A Student In The Web 2.0 - Based E-Learning Socio-Cultural System Of University Studies

Author(s):

Edita Butrime(presenting / submitting)Raimonda Bruneviciute

Conference:

ECER 2012

Network:

20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments

Format:

Paper

Session Information

20 SES 07, Using New Technologies for Intercultural Education

Parallel Paper Session

Time:

2012-09-19

17:15-18:45

Room:

ESI 3 - Aula 1

Chair:

John Willumsen

Contribution

Contemporary higher education is changing under the influence of many factors, among which the advancement of technologies has an important role. When the business world is rapidly changing and using continuously developing ICT, according to A.L.Davidson and D.Waddington (2010), universities are establishments technologically resistant to the admission of new paradigms. Admission policy of innovations plays a significant role at universities, i.e. may slow the growth and changes as well as may accelerate them. One of the key obstacles related to the successful implementation of ICT at a lot of European universities is the fact that the managerial do not support and determine relevant ICT priorities (Rutkauskiene, Pociute, Targamadze and Stricka, 2006).

Nowadays there have grown up so called net generation or digital natives – the youth born in 1980s and later (Lenhart, Madden, Hitlin, 2005; Brill, Park, 2008; Bennett, Maton, Kervin, 2008; Targamadzė, 2008; Jones, 2010; Thomas, 2011). They are modern students who spend most time of their life online. The application of modern web technologies can’t already be called an internal domestic environment. Modern web technologies enter daily life and broaden the boundaries of the latter one (Talbot, 2007). ‘Digital natives’ are willing to apply modern technologies of web in all fields of life and certainly at university.

During teaching/learning interaction cultural values, regulations and history are passed down from generation to generation. One of the teaching/learning tools is technologies which are developing very fast nowadays. Consequently there may be made a presumption that today culture is changing together with technologies.

According to A. Ausra (2005), today, for the first time in history, information and scientific knowledge is becoming not only the means of development for the modern society, but the key product of its economic activities. There has been selected the cultural model of Schein (1992) as a starting-point of the analysis to reveal ICT as a constituent of technologies.

Summarizing there may be highlighted the following e-learning problems to be solved: universities are ‘resistant’ to modern new technologies; virtual learning has not naturalized completely; e-learning sometimes lacks traditional social intercourse, and representatives of the youth generation, who are growing up surrounded by constantly developing information and communication technologies, essentially differ from the lecturers they are being taught by.

The main goal of the whole research is to investigate e-learning socio-cultural system which includes the elements: participants (teachers and students), technologies (ICT), processes, relationship/connections, material (information). Results of the empirical research are aimed at discovering students’ approach towards e-learning based on web2.0 are pressented in the article.

Problem question of the research: How to develop e-learning as a socio-cultural subsystem at university?

The subject of the research is the phenomenon of e-learning as a socio-cultural subsystem in university studies.

The research aim is to reveal the role of student as an element of e-learning socio-cultural subsystem at university

Method

Research methods: • Individual deep interview of university students who apply ICT in order to find out the students’ attitude towards ICT, their need and motivation to apply ICT in the process of studies. • Questionnaire survey in order to find out how university students apply the possibilities provided by ICT and how they evaluate such learning. • Content analysis of transcript interview in order to categorize the respondents’ answers. • Statistic processing methods of data. For the change comparison there are applied nonparametric criteria (Kruscal Wallis, Mann-Whitney U). Methodology Structuralism (Glazer, 1994) - during the research of complex objects it is possible to divide them into elements, parts and functions, and having analyzed that separately the entire object may be interpreted through joining the researched parts into the whole. Pragmatism according to which it is necessary to seek for an optimal result under the lowest expenditure (Dewey, 1991).

Expected Outcomes

Conclusions •Students possess installed computerized workplaces and internet connection at home, i.e. they have an opportunity to profit from all possibilities that ICT provides with in learning. •Students are eager to try out Web 2.0 technologies and positively evaluate them. •Students positively value traditional learning and the application of e-learning elements with a lecturer during learning. •The analysis of the qualitative research enable to highlight the following aspects students’ approach: - it is significant to apply e-learning and some of its elements communicating with a lecturer and other students in a traditional way (in auditoriums) and virtually; -be able to apply ICT in a blended-learning way; - utilitarian aspect- ICT relatively increases the flexibility of learning (for example in case of illness or journey); - be able to communicate only virtually; - be able to map out own time and be able to learn in a disciplined way. •The analysis of the quantitative researche enable to highlight: - students think that they exploit possibilities that ICT provides in learning insufficiently; - students identify search for information on the Internet and work with text edit software to all ICT possibilities provided to learning. - students apply opportunities of automated library insufficiently.

References

Davidson, A., L., Waddington, D. 2010. E-Learning in the university: When will it really happen? eLearning Papers. Nº 21 September 2010. ISSN 1887-1542. http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media23710.pdf . Rutkauskiene D., Pociute E., Targamadze A., Stricka M. 2006. Lietuvos virtualus universitetas. Kaunas. http://distance.ktu.lt/livun/. Ausra A. 2005. Atvirųjų resursų reikšmė vystant žinių visuomenę. Mokslinė elektroninė biblioteka. http://www.ebiblioteka.lt/resursai/Science%20online/05_2/eLibrary_lt_Egypt_text_2005_lt.pdf . Schein, E.H. 1992. Organisational Culture and Leadership. London, UK: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Glazer. M., 1994.Structuralism. http://www.panam.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/structuralism.htm. Dewey, J. 1991. The public and its problems. (Fotogr. leid.). Athens (Ohio): Swallow Press : Ohio University Press. 236 p. Lenhart A., Madden M., & Hitlin, P. 2005. Teens and technology: Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/162/report_display.asp. Brill J., M., Park, Y. 2008. Facilitating Engaged Learning in the Interaction Age Taking a Pedagogically‐Disciplined Approach to Innovation with Emergent Technologies. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 2008, Volume 20, Number 1, 70-78. ISSN 1812-9129. http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE474.pdf . Bennett S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. 2008. The 'digital natives' debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786. Targamadze, V. 2008. Projekcines pedagogikos eskizo breztis. Logos Vol.56. Kulturos, filosofijos /ir meno institutas. P. 116-127. ISSN 0868-7692. Jones C. 2010. Networked Learning, the Net Generation and Digital Natives. Proceedings of the 7 th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010. 3rd & 4th May, 2010. Aalborg, Denmark. Ed. By: Dirckinck – Holmferld L., Hodson V., Jones, C., de Laat M., McConnell D., Ryberg T. P. 617-618. ISBN 978-1-86220-225-2. http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/PDFs/Jones.pdf . Talbot M. 2007. Media Discourse: Representation and Interaction. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh. 198 p. ISBN 978 07486 23471. Thomas M. 2011. Technology, education, and the discourse of the Digital Native. Between Evangelist and Dissenters. In M. Thomas (Ed.). Deconstructing Digital NativesYoung People. Technology, and the New Literacies. New York. USA. Routledge. 220 p.

Author Information

Edita Butrime (presenting / submitting)

Lithuanian University of Health Sciences

Teachers Education Competence Center

Kaunas

Raimonda Bruneviciute

Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Lithuania

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.