Using a social bookmarking tool for group project work online<br />Danni Feng<br />Samuel Kai Wah Chu<br />Minqi Zhou<br /...
Table of content<br />1. Introduction<br />2. Literature review<br />3. Research methods<br />4. Results<br />5. Discussio...
Introduction<br />The educational concept: <br />instructivism to constructivism<br />The formats of resources:<br />tradi...
Literature review<br />What is social bookmarking?<br /><ul><li>Social bookmarking is the practice of saving bookmarks to ...
2. One user can set up collections of bookmarks and share the bookmarks with other users (Menchen, 2005; Millen, 2005).
3. Users can create tags to classify and organize their bookmarks (Gordon-Murnane, 2006; Millen, 2005).
4. Users can retrieve all the bookmarks that have the same tag in one step (Gordon-Murnane, 2006).
5. Social bookmarking has been suggested to be an economical application where information resources are sharable and reus...
the differences between user-contributed data and structured data (Gruber, 2007)
the problem in shared conceptualizations in social bookmarking and its solution (Jaschke et al., 2008)
social bookmarking in the academic context (Chu, Gorman, & Du, 2010)</li></li></ul><li>Literature review (Cont’)<br />Rese...
to organize information
to search information
to manage information in group projects
to compare Form 1 and Form 2 students’ perceptions on using Delicious</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods<br />Participants...
Form 2: 185 students => 5 classes => 8 groups</li></ul>A mixed method<br /><ul><li>A questionnaire about perceptions on th...
Face-to-face interviews</li></li></ul><li>Results<br />Social bookmarking for organizing information<br />Notes: * p < .05...
Discussion<br />Delicious for information organization<br /><ul><li>Creating titles and tags as well as forming groups can...
Students are used to the “My Favourites” feature supported by the Internet Explorer
Students need to shift from their Delicious accounts and the accounts of the online platform for constructing group projec...
Form 2 students n = 172</li></li></ul><li>Results<br />Social bookmarking for searching information<br />Notes: * statisti...
Discussion<br />Delicious for searching information<br /><ul><li>Tags for searching  their own or their group members’ boo...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

32 using social bookmarking presentation

908 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
908
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
16
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

32 using social bookmarking presentation

  1. 1. Using a social bookmarking tool for group project work online<br />Danni Feng<br />Samuel Kai Wah Chu<br />Minqi Zhou<br />Bingqing Zhao<br />Yiu-ming Kenneth Chin<br />
  2. 2. Table of content<br />1. Introduction<br />2. Literature review<br />3. Research methods<br />4. Results<br />5. Discussion<br />6. Conclusion<br />
  3. 3. Introduction<br />The educational concept: <br />instructivism to constructivism<br />The formats of resources:<br />traditional to electronic<br /><ul><li>Students may assume that they can find all the information they need from the Internet in the environment of Web 2.0.</li></li></ul><li>Introduction (Cont’)<br />This research aims to examine users’ perceptions on the usefulness of social bookmarking.<br />This research investigates the usefulness of social bookmarking for information organization, search as well as group information management.<br />This research focuses on the social bookmarking tool users who are Form 1 and Form 2 students.<br />
  4. 4. Literature review<br />What is social bookmarking?<br /><ul><li>Social bookmarking is the practice of saving bookmarks to a public website and “tagging” them with key words (Educause Learning Initiative, 2005).</li></li></ul><li>Literature review (Cont’)<br />What is the advantages of social bookmarking?<br /><ul><li>1. Users can save their bookmarks on a web server instead of on their local hard disks, and thus the bookmarks can be accessed from any computer (Menchen, 2005; Gordon-Murnane, 2006).
  5. 5. 2. One user can set up collections of bookmarks and share the bookmarks with other users (Menchen, 2005; Millen, 2005).
  6. 6. 3. Users can create tags to classify and organize their bookmarks (Gordon-Murnane, 2006; Millen, 2005).
  7. 7. 4. Users can retrieve all the bookmarks that have the same tag in one step (Gordon-Murnane, 2006).
  8. 8. 5. Social bookmarking has been suggested to be an economical application where information resources are sharable and reusable for group information management (Grudin, 2006). </li></li></ul><li>Literature review (Cont’)<br />Previous Studies have explored:<br /><ul><li>the functions of tags (Golder & Huberman, 2006)
  9. 9. the differences between user-contributed data and structured data (Gruber, 2007)
  10. 10. the problem in shared conceptualizations in social bookmarking and its solution (Jaschke et al., 2008)
  11. 11. social bookmarking in the academic context (Chu, Gorman, & Du, 2010)</li></li></ul><li>Literature review (Cont’)<br />Research gap<br /><ul><li>Very few studies have been done on the usefulness of social bookmarking tools at the secondary school level.</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods<br />Research objectives: <br /><ul><li>to evaluate if Delicious was perceived as a useful tool
  12. 12. to organize information
  13. 13. to search information
  14. 14. to manage information in group projects
  15. 15. to compare Form 1 and Form 2 students’ perceptions on using Delicious</li></li></ul><li>Research Methods<br />Participants<br /><ul><li>Form 1: 148 students => 5 classes => 8 groups
  16. 16. Form 2: 185 students => 5 classes => 8 groups</li></ul>A mixed method<br /><ul><li>A questionnaire about perceptions on the usefulness of Delicious
  17. 17. Face-to-face interviews</li></li></ul><li>Results<br />Social bookmarking for organizing information<br />Notes: * p < .05. an =147 , bn = 147, cn = 147, dn = 177, en = 178, fn = 178, gn = 324, hn = 325, in = 325. Participants gave ratings based on a 5 - point Likert scale where 1 = “Strongly disagree”, and 5 = “Strongly agree”.<br />
  18. 18. Discussion<br />Delicious for information organization<br /><ul><li>Creating titles and tags as well as forming groups can be achieved through many other tools, e.g., Google Sites
  19. 19. Students are used to the “My Favourites” feature supported by the Internet Explorer
  20. 20. Students need to shift from their Delicious accounts and the accounts of the online platform for constructing group projects</li></li></ul><li>Results<br />Number of tags created by students<br /><ul><li>Form 1 students n = 136
  21. 21. Form 2 students n = 172</li></li></ul><li>Results<br />Social bookmarking for searching information<br />Notes: * statistically significant at p < .05. an =146 , bn = 147, cn = 147, dn = 146, en = 177, fn = 177, gn =178 ,hn = 175, in = 323, jn = 324, kn = 325, ln = 321. Participants gave ratings based on a 5 - point Likert scale where 1 = “Strongly disagree”, and 5 = “Strongly agree”.<br />
  22. 22. Discussion<br />Delicious for searching information<br /><ul><li>Tags for searching their own or their group members’ bookmarks rather than searching other Delicious users’ bookmarks
  23. 23. Tags meaningful to the one who creates it and those who are in the same group with the creator rather than to other Delicious users
  24. 24. Tags as notes to remind them of the content of the resources rather than as the keywords by which to search new information
  25. 25. A location to save and share information within their own groups rather than a tool for searching information from other Delicious users</li></li></ul><li>Results<br />Social bookmarking for group information management<br />Notes: * p < .05. an =145 , bn = 146, cn = 173, dn = 173, en = 318, fn = 319. Participants gave ratings based on a 5 - point Likert scale where 1 = “Strongly disagree”, and 5 = “Strongly agree”.<br />
  26. 26. Discussion<br />Delicious for group information management<br />Alternative tools can also achieve the same purpose, e.g., email, Google Sites<br />
  27. 27. Results<br />Overall perceptions of social bookmarking<br />Notes: * p < .05. an =144, bn = 145, cn = 145, dn = 145, en = 174, fn = 175, gn =175, hn = 175, in = 318, jn = 320, kn = 320, ln = 320. Participants gave ratings based on a 5 - point Likert scale where 1 = “Strongly disagree”, and 5 = “Strongly agree”. <br />
  28. 28. Discussion<br />Overall findings: <br /><ul><li>Users who are secondary school students generally have negative perceptions on Delicious (Mean 2.57)</li></li></ul><li>Conclusion<br />Most of the perception central tendencies of Delicious features for organizing, searching information, and group information management are around neutral.<br />Students prefer to use other tools that are more familiar to them or more comprehensive to achieve the same purposes.<br />For secondary school students, they have not noticed the advantage of searching information from other users’ bookmarks: they are not aware of one of the most important features of Delicious as well as Web 2.0.<br />
  29. 29. References<br />Chu, S.K.W., Gorman, G.E. & Du, H.S. (2010). Social Bookmarking: An Empirical Analysis of Connotea Users’ Perspectives. Paper presented at CITE Research Symposium 2010, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.<br />Educause Learning Initiative. (2005). 7 things you should know about...social bookmarking. from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7001.pdf<br />Golder, S. A., & Huberman, B. A. (2006). Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science, 32(2), 198-208.<br />Gordon-Murnane, L. (2006). Social bookmarking, folksonomies and web 2.0 tools. Searcher,14(6):26-38.<br />Gruber, T. (2007). Collective knowledge systems: where the social web meets the semantic web. Journal of Web Semantics.<br />Grudin, J. (2006). Enterprise knowledge management and emerging technologies. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 4-7 January 2006, Kauai, HI, USA.<br />Hotho, A., Jaschke, R., Schmitz, C., Stumme, G.: Information retrieval in folksonomies: Search and ranking. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 411–426. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) <br />
  30. 30. References (Cont’)<br />Jaschke, R., Hotho, A., Schmitz, C., Ganter, B., & Stummea, G. (2008). Discovering shared conceptualizations in folksonomies. Jounal of Web Semantics, 38-53.<br />Lo, J., & Hyland, F. (2007). Enhancing students’ engagement and motivation in writing: The case of primary students in Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 219–237.<br />McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2007). Social software and participatory learning: pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. Paper presented at the Proceedings ascilite, Singapore.<br />Menchen, E. Feedback, Motivation and Collectivity in a Social Bookmarking System. In Kairosnews Computers and Writing Online Conference. 2005.<br />Millen, D., Feinberg, J., Kerr, B.: "Social Bookmarking in the Enterprise", ACM Queue, 3, 9 (2005), 28-35.<br />Millen, D., Yang, M., Whittaker, S., & Feinberg, J. (2007). Social bookmarking and exploratory search. Paper presented at the Proceedings of 10th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work.<br />Rader, E., & Wash, R. (2008). Influences on Tag Choices in del.icio.us. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work.<br />

×