Upload
gkurtz
View
385
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Learning Styles and Preferred Web 2.0 Applications as Learning Tools
Gila Kurtz, The Center for Academic Studies, Israel Barry Sponder, Central Connecticut State University, USA
MDE Virtual Conference
Outline:
Introduction – Who are we?
Purpose of the study
Definitions Web 2.0 applications in education Learning style
Methodology
Findings
Question for future discussion & research
Who are we
What we do together
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZdzd9oeZKjtZGZqNWZwODNfODNneDc4enhzMg&hl=iw
Purpose of the study :
To analyze the interactions between students' learning styles and their web 2.0 preferences as learning tools
Web 2.0 applications in education
Generally, refers to a perceived second generation of web development and design that facilitates communications and secures information sharing, interoperability, and collaboration on the web
Can play an important role in building online learning communities and is useful for motivating and supporting online collaboration
Web 2.0 in the Online Classroom
Video (YouTube)
Web 2.0 in the Online Classroom
Blogs
Learning style:
Based on Felder -Silverman learning style model (FSLSM). (Felder & Silverman, 1988)
The FSLSM model is one of the most often used learning style models in technology enhanced learning (Kinshuk et al., 2009). I
Learning style: FSLSM
It is based on the idea that each learner has a preference on each of the four following dimensions: visual/verbal, sensing/intuitive, sequential/global and active/reflective.
Each of the four dimensions the Index of Learning Styles (ILS) is measured on a scale 1.0 to 2.0 which makes it possible to describe how strong the learners' preference are for a specific learning style.
Learning style: ILS
A. Visual-verbal - visual (prefer visual representations of presented material, such as pictures, diagrams, and flow charts) or verbal (prefer written and spoken explanationB. Sensing-intuitive - sensing concrete, practical, oriented toward facts and procedures) or intuitive (conceptual, innovative, oriented toward theories and underlying meanings);C. Sequential- Global - sequential (linear thinking process, learn in incremental steps) or global (holistic thinking process, learn in large leapsD. Active-reflective active (learn by trying things out, enjoy working in groups) or reflective (learn by thinking things through, prefer working alone or with one or two familiar partners);
Methodology
57 graduate students participated: 29 students from the College of Academic Studies in Israel (a blended course), 18 UMUC Students (an exclusively online course) and 10 students from Central Connecticut State University (an on-campus course). ( mean age= 36; 90% female))Online survey learning styles and their preferences for using web 2.0 applications—from a list of 19 applicationsData collection - 2010
URL of questionnaires https://spreadsheets0.google.com/viewform?hl=iw&formkey=dDZod2w3M0NJWWRtcWxObVlzeWVmaUE6MA#gid=0
https://docs0.google.com/document/d/1tP0VUletTCobXRQO0KyxA9-qCNmvDF_dYXYMBzrEZLA/edit?hl=iw#
Findings: learning Style
• No significant differences between groups!
• Strong tendency to active learners
•Tendency to visual learners
•Tendency to sensing learners
•Equal tendency to sequential and global
Findings: Preference for web 2.0 as learning tools (4.0 + score )
Free sites 4.8 Smart record & note 4.7 Presenter 4.6 Google docs 4.3 Discussions 4.3 (NOT web 2.0) Vokis 4.2 Live meeting 4.1 Class site 4.1 (NOT web 2.0)
Findings: Students’ comments
In the nutshell,I will say I am ready to embrace technology,since there are new applications been developed each day and hence must independently study and research more on my own
I believe that the process great for all learner, It all depends on each students and their particular learning styles.
Thank you!
Findings: Correlations web 2.0 preference with ILS
High: intuitives prefer presenterMedium: visuals prefer podcastMedium: actives prefer webquest