|Posted on 7 August, 2013 at 7:20|
This is a great article for any teacher who is passionate of using Social Networking Sites in the classroom.
Behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism are the three broad learning theories most often utilized in the creation of instructional environments. These theories, however, were developed in a time when learning was not impacted through technology. Over the last twenty years, technology has reorganized how we live, how we communicate, and how we learn. Learning needs and theories that describe learning principles and processes, should be reflective of underlying social environments. Vaill emphasizes that “learning must be a way of being – an ongoing set of attitudes and actions by individuals and groups that they employ to try to keep abreast o the surprising, novel, messy, obtrusive, recurring events…” (1996, p.42).
Learners as little as forty years ago would complete the required schooling and enter a career that would often last a lifetime. Information development was slow. The life of knowledge was measured in decades. Today, these foundational principles have been altered. Knowledge is growing exponentially. In many fields the life of knowledge is now measured in months and years. Gonzalez (2004) describes the challenges of rapidly diminishing knowledge life:
“One of the most persuasive factors is the shrinking half-life of knowledge. The “half-life of knowledge” is the time span from when knowledge is gained to when it becomes obsolete. Half of what is known today was not known 10 years ago. The amount of knowledge in the world has doubled in the past 10 years and is doubling every 18 months according to the American Society of Training and Documentation (ASTD). To combat the shrinking half-life of knowledge, organizations have been forced to develop new methods of deploying instruction.”
Some significant trends in learning:
◾ Many learners will move into a variety of different, possibly unrelated fields over the course of their lifetime.
◾ Informal learning is a significant aspect of our learning experience. Formal education no longer comprises the majority of our learning. Learning now occurs in a variety of ways – through communities of practice, personal networks, and through completion of work-related tasks.
◾ Learning is a continual process, lasting for a lifetime. Learning and work related activities are no longer separate. In many situations, they are the same.
◾ Technology is altering (rewiring) our brains. The tools we use define and shape our thinking.
◾ The organization and the individual are both learning organisms. Increased attention to knowledge management highlights the need for a theory that attempts to explain the link between individual and organizational learning.
◾ Many of the processes previously handled by learning theories (especially in cognitive information processing) can now be off-loaded to, or supported by, technology.
◾ Know-how and know-what is being supplemented with know-where (the understanding of where to find knowledge needed).
Driscoll (2000) defines learning as “a persisting change in human performance or performance potential…[which] must come about as a result of the learner’s experience and interaction with the world” (p.11). This definition encompasses many of the attributes commonly associated with behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism – namely, learning as a lasting changed state (emotional, mental, physiological (i.e. skills)) brought about as a result of experiences and interactions with content or other people.
Driscoll (2000, p14-17) explores some of the complexities of defining learning. Debate centers on:
◾ Valid sources of knowledge - Do we gain knowledge through experiences? Is it innate (present at birth)? Do we acquire it through thinking and reasoning?
◾ Content of knowledge – Is knowledge actually knowable? Is it directly knowable through human experience?
◾ The final consideration focuses on three epistemological traditions in relation to learning: Objectivism, Pragmatism, and Interpretivism ◾ Objectivism (similar to behaviorism) states that reality is external and is objective, and knowledge is gained through experiences.
◾ Pragmatism (similar to cognitivism) states that reality is interpreted, and knowledge is negotiated through experience and thinking.
◾ Interpretivism (similar to constructivism) states that reality is internal, and knowledge is constructed.
All of these learning theories hold the notion that knowledge is an objective (or a state) that is attainable (if not already innate) through either reasoning or experiences. Behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism (built on the epistemological traditions) attempt to address how it is that a person learns.
Behaviorism states that learning is largely unknowable, that is, we can’t possibly understand what goes on inside a person (the “black box theory”). Gredler (2001) expresses behaviorism as being comprised of several theories that make three assumptions about learning:
1. Observable behaviour is more important than understanding internal activities
2. Behaviour should be focused on simple elements: specific stimuli and responses
3. Learning is about behaviour change
Cognitivism often takes a computer information processing model. Learning is viewed as a process of inputs, managed in short term memory, and coded for long-term recall. Cindy Buell details this process: “In cognitive theories, knowledge is viewed as symbolic mental constructs in the learner's mind, and the learning process is the means by which these symbolic representations are committed to memory.”
Constructivism suggests that learners create knowledge as they attempt to understand their experiences (Driscoll, 2000, p. 376). Behaviorism and cognitivism view knowledge as external to the learner and the learning process as the act of internalizing knowledge. Constructivism assumes that learners are not empty vessels to be filled with knowledge. Instead, learners are actively attempting to create meaning. Learners often select and pursue their own learning. Constructivist principles acknowledge that real-life learning is messy and complex. Classrooms which emulate the “fuzziness” of this learning will be more effective in preparing learners for life-long learning.
Limitations of Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism
A central tenet of most learning theories is that learning occurs inside a person. Even social constructivist views, which hold that learning is a socially enacted process, promotes the principality of the individual (and her/his physical presence – i.e. brain-based) in learning. These theories do not address learning that occurs outside of people (i.e. learning that is stored and manipulated by technology). They also fail to describe how learning happens within organizations
Learning theories are concerned with the actual process of learning, not with the value of what is being learned. In a networked world, the very manner of information that we acquire is worth exploring. The need to evaluate the worthiness of learning something is a meta-skill that is applied before learning itself begins. When knowledge is subject to paucity, the process of assessing worthiness is assumed to be intrinsic to learning. When knowledge is abundant, the rapid evaluation of knowledge is important. Additional concerns arise from the rapid increase in information. In today’s environment, action is often needed without personal learning – that is, we need to act by drawing information outside of our primary knowledge. The ability to synthesize and recognize connections and patterns is a valuable skill.
Many important questions are raised when established learning theories are seen through technology. The natural attempt of theorists is to continue to revise and evolve theories as conditions change. At some point, however, the underlying conditions have altered so significantly, that further modification is no longer sensible. An entirely new approach is needed.
Some questions to explore in relation to learning theories and the impact of technology and new sciences (chaos and networks) on learning:
◾ How are learning theories impacted when knowledge is no longer acquired in the linear manner?
◾ What adjustments need to made with learning theories when technology performs many of the cognitive operations previously performed by learners (information storage and retrieval).
◾ How can we continue to stay current in a rapidly evolving information ecology?
◾ How do learning theories address moments where performance is needed in the absence of complete understanding?
◾ What is the impact of networks and complexity theories on learning?
◾ What is the impact of chaos as a complex pattern recognition process on learning?
◾ With increased recognition of interconnections in differing fields of knowledge, how are systems and ecology theories perceived in light of learning tasks?
An Alternative Theory
Including technology and connection making as learning activities begins to move learning theories into a digital age. We can no longer personally experience and acquire learning that we need to act. We derive our competence from forming connections. Karen Stephenson states:
“Experience has long been considered the best teacher of knowledge. Since we cannot experience everything, other people’s experiences, and hence other people, become the surrogate for knowledge. ‘I store my knowledge in my friends’ is an axiom for collecting knowledge through collecting people (undated).”
Chaos is a new reality for knowledge workers. ScienceWeek (2004) quotes Nigel Calder's definition that chaos is “a cryptic form of order”. Chaos is the breakdown of predictability, evidenced in complicated arrangements that initially defy order. Unlike constructivism, which states that learners attempt to foster understanding by meaning making tasks, chaos states that the meaning exists – the learner's challenge is to recognize the patterns which appear to be hidden. Meaning-making and forming connections between specialized communities are important activities.
Chaos, as a science, recognizes the connection of everything to everything. Gleick (1987) states: “In weather, for example, this translates into what is only half-jokingly known as the Butterfly Effect – the notion that a butterfly stirring the air today in Peking can transform storm systems next month in New York” (p. 8). This analogy highlights a real challenge: “sensitive dependence on initial conditions” profoundly impacts what we learn and how we act based on our learning. Decision making is indicative of this. If the underlying conditions used to make decisions change, the decision itself is no longer as correct as it was at the time it was made. The ability to recognize and adjust to pattern shifts is a key learning task.
Luis Mateus Rocha (1998) defines self-organization as the “spontaneous formation of well organized structures, patterns, or behaviors, from random initial conditions.” (p.3). Learning, as a self-organizing process requires that the system (personal or organizational learning systems) “be informationally open, that is, for it to be able to classify its own interaction with an environment, it must be able to change its structure…” (p.4). Wiley and Edwards acknowledge the importance of self-organization as a learning process: “Jacobs argues that communities self-organize is a manner similar to social insects: instead of thousands of ants crossing each other’s pheromone trails and changing their behavior accordingly, thousands of humans pass each other on the sidewalk and change their behavior accordingly.”. Self-organization on a personal level is a micro-process of the larger self-organizing knowledge constructs created within corporate or institutional environments. The capacity to form connections between sources of information, and thereby create useful information patterns, is required to learn in our knowledge economy.
Networks, Small Worlds, Weak Ties
A network can simply be defined as connections between entities. Computer networks, power grids, and social networks all function on the simple principle that people, groups, systems, nodes, entities can be connected to create an integrated whole. Alterations within the network have ripple effects on the whole.
Albert-László Barabási states that “nodes always compete for connections because links represent survival in an interconnected world” (2002, p.106). This competition is largely dulled within a personal learning network, but the placing of value on certain nodes over others is a reality. Nodes that successfully acquire greater profile will be more successful at acquiring additional connections. In a learning sense, the likelihood that a concept of learning will be linked depends on how well it is currently linked. Nodes (can be fields, ideas, communities) that specialize and gain recognition for their expertise have greater chances of recognition, thus resulting in cross-pollination of learning communities.
Weak ties are links or bridges that allow short connections between information. Our small world networks are generally populated with people whose interests and knowledge are similar to ours. Finding a new job, as an example, often occurs through weak ties. This principle has great merit in the notion of serendipity, innovation, and creativity. Connections between disparate ideas and fields can create new innovations.
Connectivism is the integration of principles explored by chaos, network, and complexity and self-organization theories. Learning is a process that occurs within nebulous environments of shifting core elements – not entirely under the control of the individual. Learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing.
Connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired. The ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday is also critical.
Principles of connectivism:
◾ Learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions.
◾ Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources.
◾ Learning may reside in non-human appliances.
◾ Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known
◾ Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning.
◾ Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill.
◾Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities.
◾Decision-making is itself a learning process. Choosing what to learn and the meaning of incoming information is seen through the lens of a shifting reality. While there is a right answer now, it may be wrong tomorrow due to alterations in the information climate affecting the decision.
Connectivism also addresses the challenges that many corporations face in knowledge management activities. Knowledge that resides in a database needs to be connected with the right people in the right context in order to be classified as learning. Behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism do not attempt to address the challenges of organizational knowledge and transference.
Information flow within an organization is an important element in organizational effectiveness. In a knowledge economy, the flow of information is the equivalent of the oil pipe in an industrial economy. Creating, preserving, and utilizing information flow should be a key organizational activity. Knowledge flow can be likened to a river that meanders through the ecology of an organization. In certain areas, the river pools and in other areas it ebbs. The health of the learning ecology of the organization depends on effective nurturing of information flow.
Social network analysis is an additional element in understanding learning models in a digital era. Art Kleiner (2002) explores Karen Stephenson’s “quantum theory of trust” which “explains not just how to recognize the collective cognitive capability of an organization, but how to cultivate and increase it”. Within social networks, hubs are well-connected people who are able to foster and maintain knowledge flow. Their interdependence results in effective knowledge flow, enabling the personal understanding of the state of activities organizationally.
The starting point of connectivism is the individual. Personal knowledge is comprised of a network, which feeds into organizations and institutions, which in turn feed back into the network, and then continue to provide learning to individual. This cycle of knowledge development (personal to network to organization) allows learners to remain current in their field through the connections they have formed.
Landauer and Dumais (1997) explore the phenomenon that “people have much more knowledge than appears to be present in the information to which they have been exposed”. They provide a connectivist focus in stating “the simple notion that some domains of knowledge contain vast numbers of weak interrelations that, if properly exploited, can greatly amplify learning by a process of inference”. The value of pattern recognition and connecting our own “small worlds of knowledge” are apparent in the exponential impact provided to our personal learning.
John Seely Brown presents an interesting notion that the internet leverages the small efforts of many with the large efforts of few. The central premise is that connections created with unusual nodes supports and intensifies existing large effort activities. Brown provides the example of a Maricopa County Community College system project that links senior citizens with elementary school students in a mentor program. The children “listen to these “grandparents” better than they do their own parents, the mentoring really helps the teachers…the small efforts of the many- the seniors – complement the large efforts of the few – the teachers.” (2002). This amplification of learning, knowledge and understanding through the extension of a personal network is the epitome of connectivism.
The notion of connectivism has implications in all aspects of life. This paper largely focuses on its impact on learning, but the following aspects are also impacted:
◾ Management and leadership. The management and marshalling of resources to achieve desired outcomes is a significant challenge. Realizing that complete knowledge cannot exist in the mind of one person requires a different approach to creating an overview of the situation. Diverse teams of varying viewpoints are a critical structure for completely exploring ideas. Innovation is also an additional challenge. Most of the revolutionary ideas of today at one time existed as a fringe element. An organizations ability to foster, nurture, and synthesize the impacts of varying views of information is critical to knowledge economy survival. Speed of “idea to implementation” is also improved in a systems view of learning.
◾ Media, news, information. This trend is well under way. Mainstream media organizations are being challenged by the open, real-time, two-way information flow of blogging.
◾Personal knowledge management in relation to organizational knowledge management
◾ Design of learning environments
The pipe is more important than the content within the pipe. Our ability to learn what we need for tomorrow is more important than what we know today. A real challenge for any learning theory is to actuate known knowledge at the point of application. When knowledge, however, is needed, but not known, the ability to plug into sources to meet the requirements becomes a vital skill. As knowledge continues to grow and evolve, access to what is needed is more important than what the learner currently possesses.
Connectivism presents a model of learning that acknowledges the tectonic shifts in society where learning is no longer an internal, individualistic activity. How people work and function is altered when new tools are utilized. The field of education has been slow to recognize both the impact of new learning tools and the environmental changes in what it means to learn. Connectivism provides insight into learning skills and tasks needed for learners to flourish in a digital era.
Barabási, A. L., (2002) Linked: The New Science of Networks, Cambridge, MA, Perseus Publishing.
Buell, C. (undated). Cognitivism. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://web.cocc.edu/cbuell/theories/cognitivism.htm.
Brown, J. S., (2002). Growing Up Digital: How the Web Changes Work, Education, and the Ways People Learn. United States Distance Learning Association. Retrieved on December 10, 2004, from http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/FEB02_Issue/article01.html
Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Needham Heights, MA, Allyn & Bacon.
Gleick, J., (1987). Chaos: The Making of a New Science. New York, NY, Penguin Books.
Gonzalez, C., (2004). The Role of Blended Learning in the World of Technology. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://www.unt.edu/benchmarks/archives/2004/september04/eis.htm.
Gredler, M. E., (2005) Learning and Instruction: Theory into Practice – 5th Edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Pearson Education.
Kleiner, A. (2002). Karen Stephenson’s Quantum Theory of Trust. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://www.netform.com/html/s+b%20article.pdf.
Landauer, T. K., Dumais, S. T. (1997). A Solution to Plato’s Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction and Representation of Knowledge. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://lsa.colorado.edu/papers/plato/plato.annote.html.
Rocha, L. M. (1998). Selected Self-Organization and the Semiotics of Evolutionary Systems. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://informatics.indiana.edu/rocha/ises.html.
ScienceWeek (2004) Mathematics: Catastrophe Theory, Strange Attractors, Chaos. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://scienceweek.com/2003/sc031226-2.htm.
Stephenson, K., (Internal Communication, no. 36) What Knowledge Tears Apart, Networks Make Whole. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://www.netform.com/html/icf.pdf.
Vaill, P. B., (1996). Learning as a Way of Being. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Blass Inc.
Wiley, D. A and Edwards, E. K. (2002). Online self-organizing social systems: The decentralized future of online learning. Retrieved December 10, 2004 from http://wiley.ed.usu.edu/docs/ososs.pdf.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License
|Posted on 2 May, 2013 at 0:55|
More evidence......Facebook is losing its user base at a fast rate, with up to 9 million users leaving the world’s largest social networking site. The company has been losing visitors at almost the same rate for the last six months. Most of these users are said to be leaving Facebook to check out other new social networking sites such as the Path and Instagram.
In the last month, Facebook lost 6 million users in the United States, which is a 4 per cent fall. And the website lost 1.4 million users in the United Kingdom, which is a 4.5 per cent fall. Facebook users in other parts of the world such as Canada, Spain, France, Germany and Japan are also switching off their Facebook profiles.
“The problem is that, in the US and UK, most people who want to sign up for Facebook have already done it,” said new media specialist Ian Maude at Enders Analysis. “There is a boredom factor where people like to try something new. Is Facebook going to go the way of Myspace? The risk is relatively small, but that is not to say it isn’t there.”
How is Facebook trying to overcome this? Well, we have no idea. And are you one of the millions of people who are switching off their profiles?
|Posted on 30 April, 2013 at 0:30|
This is of particular interest to me at the moment as there was a recent article in an Australian Newspaper of similar trends happening in Australia:
Facebook has lost millions of users per month in its biggest markets, independent data suggests, as alternative social networks attract the attention of those looking for fresh online playgrounds.
As Facebook prepares to update investors on its performance in the first three months of the year, with analysts forecasting revenues up 36% on last year, studies suggest that its expansion in the US, UK and other major European countries has peaked.
In the last month, the world's largest social network has lost 6m US visitors, a 4% fall, according to analysis firm SocialBakers. In the UK, 1.4m fewer users checked in last month, a fall of 4.5%. The declines are sustained. In the last six months, Facebook has lost nearly 9m monthly visitors in the US and 2m in the UK.
Users are also switching off in Canada, Spain, France, Germany and Japan, where Facebook has some of its biggest followings. A spokeswoman for Facebook declined to comment.
"The problem is that, in the US and UK, most people who want to sign up for Facebook have already done it," said new media specialist Ian Maude at Enders Analysis. "There is a boredom factor where people like to try something new. Is Facebook going to go the way of Myspace? The risk is relatively small, but that is not to say it isn't there."
Alternative social networks such as Instagram, the photo sharing site that won 30m users in 18 months before Facebook acquired the business a year ago, have seen surges in popularity with younger age groups.
Path, the mobile phone-based social network founded by former Facebook employee Dave Morin, which restricts its users to 150 friends, is gaining 1m users a week and has recently topped 9m, with 500,000 Venezuelans downloading the app in a single weekend.
Facebook is still growing fast in South America: monthly visitors in Brazil were up 6% in the last month to 70m , according to SocialBakers, whose information is used by Facebook advertisers, while India has seen a 4% rise to 64m – still a fraction of the country's population, leaving room for further growth.
But in developed markets, other Facebook trackers are reporting declines. Analysts at Jefferies bank have developed an algorithm that interfaces directly with Facebook software and it "suggests user levels in [the first quarter] may have declined from peak", according to a recent note.
Jefferies saw global numbers peak at 1.05bn a month in January, before falling by 20m in February. Numbers rose again in April. The network has now lost nearly 2m visitors in the UK since December, according to research firm Nielsen, with its 27m total flat on a year ago.
The number of minutes Americans spend on Facebook appears to be falling, too. The average was 121 minutes in December 2012, but that fell to 115 minutes in February, according to comScore.
As Facebook itself has warned, the time spent on its pages from those sitting in front of personal computers is declining rapidly because we are switching our screen time to smartphones and tablets.
While smartphone minutes have doubled in a year to 69 a month, that growth is not guaranteed to compensate for dwindling desktop usage.
Facebook is the most authoritative source on its own user numbers, and the firm will update investors on its performance for the March quarter on Wednesday. Wall Street expects revenues of about $1.44bn, up from $1.06bn a year ago.
Shareholders will be particularly keen to learn how fast Facebook's mobile user base is growing, and whether advertising revenues are increasing at the same rate.
Mobile represented nearly a quarter of Facebook's advertising income at the end of 2012, and the network had 680m mobile users a month in December.
According to Pivotal Research Group, advertising revenue could be up 49%, driven by international expansion and the FBX advertising exchange, which uses Facebook to target advertising related to other websites surfers have visited.
The company warned in recent stockmarket filings that it might be losing "younger users" to "other products and services similar to, or as a substitute for, Facebook".
Wary of competition from services that were invented for the mobile phone rather than the PC, founder Mark Zuckerberg has driven through a series of new initiatives in the last year designed to appeal to smartphone users. The most significant is Facebook Home, software that can be downloaded on to certain Android phones to feed news and photos from friends – and advertising – directly to the owner's locked home screen.
This article originally appeared on guardian.co.uk
|Posted on 14 March, 2013 at 19:00|
Completing a PhD is renowned of being extremely complex and time consuming, so my expectations for it to be rather simple, is incredibly unrealistic. I have dedicated over 50 hours in the last week alone re-writing my research proposal and curating my research instruments and although this process has been extremely productive and purposeful, I already know that it is one of the numerous steps that I must complete in order to re-do it all over again.
The research proposal of any research study is just as significant as the other steps in the study. That is, all of the steps in a reseach study are equally as important. If one aspect is completed incorrectly or is rushed, the rest of the process will fall on its knees. My biggest concern for my research is that I am trying to predict what the future will hold so when my research is published around 2018-2020, the data in it will still be relevant. As I am investigating the uses of social networking sites in education and I am concerned that the social networking sites that we use today will not exist in 6-8 years time. We now live in a society where digital assets are liquid and vulnerable. Perhaps this will allow future research to take place to compare the types of social networking sites schools use and how teachers are required to constantly update their own digital skills through professional learning?
I have decided to dedicate at least two hours daily to working on my PhD, as I am finding that when I am at work, I completely ignore my studies on these days. Needless to say, those days which I am not working, I am more than prepared to spend 10-15 hours working on it. I recall a conversation that I had with my supervisor - "it doesnt matter how long it takes, just at least that it is done right" - EXACTLY! And that is what I am prepared to do. I am on track for my next deadline and although I am yet to find a 'study-buddy', I am determined to find one and submit something that I am proud to call my own.
|Posted on 9 March, 2013 at 20:00|
How Many People Use the Top Social Media, Apps & Services?
Airbnb: 3 million users, 300,000 listings
App.net: 20,000 users
AppGratis: 10 million users
Badoo: 172 million users
Bebo: 30 million users
Blippar: 1 million downloads
box.net: 15 million users
Branchout: 30 million users
Buffer: 500,000 users
Care2: 18 million users
Change.org: 25 million users
Classmates.com: 55 million users
Cooliris: 3 million users+
Deezer: 26 million users
Douban: 100 million users
Dropbox: Over 100 million users, 1 billion files uploaded daily
Edmodo: 15 million users
Ebay: 100 million active users
Eskimi: 10 million users
Etsy: 20 million users, 100 million products
Evernote: 45 million users
Fab: 11 million users
Facebook: 1.06 billion monthly active users, 680 million mobile users, more than 42 million pages and 9 million apps
See Also: By The Numbers: 22 Amazing Facebook Stats
Fancy: 2 million users
Feedly: 3 million users
Flickr: 75 million users
Flipboard: 20 million users
Fotopedia: 14 million users
foursquare: 25 million users, 1 million businesses, 10.4 million monthly users
For More foursquare Coverage
Freelancer.com: 6.6 million users
Giggle: 3.2 million users
Glassdoor: 14 million users
Glympse: 4 million users
Gmail: 425 million users
Goodreads: 13 million users
Gogobot: 2.5 million users
Google+: 343 million active users
For More Google+ Coverage
Groupon: 36.9 million users (Tweet this stab)
Hootsuite: 5 million users
Hotmail: 286 million users
Hulu Plus: 3 million users
iCloud: 250 million users
iHeartRadio: 20 million users
Imgur: 56 million users
Instagram: 100 million users, 4 billion photos
Kakao Talk: 70 million users
Keek: 6 million users
Kik Messenger: 30 million users
LevelUp: 1 million users
Life360: 25 million users
Line: 100 million users
LinkedIn: 200 million users
Listia: 2 million users
LockerDome: 4 million users
LoginRadius: 10 million users
MeetMe: 1 million users
MeetMoi: 3 million users
Mega: 3 million users, 125 million files uploaded
Mint.com: 10 million users
Momo: 20 million users
Mxit: 50 million users
MyFitnessPal: 30 million users
MyHeritage: 72 million users
MyLife: 60 million users
MySpace: 25 million users
Netflix: 30 million users
Netlog: 84 million users
Nimbuzz: 100 million users
Ookbee: 3 million users
ooVoo: 70 million subscribers
Openstreetmap: 1 million users
Ortsbo: 212 million unique users
Outlook.com: 60 million users
Pandora Radio: 175 million registered users
Path: 6 million users
Paypal: 117 million users
PicMix: 8 million users, 108 million photos
Pinterest: 25 million users
For More Pinterest Coverage
Pocket: 7.4 million users
Pulse: 20 million users
qeep: 18 million users
Quora: 1.5 million monthly unique users
QQ: 700 million monthly users
Qzone: 500 million users
Rally.org: 3 million users
Rdio: 10 million users
Reddit: 43 million users, 400 million unique visitors; 37 Billion Page Views
Renren: 100 million users
Rounds: 6 million users
Rovio (Angry Birds): 1 billion downloads, 263 million monthly active users
Runkeeper: 14 million users
Shazam: 300 million users; 5 billion tags
Shopkick: 4 million users
Sina Weibo: 503 million users
SkillPages: 8 million users
Skype: 280 million users
Slacker: 4 million monthly users
Socialcam: 56 million monthly users
Songza: 1 million users
Sonico: 55 million users
Soundcloud: 180 million monthly users
SoundHound: 100 million users
Spotify: 33 million active monthly users, 5 million paid subscribers
Square: 3 million users, 250,000 merchants
Steam: 50 million users
Stumbleupon: 25 million users, 1 billion monthly page referrals
Tagged: 330 million registered users
Tango: 80 million users
Trello: 1 million users
Truecaller: 11 million users
Tuenti: 13 million users
Tumblr: 150 million users
Twitter: 500 million total users, more than 200 million active users
For More Twitter Coverage
Viber: 175 million users
Viddy: 39 million users
Viggle: 1.8 million users
Vimeo: 12.6 million users
Visual.ly: 145,000 users
VK.com: 190 million users
Voxer: 70 million users
WAYN: 21 million users
Waze: 34 million users
WeChat: 300 million users
WeiXin: 100 million registered users
Wix: 25 million users
WordPress: 74 million blogs
Wrapp: 1 million users
Xing: 11 million users
Yahoo! Mail: 281 million users
Yammer: 7 million users
Yelp: 78 million users; 30 million reviews
Youtube: 800 million users, 4 billion views per day
Yummly: 7.5 million monthly users
|Posted on 9 March, 2013 at 19:15|
I am putting together this comprehensive list for my research of ICT Pedagogies that we can use in a 21st Century learning environment. Some brilliant sources:
- Peer-to-peer learning, distributed intelligence approach (Read, 2005)
- Learner-centered instruction; student-generated content (Lee, McLoughlin, & Chan, 2006)
- Development of digital and social competencies (Evans, 2006)
- Blending of formal and informal learning; mobile, ubiquitous learning (Miller, 2006)
- Peer teaching, reciprocal learning (Frydenberg, 2006)
- Extended learning, enrichment and extension activities, personalisation of learning content (Edirisingha, Salmon, & Fothergill, 2006)
- Peer-to-peer learning, student-generated content (Kukulska-Hulme, 2005)
- Cross-cultural collaborative work using student-generated content (McCarty, 2005)
- Student-generated content, collaborative writing, organising and editing content (Sener, 2007)
- Resource-based and collaborative learning (Wenzloff, 2005)
|Posted on 5 March, 2013 at 4:55|
Found this and believe its relevant to my classroom (21st Century) and my research:
Digital literacy is the topic that made the ETMOOC learning space so irresistible to me… I think as educators we spout off about wanting our students to be digitally literate, but not many of us (myself included) have a firm grasp about what that actually means, and quite a number of us are still attempting to become digitally literate ourselves.
Whatever that means.
It turns out, defining digital literacy isn’t such an easy task. The etmooc community was fortunate enough to hear Doug Belshaw speak on this topic in a recent webinar. I’ve followed Doug on Twitter for quite some time, and it turns out his dissertation investigates just what is digital literacy… and his TED talk can be viewed here.
Doug explained that digital literacy is quite ambiguous, and he doesn’t have all of the answers when it comes to defining these terms. He made a point to ask, How can we define digital literacy when we don’t know what literacy is? There are over 30 definitions of digital literacy represented in one of the first texts about the topic (from Gilster, published in 1998!!), so it’s no wonder that as educators we have a difficult time trying to figure out what it is and how we can ensure our students are “digitally literate.” (Doug also pointed out that often we like to attach literate to a term in order to make it sound more important ).
Doug shared this quote from his research (Martin, 2006): “Digital literacy is a condition, not a threshold.” It changes the way we teach. It’s a relationship and represents the way we orient ourselves with the world. Digital literacy doesn’t include a sequential set of skills. There’s a lot more “messing around” involved, and it’s subjective and highly contextual. Digital literacy in a K-12 setting varies greatly from that in a collegiate setting.
From his research, Doug crafted Eight Essential Elements of Digital Literacy:
He explained each along with “soundbites” from his research to guide the discussions.
Cultural - We need to pay attention to the culture in which the literacies are situated.
Cognitive - We can’t just consider the procedural ways in which we use devices and programs. It’s the way we think when we’re using them.
Constructive - We can’t be passive consumers of technology/information. We should strive to use digital tools in reflective and appropriate ways to be constructive and be socially active.
Communicative - Digital tools and power structures change the way we communicate. An element of digital literacy is how we take command of that structure and use it to communicate effectively and contribute meaningfully.
Confident - Doug believes that in order to be a proficient user of technology, one must have the courage and confidence to dive into the unknown, take risks, make mistakes, and display confidence when “messing around” with new tools.
Creative - Doug shared this quote from his research, which, to me, said it all:
“The creative adoption of new technology requires teachers who are willing to take risks… a prescriptive curriculum, routine practices… and a tight target-setting regime, is unlikely to be helpful.” Conlon & Simpson (2003)
Critical - Digital literacy involves an understanding of how to deal with hyperspace and hypertext and understanding that it’s “not entirely read or spoken.” Can we critically evaluate the technologies we’re using?
Civic - Something I think many schools are beginning to embrace, we must use technology to improve our lives and the lives of others in our world.
There was a discussion in the session about the term “digital native” and most participants disagreed that digital natives actually existed, and instead the term “digital wisdom” was suggested as an alternative.
So, as someone who is currently working on drafting a sort of elementary “technology curriculum” for her district, based around ISTE’s NETS for Students and aligned to our content curricula, I see a great need to infuse these digital literacy elements into that plan. But, alas, how to do that when digital literacy is so “grey?” How to make a plea for these characteristics and competencies to be modeled by our teachers and administrators when due to our current state, teachers may just revolt if I ask them to veer from the script they’ve been tasked with delivering to spend time on topics and tasks that won’t be progress monitored, standardized-tested or used in their professional evaluations? Alec’s comment in the chat caused me to mutter, “Uh, yes” under my breath when I read it: “Which is where curriculum planners always get stumped by deliverables.” How can we design standards for digital literacy when we’ve proven how contextual it is? And how best to marry these digital literacy elements with the strictly enforced content area curricula our district prescribes?
All questions I shall continue to ponder.
Click here to view a fantastic digital literacy slideset shared by Doug. Check it out, and ask yourself: In my school, how do we approach these eight elements of digital literacy with our students? Teachers? Administrators? Community? If we don’t, how can we start? If you have ideas/advice/resources to share, please do so in the comments below!
This post was originally posted on my blog and my #etmooc reflections blog. For those of you who are unfamiliar with ETMOOC, check it out! This massive open online course focuses on educational technology and media. Topics of discussion include digital literacy, digital storytelling, open access, connected learning, and more. Webinars are archived and the conversations that have emerged in the various online communities are rich.
|Posted on 28 February, 2013 at 3:25|
|Posted on 23 February, 2013 at 5:10|
Came across this article. Just fantastic! Its definitely going to assist me with my proposal and research!
The Impact of Social Media on Children, Adolescents, and Families
Gwenn Schurgin O'Keeffe, MD, Kathleen Clarke-Pearson, MD, Council on Communications and Media
Abstract: Using social media Web sites is among the most common activity of today's children and adolescents. Any Web site that allows social interaction is considered a social media site, including social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter; gaming sites and virtual worlds such as Club Penguin, Second Life, and the Sims; video sites such as YouTube; and blogs. Such sites offer today's youth a portal for entertainment and communication and have grown exponentially in recent years. For this reason, it is important that parents become aware of the nature of social media sites, given that not all of them are healthy environments for children and adolescents. Pediatricians are in a unique position to help families understand these sites and to encourage healthy use and urge parents to monitor for potential problems with cyberbullying, “Facebook depression,” sexting, and exposure to inappropriate content.
Social media participation also can offer adolescents deeper benefits that extend into their view of self, community, and the world, including:
- opportunities for community engagement through raising money for charity and volunteering for local events, including political and philanthropic events;
- enhancement of individual and collective creativity through development and sharing of artistic and musical endeavors;
- growth of ideas from the creation of blogs, podcasts, videos, and gaming sites;
- expansion of one's online connections through shared interests to include others from more diverse backgrounds (such communication is an important step for all adolescents and affords the opportunity for respect, tolerance, and increased discourse about personal and global issues); and
- fostering of one's individual identity and unique social skills.
Enhanced Learning Opportunities
Middle and high school students are using social media to connect with one another on homework and group projects. For example, Facebook and similar social media programs allow students to gather outside of class to collaborate and exchange ideas about assignments. Some schools successfully use blogs as teaching tools,12 which has the benefit of reinforcing skills in English, written expression, and creativity.
Using social media becomes a risk to adolescents more often than most adults realize. Most risks fall into the following categories: peer-to-peer; inappropriate content; lack of understanding of online privacy issues; and outside influences of third-party advertising groups.
The main risk to preadolescents and adolescents online today are risks from each other, risks of improper use of technology, lack of privacy, sharing too much information, or posting false information about themselves or others.28 These types of behavior put their privacy at risk.
When Internet users visit various Web sites, they can leave behind evidence of which sites they have visited. This collective, ongoing record of one's Web activity is called the “digital footprint.” One of the biggest threats to young people on social media sites is to their digital footprint and future reputations. Preadolescents and adolescents who lack an awareness of privacy issues often post inappropriate messages, pictures, and videos without understanding that “what goes online stays online.”8 As a result, future jobs and college acceptance may be put into jeopardy by inexperienced and rash clicks of the mouse. Indiscriminate Internet activity also can make children and teenagers easier for marketers and fraudsters to target.
|Posted on 22 February, 2013 at 20:55|
Defining Critical Thinking
Defining Critical Thinking is quite perplex. There are variations of definitions, some of which include specific terminology whereas others do not. Some such as Shanaz, Profetto-McGrath, Gul, Ashraf and Kauserall (2012) go further and state that educators quite easily confuse critical thinking with other terms such as ‘Problem Solving’, ‘Decision Making’, ‘Creative Thinking’, and ‘Evidence Based Practice’. This suggests that ‘critical thinking’ is more complex to those terms stated above.
It is agreed by educators that critical thinking is a central educational theme in the classroom (Saade, Morin, Tomas, 2012) and that critical thinking is a process that includes reasoning, problem solving and decision making skills to search for information that will enable us to yield more productive results (Saiz & Rivas, 2011). Critical thinking skills entails the ability(ies) of mental processes of discernment, analysis and evaluation applied to information in order to achieve a logical final understanding and/or judgement (Saade, Morin, Tomas, 2012). Stanton, et al, (2011) extend on this and state that critical thinking skills are likely to include iterative and cyclic activities, such as problem solving, development of competing hypothesis, calculating probabilities and making decisions.
Thus critical thinking is regarded as the most important skill in order to discern false, incomplete, obsolete information (Saade, Morin, Tomas, 2012) and a skilled critical thinker is the one who can acknowledge the difference between logical reasoning and personal opinion (Saade, Morin, Tomas, 2012).
Critical thinking stems from the ability of higher-order-thinking which has been linked to deep learning (deep learning can be defined as the intention to extract meaning which produces active learning processes that involve relating ideas and looking for patterns and principles on the one hand and using evidence and examining the logic of the argument on the other (Saade, Morin, Tomas, 2012). This also suggests that different learning activities lead to different levels of critical thinking (Saade, Morin, Tomas, 2012) which must be considered by educators in creating programs and developing classroom content.
So who are Critical Thinkers?
Branch (2000) states that individuals who attain the power of critical thinking are curious, open minded, systematic and analytical, they have self-esteem and are willing to search for the truth’ whereas, Demir (2011) states that critical thinking is not a random style of thinking, that those individuals with critical thinking need to examine the reasons of problems in depth, try to understand, oppose when needed and be able to look at occurrences without obsession and objectivity.
Critical Thinking and Learning
As critical thinking is at the core of most intellectual activity that involves students in learning to recognise or develop an argument, use evidence in support of that argument, draw reasoned conclusions, and use information to solve problems, educators can use tools such as promote interpreting, analysing, evaluating, explaining, sequencing, reasoning, comparing, questioning, inferring, hypothesising, appraising, testing and generalising (National Curriculum, 2013).
|Posted on 27 January, 2013 at 7:40|
I officially started my PhD last October, and although I have completed quite a lot of work thus far (in 3 months), I still feel as though time is against me and that I have made little progress.
As you can tell by my Blog entries, I am not a full time student, nor am I a full time teacher. I am someone whom wears many, many hats and likes to do quite a lot ALL OF THE TIME. But, please dont get me wrong. I am not one to complain about the huge volume of work that I need to complete. On the contrary, I quite enjoy it.
I completed a Masters in Education in 2011 and thought that I would take a year off and relax and 'enjoy' life. Instead, I attended every professional learning session, workshop and industry open day that was available to every NSW Teacher. I learned so much last year and met so many amazing educators, that when it came to writing my application for my PhD, I knew exactly what I wanted to study and felt that had the know-how to do it. Meeting teachers from other schools, regardless if they are from a DEC or Non DEC school, rural or city school, single sex or co-ed school, we all have the same goal...and that is to help our students be excited about their learning journey.
My learning journey is no where near complete. As I stated, I begin my PhD in October and step 1 was to organise all of the adminstrative tasks to be a member of the university. Macquarie University is a fantastic institution as much of it could be completed online and within a few keystrokes, I had access to the university's library and the most sophisticated databases around the world. I then began familiarising myself with the latest literature in social networking. As this has been a very passionate area for me and something that I can continuously immerse my students in within the classroom, this was a relatively easy task. Although my collection of readings were a couple of years old, updating it seemed relatively simple. In November, I began writing my research proposal. I am one to work in 'stints'. I will be able to do quite a lot of work for a day or two and then stop for a week and then repeat my habit. Im also very lucky that I am a nightowl and that I dont require much sleep as this is when I am able to complete a lot of work without disturbance. I have now submitted 2 drafts and although I am 'liking' the direction my research proposal is heading, I am realistic to understand that it could and probably, will change. Like the actual research, flexibility is the key...times change and so must we.
The next things that I must do is find schools who would like to participate in my study, create my research instruments and start writing my ethics applications (I have 3 to complete).
Friends and colleagues have begun asking me what the workload of a PhD is like and how I am finding the experience. Well, so far, its ok. I dont feel overwhelmed (I only feel overwhelmed at report time). I have time to research and to read and I always have time for my family and friends. So far, my personal life has not been impacted by my studies.
I believe that having a supervisor that you can trust and that is genuinly interested in assisting you makes a difference. I communicate with my supervisor mainly by email and his response time is so fast, that it allows me to maintain my momentum. He is also extremely motivating and always knows how to keep me excited about my research. If you are thinking about completing a postgraduate degree with a research component, interview the lecturers at your university first - believe me, it will make a huge difference to your own personal outcomes and goals.
Having a great support network is key to success - regardless of what you do!
|Posted on 25 January, 2013 at 7:30|
Facebook introduced a new revolution system named Facebook graph search. Its simply a tool that one can use to find people who shares your interests. Facebook Inc announced to their users that it is a privacy setting that works like a news feed. Users can use this tool that help them find information’s about another's network.
The graph searches through photos of friends, restaurants your friends have been to, photos one likes, music and so forth. Its a great tool for individuals who are not experienced with Facebook as they can find what they are looking for quite easily. The Facebook graph search tool helps individuals to search and retrieve the things that he is looking for.....perfect for potential employers! ....so what are the implications for education?
|Posted on 25 January, 2013 at 7:30|
Twitter Newly introduced video sharing service named Vine. Vine is a mobile based video sharing service to share short looping videos. Everyone can share their (6 seconds or less) videos. Twitter bring the Vine application to capture your favorite motion and sounds.
This Vine application provides the option to share 140-characters tweet or 6 second video. You can share this video in Facebook or twitter through Vine application.Vain also offer video search option based on subjects or hash tags. Vine application now support English only. This application must required iOS 5.0 or later.
Now this Vine application available on iPhone and iPad touch.
You can find more details about Vine in their official blog.
|Posted on 7 November, 2012 at 6:15|
I know this topic seems a little far-fetched, but I have spent a considerable amount of time analysing the social behaviours of teenage students, that I am now pondering the social behaviours of my own. I like many educators, parent or adult (who are at a Westfields anywhere) see how teenagers interact with each other in ‘person’. This is often different to how they interact ‘online’. There is much evidence that already supports this notion of teenagers acting differently online, however, research also states that teenagers are ‘awkward, friendless and have little social skills’ when out and about in the real world and therefore are forced to create a fake persona that they can live through online. Im not sure which teenager you are mentally picturing right now, but every single teenager at my school including all of my nieces and nephews do not fit this profile. In fact, they couldn’t be more ‘in’ as all they appear to do is constantly check that their hair is perfect and take photos of themselves with a mobile phone. For those who claim that they have no friends in real life, a fake persona online makes teenagers more accepted and ‘liked’ by hundreds, if not thousands of people that they generally don’t know. So, if making friends whilst being a teenager is so difficult, what do us 'over 30s' need to do to find a friend or is it all over for us?
I’m not sure how many people can relate to my story, but I feel that I have more sincere friends now than I have ever had. And many of those are people I am still meeting. Colleagues that I once said ‘hi’ to as I passed them in the corridor are now turning into great friends and our social media interaction simply supports our friendship, not dominating it (this means, that we still ‘talk’ in case you are one to ‘inbox’ a conversation). People I am meeting at conferences, networking meetings, professional learning sessions and more and now considered to be more than an ‘acquaintance’. This is certainly the proof that I need to confirm that friendships, valuable friendships, can be made at any age, phase or stage of our lives. So, thank you to all of my new friends and thank you to social media for helping us stay in touch whilst still giving us our voices.
|Posted on 21 October, 2012 at 7:20|
So, what exactly is a Social Networking Site (SNS)?
Defining Social Networking Sites is as complex as finding and agreeing on a most accepted term for this internet based technological tool. The terms ‘social networking’, ‘social media’, ‘social networking service’ and ‘social software’ are all used interchangeably in ones attempts to define these websites that many individuals are embracing in their personal, professional and educational lives. It is noted that the term ‘social networking sites’ is most commonly used by scholars and bloggers and perhaps considered to be a more respected term within scholarly documents, thus will be used as the preferred term for the purposes of this paper.
Interestingly there are differences in social networking site definitions written by scholars and bloggers. Scholars tend to define social networking sites by their technical capabilities and its benefits whereas bloggers tend to define social networking sites quite vaguely as well include a list of its characteristics. A comparison of these will be discussed in this paper. There are also vast differences in definitions of what ‘a social networking site constitutes of’ over time. This is mainly due the development of tools, widgets, add-ons and applications that are now available that may not have been available at the original time of print of that particular publication. These definitions will also be recorded. Moreover, many definitions (including those written recently) state that social networking site users are teenagers and often solely refer to this demographic when explaining its use. This is extremely interesting as there is much data that confirm that the most typical users of social networking site are female and aged between 18 and 30 years. Recent data has also noted that the elderly are also utilising this tool.
It must also be noted that there is an extensive collection of literature that discusses social networking sites within a medical context. Within each of these definitions, specific medical websites are identified in an attempt to authenticate the definition. In most instances, the definition of a social networking site is general and only consists of its ability to connect numerous people within a virtual context. Additionally these papers proceed to illustrate the full acceptance and active use of medicine based social networking sites for its professionals and patients. It has also been identified that there is an emergence of scholarly publications that discuss social networking in various professions, such as that of marketing and advertising, translation, media and nationalism, which also discuss social networking sites in context with their industry.
According to a report by Nielsen (2012): “In the U.S. alone, total minutes spent on social networking sites have increased 83 percent year-over-year. In fact, total minutes spent on Facebook increased nearly 700 percent year-over-year, growing from 1.7 billion minutes in April 2008 to 13.9 billion in April 2009, making it the No. 1 social networking site for the month.”
Rationale for finding the ideal definition
Determining the most sound definition for social networking sites is imperative as it determines which sites can be classified as a ‘social networking site’. Some scholars and bloggers include social networking sites to be a part of the Web 2.0 suite whereas, others do not. Some classify websites to be a social networking site, whereas, others do not. Additionally, some recognise social networking tools and add-ons to be a critical component of what constitutes a social networking site whereas others do not. This is quite important as it results in some identifying sites such as twitter and Google as a social networking site whereas others do not. Having a clear definition of what a social networking site is may lead to a distinctive list of which website IS a social networking site. This is actually more difficult than anticipated as even Alexa Web Company (2012), the most accepted internet traffic tracking website has multiple categories for social networking sites and each category is a stand-alone list. For example, Facebook is only in ONE of their many lists that fall under the social networking site banner.
The most accepted social networking site definition
The first considered definitions of social networking sites were those that referred to Computed Mediated Communications (CMC’s) (Lockyear) which are considered to be a communicative transaction that occurs through the use of two or more computers. Recent definitions have also extended this and include ‘computer mediated formats’ which accept tools such as instant messaging, email, chat rooms and text messaging (Thurlow, Lengel, & Tomic 2004) to be considered as a CMC.
The most common social networking definition is a definition that is repeatedly used as a point of reference in many scholarly publications is that by Boyd and Ellison (2007). Boyd & Ellison (2007) define social networking sites (SNSs) as “web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system” (para. 4). Boyd & Ellison (2007) also state that “what makes social network sites unique is not that they allow individuals to meet strangers, but rather that they enable users to articulate and make visible their social networks” (para. 6). Thus, this definition is the most recognised and accepted definition of social networking sites. It should, therefore, be used as a basis for further elaboration, simply due to the technological advancements (as stated) since 2007.
Boyd and Ellison (2007) use the term "social network site" to describe this phenomenon, the term "social networking sites" also appears in public discourse, and the two terms are often used interchangeably. We chose not to employ the term "networking" for two reasons: emphasis and scope. "Networking" emphasizes relationship initiation, often between strangers. While networking is possible on these sites, it is not the primary practice on many of them, nor is it what differentiates them from other forms of computer-mediated communication (CMC).
They continue to add that on many of the large SNSs, participants are not necessarily "networking" or looking to meet new people; instead, they are primarily communicating with people who are already a part of their extended social network. To emphasize this articulated social network as a critical organizing feature of these sites, we label them "social network sites." While SNSs are often designed to be widely accessible, many attract homogeneous populations initially, so it is not uncommon to find groups using sites to segregate themselves by nationality, age, educational level, or other factors that typically segment society (Hargittai, 2007), even if that was not the intention of the designers.
Today, almost all definitions use Facebook as an example when defining social networking sites. Facebook is the number 1 social networking site, and has been, since its commencement into the World Wide Web regardless of being blocked (not available) in numerous countries.
|Posted on 16 October, 2012 at 5:25|
Stumbled across this and am absolutely fascinated by it
1. Facebook has 845 million active users.
2. The average Facebook user has 130 friends.
3. The average Facebook visit lasts 23 minutes.
4. 46% of Facebook users are over the age of 45.
5. 57% of Facebook users are female (43% male).
6. 57% of Facebook users report having been to “some college” (24% bachelors or graduate degree).
7. 47% of Facebook users report making between $50,000 – $99,000 annually (33% between $25,000 – $49,999).
1. Titter has 127 million active users.
2. 13% of internet users also use Twitter.
3. 54% of Twitter users use Twitter on their mobile devices.
4. 36% of Twitter users tweet at least once a day.
5. The average visit on Twitter lasts for 14 minutes.
6. 59% of Twitter users are female (41% male).
1. Google+ has had 90 million unique visitors.
2. Google+ users are 71% male.
3. The most common occupation of a Google+ user is an engineer.
4. 44% of Google+ users are “single”.
1. Pinterest has had 21 million unique visits.
2. The top locations for Pinterest users are Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky and Tennessee.
3. The top interests of Pinterest users are crafts, hobbies, interior design and fashion.
4. 82% of Pinterest users are female (18% male).
5. The average Pinterest visit lasts 17 minutes.
1. LinkedIn has 150 million registered users.
2. 75% of LinkedIn users use it for business purposes.
3. There are 2 million companies on LinkedIn.
4. 50% of LinkedIn users have a bachelors or graduate degree.
|Posted on 13 October, 2012 at 6:25|
I stumbled across this reading today by Otto & Albion (2009) and reflected on its truth:
Even if “technology leadership” is a characteristic of the school community rather than an individual such as the principal (Anderson & Dexter, 2000), a strong case can be made that principals’ beliefs and understandings are crucial in the development of a school culture that will support creative integration of ICTs for teaching and learning (Otto, 2001). Understanding the nature and origins of principals’ beliefs may be the first step towards assisting principals to work more effectively to develop appropriate school visions for the integration of ICTs. Prior research, including self-efficacy theory, provides a useful starting point for developing a framework to guide such research.
Bandura (1997) defines self-efficacy as the "beliefs in one's capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments" (p. 3). In the context of this paper, "beliefs in one's capabilities" refers to the confidence a principal has in his or her beliefs about teaching with ICTs, and "courses of action" refers to the effectiveness of the principal as a visionary and agent for change. Non-teaching principals have few opportunities to test their beliefs in a classroom over extended periods of time. While a principal may have read about teaching with ICTs and observed teachers teaching with ICTs, personal classroom experiences may be limited to print based pedagogy. Principals with low self-efficacy for leadership in respect of ICTs may be less willing to advise teachers, and their evaluation of teaching with ICT may be limited to comparisons with print based pedagogy. However, at some point, pedagogical principles for teaching with the new technologies depart from print-based learning, otherwise teachers will use the technologies in the same way they use print. This is one of the problems identified by educational commentators such as Luke (2001).
In their study of the relationship between self-efficacy and willingness to act, Dimmock and Hattie (1996) concluded that high self-efficacy is not only a factor in creating conditions for change, but also reduces principals' stress levels and enables them to cope with unfamiliar situations and challenges. As well, high self-efficacy is linked to school reform because the principal has the confidence to take advantage of new opportunities. Self-efficacy is an element of empowerment, that is, 'taking charge of ones own growth and resolving ones own problems' (Ghaith & Shaaban, 1999, p. 495). Furthermore, principals with high self-efficacy are more likely to assume collaborative leadership styles and allow participative decision making, while maintaining confidence in their influence as leaders (Dimmock & Hattie, 1996).
|Posted on 10 October, 2012 at 6:35|
In an effort to create the most sound definition of Social Media, I came across this list. Very interesting to see what the perceptions of others are....and just how it is all based on perspective:
1. Media is an instrument on communication, like a newspaper or a radio, so social media would be a social instrument of communication
2. Social media is content created and shared by individuals on the web using freely available websites that allow users to create and post their own images, video and text information and then share that with either the entire internet or just a select group of friends
3. Social media essentially is a category of online media where people are talking, participating, sharing, networking, and bookmarking online
4. The online forms of communicating to the masses, which include blogs, microblogs, social networking sites and podcasts
5. Social media is any online media platform that provides content for users and also allows users to participate in the creation or development of the content in some way
6. Social Media is the sharing of user (human) created information and interacting on-line using Internet technology
7. Social Media is the democratization of information, transforming people from content readers into publishers. It is the shift from a broadcast mechanism, one-to-many, to a many-to-many model, rooted in conversations between authors, people, and peers
8. Social media in plain English (video)
9. Social Media is the new term for socialising online. It allows people to freely interact with each other online where-ever they are and whenever they want
10. Social media are the various forms of user generated content and the collection of websites and applications that enables people to interact and share information online
11. Social media is the use of technology combined with social interaction to create or co-create value
12. Social media is people having conversations online. These conversations can take a variety of forms; for example, blogs and comments or photo sharing
13. Digital word of mouth
14. Social media is people having conversations online
15. Social Media is the meeting place between people and technology
16. Social Media is often used as another term for user-generated content
17. An umbrella term that defines the various activities that integrate technology, social interaction, and the construction of words and pictures
18. Social media explained (video)
19. Internet-based software and interfaces that allow individuals to interact with one another, exchanging details about their lives such as biographical data, professional information, personal photos and up-to-the-minute thought
20. Social media is any media form that displays itself to an open public and encourages interaction between the host and all observers
21. Social media is the technological path of least resistance for two-way communication and distribution through a large audience who would otherwise be unconnected if it were not for the technological medium
22. Social media is a group of Internet-based applications that allow the creation and exchange of user generated content. This content is then shared through social interaction
23. Social media is content created by people using highly accessible and scalable publishing technologies. At its most basic sense, social media is a shift in how people discover, read and share news, information and content
24. What is Social Media (presentation)
25. Social media is life online
26. Social Media, by definition, is the collection of strategies, practices and tools for communicating, creating, sharing and discussing news, information and other media online
27. Social media is technically a means for social interaction through the web
28. Social media are online venues, such as social networking sites, blogs and wikis that enable people to store and share information called content, such as text, pictures, video and links
29. Social media is about interacting with and sharing information with others online
30. Social media are online communications in which individuals shift fluidly and flexibly between the role of audience and author. To do this, they use social software that enables anyone without knowledge of coding, to post, comment on, share or mash up content and to form communities around shared interests
31. Social media is game changing, not a closed system, not just another media, transparent, more than blogs, decentralized and real-time and measurable
33. Social media is communications
34. Internet media that has the ability to interact with it in some way
35. Social media itself is a catch-all term for sites that may provide radically different social actions
36. Social Media is simply people having conversations online
37. Social media is people meeting other people
38. Simply refers to communication/publication platforms which are generated and sustained by the interpersonal interaction of individuals through the specific medium or tool
39. Social media also includes social networks that insist on people to come together online that shares a common interest
40. Media is an instrument of communication, like a newspaper or a radio, so social media would be a social instrument of communication
41. Social media explained visually (presentation)
42. Social media isn’t about the media, it’s about being social
43. Social media is people talking to people online
44. Social Media is word of mouth on steroids
45. Social Media consists of media that support and encourage social interaction among user
46. Social Media is generally any website or service that uses Web 2.0 techniques and concepts
47. A term used to describe a variety of Web-based platforms, applications and technologies that enable people to socially interact with one another online
48. Social media are media for social interaction, using highly accessible and scalable publishing techniques
49. Social media mainly consists of user-generated Internet content
50. Social media is user generated content that is shared over the internet via technologies that promote engagement, sharing and collaboration
|Posted on 7 October, 2012 at 4:30|
I stumbled across this which I believe could lead to something in my own research.....Im sure that this will become a 'buzz word/phrase' in the near future:
Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) attempts to identify the nature of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching, while addressing the complex, multifaceted and situated nature of teacher knowledge. At the heart of the TPACK framework, is the complex interplay of three primary forms of knowledge: Content (CK), Pedagogy (PK), and Technology (TK). As must be clear, the TPACK framework builds on Shulman’s idea of Pedagogical Content Knowledge.
Definitive descriptions of TPACK can be found in Mishra & Koehler, 2006, or through any of the other links in the “Learn more about tpck” box on the right margin of this page, or on the left margin of every page.
The TPACK approach goes beyond seeing these three knowledge bases in isolation. On the other hand, it emphasizes the new kinds of knowledge that lie at the intersections between them. Considering P and C together we get Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Shulman’s idea of knowledge of pedagogy that is applicable to the teaching of specific content. Similarly, considering T and C taken together, we get Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), the knowledge of the relationship between technology and content. At the intersection of T and P, is Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), which emphasizes the existence, components and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in the settings of teaching and learning.
Finally, at the intersection of all three elements is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator). Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, [transactional] relationship between all three components.
The TPACK Survey can be downloaded in both word and pdf format
|Posted on 6 September, 2012 at 5:40|
In preparation for my PhD, I have begun immersing myself in literature and new research regarding the latest developments and theorems surrounding the use of social media in an educational context. There are so many people attempting to define social media and trying to include every facet in relation to this definition, where in reality, this cannot be achieved. As we all know, any technological device, whether it be a pc, mobile phone etc that are state-of-the-art today will be out of date and possibly even redundant tomorrow. Social media is exactly the same. Publications written 5 years ago document that Facebook is inferior to MySpace and the like. Today, undoubtedly, Facebook is the number 1 social media website in the world.
Further to defining this paradigm, many have attempted to either discuss the successes or failures of using social media in the classroom. Unfortunately, many of these have an underlying message of using iPads, mobile devices, looking at privacy issues, and thus do not provide a clear finding on whether social media can be used pedagogically.
I continue my journey to finding up-to-date information about the use of social media and it's use in a high school (and where possible), in australa.