Student Blogging: Implications for Learning in a Virtual Text-Based Environment

  • Craig Deed
  • Anthony Edwards
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 73)

Abstract

Realising the potential for web-based communication in learning and teaching is challenging for educators. The purpose of this paper is to report students’ attitudes and perception of active learning when using an unrestricted blog in an academic context. It will examine if an unrestricted blog can be used to support reflective and critical discussion leading to the construction of knowledge whether. Unrestricted in this context refers to autonomous individual and group activity undertaken in an unstructured online environment. It will attempt provide an insight into what students make of working at the intersection between academic and online environments. Data was collected using an online survey with questions focused on student perceptions of the type, frequency and effectiveness of their strategy use. Analysis of the resulting material was conducted using Bloom’s revised taxonomy to determine whether student strategy was useful in supporting the construction of knowledge. Our research indicates that students need to suitably prepare themselves or be prepared by others to make the most effective use of their prior familiarity with this form of communication technology (which is usually informal) in order to constructing knowledge in an academic context. Thus we conclude that effective learning will only emerge from considered pedagogical design, informed by the student experience and perspective.

Keywords

word Blogging virtual learning cognitive investment constructing knowledge text based communication higher education 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., et al.: A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  2. Chan, C.C., Tsui, M.S., Chan, M.Y.C., Hong, J.H.: Applying the Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) Taxonomy on student’s learning outcomes: An empirical study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 27(6), 511–527 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Garrison, D.R., Vaughan, N.D.: Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (2008)Google Scholar
  4. Georgina, D.A., Olson, M.R.: Integration of technology in higher edu-cation: A review of faculty self-perceptions. Internet and Higher Education 11, 1–8 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Goh, W.W., Dexter, B., Murphy, W.D.: Promoting critical thinking with computer mediated communication technology. Paper Presented at the Sixth IASTED International Conference Web-Based Education, Chamonix, France, March 14-16 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. Hanlin-Rowney, A., Kuntzelman, K., Lara, M.E.A., Quinn, D., Roffman, K., Nichols, T.T., et al.: Collaborative inquiry as a framework for exploring transformative learning online. Journal Of Transformative Education 4(4), 320–334 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., Haag, B.B.: Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education 9(2) (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Krathwohl, D.R.: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice 41(4), 212–218 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Marshall, S.P.: Schemas in Problem Solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Melville, D.: Report of an independent Committee of Inquiry into the impact on higher education of students’ widespread use of Web 2.0 technologies, London, Joint Information Systems Committee, JISC (2009)Google Scholar
  11. Mimirinis, M., Bhattacharya, M.: Design of virtual learning environ-ments for deep learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 18(1), 55–64 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. Pintrich, P.R.: A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review 16(4), 385–407 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ploetzner, R., Bodemer, D., Neudert, S.: Successful and Less Sucessful Use of Dynamic Visualisations in Instructional Texts. In: Lowe, R., Schnotz, W. (eds.) Learning with Animation: Research Implications for Design, pp. 71–91. Cambridge University Press, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  14. Salmon, G.: Flying not flapping: A strategic framework for e-learning and pedagogical innovation in higher education institutions. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology 13(3), 201–218 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schrire, S.: Knowledge building in asynchronous learning groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers & Education 46(1), 49–70 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wang, K.T., Huang, Y.-M., Jeng, Y.-L., Wang, T.-I.: A blog-based dynamic learning map. Computers & Education 51, 262–278 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Westbrook, V.: The virtual learning future. Teaching in Higher Education 11(4), 471–482 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Williams, J.B., Jacobs, J.: Exploring the use of blogs as learning spaces in the higher education sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 20(2), 232–247 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wu, A.: Supporting electronic discourse: Principles of design from a social constructivist perspective. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 14(2), 167–184 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. Yin, R.K.: Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Craig Deed
    • 1
  • Anthony Edwards
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of EducationLa Trobe UniversityAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of EducationLiverpool Hope UniversityUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations