Scoping the pedagogic relationship between self-efficacy and Web 2.0 technologies

Learning, Media and Technology

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 255-273

  Hall, Richard ^a   Hall, Melanie ^b  

^a DE MONTFORT UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b STAFFORDSHIRE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Learner voice; Self efficacy; Social learning theory; Web 2.0

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649660005     PISSN: 17439884     EISSN: 17439892     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2010.485204     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Anderson, P. 2007. What is Web2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education. Report for JISC. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701.pdf
2. Aziz, M., and R. Macredie. 2005. Analysing the role of perceived self-efficacy in information processing for web-based information systems. Paper presented at the 4th IEEE Conference on Cognitive Informatics, July, in Irvine, CA.
3. Bandura, A. 1977. Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
4. Bandura, A. 1989. Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. The Psychologist: Bulletin of the British Psychological Society 2: 411-24.
5. Bandura, A. 1995. Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Bates, R., and S. Khasawneh. 2007. Self-efficacy and college students' perceptions and use of online learning systems. Computers in Human Behavior 23, no. 1: 175-91.
7. Becta. 2009. Software and internet analysis: Micro-blogging in education. http://emergingtechnologies.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=etr&rid=14363
8. Bloom, B., D. Krathwohl, and B. Masia. 1964. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: McKay.
9. Boyatzis, R. 1998. Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Clark, W., K. Logan, R. Luckin, A. Mee, and M. Oliver. 2009. Beyond Web 2.0: Mapping the technology landscapes of young learners. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25, no. 1: 56-69.
11. Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. 2009. Education in a Web 2.0 world. JISC. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/heweb20rptv1.pdf.
12. Driscoll, M. 1994. Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
13. Ebner, M., A. Holzinger, and H. Maurer. 2007. Web 2.0 technology: Future interfaces for technology enhanced learning? Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4556: 559-68.
14. Engeström, Y. 1999. Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Perspectives on activity theory, ed. Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, and L. Punömaki, 19-38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Franklin, T., and M. van Harmelen. 2007. Web 2.0 for content for learning and teaching in higher education. Report for JISC. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/digitalrepositories/web2-content-learning-and-teaching.pdf
16. FutureLab. 2009. Enquiring minds - Year 4 report: Innovative approaches to curriculum reform. Report. http://www.enquiringminds.org.uk/our_research/reports_and_papers/year4_report/
17. Hall, R. 2008. The impact of the read/write web on learner agency. e-learning 5, no. 3: 284-96.
18. Hemmi, A., S. Bayne, and R. Land. 2009. The appropriation and repurposing of social technologies in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25, no. 1: 19-30.
19. Illich, I. 1978. Toward a history of needs. New York: Random House.
20. JISC. 2009a. Thriving in the 21st century: Learning literacies for the digital age. http://elearning.jiscinvolve.org/2009/06/11/thriving-in-the-21st-century-learningliteracies-for-the-digital-age/
21. JISC. 2009b. eLearning programme. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning.aspx
22. JISC. 2009c. Information Spaces for Collaborative Creativity project. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/curriculumdelivery/informationcreativity.aspx
23. JISC. 2009d. Mobilising Remote Student Engagement project. http://morse.ac.uk/
24. Joffe, H., and L. Yardley. 2004. Content and thematic analysis. In Research methods for clinical and health psychology, ed. L. Yardley and D.F. Marks, 56-68. London: Sage.
25. Kearsley, G. 1994. Social learning theory (A. Bandura). http://tip.psychology.org/bandura.html
26. O'Donoghue, J. 2009. Technology-supported environments for personalized learning: Methods and case studies. Hershey, PA: Information Science.
27. O'Reilly, T. 2005. What is Web 2.0? Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
28. Pachler, N., and C. Daly. 2009. Narrative and learning with Web 2.0 technologies: Towards a research agenda. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25, no. 1: 6-18.
29. Parajes, F. 1996. Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research 66, no. 4: 543-78.
30. Parajes, F., and D.H. Schunk. 2001. Self-beliefs and school success: Self-efficacy, self-concept and school achievement. In Perception, ed. R. Riding and S. Rayner, 239-66. London: Ablex.
31. Parsons, R. 2007. Improving preceptor self-efficacy using an online educational program. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship 4, no. 1: art. 21. http://www.bepress.com/ijnes/vol4/iss1/art21
32. Pettenati, M.C., E. Cigognini, J. Mangione, and E. Guerin. 2007. Using social software for personal knowledge management in formal online learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 8, no. 3: 52-65. http://elilearning.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/tojde2007_pettenati_cigognini_mangione_guerin.pdf
33. Piaget, J. 1970. Structuralism. New York: Harper & Row.
34. Ravenscroft, A. 2009. Social software, Web 2.0 and learning: Status and implications of an evolving paradigm. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25, no. 1: 1-5.
35. Reason, P., and H. Bradbury, eds. 2001. Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice. London: Sage.
36. Rollett, H., M. Lux, M. Strohmaier, G. Dosinger, and K. Tochtermann. 2007. The Web 2.0 way of learning with technologies. International Journal of Learning Technology 3, no. 1: 87-107.
37. Selwyn, N. 2010. Looking beyond learning: Notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 26, no. 1: 65-73.
38. Sharpe, B. 2006. The ambient web. Emerging technologies for learning. Review by the British Educational Communications and Technology Agency. http://partners.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/page_documents/research/emerging_technologies.pdf
39. Trinder, K., J. Guiller, A. Margaryan, A. Littlejohn, and D. Nicol. 2008. Learning from digital natives: Bridging formal and informal learning (Final Report). Report for HEA. http://www.academy.gcal.ac.uk/ldn/LDNFinalReport.pdf.
40. University of Reading. 2009. This is me project. Eduserve. http://thisisme.reading.ac.uk/
41. Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43. Wenger, E., N. White, and J.D. Smith. 2009. Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. Portland, OR: CPsquare.
44. Winnicott, D. 1982. Playing and reality. London: Routledge.
45. Yi, M.Y., and H. Yujong. 2003. Predicting the use of web-based information systems: Self efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 59, no. 4: 431-49.
46. Zimmerman, B.J., and T.J. Cleary. 2006. Adolescents' development of personal agency. The role of self efficacy beliefs and self-regulatory skill. In Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, ed. F. Parajes and T. Urdan, 45-70. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.