1. 1
9th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences 2013
(IC-HUSO2013)
At Khon Kaen University, Thailand
Using New Media for Educational Support in Higher Education:
A Comparative Analysis of Thai and American Professors
Suthin Rojprasert: 53501815@st.kmutt.ac.th, suthin.roj@dpu.ac.th
Ph.D.student, Learning Innovation and Technology Program,
Jariya Neanchaleay: jariya.nea@kmutt.ac.th
Surapon Boonlue: surapon.boo@kmutt.ac.th
Faculty of Industrial Education and Technology, King Mongkut’s University of Technology
Thonburi, Bangkok Thailand
-----------------------------------------------
Abstract
This paper presented the using of new media on web to support teaching of instructors who
supplied forms and content in social media approaching in course at the higher education
level of California State University, Sacramento (CSUS) in the United States and the
professors of Universities in Thailand. The implementation with new media on Web 2.0
tools, including the integrated form digital learning innovation of instructors in higher
education. There had been widely used to facilitate online learning in the social activity of
learning. The development from the synthesis of self-directed learning model with
constructionism in the environment of new media and the follow up information collected
followed by opinions of experts in learning activities, preparation of a learning environment,
and learning assessment. The results revealed that there were differences of designing new
learning environments to support web applications in context and social technologies which
could support the online learning activities, which the use of new media in online instruction
of the characteristics of difference based on country has statistically significant difference and
the integrated form of digital learning technology and new media must be built to guide in the
production of new design education.
Keywords: New Media, Web 2.0 Tools, Higher Education
1. Introduction
The learning innovation and online communications are dominant forces in students’
lives and a majority of teachers use new media in their subjects, and the adoption of online
instruction continues to increase in higher education. Electronic Learning Management
Systems (LMS) can also be linked to the Course Management System (CMS), providing an
instructor with a central electronic platform to monitor student performance. In the midst of
this connectivity, it has been reported that students today demand more autonomy,
connectivity, interaction, and socio-experiential learning opportunities (McLoughlin, 2007).
Furthermore, software development program of web tools to support activities, and teachers
are using technology to access traditional resources, such as lesson plans, videos and images,
and including interactive simulations with online learning which instruction and content are
delivered primarily via the social media. Whereas, there are reference the technology medium
or context with used display and online learning by stating that one uses the technology as
access to learning experiences via the use of some technology (Benson, 2002; Carliner, 2004;
Conrad, 2002; Dalsgaard, 2006) argues that social software tools can support a social

2. 2
constructivist approach to e‐learning by providing students with personal tools and by
engaging them in social networks, thus allowing learners to direct their own problem‐solving
process. The performance is an achieved through a variety learning experiences, that are
tailored to the environment and situation in which students find themselves. It may require a
different mix of learning experiences and select instructional technologies that store and
deliver the learning experiences effectively. These are the several reasons everyone would
like to use new media in higher education, and efforts to provide teachers with the best
support for their work in 21st Century.
1.1 New media for educational
The digital era in 2013 of new media brings the innovation. New technology will
directly face the diversity and the possibility of unlimited. For the definition of New Media,
refers to the many forms of electronic communication made possible by computer
technology, including recreational, informational, social, cultural, pedagogical, and
commercial applications that are manipulable and networkable. Examples of new media
include computer and video games (both casual and serious types), virtual reality
environments, social networks, websites, mobile devices, blogs, and podcasts (Feldman,
1997; Hartley, 2002). Internet technologies have integrated into our lives as essential from
communication, and social media is defined as “forms of electronic communication, such as
websites for social networking and micro-blogging, through which users create online
communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content, such as
videos and other various media" (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 2012). The use of
social media implies, for example, that learners should be ‘active co-producers’ of knowledge
rather than ‘passive consumers’ of content, and that learning should be a ‘participatory, social
process’ supporting personal life goals and needs (Lee and McLoughlin, 2010). Therefore,
social media such as Facebook and Twitter; and includes community sites, blogs,
bookmarking sites, photo sites, sharing tools, audio and video tools, and some advanced tools
that are used in conjunction with one another to have online experience. Whereas people may
log on to websites for social networking and applications that rely on openly shared digital
content and re-configured by users and experience use this of new media excited students and
motivated to go through the content of course was supported by new media.
New media could facilitate a change of paradigm in learning from focused in teachers
and established knowledge to a networked approach to become coaches and facilitators of the
learning process. Involve participatory and collective activity are reflected in higher
education institutions of the used to social media applications and use often described
learning in terms of the collaboration, conviviality and creativity.
1.2 Web 2.0 tools / applications for Education
The recent interest in Web 2.0 technologies in education and beginning of a
revolution social learning are emphasizing the context within which learning occurs and the
continued evolution of technologies and how they are used since the introduction of the
Internet. Tim O’Reilly (2005) definition of Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all
connected devices, and Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic
advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually updated service that gets
better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including
individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing
by others, creating network effects through an “architecture of participation”, and going
beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences. Web 2.0 applications
could facilitate and enhance lifelong learning experience by connecting in collaborative
environments. Web 2.0 applications, might be prominent to enable educators to create

3. 3
personalized, active, participatory, and cooperative learning environments. In turn, educators
can provide extensive opportunities for students who have various needs to enhance their
learning experiences through enriched interactions and collaborations in Web 2.0 applications
(Bryant, 2006; McLoughlin & Lee, 2007). Fuchs (2011) have been discussed Web 2.0
platforms such as YouTube, MySpace, Facebook, Flickr, and Twitter that focus on data
sharing; communication, community, and co-production have become very popular, which
hundreds of Web 2.0 tools have been developed over the past few years, allowing users to
become active creators of Web content (Oliver, 2010). Such tools can be used to develop
Learning 2.0 strategies that can enhance student motivation, improve participation, facilitate
learning and social skills, stimulate higher order cognitive skills, and increase self-directed
learning (Redecker et al., 2009). Therefore, emphasized that Web 2.0 applications or Web 2.0
tools provide particular for self-learning and contextual learning. Learners can also create
their own content and resources, enabling increased creativity and flexibility within the
learning, and some of the most commonly cited tools are wikis and blogs.
Web 2.0 is the term for applications where users can write as well as read on the Web
with the context of online learning has been transformed by the advent of Web 2.0. While
universities have started to use Web 2.0 applications, these applications already exist in the
students’ personal and popularity can be credited to highly utilized services like blogging,
video sharing and social networking sites, and the purposes of blended learning model was
combining online and face to face video-based blogs. Therefore Web 2.0 applications
encourage greater participation and interaction between learners and teachers, which helps
with building communities of learning, supports better feedback provisions, and facilitates
more active learning engagement (Turban & Volonino, 2010; Selwyn, 2007; Boulos &
Wheeler, 2007; Shih, 2010). Web 2.0 applications, might be prominent to enable educators to
create personalized, active, participatory, and cooperative learning environments, and assert
how students using Web 2.0 tools will likely become proficient in “some or all of the
following”: digital competencies that focus on creativity and performance; strategies for
meta-learning, including learner-designed learning; inductive and creative models of
reasoning and problem-solving; learner-driven content creation and collaborative knowledgebuilding; and horizontal (peer-to-peer) learning and contribution to communities of learning
(McLoughlin & Lee, 2007; 2008)
Silius et al.(2009) in a study of Students’ Motivations for Social Media Enhanced
Studying and Learning, say that using Web 2.0 based social media services such as
Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. have recently become well known especially among young people.
There is clearly something appealing in web-based social services. In social networking sites
a user can participate intensively in activities in the service, share contents, debate and share
opinions and create different kinds of groups for different needs. Social networking sites such
as MySpace, Facebook, Bebo and Ning are websites used to build online networks and
communities. However, online learning in Web 2.0 was processes to become embedded in
teaching of instructor in higher education and can be used to support teaching and learning.
The case studies focus on evaluation of site for learning and teaching which Web 2.0
functional to facilitate and several elements influence students’ satisfaction in the online
environment and successfully promoting the sharing of ideas and discussion of educational
practice. Web 2.0 Tools presents challenges and opportunities for education, how to prepare
teachers to use Web 2.0 tools in their own teaching and to take advantage of what it has to
offer for immediate application in course. Having considered some of the general
implications of Web 2.0 tools for education, it is useful to review some examples of current
applications in higher education.
Boateng et al.(2010) Web 2.0 applications can be categorized into five types
Communicative: applications that are used to share ideas, information and creations.

4. 4
Examples are Social networks, Blogs, and Podcasts, collaborative publishing: for working
with others in a shared working environment for a particular purpose. Examples are Wikis
and Blogs, documentaries (content management): applications which collect and/or present
people’s experiences and thoughts. Examples are Blogs and Social Bookmarking, generative:
applications to generate something new to be used by other users. Examples are Mishaps and
Media sharing, and interactive: applications which facilitate information and resource
exchange between users. Examples are Social bookmarking and RSS
Majhi and Maharana (2011) conducted a study on familiarity of Web 2.0 and its
application in learning in two Indian Universities. The investigations conducted a survey of
about 500 respondents including students, teacher and research scholars of Utkal and
Sambalpur Universities in the State of Odisha. Results revealed that the usage of Web 2.0
tools is not very significant in either of the two universities in Odisha.
Therefore , reflections on the implications of new technologies for learning and
teaching, strategies for more effective take up of technology, the adoption and learning
impact of teaching experience and can offer valuable into the perceived with Web 2.0 tools
in Higher Education. Instructors serve an important role, both in bringing Web 2.0
applications into their teaching and optimally utilize the opportunities made available through
technology. For these reasons, these using case studies of teaching, experiences, interest,
adopt, and integrate Web 2.0 technologies into their teaching.
1.3 Use Web 2.0 Tools in Higher Education
The United States is a leader in the use of Web 2.0 technology. Much of the research
on social media use is conducted in the United States, and American students are highly
conversant with social media use because of social media used for educational at universities
throughout America, driven by current pedagogical theories of active, student-centered,
constructivist learning models which correspond of Web 2.0 tools.
A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. The study
investigates of Web 2.0 technologies in shaping the collaborative working environment for
professional knowledge workers, and to analyze the potential conditions for success in such
Web 2.0 enabled working environments. Such as Lemley and Burham (2008) in a study on
Web 2.0 tools in medical and nursing school curricula investigates the extent to which social
networking tools are being used in the curricula of medical and nursing schools. As new
internet technology tools are introduced, educators in health-related disciplines have the
opportunity to incorporate these new tools into the curriculum to enhance instruction and the
learning process. Wikis, blogs, and other social networking tools may all be used both to
augment the educational method and to increase its efficacy. From the responses received to
the surveys, it appears that Web 2.0 tools are slowly being introduced into the curricula of
medical and nursing schools for a variety of uses. Besides, the open-source CMS called
Moodle, which includes a plethora of Web 2.0-related plug-ins, positions itself as an
alternative to more restrictive CMS, with 47 thousand sites and more than 2.2 million courses
created (Moodle, 2008).
Park et al. (2009) investigated the learners’ perception of Web 2.0 applications for
learning. The results showed that Malaysian students learned more from a collectivist
learning approach but the American students preferred an individualistic learning approach.
However, learners in two countries responded that Web 2.0 applications were useful for
learning.
Therefore, American professor are users of popular social media technologies, and
encourage active teaching and comfort with computers and new media. Furthermore a
necessary skill for teach and life in modern America. In order to fully educate Americans for

5. 5
the 21st century media landscape and universities must overcome institutional inertia and
begin to evaluate how the university curriculum can best utilize such modern tools.
The North Carolina Center for the Advancement of Teaching (2009) found that
technology makes a difference in classroom instruction. Student projects created online are
much more inviting than a lecture by the teacher. Students today are comfortable with
technology as part of their daily lives. Technology engages students and advances their
learning. Technology can be utilized in order to monitor individual progress. In addition, it
can also be used as a tool to engage the learners by incorporating interactive components to a
lesson to enhance the learning experience (Branch & Merrill, 2011).
Most Thai universities have already developed learning platforms (LP) to allow
students to access course materials and to communicate with their classmates, lecturers and
university staff. Such web based applications usually include web pages, email, message
boards, discussion forum, text and video conference, shared diaries and communication tools
with Learning Management System (LMS) or Course Management System (CMS). Web 2.0
tools and learning platform, therefore, comes as a perfect tool to help students achieve
extraordinary learning results in classrooms, laboratories and beyond
Higher education appears to have changing in Thailand, as students, especially
younger students whose social networking concerns match their obsession with mobile
technology such as mobile-learning (m-Learning). Find yield a mixed response in terms of
student readiness for m-Learning technology demands. Finding there are crucial
technological constraints that have to be overcome relating to mobile devices, the media used
and the effects of the delivery mechanism; and that these technological constraints have a
considerable impact on student’s pedagogic engagement (Paul TJ James, 2011).
The future in higher education institutions will adopt a wide variety of Web
applications for the purposes of engaging learner and enhancing instructional efficiencies in
terms of informal learning. Web applications allow students to practice in creating and
interacting with digital media in a learning-focused environment. Therefore, teachers can use
Web 2.0 tools to captivate students, to hold their attention, and to enhance their learning
experiences, which use of Web technologies is in teaching and learning, in part because it is
believed to offer good support for constructivist approaches and the co-creation of knowledge
which have become more popular in higher education.
2. A description of the study
2.1 Statement of Problem
The adopter began to experiment with new media on Web 2.0 tools such as LMS
Moodle, Facebook, Blogs, chat tools, podcasting, video-sharing, and bookmarking. Since
then, all kinds of surveys have been conducted in the beginning of the 21st century. These
tools are used by instructors regularly on their use of social media and online learning, but the
study has not been conducted on application of Web 2.0 tools with applied comparison with
opinion-based case studies and generally research it lacks a strong empirical base. It is not
known, for example, what types of Web 2.0 tools are commonly used in teaching.
2.2 Scope of Study
The purpose of this study was to exploring use of new media on Web 2.0 tools in
literacy instruction by instructors in the United State and Thailand, case studies; Department
of Communication Studies, California State University, Sacramento, USA and Thai
professors in the universities.

6. 6
3. Method
Quantitative and qualitative methodologies were studies to investigate use of new
media on web to support teaching of instructor with implementing skills using Web 2.0 tools.
The researcher utilized descriptive statistics to report the mean scores of two countries,
United Stated and Thailand differences in using new media on web to support teaching
teacher responding in this study.
3.1 Participants
This study done while researcher had visiting scholarship for Special Topics course of
Learning Innovation and Technology Program, during the period September 16 to December
31, 2012 in the Faculty of Communication Studies at California State University,
Sacramento, United State. Participants in this study as the sample group composed of 60
instructors using social media within courses at the higher education level. They were thirty
professors of Fall 2012 semester (August 27 – December 14, 2012) at California State
University, Sacramento (n=30) and thirty professors (n=30) ) in the second semester of the
2012 academic years (November 5 – Much 11, 2012) from Universities in Thailand in
Faculty of Communication Art at Dhurajit Pandit University and Faculty of Liberal Arts
at Huachiew Chalermprakiet University, using new media on Web 2.0 tools.
3.2 Data Sources
Data sources included instructors’ survey, lesson plans, online learning, and students’
reflections. The instructor survey revealed of using Web 2.0 tools in instruction.
For the purposes of the survey, a Web 2.0 tool was defined as social media
applications for teaching that allow user to create and publish material on the Web, also
noting that Web 2.0 tools are accessed and used entirely online through a Web browser.
Examples of Web 2.0 tools are blogs, wikis, social bookmarking, social networking, micro
blogging, online presentations, video sharing, photo sharing, and podcasting. Instructors
indicated their experience with Web 2.0 tools, whether they had interactive media via using
Web 2.0 tools, their opinion of the importance of using Web 2.0 tools for teaching, and
finally their preference in using Web 2.0 tools
Data collection and analysis with use survey questionnaire. Researchers analyzed two
sets of data from the surveys using descriptive statistics to report the mean scores for survey
items. A comparison was made of the using data on two cohorts of instructors using in social
media within course at the higher education level.
4. Survey Results
Survey results revealed Web 2.0 tools for teaching in higher education of California
State University, Sacramento in the United States and the professors of Universities in
Thailand.
The background information characteristics of the respondents; 24 (40%) of the
respondents were males, while 36 (60%) were females, The largest respondents group was
the 40-49 year olds 19 (31.7%), the mostly respondents 39 (65%) had full-time employment,
in terms of highest academic qualifications 24 (40%) of the respondents had doctoral degrees,
and the mostly respondents 12 (20%) professors with 11-15 years of experiences.
The lecturer appraisal and feedback revealed; the purpose of the instructional media
the most respondents 43(55.1%) used on instructional tool, and the relate respondents
22(28.2%) used on dissemination of information. The most respondents 35(40.7%) consider
choosing a new media platform were applicable in student’s field, and 22(25.6%) choosing
password protected. The most respondents 26(23.6%) consider in the instructional design
were feedback procedures, and 19(17.3%) assessment of project. The mostly respondents
32(33.7%) guidelines for project was information should provide students, 19(20%) resources
for project, and 18 (18.9%) tutorials via new media.

7. 7
Table 1: The questionnaire for user, of the respondents (n = 60)
Questionnaire for users.
1. Are you aware with the mentioned Web 2.0 tools?
a) Students’ Blogs
b) Collaborative
c) Media Sharing
d) Social Network
e) Other
2. Which Web 2.0 tool you use mostly;
a) Students’ Blogs
b) Collaborative
c) Media Sharing
d) Social Network
e) Other
3. Which RSS reader is most popular concerning you;
Frequency
(n = 60)
%
28
31
35
42
3
20.1
22.3
25.2
30.2
2.2
5
18
26
25
6
6.3
22.5
32.5
31.3
7.5
a) Yahoo
26
b) Bloglines
4
c) NetNewsWire
1
d) Firefox Live Bookmarks
4
e) Reader not identified
2
f) Rss Reader
2
g) Opera RSS reader
4
h) Google reader
36
4. Web 2.0 technologies helpful in education;
a) Is Web 2.0 technology helpful in education
40
b) Not helpful
1
c) No comments
19
5. The nature of benefit of Web 2.0 technologies in education:
a) Broadened faculty perspective, and facilitated
obtaining students feedback and following
29
students interest trends
b) Drew on collective knowledge to better serve
5
c) Improved teachers inter-departmental
13
communication
d) Facilitated instant problem solving with the
12
benefit
e) Improved knowledge sharing and
30
collaboration
6. Satisfaction level with the usage of Web 2.0 technologies;
a) Satisfied
19
b) Moderately satisfied
19
c) Dissatisfied
4
d) No comments
18
32.9
5.1
1.3
5.1
2.5
2.5
5.1
45.6
66.7
1.7
31.7
32.6
5.6
14.6
13.5
33.7
31.7
31.7
6.7
30.0

8. 8
Table 1 presented the questionnaire for user, the mostly respondents were aware with
the mentioned web 2.0 tools 42 (30.2%) use social network (Hi5, Skype, Facebook, Myspace,
ect.), and 35 (25.2%) use media sharing (YouTube, Slideshow, Flickr, ect.). While the
mostly respondents 26 (32.5%) use web 2.0 tool for media sharing, 25 (31.3%) use social
network, and other SacCT, school base collaboration tool. The RSS reader most popular
concerning which respondents 36 (45.6%) to use Google Reader, and use of the Yahoo 26
(32.9%). The mostly respondents agreed 40 (66.7%) web 2.0 technologies helpful in
education. The most respondents the nature of benefits of using Web 2.0 tool 30 (33.7%) for
improved knowledge sharing and collaboration, and 29 (32.6%) broadened faculty
perspective and facilitated obtaining students. The respondents 19 (31.7) satisfied and
moderately satisfied with the usage of web 2.0 technologies, and while 18 (30%) no
comments.
The opinion of respondents most popular such as Facebook, Moodle (Chat Room),
Google reader, Google doc, Yahoo, Wiki, YouTube, Blogging, Blogger, Weebly, Wordpress,
Twitter and Hi5.
Finally, the opinion of respondents using web 3.0 technologies to support the learning
skill for the student who interested and be able to access technology and enjoying the benefits
and involves an increasing mobile web experience but obstacles to finding subject matter
experts and relevant content should be easier with web 3.0 technology and budget constraints
which affect the e-learning adoption project.
Table 2: Descriptive statistics of comparisons regarding the use of new media in online
instruction.
Factors
New media are good tool for teaching and
learning.
New media are effective for collaborative
problem solving.
New media can provide useful tool for
educational technology students.
New media is to facilitate group learning.
New media foster experiential learning.
New media are useful in online learning
environments.
Total
Thai
Mean
SD.
4.23
0,68
USA
Mean SD.
3.93
0.91
Sig.
(2-tailed)
.152
3.87
0.73
3.60
0.89
.211
1.26
4.37
0.56
4.10
0.71
.111
1.62
4.13
4.20
4.47
0.90
0.76
0.63
3.23
3.33
4.17
0.94
1.12
0.65
.000*
.001*
.074
3.80
3.49
1.82
4.06
0.52
3.64
0.61
.006*
2.87
t-test
1.45
* Sig. < .05
Table 2 presented comparisons regarding the use of new media in online instruction
of difference based on country. All variables were measured by frequency variables for
demographic data and characteristics variables in order to find out what are the characteristics
of difference based on country. There is statistical significant difference at level .05.

9. 9
5. Conclusion
The primary goal of this study was to explore using of new media on Web 2.0 tools in
literacy instruction by instructors with their use of social media and online learning. The
study has been conducted on application of Web 2.0 tools with comparison with to teaching
in higher education level of California State University, Sacramento in the United States and
the Universities in Thailand.
Furthermore, comparisons regarding the use of new media in online instruction of
demographic data and characteristics of variables differences. This study has shown that
American and Thai professor tend to differ in their technology acceptance levels and the
usage of new media in online instruction for learning based on country, and optimistic in
using new media to facilitate group learning, and foster experiential learning, and new media
were good tool for teaching and learning, effective for collaborative problem solving, and
useful in online learning environments, and can provide useful tool for educational
technology students.
The using of new media on Web technologies can be used to provide professors with
meaningful feedback and can help in teaching and learning with new media and support
teaching of instructors who supplied forms and content in social media approaching in
courses at the higher education level. The professors of California State University,
Sacramento (CSUS) in the United States and Universities in Thailand need to focus on
different delivery strategies and methods that will target all learners to attain knowledge and
communication. It can also be used as a tool to engage the learners with interactive to a
lesson to enhance the learning experience. Therefore web 2.0 is social networking enable
learners who share the same interests, to build their own online social networks for
communicating or sharing resources. Furthermore, the importance of self-directed learning to
use Web 2.0 tools with can bring about authentic learning. The new media on Web 2.0 tools,
including the integrated form digital learning innovation of instructors in higher education.
6. Suggestion
Finally, the using new media were able to access web technology, which increased
interest in web experience and adoption in the online learning, and great benefit of Thailand
to support learning in the near future. Also, the application of technology can be applied to
the other academic fields which serve sustainable and mass education with no boundary of
distance as stated “Anytime Anywhere”.
7. Reference
Branch, R., & Merrill, M.D. (2011). What is instructional design? In R. A. Reiser & J. V.
Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (3rd ed.,
pp. 17- 29). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.
Benson, A. (2002). Using online learning to meet workforce demand: A case study of
stakeholder influence. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(4), 443−452.
Boateng, R., V. Mbarika and C. Thomas. (2010). When web 2.0 becomes an organizational
learning tool: Evaluating web 2.0 tools. Development and Learning in Organizations,
24: 17-20. Retrieved from:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1858222&show=abstract
Boulos M. N. K., and Wheeler S. (2007). The emerging Web 2.0 social software: an enabling
suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. Health Information
and Libraries Journal, 24, 2-23. Retrieved from:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2007.00701.x/pdf

10. 10
Bryant, T. (2006). Social software in academia, EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 29(2), 61-64.
Retrieved from: http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0627.pdf
Carliner, S. (2004). An overview of online learning (2nd ed.). Armherst, MA: Human
Resource Development Press.
Conrad, D. (2002). Deep in the hearts of learners: Insights into the nature of online
community. Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 1−19.
Dalsgaard, C. (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management
systems. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Retrieved from:
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/671/1267
Feldman T. (1997). An Introduction to Digital Media. London: Routledge.
Fuchs C. (2011). Web 2.0 presumption and surveillance. Surveillance & Society. 8: 288-309.
Hartley J. (2002). Comunication, cultural and media studies: The key concepts. London:
Routledge.
Lee, M. and McLoughlin, C. (2010). Web 2.0-based e-learning. Hershey PA, Information
Science Reference.
Lemley, T., & Burham, F. (2008). Web 2.0 tools in medical and nursing school curricula. J
Med Libr Assoc. 97(1): 50–52.
Majhi S, Maharana B. (2011). Familiarity of Web 2.0 and its application in learning: A case
study of two Indian Universities. Int. Lib. Inf. Sci, 3: 120-129.
McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. (2007). “Social software and participatory learning:
pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era”, Paper
presented at the ascilite, Singapore.
McLoughlin, K. Shark Gillnet and Hook Sectors. (2007). In: Larcombe, J. and McLoughlin,
K.(eds.) (2007) Fishery Status Reports 2006: Status of Fish Stocks Managed by the
Australian Government. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra, 174–186.
McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M.J.W. (2008). The 3 P’s of pedagogy for the networked society:
Personalization, participation, and productivity. International Journal of Teaching
and Learning in Higher Education, 20(1). 10-27.
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, (2012). Social media. Retrieved from: http://merriamwebster.com/dictionary/social%20media
Moodle. (2008). Moodle Statistics. Retrieved from: http://moodle.org/stats/
North Carolina Center for the Advancement of Teaching. (2009). Technology engages
students, advances learning. NCCAT Winter Newsletter, 22(1), 5.
Oliver, K. (2010). Integrating Web 2.0 across the Curriculum. TechTrends: Linking Research
and Practice to Improve Learning, 54(2), 50-60. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Paul TJ James. (2011). Mobile-Learning: Thai HE Student Perceptions and Potential
Technological Impacts, International Education Studies. Vol. 4, No. 2; May 2011.
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education www.ccsenet.org/ies
Park, E., Mohan, R. & Ponnusamy, V. (2009). Facilitating Learning Through Web 2.0
Collaboration - Cases Across the Culture. In G.Siemens & C. Fulford (Eds.),
Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and
Telecommunications 2009 (p. 3764). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

11. 11
Redecker, C., K. Ala-Mutka, M. Bacigalupo, A. Ferrari and Y. Punie. (2009). Learning 2.0:
The Impact of Web 2.0 Innovations on Education and Training in Europe. Final
Report. JRC Scientific and Technical Report, EUR 24103 EN, Retrieved from:
http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=2899.
Selwyn, N. (2007). Web 2.0 applications as alternative environments for informal learning A critical review. Paper presented at the OECD-KERIS International Expert Meeting
on ICT and Educational Performance, Cheju Island, South Korea.
Shih, R. C. (2010). Blended learning using video-based blogs: Public speaking for English as
a second language students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(6),
883-897. Retrieved from: http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet26/shih.html
Silius, K., Miilumäki, T., Sairanen, H., Huhtamäki, J., Liukkonen, A. & Pohjolainen, S.
(2009). Mikä motivoi opiskelijat verkkoyhteisöön? What motivates a student to use a
Web community? Retrieved from: http://hlab.ee.tut.fi/hmopetus/sosiaalinenmedia/mika-motivoi-opiskelijat-verkkoyhteisoon
Tim O’Reilly. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next
generation of software. Retrieved from: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web20.html
Turban, E., and Volonino, L. (2010). Information Technology for Management: Improving
Performance in theDigital Economy, 7th Edition. John Wiley & Sons Inc.