You are here:

Engaging Students with Free Collaboration Technologies in Higher Education
PROCEEDINGS

, Gazi University, Turkey ; , , Gazi Üniversitesi, Turkey

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Orlando, Florida, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-83-9 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

Although a number of learning management software are available in commercial or open source licenses, not all higher education faculty have technical skills to set up and operate them for teaching and learning purposes. The purpose of this paper is to explore how Google collaboration technologies impact student engagement and group work in higher education. 60 sophomore level students, studying in instructional technology department of a large state university in Turkey, developed an instructional systems development project in groups of 4 using free Google collaborative tools in order to fulfill the requirements of the class. It is expected that using collaborative tools to complete a project improves students’ communication and persuasion skills, and gives instructors ability to oversee the students’ learning process.

Citation

Cakir, H., Karatas, S. & Üstündag, M.T. (2010). Engaging Students with Free Collaboration Technologies in Higher Education. In J. Sanchez & K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2010--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 1618-1623). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 1, 2021 from .

© 2010 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Astin, A.W. (1993). What Matters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  2. Carini, R.M., Kuh, G.D., & Klein, S.P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1-32.
  3. Chickering, A.W., & Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
  4. Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning management systems on university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and Management, 11(1), 19-36.
  5. Greenwood, C.R., Horton, B.T., & Utley, C.A. (2002). Academic engagement: Current perspectives in research and practice. School Psychology Review, 31, 328-349.
  6. Hmelo-Silver, C.E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.
  7. Issenberg, S.B., Mcgaghie, W.C., Petrusa, E.R., Gordon, D.L., & Scalese, R.J. (2005). Features and uses of highfidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Medical Teacher, 27(1), 10-28.
  8. Kuh, G. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the National Survey of Student Engagement. Change, 33(3), 10-17.
  9. Savery, J.R., & Duffy, T.M. (1996). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B.G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design (pp. 135-148). New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
  10. Umbach, P.D., & Wawrzynski, M.R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 153-184.
  11. Weaver, D., Spratt, C., & Nair, C.S. (2008). Academic and student use of a learning management system: Implications for quality. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 30-41.
  12. Zhao, C.M., & Kuh, G. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 115-138.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read