You are here:

An Instructional Design Model utilizing Social Networking Groups: Articulating the Networked Learning Framework
PROCEEDINGS

, Athabasca University, Canada ; , Wayfinder Education Group, Canada

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-90-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

This paper describes an instructional design model, the Networked Learning Framework (NLF), which combines the use of social media tools found in social networking sites with guided online activities to deliver engaging learning opportunities. Key for the Networked Learning Framework is that this model utilizes social networking site groups as a virtual learning space. Some of the unique characteristics of this model include the persistance of the course space over time, a focus on artifact creation as a learning outcome, and the ability of the learning space to be used for continuous intake enrolments. Participants of NLF implementations report that the sharing of resources, reflective blogs, and collegial discussions are some of the valuable outcomes. Using a design-based research methodology, this research has resulted in design principals and factors for designers. Further research to identify effective supports for social networking novices and ways to build online facilitator capacity is needed.

Citation

Ostashewski, N. & Reid, D. (2011). An Instructional Design Model utilizing Social Networking Groups: Articulating the Networked Learning Framework. In C. Ho & M. Lin (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2011--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 2057-2065). Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved November 29, 2023 from .

© 2011 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class Difference$: Online Education in the United States, 2010. Sloan Consortium.
  2. Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2009). Learning on Demand: Online Education in the United States, 2009. Sloan Consortium.
  3. Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the Course: Online Education in the United States, 2008. Sloan Consortium.
  4. Anderson, T. (2006). Higher education evolution: Individual freedom afforded by educational social software. In M. Beaudoin (Ed.), Perspectives on the Future of Higher Education in the Digital Age. (pp. 77-90). New York: Nova Science.
  5. Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The International Review Of Research In Open And Distance Learning, 12(3), 80-97.
  6. Design-based Research Collective (2003): Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), pp. 5-8.
  7. Dron, J. & Anderson, T. (2007). Collectives, Networks and Groups in Social Software for E-Learning. In T. Bastiaens& S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2007 (pp. 2460-2467). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  8. Dron, J., & Anderson, T. (2009). How the Crowd Can Teach. In S. Hatzipanagos& S. Wartburton (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Social Software and Developing Community Ontologies (pp. 1-17). Hershey,
  9. Hovorka, D., & Rees, M. (2009). Active Collaboration Learning Environments-The Class of Web 2.0. Proceeding of the 20th Australasian Conference on Information Systems Active Collaboration Learning Environments. Melbourne, AU: ACIS
  10. Johnson, L., Smith, R., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report: K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
  11. Malopinsky, L., Kirkley, J.R., Stein, R. & Duffy, T. (2000). An instructional design model for online problem based learning (PBL) environments: The Learning to Teach with Technology Studio. Proceedings of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Denver, Colorado: AECT.
  12. Ostashewski, N. (2010) Online Technology Teacher Professional Development Courselets: Design and Development. In D. Gibson& B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 2329-2334). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  13. Papert, S. & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel, & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1-11) Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  14. Papert, S. (1992). The Children's Machine. N.Y.: Basic Books.
  15. Reid, D. (2002). A Classification Schema of Online Tutor Competencies. Conference Proceedings, International Conference for Computers in Education 2002. Auckland, New Zealand.
  16. Reid, D. (2003). “Was she smiling when she typed that?”: An exploratory study into online tutor competencies and the factors which affect those competencies. Conference Proceedings, ASCILITE 2003. Adelaide, Australia (pp. 684-690).
  17. Sternberg, J. (2011) Social Media’s Slow Slog Into the Ivory Towers of Academia. Published September 2, 2011. Atlantic media Company. Washington, DC:

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections