The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0033-0337.htm
PROG
42,3
Use of Web 2.0 technologies in
LIS education: experiences at
Tallinn University, Estonia
262
Received 27 March 2008
Revised 14 April 2008
Accepted 23 April 2008
Sirje Virkus
Institute of Information Studies, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe the experiences of the Institute of Information
Studies of Tallinn University in introducing ICT, including Web 2.0 technologies, in library and
information science education, and to explore the role that these can play in new models of learning
and teaching.
Design/methodology/approach – Web 2.0 applications are reviewed in this paper and the role that
these can play in new models of learning and teaching. The introduction of new technologies into
library and information science (LIS) education is examined through a case study at the Tallinn
University.
Findings – Web 2.0 is influencing the way in which people learn, access information and
communicate with one another. The Institute of Information Studies of Tallinn University has a long
history in using ICT in its teaching and learning. Experiences with open and distance learning and
e-learning have transformed teaching and learning, provided new alternative delivery modes, and
helped to reach new target groups. Recently the staff have been experimenting with Web 2.0
technologies and a few have successfully adopted them in teaching and learning.
Practical implications – The paper suggests that in order to be successful in our modern society
LIS educators should take advantage of new ICT and consider the learning preferences of digital
natives as well as digital immigrants. Web 2.0 supports constructivist approaches to learning and has
great potential to socialise online learning to a greater extent than we have previously seen. Web 2.0
technologies should be implemented taking into account pedagogical perspectives.
Originality/value – This paper supports the idea that integration of information and
communication technologies, including Web 2.0 technologies, into LIS education is an important
challenge for LIS educators.
Keywords Higher education, Information science, E-learning, Communication technologies, Estonia
Paper type Case study
Program: electronic library and
information systems
Vol. 42 No. 3, 2008
pp. 262-274
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0033-0337
DOI 10.1108/00330330810892677
1. What is Web 2.0?
Over the past three years there has been an increasing interest in the new generation of
web-based technologies, tools and services under the labels Web 2.0 and social software
or social media (Bryant, 2007). The phrase “Web 2.0” became popular after the first
O’Reilly Media Web 2.0 conference in 2004 and provides now more than 76 million hits in
Google. The fourth Web 2.0 Summit that will take place in San Francisco, California, in
November 2008 highlights the importance of these developments. However, there is “still
a huge amount of disagreement about just what Web 2.0 means, with some people
decrying it as a meaningless marketing buzzword, and others accepting it as the new
conventional wisdom” (O’Reilly, 2005). Oberhelman (2007) notes that “Web 2.0 refers
generally to web tools that, rather than serve as a forum for authorities to impart
information to a passive, receptive audience, actually invite site visitors to comment,
collaborate, and edit information, creating a more distributed form of authority in which
the boundaries between site creator and visitor are blurred”.
Web 2.0 has been referred to as a:
.
technology (Franklin and Van Harmelen, 2007);
.
second generation of web-based tools and services (Guntram, 2007); and
.
community-driven online platform or an attitude rather than technology
(Downes, 2005).
Downes (2005), a Canadian researcher, believes that the emergence of Web 2.0 is a
social revolution rather than a technological revolution. Web 2.0 tools and services
foster new modes of connectivity, communication, collaboration, sharing of
information, content development and social organisation. Bryant (2007) calls this
new way of living as the “always on” culture where distinctions between learning,
working and entertainment are beginning to blur.
However, the new user-centred paradigm in which users are, at the same time, both
producers and consumers of content and services has evolved from previous web
developments. The web before the dot.com crash is usually referred to as Web 1.0.
O’Reilly (2005) cites a number of examples of how Web 2.0 can be distinguished from
Web 1.0, such as Web 1.0 was mainly a platform for information, but Web 2.0 is also a
platform for participation.
In a nutshell, what was happening was that the web was shifting from being a medium, in
which information was transmitted and consumed, into being a platform, in which content
was created, shared, remixed, repurposed, and passed along. And what people were doing
with the web was not merely reading books, listening to the radio or watching TV, but having
a conversation, with a vocabulary consisting not just of words but of images, video,
multimedia and whatever they could get their hands on. And this became, and looked like,
and behaved like, a network (Downes, 2005).
Many authors refer to the Britannica Online as a typical example of Web 1.0, and to the
Wikipedia as a typical example of Web 2.0. Thus, Web 1.0 is characterised as “read
only Web” and Web 2.0 as “read-write Web” which “enables the users to add, share,
rate or adjust information” (Drachsler et al., 2007).
Some of the typical features of Web 1.0 are: static and non-interactive web pages;
content management systems; portals and taxonomy. Web 2.0 is about blogs, wikis,
RSS (Really Simple Syndication) and social tagging. Blogging is one of the most highly
favoured features of the Web 2.0. A weblog, or blog, is just an online diary where
entries are displayed in reverse chronological order and in addition to text messages,
postings can include photos, links, video and audio. Tools, like Blogger and
WordPress, make the creation of blogs very easy. Wiki is a web site creation and
authoring tool that allows a group of people collaboratively to edit web site content.
RSS is a format for syndicating content on the web. RSS is based on XML and allows
bloggers to send their content to subscribed readers. Instead of checking web sites
daily for updates, people can subscribe to the site’s RSS feed and get a notification
every time new information is posted to the web site. Services based on RSS feeds can
be used to update web sites continually with thematically relevant content. Tagging is
an open and informal method of categorising that allows users to associate keywords
or “tags” with online content (Downes, 2005; Farkas, 2007).
Use of Web 2.0
technologies
263
PROG
42,3
264
However, Web 2.0 is not restricted to these tools and services. Some of the popular
examples of Web 2.0 include:
.
YouTube – which allows members to upload videos for everybody to see and
vote on their popularity;
.
social networking sites, such as Facebook and MySpace, with hundreds of
millions of users which allow subscribers to create web spaces where they can
share their thoughts, music, videos and pictures;
.
Flickr’s photo collecting, tagging, and distribution service;
.
sites like del.icio.us that allow users to bookmark favourite sites and share those
bookmarks with others;
.
free Audacity software for recording and editing sounds that allow users to
record talk and music which, when combined with RSS, become podcasting; and
.
tools such as CiteULike allow scholars to share their personal bookmarks
(Downes, 2005).
However, the above are just some examples. These types of sites have become
incredibly popular. Reding (2006) notes that blogs have doubled every five months for
the last two years; social networking web sites usage is multiplying year on year; over
the past three years peer-to-peer has become the largest source of traffic on the internet
and FON, the wifi-sharing network, has become the largest wifi network in the world in
just one year (www.fon.com/en/info/whatsFon). The rapid evolution of Web 2.0
applications offers rich user experiences where the process of knowing is a
community-based, collaborative endeavour (Alexander, 2006).
2. Web 2.0 in an educational context
Several authors believe that the development and growth of the web has been a major
driver of educational change and offers new perspectives and challenges to education
at all levels (Steeples and Jones, 2002). It is suggested that Web 2.0 supports
constructivist approaches to learning and has great potential to socialise online
learning to a greater extent than we have previously seen (Bryant, 2007). These tools
and services can support much flexibility in the learning processes and allow for easy
publication, sharing of ideas and re-use of study content, commentaries, and links to
relevant resources in information environments that are managed by the teachers and
learners themselves (Guntram, 2007, p. 23). Web 2.0 is well suited to active and
meaningful learning and collaborative knowledge building. Mejias (2006) describes it
in this way:
It exhibits three comparable advantages to those associated with problem-based learning:
.
.
.
It engages students in learning to learn by having them assume some of the responsibility
for integrating and maintaining the social software systems that allow learning to happen.
It promotes the benefits of working co-operatively with tools that facilitate the
aggregation and organisation of knowledge while at the same time demonstrating that the
diversity of individual research interests enhances learning for all.
It helps students develop practical research skills that they need in a world where
knowledge construction and dissemination make increasing use of online information
networks.
Web 2.0 is suitable for educational and lifelong learning purposes in our knowledge
society, because our modern society is built to a large degree on digital environments of
work and social communication, and educational practices must foster a creative and
collaborative engagement of learners with this digital environment in the learning
process (Guntram, 2007, p. 17). However, open educational practices require a decisive
shift away from the teacher-centred knowledge-transfer model and highlight active,
constructive and the collaborative engagement of students with authentic and complex
real world problems. A new educational culture and mind-set as well as overcoming
considerable organisational barriers are important prerequisites for that (Geser, 2007;
Guntram, 2007).
The use of Web 2.0 technologies in higher education is still a new phenomenon and its
integration into teaching and learning is in the initial phase. The report Open Educational
Practices and Resources. OLCOS Roadmap 2012 (Guntram, 2007) which is based on
research work, expert workshops and other consultations with many international
projects that promote the creation, sharing and re-use of open educational resources,
concludes that “new educational approaches are not easily found and their
implementation will be difficult if they require considerable transformations of current
educational frameworks and practices”. The current focus in education is mainly on
providing access to more content in digital formats and there is little consideration of
whether this will promote real innovation in teaching and learning (Guntram, 2007, p. 31).
However, there already exists experimentation with Web 2.0 and social software tools
and services at universities, colleges and schools. Wikis probably take the lead and also
weblogging, or blogging, has seen some interesting uses. Blogs have been used to
support group discussions, extend the boundaries of the classroom and encourage
students in looking for information. Wikis have been used to support the development of
teamwork skills and consensus building as well as sharing of information and ideas.
Educators have also taken an interest in podcasting (Guntram, 2007, p. 30). Recently,
researchers have been focusing more on how to incorporate the new web trends into the
learning process and how to apply Web 2.0 concepts to create new learning experiences
and learning across communities (Chatti et al., 2007). It is also recognised that technology
alone does not deliver educational success. It only becomes valuable in education if
learners and teachers can do something useful with it (OECD, 2001, pp. 24-5).
It is suggested that an area which can make education and lifelong learning more
effective and efficient is e-learning. Unfortunately, there has been a tendency for many
e-learning models just to imitate previous educational paradigms (Guntram, 2007).
However, the growth of the open source movement and social networking, and use of
new web-based tools and services among a new generation of students has questioned
the previous models of e-learning. To highlight new developments in e-learning based
on Web 2.0 and social networking the phrase “e-learning 2.0” was coined by Downes
(2005) who believes that this new world of e-learning reflects very much the ideas of “a
community of practice” suggested by Wenger (1998). In this model, students form
networks according to their interests, they collaborate and learn together, they develop
and share content using various tools and resources, and re-use and organise content
according to their preferences and needs.
Some Web 2.0 “tools” that are thought to be of interest for an e-learning 2.0 are:
.
Social software for easy publishing and sharing of ideas, content and links. In
particular blogs, wikis, social bookmarking, and content sharing web sites such
Use of Web 2.0
technologies
265
PROG
42,3
.
266
.
.
.
as Flickr. Increasingly also collaborative authoring and other interactions in real
time (examples include Writeboard, Writely, SynchroEdit).
Collaborative filtering: discovery of the “most interesting” resources through
filtering techniques, but also ongoing conversations, recommendations and
cross-linking of resources in social networks.
Open Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) of web service applications
(e.g. Google Maps API, Flickr API) for creative re-use (i.e. “mashups”) of services
and content.
Many services based on RSS feeds as well as the personal libraries of end users
with information about, and a link to, available thematically relevant content
(which can also be podcats or videocasts).
The content on Web 2.0 web sites which is often licensed as open content (e.g.
Creative Commons) (Guntram, 2007, p. 24).
The authors of the report Open Educational Practices and Resources. OLCOS Roadmap
2012 (Guntram, 2007, p. 30) conclude:
Therefore, we expect that by 2012 a stronger shift towards e-learning will take place that will
build on tools and services for collaboratively creating and sharing content while also
drawing on many larger and smaller publicly funded educational and other e-content
repositories, including offerings of private-public partnership.
3. Web 2.0 in LIS education at Tallinn University
The use of ICTs for collaboration as well as for enhancement of educational processes
presents a challenge to European Library and Information Science (LIS) educators.
Kajberg (2003, p.40) notes that a few LIS schools use the possibilities of modern ICT for
collaboration, and LIS-specific e-learning across geographical boundaries is difficult to
spot in Europe. In 2008 we can follow some developments, but still a limited number of
authors have discussed the pedagogical or technological innovation in European LIS
education (e.g. Virkus and Sponberg, 1999; Iivonen et al., 2001; Virkus and Wood, 2004;
Bawden et al., 2007; Virkus, 2007).
However, in order to survive in our post-modern society, possibilities of modern
ICTs cannot just be ignored by LIS educators. In addition to changing learning and
teaching approaches discussed earlier, one visible trend that has got much attention is
the changing student population. Prensky (2001) offers the phrases “digital
immigrants” and “digital natives” to highlight this radical change. This new
generation, sometimes also called the “N-gen”, approaches learning and living in new
ways, for instance they:
.
are better at taking in information, making decisions quickly, multi-tasking,
parallel processing and thinking graphically rather than textually;
.
assume connectivity and see the world through the lens of games and play;
.
have a diversity of experiences and needs, and they are expecting instant
responses and feedback; and
.
are goal and achievement oriented.
The learning preferences of digital natives include the use of technology, interaction,
teamwork, experiential and collaborative activities (gaming, simulations, role playing),
and multitasking (Prensky, 2004).
The Demos report (Green and Hannon, 2007, p. 17) notes:
The current generation of young people will reinvent the workplace, and the society they live
in. They will do it along the progressive lines that are built into the technology they use
everyday – of networks, collaboration, co-production and participation. The change in
behaviour has already happened. We have to get used to it, accept that the flow of knowledge
moves both ways and do our best to make sure that no one is left behind.
LIS education has been provided at Tallinn University since 1965. The Institute of
Information Studies currently offers the following programmes:
.
BA, MA and PhD in Information Science;
.
MA in Information Management (online); and
.
MA in Records Management.
The development of joint international programmes and English language courses has
been an important recent initiative for preparing students for professional life in a
global, instead of a strictly national, setting and coping with scarce resources, rapid
technological change and increased calls for quality assurance. In 2007 a joint
international master programme on Digital Library Learning (DILL) between Oslo
University College (Norway), Parma University (Italy) and Tallinn University (Estonia)
which was supported in the framework of the European Union (EU) Erasmus Mundus
programme, started (http://dill.hio.no/). The first semester was offered in Oslo, the
second semester in Tallinn and the third semester in Parma. Students can choose to
write their Masters thesis at either of the three partner institutions. Another new online
masters programme, Information Management in Digital Environment, is currently
being developed. In 2008 there are 241 students and 10 full-time staff members in the
Institute.
From the middle of the 1990s there has been an attempt at the Department of
Information Studies (since January 2008 the Institute of Information Studies) at Tallinn
to improve and innovate traditional education as well as to provide new and alternative
learning opportunities. The new ICT-based learning approaches of the mid-1990s
influenced a rethink of the whole teaching and learning process. Since 1994 the
department started, step-by-step, to develop students’ knowledge, skills and
understanding in reflective thinking, critical analysis, problem-solving,
learning-to-learn, teamwork and presentation. The department started to apply
methods which supported student participation and encouraged students to develop
research and writing skills, and to be self-confident in articulating their thoughts and
in writing. Thus, in the framework of distance education (DE), open and distance
learning (ODL) and e-learning, the department has experimented with ICT-based
teaching and learning methods and tools since 1994. The new pedagogic models for
learning, using electronic support and learner-centred approaches providing education
to remote students, were explored. Two DE projects were designed, one for school
librarians (1995-1996) and one IT in libraries (1996). Within these projects Web 1.0
tools were used for the delivery of the course materials and for communication (Virkus,
1997). Several other projects supported the implementation of technology, deepened the
Use of Web 2.0
technologies
267
PROG
42,3
268
knowledge and skills about ODL and new pedagogical concepts, and promoted the
integration of theories, methodologies and expertise from other related disciplines and
practices into the LIS field.
For instance, the “The study and implementation of distance learning and teaching
in a new learning environment in Estonia” (1998-2001) was funded by an Estonian
Science Foundation grant and enabled the testing of different technologies for DE
including ISDN, internet, CD-ROM and audio/video technology, as well as learning
management systems such as WebCT and LearnLoop. Also, the
“Netbased-Multimedia” (1998-1999) project between Estonia and Norway studied
and evaluated the possibilities of joint international courses and the experiences of
learners in a new ICT-based learning environment. The project integrated a number of
ICT tools for the presentation of students’ group work to remote audiences. Integrated
media tools, such as document camera, video, CD-ROM, internet, were used in the
project. The students learned about the strengths and limitations of ICT, camera
techniques, audio and light conditions, design of the videoconferencing studio,
one-to-one and multipoint videoconferencing, etc. The course included a number of
online connections with international experts within this area of technology and was
based on a high level of interactivity among students and teachers in Estonia and
Norway (Virkus and Sponberg, 1999).
Thus, new pedagogical models were implemented and there was a shift from a
“knowledge transfer model” to a “knowledge construction model” at the department. It
also meant that there was a reduction of classroom work and an increase in
independent work. There was more focus on team projects requiring problem solving
and on reflective seminars in all areas of the curriculum in order to develop complex
cognitive skills and social competences of students.
These new educational ideas derived from educational theories and collaboration
with high level ODL centres and institutions, for example, Pennsylvania State
University in the USA, the University of New Brunswick in Canada, the Dutch Open
University in The Netherlands, Turku University in Finland, Gjøvik College in Norway
and the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU). Experts
from these, and other institutions, were helpful when the department started to develop
its first ODL courses and programmes based on modern ICT (Virkus et al., 2005).
Thus, being influenced by constructivist and reflective thinking and alternative
modes of educational delivery, the department started to rethink the curriculum design
and pedagogical or didactic models. Close co-operation with colleagues from the
department of educational sciences and computer science in developing joint project
proposals and arranging joint research seminars, influenced a new way of thinking as
well. Thus, the focus on distance learning and new ICTs influenced an understanding
of the new ways of curriculum design.
Since 2001 the department has used the learning management system IVA to
deliver online courses and to support traditional face-to-face education. IVA was
developed by the Educational Technology Centre of Tallinn University and is based on
the open source Zope product called FLE3. IVA is a metaphor in Estonian language
and means “a seed” (also “point” or “meaning”). In 1817, the Reverend Otto Reinhold
von Holtz published a series of moralist stories for Estonian peasants under a slogan
“story is a shell, meaning is a seed”. Since then this slogan has been widely used among
teachers and teacher educators in Estonia, when they want to stress the importance of
looking deeper below the surface in order to understand better the meaning, or “the
point” of phenomena. The developers of IVA believe that in order to make full use of
opportunities offered by new powerful learning environments, both teachers and
learners should look deeper behind the routine of traditional educational practices and
discover new ways of meaning-making (Põldoja, 2003; Laanpere et al., 2003; Laanpere
et al., 2005; Virkus, 2005).
The structure and functionalities of the IVA system advocate constructivist
approaches to learning and teaching and are derived from the “three Cs model”:
construction, context and collaboration (Jonassen, 1994).These are reflected in the IVA
user interface which is structured into three sections:
(1) WebTop – a space and tools for personal knowledge construction and
reflection.
(2) BookShelf – a space and tools for providing context for meaningful learning.
(3) WorkShops – a space and tools for student collaboration and group work
(Põldoja, 2003; Laanpere et al., 2005; Virkus, 2005).
It is believed that this kind of enforced pre-structuring of the learning environment
helps teachers to keep these three sections in balance and supports the constructivist
approach to learning (Laanpere et al., 2005).
The Workshops area includes three workshops:
(1) a structured discussion forum called Knowledge Building;
(2) “Jamming” that allows student collaboration in working with different media
files; and
(3) GroupPortfolios, used as a common working area for smaller subgroups.
The Knowledge Building discussions are oriented towards finding solutions to
research problems based on an authentic context provided by the teacher. Every
submission to the Knowledge Building forum belongs to a certain knowledge type.
IVA has multiple knowledge typesets drawn from different learning theories. For
example, the typeset based on Hakkarainen’s (1999) Progressive Inquiry learning
theory contains the following knowledge types:
.
Problem.
.
My Explanation.
.
Scientific Explanation.
.
Evaluation of the Process.
.
Summary.
In addition to existing knowledge typesets (Progressive Inquiry, Six Hat Thinking,
Design Thinking Types, Forum), teachers are allowed to create new ones with IVA’s
knowledge type management tool (Laanpere et al., 2005).
“Jamming” is a tool for collaborative media projects. Media files in different formats
can be uploaded, modified into new versions and commented upon. As a repository of
different graphics, sound, video and text files as well as a versioning tool, the Jamming
can be used as a unique group work tool in various courses. There is also a
collaborative concept mapping tool which allows users to create and edit visual
Use of Web 2.0
technologies
269
PROG
42,3
270
concept maps, derive new versions and merge the maps produced by different
sub-groups (Laanpere et al., 2005).
At the time of writing (April 2008), the so called “blended model” is dominant in
delivering LIS education at the Institute of Information Studies at Tallinn University.
Most of the modules and courses are supported by IVA, where teachers present their
lecture notes and slides, study guides, relevant links and assignments. Students
present their individual works in personal portfolios in IVA, add files, memos, links
and wikis. They develop their collaborative projects using IVA wiki possibilities and
present the project results in subgroup portfolios. Several Web 2.0 tools (such as blogs
and RSS) have been integrated within IVA.
Also, several Web 2.0 tools have been used to support face-to-face lectures or online
learning including:
.
reading weblogs of LIS professionals;
.
using RSS-based services to obtain thematically filtered information;
.
integrating audio and video podcasts on relevant topics with individual or group
work of students; and
.
assignments including aspects of Second Life.
For example, within the Information Literacy module in the course Information
Support in the Digital Learning Environment, the students are encouraged to analyse
the information literacy weblog of Sheila Webber from Sheffield University (http://
information-literacy.blogspot.com/) and the Information Literacy Land of Confusion
created by Michael Lorenzen (www.information-literacy.net/). One collaborative
assignment in this course requires students to find out relevant topics in the Wikipedia
and add their study group contributions and corrections to the Wikipedia topic or
create and develop new entries. Within the Marketing course the students have to
analyse the blog of Jill Stover: Library Marketing – Thinking Outside the Book (http://
librarymarketing.blogspot.com/) and assess the principles and approaches of
marketing used within the Second Life. In the Information and Knowledge
Management module students have to get together in small study groups of five
and prepare collaborative group projects using wiki tools in IVA. One of the suggested
topics for the collaborative project work was “Social software and knowledge sharing
from the knowledge management perspective”. Students are also encouraged to use an
academic service such as CiteULike to bookmark and share scholarly articles (http://
www.citeulike.org/). They also have to set up and start using a personal weblog to
write a learning story of their experiences; reflections include comments on the
required readings, thoughts on the group discussions, feelings and emotions, etc.
Within the Digital Library Learning MA programme there is also a blog where
students share their experiences outside the classroom activities.
One of the most popular tools in many courses is Six Hat Thinking Tool in IVA.
Edward de Bono invented this method in the 1980s and the six hats represent six
modes of thinking. These modes are symbolised by putting imaginatively on a
coloured hat:
(1) Red Hat for emotional thinking.
(2) Yellow Hat for positive thinking.
(3) Black Hat for critical thinking.
(4) Green Hat for creative thinking
(5) Blue Hat for the “Big Picture”.
(6) White Hat for the data and information available (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Six_Thinking_Hats).
Use of Web 2.0
technologies
This tool has been used, either by students working alone or in groups, for exploring
different perspectives towards a complex phenomenon or situation.
The DILL programme has also integrated several video interactions with remote
experts where students have discussed relevant topics of information and knowledge
management. For example, students had a discussion session with Dr Christian
Schlögl from Graz University (Austria) via a video conference after reading his article
“Information and knowledge management: dimensions and approaches”. There was
also a Skype conference with Professor Tom Wilson, from Sheffield (UK) on the topic
“The nonsense of knowledge management” after reading the special issue on
Knowledge Management of the online journal Information Research. Skype is also
used to communicate with tutors and peer-students. Skype, created by the Swedish and
Danish entrepreneurs and a team of Estonian software developers, is a very popular
communication tool among Estonians.
The MA programme in Information Management at Tallinn is completely online
and an online MA in Information Management in the Digital Environment is in the
development process. Both programmes use IVA supportive tools described earlier.
Also, some courses, traditional curricula are delivered in online mode when there is a
need for it. For example, the author of this article delivered a number of courses to her
students in Tallinn using IVA whilst studying during 2001-2005 at Manchester
Metropolitan University. All programmes at the Institute of Information Studies in
Tallinn have been revised and a new online MA programme has been designed on the
basis of educational modelling, personalisation and re-use of materials.
In 2003 a study was conducted to examine the contribution of LIS institutions to
innovation in Europe. This was examined through interviews (covering a number of
aspects) at three institutions:
(1) Manchester Metropolitan University;
(2) Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen; and
(3) Tallinn University.
271
The main innovations pointed out by the staff members of the Department of
Information Studies in Tallinn were changes where ICT has been introduced as a tool
for innovation of education, particularly in the improvement of teaching and learning.
These included the:
.
development of new online courses and programmes;
.
use of learning management systems;
.
use of video/audio-conferencing possibilities to support learning and
communication; and
.
establishment of an electronic journal within the department.
PROG
42,3
272
Several of those interviewed highlighted the role of distance learning as an innovation,
and the by-product of being able to review lecturer/student interactions. It has enabled
a rethink of teaching and learning approaches and has added new quality to learning
materials. These developments feed through into on-campus teaching. The main
pressures, or triggers, that led to the introduction of innovation were connected with
the need for continuous improvement and to maintain efficiency, effectiveness and
economy. The development of new courses has arisen from a concern that degrees are
still marketable and use available teaching expertise to maximum effect. Introducing
ICT in education:
.
helped to overcome routine and repetitive tasks;
.
offered new and innovative modes of learning (multiple modes of interaction –
(a)synchronous, differentiated content, interactive learning materials);
.
offered flexibility (time, place, pace); and
.
offered teachers opportunities to spend more time on the creation of lessons in a
new and challenging way.
It has also released staff to invest more time to individual coaching (Virkus and Wood,
2004).
4. Conclusions
Web 2.0 is influencing the way in which people learn, access information and
communicate with each other. To be successful in our modern society LIS educators
should take advantage of new information and communication technologies and
consider the learning preferences of digital natives as well as digital immigrants.
However, Web 2.0 technologies should be implemented taking into account
pedagogical perspectives. Educational research has confirmed that technology alone
does not deliver educational success. It only becomes valuable in education if learners
and teachers can do something useful with it.
The Institute of Information Studies of Tallinn University has a long history of
using web-based technologies in its teaching and learning and currently IVA, based on
constructive approaches to learning, is used. To extend the pedagogical applications
and choices for learners and learning, staff have been experimenting with Web 2.0
technologies and a few have successfully adopted them in teaching and learning.
Experiences with open and distance learning and e-learning have transformed
teaching and learning, provided new alternative delivery modes, and helped to reach
new target groups. The dominant approach at the Institute of Information Studies is a
“blended learning”, but there is an increasing demand for online programmes.
However, innovation of teaching and learning practices and the implementation of
modern ICTs has been a step-by-step process.
References
Alexander, B. (2006), “Web 2.0: a new wave of innovation for teaching and learning?”,
EDUCAUSE Review, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 32-44, available at: www.educause.edu/ir/library/
pdf/ERM0621.pdf
Bawden, D., Robinson, L., Anderson, T., Bates, J., Rutkauskiene, U. and Vilar, P. (2007),
“Towards Curriculum 2.0: library/information education for a Web 2.0 world”, Library and
Information Research, Vol. 31 No. 99, pp. 14-25.
Bryant, L. (2007), “Emerging trends in social software for education”, Emerging Technologies for
Learning, Vol. 2, pp. 9-22, available at: http://partners.becta.org.uk/page_documents/
research/emerging_technologies07_chapter1.pdf
Chatti, A., Klamma, R., Jarke, M. and Naeve, A. (2007), “The Web 2.0 driven SECI model based
learning process”, paper presented at the International Conference of Advanced Learning
Technologies (ICALT-2007), Japan, available at: http://mohamedaminechatti.blogspot.
com/2007/06/icalt-2007.html
Downes, S. (2005), “e-Learning 2.0”, eLearn Magazine: Education and Technology in perspective,
available at: www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section ¼ articles&article ¼ 29-1
Drachsler, H., Hummel, H. and Koper, R. (2007), “Personal recommender systems for learners in
lifelong learning: requirements, techniques and model”, International Journal of Learning
Technology, available at: http://dspace.ou.nl/handle/1820/937
Farkas, M. (2007), Social Software in Libraries: Building Collaboration, Communication, and
Community Online, InfoToday, Medford, NJ.
Franklin, T. and Van Harmelen, M. (2007), Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in
Higher Education, JISC, Bristol, available at: www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/
programmes/digitalrepositories/web2-content-learning-and-teaching.pdf
Geser, G. (2007), “Open educational practices and resources: the key role of social software”,
paper presented at the European Distance and E-learning Network (EDEN) Annual
Conference, Naples, available at: www.olcos.org/cms/upload/docs/OLCOS-presentation_
Naples-2007.pdf
Green, H. and Hannon, C. (2007), Their Space: Education for a Digital Generation, Demos,
London, available at: www.demos.co.uk/files/Their%20space%20-%20web.pdf
Guntram, G. (Ed.) (2007), Open Educational Practices and Resources. OLCOS Roadmap 2012,
Salzburg Research EduMedia Group, Salzburg, available at: /www.olcos.org/cms/upload/
docs/olcos_roadmap.pdf
Hakkarainen, K., Lonka, K. and Lipponen, L. (1999), Tutkiva oppiminen: älykkään toiminnan
rajat ja niiden ylittäminrn, WSOY.
Iivonen, M., Sonnenwald, D.H. and Parma, M. (2001), “Experiences of international
collaboration”, in Carroll, F.L. and Harvey, J.F. (Eds), International Librarianship:
Cooperation and Collaboration, The Scarecrow Press, Lanham, MD, pp. 197-210.
Jonassen, D. (1994), “Thinking technology”, Educational Technology, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 34-7.
Kajberg, L. (2003), “A survey of internationalisation activities in European library and
information science schools”, New Review of Information and Library Research, Vol. 9,
pp. 25-60.
Laanpere, M., Kikkas, K. and Põldoja, H. (2005), “Pedagogical foundations of learning
management system IVA”, e-Learning in Higher Education, Rudolf Trauner
Universitätsverlag, Linz.
Laanpere, M., Kippar, J. and Põldoja, H. (2003), “Kodumaine õpihaldussüsteem IVA:
pedagoogiline ja tehniline kontseptsioon”, A & A, Vol. 2, pp. 29-42, available at: http://
viru.tlu.ee/,martl/docs/kodumaine_opihaldussysteem_iva.rtf
Mejias, U. (2006), “Teaching social software with social software”, Innovate: Journal of Online
Education, Vol. 2 No. 5, available at: www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view ¼
article&id ¼ 260
Oberhelman, D.D. (2007), “Coming to terms with Web 2.0”, Reference Reviews, Vol. 21 No. 7,
pp. 5-6.
OECD (2001), OECD E-learning: The Partnership Challenge, OECD, Paris.
Use of Web 2.0
technologies
273
PROG
42,3
274
O’Reilly, T. (2005), What is Web 2.0? Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next
Generation of Software, available at: www.oreillynet.com/lpt/a/6228
Põldoja, H. (2003), “Learning management system IVA”, Conference of e-Learning in Science and
Environmental Education, 1-4 October, Tartu, Estonia, available at: www.ut.ee/eLSEEConf/
Kogumik/Poldoja.pdf
Prensky, M. (2001), “Digital natives, digital immigrants”, On the Horizon, Vol. 9 No. 5, available
at: www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital
%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
Prensky, M. (2004), Use Their Tools! Speak Their Language!, available at: www.marcprensky.
com/writing/Prensky-Use_Their_Tools_Speak_Their_Language.pdf
Reding, V. (2006), “The disruptive force of Web 2.0: how the new generation will define the
future”, Paper 06/773, Youth Forum, ITU Telecom World, Hong Kong, China, 3 December
2006, available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference ¼ SPEECH/
06/773&format
Steeples, C. and Jones, C. (Eds) (2002), Networked Learning: Perspectives and Issues,
Springer-Verlag, London.
Virkus, S. (1997), “Distance education as a new possibility for librarians in Estonia”, Information
Research: An Electronic Journal, Vol. 2 No. 4, available at: http://informationr.net/ir/2-4/
paper20.html
Virkus, S. (2005), “E-learning in Estonia: past, present and possible future”, in Dittler, U., Kahler, H.,
Kindt, M. and Schwarz, C. (Eds), E-learning in Europe – Learning Europe: How Have New
Media Contributed to the Development of Higher Education?, Waxmann Verlag GmbH,
München, pp. 271-95.
Virkus, S. (2007), “Collaboration in LIS education in Europe: challenges and opportunities”,
Proceedings of the World Library and Information Congress: 73rd IFLA General
Conference and Council. Libraries for the future: Progress, Development and Partnerships,
19-23 August 2007, Durban, South Africa, available at: www.ifla.org/IV/ifla73/papers/
134-Virkus-en.pdf
Virkus, S. and Sponberg, H. (1999), “Collaborative learning and teaching: co-operation between
Estonia and Norway”, Proceedings of the ENABLE99 Conference, Enabling Network-Based
Learning, at the Espoo-Vantaa Institute of Technology (EVITech), Espoo, Finland, 2-5 June
1999, Espoo Vantaa Institute of Technology, Espoo, pp. 69-74.
Virkus, S. and Wood, L. (2004), “Change and innovation in European LIS education”, New Library
World, Vol. 105 Nos 9/10, pp. 320-9.
Virkus, S., Boekhorst, A.K., Gomez-Hernandez, J.A., Skov, A. and Webber, S. (2005), “Information
literacy and learning”, in Kajberg, L. and Lørring, L. (Eds), European Curriculum
Reflections on Library and Information Science Education, Royal School and Information
Science, Copenhagen, pp. 64-83.
Wenger, E. (1998), Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Corresponding author
Sirje Virkus can be contacted at: sirvir@tlu.ee
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints