Over the past decades, information technology has had a disruptive effect on adult education. Today, learners can access libraries from their pocket and shape their thoughts while socializing on networks. The position of educators as ‘knowledgeable others’ has been challenged as experts can be found online and learners can control their own learning. Social media are changing adult education, because they offer tremendous potential to enhance learning processes. But do they really?
2. ABSTRACT
Over the past decades, information technology has had a disruptive effect on adult
education. Today, learners can access libraries from their pocket and shape their
thoughts while socializing on networks. The position of educators as ‘knowledgeable
others’ has been challenged as experts can be found online and learners can control
their own learning. Social media are changing adult education, because they offer
tremendous potential to enhance learning processes. But do they really?
This doctoral thesis questions the connectivist premise of epistemological
transformation. It investigates the position of the learner in the learning experience
and his/her level of control in comparison to the tutor and the institution. It examines
how social media can be used effectively in communication in learning. This
longitudinal qualitative study shows how students, tutors and staff negotiated the
intricacies of social media in a formal adult education setting. The researcher
surveyed learners participating in three online networks and immersed herself in one
for nine months.
The results show that Web 2.0 technologies can facilitate a high level of
communication amongst learners and educators, and consequently raise the level of
“presence” in the online environment. New technologies were seen to foster
engagement and self-directed learning. The role of adult educators was seen as
crucial for all learners, and for those displaying higher levels of autonomy, the
educator was perceived as a trusted “human filter” of information.
The research adds to the under-conceptualized field of networked learning in the
Web 2.0 era, and challenges the notion that knowledge and learning are
revolutionized by new social media. It shows that a trusted “knowledgeable other” is
still at the heart of a meaningful learning experience. Finally, the thesis provides
recommendations for adult educators and institutions to enhance their effectiveness
in networked environments characterized by changing attitudes toward interaction
for learning.
i
4. TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ______________________________________________________________________ I
DECLARATION AND STATEMENTS ___________________________________________________ II
TABLE OF CONTENTS _____________________________________________________________ III
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS __________________________________________________________ VI
LIST OF TABLES _________________________________________________________________ VII
LIST OF FIGURES ________________________________________________________________ VIII
LIST OF CHARTS _________________________________________________________________ X
_ I
ABBREVIATIONS _________________________________________________________________ X
DEFINITIONS ____________________________________________________________________ X
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION _________________________________________________________ 1
1.1. CONTEXT ___________________________________________________________________ 1
1.1.1. Personal context _________________________________________________________ 5
1.2. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY _______________________________________________________ 6
1.3. THE STUDY __________________________________________________________________ 7
1.4. THESIS ORGANISATION – A GUIDE THROUGH THE CHAPTERS __________________________ 9
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ____________________________________________________ 11
2.1. INTRODUCTION _____________________________________________________________ 11
2.2. THE INTERNET ______________________________________________________________ 12
2.2.1 Control and Power _______________________________________________________ 12
2.2.2. The World Wide Web as a Network _________________________________________ 13
2.2.3. Information abundance ___________________________________________________ 15
2.2.4. Information Communication Technology and Communication ____________________ 18
2.2.5. New developments in Information and Communication Technology ________________ 20
2.2.6. Access ________________________________________________________________ 27
2.2.7. Young people and technology ______________________________________________ 29
2.2.8. Technology as part of everyday existence ‐ Identity _____________________________ 31
2.2.9. Post Modernism ________________________________________________________ 32
_
2.3. TECHNOLOGY ENHANCED LEARNING ____________________________________________ 39
2.3.1. Adult Education and new technologies _______________________________________ 40
2.3.2. The learning space _______________________________________________________ 42
2.3.3. Theories of mind, knowledge and (online) learning _____________________________ 43
2.3.4. Discussion of theories of online learning and knowledge _________________________ 57
2.3.5. Online pedagogy ________________________________________________________ 59
2.3.6. Institutional Change _____________________________________________________ 84
2.4. CONCLUSION _______________________________________________________________ 89
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY _______________________________________________ 95
3.1. INTRODUCTION _____________________________________________________________ 95
3.1.1. The move towards qualitative research methods _______________________________ 95
3.1.2. Epistemological Perspectives within Qualitative Research _______________________ 100
3.1.3. Objectivity and generalization in qualitative research __________________________ 102
3.2. CHOOSING A RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ________________________________________ 105
3.2.2. Design Based Research __________________________________________________ 105
3.3. FIT OF DESIGN BASED RESEARCH WITH RESEARCH QUESTIONS _______________________ 108
3.4. DECISIONS ON RESEARCH METHODOLOGY _______________________________________ 112
3.5. RESEARCH METHODS USED ___________________________________________________ 113
3.5.1. Research Methods ABCD Project ___________________________________________ 113
3.5.2. Research methods online network _________________________________________ 117
3.6. ETHICAL ISSUES ____________________________________________________________ 119
3.6.1. Setting One: the ABCD Project ____________________________________________ 120
_
3.6.2. Setting Two: online network study _________________________________________ 122
3.7. METHODS OF ANALYSIS ______________________________________________________ 123
iii
5. CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS OF THE ABCD PROJECT __________________________________________ 126
4.1. CONTEXT ‐ BACKGROUND ABCD PROJECT _______________________________________ 126
_
4.1.1. Why choose the ABCD Project? ____________________________________________ 126
4.1.2. The Research Setting ____________________________________________________ 126
4.1.3. The Programme of study _________________________________________________ 127
4.1.4. The teaching and learning environment _____________________________________ 129
4.1.5. Restraints and Flexibility in designing the learning environment __________________ 129
4.2. DESIGN ISSUES _____________________________________________________________ 130
4.2.1. Context ______________________________________________________________ 130
_
4.2.2. Instructional Design. ____________________________________________________ 132
4.2.3. Experience Design ______________________________________________________ 135
4.2.4. Control – Constraints ____________________________________________________ 144
4.3. THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE __________________________________________________ 145
4.3.1. Context ______________________________________________________________ 145
_
4.3.2 Learning Preferences ____________________________________________________ 146
4.3.3. Communication and dialogue _____________________________________________ 151
4.3.4. Learning a social activity? ________________________________________________ 159
4.3.5. Thinking Processes _____________________________________________________ 161
_
4.3.6. Affective Issues ________________________________________________________ 164
4.3.7. Control and Constraints __________________________________________________ 165
4.4. THE TUTOR EXPERIENCE _____________________________________________________ 170
4.4.1. Context ______________________________________________________________ 171
_
4.4.2. Teaching Preferences ___________________________________________________ 172
4.4.3. Pedagogy _____________________________________________________________ 174
4.4.4. Communication and dialogue _____________________________________________ 182
4.4.5. Affective Issue _________________________________________________________ 194
4.4.6. Higher Order Thinking __________________________________________________ 196
4.4.7. What fostered learner engagement? _______________________________________ 200
4.4.8. Control – Constraints ____________________________________________________ 201
4.5. MOST SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS _________________________________________________ 211
CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS OF THE ONLINE NETWORK PROJECT ______________________________ 214
5.1 BACKGROUND PROJECT ______________________________________________________ 214
5.1.1. Research setting _______________________________________________________ 214
5.2. FINDINGS _________________________________________________________________ 215
5.2.1. Accessing information and validating information _____________________________ 215
5.2.2. Analysis of the online networks ____________________________________________ 220
5.2.3. Knowledge on online networks ____________________________________________ 223
5.3. MOST SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS _________________________________________________ 226
CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION __________________________________________________________ 228
6.1. THE INTERNET AND WEB2.0 TECHNOLOGIES _____________________________________ 228
6.1.1. Processing of information ________________________________________________ 228
6.1.2. Affordances of the new technologies _______________________________________ 230
6.1.3 Design of learning experiences ____________________________________________ 231
6.2. TOWARDS A THEORY OF NETWORKED BUT MEDIATED LEARNING ____________________ 240
6.2.1. ‘Pedagogy of abundance’, or ‘pedagogy for human beings’? ____________________ 240
6.2.2. New interactive technologies and the learning experience ______________________ 242
6.2.3. The knowledgeable other ________________________________________________ 252
6.2.4. The relevance of learner autonomy ________________________________________ 258
CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS _________________________________________________________ 266
7.1 CONCLUSIONS – VIEWS ON KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING ___________________________ 266
7.2 CONCLUSIONS ABOUT LEARNING AND TEACHING _________________________________ 267
_
7.2.1. Web 2.0 technologies to facilitate communication in learning ___________________ 268
7.2.2.Recommendations and implications for adult education and institutions ___________ 268
iv
6. 7.3. CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY _____________________________ 276
7.4. AREAS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ________________________________________________ 279
7.5. RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION ___________________________________________________ 280
7.6 FINAL CONCLUSIONS ________________________________________________________ 282
APPENDIX 1 RELATED PUBLICATIONS _________________________________________________ XI
APPENDIX 2 (SECOND) TUTOR INTERVIEW SCHEDULE ___________________________________ XIII
APPENDIX 3 (SECOND) STUDENT INTERVIEW SCHEDULE ________________________________ XVII
APPENDIX 4 (SECOND) INTERVIEW SCHEDULE LEARNING TECHNOLOGIST AND PROJECT MANAGER
_______________________________________________________________________________ XXI
APPENDIX 5 PRE COURSE QUESTIONNAIRE __________________________________________ XXV
APPENDIX 6 EXAMPLE OF SURVEY ONLINE NETWORK ________________________________ XXVII
APPENDIX 7 CONSENT FORM _____________________________________________________ XXXI
_
GLOSSARY OF TERMS ___________________________________________________________ XXXIII
BIBLIOGRAPHY ________________________________________________________________ XXXVI
v
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank everybody who has helped me over the past five years to finish
this project. I would like to mention in particular:
Lynne Jenkins and Patrick Walters who have been patient and kind and helped me
over numerous hurdles on my way to producing this substantial piece of writing and
thinking. Lynne helped me to keep organized and Patrick was always ready to come
up with a new title to read or another issue to critically assess. I am very grateful for
all the sparring and debating of particular issues in the thesis as it has helped me
grow and develop.
The participants in the research as this thesis would not have been written without
their input.
Alyce von Rothkirch for being kind enough to proofread this thesis. Her attention to
detail and knowledge of the English language have put my mind at rest and made me
feel confident about submitting this thesis in the English language.
Chaouki Regoui for working his magic on the page numbers and table of content of
this document.
My critical friend Paul Bouchard for spending hours and hours on the telephone with
me, discussing issues of adult education and networked learning. I have had to think
and re-think issues that I took for granted and that he made me reconsider. His love
for the written word has taught me a thing or two about the power of semiotics,
digital or otherwise, and has shown me the magic you can bring about with words if
you dare to use these symbols creatively. The mastodon has awoken!
vi
8. LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 2.2.6. Reasons why people do not use the Internet_____________________ 28
Table 2 3.7. Research analysis matrix __________________________________ 125
Table 3 4.4.6. Relation between Higher Order Thinking and tutor level of support _ 197
Table 4 4.4.6. Relation between level of presence and engagement of learners ____ 200
Table 5 6.2.4.1. Who is in control? (Adapted from model by Grow, 1996) _________ 259
vii
9. LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 2.3.3. Influences on education practices (Adapted from Leach et al, 1999) 44
Figure 2 2.3.5.5. Dimensions of learner autonomy (Bouchard, 2009b, p5.) ________ 76
Figure 3 3.2.2. ‘Integrative Learning Design Framework’ (Bannan-Ritland, 2003) 107
Figure 4 4.1.4. The ABCD online learning environment ____________________ 129
Figure 5 4.2.3.1. Layout of the ABCD online learning environment _____________ 136
Figure 6 4.2.3.1. Front cover of reference book _____________________________ 137
Figure 7 4.2.3.1. A page in the reference book______________________________ 137
Figure 8 4.2.3.1. An example of an ABCD learning activity ___________________ 138
Figure 9 4.4.5. Visualisation of a chat session ____________________________ 195
Figure 10 5.2.2. Visualisation of network development (Krebs and Holley, ND) __ 221
Figure 11 6.1.3.1. 'Design is the process of evoking meaning' (Shedroff, 2009). ____ 233
viii
10. LIST OF CHARTS
Chart 1 5.2.1. Main reasons for using the network ____________________________ 218
Chart 2 5.2.1. Participants becoming more knowledgeable on the network ________ 219
Chart 3 5.2.3. What makes online experts knowledgeable? _____________________ 224
Chart 4 5.2.3. Level of truth in what experts disseminate ______________________ 225
ix
11. ABBREVIATIONS
ABCD Anonymised name of the researched project
DACE Department of Adult Continuing Education, Swansea University
ESF European Social Fund
Listserv Electronic mailing list software application
LT1 Learning Technologist 1
LT2 Learning Technologist 2
LT3 Learning Technologist 3
MOOC Massive Open Online Course
PLE Personal Learning Environment
PM Project Manager
S1 Student 2
S2 Student 2
S3 Student 3
S4 Student 4
S5 Student 5
S6 Student 6
S7 Student 7
S8 Student 8
T1 Tutor 1
T2 Tutor 2
T3 Tutor 3
T4 Tutor 4
VLE Virtual Learning Environment
WAG Welsh Assembly Government
DEFINITIONS
Tutor In this thesis the term tutor is used as a member of staff teaching adult
students. This term is widely used in the UK in this context, but has a
different meaning in the USA and Canada
x
12. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. CONTEXT
Technological change and the drive by the developed world for economic
competitiveness and globalization have greatly influenced adult education in recent
years. They have contributed to the shift in discourse from adult continuing
education to lifelong learning (Edwards & Usher 1998). This change has not only
encompassed new skills in the work place. Several commentators (Wellman et al,
2003, Shearman, 2000) have indicated that the introduction of Information and
Communications Technology (ICT) has blurred the boundaries between home, work,
leisure, learning and play, and has reshaped our life-styles and social interaction,
while creating a new form of literacy. Being able to read books is not enough to
function well in society, “effective” citizens also have to be able to “read” new
media, understand and learn from interactive learning programmes and adjust to new
ways of communicating. Self-directed and informal learning from videos, television
programmes and computers have gained in popularity and a more consumer-oriented
field of adult education has been born (Field 1996) in which the learner chooses
learning opportunities that suit him or her and which take place wherever he or she
likes at the time most appropriate to him or her.
Governments in the developed world have seen the importance of ICT in the advance
of the “knowledge economy” and in aid of economic development.
European Heads of State in Lisbon (European ODL liaison committee, 2004)
committed themselves to make Europe the world's most competitive and dynamic
economy, characterised by sustainable growth, more and better jobs and greater
social cohesion, by 2010. At the ‘Knowledge 2000’ conference, Tony Blair, the then
British Prime Minister, said:
I strongly believe that the knowledge economy is our best route for success
and prosperity. But we must be careful not to make a fundamental mistake. We
mustn't think that because the knowledge economy is the future, it will happen
only in the future. The new knowledge economy is here, and it is now. . . . The
Internet is dissolving physical barriers, and levelling the business playing field.
Blair (2000, p1)
1
13. In addition, the UK government highlighted the importance of enabling the UK to
engage with technology by stating that ‘digital engagement is important because it
can improve people’s lives, opening doors to things that really matter, such as
education, jobs, entrepreneurial innovation, entertainment and making contact with
family and friends.’ (Cabinet Office, 2004, page 9)
Learners, particularly adult learners, make choices about the level of control imposed
by others on their lives and their learning. Indeed, the choice to study at an institution
and with a tutor on a classroom-based course or to study on a course mediated
through technology will mean a different level of control imposed on the learning
process by different actors and on the different aspects of learning itself.
Much discussion has taken place about the impact of the introduction of virtual
learning systems on adult education, as technology in education has the potential to
change the traditional level of control over education, and to a certain extent, over
the creation of knowledge that used to be exercised by the authorities of knowledge,
academics in universities. The changed position of educational institutions such as
universities due to the altered sense of space, place and identity in a virtual learning
space has been lamented as a loss, as universities were seen as places where people
came together, where minds met and where new ideas were conceived, criticised and
tested and provisionally accepted if they were found to stand up sufficiently robustly
under criticism. Some academics have expressed reservations about the networked
alternatives (Greener & Perriton, 2005) suggesting that Virtual Learning
Environments (VLEs) have neither managed to be convincing in areas such as
communication and in engaging students, nor are they an effective alternative to the
actual classroom. However, proponents of the use of peer-to-peer technology in
education have argued that tools such as wikis and blogs, the new social media and
“Web 2.0 technologies”, can fulfil exactly this role (Downes, 2006; Lamb, B., 2004).
The openness of the media and the willingness of people to share in online
experiences encourage the discussion of ideas and collaborative development of
thoughts and knowledge that traditionally form part of a quality university
experience. The added advantage of the online tools lies in their globally positioned
2
14. communication forums, which provide immediate responses on a scale unimaginable
in the traditional university.
Education has its roots in age-old cultural traditions that have developed over
centuries. To move away from a teaching room bounded by doors and walls to an
open and undefined virtual environment has major consequences for education. In
traditional teaching there is usually a particular teaching room, and teaching takes
place at a particular time. Peters was reminded of rites with religious undertones,
which link location, time and action: ‘Learning and teaching might be based on
unconscious, but at the same time “deep-seated” patterns of behaviour, not only of
students but also of the teachers. Their ritualisation lends solidity and permanence to
the actions taking place in the teaching space’ (Peters, 1999, p. 1). Although informal
teaching has taken place before, it is only recently that suggestions have been made
to seriously change the education system and leave the traditional classroom behind,
initially in the 1970s through the radical perspectives of Freire and Illich, and in the
past decades, under the influence of developing technologies. Learning
Technologists, teachers and learners have started to question the effectiveness of the
teaching strategies developed over generations (Peters, 1999; Illich, 1971; Freire,
1972).
In E-learning over the past decades two different positions on the main aspects in
people’s learning have developed (Weller, 2007). In the first view, information and
resources are seen to be at the centre of the learning environment, while in the
second, communication is seen to be the most important to develop a positive
learning environment. Some argue that an emphasis on resources has lead in e-
learning to the delivery of education as a commodity, which suggested that
technology would not be suitable to bring into practice the ideas of Illich and Freire
that became prominent in the 1970s. Gur and Wiley (2007, p. 1), for instance,
discuss the concept of objectification in relation to online learning and conclude that
‘education is often reduced to the packaging and delivery of information, in which
the process of teaching is reduced to the transmission of information and courses are
transformed into courseware.’ The development of VLEs has facilitated this
depersonalization of learning, as communication in such environments has been seen
to be problematic, and turned teaching into “delivery” and the process of teaching
3
15. into a transaction consisting of the transmission of information. Intelligent tutoring is
another example of how the delivery of content could be at the centre of learning.
Weller (2007) highlighted that e-learning might be organised in quite a different way.
In the second model information would be related to two-way communication. In
this view of e-learning, ‘The Internet encourages discussion, dialogue and
community that is not limited by time or place. The role of educators in this world is
to facilitate dialogue and support students in their understanding of resources’
(Weller, 2007, p.6).
Communication has had a place in distance education since the 70s, when Turoff
introduced and developed the first conferencing system that progressed into
becoming full conferencing and personal messaging systems such as Lotus Notes,
Forum, First Class and Participate (Harasim, 1995), which contained synchronous
and asynchronous systems. In the late 1980s distance education institutions started
their development towards the use of the VLE, which has formed a natural
progression from the use of early conferencing systems such as First Class (Mason
and Bacsich, 1998). The VLE combines communication with the distribution of
resources and information.
In traditional “brick and mortar” universities, however, technology use has been
mainly limited to the use of VLEs to transfer information, or to store resources and
although a VLE has a variety of options for communication, these have not always
been chosen by users ‘as most people have a tendency to take the default path’ (Dron
& Anderson, 2009, p.2), the easy option of accessing resources, rather than the more
complicated option of using the tools made available for communication.
In recent years the new developments in technology have encouraged a higher level
of communication in technology-based learning. Especially the use of Web 2.0
technologies have been seen to make possible the development of lifelong and
lifewide learning with possibilities to facilitate informal and self-directed learning
and also opportunities to enhance communication in the online learning environment
(Siemens, 2008; Downes, 2009; Dron and Anderson, 2009). The new social media
have not long been used in an educational context. The first discussions about their
4
16. possibilities for education and learning started about five years ago, just before this
study was started (Downes, 2004) and the need for research that analyses critically
how Web 2.0 technologies might alter adult learning and teaching in and outside
educational institutions was also identified (Conole et al, 2006, Gulati, 2006)
The term “Web 2.0 technologies”, will in this study indicate the technologies that
emerged around 2004 and which are commonly associated with web applications that
facilitate interactive information sharing and collaboration on the World Wide Web.
Web 2.0 technologies include blogs, wikis, social-networking sites, video and photo-
sharing sites and bookmark-sharing sites. A Web 2.0 site allows its users to interact
with other users or to change website content easily, quite often through a content
management system. This in contrast to websites that were the norm in the Web 1.0
era, where hyperlinks were the main interactive feature and direct communication
with other Web users was more complicated. This will be further expanded upon in
section 2.2.5.1.
This study took place in the political and pedagogical context just described. It aims
to challenge the assumptions about the nearly magical properties of the technologies
that have been made by enthusiasts, but also to find out if the technologies could
enhance the sometimes static online adult education provision at the time.
1.1.1. Personal context
My original background is in primary education. I used to be a teacher and head-
teacher in the Netherlands before moving to the UK and eventually working in a
University Department of Adult Continuing Education. Lifelong Learning “from the
cradle to old age” has been my background and interest for a long time. Working
with adults in community locations, my initial role was to manage a large project that
provided an ICT infrastructure in twelve community education centres. This involved
installing a computer lab and network connectivity as well as raising awareness in
the communities of South West Wales and the Valleys of what technology could
mean to local people’s lives, digital inclusion, and taking initial steps towards e-
learning.
5
17. It became clear very early on that digital inclusion not only involves access to
technology and networked connectivity, but especially gaining confidence and
realising that technology has relevance to one’s life, and breaking down barriers
similar to non-participation in learning.
This led to other e-learning projects, but always with the central premise of the active
involvement in learning of people who might otherwise not be involved in Higher
Education. My interest in educational technology, and the drive to make people
experience the creative and “fun” potential of technology made me apply for funding
for the ABCD project. This provided the opportunity to design and develop learning
opportunities that used Web 2.0 technology and to investigate whether their use
would enhance or hinder the communication of participants in the teaching and
learning process. In addition, it offered the opportunity to enquire if an environment
could be created that would facilitate a “human” form of e-learning that might
engage non-traditional adult learners.
1.2. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
Terry Freedman advocated robust research in the use of social software in education
to determine if the anecdotes by enthusiasts are a valid indication of the long-term
positive effect of the new social tools (Freeman, 2006). Moreover, Thorpe and
Godwin encouraged continued research in the interaction between learner and online
tutor that includes the ‘impact of the design of tasks and learning environments’
(Thorpe & Godwin, 2006, 204) as the design of the learning environment and the
tools used will influence the learning experience. Furthermore, Gulati’s research in
the learning experience of professional students on online and blended courses
questioned the use of institutionally controlled VLEs and in particular their
discussion boards. Students used informal strategies for communication and learning
outside the formal environment to complement the formal structures because the
discussion boards created difficulties in the communication process between
learners, and between learners and their tutors. She recommended that ‘the new and
existing strategies for online socialising needed to be studied for their effectiveness
in enabling group and social identities in the formal educational contexts’ (Gulati,
2003, p. 50).
6
18. It seemed important to find out what the learning and teaching experience might be
while using such tools. Learning technologists could see how they would help to
make the learning environment less formal, how they could create a social online
environment, while the discussions online amongst technologists also indicated how
they could cross the boundaries of institutional and informal learning. How they
would challenge educational institutions to change their practice was another
important issue raised, and worthy of research, as one characteristic of the tools
would be their ability to facilitate self-directed learning and people would be able to
consult experts and peers on internet networks to find information and validate
knowledge, rather than to remain within institutional boundaries. This would
influence the institutions themselves.
1.3. THE STUDY
The speculations amongst technologists on the positive and negative effects of social
media and their possible disruption of adult education have raised two interlinked
research questions:
1. The interpersonal informal online networks that people build up throughout
their lives provide expertise and knowledge in addition to the guidance that
tutors offer in formal education.
Would it be desirable for the learner to be at the centre of the learning
experience rather than the tutor and the institution?
Other more specific questions will be discussed in answering this research
question: How much control could and should be passed over from the
institution to the learner in a technology-rich environment to enhance the
learning experience? Should students have more say in the content of the
learning opportunity and the route the learning journey takes? What would be
the implications for the institution? What would be the implications for the
concept, reliability and validity of knowledge if knowledge is investigated
and created on online networks independently from the institution?
7
19. 2. What Web 2.0 technologies could be used effectively in communication and in
learning?
How could their use enhance or hinder the learning experience of adults?
In the literature review, these questions will be further explored. In order to research
all aspects of these questions it will not be sufficient to solely study formal
education. Research in the learning that takes place on online networks will also be
investigated and carried out.
The term “online networks” will be used throughout this study and will mean
networks of people who share information on the World Wide Web. A node on the
network will signify a person, or a group of people, distributing and sharing
information.
The design of the online learning environment will be an important factor in the
educational issues researched as the design of the learning space influences the
learning experience (Barab & Squire, 2004; Cobb et al, 2003; The Design-Based
Research Collective, 2003) as well as the informal learning space.
Barab and Squire propose that ‘cognition is not a thing located within the individual
thinker but is a process that is distributed across the knower, the environment in
which knowledge occurs, and the activity in which the learner participates’ (Barab &
Squire, 2004, p. 1). The context is an important factor in the learning process, as has
been conclusively shown by educationalists and psychologists over the past decades
(Bruner, 1999; Lave and Wenger, 2002). This means that the contextual realities
need to be taken into consideration when researching adult learning and technology.
Moreover, the environment in which young people operate is also an important
consideration. This will, after all, give an indication of future possible changes, as of
course young people grow into adults. The above explanation and research questions
have led to the following research aim:
8
20. To investigate how people learn and teach while using social media, and the
challenges and opportunities they face, in two different settings: the ABCD project in
a formal education institution, and on three online networks.
The analysis of the data gathered will create an understanding of the positive and
negative effects of social media in learning and their possible effects on adult
education. It will draw conclusions on the effective educational practice when using
the tools as it will synthesise key influences on online learning and on the use of the
media in question, and it will generate recommendations for future practice.
1.4. THESIS ORGANISATION – A GUIDE THROUGH THE CHAPTERS
The thesis is organised in seven chapters. Chapter one and two are introductory and
set the subject matter in context. Chapter two contains the literature review that
analyses the development of the internet, including political, social, and
philosophical influences. It analyses theories of knowledge and learning and how
technology has influenced these. It investigates issues of learner autonomy, online
pedagogy and the place of communication in the learning experience and it explores
changes in behavioural patterns in computer use between young and old people. It
also makes an attempt at re-evaluating the position of knowledge in a connected
world. It closes with a section on the place of the educational institution, in particular
of the university, in a world where life without technology has become unthinkable.
Chapter three deals with the research approach and methodology. It explores
different research methods in order to find out the best possible “fit” with the
research questions. It also explores the ethical issues that need to be taken into
consideration when carrying out research in a virtual learning environment and in an
open online environment.
Chapters four and five will report on the findings of the research in the two settings:
The ABCD project and the online networks. Chapter four discusses the context, the
methods of analysis, and reports on issues such as the learning experience and the
teaching experience, which also include learner and tutor preferences in using
technologies, the value of an online presence of participants and the significance of
communication in learning. Particular attention is given to issues of self-direction
9
21. and personalisation. An extensive discussion on the positive and negative sides of
Web 2.0 use in online education will also form part of the chapter. It will also report
on what activities lead to a higher level of engagement, and the skills and
competencies required to learn and teach in a semi-autonomous learning
environment. Design issues are also explored to find out what particular aspects are
of importance for the creation of engaging learning experiences.
Chapter five explains how the online networked research was carried out and
analyses how people communicate online and what makes them learn. It also
explores how important “other” people on the network are for learning and in
particular who the “knowledgeable others” are and why. An analysis of the network
will explain how particular nodes on online networks are perceived by learners.
Chapter six contain a discussion of the findings and the literature. It reports on the
affordances of the new tools and the design of meaningful online learning
experiences. It will show a view of networked mediated learning that consists of an
analysis of interactive technologies in the learning experience and their influences in
creating an online presence, including how to foster affective relationships. The role
of the learner and the tutor will be analysed and the level of control that each of them
has when the new tools are being used. Finally, the benefits and limitations of this
use on the educational experience and learner autonomy will be addressed.
Chapter seven brings the thesis to a close with the conclusions. It contains
conclusions on views on knowledge and learning. This section will provide some
recommendations for tutors, learners and educational institutions. The chapter will
close with conclusions about the research methodology and a section on possible
future research to advance the knowledge gained through this research. The final
section will deal with the original contribution to knowledge that this research study
has provided.
10
22. CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years the traditional view of knowledge in a rapidly changing world has been
challenged (Lyotard, 1984; O’Hara, 2002; Lankshear et al, 2003; Lewis, 1999; Glaser,
1999). Moreover, technological change has had a major influence on lifelong learning
and has been a force for change in adult education. It has introduced a new flexibility,
with a range of new developments, including the introduction of VLEs, knowledge
banks, global online networks, knowledge management systems in the workplace and the
use of handheld and mobile devices for learning. Emergent Internet tools such as blogs
and wikis are also making their way into adult education classrooms.
Much discussion has taken place about these new developments as it is thought that
networked learning spaces could take over from lecture theatres and that libraries, which
used to be places where librarians were the gate-keepers of stores of paper-based
information, might be revolutionised by technology, for example with the exponential
growth in digital archives and online journal publications.
It is perhaps not surprising that a vast number of academics, librarians and teachers have
reservations about the pace of change and the need for change, wondering what kind of
knowledge may be acquired, how valid the created knowledge would be, what their role
should be in the learning process, and who is to control both knowledge and learning?
This literature review will explore the ways Information and Communication
Technologies and the Internet are changing the educational landscape. It will identify and
analyse the prominent theories of knowledge and views of learning and the most
significant changes that Information and Communication Technology might pose for
adult education and the possible consequences for educational institutions and education
in general.
11
23. 2.2. THE INTERNET
Perhaps the most significant development in new technologies for education has been the
Internet. The Internet is a global system of interconnected computer networks that
developed from the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), the major think tank
of the Ministry of Defence in the United States of America in the 1950s. In the late
1970s USENET (User’s Network), and in the early 1980s, BITNET (Because It’s Time
Network) and CSNET (the Computer Science Network) were created to facilitate
networking opportunities within the academic and research community (Harasim et al,
1995). When in 1982 ARPA adopted the TCP/IP protocol (Transmission Control
Protocol/Internet Protocol, the communications procedure to connect hosts on the
Internet) the Internet was born: a connected set of networks using the TCP/IP standard.
Up to that point the development had mostly been the work of scientists, but major
advances in the power and speed of computers facilitated the growth of the system. In
1986 the American Science Foundation Network was formed connecting the academic
and science community to five super computers. In 1989 the World Wide Web (WWW),
a global network of networks was developed by Tim Berners-Lee. It is a network of
interlinked hypertext documents that can be searched and on which information can be
retrieved by a special protocol known as a Hypertext Transfer protocol (HTTP). This
protocol has facilitated the automated searching of the Internet for particular sites and
greatly boosted its use.
A year later Berners-Lee developed a browser/editor programme and coined the name
World Wide Web as a name for the programme. The development of a browser and
Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) that could be activated by a mouse click enabled
simple searching (Cerf, 2003). By using a web browser people can view web pages that
might contain text, images, videos, and other multimedia and navigate between these.
2.2.1 Control and Power
Since its inception only limited control has been exercised over the Internet by nation
states. During the 1990s, the commercial world realized the potential of the WWW for
communication, for managing information flows and for retailing, while users saw its
creative potential. We have seen an exponential growth of the Web. Nation states have
had problems keeping up with new developments and consequently have only had
limited control over it. Although it is based in the USA, the global nature of its
12
24. development has been a factor in the lack of control by individual states over content
developed. Individual nations police sites originating from their own country and only a
number of nations have gone further than this, notably China and Iran, who have
imposed limitations on the web sites its population is able to access.
There has been an exponential growth in the use of blogs (Smith, 2008), and video-
sharing sites such as YouTube, on which, in October 2006, 100 million home-made
videos were downloaded per day, and personal presence sites such as MySpace and
Facebook that have been embraced by youth culture. They have shown the creative
potential of the WWW if left uncontrolled, which was acknowledged when the European
Union decided that ‘internet users should be left to police themselves within the bounds
of the law’ (Gibson, 2006).
It should be noted, however, that most new, successful grass-roots developments have
been commercialised and integrated in the corporate world. Increasingly concern is being
raised about the influence of commerce on the Web (Burke, 2007; Lanier 2010; Mejias,
2009). Lanier (2010) and Mejias (2009) emphasise the high level of influence by a low
number of companies, such as Google. The market seems to slowly but steadily
influence and control the new tools. Burke posits:
The connotations of freedom, democracy and egalitarianism are used to sell both
White House policy at one end of the spectrum, and the commercial dream of the
first “must have” personalized infrastructure (the net, cell phones, blackberry’s etc)
to the gadget crazed consumer desires of the middle classes on the other
(Burke, 2007, p. 55)
On the other hand, others highlighted the freedom to express oneself. Sim mentions for
instance how feminists, including Haraway and Plant, have embraced the Internet
because of a lack of control and hierarchy over the content. Men and women speak on
equal terms and ICT has been embraced in the workplace, where the Internet is being
accessed through the keyboard, the traditional female device (Sim, 2001).
2.2.2. The World Wide Web as a Network
It should be noted however that research is now available that shows that the Internet and
the WWW do not act as non-hierarchical networks (Barabasi, 2003; Jones, 2004; Mejias,
2009; Burke, 2007; Bouchard, 2010 forthcoming). Burke posits that:
13
25. Control, not freedom has become absolutely distributed and while we enjoy
unprecedented access to information and personal communications devices, we are
simultaneously smothered by the cloying ubiquity of networks that have no outside,
while our media is characterized as “the most highly controlled mass media
hitherto known.”
(Burke, 2007, p.54)
Barabasi looked at the mathematics of the Internet and Web as networks and found that
they do not perform as “random” networks, but as “scale-free” networks. The difference
would be ruled by two characteristics: “growth” and “preferential attachment”, showing
that this type of network grows “one node at a time” and that a node chooses to what
other node it connects. The more connections a node already has, the more likely it is
that other nodes will connect to it (Barabasi, 2003, P.86), thus creating “hubs”. This
implies that there are power-relations on the network and Barabasi’s research shows that
networks are not neutral. Bouchard (2010, in press) also questions the possibility of
hierarchy-free peer to peer connections on the Web:
However, the notion of 'supernode' predictably emerges when some contributors
are recognized by a number of others as having particular relevance to, or
knowledge of a problem. There seems to be a natural tendency within the 'perfectly'
democratic network to organize itself, over time, in a hierarchical system composed
of leaders and followers. We are then left with a social organization that resembles
the 'outside' world of government and commerce, with the difference that the
currency of exchange in the network is not money or power, but reputation and
popularity.
(Bouchard, 2010, p. 3)
Wellman et al (2003) and Jones et al (2008) highlighted another issue relevant to
networks on which humans interact; that of the quality of the connection between the
nodes. On some networks, such as groups in online class rooms, people have “strong”
ties, while on other networks, such as the open online Web, people make connections
that are not as strong; they call them “weak” ties. There is a different level of
engagement between strong and weak ties. Dron and Anderson (2007) argue that there is
a stronger commitment to activities in “groups’, than on “networks”, where the ties are
weaker.
Barabasi found that participants on networks are not only selective, but that the nature of
networks prevents network “surfers” from having access to all information at the same
level.
14
26. The most intriguing result of our Web-mapping project was the complete absence of
democracy, fairness, and egalitarian values on the Web. We learned that the
topology of the Web prevents us from seeing anything but a mere handful of the
billion documents out there.
(Barabasi, 2003, p. 56)
These were just a few aspects of networks that should be considered when researching
learning in a network environment. Throughout this thesis reference will be made to the
hierarchical nature of the open online Web-based networks, the differences in ties
between users, and the level of access that people have to information on online
networks as they might possibly influence the learning taking place on these networks.
Open Web-based networks are meant when referring to networks in this thesis. When
reference is being made to nodes on the network, a node would signify a human being, or
human beings, as a member of the network who act(s) as filter(s) of information.
2.2.3. Information abundance
Fischer and Naumer’s research on people’s information habits found that most people
have ‘deeply engrained habitual patterns in seeking information’ (Fischer & Naumer,
2006, p. 2) Their research shows that people will first and foremost find information
from people with whom they have a strong relationship, which are usually found in their
circle of family, close friends and their local communities and in places such as doctors’
surgeries and libraries. Pettigrew et al state that the Internet is supplementing these
‘information grounds’ and is also creating new options for obtaining information
(Pettigrew, 1999). The exponential growth and wide availability of information on the
Internet has been seen by some as crucial for the new knowledge industries to perform
well and also to offer new opportunities for innovation of old ones. Others see this
development as problematic (Burkeman & Johnson, 2005; Bruce, 2000; Armstrong,
2004; Gandel et al, 2004; McKie, 2000; Sandbothe, 2000).
Burkeman and Johnson wonder if we really want all this new information? They
highlight that;
The end result of a perfect search world is that as fast as answers are generated and
consumed, new questions come quicker, with the consequence that ignorance
expands. . . What we know that we don’t know expands faster than what we know.
. . . there is this sense that the world is out there to be Googled. But linking from
one thing to another is not the same as having something to say. A structured
thought is more than a link.’
(Burkeman & Johnson, 2005, p. 5)
15
27. Furthermore, Hagel explains that there are other problems with the information
abundance and introduces the notion of the “attention economy”.
In an information-rich world, the wealth of information means a dearth of
something else: a scarcity of whatever it is that information consumes. What
information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients.
Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention and a need to allocate
the attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that
might consume it.
(Hagel, 2006, p. 1)
Hagel argues that the more information is available, the less time we have available to go
into any depth when analysing the information. In addition, Goldhaber (1997) posits that,
by using new technologies, we might end up chatting, but not necessarily about anything
of substance. The abundance of information and the poverty of attention could be the
cause of changes in thinking processes. If we compare the information behaviour of
people in antiquity with current scholars, the former were able to spend their time
contemplating minute details and perhaps discuss findings with a small number of
people, while contemporary thinkers, if they make use of the Web, might be engaging
with gigabytes of information and possibly communicate with a wide variety of people
dispersed all over the globe simultaneously. Suggestions have been made that these new
ways of working might influence our thought processes (Bauerlein, 2008; Armstrong,
2004). Dennis and Al-Obaidi (2010) for instance compare changes in modes of thinking
and concepts through the new technologies with an “epistemic rupture”, while
Greenfield problematizes Internet use as opposed to the book.
When we read a book usually authors take you by the hand and you travel from the
beginning to the middle to the end in a continuous narrative series of
interconnected steps. It may not be a journey with which you agree or that you
enjoy, but none the less as you turn the pages one train of thought succeeds the last
in a logical fashion.
(Greenfield, 2006, p. 1)
She argues how in traditional education teachers and tutors compare and contrast
narratives with one another and help people with the building of a conceptual framework
in doing so (Greenfield, 2006, p. 1; Greenfield, 2004). The Web is changing this linear
process and of course not everyone uses books in the linear fashion she describes. New
Internet-based ways of obtaining information, such as following hyperlinks, which are an
integral part of the Internet experience, and the creation of knowledge by participation in
informal, interactive online phenomena, in which people take part at their leisure offer
16
28. opportunities for engagement in a wide range of subject choices according to one’s own
interests. This offers learners the chance to follow their own learning journey in a
manner suited to actively constructing knowledge and linking it to their own experiences
in an autonomous fashion, while collaborating with others. Greenfield is concerned
however, that if people do not have access to a robust conceptual framework developed
over time with the help of knowledgeable others, they might have problems constructing
knowledge (Greenfield, 2004).
The abundance of information on the Internet and other information sources have raised
concerns about the feasibility for individuals to critically analyse all that is available to
ensure reliability and validity and to manage the vast streams of information now
available. Bauerlein (2008) even goes as far as arguing that the lack of attention span
because of this overload of information and the different resources used today have
created the “dumbest generation of Americans” to date. CIBER (2008) researched how
people acquire information and how information behaviour has changed over time. They
surveyed literature from the 1980s and 1990s and carried out primary research on
internet based behaviour themselves and they found that “power-browsing”, the clicking
of hyperlinks and the skimming of web pages, replaced traditional chronological reading
and longer term critical thinking. Advanced information searching was lacking and the
level of information literacy, in the form of validating information and sources, was at a
low level (CIBER, 2008).
Sandbothe argues that the ‘comprehensive and systematic development of reflective
judgement at all levels of the population and on a global scale is the central task for a
democratic educational system in the twenty-first century’ (Sandbothe, 2000, p. 67). This
might not be promoted by the new ways of accessing information. Moreover, McKie
emphasised that people, when they start an information search, will take into account the
amount of time required for the search, where they expect to find the information and the
route to take to get there. Not everyone uses the same route as people are different and
have different learning preferences, cultural backgrounds and personalities. She argues
that to give too much guidance would be a mistake as it would constrict the experience
and the possibilities of finding the relevant information (McKie, 2000).
17
29. Walters and Kop (2009) argue that information literacy is acquired at a young age and
highlight that “information behaviour” is a developmental process at a deep level and
that this sort of behaviour will be very difficult to advance substantially later in life, eg.
on a course at university. Bass, on the other hand, highlighted that there is a great deal of
evidence to show that electronic environments encourage analytical and reflective
practice. In addition, ‘there are clear indications that the electronic era will provide an
unprecedented opportunity for immersion in archival and primary materials, and
consequently the making of meaning in cultural and historical analysis for all kinds of
learners, from novice to expert’ (Bass, 1999, p1.).
Bruce saw the information abundance as an advantage over earlier media in ‘the way it
can open up our questions. We ask one thing, but the Web leads us to ask more questions
and to become aware of how much we do not know’ (Bruce, 2000, p. 107). He would
like us to use the Internet not to “pick and choose” what fits in with our own points of
view, but also to take on board what discomfits, and to look for alternatives that make us
think. It should perhaps be questioned if people will do this of their own accord or that
they will need the guidance of an educator. He saw the greatest challenge as a change of
our search strategies from looking something up, to incorporating web-searching into
thinking and reflection processes in order to enable a fruitful investigation. New
emerging collaborative tools that facilitate networking and communication with others
might aid in developing such a referencing strategy.
2.2.4. Information Communication Technology and Communication
From its inception claims have been made about the exciting opportunities for interaction
on the WWW (Standish, 2000), ranging from clicking a mouse to engaging in in-depth
online communication. Tim Berners-Lee saw the development of the Web as follows:
The basic idea of the Web was that of an information space through which
people can communicate, but communicate in a special way: communicate
by sharing their knowledge in a pool. The idea was not just that it should be
a big browsing medium. The idea was that everybody would be putting their
ideas in, as well as taking them out. This [the Internet] is not supposed to be
a glorified television channel.
(Berners-Lee, 1999, p. 1)
18
30. His vision was that people would not only use the WWW for consumption, but also to
exchange knowledge by communication. Some, however, argue that there are numerous
reasons that inhibit people from expressing themselves online.
The scale and anonymity of the potential audience discourages the kind of personal
engagement that might be found in a conversation. The predominantly passive
experience of the Web may have reduced in users the capacity for a dialogical
response, in spite of the constant emphasis in the ostensible interactivity of Web
use.
(Standish, 2000, p. 166)
Initially people have to overcome the fear of failure and gain confidence before realising
that the internet-experience can be quite pleasant: ‘The absence of the more rigid
conventions of letter writing may release a kind of spontaneity. Attentive and with the
freedom to innovate, you become absorbed in the writing, which elaborates, becomes
discursive and picks up speed’ (Standish, 2000, p. 166). During the past ten years and
through the inception of Web 2.0 technologies a different form of communication might
be possible online. Since antiquity communication and dialogue have been seen as the
crucial components in the creation of knowledge, but communication technology seems
to be changing its nature. Dewey saw communication as the most important aspect in
making people what they are:
mind, consciousness, thinking, subjectivity, meaning, intelligence, language,
rationality, logic, inference and truth – all of these things that philosophers over the
centuries have considered to be part of the natural ‘make-up’ of human beings –
only come into existence through and as result of communication.
Dewey (1958, p. 17)
Dewey argued that ‘the world of inner experience is dependent upon an extension of
language which is a social product and operation’. By communication with others our
inner thoughts become clear. In addition, meaning making in communication does not
happen for only one participant of the activity. ‘It is because people share in a common
activity, that their ideas and emotions are transformed as a result of and in function of the
activity in which they participate’. It is not one or the other participant that changes, both
participants will be influenced by communication (Biesta, 2006, p. 17-19).
Online communication is quite different from that in a face-to-face environment. It is a
fast connection between systems and networks, conveying messages produced by people.
Online messages are not necessarily the same as communications between people face-
19
31. to-face: they are one-way, the receiver might not know the sender, nor her intentions or if
she can be trusted (Kop, 2006). Meyerson (2001, pg.36) highlighted that in
technologically mediated communication we might replace a dialogue between people,
’the human pursuit of common understanding’, with an exchange of messages. He
analysed Habermas’ ideas of communication who questioned if it would at all be
possible to reach a shared understanding of the world through an exchange of messages.
Meyerson perceived a message to be a one-dimensional version of meaning and a
‘narrowed-down model of meaning’ (Meyerson, 2001, pg.40).
It might be possible to convey more meaning in online communication in the Web 2.0
era than was possible in the Web 1.0 era with the tools available today. Bass expects that
the distributive effect, namely ‘the shift from one-to-many to a many-to-many model of
communication is one of the most important features of new media, and provides a
fundamental groundwork for a great many changes in social structure and subject
formation’ (Bass, 2000, p. 6). Siemens agrees with this and argued that the more
connections with other people we can make, and the more networks we are connected to,
the better we will communicate, as long as we have effective structures in place to access
and syndicate the messages (Siemens, 2006a, 2008). If this is compared with Dewey’s
ideas of communication, it seems that the emphasis has changed from “communicating
with others and both learning and changing through the interaction”, to a much “looser”
form of communication. Wellman (2003) compared these differences forms of
communication as the differences between “strong” and “weak” ties” between people.
The intensity in the level of communication is different.
2.2.5. New developments in Information and Communication Technology
2.2.5.1. Emergence of Web 2.0 technology
Over the past five years, the WWW has moved on from being a resource of information
(web 1.0) to emerge as an instrument of communication and networking (web 2.0.). Dron
and Anderson posit that the main dissimilarity between Web2.0 and Web 1.0 is
characterised by ‘a distinctive cultural shift in emphasis from total control of website
authorship by the technorati to a gentle relinquishing of control to the masses – the user-
generated Web’ (Dron & Anderson, 2009, p.2). The ease with which it is now possible to
produce and make changes to web pages, in addition to the ease with which it is possible
20
32. to communicate and collaborate in a many-to-many format rather than a one-to-many
format, have created a shift in the development of the Web. People can use informal
social software tools, such as blogs (web-logs), instant messaging, wikis (collaborative
websites), networked social spaces, including MySpace, Flickr (images) YouTube
(videos), social book-marking sites (such as del.icio.us) and social searching, where
information streams can be shared and connected to those of others, thus creating
networked information. The key to social software is that it brings people in contact with
likeminded people, thus creating a community. McLuhan in his classic Understanding
Media suggested ‘The medium is the message’ (McLuhan, 1964, p.1), which is
especially appropriate in the new wave of Web 2.0 Internet developments. He argued
that ‘the personal and social consequences of any medium – that is, of any extension of
ourselves, results from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension
of ourselves, or by any new technology’ (McLuhan, 1964, p. 1). In other words, it is not
only the medium that is important, but the changes that the media cause. Through our
extended reach, our range of opportunities changes, which will have an impact on other
areas of our lives.
The emergence of Web 2.0 technologies seems to be something that has such an effect,
as for a number of years we have been using the Web to find information, much like
books in the past, but on a larger scale. The new social tools have changed our
relationship with the medium and made it possible for humans to move the Web on from
a one-directional broadcasting model into a many-to-many form of interaction. The new
developments have ensured that we are no longer solely consumers of online
information, but can also be online contributors. People in our local communities can
have a voice that can be heard all over the world (Shearman, 2000) using words, images,
film and music. It is very much a mix of consuming and creating: people might “mash
up” text, music or video produced by others and reshape it into their own image and
distribute it worldwide or within their online community.
A blog is one example of a Web 2.0 technology and is a variation of an interactive online
diary, usually written by one person, who would publish a number of date-stamped
pieces of writing, videos, sound or images. The most current will appear at the top, and
will offer the opportunity for people to post comments to which reactions are invited. A
blog reflects personal opinions and areas of interest of the “blogger” and can be a very
21
33. personal diary, although numerous academic, journalistic, subject specific and
educational blogs have emerged. Generally the aim is not only to publish individual
ideas and views, but to link these to friends’ views and other people’s ideas with
different visions, and comment on these, usually by providing hyperlinked evidence. An
argument and communication with others are important components of the blog, which
makes it more than a personal diary. ‘It reveals something about how we think that
would not be explicit in another medium’ (Mortensen & Walker, 2002, p. 249) according
to Mortensen and Walker, two academics working on blogs. They explain that
our blogs became tools with which to think about our research, its values,
connections and links to other aspects of the world. They altered the way in which
we approached online communication, and have influenced the writing of both our
dissertations.
(Mortensen & Walker, 2002, p. 249-251)
Most bloggers have a “blog-roll” showing a list of links to favourite blogs, which makes
that communities of interest are formed quite easily. In fact, blogs can be produced by
free, user-friendly software, containing search facilities, while possibilities to subscribe
to blogger news-feeds have contributed to the increased speed with which a steadily
growing web of interrelated searchable sites, has emerged. Downes argued that blogs are
revolutionising publishing on the Internet (Downes, 2004) while Johnson stated that
blogging has moved on from being a pastime of amateurs to a grassroots movement
resulting in a “network of interesting voices”. Blogs are created by individuals operating
outside institutional constraints who do not always “play by the rules” exposing
inaccuracies in traditional media publishing (Johnson, 2005, p. 1). Blogging has become
increasingly popular. Technorati (2008) have tracked 133 million weblog records since
2002 and have found that 1.5 million blogs are posted in an average week. Community
blogs have also materialized, where like-minded people work together on the
development of an interactive website. ‘Many-to-many’ communication features are
built into these sites to enable communication between large numbers of people.
Wikis are quite different. They do not have a diary format but are websites, which offer
people the opportunity to add text, images, video, possibly whole books. Moreover,
individuals are encouraged to edit entries from other people if they think they have any
knowledge to add. One or more people are responsible for the venture, but the aim is to
develop a project collaboratively. The best-known wiki is the Wikipedia
22
34. (www.wikipedia.com), which has grown into a huge online encyclopedia in 80
languages in which people can find information about numerous topics.
One of the differences to blogs is that the form of communication in wikis is based on
documents rather than messages, which are much easier to edit and re-edit by a number
of people until they become coherent pieces of writing that are useful to anybody. Its
strength is its ease of use: it uses a simplified hypertext language – as with blogs,
technology does not have to stand in the way of the medium. A site can have multiple
contributors who can stay anonymous. There is a wide spectrum of wikis and ways in
which wikis are being used: on the one side Cunningham’s first system ‘The
WikiWikiWeb’ excels through its openness and simplicity, while on the other end of the
spectrum corporate wikis are being used as intricate knowledge management tools
(Lamb, B. 2004).
When discussing wikis, most commentators see their strength in offering a framework
for collaboration. Some even see them as the ultimate in democratic creation that
encourages participation by providing opportunities for anybody to add anything,
anywhere at any time. At the same time this is seen as their downfall as what has been
created today can be destroyed tomorrow. If we look at the best-known open content
wiki, the Wikipedia, surprisingly, ‘what seems to create chaos, has actually produced
increasingly respected content which has been evaluated and revised by the thousands to
visit the site over time’ (Lih, 2004, p. 3).
Social bookmarking and tagging gained in importance in 2003 when del.icio.us was
launched. Social bookmarking applications are web-based rather than desk-based and
enable users to store links to web-addresses online and “tag” their bookmarks with key-
words that have a relevance to them and make them available online to others. This
tagging is what makes them social and special. Instead of searches being led by
institutions or commercial search engines, the searching by keywords that were provided
by other members of a group, makes the searching social.
‘This form of organising information through user-generated tags has become known as
“folksonomy”. It implies a bottom-up mode of organising information as opposed to a
hierarchical and top-down taxonomy’ (Owen et al, 2006, p. 17). There is a range in the
formality of different bookmarking sites. Academic sites such as Connotea and
23
35. CiteULike have a planned style of tagging with a clear audience in mind, others such as
Flickr, a photo-sharing site, promote a more light-hearted and personal style of tagging.
Discussions amongst the user groups of tagging sites on the desirability of more control
on the tags used are extensive: e.g. a blog could be tagged as weblog, blog, blogs, or
blogging, making searching more difficult than a more regulated system, but so far the
choice has been to maintain flexibility and openness. Shirky (2005) argues that, if the
system would be turned into a normal search engine, the strength of the organic
organisation that emerges from user-generated tagging would be lost.
Other Internet based innovations are social networking spaces. Currently most popular
are personal spaces such as MySpace and Facebook, photo sharing sites such as Flickr
and video sharing sites such as YouTube, where people can share information, photos
and videos. Instant Messaging or “chat” sites such as MSN might be seen by some as
mere text chat sites, that are not much different from the chat sites that were used in the
80s and 90s for synchronous communication (Mason and Bacsich, 1998), but where the
current wave of chat sites differ is that people can communicate in groups, they can
incorporate multimedia files and use VOIP for sound and video communication and the
chat facilities can be integrated themselves on other applications such as social
networking sites. Further, the popularity of iPods has instigated the development of
downloadable music and videofiles called podcasts. These might be seen as an extension
of a radio or a television show. The difference lies in the easy opportunities for
responding by using online tools. With the press of a button and through fairly user-
friendly applications people can be in direct contact with the producer and can produce
and send sound and video files themselves in response, whereas this would have been a
much more elaborate process using traditional media. The latest development are
microblogging sites such as Twitter, which offer the opportunity for the fast passing of
short messages around a network, and, as with other social networking, following the
messages, or “tweets”, of particular interesting people.
2.2.5.2. Networks – Really Simple Syndication (RSS) and The Semantic Web
The emergence of these sites and applications has meant that vast numbers of people
share files and communicate over the Internet, which has created huge information
networks. Really Simple Syndication (RSS) and other software have been developed that
allow people to organise web sites in searchable patterns through the use of tags. The use
24
36. of this filtering software to manage the load of information on the Internet is increasing.
Readers and environments to display the results of these aggregators are also in use and
have been developed. Also, in particular communities of interest, people have come to
the fore who do the filtering for other people and send out newsletters on a regular basis.
Tim Berners-Lee and a team of researchers are currently working on an even wider-
reaching organisation of the Web. He started the Semantic Web initiative, which is led
by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C, 2009). His vision was to ensure that routine
tasks related to the Internet no longer have to be carried out by humans, but that the Web
itself will take charge of them. The search engine is one example of this. Matthews
quotes Berners-Lee et al: ‘The semantic Web will bring structure to the meaningful
content on the Web pages, creating an environment where software agents roaming from
page to page can readily carry out sophisticated tasks for users’ (Matthews, 2005, p. 3).
In an interview with The Times Online, Tim Berners-Lee thought a new type of Google,
a big mash-up of applications, might be developed in the future:
Imagine if two completely separate things — your bank statements and your
calendar — spoke the same language and could share information with one
another. You could drag one on top of the other and a whole bunch of dots would
appear showing you when you spent your money. If you still weren't sure of where
you were when you made a particular transaction, you could then drag your photo
album on top of the calendar, and be reminded that you used your credit card at the
same time you were taking pictures of your kids at a theme park. So you would
know not to claim it as a tax deduction.
It's about creating a seamless web of all the data in your life.
(Richards, 2008, p. 1.)
A large research team is working on the development and it is not quite clear what the
impact on education will be. The most likely implications are that there will be more
refined information management and discovery tools, better search facilities for
catalogues of online libraries, better interaction between groups of people, and
applications for e-learning, including sharing learning objects, photos, videos, sound files
will be available over peer to peer networks. Some learning technologists, researchers
and educators (Siemens, 2008b; Downes, 2006; Arina, 2006) advocate that Web 2.0 and
semantic web technologies could be useful in the educational arena as they could foster
informal learning through communication and collaboration with others on online
networks in combination with intelligent recommender systems.
25
37. 2.2.5.3. Convergence
The convergence of computers, telecommunications, broadcasting, music distribution,
and other media is expected to aid with network-forming, and, according to some, will
change our society forever (NetworkWorld, 2006). We can use mobile phones and
wireless technologies with cameras and state of the art music players “on the hoof”, and
our televisions, computers and telephones are all merging into one system.
Rapid developments in the mobile world means that the applications available only a few
years ago now seem almost prehistoric. The “brick”-size mobile phone that could just be
used to make a crackly phone call has been replaced in today’s era of convergence with
one small pocket size device containing a photo-camera, film camera, music player,
television, office organiser and computer. Palmtop size computers and laptops are also
widely used. The wireless network coverage and convergence of wired-up telephone-
lines, wireless broadband Internet access and wireless phone connections have opened up
a world of developments and innovative opportunities for commerce, consumers, and
educationalists alike. Wagner states:
Whether we like it or not, whether we are ready for it or not, mobile learning
represents the next step in a long tradition of technology-mediated learning. . . . It
responds to the on-demand learning interests of connected citizens in an
information-centric world. It also connects formal educational experiences with
informal, situated learning experience.
(Wagner, 2005, p. 44)
In Australia, Barbaux researched how mobile technology can be used in an educational
context:
The ubiquitous pocket-sized mobile devices are the first digital technologies that
afford a “better fit” between everyday life and learning activities. Like pen and
paper and books did before them, they allow learning to take place in locations and
at a time chosen by the learner.
Barbaux (2006, p. 132)
Barbaux sees this element of choice by the learner as the biggest positive effect of
mobile and wireless technology on education, but also its biggest challenge. It not only
offers new opportunities for learning and communication on a global scale, but the
convergence of learning with everyday life will put the learner in control of the
experience. Learning will have to compete with other time pressures and perhaps with
interesting applications available on the device, which means that the learning
26
38. experience will have to be interesting otherwise the learner will choose to do something
else with her time. Of course learners have always made choices about where and how to
learn and how to spend their time, but the scale and availability of a vast amount of
information and communication channels through a small hand held device with the
click of a button makes this different. This might also bring new pedagogical challenges
(Barbaux, 2006). Clearly, the possibilities to customise and personalise learning to an
individual’s needs in combination with the options for communication and networking
on a global scale will challenge the way teachers have taught for centuries.
Broadband and Internet access, including VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol, online
telephone such as Skype), is now accessible on mobile phones, which will push forward
the boundaries and the further development of applications that are currently only
available on computers onto mobile devices, so they can be accessed at any place at any
time at a reasonable price. It is hard to predict what the implications of future
convergence will be for education. In the developments so far, the more applications and
technologies have converged, the lower the access threshold as the technology has
become more intertwined with everyday life.
2.2.6. Access
Governments clearly see the advantages of getting citizens engaged with Information and
Communications Technology (Blair, 2000; WAG, 2002). They call for everyone to have
the opportunity to acquire the necessary skills and to get engaged with ICT, but how can
this be done? Although broadband access has penetrated much of the UK apart from
some black-spots, 30% of the UK population does not have Internet access (National
Statistics, 2008, 2009). 34% of these say they don’t need Internet as it is not useful or not
interesting, while 24% say they just don’t want the Internet. Some still say that the cost is
too high, although that figure has dropped to 15%, while lack of skills has become more
important at 15%. Access has clearly increased compared to the UK figures in 2006,
when 47% did not use the Internet at all and 51% of the people who weren’t using the
Internet felt that they did not need it or did not want to use it, compared to only 17% who
did not know how to use it and 12% who could not afford it. In 2008 65% of UK
households could access Internet from home and of these 65% households, 80% had
broadband Internet access, up from 40% of UK households in 2006 (National Statistics,
2008). Of all home communications technologies, the Internet has the lowest ownership
27
39. figures and the highest ‘Voluntarily Excluded’ (no need/do not want) figures (Ofcom,
2008), although more and more people are engaging with the technology.
If we compare these figures with the Welsh adult participation in learning statistics from
the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (Aldridge et al, 2007), the people
who do not participate in learning, e.g. people from social classes IV and V (partly
skilled manual and unskilled manual backgrounds) are least likely to have access to the
Internet at home or to access the Internet at all, while the older generation (those aged
55+) are the least predisposed to use the Internet. People over 65 are least likely to access
the internet of all age categories (70%), while 16-24 year olds have all used it (National
Statistics, 2008). The reasons why people do not use the Internet are varied as Table 1
indicates.
Why do people not use the Internet? (National Statistics, 2008)
Don’t need Internet as is not useful or interesting 34%
Don’t want Internet 24%
Don’t have the right equipment 22%
Lack of skills 15%
The equipment is too expensive 15%
Access cost too high 10%
Table 1 2.2.6. Reasons why people do not use the Internet
People with access to the Internet at home are also most likely to access it elsewhere.
The reluctance to engage with technology is common across the globe as exemplified in
Stanley’s study, looking at the obstacles that prevent socio-economically disadvantaged
people in San Diego achieving basic computer literacy. Although approximately 20% of
the research respondents cited cost, again the vast majority emphasised psychosocial
obstacles, what Stanley refers to as “relevance, comfort zone and self-concept” (Stanley,
2003, p. 2). Whilst it is possible to teach people how to use technology or to give them
access to the technology if they cannot afford it themselves, it will be much harder to
convince the ‘non-believers’ of its potential. If governments are serious about the
potential benefits ICTs can offer to communities they will have a considerable task in
convincing the people that technology has relevance to their lives.
One approach could be to use mobile and wireless technologies to which many people
have access already, for learning, or to increase opportunities using digital interactive
28
40. television and reach people in their own homes. Most people prefer to access the Internet
from the comfort of their own home. Another issue preventing access was highlighted by
a study commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES). It identified
problems with the standard Internet interface for a number of non-users, which inspired
Laurillard to start work with the DfES on the development of ‘Cybrarian’, an interface
that will tailor the web to the needs of the individual. (Lamb, J., 2004). The
Massachusetts Institute of Technology is also researching the development of a more
intuitive interface between computer content and human beings and demonstrated for
instance how the computer can be projected and used on any surface available (Mistry,
2009).
Davies states that lack of engagement with technology ‘is a social, economic, and
cultural phenomenon, relating to motivation, confidence, assistance and the type of
content available on the Internet’ (Davies, 2005, p. 14). Fahy et al apply Bourdieu’s
concept of cultural capital, indicating that those who most need help in accessing
educational opportunities are most likely to be those who lack skills and hardware to use
the technology (Fahy et al, 2001). It is also important to bear in mind that excluded
communities do not consist solely of groups such as the unemployed and ethnic
minorities. They also encompass rural communities, disabled and older people. For these
groups technology has the potential to offer major benefits for communication and
interaction.
2.2.7. Young people and technology
The new technological developments have been driven by technology, but also by youth
culture. Although this thesis is related to Adult Education, it has relevance that young
people use technology in the same way as older generations use books, paper and pen.
Marc Prensky was one of the first to argue that current institutions were not designed for
the students of today and tomorrow. He used the “native” and “immigrants” metaphor to
highlight possible distinctions between ‘digital natives’, who have been immersed in
technology all their lives, who are used to these immediate forms of communication with
peers, and who use technology in a very different way from ‘digital immigrants’.
They are used to the instantaneity of hypertext, downloaded music, phones in
their pockets, a library on laptops, beamed messages and instant messaging.
They’ve been networked most of their lives. They have little patience for
lectures, step-by-step logic, and “tell-test” instruction.
29
41. (Prensky, 2001, p. 3)
Greenfield mentioned that findings in a recent survey of 8-18 year olds indicate that
children now spend on average 6.5 hours a day using electronic media and be ‘multi-
tasking’ (using more than one device at the same time) for up to 8.5 hours a day
(Greenfield, 2006). She is concerned that the way young people use technology will
cause major changes in the way we learn: ‘The brain is very sensitive to what happens in
the environment, so we are going to be changing quite a lot because of information, bio
and nano-technology’ (Greenfield quoted in Keating, 2006, p. 1.; Greenfield, 2004).
Greenfield (2004) anticipated major changes and problems in the workplace as the
discrepancy between the young, ‘who speak IT as a first language’, and the older ones,
who do not, will cause friction as the young will increasingly feel that the old do not get
the best out of the technology and hold back new development and innovations.
However, these ideas are contested and refuted by current research (Bennett, 2008;
Bullen, 2009). Selwyn argues that the evidence is not yet available to show that the
young are engaging in a transformative way with technology but posits instead that they
use it in a mundane way and that they do not necessarily engage with technology at all
(Selwyn, 2006). UK National Statistics show that 96% of 16-24 year olds used the
Internet in the first quarter of 2009, while older people have a much lower access level,
e.g. 72% for people between the ages of 55 and 65, 30% for people over 65 (National
Statistics, 2009). This shows that the heaviest use of the Internet is by young people, but
does not necessarily indicate the level of engagement with any other applications than
contacting friends, looking for information or revealing issues about themselves in
personal space such as MySpace, or YouTube. Bennett et al (2008, p. 775) carried out a
critical review of the literature related to the ‘digital natives’ debate and likened it ‘to an
academic form of a “moral panic”, as they found a profound lack of empirical and
theoretical evidence to indicate that learners have actually changed all that much or for
the need of a changed educational system. They found a high number of position papers,
such as the one by Prensky, which had been used to highlight claims of change in young
people’s behaviour, but empirical research has been lacking and has only recently been
carried out. Bullen et al (2009) published research in which they showed that there is no
generational difference in use of the Web.
30
42. 2.2.8. Technology as part of everyday existence - Identity
Technology seems to have become increasingly integrated in our existence. Heidegger
(1977) explored the principle of “ready-to-hand”: (Zuhandenheit), the way in which tools
in the hand of a human being nearly become part of that human. Standish mentioned that
we don’t realise how tools have become part of our existence until they stop working.
The car and the computer are prime examples (Standish, 2000). Another example is how
people experience immersive environments such as computer games. They use keyboard
and mouse unconsciously and are only partially aware what happens around them; they
reach a “flow state” (Metros, 2001) in which they lose awareness of the physical world
around them, and get totally absorbed in the playful activity. Bass states that ‘this kind of
multi-sensory computer design that resulted in some of the really basic components of
human-computer interaction, such as the mouse and the “drag and drop” file and
directory structure was based on a fundamental belief in the potential “fluidity”; between
human thinking and thinking technologies’ (Bass, 1999, p. 1). As McCarthy and Wright
(2004) point out, technological developers take into consideration the overall impression,
feelings, interactions that a user has; they make an effort to support the creation of
relationships with individuals and create an environment that connects on an emotional
level. This close connection between people and technology has raised questions and
concern about possible changes in identity in the “real” and face-to-face world.
According to Owen et al (2006) the two most important aspects in the shaping of our
identity while participating in online experiences are the interrelation of real and virtual
identities, and the way we construct our identity through producing and consuming
digital content. The “new” Internet offers us opportunities not only to have a real
identity, but also to invent a new one. Virtual reality games and related developments
such as “Second Life” thrive on this. Also in online communities and shared spaces such
as Flickr people provide feedback on actions, interactions, images and text, which
encourages reflection and adaptation of identity. The Internet can hide a person’s gender,
race, appearance or class, which has been seen to some as advantageous as this can take
away prejudices that exist in the actual world (Turkle, 1995).
Owen et al clarify that the virtual identity is inextricably linked to the offline identity.
Even if people sometimes play-act on the web, the online world is constructed in the
31