2.0 tools for education, it is useful to review some examples of current applications in higher education. Boateng et al.(2010) Web 2.0 applications can be categorized into five types Communicative: applications that are used to share ideas, information and creations.
  • 4 Examples are Social networks, Blogs, and Podcasts, collaborative publishing: for working with others in a shared working environment for a particular purpose. Examples are Wikis and Blogs, documentaries (content management): applications which collect and/or present people’s experiences and thoughts. Examples are Blogs and Social Bookmarking, generative: applications to generate something new to be used by other users. Examples are Mishaps and Media sharing, and interactive: applications which facilitate information and resource exchange between users. Examples are Social bookmarking and RSS Majhi and Maharana (2011) conducted a study on familiarity of Web 2.0 and its application in learning in two Indian Universities. The investigations conducted a survey of about 500 respondents including students, teacher and research scholars of Utkal and Sambalpur Universities in the State of Odisha. Results revealed that the usage of Web 2.0 tools is not very significant in either of the two universities in Odisha. Therefore , reflections on the implications of new technologies for learning and teaching, strategies for more effective take up of technology, the adoption and learning impact of teaching experience and can offer valuable into the perceived with Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. Instructors serve an important role, both in bringing Web 2.0 applications into their teaching and optimally utilize the opportunities made available through technology. For these reasons, these using case studies of teaching, experiences, interest, adopt, and integrate Web 2.0 technologies into their teaching. 1.3 Use Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education The United States is a leader in the use of Web 2.0 technology. Much of the research on social media use is conducted in the United States, and American students are highly conversant with social media use because of social media used for educational at universities throughout America, driven by current pedagogical theories of active, student-centered, constructivist learning models which correspond of Web 2.0 tools. A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. The study investigates of Web 2.0 technologies in shaping the collaborative working environment for professional knowledge workers, and to analyze the potential conditions for success in such Web 2.0 enabled working environments. Such as Lemley and Burham (2008) in a study on Web 2.0 tools in medical and nursing school curricula investigates the extent to which social networking tools are being used in the curricula of medical and nursing schools. As new internet technology tools are introduced, educators in health-related disciplines have the opportunity to incorporate these new tools into the curriculum to enhance instruction and the learning process. Wikis, blogs, and other social networking tools may all be used both to augment the educational method and to increase its efficacy. From the responses received to the surveys, it appears that Web 2.0 tools are slowly being introduced into the curricula of medical and nursing schools for a variety of uses. Besides, the open-source CMS called Moodle, which includes a plethora of Web 2.0-related plug-ins, positions itself as an alternative to more restrictive CMS, with 47 thousand sites and more than 2.2 million courses created (Moodle, 2008). Park et al. (2009) investigated the learners’ perception of Web 2.0 applications for learning. The results showed that Malaysian students learned more from a collectivist learning approach but the American students preferred an individualistic learning approach. However, learners in two countries responded that Web 2.0 applications were useful for learning. Therefore, American professor are users of popular social media technologies, and encourage active teaching and comfort with computers and new media. Furthermore a necessary skill for teach and life in modern America. In order to fully educate Americans for
  • 5 the 21st century media landscape and universities must overcome institutional inertia and begin to evaluate how the university curriculum can best utilize such modern tools. The North Carolina Center for the Advancement of Teaching (2009) found that technology makes a difference in classroom instruction. Student projects created online are much more inviting than a lecture by the teacher. Students today are comfortable with technology as part of their daily lives. Technology engages students and advances their learning. Technology can be utilized in order to monitor individual progress. In addition, it can also be used as a tool to engage the learners by incorporating interactive components to a lesson to enhance the learning experience (Branch & Merrill, 2011). Most Thai universities have already developed learning platforms (LP) to allow students to access course materials and to communicate with their classmates, lecturers and university staff. Such web based applications usually include web pages, email, message boards, discussion forum, text and video conference, shared diaries and communication tools with Learning Management System (LMS) or Course Management System (CMS). Web 2.0 tools and learning platform, therefore, comes as a perfect tool to help students achieve extraordinary learning results in classrooms, laboratories and beyond Higher education appears to have changing in Thailand, as students, especially younger students whose social networking concerns match their obsession with mobile technology such as mobile-learning (m-Learning). Find yield a mixed response in terms of student readiness for m-Learning technology demands. Finding there are crucial technological constraints that have to be overcome relating to mobile devices, the media used and the effects of the delivery mechanism; and that these technological constraints have a considerable impact on student’s pedagogic engagement (Paul TJ James, 2011). The future in higher education institutions will adopt a wide variety of Web applications for the purposes of engaging learner and enhancing instructional efficiencies in terms of informal learning. Web applications allow students to practice in creating and interacting with digital media in a learning-focused environment. Therefore, teachers can use Web 2.0 tools to captivate students, to hold their attention, and to enhance their learning experiences, which use of Web technologies is in teaching and learning, in part because it is believed to offer good support for constructivist approaches and the co-creation of knowledge which have become more popular in higher education. 2. A description of the study 2.1 Statement of Problem The adopter began to experiment with new media on Web 2.0 tools such as LMS Moodle, Facebook, Blogs, chat tools, podcasting, video-sharing, and bookmarking. Since then, all kinds of surveys have been conducted in the beginning of the 21st century. These tools are used by instructors regularly on their use of social media and online learning, but the study has not been conducted on application of Web 2.0 tools with applied comparison with opinion-based case studies and generally research it lacks a strong empirical base. It is not known, for example, what types of Web 2.0 tools are commonly used in teaching. 2.2 Scope of Study The purpose of this study was to exploring use of new media on Web 2.0 tools in literacy instruction by instructors in the United State and Thailand, case studies; Department of Communication Studies, California State University, Sacramento, USA and Thai professors in the universities.
  • 6 3. Method Quantitative and qualitative methodologies were studies to investigate use of new media on web to support teaching of instructor with implementing skills using Web 2.0 tools. The researcher utilized descriptive statistics to report the mean scores of two countries, United Stated and Thailand differences in using new media on web to support teaching teacher responding in this study. 3.1 Participants This study done while researcher had visiting scholarship for Special Topics course of Learning Innovation and Technology Program, during the period September 16 to December 31, 2012 in the Faculty of Communication Studies at California State University, Sacramento, United State. Participants in this study as the sample group composed of 60 instructors using social media within courses at the higher education level. They were thirty professors of Fall 2012 semester (August 27 – December 14, 2012) at California State University, Sacramento (n=30) and thirty professors (n=30) ) in the second semester of the 2012 academic years (November 5 – Much 11, 2012) from Universities in Thailand in Faculty of Communication Art at Dhurajit Pandit University and Faculty of Liberal Arts at Huachiew Chalermprakiet University, using new media on Web 2.0 tools. 3.2 Data Sources Data sources included instructors’ survey, lesson plans, online learning, and students’ reflections. The instructor survey revealed of using Web 2.0 tools in instruction. For the purposes of the survey, a Web 2.0 tool was defined as social media applications for teaching that allow user to create and publish material on the Web, also noting that Web 2.0 tools are accessed and used entirely online through a Web browser. Examples of Web 2.0 tools are blogs, wikis, social bookmarking, social networking, micro blogging, online presentations, video sharing, photo sharing, and podcasting. Instructors indicated their experience with Web 2.0 tools, whether they had interactive media via using Web 2.0 tools, their opinion of the importance of using Web 2.0 tools for teaching, and finally their preference in using Web 2.0 tools Data collection and analysis with use survey questionnaire. Researchers analyzed two sets of data from the surveys using descriptive statistics to report the mean scores for survey items. A comparison was made of the using data on two cohorts of instructors using in social media within course at the higher education level. 4. Survey Results Survey results revealed Web 2.0 tools for teaching in higher education of California State University, Sacramento in the United States and the professors of Universities in Thailand. The background information characteristics of the respondents; 24 (40%) of the respondents were males, while 36 (60%) were females, The largest respondents group was the 40-49 year olds 19 (31.7%), the mostly respondents 39 (65%) had full-time employment, in terms of highest academic qualifications 24 (40%) of the respondents had doctoral degrees, and the mostly respondents 12 (20%) professors with 11-15 years of experiences. The lecturer appraisal and feedback revealed; the purpose of the instructional media the most respondents 43(55.1%) used on instructional tool, and the relate respondents 22(28.2%) used on dissemination of information. The most respondents 35(40.7%) consider choosing a new media platform were applicable in student’s field, and 22(25.6%) choosing password protected. The most respondents 26(23.6%) consider in the instructional design were feedback procedures, and 19(17.3%) assessment of project. The mostly respondents 32(33.7%) guidelines for project was information should provide students, 19(20%) resources for project, and 18 (18.9%) tutorials via new media.
  • 7 Table 1: The questionnaire for user, of the respondents (n = 60) Questionnaire for users. 1. Are you aware with the mentioned Web 2.0 tools? a) Students’ Blogs b) Collaborative c) Media Sharing d) Social Network e) Other 2. Which Web 2.0 tool you use mostly; a) Students’ Blogs b) Collaborative c) Media Sharing d) Social Network e) Other 3. Which RSS reader is most popular concerning you; Frequency (n = 60) % 28 31 35 42 3 20.1 22.3 25.2 30.2 2.2 5 18 26 25 6 6.3 22.5 32.5 31.3 7.5 a) Yahoo 26 b) Bloglines 4 c) NetNewsWire 1 d) Firefox Live Bookmarks 4 e) Reader not identified 2 f) Rss Reader 2 g) Opera RSS reader 4 h) Google reader 36 4. Web 2.0 technologies helpful in education; a) Is Web 2.0 technology helpful in education 40 b) Not helpful 1 c) No comments 19 5. The nature of benefit of Web 2.0 technologies in education: a) Broadened faculty perspective, and facilitated obtaining students feedback and following 29 students interest trends b) Drew on collective knowledge to better serve 5 c) Improved teachers inter-departmental 13 communication d) Facilitated instant problem solving with the 12 benefit e) Improved knowledge sharing and 30 collaboration 6. Satisfaction level with the usage of Web 2.0 technologies; a) Satisfied 19 b) Moderately satisfied 19 c) Dissatisfied 4 d) No comments 18 32.9 5.1 1.3 5.1 2.5 2.5 5.1 45.6 66.7 1.7 31.7 32.6 5.6 14.6 13.5 33.7 31.7 31.7 6.7 30.0
  • 8 Table 1 presented the questionnaire for user, the mostly respondents were aware with the mentioned web 2.0 tools 42 (30.2%) use social network (Hi5, Skype, Facebook, Myspace, ect.), and 35 (25.2%) use media sharing (YouTube, Slideshow, Flickr, ect.). While the mostly respondents 26 (32.5%) use web 2.0 tool for media sharing, 25 (31.3%) use social network, and other SacCT, school base collaboration tool. The RSS reader most popular concerning which respondents 36 (45.6%) to use Google Reader, and use of the Yahoo 26 (32.9%). The mostly respondents agreed 40 (66.7%) web 2.0 technologies helpful in education. The most respondents the nature of benefits of using Web 2.0 tool 30 (33.7%) for improved knowledge sharing and collaboration, and 29 (32.6%) broadened faculty perspective and facilitated obtaining students. The respondents 19 (31.7) satisfied and moderately satisfied with the usage of web 2.0 technologies, and while 18 (30%) no comments. The opinion of respondents most popular such as Facebook, Moodle (Chat Room), Google reader, Google doc, Yahoo, Wiki, YouTube, Blogging, Blogger, Weebly, Wordpress, Twitter and Hi5. Finally, the opinion of respondents using web 3.0 technologies to support the learning skill for the student who interested and be able to access technology and enjoying the benefits and involves an increasing mobile web experience but obstacles to finding subject matter experts and relevant content should be easier with web 3.0 technology and budget constraints which affect the e-learning adoption project. Table 2: Descriptive statistics of comparisons regarding the use of new media in online instruction. Factors New media are good tool for teaching and learning. New media are effective for collaborative problem solving. New media can provide useful tool for educational technology students. New media is to facilitate group learning. New media foster experiential learning. New media are useful in online learning environments. Total Thai Mean SD. 4.23 0,68 USA Mean SD. 3.93 0.91 Sig. (2-tailed) .152 3.87 0.73 3.60 0.89 .211 1.26 4.37 0.56 4.10 0.71 .111 1.62 4.13 4.20 4.47 0.90 0.76 0.63 3.23 3.33 4.17 0.94 1.12 0.65 .000* .001* .074 3.80 3.49 1.82 4.06 0.52 3.64 0.61 .006* 2.87 t-test 1.45 * Sig. < .05 Table 2 presented comparisons regarding the use of new media in online instruction of difference based on country. All variables were measured by frequency variables for demographic data and characteristics variables in order to find out what are the characteristics of difference based on country. There is statistical significant difference at level .05.
  • 9 5. Conclusion The primary goal of this study was to explore using of new media on Web 2.0 tools in literacy instruction by instructors with their use of social media and online learning. The study has been conducted on application of Web 2.0 tools with comparison with to teaching in higher education level of California State University, Sacramento in the United States and the Universities in Thailand. Furthermore, comparisons regarding the use of new media in online instruction of demographic data and characteristics of variables differences. This study has shown that American and Thai professor tend to differ in their technology acceptance levels and the usage of new media in online instruction for learning based on country, and optimistic in using new media to facilitate group learning, and foster experiential learning, and new media were good tool for teaching and learning, effective for collaborative problem solving, and useful in online learning environments, and can provide useful tool for educational technology students. The using of new media on Web technologies can be used to provide professors with meaningful feedback and can help in teaching and learning with new media and support teaching of instructors who supplied forms and content in social media approaching in courses at the higher education level. The professors of California State University, Sacramento (CSUS) in the United States and Universities in Thailand need to focus on different delivery strategies and methods that will target all learners to attain knowledge and communication. It can also be used as a tool to engage the learners with interactive to a lesson to enhance the learning experience. Therefore web 2.0 is social networking enable learners who share the same interests, to build their own online social networks for communicating or sharing resources. Furthermore, the importance of self-directed learning to use Web 2.0 tools with can bring about authentic learning. The new media on Web 2.0 tools, including the integrated form digital learning innovation of instructors in higher education. 6. Suggestion Finally, the using new media were able to access web technology, which increased interest in web experience and adoption in the online learning, and great benefit of Thailand to support learning in the near future. Also, the application of technology can be applied to the other academic fields which serve sustainable and mass education with no boundary of distance as stated “Anytime Anywhere”. 7. Reference Branch, R., & Merrill, M.D. (2011). What is instructional design? In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed., pp. 17- 29). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall. Benson, A. (2002). Using online learning to meet workforce demand: A case study of stakeholder influence. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(4), 443−452. Boateng, R., V. Mbarika and C. Thomas. (2010). When web 2.0 becomes an organizational learning tool: Evaluating web 2.0 tools. Development and Learning in Organizations, 24: 17-20. Retrieved from: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1858222&show=abstract Boulos M. N. K., and Wheeler S. (2007). The emerging Web 2.0 social software: an enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 24, 2-23. Retrieved from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2007.00701.x/pdf
  • 10 Bryant, T. (2006). Social software in academia, EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 29(2), 61-64. Retrieved from: http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0627.pdf Carliner, S. (2004). An overview of online learning (2nd ed.). Armherst, MA: Human Resource Development Press. Conrad, D. (2002). Deep in the hearts of learners: Insights into the nature of online community. Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 1−19. Dalsgaard, C. (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Retrieved from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/671/1267 Feldman T. (1997). An Introduction to Digital Media. London: Routledge. Fuchs C. (2011). Web 2.0 presumption and surveillance. Surveillance & Society. 8: 288-309. Hartley J. (2002). Comunication, cultural and media studies: The key concepts. London: Routledge. Lee, M. and McLoughlin, C. (2010). Web 2.0-based e-learning. Hershey PA, Information Science Reference. Lemley, T., & Burham, F. (2008). Web 2.0 tools in medical and nursing school curricula. J Med Libr Assoc. 97(1): 50–52. Majhi S, Maharana B. (2011). Familiarity of Web 2.0 and its application in learning: A case study of two Indian Universities. Int. Lib. Inf. Sci, 3: 120-129. McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. (2007). “Social software and participatory learning: pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era”, Paper presented at the ascilite, Singapore. McLoughlin, K. Shark Gillnet and Hook Sectors. (2007). In: Larcombe, J. and McLoughlin, K.(eds.) (2007) Fishery Status Reports 2006: Status of Fish Stocks Managed by the Australian Government. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra, 174–186. McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M.J.W. (2008). The 3 P’s of pedagogy for the networked society: Personalization, participation, and productivity. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(1). 10-27. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, (2012). Social media. Retrieved from: http://merriamwebster.com/dictionary/social%20media Moodle. (2008). Moodle Statistics. Retrieved from: http://moodle.org/stats/ North Carolina Center for the Advancement of Teaching. (2009). Technology engages students, advances learning. NCCAT Winter Newsletter, 22(1), 5. Oliver, K. (2010). Integrating Web 2.0 across the Curriculum. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 54(2), 50-60. Retrieved from ERIC database. Paul TJ James. (2011). Mobile-Learning: Thai HE Student Perceptions and Potential Technological Impacts, International Education Studies. Vol. 4, No. 2; May 2011. Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education www.ccsenet.org/ies Park, E., Mohan, R. & Ponnusamy, V. (2009). Facilitating Learning Through Web 2.0 Collaboration - Cases Across the Culture. In G.Siemens & C. Fulford (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2009 (p. 3764). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  • 11 Redecker, C., K. Ala-Mutka, M. Bacigalupo, A. Ferrari and Y. Punie. (2009). Learning 2.0: The Impact of Web 2.0 Innovations on Education and Training in Europe. Final Report. JRC Scientific and Technical Report, EUR 24103 EN, Retrieved from: http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=2899. Selwyn, N. (2007). Web 2.0 applications as alternative environments for informal learning A critical review. Paper presented at the OECD-KERIS International Expert Meeting on ICT and Educational Performance, Cheju Island, South Korea. Shih, R. C. (2010). Blended learning using video-based blogs: Public speaking for English as a second language students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(6), 883-897. Retrieved from: http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet26/shih.html Silius, K., Miilumäki, T., Sairanen, H., Huhtamäki, J., Liukkonen, A. & Pohjolainen, S. (2009). Mikä motivoi opiskelijat verkkoyhteisöön? What motivates a student to use a Web community? Retrieved from: http://hlab.ee.tut.fi/hmopetus/sosiaalinenmedia/mika-motivoi-opiskelijat-verkkoyhteisoon Tim O’Reilly. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved from: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web20.html Turban, E., and Volonino, L. (2010). Information Technology for Management: Improving Performance in theDigital Economy, 7th Edition. John Wiley & Sons Inc.