Group items tagged

Computer-mediated Communication in Education: A review of recent research. This research paper available online addresses the recent research into Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) in education (Keller, 2007). The author looks at each research methods and compares it to a counter research method like Quantitative verses Qualitative and Empirical verses Non-empirical research. This gives you a clear picture in many areas that are lacking in research and would help anyone who is looking to further research this area. It is important to note at this study of articles during the period 2000 to 2004 indicates some recent changes of interest but also shows interests that have remained steady in the research community(Keller, 2007). Also, it should be remembered that these results are based on 117 selected articles in Computers & Education, Educational Media International, Journal of Educational Computing Research and Journal of Educational Media between 2000 and 2004 out of many journals on educational technology. The article concludes a number of outcomes. That more work is needed that builds theories concluding that the research field has relied heavily on empirical studies (Keller, 2007). More research is needed in new and emerging communication media stating that current research is very much focused on text-based communication, not using graphics, audio and video(Keller, 2007). Research is needed on synchronous media because that most of the research has been on asynchronous studies. And finally Keller concludes that research is needed on the combination of different media in blended education. Keller, S. H. C. (2007). Computer-mediated Communication in Education: A review of recent research - Educational Media International. Educational Media International, 44(1), 61-77.

(2001) This is a critical view about the internet and education. Peter Macinnis Speaks with Robyn Williams (ABC Science National Radio) about the evolution of Technology and how technology takes 20 plus years to become an accepted technology. Macinnis shows the analogy of the printing press, steam trains, telephone,radio and TV development and then compares the internet.  He claims you need to take the rear view mirror approach to see what the trends are.   One interesting point that Macinnis makes is that the examination process of education is still ran by the old school where the generation today have a whole new literacy in Internet communications. He also criticise how the Internet is organised and there is some work needed to add metadata to the already exciting data on the web.  I find this a good argument as search engines rank results based on several factors other than truth and reliability.     Williams, R. (Writer). (2001). The Internet and Education [Radio ], ABC Science. Australia: ABC Radio National.

REFERENCES ABS. (2007). 8146.0.55.001 - Patterns of Internet access in Australia, 2006, Australian Bureau of Statistics. First Issued November 29, 2007. Retrieved April 12, 2011 from: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/8146.0.55.001Main+Features12006?OpenDocument Downes, S. (2007). The Future of Online Learning and Personal learning Environments. Retrieved April 12, 2011 from: http://www.slideshare.net/Downes/the-future-of-online-learning-and-personal-learning-environments NSWDET (2009). Social Learning 2.0 Concepts and Visuals. Uploaded by the NSW Department of Education and Training March 2009. Retrieved April 12, 2011 from Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/etalbert/sociallearning20-concepts-and-visuals-mar09# Williams, R., and Peter Macinnis (2001). The Internet and Education. Ockham's Razor, Radio National. Broadcast Sunday May 6, 2001. Retrieved April 12, 2011 from: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s289416.htm

It is good to go back and examine Peter Macinnis's point of view. Reminds me of the exercise of examining Clifford Stoll's (1995) view on what the internet was to become, which of course was mostly wrong. Macinnis seemed to have predicted the unorganised nature of the information on the internet (ABC Radio, 2001) which to an extent does exist now. This is one reason I believe is important to address in terms of internet collaboration especially in education. Collaborating is about organising information into a presentation form for all students collaborating within a system. But that must be with a gatekeeper, namely the teacher or lecturer or tutor who can intervene when needed. Michael Green (ABC Radio, 1999) in an earlier view on that show quoted Fred Bennett who urged computers to teach students without an intermediary, namely a tutor or teacher. Whilst tertiary education is underpinned by self-reliance, I wonder if such views back then apply now. In collaboration, does the lecturer decide to be strictly a hands off non-interventionist given that their students are mature and can think for themselves? Or does the lecturer, given the high demands of departmental, research and publishing commitments, become part of the student group collaboration? In my resources, Google Docs seems to raise more issues about information use which suggest students place a high value on organised information which makes sense to them. I feel that Macinnis should revise today if inaccurate information is the real problem. We had virtual communities were information could be corrected, but with Web 2.0, Wikipedia being the most obvious example, we can correct what is wrong. I do agree with Tessa that social media overall seems to be quite behind in the way it is being diffused across educational sectors. Collaboration tools such as Facebook etc will be used by students anyway so it seems odd that the resistance still exists. This interview is a good resource to reflect on how f

This is a comprehensive blog entry introduction to the potential of Google Docs as a collaborative tool for students. These potential uses are also valuable in work places or other group work. The value of this resource is the well-written way Wetzel articulates the advantages of Google Docs for collaborative practice. His argument is that such a system, aside from being free, is valuable to go beyond the e-mail sharing culture to a full real-time collaborative environment. Wetzel then proceeds to give examples of the potential for the application of Google Docs in education contexts and classrooms. To summarise, he argues three main points in using Google Docs for collaboration:  The ability for Google Docs to provide instant feedback to students on their work  To conserve expenses on school projects such as printing costs  Encouraging the working together of students on a projects in a systematic and orderly manner The tone of the article is clearly very much in favour of using Google Docs for collaborative practice in educational settings. However, though this may not be an issue in educational contexts, there are disadvantages using Google Docs that are not reported. Two bloggers highlight those weaknesses which may be of concern when trying to use more features in Google Docs that are not there but are part of the Microsoft Office Suite:  The speed of internet connection is vital; if it is slow the collaborator may not be able to keep up with others' postings (Bukisa, 2011)  Most of the time you cannot work offline with Google Docs, you must be online to create and update documents (Creative Marketing Solutions, n.d.) However, the article does put a compelling list of features that make Google Docs a good system to use for educational collaboration.

References Bukisa. (2011). Google Docs review. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://www.bukisa.com/articles/480255_google-docs-review Creative Marketing Solutions. (n.d.). How to use Google Docs. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://knolt.com/creative-marketing-solutions/2010/10/20/heading-2/ Wetzel, D. R. (2009). Google Docs are a free online educational tool: Web-based productivity software for teacher or student collaboration. Suite101.com. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from http://www.suite101.com/content/google-docs-are-a-free-online-educational-tool-a105900

Application of Computer Communications in Education. This article is about how computers communications should be used in eduction. It is interesting because of it was published in the IEEE Magazine in 1999.  This was before web 2.0 technology and gives some insight into what was seen to be useful back then.  The paper covers what has been important developments in CMC and starts out but discussing Java applets as an important tool in CMC.  This allows for computer software to be ran inside the browser. The paper also discusses the use of Database management environment. Similar to what we see with Blackboard and Moodle. It covers the management of CMC. Finaly the article enters into the area of online video. This is interesting to the point that in 1999 the bandwidths for video where limited and video where consumed in small windows. Very different to what we have today  with tools such as Youtube. Finally the issued are raised by about staff engagement and support. These are issue we are still addressing today in using Computer Mediated Communications  in education although we are some highly advanced tools.   Collis, B. (1999). Applications of Computer  Communications in Education: An Overview. IEEE Communication Magazine, 37, 82-86

This article highlights the potential that blogs have in allowing student nurses to collaborate and enhance their studies. The article describes how healthcare professionals can use online collaboration to "communicate, manage knowledge, mitigate error, and support decision" (Maag, 2005). The author believes that strong written skills are essential in nursing to "disseminate information on evidence-based practice and ultimately provide safer client care" (Maag, 2005). These skills can be enhanced by the online collaboration found with blogs as they provide "an opportunity for the nursing student to converse and state opinions about their knowledge acquisition" (Maag, 2005). Further to this, online collaboration in the form of blogs can provide the setting for "public debate regarding simulations and scenarios that might occur in the clinical setting" (Maag, 2005). This article is a valuable and highly credible resource. The author, Margaret Maag EdD, RN is a Doctor of Education as well as a Registered Nurse. Also the article was accepted by and published by an Industry Journal, Medscape. Although this article may be too detailed at times and provides a lot information on the types and working of blogs, this is probably due to the article's age (published in 2005) when background information was probably required on blogs. The main value of this article is it ability show how blogs, even back in 2005, were "providing the means to make a collaborative effort in enhancing knowledge acquisition". This would not only benefit nursing education but also the healthcare industry at large. References: Maag, M. (2005). The Potential Use of Blogs in Nursing Education. Retrieved April 16, 2011, from http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/498947

Kumar's work has a reasonable amount to offer in terms of a resource; his research gives more clues to the perceived effectiveness of Google Docs users have towards it as a collaborative tool. He has chosen to use the effective research method focus groups with semi-structured questions. Perhaps the useful part of investigating Google Docs as a collaborative tool is how he selected students at the university site who were in many disciplines. Thus he was able to elicit some good insights into why Google Docs is so praised as a collaborative educational tool. One finding was that students preferred Google Docs as a time saving tool where no formal meetings took place. Although the students were on campus, it was surprising that they felt they would rather use Google Docs then all meet to work on a project. The other finding was that the acceptance of this Web 2.0 collaborative technology was greater amongst students that had previous experience with Google Docs or other similar software. Another major advantage found by Kumar (2009) was that overall using such collaborative tools increased interest in the subject matter of their particular discipline. The concept that new technologies add value to existing practice was also interesting. Although Kumar was not clear on this concept, what students indicated this was the case, such a statement suggests that using Google Docs is linked to increased interest in a subject and in turn a desire to succeed. The weakness of this resource is Kumar is not clear of this link; however, as an article to show that Google Docs is of value equating collaboration tools with increased productivity shows how potentially valuable using them can be.

References Kumar, S. (2009). Undergraduate perceptions of the usefulness of Web 2.0 in higher education: Survey development. In D. Remenyi (Ed.) Proceedings of 8th European Conference on E-learning, Italy, 308-314. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://web2integration.pbworks.com/f/Undergraduate+Perceptions+of+the+Usefulness+of+Web+2.0+in+Higher+Education.pdf

This article takes a case study approach using qualitative and quantitative survey questions to measure the difference between pre and post uses of Google Docs. The research problem was based on the observation that Web 2.0 collaborative technologies were initially causing hesitation. However, upon consistent use in the context of an online course, students changed their minds about the usefulness of Google Docs. Both researchers intended to measure undergraduate levels of self-efficacy and undergraduates perceptions of using these collaborative technologies. The study had 18 respondents to the survey. Although the researchers acknowledged Google Docs limitations in the robustness of the software, they argued that this would make no difference to the perceptions of the undergraduates using it. The results of the study are somewhat unremarkable and predicable, yet support the idea that Google Docs is very useful for collaborative student work. There were major differences pre and post use of Google Docs that were significant. A majority of students felt their level of self-efficacy, that is confidence to use the software, was much higher after undertaking the course. The second hypothesis also showed the majority had positive perceptions of using Google Docs both in the course but significantly in future studies and workplaces. Although the researchers reported mostly positive results about the use of Google Docs, one issue clouded the results. Not being able to access the documents when offline is perceived as a major impediment in the collaborative process. Overall this study may seem somewhat bland and predictable; however, it supports much positive and negative criticism of Google Docs in the ability to foster and impede the learning of the students using it.

I have used Google Docs on many occasions for education purpose both as a teacher and a student. As a teacher I had found that Google Docs provided a tool that created group work with ease. Student where able to contribute to ideas and develop learning outcome far more than the unit outline proved for. The article here proves that through the efforts of many working on the same document improves as more contribute ideas and ads greater value to the document. Your comment about the uselessness of Google without online access does provide problems when it comes to the digital divide. We in the western world still have areas that suffer from digital divisions as well as those in less fortunate countries. However tools like Google docs can contribute to the cost of entry to CMC as there are no licensing fees required and programs such as the one laptop per child that aids in the narrowing of the digital divide(OLPC, n.d). As a student I have done one project with Google docs and currently using Google docs in another project. The reason for the choice to use Google Docs was mainly the reason cited in this article. Although the article was limited in what Google docs can actually do and takes on the assumption that we know what it can do. It is more about how it can be used in education. I recently used Google docs to collaborate with my family in arranging my mother's funeral. The outcome was very smooth as each member collaborated amicably on the document that may have been a family feud if handled face to face. References OLPC. (n.d). OLPC's mission is to empower the world's poorest children through education. Retrieved 15th April 2011, from http://one.laptop.org/about/mission Edwards, J.T., & Baker, C. (2010). A case study: Google collaboration applications as online course teaching tools. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4), Retrieved April 3, 2011, from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no4/edwards_1210.htm

Your comment about the uselessness of Google without online access does provide problems when it comes to the digital divide. We in the western world still have areas that suffer from digital divisions as well as those in less fortunate countries. However tools like Google docs can contribute to the cost of entry to CMC as there are no licensing fees required and programs such as the one laptop per child that aids in the narrowing of the digital divide(OLPC, n.d). - that is 100 % right and that causes some disadvantages yet being free if connectivity can be gotten in any form then it has the potential to educate in any society that has networking. More work needs to be done to get to those areas, but I also argue that income might also be a factor and age. Nevertheless, GD if networking is there can provide the benefits of sharing and working on projects, it is just a case of making sure those that need it can get access to it in some form.

This paper discusses the issues around eLearning and communication Technology. It cover how freeware skype  is an ideal tool for communication in education an suggest methods of how to use Skype for the learning outcomes. 7 Instructor Recommendations for Skype UseSchedule the students' Skype subscription in the class orientation. The sooner studentsare exposed to the technology, the better they'll adjust to the unique learning experience.Organize a pre-class training session for a subset of the entire class. Instructors canschedule a meeting with a group of class "trainers." These trainers then teach theirown group members skills.Divide students into groups of four. A Skype conference call can only take up to fiveparticipants. If needed, reserve a seat for the instructor for tracking/coaching purposes.Provide technology use protocols ahead of time. For instance, if someone accidentallyhangs up, the conference call initiator (usually the group leader) can immediatelyadd him back in to the meeting.Keep group deliberations on the record using additional tools. Skype conferencecalls are not recorded. Options are Skype Chat and Blackboard Chat.Reserve a Blackboard Chat Room for each group as the last resort. One of the drawbacksof using such freeware is that the service makes no guarantee that theprogram will be there when needed. An effective way to cope with this is to reservethe Blackboard Chat Room as a backup device.Encourage necessary accessories. A headset and a wired broadband connection arepreferred accessories for use with Skype and other similar communication tools. Pan, C.-C., & Sullian, M. (2005). Promoting Synchronous Interaction in an eLearning EnvironmentThe Journal  Retrieved 11th April 2011, from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2005/09/01/Promoting-Synchronous-Interaction-in-an--eLearning-Environment.aspx?Page=1

[Please Note: This comment is in two parts due to Diigo restrictions on length] Topic: Flash Mobs Anderson conveys the self-fueling model of global innovation he calls "crowd-accelerated innovation," which is assisting individuals to improve in many areas as a result of watching videos online. The phenomenon of "Flash Mobs" has made use of global video facilities on popular sites such as "YouTube" to spread their message. One example of a self-fueling model of global innovation given by Anderson is of a group of extreme dancers who performed at the 2010 academy awards despite not having any formal dance training. Their dance moves were inspired by and copied from watching videos online. These isolated individuals have been able to connect and collaborate to share their new innovations due to the assistance of free online sites such as YouTube. Videos pack a huge amount of data into a few minutes. However our minds are more suited to understanding information from a few minutes of video as opposed to the traditional method of learning based on books and scientific peer-reviewed papers. Anderson believes that online video will one day surpass the ideas printed in books. He believes that there are a multitude of non-verbal subconscious cues that enhance the delivery of information through video publication that cannot be conveyed as adequately through a book or written transcription. These ideas are one of the reasons that TED talks have gained popularity in global education. The power of globally available videos has enhanced the popularity and effectiveness of flash mobs, which assists the organizers to spread their message more effectively. People are more likely to remember an idea or product if it has been delivered in an unusual way such as through a flash mob.

[Continuation of comment above] These ideas are one of the reasons that TED talks have gained popularity in global education. The power of globally available videos has enhanced the popularity and effectiveness of flash mobs, which assists the organizers to spread their message more effectively. People are more likely to remember an idea or product if it has been delivered in an unusual way such as through a flash mob. REFERENCES Anderson, C. (2010). How Web Video Powers Global Innovation. TED Talks. Filmed July 2010. Posted September 2010. Retrieved April 5, 2011, from: http://www.ted.com/talks/chris_anderson_how_web_video_powers_global_innovation.html

Johnson, S. (2009, June 5). How Twitter Will Change the Way We Live. Time. When 40 educators attended the conference in the Manhattan they decided to use the Twitter for posting live commentary during the event. The commentary was projected on a large display screen displaying running incoming feed of tweets. Everyone had a chance to tweet using their laptops or BlackBerrys. The rule for the tweets was to include the word #hackedu in 140 characters. The twitter's function was embraced at the conference by the conference participants. The tweets unfolded in a real time communication reflecting the participants' thoughts, arguments, jokes and other feelings from being at the conference. However, after a while the tweeting expanded into the 'Twittersphere' delivering tweets from the strangers. The communication engaged all different groups of people sharing views about the topic at the conference. The tweeting continued several weeks after the conclusion of the conference. This case demonstrates a real experience of Twitter being was used for a particular event in means of interactive communication between the conference participants and how it expanded into the 'Twittersphere'. The Twitter simply provided a very useful venue for a collaborative communication engaging different groups of people and documenting their tweets as valid communication that was very useful during the conference and the recorded tweets can be used in a future. From organisational point of view, it was a wise plan to have the Twitter at the conference that it gave the conference another interactive dimension of communication and provided access to useful information from people and about the people. The equipment for the tweets is now widely available for the individuals and venues set up, and it is a matter of organising it once a benefit of the twitting is seriously considered.

Written by Michael Pick, Online Activism: Media Stereotypes And The Rise Of Smart Mobs is an article published on Robin Good's MasterNewMedia website. The publisher, Robin Good, has had "... a career as a new media communication and publishing consultant for major international organizations that operate in the fields of research, development and education" (Good, n.d.). Robin Good is an independent new media publisher that "... converted his professional skills and interests into a self-publishing career (Good, n.d.). In 1999, Robin Good began MasterNewMedia, an online magazine dedicated to "... news, skills and resources to communicate more effectively with new media technologies" (Good, n.d.). Michael Pick's article first explores some of the ways of how people are stereotyped by mass-media propaganda. One example of this is, "The Nazis, pioneers of mass-media propaganda (Pick, n.d.), managed to convince a nation that it was being bled dry by the Jews, communists, gypsies, and anyone else that they could scapegoat. With relentless repetition and indoctrination they created the sense that these people were something less than human" (Pick, 2007). Which he then argues is that this mass-media propaganda is being continued today through television media. Pick then discusses Howard Rheingold's concept of Smart Mobs, and then he briefly discusses Avaaz.org (2011a), a website and platform, where everyone can have an

opinion and everyone can unite and help others, regardless of political stature and unaccountable organisations. It is a site where the values of people shape global decisions (Avaaz.org, 2011b). References: Avaaz.org. (2011a).The World in Action. Retrieved from http://www.avaaz.org/en Avaaz.org. (2011b).The World in Action - About Us. Retrieved from http://www.avaaz.org/en/about.php Good, R. (n.d.). About Robin Good. Retrieved from http://www.masternewmedia.org/about.htm Pick, M. (n.d.). The War On Terror And The Victory Of Spin: Believing Your Own Propaganda Is The True Weapon Of Mass Destruction. Robin Good - independent new media publisher. Retrieved from http://www.masternewmedia.org/information-access/propaganda/the-war-on-terror-and-victory-of-spin-20070414.htm Pick, M. (2007). Online Activism: Media Stereotypes And The Rise Of Smart Mobs. Robin Good - independent new media publisher. Retrieved from http://www.masternewmedia.org/information_access/online-activism/media-stereotypes-war-online-activism-20070609.htm

This article is quite short and not academic but I have included it because it adds some symmetry to the previous articles I have reviewed. While this article is focused specifically on the "risks associated with self-diagnosis and the reliance on 'Dr Google'" (Whyte, 2010), it also serves to highlight a potential problem of online collaboration: credibility and the quality of information. This is its primary value as resource for this project. While Giustini (2006) talks of the open access and freedom of publication that online collaboration allows, I think there is a drawback to online collaboration that hasn't been addressed in the previous articles. Misleading or incorrect information, especially of a medical nature, can be potentially harmful if published. As Whyte (2010) writes in this article, doctors are finding it increasingly concerning that patients are misusing their medication, referring to the internet for advice rather than consulting a trusted GP. Some Google listings that have not been filtered may list incorrect complications and side effects of certain medicines. As a result patients are taking less than the recommended dosage. Dosages or remedies may also be incorrect on Google and this could lead to potentially dangerous overdoses of medicine. Boulos (2006) writes of the problems gauging the reliability and accuracy of information on the internet. While "virtually anybody is able to alter, edit or otherwise contribute to the collaborative Web pages … the very process of collaboration leads to a Darwinian type 'survival of the fittest' content within a Web page" (Boulos, 2006). This would ensure that dubious information was kept to a minimum. Also by providing a closed and secure digital environment, the collaboration process could be carefully monitored and moderated. References: Boulos, M., Maramba, I. & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis. blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and ed

[Part 1] This article brings together a number of links to UK student protest sites. Reading this and related articles it becomes clear that the students protesting about the UK government's fee cut policy are willing to use any tools at their disposal. Their primary aim has been to collaborate with, and inform supporters of offline physical protests; predominantly marches and occupations. The article itself is posted on the movements.org website, a non profit organisation whose stated mission is to identify, connect and support grassroots digital activists from around the world. The support offered by movement.org goes beyond the mere publication of articles and offers advice to individuals and groups on how to choose and best use digital tools. It is interesting to see the number of freely available digital tools that student protesters have used to disseminate information: Facebook, Twitter, websites, blogs, Google maps, YoutTube, open calendars and Flickr are all part of the student protesters' arsenal. Fast adoption of new technologies seems to be one of the strengths of the UK students' movement. Recently, for instance, student protesters in London used the new "Sukey" application, a conglomeration of tools like google maps, twitter and SMS, to avoid clashes with police (Kingley 2011). Google Maps too have been a useful tool and have been utilised to show the locations of upcoming protests, the map posted at http://www.feesprotest.com/ gives a good indication of the nationwide spread of student dissatisfaction, while at the same time hyperlinking to fairly detailed information for each locality and directing viewers to facebook protest pages for up to date information and interaction.

[Part 2] References: 30th November Here We Come. (2010). Retrieved from: http://www.feesprotest.com/ Cullum, B. (2010). NETWORKED PROTESTS IN THE UK: hOW OLD AND NEW TACTICS ARE BEING USED TO FIGHT RISING TUITION FEES. Retrieved from: http://www.movements.org/blog/entry/networked-protests-in-the-uk-how-old-and-new-tactics-are-being-used-to/ Kingsley, P. (2011). Inside the anti-kettling HQ. Retrieved from:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/02/inside-anti-kettling-hq?INTCMP=SRCH

This study by Blau and Caspi is valuable for seeing how using Google Docs in a sharing and collaborating environment has on perceived student learning. The credibility of this study is enhanced by a wide survey of 118 students at an Open University in Israel. Ownership meant the degree to which the student using Google Docs felt responsible to work on and update project documents. This quantitative study also sought to measure the perceived learning and quality of project outcomes students felt were a result of using Google Docs. The implications from the study suggested the importance of owning the document, but also to make sure others knew of changes to the document. A document creator felt they lost ownership of the document when editing was done on it. They became the reader of the document. Such a change in hierarchy shows the importance of communicating changes done on Google Docs to every team member. A second implication was that the value of the document seemed to increase when more revisions was done. This suggested that more work on the document resulted in a more credible and trustworthy document as the project document was improved towards its final presentation. In fact most survey respondents seemed to not think the document got worse as more things were added to it. Overall, there was a correlation between document quality and revision, with Google Docs being perceived as quite effective in producing trustworthy documents which add to the learning process. The researchers' main advice from the study is that revising documents and suggesting improvements is far more effective than editing another's documents. Whilst this is not always possible it does suggest the importance of communication in the collaboration process. Google Docs is not a passive collaboration media; therefore, care in making sure all team members communicate changes is vital to a much better collaboration process.

References Blau, I., & Caspi, A. (2009). What type of collaboration helps? Psychological ownership, perceived learning and outcome quality of collaboration using Google Docs. Proceedings of the Chais conference on instructional technologies research 2009: Learning in the technological era. Y. Eshet-Alkalai, A. Caspi, S. Eden, N. Geri, Y. Yair (Eds.), Raanana: The Open University of Israel. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache:bBVQbNfm4-MJ:scholar.google.com/+google+docs&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

Action for Australia GetUp! is a not-for-profit 'independent, grass-roots community advocacy organisation giving everyday Australians opportunities to get involved and hold politicians accountable on important issues' (About GetUp, n.d.). Rather than users starting individual projects and promoting them for donations from supporters, GetUp! hosts movements for causes of specific interest to Australians, including financial support for advertising and other schemes, to gain attention from politicians and the government at large, such as collecting 27,000 signatures petitioning the repeal of undemocratic laws preventing thousands from voting in the 2007 elections. A few dollars each from tens of thousands of supporters has produced high-profile ad campaigns that have helped raise awareness for issues important to the Australian people. GetUp! campaigns rely on social media and word-of-mouth to get the community informed and involved, requesting recommendations for new campaigns from everyday Australians concerned about government policies. According to Belleflamme, Lambert, and Schwienbacher (2011) this community involvement constitutes crowd-sourcing, where ideas and suggestions are sourced from the 'crowd', along with volunteers and appeals for solutions. In the spirit of transparency the movement advocates, GetUp! provides access to its annual reports as well as a 'real-time snapshot' of the donations members are contributing to campaigns, updated half hourly. This snapshot includes unique actions, new members, number of donations, the total collected from donations, average donation, and how many are first-time donors.

Financial donations are not required to participate in GetUp! campaigns, but the necessary funds to produce a commercial for exposure on national television is sourced from contributions by supporters: crowd-funding for a community cause. Unlike crowd-funding for individual projects, such as those found on online crowd-funding tools such as Pozible, investors in community campaigns may have no expectation of reward. The GetUp! website clearly indicates its intentions, guiding visitors to campaigns to inform, raise awareness and make contributions toward improving the Australian community through policy and reform. GetUp. (n.d.) GetUp! Retrieved from http://www.getup.org.au. Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2011). Tapping the Right Crowd. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=157817.

by Paul Belleflamme, Thomas Lambert, and Armin Schwienbacher, February 13, 2011. This academic, peer-reviewed article defines crowdfunding as belonging within the broader concept of crowdsourcing, in which a 'crowd' is used for gaining feedback, solutions, and ideas. The objective is to use the crowd to collect investment money in cases of financing individual projects (Pozible), or to raise social awareness in community-minded ventures (GetUp!). Belleflamme, Lamber, and Schwienbacher equates crowdfunding with pre-ordering, menu pricing, and price discrimination, and studies the circumstances under which crowdfunding is preferred to more traditional forms of acquiring funds. They describe crowdfunding as sharing a model with pre-ordering due to the expectation of investors receiving some form of reward for their contribution, in much the same way as pre-ordering a product, such as a game, entails some reward for investor support and interest, such as receiving a copy of the game early, and at a better price. Price discrimination is the disparity between the cost for the investor and the consumer (someone who waits for official release before purchasing). The article describes the advantages of enhanced user experience for investors and the allowance of price discrimination for 'a larger share of the consumer surplus', and the disadvantage of constraints in the amount of initial capital required (Belleflamme, et. al, 2011). The article continues with an empirical survey analysis, and key features from the perspective of industrial organisations, including sourcing information, building communities, and generating product interest, as well as the success of non-profit organisations using the crowdfunding model.

It is suggested (Glaeser & Shleifer; Ghatak & Mueller, cited in Belleflamme, et. al, 2011) that 'crowdfunders care about social reputation and/or enjoy private benefits from participating in the success of the initiative'; a vital asset for charities and entrepreneurs alike. The article concludes with the implications crowdfunding has for market research, and that it may be viewed more broadly than simply raising funds. Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2011). Tapping the Right Crowd. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=157817.

ABC LATELINE Michael Atkin Byline: "Australian website Pozible is helping to connect generous donors with needy projects, but there are concerns about how the website operates." The article introduces crowd-funding as an 'innovation of the internet age', bringing together donors and projects in need of funding, using an environmental group called Green Way Up as an example project, and a website called Pozible as an example of a crowd-funding resource. As an introduction to crowd-funding it presents Green Way Up as being both environmentally and socially conscious, as well as a good example of a crowd-funded project worth attention: Bob Miles and Chuck Anderson want to travel around the world on bio-fuel converted from recycled fats and oils obtained, in one case, from the waste of a chicken shop. However, Green Way Up may not have had such a start toward achieving this venture if not for Pozible; a crowd-funding resource whose Co-founder, Rich Chen, created the site 'because he was sick of hearing about exciting projects which failed to go ahead because they lacked money' (Atkin, 2011). Though it presents a hopeful opportunity to projects and financial benefactors alike, the article turns critical of the website's operations, suggesting Pozible may be 'violating the Corporations Act by raising money and offering rewards without issuing a prospectus' (Atkin, 2011).

Jennifer McKay, Professor at the University of South Australia is also concerned that Pozible infringes upon consumer protection laws and security laws, but when asked by Lateline, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission said they were 'considering whether crowd-funding poses any regulatory concerns' (Atkin, 2011). Green Way Up is presented as an exception rather than a rule for projects seeking crowd-sourced funding; '[p]rojects only receive the money if they reach their funding target within 90 days and currently two-thirds fail' (Atkin, 2011). Built upon and relying heavily on trust, the article concludes there is potential risk for all involved. Atkin, M. (2011). Website helps to make dreams come true. Lateline. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3180494.htm.

SETI@home and the various other projects that use BOINC rely on public contributions to achieve their computer processing goals. In a similar vein, the website Pozible.com.au also relies on public response to assist what would otherwise be unheard of projects. Pozible is a website that uses "crowd-funding" to get its donations. "Crowd-funding is an innovation of the internet age which links generous donors with needy projects" (ABC, 2011). In the example provided by this resource, the needy case is an environmental group called Green Way Up who want to fund an expedition to Norway using only bio-fuel. First shown on ABC's Lateline on the 1st April 2011, this interview discusses numerous aspects of Pozible. It talks through the set-up process, talks to a donator, and even questions the administration process from an ASIC/ACCC point of view. Not only does this website help otherwise unknown projects get up off the ground, it also helps connect them to "lounge-chair activists" looking to donate to causes they believe in. There are still a few problems with the donation process. Projects are required to generate 100% of their goal amount within 90 days to receive the money, meaning that currently only 1/3 of projects achieve this goal. There is also no formal follow-up process to ensure that the projects do what they have promised. On a positive note however, if a project fails to meet the requested total, no money changes hands. Donations work more on a pledge system, and even Pozible makes no profit from the projects, unless this total is met(Pozible.com, 2010). Projects like BOINC and Pozible are innovative ways of using current computer/internet usage to get public interest and participation in what could otherwise be undiscovered projects that could have positive implications in the future. ABC. (2011). Website Helps To Make Dreams Come True. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3180494.htm Pozible.com. (20

This wiki is about Social Constructivism. The idea that learners are influenced by their environment is the bases of this theory.  The empathy on the importance of culture and understanding what occurs in society and constructing knowledge based on it understanding.(Derry, 1999; McMahon, 1997) There is three elements to the assumption of social constructivism.  Reality: Social constructivists believe that reality is constructed through human activity Knowledge: To social constructivists,. Individuals create meaning through their interactions with each other and with the environment they live in. Learning: Social constructivists view learning as a social process.. Meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged in social activities Topics covered include 1 Social Constructivism Vignette2 What is Social Constructivism?3 Assumptions of Social Constructivism4 Intersubjectivity of Social Meanings5 Social Context for Learning6 General Perspectives of Social Constructivism on Learning7 Social Constructivism and Instructional Models8 Sorting Out Variations on the Terms "Constructionism" and Constructivism" Derry, S. J. (1999). A Fish called peer learning: Searching for common themes. In A. M. O'Donnell & A. King (Eds.),  Kim, B. (2001). Social Constructivism.. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved 15th April 2011, from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

This poster aims to provide the concept of Web 2.0 and its relevant tools in language teaching and learning. An online blog is served as an information kiosk and indicate possible instructional design and applications to language education. By experimenting with the Web 2.0 tool in a participatory community, we are hoping language teachers will learn about appropriate tools ready to be used and further think about the relationship of Web 2.0 and the four skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) and 5 Cs (communication, culture, connections, comparisons, and communities) as well as the Wallace's framework for assessing its effectiveness.

Nelson, A. (2011). The limits of the 'Twitter revolution. The Gaurdian  Retrieved 11th April 2011, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/24/digital-media-egypt   

Nelson makes a strong argument suggesting the 2011 Egypt uprising was not necessarily fuelled by social media; instead she links it to years of oppression and dictatorship as the main triggers. On the flipside, many of Nelson's statements need to be challenged. Firstly, she states that only 15,000 Egyptians were tweeting - out of a population of 80 million - throughout the protests. What she fails to mention is that less than 20% of Egyptians actually have Internet access (Internet World Stats, 2011). In addition, many of these users also reside outside of Cairo and may not have directly participated in the demonstrations. Lastly, the Internet and SMS services were shutdown in Egypt two days after the initial January 25th demonstration and this act would drastically reduce numbers as the only way to circumvent the block was through dialup or a voice-to-tweet service. An interesting concept raised in this article is 'slackivism', a term coined to describe the attraction of getting caught up in the euphoria of online activism. The benefits however have little or no impact on society because clicking a 'like' button within a Facebook group is far from participatory and adds very little value to the cause. Instead, Nelson argues that web users need to be better educated in the use and the expectations of crisis-mapping platforms to effectively participate. Sukey , an anti-police kettling web application is a recent example of internet enabled, active participation. Its use during a recent political demonstration in London resulted in successful, non-violent outcome (Kingsley, 2011). This was attributed to activists working together and feeding information from Twitter, Google Maps and news feeds into Sukey to counter the act the police kettling. This example highlights that technical aptitude and active participation are required to effectively coordinate a internet enabled, protest. Internet World Stats - Usage and Population Statistics. (2011

References: Morozov, E. (2009). Moldova's Twitter Revolution. Retrieved April 13, 2011. From http://neteffect.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/04/07/moldovas_twitter_revolution Nelson, A. (2011). The Limits Of The "Twitter Revolution". Retrieved April, 16 2011. From http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/24/digital-media-egypt