Journals / Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education / 2007 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3

Web 2.0 Learning Platform: Harnessing Collective Intelligence

Pages
16–33
Publication Date
2007-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

We also highlight the strengths and weaknesses of SCORM in allowing for learning management systems to have a Web 2.0 character.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The rate of technological diffusion and the pace at which technology is altering how and with whom we connect is astounding.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Whereas much of the initial e-learning simply patterned old models of teaching and learning, the new technological possibilities and realities encourage us to think differently about what is meant by education (Brown, 2000).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We also highlight the strengths and weaknesses of SCORM in allowing for learning management systems to have a Web 2.0 character.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Web 2.0 · E-Learning 2.0 · SCORM

Abstract

The rate of technological diffusion and the pace at which technology is altering how and with whom we connect is astounding. Although not at the same pace, theoretical views of learning and teaching are also changing. Whereas much of the initial e-learning simply patterned old models of teaching and learning, the new technological possibilities and realities encourage us to think differently about what is meant by education (Brown, 2000). In this paper, we provide a stepping stone in some of the theoretical background, history, and possibilities for learning systems and platforms in the Web 2.0 era. We share a case study that reflects the experiences of a small university that is moving towards E-Learning 2.0 while simultaneously increasing interoperability by using e-learning standards reflected in the widely-used reference model called SCORM (Sharable Content Object Reference Model). We also highlight the strengths and weaknesses of SCORM in allowing for learning management systems to have a Web 2.0 character.

🔖

Cite This Article

ROGERS, P. C., LIDDLE, S. W., CHAN, P., DOXEY, A., ISOM, B. (2007). Web 2.0 Learning Platform: Harnessing Collective Intelligence. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3, 16–33. https://ajindex.com/articles/140554

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Beck, R.J. (2003). Online list of learning object collections. Retrieved February 2, from the World Wide Web: http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/CIE/AOP/LO_collections.html
  2. Blackmon, B. (2007). ADL and SCORM Update. Presented at the ID+SCORM conference, Provo, UT. Blumen, R. (2003). Knowledge Capitalism: Business, work, and learning in the new economy. Economic Affairs 23(3), 58–59.
  3. Brown, J.S. (2000). Growing Up Digital: How the Web Changes Work, Education, and the Ways People Learn. Change. Retrieved from http://www.johnseelybrown.com/speeches.html#digitalage on 1/31/2007.
  4. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
  5. Bush, M. D. (2002). Connecting Instructional Design to International Standards for Content Reusability, Educational Technology, 42(6), 5-13. Retrieved from http://arclite.byu.edu/digital/edtechscorm.htm on 6/13/2007.
  6. Carnevale, D. 2006. E-Mail is for old people. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 53(7): A27. Collins, A., Brown, J.S., & Newman, S.E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L.B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494).
  7. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Downes, S. (2003). Commentary: Design, Standards and Reusability. Retrieved from http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/page.cgi?post=54 on 6/13/2007.
  8. Downes, S. (2006). Learning Networks and Connective Knowledge. IT Forum. Retrieved on Jan 29, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Previous.html
  9. Duke Digital Initiative. (2006). iPods at Duke. Retrieved from http://www.duke.edu/ddi/projects/ipod.html
  10. Ferris, S. P., & Wilder, H. (2006). Uses and potentials of wikis in the classroom. Innovate 2 (5). Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=258 on 6/14/2007.
  11. Glogoff, S. (2005). Instructional blogging: Promoting interactivity, student-centered learning, and peer input. Innovate 1 (5). Retrieved http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=126 on 6/14/2007.
  12. Hodgins, H. W. (2000). Into the future: A vision paper. Commission on Technology and Adult Learning. Retrieved from http://www.learnativity.com/download/MP7.PDF on 6/13/2007.
  13. Hylen, J. (2006). Open Educational Resources: Opportunities and Challenges. Presented at OpenEd 2006,
  14. Logan, UT. Retrieved from http://cosl.usu.edu/conferences/opened2006/program/ on 1/29/2007.
  15. Inouye, D. (2004