Advertisement

The Effect of Project Based Web 2.0-Learning on Students’ Outcomes

Chapter

Abstract

Web 2.0 technologies are a potential tool for supporting informal learning in academic research practices that may enrich learning performance and learners’ attitudes. Thus, understanding informal learning in academic research activities is a critical issue. The present chapter investigates learners’ performance and attitude toward community-based project management learning system. Data has been collected from post-graduate learners in a specific education faculty, the Menofia University in Egypt. Accordingly, the study found no significant differences between online and offline groups into project performance (writing, presenting, and social activities). However, the study found significant differences between online and offline groups’ attitude towards academic research web-based activities. Participatory media and Web 2.0 technologies play an important role to enhance and promote learners’ attitudes towards research tasks and activities.

Keywords

Knowledge Management Attitude Scale Informal Learning Content Management System Postgraduate Learner 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Amin, U. (2007). Statistical analysis by using SPSS, Academic Bookshop, 2nd print, Cairo.Google Scholar
  2. Ardaiz-Villanueva, O., et al. (2010). Evaluation of computer tools for idea generation and team formation in project-based learning, Computers & Education, 1–12.Google Scholar
  3. Augustsson, G. (2010). Web2.0 pedagogical support for reflexive and emotional social interaction among Swedish students, Internet and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  4. Bakker, R.M., et al. (2010). Managing the project learning paradox: A set-theoretic approach toward project knowledge transfer, International Journal of Project Management.Google Scholar
  5. Bevarly, D. (2009). Maslow 2.0 – A New Hierarchy of Needs for Collaboration. Retrieved 21.01.2011 from Weblog: (http://www.aheadofideas.com/?p=156).
  6. Bianco, F. & Michelino, F. (2010). The role of content management systems in publishing firms, International Journal of Information Management 30, 117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carmichael, P. & Burchmore, H. (2010). Social software and academic practice: Postgraduate students as co-designers of web2.0 tools, Internet and Higher Education 13, 233–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cavus, N. & Kanbul, S. (2010). Designation of web2.0 tools expected by the students on technology-based learning environment, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 5824–5829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cheng, C.K., Paré, D. E., Collimore, L-M., Joordens, S., & Serious Games (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of a voluntary online discussion forum on improving students’ course performance, Computers & Education 56, 253–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chong, E.K.M. (2010). Using blogging to enhance the initiation of students into academic research, Computer & Education 55, 798–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ebner, M., Lienhardt, C., Rohs, M., & Meyer, I. (2010). Microblogs in higher education- A chance to facilitate informal and process-oriented learning, Computers & Education 55, 92–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fischer, E. & Reuber, A.R. (2011). Social interaction via new social media: How can interactions on Twitter affect effectual thinking and behavior, Journal of Business Venturing 26, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Halic, O., Lee, D., Paulus, T., & Spence, M. (2010). The blog or not to blog: student perceptions of blog effectiveness for learning in a college-level course, Internet and Higher Education 13, 206–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hammond, M. (2000). Communication within on-line forums: the opportunities, the constraints and the value of a communicative approach, Computers & Education 35, 251–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Han, S. H., Kim, D. Y., Kim, H., & Jang, W-S. (2008). A web-based integrated system for international project risk management, Automation in Construction 17, 342–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hernandez-Serrano, M.J., González-Sánchez, M. & Muñoz-Rodríguez, J. (2009). Designing learning environments improving social interaction: essential variables for a virtual training space, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 1, 2411–2415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 235–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kear, K., Woodthorpe, J., Robertson, S. & Hutchison, M. (2010). From forum to wikis: Perspectives on tools for collaboration, Internet and Higher Education 13, 218–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kirschner, P.A., Karpinski, A.C. (2010). Facebook and academic performance, Computers in Human Behavior 26, 1237–1245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koese, U. (2010). A web-based system for project-based learning activities in “web-design and programming” course, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 1174–1184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lai, Y.C. & Ng, E.M.W. (2010). Using wikis to develop student teachers’ learning, teaching, and assessment capabilities, Internet and Higher Education, 2010.Google Scholar
  22. Laleci, G.B., Aluc, G., Dogac, A., Sinaci, A., Kilic, O. & Tuncer, F. (2010). A semantic backend for content management systems, Knowledge-based systems 23, 832–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Learning Approaches & Technologies: The CALT Perspective. The Center for Advanced Learning Technologies, Web Site, retrieved on February 27, 2010, from http://www.insead.fr/CALT/Publication/CALTReport/calt-perspective.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liaw, S.S., Chen, G.D., Huang, H.M. (2008). Users’ attitudes towards web-based collaborative learning systems for knowledge management, Computers & Education 50, 950–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mak, B. & Coniam, D. (2008). Using wikis to enhance and develop writing skills among secondary school students in Hong Kong, System 36, 437–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Makoul, G., et al. (2010). using an online forum to encourage reflection about difficult conversations in medicine, Patient Education and Counseling 79, 83–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maranto, G., Barton, M. (2010). Paradox and Promise: MySpace, facebook, and the sociopolitics of social networking in the writing classroom, Computer and Composition 27, 36–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Meyer, K.A. (2010a). Web2.0 research: Introduction to the special issue, Internet and Higher Education 13, 177–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meyer, K.A. (2010b). A comparison of web 2.0 tools in a doctoral course, Internet and Higher Education, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Milentijevic, I. et al. (2008). Version control in Project-based Learning, Computer & Education 50, 1331–1338.Google Scholar
  31. Miyazoe, T. & Anderson, T. (2010). Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of online writing: Simultaneous implementation of a forum, blog, and wiki in an EFL blended learning sitting, System 38, 185–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mohamed, B, Köhler, T.(2009). Learning management systems as tool for community-based project management. In: Meißner, K. & Engelien, M.: Virtuelle Organisation und Neue Medien (2009).Google Scholar
  33. Moskal, Barbara M. (2000). Scoring rubrics: what, when and how?. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(3). Retrieved September 25, 2011 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=3. This paper has been viewed 295,859 times since 3/29/2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Puntambekar, S. (2006). Analyzing collaborative interactions: Divergence, shared understanding and construction of knowledge. Computers & Education, 47, 332–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Purdy, J.P. (2010). The changing space of research: Web2.0 and the integration of research and writing environments, Computers and Composition 27, 48–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rinner, C., et al. (2008). The use of web2.0 concepts to support deliberation in spatial decision-making, Computers Environment and Urban System 32, 386–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rodriguez, K. & Al-Ashaab, A. (2005). Knowledge web-based system architecture for collaborative product development, Computers in Industry 56, 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rubin, B., Fernandes, R., Avgerinou, M. D., Moore, J. (2010). The effect of learning management systems on student and faculty outcomes, Internet and Higher Education 13, 82–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schindler, M. & Eppler, M. (2003). Harvesting project knowledge: a review of project learning methods and success factors, International Journal of Project Management 21, 219–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sorapure, M. (2010). Information visualization, web2.0, and the teaching of writing, Computers and Composition 27, 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tuncay, N., & Ekizoglu, N. (2010). Bridging achievement gaps by “free” project based learning, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 5664–5669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Turner, Fred. (2006). From counterculture to cyber culture: Steward Brand, the Whole Earth Network, and the rise of digital utopianism. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. UNESCO (2007). Report on the implementation of the Promotion and Use of Multilingualism and Universal Access to Cyberspace. Retrieved 16.01.11 from http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/files/26047/12041267483EGYPTE.pdf/EGYPTE.pdf.
  44. Usluel, Y.K. & Mazman, S.G. (2009). Adoption of web2.0 tools in distance education, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 1, 818–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Uzunboylu, H., Bicen, H. & Cavus, N. (2010). The efficient virtual learning environment: A case study of web2.0 tools and windows live spaces, Computers & Education.Google Scholar
  46. Wertenbroch, A. & Nabeth, T. (2000). Advanced Learning Approaches & Technologies: The CALT Perspective. The Center for Advanced Learning Technologies, Web Site, retrieved on February 27, 2010, from http://www.insead.fr/CALT/Publication/CALTReport/calt-perspective.pdf.
  47. WiseGEEK (2010). what is a scoring rubric, Web Site, retrieved on June 13, 2010, from http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-scoring-rubric.htm.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yancey, K.B. (1999). Looking back as we look forward: Historicizing writing assessment. College Composition and Communication, 50, 483–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yang, X., Li, Y., Tan, C. H. & Teo, H.H. (2007). Students’ participation intention in an online discussion forum: Why is computer-mediated interaction attractive? Information and Management 44, 456–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yoo, S.B. & Kim, Y. (2002). Web-based knowledge management for sharing product data in virtual enterprises, Int. J. Production Economics 75, 173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TU-DresdenDresdenGermany

Personalised recommendations