Browse wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
A comparison of Web 2.0 tools in a doctoral course
Abstract Adult, professional students in a doctoralAdult, professional students in a doctoral-level course used Web 2.0 tools such as wikis, blogs, and online discussions to develop answers to six "Big Questions" related to higher education finance and also produced a research paper that used original data or the research literature to improve understanding of a specific topic. At the close of the course, students were asked to provide examples of learning for each question and each tool, and to evaluate the tools used. Bloom's Digital Taxonomy was used to evaluate levels of learning. Results indicated that the level of learning mirrored that of the Big Question or was at higher levels when students used new tools. Wikis generated objections from students who did not care for group work, although others found it a good collaborative tool. Blogs were more acceptable, but online discussions were preferred because of the interaction and sharing among students. Research papers allowed students to learn material of their own interest and to do so in depth. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Abstractsub Adult, professional students in a doctoralAdult, professional students in a doctoral-level course used Web 2.0 tools such as wikis, blogs, and online discussions to develop answers to six "Big Questions" related to higher education finance and also produced a research paper that used original data or the research literature to improve understanding of a specific topic. At the close of the course, students were asked to provide examples of learning for each question and each tool, and to evaluate the tools used. Bloom's Digital Taxonomy was used to evaluate levels of learning. Results indicated that the level of learning mirrored that of the Big Question or was at higher levels when students used new tools. Wikis generated objections from students who did not care for group work, although others found it a good collaborative tool. Blogs were more acceptable, but online discussions were preferred because of the interaction and sharing among students. Research papers allowed students to learn material of their own interest and to do so in depth. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Bibtextype article  +
Doi 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.02.002  +
Has author Meyer K.A. +
Has extra keyword Collaborative tools + , Group work + , Higher education + , Online discussions + , Professional students + , Research papers + , Web 2.0 + , Wiki + , Blogs + , Internet + , Research + , Students + , World Wide Web + , Teaching +
Has keyword Blogs + , Online discussions + , Web 2.0 tools + , Wiki +
Issn 10967516  +
Issue 4  +
Language English +
Number of citations by publication 0  +
Number of references by publication 0  +
Pages 226–232  +
Published in Internet and Higher Education +
Title A comparison of Web 2.0 tools in a doctoral course +
Type journal article  +
Volume 13  +
Year 2010 +
Creation dateThis property is a special property in this wiki. 6 November 2014 16:08:06  +
Categories Publications without license parameter  + , Publications without remote mirror parameter  + , Publications without archive mirror parameter  + , Publications without paywall mirror parameter  + , Journal articles  + , Publications without references parameter  + , Publications  +
Modification dateThis property is a special property in this wiki. 6 November 2014 16:08:06  +
DateThis property is a special property in this wiki. 2010  +
hide properties that link here 
A comparison of Web 2.0 tools in a doctoral course + Title
 

 

Enter the name of the page to start browsing from.