E-learning

The concept of Web 2.0 was popularised by O’ Reilly and MediaLive International in 2004, but had roots in literature prior to this point (Madden et al., 2006). O’ Reilly defines the term in a seminal piece ‘What is Web 2.0. Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software’ (O'Reilly, 2005; 2007) capturing seven key principles about what is encompassed by the term ‘Web 2.0’. What can be seen as the core principles across other individuals (Hagemann et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2008; Wijaya et al., 2008; Weber et al., 2007; and Multisilta 2008) attempting to define Web 2.0 are the principles of: ‘Web as platform’ and ‘harnessing collective intelligence’.

The ‘Web as platform’ principle simply outlines the shift over the past five to seven years of previously desktop based application functionality to web based services. In addition, the growth of web based services which allow for the collection of shared resources e.g. Flickr and YouTube. This principle removes issues previously existing with the interoperability of applications across platform as now applications run via the web browser which is cross

20 platform compatible.

According to O’ Reilly, “Hyper linking is the foundation of the web. As users add new

content and new sites, it is bound in to the structure of the web by other users discovering the content and linking to it” (O’ Reilly 2007). Therefore capturing the

essence of how users navigate the web and their impressions of web content through mechanisms such as tagging, page rating, and collaborative sharing, can aid users in identifying resources to meet their specific needs.

According to Anderson (2008) Web 2.0 is more than just a web platform it is a service that offers more than just sharing content, tagging, wikis, blogs, and social networking. Web 2.0 is an easy way for people to publish self-generated materials like music, videos and photos.

Also coined alongside Web 2.0 is the term e-learning 2.0, which according to Ghali et al., (2009), Safran et al., (2007), and Ullrich et al.,(2008), refers to on-line learning environments that incorporate the idea of the Social Web making use of technologies such as collaborative authoring tools, rating tools, social identification (e.g. bookmarking) and annotation. According to Hamburg et al., (2008) e-learning 2.0 uses web-based tools to create new forms of learning materials (e.g. blogs, video sharing repositories, social networking spaces etc…) and to provide different ways of delivering learning materials. Hamburg et al., (2008) and Ullrich et al., (2008) suggest that incorporating social web concepts into on-line environments can assist with collaborative learning through the use of formal learning; the creation and construction of content; and the receiving and giving of feedback through discussion groups.

According to Safran et al., (2007) and Ullrich et al., (2008), e-learning 2.0 can be categorised or identified within two particular themes, these are: Technology and Social Networking. These link in to the Web 2.0 themes of ‘web as platform’ and ‘harnessing collective intelligence’.

 Technology: According to Safran et al., (2007) and Ullrich et al., (2008) the use of technology within e-learning 2.0 can provide support for a variety of key educational features: Wiki-blogs, pod-casts, RSS (Rich Site Summary or Really Simple Syndication), and e-portfolios.

21

 Social Networking: According to Safran et al., (2007), Chatti et al., (2007) and Ghali et al., (2009) social interaction plays an important part within e-learning 2.0 because it allows students to interact, share ideas, communicate (e-mail, chat, video conference), and use forum’s to discuss problems. According to Hamburg et al., (2008) collaborative learning may provide a useful perspective on learning, knowledge creation and management from a social networking perspective. There are a variety of e-learning 2.0 environments that can be found within literature; however, several will be discussed.

The first example to look at is a European project financed under the European e- learning Initiative called the SMEs Improving E-Learning Practices (SIMPEL) project, which was introduced in 2008 by Hamburg et al., The SIMPEL project focused on analyzing, understanding and suggesting mechanisms –“to involve SMEs and e-learning experts in a

community of practice to share knowledge and to develop participative training strategies based on elearning 2.0”. One particular aspect of the project focused on the

use of Moodle to provide a way of using blogs to distribute and share information on services or products. According to Hamburg et al., (2008) the use of SIMPEL, provided a way of blending knowledge, communication and learning. It also through identification of scenarios provided mechanisms through which educators could establish ways in which to best integrate e-learning 2.0 technologies into their educational practice. Hamburg et al., (2008) suggests that by understanding the right mix of approaches and technologies then

“e-competences” can be achieved.

Like the Hamburg et al., (2008) approach Ghali et al., (2009) tries to blend a variety of approaches to achieve “e-competences” through the use of an e-learning 2.0 system called MOT 2.0 (My Online Teacher 2.0), which is an adaptive authoring and delivery system. According to Ghali et al., (2009) MOT 2.0 focuses on: content recommendation; adaptation of the authoring environment; and it allows students to contribute in the development process of course content. This approach to learning means that learning content is created and distributed in a very different manner. Rather than being of a linear approach based around the lecturer and the desired syllabus, it can incorporate the learner through every possible step of introducing course work, exercises, and tasks.

22

Alevizou et al., (2010) has similar views to (Hamburg et al., 2008; Ghali et al., 2009) about the use of the new generation of e-learning 2.0 technologies to facilitate collaborative learning. Alevizou et al., (2010) introduces a specialised web-site called CLOUD, which is used for sharing resources, and ideas on learning and teaching. Cloudmark was designed according to Alevizou et al., (2010) to facilitate and focus primarily on social networking within online learning by investigating practices of socialisation; sharing and editing content within, wikis and social media. Cloudmark uses collective intelligence, as a way of analysing how humans can potentially share, collaborate, produce and reproduce knowledge. Alevizou et al., (2010) indicate that Cloudmark attempts to solve issues concerning: mobilization of resources; sharing resources between learners; and meditating social relations.

It is clear to see that this new generation of e-learning 2.0 is focused on applying some form of collaborative community learning through the use of collective intelligence (Hamburg et al., 2008; Ghali et al., 2009; Alevizou et al., 2010; Safran et al., 2007; Ullrich et al., 2008).

According to Safran et al., (2007) the use of e-learning 2.0 within on-line learning will become more frequent and also lead to the incorporation of collaboratively created content in traditional learning environments. Hamburg et al., (2008) and Ghali et al., (2009) have similar thoughts to Safran et al., (2007) about the future trends which they suggest should focus on incorporating the social web into on-line learning environments to allow other students to assist each other, share ideas, and make on-line learning more community focused. However, as Chatti et al., (2007) questions, within modern society will busy learners adopt this approach of having a collaborative community? Hamburg et al., (2008) does indicate that future trends must try to overcome other issues like:

 “Lack of immediate context of applying the learning for example by incorporating new learning in a personal knowledge schema or portfolio;

 Lack of time and lack of access to sufficient bandwidth to ensure high quality training, especially user-friendly tools and quality content;

 The attitude of managers– they often have not enough knowledge or are not convinced of the effectiveness of e-learning. Instead they put their trust in classroom-based training. Many of them prefer “learning from peers” Hamburg et

23 al., (2008)

The work contained within this Thesis sits within the scope of systems designed as E- Learning 2.0 systems due to a focus on encompassing the principles of collaborative & community based learning, the integration of group-learning-paradigms; and the intelligent matching and tailoring of the system to meet the learner’s needs. This new approach to e- learning will replace the ttraditional Virtual Learning Environment (VLE), that is often cumbersome and expensive - and which tends to be structured around courses, timetables, testing, and often driven by the needs of the institution rather than those of the individual learner. These new ideas and concepts have the potential to act as a way of offering a personalised tailored approach to: exchange and reuse of learning objects; tailored learning activities; and matching content to individual preferences. Computer based research towards the personalisation of learning experiences has been undertaken since the 1970’s. The next few sections will introduce early forms of achieving this through User Modelling, and stereotyping, moving on in the final section of this chapter to outline research in personalized learning.