Author :
Abstract
This study provides a framework for the teachers about the web 2.0 technologies. The purpose of this study is to investigate the properties, effects and importance of the web 2.0 tools considering the relevant, recent and significant collection of articles. Web 2.0 tools were categorized into 8 main themes. Easily accessible and educationally useful programs were exemplified according to these 8 main themes. In addition to these, how social constructivist theories are in congruence with the web 2.0 tools were discussed and the advantages of using these programs for students, teachers and classroom environment were determined and reported.
Keywords
Abstract
This study provides a framework for the teachers about the web 2.0 technologies. The purpose of this study is to investigate the properties, effects and importance of the web 2.0 tools considering the relevant, recent and significant collection of articles. Web 2.0 tools were categorized into 8 main themes. Easily accessible and educationally useful programs were exemplified according to these 8 main themes. In addition to these, how social constructivist theories are in congruence with the web 2.0 tools were discussed and the advantages of using these programs for students, teachers and classroom environment were determined and reported.
Keywords
- Akpınar, E., Aktamış, H., & Ergin, O. (2005). Fen bilgisi dersinde eğitim teknolojisi kullanılmasına ilişkin öğrenci görüşleri. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(1), 93-100.
- Bawden, D., Robinson, L., Anderson, T., Bates, J., Rutkauskiene, U., & Vilar, P. (2007). Towards curriculum 2.0: library/ınformation education for a web 2.0 world. Library and Information Research, 31(99), 14-25.
- Binghimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning: A review of literature. Eurosia Journal of Matematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(3), 235-245.
- Bonk, C. J. (2009). The World is Open: How Web Technology is Revolutionizing Education. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
- Bryant, T. (2006). Social software in academia. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 29(2), 61-64.
- Byrne, R. (2009). The effect of web 2.0 on teaching and learning. Teacher Librarian, 37(2), 50-53.
- Carrasco, M. (2006). Best of the best web 2.0 web sites. Retrieved 28 June, 2011, from http://www.realsoftwaredevelopment.com/best-of-the-best-web-20-web-sites/
- Carrasco, M. (2008). The greatest web 2.0 videos of our time. Retrieved 29 June, 2011, from http://www.realsoftwaredevelopment.com/the-greatest-web-20-videos-of-our-time/
- Collis, B. & Moonen, J. (2008). We 2.0 tools and processes in higher education: quality perspectives. Educational Media International, 45(2), 93-106.
- Conole, G. & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of web 2.0 tools in higher education. Retrieved 10 August, 2011, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/EvidenceNet/Conole_Alevizou_2010.pdf
- Craig, R. J., & Amernic, J. H. (2006). PowerPoint presentation technology and dynamics of teaching. Innovations in Higher Education, 31, 147-160.
- Crook, C., Cummings, J., Fisher, T., Graber, R., Harrison, C., Lewin, C., et al. (2008). Web 2.0 technologies for learning: the current landscap -opportunities, challenges and tensions. A Report Becta.
- Çelen, F. K., Çelik, A., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2011). Türk eğitim sistemi ve pısa sonuçları. Paper presented at the meeting of Akademik Bilişim, Malatya, Turkey.
- Elmas, R., Demirdöğen, B, & Geban, Ö. (2011). Preservice chemistry teachers’ ımages about science teaching in their future classrooms. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 40, 164-175.
- Foratv (2009). Web 3.0: The future of the internet. Retrieved 30 June, 2011, from http://fora.tv/2009/04/02/Tim_OReilly_Talks_Web_20.
- Franklin, T. and van Harmelen, M. (2007). Web 2.0 for content for learning and teaching in higher education. Retrieved 10 August, 2011, from http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/148/1/web2-content-learning-andteaching.pdf
- Garber, A. R. (2001). Death by powerpoint. Small Business Computing. Retrieved 07 July, 2011, from http://www.smallbusinesscomputing.com/biztools/article.php/684871
- Gillard, C. (2010, July/August). ‚Dumb‛ phones, smart lessons. Harvard Education Letter, 26(4). Retrieved 21 September, 2011, from http://www.hepg.org/hel/article/474
- Horzum, M. B. (2007). Web tabanlı yeni öğretim teknolojileri: web 2.0 araçları. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 6(12), 99-121.
- Horzum, M. B. (2010). Öğretmenlerin web 2.0 araçlarından haberdarlığı, kullanım sıklıkları ve amaçlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısında incelenmesi. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1), 603-634.
- Horzum, M. B. (2011). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin bilgisayar oyunu bağımlılık düzeylerinin çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(159), 56-68.
- Jarrett, K. (2008, March). Interactivity is evil! A critical investigation of Web 2.0. First Monday, 13(3). Retrieved 10 July, 2011, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2140/1947
- Kalyuga, P., Chandeler, P. & Sweller, J. (2004). When redundant on-screen text in multimedia technical instruction can interfere with learning. Human Factors, 46(3), 567-581.
- Kayaduman, H., Sırakaya, M., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2011). Eğitimde FATİH projesinin öğretmenlerin yeterlilik durumları açısından incelenmesi. Paper presented at the meeting of Akademik Bilişim, Malatya, Turkey.
- Keser, Ö. F. (2005). Recommendations towards developing educational standards to ımprove science education in Turkey. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(1), 46-53.
- Kıyıcı, F. B. (2010). The definitons and preferences of science teacher candidates concerning web 2.0 tools: A phenomological research study. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(2), 185-195.
- Kolb, L. (2008). Toys to tools: Connecting student cell phones to education. Washington, D.C.; International Society for Technology in Education.
- Lu, J., Lai, M., & Law, N. (2010). Knowledge building in society 2.0: Challenges and opportunities. In M. S. Khine & I. M. Saleh (Eds) New science of learning: Computers, cognition and collaboration in Education (pp. 553-567). Newyork, Springer.
- Mazman, S. G. & Usluel, Y. K. (2011). Gender differences in using social networks. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 133-139.
- 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 meeting of Ascilite, Singapore.
- McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. (2008). Mapping the digital terrain: New media and social software as catalysts for pedagogical change. Paper presented at the meeting of Ascilite, Melbourne, Australia.
- MEB (2012). Fatih Projesi web sitesi. Retrieved 03 March, 2012, from http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/site/index.php
- O’Reilly T. (2007). What is web 2.0: design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & Strategies, 65(Jan), 17-37.
- OECD (Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development) (2009). The new millennium learners: Main findings. Paris: OECD
- Prashnig, B. (2006). Learning styles and personalized teaching. London, UK: The Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd.
- Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon 9(5), 1-6.
- Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 2: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon 9(6), 1-6.
- Prensky, M. (2009). H. sapiens digital: From digital immigrants and digital natives to digital wisdom. Innovate 5(3). Retrived 20 July, 2011, from http://www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol5_issue3/H._Sapiens_Digital__From_Digital_Immigrants_and_Digital_Natives_to_Digital_Wisdom.pdf
- Punie, Y. & Cabrera, M. (2006). The Future of ICT and Learning in the Knowledge Society. European Communities. Retrieved 28 June, 2011, from http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/eur22218en.pdf
- Richards, R. (2010). Digital citizenship and web 2.0 tools. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 516-522.
- Saltman, D. (2011, March/April). Nine hot web tools for students. Harvard Education Letter, 27(2). Retrieved 21 September, 2011, from http://www.hepg.org/hel/article/497
- Savaş, M., Elmas, R., Öztürk, N. (2011). A curriculum reflection: New science and technology curriculum in Turkey. Paper presented at the meeting of ESERA, Lyon, France.
- Thompson, J. (2007). Is Education 1.0 ready for web 2.0 students? Innovate 3(4). Retrieved 10 July, 2011, from http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol3_issue4/Is_Education_1.0_Ready_for_Web_2.0_Students_.pdf
- Tonta, Y. (2009). Dijital yerliler, sosyal ağlar ve kütüphanelerin geleceği. Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 23(4), 742-768.
- Tufte, E. R. (2003). PowerPoint is Evil. Wired, (issue 11.09). Retrieved 06 July from http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/ppt2.html
- Türkmen, H., Pedersen, J. E. & McCarty, R. (2007). Exploring Turkish pre-service science education teachers’ understanding of educational technology and use. Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(2), 16.