Learning Styles and Preferred Web 2.0 Applications as Learning Tools<br />Gila Kurtz, The Center for Academic Studies, Israel <br />Barry Sponder, Central Connecticut State University, USA<br />MDE Virtual Conference<br />
Outline:<br /><ul><li>Introduction – Who are we?
Question for future discussion & research</li></li></ul><li>Who are we<br />
What we do togetherhttps://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZdzd9oeZKjtZGZqNWZwODNfODNneDc4enhzMg&hl=iw<br />
Purpose of the study :<br />To analyze the interactions between students' learning styles and their web 2.0 preferences as learning tools<br />
Web 2.0 applications in education<br />Generally, refers to a perceived second generation of web development and design that facilitates communications and secures information sharing, interoperability, and collaboration on the web<br />Can play an important role in building online learning communities and is useful for motivating and supporting online collaboration<br />
Web 2.0 in the Online Classroom<br />Video (YouTube)<br />
Web 2.0 in the Online Classroom<br />Blogs<br />
Learning style:<br />Based on Felder -Silverman learning style model (FSLSM). (Felder & Silverman, 1988) <br />The FSLSM model is one of the most often used learning style models in technology enhanced learning (Kinshuk et al., 2009). I<br />
Learning style: FSLSM<br />It is based on the idea that each learner has a preference on each of the four following dimensions: visual/verbal, sensing/intuitive, sequential/global and active/reflective. <br />Each of the four dimensions the Index of Learning Styles (ILS) is measured on a scale 1.0 to 2.0 which makes it possible to describe how strong the learners' preference are for a specific learning style.<br />
Learning style: ILS<br /> Visual-verbal - visual (prefer visual representations of presented material, such as pictures, diagrams, and flow charts) or verbal (prefer written and spoken explanationB. Sensing-intuitive - sensing concrete, practical, oriented toward facts and procedures) or intuitive (conceptual, innovative, oriented toward theories and underlying meanings);C. Sequential- Global - sequential (linear thinking process, learn in incremental steps) or global (holistic thinking process, learn in large leapsD. Active-reflective active (learn by trying things out, enjoy working in groups) or reflective (learn by thinking things through, preferworking alone or with one or two familiar partners);<br />
Methodology<br />57 graduate students participated: 29 students from the College of Academic Studies in Israel (a blended course), 18 UMUC Students (an exclusively online course) and 10 students from Central Connecticut State University (an on-campus course). ( mean age= 36; 90% female))<br />Online survey learning styles and their preferences for using web 2.0 applications—from a list of 19 applications<br />Data collection - 2010<br />URL of questionnaires https://spreadsheets0.google.com/viewform?hl=iw&formkey=dDZod2w3M0NJWWRtcWxObVlzeWVmaUE6MA#gid=0<br />https://docs0.google.com/document/d/1tP0VUletTCobXRQO0KyxA9-qCNmvDF_dYXYMBzrEZLA/edit?hl=iw#<br />
Findings: learning Style<br /><ul><li>No significant differences between groups!
Class site 4.1 (NOT web 2.0) </li></li></ul><li>Findings: Students’ comments<br />In the nutshell,I will say I am ready to embrace technology,<br />since there are new applications been developed each <br />day and hence must independently study and research more on my own<br />I believe that the process great for all learner,<br /> It all depends on each students and their particular <br />learning styles.<br />