Tracing the Emmerging Use of Communication Technologies in Higher Education

CSEDU 2012

Proceedings of the

4th International Conference on

Computer Supported Education

Volume 1

Porto, Portugal

16 - 18 April, 2012

Sponsored by

INSTICC – Institute for Systems and Technologies of Information, Control

and Communication

Technically Co-sponsored by

SPEE – Portuguese Society for Engineering Education

IFIP – International Federation for Information Processing

ROLE – Responsive Open Learning Environments

IGIP – International Society for Engineering Education

Media Partner

Copyright c

2012 SciTePress – Science and Technology Publications

All rights reserved

Edited by Markus Helfert, Maria João Martins and José Cordeiro

Printed in Portugal

ISBN: 978-989-8565-06-8

Depósito Legal: 342246/12

http://www.csedu.org/

[email protected]

B

RIEF

C

ONTENTS

I

S

. . . IV

O

S

C

. . . V

P

C

. . . VI

A

R

. . . XI

S

P

J

. . . XI

F

. . . XIII

C

. . . XV

I

NVITED

S

PEAKERS

Joseph Trimmer Ball State University

U.S.A.

David Kaufman Simon Fraser University

Canada

Hugh Davis University of Southampton

U.K.

O

RGANIZING AND

S

TEERING

C

OMMITTEES

CONFERENCECHAIR

José Cordeiro, Polytechnic Institute of Setúbal / INSTICC, Portugal

PROGRAMCO-CHAIRS

Markus Helfert, Dublin City University, Ireland Maria João Martins, Instituto Superior Tecnico, Portugal

PROCEEDINGSPRODUCTION

José Braz, Escola Superior de Tecnologia de Setúbal, Portugal Marina Carvalho, INSTICC, Portugal

Helder Coelhas, INSTICC, Portugal Patrícia Duarte, INSTICC, Portugal Bruno Encarnação, INSTICC, Portugal

Liliana Medina, INSTICC, Portugal Carla Mota, INSTICC, Portugal Raquel Pedrosa, INSTICC, Portugal

Vitor Pedrosa, INSTICC, Portugal Cláudia Pinto, INSTICC, Portugal José Varela, INSTICC, Portugal

CD-ROM PRODUCTION

Pedro Varela, INSTICC, Portugal

GRAPHICSPRODUCTION ANDWEBDESIGNER

Daniel Pereira, INSTICC, Portugal

SECRETARIAT

João Teixeira, INSTICC, Portugal

WEBMASTER

Susana Ribeiro, INSTICC, Portugal

P

ROGRAM

C

OMMITTEE

Mehdi Adda, Université du Québec à Rimouski,

Canada

Wan Fatimah Wan Ahmad, Universiti Teknologi

PETRONAS, Malaysia

Esma Aïmeur, Université De Montréal, Canada AbdulKareem Eid Al-Alwani, Yanbu University

College, Saudi Arabia

Grigore Albeanu, Spiru Haret University, Romania Peter Albion, University of Southern Queensland,

Australia

Antonia Lucinelma Pessoa Albuquerque,

Independent Researcher, The Netherlands

Colin Allison, University of St. Andrews, U.K. Gustavo Alves, LABORIS / Instituto Superior de

Engenharia do Porto (ISEP), Portugal

Mike Ananny, Microsoft Research & Harvard

University, U.S.A.

Stamatina Anastopoulou, University of Athens,

Greece

Faye Antoniou, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece

Kevin Ashley, University of Pittsburgh, U.S.A. Anders Avdic, Örebro University, Sweden Nilufar Baghaei, Unitec, New Zealand

Balamuralithara a/l Balakrishnan, Universiti

Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia

Amar Balla, Ecole Nationale d’Informatique, ESI,

Algeria

Jorge Barbosa, UNISINOS, Brazil

Patrícia Brandalise Scherer Bassani,

Universidade Feevale, Brazil

Jos Beishuizen, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The

Netherlands

Markus Bick, ESCP Europe Wirtschaftshochschule Berlin, Germany

Gautam Biswas, Vanderbilt University, U.S.A. Marlies Bitter-Rijpkema, Open Universiteit, The

Netherlands

Emmanuel G. Blanchard, Aalborg University

Copenhagen, Denmark

Lars Bollen, Universiteit Twente, The Netherlands Andreas Bollin, Alpen-Adria Universität Klagenfurt, Austria

Katrin Borcea-Pfitzmann, Technische Universität

Dresden, Germany

Federico Botella, Miguel Hernandez University of

Elche, Spain

Jacqueline Bourdeau, Télé-université, UQAM,

Canada

Ghizlane El Boussaidi, École de Technologie

Supérieure, Canada

Amel Bouzeghoub, Telecom SudParis, France Paul Brna, University of Leeds, U.K.

Dumitru Burdescu, University of Craiova, Romania

Winslow S. Burleson, Arizona State University,

U.S.A.

Murat Perit Çakir, Middle East Technical University, Turkey

Chris Campbell, University of Queensland, Australia

Manuel Ortega Cantero, Castilla – La Mancha

University, Spain

Ana Amélia Carvalho, Universidade do Minho,

Portugal

Carlos Vaz de Carvalho, ISEP, Portugal Manuel Cebrian, Universidad de Málaga, Spain Vanessa Chang, Curtin University of Technology,

Australia

Mohamed Amine Chatti, RWTH Aachen University, Germany

Maria de Fátima Chouzal, University of Porto

-Faculty of Engineering, Portugal

Geraldine Clarebout, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium

Cesar Collazos, Universidad del Cauca, Colombia

P

ROGRAM

C

OMMITTEE

(

CONT

.)

Ruth Gannon Cook, DePaul University, U.S.A. Mark G. Core, USC Institute for Creative

Technologies, U.S.A.

Gennaro Costagliola, Università di Salerno, Italy Manuel Perez Cota, Universidade de Vigo, Spain Caroline M. Crawford, University of Houston-Clear Lake, U.S.A.

Ulrike Cress, University of Tübingen, Germany John Philip Cuthell, Mirandanet, U.K.

Thanasis Daradoumis, University of the Aegean /

Open University of Catalonia, Greece

Sergiu Dascalu, University of Nevada, Reno,

U.S.A.

Lizanne DeStefano, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, U.S.A.

Giuliana Dettori, Istituto per le Tecnologie

Didattiche (ITD-CNR), Italy

Darina Dicheva, Winston-salem State University,

U.S.A.

Yannis Dimitriadis, School of Telecommunications Engineering, University of Valladolid, Spain

Danail Dochev, Institute of Information and

Communication Technologies-Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Bulgaria

Peter Dolog, Aalborg University, Denmark Chyi-Ren Dow, Feng Chia University, Taiwan Jon Dron, Athabasca University, Canada

Roza Dumbraveanu, The State Pedagogical University, Moldova, Republic of

Larbi Esmahi, Athabasca University, Canada Si Fan, University of Tasmania, Australia Mingyu Feng, SRI International, U.S.A.

Alvaro Figueira, Faculdade de Ciências da

Universidade do Porto, Portugal

Davide Fossati, Carnegie Mellon University in

Qatar (CMU- Qatar), Qatar

Rita Francese, Università degli Studi di Salerno,

Italy

Reva Freedman, Northern Illinois University,

U.S.A.

Antonio Bautista García-Vera, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain

Serge Garlatti, TELECOM Bretagne, France Isabela Gasparini, UFRGS and UDESC, Brazil Xun Ge, University of Oklahoma, U.S.A.

Henrique Gil, Escola Superior de Educação de

Castelo Branco & CAAP da Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Portugal

Song Gilsun, Zhejiang University, China

Anandha Gopalan, Imperial College London, U.K. Jivesh Govil, Cisco Systems, U.S.A.

Sabine Graf, Athabasca University, Canada Steve Graham, Vanderbilt University, U.S.A. Scott Grasman, Rochester Institute of Technology,

U.S.A.

Maria Grigoriadou, University of Athens, Greece Gabriela Grosseck, West University of Timisoara,

Romania

Angela Guercio, Kent State University, U.S.A. Christian Guetl, Graz University of Technology,

Austria

Nuno Guimarães, Lasige / Faculty of Sciences,

University of Lisbon, Portugal

David Guralnick, Kaleidoscope Learning / Columbia University, U.S.A.

Joerg M. Haake, FernUniversitaet in Hagen,

Germany

Laurence Habib, Oslo and Akerhus University

College of Applied Sciences, Norway

Leontios Hadjileontiadis, Aristotle University of

Thessaloniki, Greece

John Hamer, University of Glasgow, U.K. Yasunari Harada, Waseda University, Japan

P

ROGRAM

C

OMMITTEE

(

CONT

.)

Andreas Harrer, Universität Eichstätt-Ingolstadt,

Germany

Roger Hartley, University of Leeds, U.K.

Stylianos Hatzipanagos, King’s College London,

U.K.

Orit Hazzan, Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Israel

Rachelle Heller, The George Washington University, U.S.A.

Richard Helps, Brigham Young University, U.S.A. Davinia Hernández-Leo, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain

Nick Hine, University of Dundee, U.K.

Mark van’t Hooft, Kent State University, U.S.A. Kun Huang, University of North Texas Health

Science Center, U.S.A.

Janet Hughes, University of Dundee, U.K.

Kin-chuen Hui, University of Hong Kong, Hong

Kong

Nataliya V. Ivankova, University of Alabama at

Birmingham, U.S.A.

Romina Jamieson-Proctor, University of Southern

Queensland, Australia

Marc Jansen, University of Applied Sciences Ruhr

West, Germany

Katerina Kabassi, Tei of the Ionian Islands, Greece Michail Kalogiannakis, University of Crete,

Greece

Achilles Kameas, Hellenic Open University, Greece

Bill Kapralos, University of Ontario Institute of

Technology, Canada

Manu Kapur, Nanyang Technological University,

Singapore

Göran Karlsson, KTH Stockholm, Sweden David Kaufman, Simon Fraser University, Canada Jalal Kawash, University of Calgary, Canada Nick Kearney, Andamio Education and Technology S.L., Spain

ChanMin Kim, The University of Georgia, U.S.A. Lars Knipping, Berlin Institute of Technology,

Germany

Gwendolyn Kolfschoten, Delft University of

Technology, The Netherlands

Maria Kordaki, Computer Institute of Technology,

Greece

Georgios Kouroupetroglou, University of Athens,

Greece

Milos Kravcik, RWTH Aachen University, Germany

Birgit Krogstie, Norwegian University of Science

of Technology, Norway

Jean-Marc Labat, Université Pierre et Marie

Curie, France

Timo Lainema, Turku School of Economics,

Finland

H. Chad Lane, University of Southern California,

U.S.A.

Reneta Lansiquot, New York City College of

Technology, U.S.A.

Kevin Larkin, University of Southern Queensland,

Australia

Richard C. Larson, Massachusetts Institute of

Technology, U.S.A.

José Paulo Leal, Faculty of Sciences of the

University of Porto, Portugal

Dominique Leclet, UPJV, France

Chien-Sing Lee, National Central University,

Taiwan

Newton Lee, Newton Lee Laboratories LLC,

U.S.A.

Howard Leung, City University of Hong Kong,

Hong Kong

Andrew Lian, Suranaree University of Technology,

Thailand

Cheng-Min Lin, Nan Kai University of Technology, Taiwan

Andreas Lingnau, University of Strathclyde, U.K. Chen-Chung Liu, National Central University,

Taiwan

P

ROGRAM

C

OMMITTEE

(

CONT

.)

Jacques Lonchamp, Loria, University of Nancy,

France

Heide Lukosch, Delft University of Technology,

The Netherlands

Stephan Lukosch, Delft University of Technology,

The Netherlands

Liliane Machado, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, Brazil

Philip Machanick, Rhodes University, South

Africa

Krystina Madej, Georgia Tech, U.S.A. Roderval Marcelino, SATC, Brazil José Marques, FEUP, Portugal

Lindsay Marshall, Newcastle University, U.K. Alke Martens, Universität of Education Schwäbisch Gmünd, Germany

Manolis Mavrikis, London Knowledge Lab, U.K. Bruce Maxim, University of Michigan-Dearborn,

U.S.A.

Rory McGreal, Athabasca University, Canada António José Mendes, Universidade de Coimbra,

Portugal

José Carlos Metrôlho, Instituto Politécnico de

Castelo Branco, Portugal

Bakhtiar Mikhak, Harvard University, U.S.A. Alexander Mikroyannidis, The Open University,

U.K.

Tanja Mitrovic, University of Canterbury, New

Zealand

Riichiro Mizoguchi, Osaka University, Japan Felix Mödritscher, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria

Susan Moisey, Athabasca University, Canada Gaëlle Molinari, Distance Learning University

Switzerland, Switzerland

Alejandra Martínez Monés, Universidad de

Valladolid, Spain

Anders Morch, University of Oslo, Norway

Pablo Moreno-Ger, Universidad Complutense de

Madrid, Spain

Roberto Moriyón, Universidad Autonoma de

Madrid, Spain

Chrystalla Mouza, University of Delaware, U.S.A. Jogesh K. Muppala, Hong Kong University of

Science and Technology, Hong Kong

Larysa Nadolny, West Chester University, U.S.A. Hiroyuki Nagataki, Okayama University, Japan Minoru Nakayama, Tokyo Institute of Technology,

Japan

David Nichols, University of Waikato, New

Zealand

Sotiris Nikolopoulos, Technological Educational

Institute of Larissa, Greece

Stavros Nikolopoulos, University of Ioannina,

Greece

Brian Nolan, Institute of Technology Blanchardstown, Ireland

Daniel Novak, Czech Technical University, Czech

Republic

Fátima L. S. Nunes, Universidade de São Paulo,

Brazil

Hajime Ohiwa, Keio University, Japan Rocco Oliveto, University of Salerno, Italy

José Palma, Escola Superior de Tecnologia de

Setúbal, Portugal

Viktoria Pammer, Know-Center, Austria

Kyparisia A. Papanikolaou, School of Pedagogical & Technological Education, Greece

Iraklis Paraskakis, South East European Research

Centre, Greece

Paul Peachey, University of Glamorgan, U.K. Chang-Shyh Peng, California Lutheran University,

U.S.A.

Mar Pérez-Sanagustín, Universidad Carlos III de

Madrid, Spain

Antonio Ramón Bartolomé Pina, Universitat de

Barcelona, Spain

P

ROGRAM

C

OMMITTEE

(

CONT

.)

Niels Pinkwart, Clausthal University of Technology, Germany

Leonard A. Plugge, Stichting SURF, The Netherlands

Elvira Popescu, University of Craiova, Romania Philippos Pouyioutas, University of Nicosia,

Cyprus

Franz Puehretmair, Competence Network Information Technology to Support the Integration of People with Disabilities (KI-I), Austria

Ricardo Queirós, DI/ESEIG & CRACS, Portugal Roy Rada, University of Maryland Baltimore

County, U.S.A.

Maria da Graça Rasteiro, University of Coimbra,

Portugal

Janet C. Read, University of Central Lancashire,

U.K.

Petrea Redmond, University of Southern Queensland, Australia

Gabriel Reedy, King’s College London, U.K. Martin Reisslein, Arizona State University, U.S.A. Maria Teresa Restivo, FEUP, Portugal

Fernando Reinaldo Ribeiro, Instituto Politécnico

de Castelo Branco, Portugal

Griff Richards, Thompson Rivers University,

Canada

Uwe Riss, SAP AG, Germany

Barbara Sabitzer, Klagenfurt University, Austria Fahad Samad, Institute of Business & Technology,

Pakistan

Ian Douglas Sanders, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa

Abdolhossein Sarrafzadeh, Unitec, New Zealand Giuseppe Scanniello, Università Degli Studi della

Basilicata, Italy

Hans-Christian Schmitz, Fraunhofer Institute for

Applied Information Technology, Germany

Ulrik Schroeder, RWTH Aachen University,

Germany

Georgios Sideridis, University of Crete, Greece Pei Hwa Siew, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman,

Malaysia

Juarez Bento da Silva, Universidade Federal de

Santa Catarina, Brazil

Ricardo Silveira, Universidade Federal de Santa

Catarina, Brazil

Peter Sloep, Open University of the Netherlands,

The Netherlands

Zacharoula Smyrnaiou, University of Athens,

Greece

Nancy Butler Songer, University of Michigan,

Ann Arbor, U.S.A.

Michael Sonntag, Johannes Kepler University,

Austria

Safeeullah Soomro, BIZTEK Institute of Business

& Technology, Pakistan

Karl Steffens, University of Cologne, Germany Craig Stewart, Indiana University, U.S.A. Carlo Strapparava, FBK-IRST, Italy

Katsuaki Suzuki, Kumamoto University, Japan Bénédicte Talon, ULCO, Université Lille Nord de

France, France

Brendan Tangney, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland Steven Tanimoto, University of Washington,

U.S.A.

Maria Tatarinova, Moscow University of Economics, Statictics and Informatics, Russian Federation

Pei-Lee Teh, Monash University, Malaysia

John Thompson, Buffalo State College, State

University of New York, U.S.A.

Thanassis Tiropanis, University of Southampton,

U.K.

Shu-Mei Tseng, I-SHOU University, Taiwan George Tsihrintzis, University of Piraeus, Greece Jean Underwood, Nottingham Trent University,

U.K.

Luis de la Fuente Valentín, University Carlos III

de Madrid, Spain

P

ROGRAM

C

OMMITTEE

(

CONT

.)

Jari Veijalainen, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland Ioanna Vekiri, University of Thessaly, Greece Maria Virvou, University of Piraeus, Greece Harald Vranken, Open Universiteit, The Netherlands

Charalambos Vrasidas, CARDET, Cyprus Rupert Wegerif, University of Exeter, U.K. Martin Wessner, Fraunhofer IESE, Germany Su White, Web and Internet Science, U.K. Denise Whitelock, Open University, U.K. Tina Wilson, The Open University, U.K.

James Wolfer, Indiana University South Bend,

U.S.A.

Su Luan Wong, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia

Clayton R. Wright, International Education Consultant, Canada

Kalina Yacef, University of Sydney, Australia Jie Chi Yang, National Central University, Taiwan Takami Yasuda, Graduate School of Information

Science, Nagoya University, Japan

Kun Yuan, RAND Corporation, U.S.A.

Yun (Maria) Yue, University of Tasmania, Australia

Mario Žagar, University of Zagreb, Faculty of

Electrical Engineering and Computing, Croatia

Katarina Zakova, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, Slovak Republic

Diego Zapata-Rivera, Educational Testing Service, U.S.A.

Qinglong Zhan, Tianjin University of Technology

and Education, China

Fani Zlatarova, Elizabethtown College, U.S.A. Amal Zouaq, Royal Military College of Canada,

Canada

Javier García Zubía, Universidad de Deusto,

Spain

A

UXILIARY

R

EVIEWERS

Alda Lopes Gancarski, Institut TELECOM,

CNRS SAMOVAR, France

Vittorio Fuccella, Università Di Salerno, Italy John Lawlor, Bridge21, Ireland

Roberto Martinez, University of Sydney, Australia

Danielle O’Donovan, Trinity College Dublin,

Ireland

Sohei Okamoto, University of Nevada, Reno,

U.S.A.

Susan Reardon, Institute of Art, Design and

Technology, Ireland

S

ELECTED

P

APERS

J

OURNAL

A short list of papers presented at CSEDU 2012 will be selected for publication of extended and revised versions in the Journal of Education and Information Technologies. This selection will be done by the Conference Chair and Program Co-chairs, among the papers actually presented at the conference, based on a rigorous review by the CSEDU 2012 Program Committee members.

F

OREWORD

This book contains the proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer

Sup-ported Education (CSEDU 2012) which was organized and sponsored by the Institute for

Systems and Technologies of Information, Control and Communication (INSTICC) and

technically co-sponsored by SPEE (Portuguese Society for Engineering Education), IGIP

(International Society for Engineering Education), ROLE (Responsive Open Learning

Envi-ronments) and IFIP TC3 (International Federation for Information Processing – Technical

Committee 3 – ICT and Education).

CSEDU has become an annual meeting place for presenting and discussing learning

para-digms, best practices and case studies that concern innovative computer-supported learning

strategies, institutional policies on technology-enhanced learning including learning from

distance, supported by technology. The Web is currently a preferred medium for distance

learning and the learning practice in this context is usually referred to as e-learning or

technology-enhanced learning. CSEDU 2012 is expected to give an overview of the state of

the art in technology-enhanced learning and to also outline upcoming trends and promote

discussions about the education potential of new learning technologies in the academic and

corporate world.

This conference brings together researchers and practitioners interested in methodologies

and applications related to the education field. It has five main topic areas, covering different

aspects of Computer Supported Education, including “Information Technologies Supporting

Learning”, “Learning/Teaching Methodologies and Assessment”, “Social Context and

Lear-ning Environments”, “Domain Applications and Case Studies” and “Ubiquitous LearLear-ning”.

We believe the proceedings, demonstrate new and innovative solutions, and highlight

tech-nical problems in each field that are challenging and worthwhile.

CSEDU 2012 received 243 paper submissions from 58 countries in all continents. A

double-blind review process was enforced, with the help of the 297 experts who are members of

the conference program committee, all of them internationally recognized in one of the

main conference topic areas. Only 29 papers were selected to be published and presented

as full papers, i.e. completed work (10 pages in proceedings / 30’ oral presentations). 73

papers, describing work-in-progress, were selected as short papers for 20’ oral presentation.

Furthermore 37 papers were presented as posters. The full-paper acceptance ratio was thus

12%, and the total oral paper acceptance ratio was less than 42%. These ratios denote a

high level of quality, which we intend to maintain and reinforce in the next edition of this

conference.

The high quality of the CSEDU 2012 programme is enhanced by three keynote lectures,

delivered by distinguished guests who are renowned experts in their fields, including

(alpha-betically): Joseph Trimmer (Ball State University, United States), David Kaufman (Simon

Fraser University, Canada) and Hugh Davis (University of Southampton, United Kingdom).

For the fourth edition of the conference we extended and ensured appropriate indexing of

the proceedings of CSEDU including DBLP, INSPEC, EI and Thomson Reuters Conference

Proceedings Citation Index. Besides the proceedings edited by SciTePress, a short list of

papers presented at the conference will be selected for publication of extended and

revi-sed versions in the Journal of Education and Information Technologies. Furthermore, all

presented papers will soon be available at the SciTePress digital library.

The conference is complemented with two special sessions, focusing on specialized aspects

of computer supported education; namely, a Special Session on Enhancing Student

Enga-gement in e-Learning (ESEeL 2012) and a Special Session on Serious Games on Computer

Science Learning (SGoCSL 2012).

Building an interesting and successful program for the conference required the dedicated

effort of many people. Firstly, we must thank the authors, whose research and development

efforts are recorded here. Secondly, we thank the members of the program committee and

additional reviewers for their diligence and expert reviewing. We also wish to include here

a word of appreciation for the excellent organization provided by the conference secretariat,

from INSTICC, who have smoothly and efficiently prepared the most appropriate

environ-ment for a productive meeting and scientific networking. Last but not least, we thank the

invited speakers for their invaluable contribution and for taking the time to synthesize and

deliver their talks.

Looking forward to an inspiring world-class conference and a pleasant stay in the beautiful

city of Porto for all delegates, we hope to meet you again next year for the 5th CSEDU,

details of which will be available at http://www.csedu.org.

José Cordeiro

Polytechnic Institute of Setúbal / INSTICC, Portugal

Markus Helfert

Dublin City University, Ireland

Maria João Martins

Instituto Superior Tecnico, Portugal

C

ONTENTS

KEYNOTESPEAKERS

CREATIVE INQUIRY AND IMMERSIVE LEARNING

Joseph Trimmer IS-5

ENHANCING STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN ELEARNING - A Theoretical Perspective

David Kaufman IS-7

INSTITUTIONAL PERSONAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS - Paradise or Paradox?

Hugh Davis IS-9

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES SUPPORTING LEARNING FULLPAPERS

AUTOMATIC ANALYSIS OF ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSIONS

Breno Fabrício Terra Azevedo, Patricia Alejandra Behar and Eliseo Berni Reategui 5

AUTOMATED EXTRACTION OF LECTURE OUTLINES FROM LECTURE VIDEOS - A Hybrid Solution for Lecture Video Indexing

Haojin Yang, Franka Gruenewald and Christoph Meinel

13

LEARNING BEHAVIOUR MINING BASED ON SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS

Yu-Tzu Lin, Teng-Fai Seum and Herng-Yow Chen 23

A REVIEW OF E-LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES - Opportunities for Teaching and Learning

Annemieke Craig, Jo Coldwell-Neilson, Annegret Goold and Jenine Beekhuyzen 29

A LIGHT-WEIGHT SEMANTIC INTERPRETATION MECHANISM FOR A SKETCH-BASED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

Stefan Weinbrenner, Jan Engler, Pouyan Fotouhi-Tehrani and H. Ulrich Hoppe

42

OVERVIEW OF MATH LESSONS AUTHORING SYSTEM (MLAS)

Samer F. Khasawneh and Paul S. Wang 48

MANAGING HUMANITARIAN EMERGENCIES - Teaching and Learning with a Virtual Humanitarian Disaster Tool

Olatokunbo Ajinomoh, Alan Miller, Lisa Dow, Alasdair Gordon-Gibson and Eleanor Burt

55

VISUALIZATION OF OBJECT-ORIENTED (JAVA) PROGRAMS

Cornelis Huizing, Ruurd Kuiper, Christian Luijten and Vincent Vandalon 65

ViPS - An Intelligent Tutoring System for Exploring and Learning Physics through Simple Machines

Lakshman S. Myneni and N. Hari Narayanan

73

PROGRAMMING EXERCISES EVALUATION SYSTEMS - An Interoperability Survey

Ricardo Queirós and José Paulo Leal 83

SHORT PAPERS

HUMAN MOTIVATION PRINCIPLES AND HUMAN FACTORS FOR VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES

Azam Esfijani, Farookh Khadeer Hussain and Elizabeth Chang

93

HTML5, MICRODATA AND SCHEMA.ORG - Towards an Educational Social-semantic Web for the Rest of Us?

Lars Johnsen

101

TEAM LEARNING PROGRAM FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERS USING PROJECT-BASED LEARNING - Case Study of the “Upper Process” in IT Engineering

Minoru Nakayama, Manabu Fueki, Shinji Seki, Toshikazu Uehara and Kenji Matsumoto

105

PRO-INOVA - Virtual Platform for Innovation Management in Doctoral Schools

Gheorghe Sebestyen, Marius Bulgaru and Laura Grindei 112

ForMath - Intelligent Tutoring System in Mathematics

Piotr Brzoza, Ewa Łobos, Janina Macura, Beata Sikora and Marek ˙Zabka 118

JAPANESE TEXT PRESENTATION SYSTEM FOR PERSONS WITH READING DIFFICULTY - Design and Implementation

Kyota Aoki and Shinjiro Murayama

123

SPREADSHEETS FOR LANGUAGE LEARNING - Creative Ideas for Informatics and Foreign Language Lessons

Barbara Sabitzer

129

OBSERVATION AND SUPPORT IN A COLLABORATIVE PEDAGOGICAL DEVICE - A Multi-agent System to Control and Monitor Pedagogical Activities

Insaf Tnazefti-Kerkeni, Henda Belaid-Ajroud and Bénédicte Talon

135

REQUIREMENTS FOR EDUCATIONAL SUPPORT TOOLS IN VIRTUAL WORLDS

Ishbel M. M. Duncan and Natalie J. Coull 141

NEW FRONTIERS IN MUSIC EDUCATION THROUGH THE IEEE 1599 STANDARD

Adriano Baratè and Luca A. Ludovico 146

SUPERVISING AND MANAGING PROJECTS THROUGH A TEMPLATE BASED E-PORTFOLIO SYSTEM

Catarina Félix and Álvaro Figueira

152

TRACESHEETS - Spreadsheets of Program Executions as a Common Ground between Learners and Instructors

Soichiro Fujii and Hisao Tamaki

158

GRAPHICAL SIMULATION OF NUMERICAL ALGORITHMS - An Aproach based on Code Instrumentation and Java Technologies

Carlos Balsa, Luís Alves, Maria J. Pereira, Pedro J. Rodrigues and Rui P. Lopes

164

LEARNING SUPPORT FOR TENSE SELECTION OF ENGLISH COMPOSITION BY ASKING BACK QUESTIONS

Hiroki Hidaka, Yasuhiko Watanabe, Kenji Umemoto, Yuusuke Taniguchi and Yoshihiro Okada

170

SPREADING EXPERTISE SCORES IN OVERLAY LEARNER MODELS

Martin Hochmeister 175

TRACING THE EMMERGING USE OF COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION - A Literature Review

Marta Pinto, Francislê Souza, Fernanda Nogueira, Ana Balula, Luis Pedro, Lúcia Pombo, Fernando Ramos and António Moreira

181

GENERIC USER MODELING FOR ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS

Alexander Heimbuch, Christian Saul and Heinz-Dietrich Wuttke 187

EFFECTIVE POLICY BASED MANAGEMENT OF 3D MULE - An Exploratory Study Towards Developing Student Supportive Policy Considerations

Indika Perera, Colin Allison and Alan Miller

193

THE METAFORA PLATFORM TOOLS AND LEARNING TO LEARN SCIENCE TOGETHER

Z. Smyrnaiou and R. Evripidou 200

USER’S ACCESS TO THE ROBOTIC E-LEARNING SYSTEM - SyRoTek

Miroslav Kulich, Karel Košnar, Jan Chudoba, Ondˇrej Fišer and Libor Pˇreuˇcil 206

BI-DIRECTIONAL EDUCATION SYSTEM BASED ON POSITION PATTERN TECHNOLOGY

Sanghoon Kim, Joonkyo Kim, Jaehyun Park and Seung-Gol Lee

212

EXPERIMENTING WITH ENGLISH COLLABORATIVE WRITING ON GOOGLE SITES

Nicole Tavares and Samuel Chu 217

EVALUATING ENGAGEMENT TO ADDRESS UNDERGRADUATE FIRST YEAR TRANSITION - A Case Study

Clive Holtham, Rich Martin, Ann Brown, Gawesh Jawaheer and Angela Dove

223

SCAFFOLDING THE STORY CREATION PROCESS

M. Hall, L. Hall, J. Hodgson, C. Hume and L. Humphries 229

WEB TOOLS FOR CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION COUPLING FUNDAMENTALS WITH PROCESS DESIGN - The Distillation Case Study

M. G. Rasteiro, A. Ferreira and J. Granjo

235

RECMOODLE - AN EDUCATIONAL RECOMMENDER SYSTEM

Dhiego Carvalho, Carlos Tadeu Queiroz de Moraes, Dante Barone and Leandro Krug Wives 241

A SYSTEM FOR MANAGING CHANGES IN COURSE MATERIAL

Essam Zaneldin 247

DESIGN OF PROACTIVE SCENARIOS AND RULES FOR ENHANCED E-LEARNING

Sandro Reis, Denis Shirnin and Denis Zampunieris 253

INTERACTION WITH A DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT OF A UNIVERSITY

Emily Bagarukayo and Theo P. van der Weide 259

DESIGNING ELEARNING MODELS - The Agora Framework

José Rangel-Garcia and Jorge Buenabad-Chávez 265

NETWORKING BETWEEN LMS MOODLE AND EXTERNAL APPLICATIONS

Mikuláš Gangur 271

eLSaaS: A FRAMEWORK FOR MOBILE LEARNING CONTENT ADAPTATION

Ivan Madjarov and Omar Boucelma 276

AN EFFICIENT EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL EXPLORATION USING EXTRACTED CONCEPTS

Tetsuro Takahashi and Richard C. Larson

282

SMILE - SMARTPHONES IN LECTURES - Initiating a Smartphone-based Audience Response System as a Student Project

Linus Feiten, Manuel Buehrer, Sebastian Sester and Bernd Becker

288

LEARNET - A Location-based Social Networking Methodology for Learner Group Forming

Jessica G. Benner, Mohd Anwar and Hassan A. Karimi 294

POSTERS

INTRODUCTION TO INFORMATICS FOR FUTURE DOCUMENTALISTS IN THE EUROPEAN HIGHER EDUCATION AREA

M. Gestal, D. Rivero, J. R. Rabuñal, J. Dorado and A. Pazos

301

ANALYSIS OF CURRENT SITUATION AND PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT OF E-LEARNING APPLICATION FOR STRESS PREVENTION OF ROAD TRANSPORT DRIVERS AND SME

Ivan Atanasov Kolarov

305

EVALUATION OF E-LEARNING TOOLS BASED ON A MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING

Eduardo Islas-Pérez, Yasmín Hernández-Pérez, Miguel Pérez-Ramírez, Carlos F. García-Hernández and Guillermo Rodriguez-Ortiz

309

ONLINE DISTANT LEARNING USING SITUATION-BASED SCENARIOS

Fabrice Trillaud, Phuong Thao Pham, Mourad Rabah, Pascal Estraillier and Jamal Malki 313

LEARNING STYLES FOR K-12 MATHEMATICS E-LEARNING

Atakan Aral and Zehra Cataltepe 317

DIALOGICAL INTERACTIONS CONCERNING THE SCIENTIFIC CONTENT USING THE PLANNING TOOL, THE ARGUMENTATION TOOL AND FACE TO FACE COMMUNICATION

Z. Smyrnaiou, E. Varypati and E. Tsouma

323

MULTIPLEXING OF TUTORIALS IN DISTANCE EDUCATION USING TV BROADCAST NETWORK

Arindan Saha, Aniruddha Sinha, Arpan Pal and Anupam Basu

327

ANALYSIS OF THE BENEFITS OF COLLECTIVE LEARNING THROUGH QUESTION ANSWERING

Iasmina-Leila Ermalai, Josep Lluís de la Rosa and Araceli Moreno

331

A WATERMARKING SYSTEM FOR TEACHING STUDENTS TO RESPECT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

Maria Chroni, Angelos Fylakis and Stavros Nikolopoulos

336

EFFECTIVE ONLINE TESTING - Nurturing the Digital Natives

Gabriele Frankl, Peter Schartner and Zebedin Gerald 340

THE LEARNING DESIGN IN EDUCATION TODAY - Putting Pedagogical Content Knowledge into Practice

Isabel Azevedo, Dulce Mota, Carlos Vaz de Carvalho, Eurico Carrapatoso and Luis Paulo Reis

344

ATTITUDES OF INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARD USERS

Biró Piroska 348

LOW COST EXPERIMENTAL DEVICES FOR EDUCATIONAL SEISMIC NETWORKS

George Hloupis, Ilias Stavrakas, Konstantinos Moutzouris and Dimos Triantis 356

ONLINE MATHEMATICS EDUCATION - E-Math for First Year Engineering Students

Steen Markvorsen and Karsten Schmidt 360

Q-BAT: A CUSTOMIZABLE VIDEOGAME FOR EDUCATION

Olga Peñalba, Antonio Cerezo, Alejo Silos and Alvaro García-Tejedor 364

USING ONTOLOGIES TO DESIGN COMPETENCY-BASED E-LEARNING APPLICATIONS

Maria Bagiampou and Achilles Kameas 368

TOWARDS PERSONALIZED TRAINING OF ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION OPERATORS

Ricardo Molina, Guillermo Rodriguez, Yasmin Hernandez, Israel Paredes, Gustavo Arroyo and Liliana Argotte

372

TOWARDS BUILDING PEDAGOGICAL AGENTS BASED ON EXPERIMENTS - A Preliminary Result

Hanju Lee and Kazuo Hiraki

376

AUTHOR INDEX 381

TRACING THE EMMERGING USE OF COMMUNICATION

TECHNOLOGIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION

A Literature Review

Marta Pinto1, Francislê Souza2, Fernanda Nogueira3, Ana Balula4, Luís Pedro5, Lúcia Pombo6, Fernando Ramos7 and António Moreira8

1

Department of Education, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, Aveiro, Portugal

2

Department of Education, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

3

Department of Education, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

4

School of Technology and Management of Águeda, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

5

Department of Communication and Art, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

6

Department of Education, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

7

Department of Communication and Art, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

8

Department of Education, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

{martapinto, fns, fnogueira, balula, lpedro, lpombo, fernando.ramos, moreira}@ua.pt

Keywords: Communication Technology, Higher Education, Teaching, Learning.

Abstract: Communication Technologies being used in Higher Education Institutions worldwide are producing changes in the design of teaching and learning practices, giving rise to learning paradigms such as e-learning, b-learning and m-learning. Research embraces different perspectives on how the use of Internet and Communication Technologies potentiate innovation and disruptiveness of more traditional forms of education, as well as promotion of changes in the way teachers and students work and in the roles they adopt. The present review suggests that web 2.0 technologies has promoted new forms of communication, interaction and sharing between users and content in formal education settings. Furthermore, the realization of how vast and disperse the body of literature is, revealed as significant the main goals of the project “Portuguese Public Higher Education Use of Communication Technologies”, that aims to characterize Portuguese higher education institutions according to their use and best practices, disseminating the information obtained through an online information visualization tool. The ultimate goal of the project is to contribute towards making valuable and up-to-date information available to Higher Education Institutions and users, facilitating and potentiating research in the area.

1 INTRODUCTION

The adoption and promotion of Communication Technologies (CTs) is happening throughout the world of Higher Education Institutions, especially because CTs are now embedded in people’s lives, shifting into more ubiquitous and networked participations. This is estimated to further contribute towards the future of economy, society and personal quality of life, by simultaneously demanding Higher Education (HE) institutions to compete in the globalised economy, cooperating among themselves, and resorting to a variety of technological services that add to their capacity to potentiate best practices and innovation. As to the existing impact of CTs in

HE, programs such as i2010 and entities like UNESCO and OECD report that students are mostly using the web to interact, communicate and produce content, being increasingly influenced by Web intelligent services that empower user to distribute content and customize Internet applications. In this article CTs are defined as the hardware and software that allow and promote communication and information distribution supported by the Internet (Armstrong and Franklin, 2008); (Grodecka et al., 2009).

The vast emerging and disperse body of literature justifies the relevance of the present literature review, aiming to provide a synthesis of the research conducted in the field, and to draw some conclusions as to the impact of these CTs in

HE teaching and learning environments. In this setting, it challenges of the project “Portuguese Public Higher Education Use of Communication Technologies” - TRACER, under development at the University of Aveiro, are enhanced, once it aims to trace and disseminate the information expected to characterize the Portuguese Public Higher Education Institutions (PPHEI) as to their adoption and use of CT, disseminating the information obtained through an online information visualization tool. This will contribute to making information of interest to institutions and users, available and up-to-date, proposing the dissemination of best practices.

2 LITERATURE

REVIEW

METHODOLOGY

A systematic literature review search was undertaken from June to November 2011, in the attempt to answer two questions: a) which CTs are being used in HE? b) how are CTs being used in HE? The need to answer these questions relates to the development of the aforementioned research project TRACER, looking specifically for publications concerning web 2.0 tools, services and platforms use in HE. The review was made in the following international online bibliographic databases: Scopus, Eric, Springer, B-On and Google Scholar. Search was also performed directly in the UNESCO and OECD websites. The keywords used were: higher education, communication technologies, communication technologies, web 2.0, e-learning, blended learning, mobile learning, immersive worlds, and personal learning environments, all combined with the boolean operator “AND”.

Search resulted in a total of 193 documents, limited to the English and Portuguese languages, namely: 22 books; 22 conference papers; 95 journal articles; 28 reports; 18 work thesis; 2 series documents and 2 webpages.

3 CTS USED IN HE TO SUPPORT

TEACHING AND LEARNING

PRACTICES

The use of CTs in HE has evolved, alongside the evolution of the web and web technologies, from web 1.0 tools with no interactive components, to web 2.0 tools which embrace interaction and

promote social network media tools and applications (O'Reilly, 2005).

CTs may be seen as becoming “an icon of early 21st century higher education provision” (Selwyn, 2007, p. 83), with increased investments on computer infrastructures in developed and developing countries, attempting to “‘blend’ ICTs into all aspects of face-to-face teaching and learning, as well as into students’ independent study” (Selwyn, 2007, p. 83). In new learning environments, new roles are adopted. Teachers position themselves as facilitators and mentors, continuously negotiating authority (Wesch, 2009), in a shared process of scaffolding of learning, where students gain more autonomy. With greater autonomy students are empowered to create spaces where learning can take place and skills are built, managing information in different ways, analysing, discussing, and sharing (Wesch, 2009), using and transforming content. This is having its confirmation in the exponential development and use of web 2.0 and social networking software for communication, interaction, collaboration, establishing connections, and sharing information, opinions and thoughts (Downes, 2005).

Conversely et al., (2008) contested the idea of disruption happening as a result of the impact of technologies in HE. Their research showed that between 2005 and 2006 the main use of one Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) in Dublin City University, did not go beyond replication of existing practices, creating no disruptive change in assessment methods and activities, where web tools which demand collaboration or reflection are less used than face-to-face teaching (Blin and Munro, 2008).

Other learning theories, such as connectivism (Siemens, 2005), have revised the meaning of learning, adjusted to reflect the changing and connected learning environments.

3.1 Teaching and Learning Supported

by CTs

All the systems related with teaching and learning as being supported by CTs in both the delivery of face-to-face and distance modes – resorting to classical or online approaches, may be defined as Distance Learning (DL) (Bielschowsky, 2009). In this context, teachers and students tend to nowadays communicate resorting to several online tools and media. When referring to distance learning we have to understand Distance Education (DE) from which it derives. DE is defined as being institutionally

CSEDU2012-4thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

based, where teacher and student can be separate geographically or in time, and CTs contribute to diminish those distances (Schlosser and Simonson, 2009). The effort to develop DE supported by CTs is extended to developed and developing countries, as the UNESCO incentives African countries to invest in the applications of CTs in HE, despite the need of faculty training and the need to cooperate internationally. The literature shows that within learning supported by CTs, the concept of DL comprises three learning paradigms, intersecting: e-leaning, blended learning, mobile learning. For the purpose of this article, the definitions of the learning paradigms will only contemplate the formal learning context.

3.1.1 e-Learning

e-Learning can be understood as a significant part of the learning content made available via the Internet, “the use of new multimedia technologies and Internet, to improve the quality of learning by facilitating access to resources and services, as well as remote exchanges and collaboration” (EuropeanComission, 2001), and the support of online teaching and learning processes. E-learning in European HE is considered to be strategic for the education and training systems to become more competitive and dynamic within a knowledge-based economy.

It is expected that every HE institution in the OECD area uses a learning management platform, justifying the results of the OECD report on Millennium Learners, which identifies the use of VLEs by students (82.3% several times a week) as one of the largest technologies used for academic purposes (Pedró, 2009).

3.1.2 Blended Learning

Blended learning is considered to be a mix of face-to-face and online learning, although “it is not clear how much or how little, online learning is inherent to blended learning” (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004, p. 97) and its instructional design must be flexible. It requires a restructuring of the class, of the contact hours between teachers and students, and of the approach to teaching and learning (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004). By practicing blended learning the conveniences of online courses are gained without the loss of face-to-face contact (Ellis et al., 2009). Thus, a learning environment is created which is richer than either a traditional face-to-face environment or a fully online environment.

3.1.3 Mobile Learning

Mobile learning as a theory encompasses learning in a society characterized by mobility of people and knowledge supported by mobile devices (Sharples et al., 2007) and by application software and networking technology. The accessibility of mobile technology to the average person is making learning accessible anytime and anywhere.

Giorgieva (2011) states that mobile learning is a new trend in the development of e-learning, in which mobile devices help students get access to course materials anytime anywhere. This is important for HE because today’s faculty members and students are arriving at universities with easy-to-use devices such as laptops or mobile computers, fully equipped with web development environments, music and video displayers, productivity tools and prepared for broadband web connections (Katz, 2008). Motiwalla (2007), emphasizes that features such as alerts and permanent access to interact and communicate may help users be more productive, showing however that differences reside in the tools used while the pedagogies remain similar.

3.2 CTs used in HE to Support

Teaching and Learning

To look at CTs in HE means to look at web 2.0 tools. Longitudinal studies show the considerably patchy and diverse use of web 2.0 social media technologies in formal learning and change of practices (Armstrong and Franklin, 2008); (Conole and Alevizou, 2010) at the teaching and learning levels. To sustain the review analysis we have adopted the major categories of web 2.0 activity and tools proposed in the BECTA Report (Crook et al., 2008), also adopted in other reports (Conole and Alevizou, 2010). Accordingly, 13 activities were categorized, as transcribed (Crook et al., 2008, p. 9-15.): “Trading; Media Sharing; Media manipulation; Data/web mash-ups; Conversational arenas; Online games and virtual worlds; Social networking; Blogging; Social bookmarking; Recommender systems; Collaborative editing; Wikis; Syndication”.

3.2.1 Web 2.0 Activities and Tools used in HE

In result of the review, there was no evidence concerning trading in educational contexts.

Mash-up websites composed by data from different sources into a new Web service (Batty et al., 2010), are seen as a set of tools and

TRACINGTHEEMMERGINGUSEOFCOMMUNICATIONTECHNOLOGIESINHIGHEREDUCATION-A LiteratureReview

environments of emerging interest in HE (Wesch, 2009). Netvibes, a web 2.0 mash-up is increasingly being used to create ideal learning environments that maximize the exchange of ideas and interaction, individually or in a community (Li and Li, 2011). Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) may be understood as an aggregation kind of tool. In fact, University of Aveiro offers its community, since 2009, aggregation possibilities in SAPO Campus, a technological platform supported by widgets, which integrates web 2.0 tools for video and photo sharing, a cross-institutional wiki and a blog platform promoting a PLE construction culture (Santos et al., 2011).

Social networking sites such as Facebook, Ning or Elgg, are frequently used to create communities of practice in HE (Conole, 2010), to include group settings in formal learning, and for library and administrative applications. Facebook is popular and commonly used by students. College of Business at Carbondale, reported to have 400 members on its Facebook group, receiving school news, communicating with the school community, to publish reports of Facebook use and to market school events (Roblyer et al., 2010). The Brooklyn College Library has provided a MySpace portal to its services containing links to documents, databases and catalogues (Roblyer et al., 2010).

Wikis are user constructed, allowing: i) collaborative writing in a peer group wiki, where students share and discuss ideas, improve their communication skills and comment on their writing (Armstrong and Franklin, 2008), ii) teaching support in their design for learning, a single space where they can share the materials for a lecture (Armstrong and Franklin, 2008).

Blogging, wikis, RSS are commonly offered by HE institutions, being integrated in social networking sites such as Ning and Elgg, frequently used as VLEs (Brown, 2010); (Conole and Alevizou, 2010), concerning mostly the management and sustaining of various kinds of online interactions through several web applications (Brown, 2010). Resulting from the analysis of 4 case studies in 4 different universities, Franklin & van Harmelen (2007) made it evident that there are multiple choices for implementing VLE systems and web 2.0 tools within those systems - besides podcasting and personal blogs; wiki and a social networking sites are offered, to promote campus life communication information, work groups, sharing research findings and participating in communities of practice. Nevertheless, as reported in the study done by Harinarayana and Raju (2010) study, which involved

57 university library web, the use of podcast was used only by 3 of them. Universities have also embraced web 2.0 tools for enhancing their library services. In the Tripathi study (2010), results showed that from 277 university libraries, 211 had adopted at least one web 2.0 tool, whereas 23.8% did not use any web 2.0 tools. The three most used tools were instant messaging (43.7%), blogs (33.2%), and RSS (31.4%) to convey relevant news and events.

Media sharing tools, allow sharing content in open access and open participation contexts. Video media sharing tools, such as YouTube, are being used by HE institutions in order to have official presence in video sharing services, making lectures available to larger audiences, publishing educational content (Armstrong and Franklin, 2008), and also being used for delivering DE courses. A large number of HE institutions have adhered to iTunes U, allowing their lectures to be openly viewed and downloaded online (Katz, 2008).

As to immersive worlds, the 2007 Horizon Report classified virtual worlds as an emerging trend likely to have an impact in HE. Increasingly being used in HE, virtual worlds are enabling authentic and scenario-based learning contexts and, according to Conole and Alevizou (2010), over 250 HE institutions worldwide are teaching using Second Life, because of the interaction opportunities, and also because it supports activities like seminar and lectures, social interaction within realistic contexts, conceptual experimentation and role play, which may facilitate different interpretations of events (Freitas, 2008). The high usage of 3D immersive virtual worlds by teachers in HE is reflected on the numbers Dalgarno (2011) presents, indicating that from a total of 125 HE teachers from Australia and New Zeland, 62 use 3D immersive virtual worlds in their teaching, using Second Life (78.0%) and Active Worlds (5.0%), the most commonly used platforms, followed by OpenSim (4.0%) and There.com (1.0%).

4 DISCUSSION

AND

SUMMARY

OF RESEARCH AIMS

Tracing the use of CT in HE is a time-consuming task, due to the vast and fragmented information published. The systematized analysis proposed was challenging and a small sample of a complex work possible to be built. It is possible to conclude that the ubiquity of CTs are both in people’s lives and in educational contexts. Web 2.0 tools and

CSEDU2012-4thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

environments are popular regarding the interactions and communications they potentiate, with strong impact in the support of teaching and learning practices in HE, and changes in the roles adopted by teachers and students, into more student-centred, reflected on activities involving collaboration, interaction, connection between users and content, sharing, consuming and producing. The idea of a disruptive change in teaching and learning practices is considered by some authors, while others state that technologies are used in HE, but teaching forms have not changed. The difference of scale of the documents reviewed, the contexts to which they refer and time-frame of their development offer us a clear view of the wide view upon approaches made. To systematize the richness of the information collected as a whole, a longer and exhaustive review is needed.

One of the main objectives of the TRACER project is to characterize, as stated earlier, the adoption and use of CT in the PPHEI, in order to understand which tools are used, if they are mostly used as support for already existing technological processes and structures of teaching and learning, or whether their potential is being used for innovation. To achieve this objective, an exploratory study will be held based on the results of an online questionnaire, addressing key elements of the HE institutions, so that an overall institutional view of CTs used and their support mechanisms (social, academic, logistic) is unveiled. An information visualization tool will serve the purpose of giving visibility to the collected data, making sense of a vast quantity of information. The aim is to contribute towards making information of interest to institutions and users, available and up-to-date, facilitating and potentiating research in the area.

5 FINAL

CONSIDERATIONS

As this literature review has revealed CTs have a confirmed use in HE. The use of social Web tools and environments is a trend in teaching and learning practices in HE, placing challenges to teachers, students, and institutions, at the level of the interaction, production and delivery of educational content. The ubiquity of web2.0 tools revealed a strong relation to the idea of disruptive changes of more traditional forms of education in HE. Despite this, it is possible to conclude that HE is using social web tools as a support for already existing educational processes and adding them to technological structures of teaching and learning

previously used. The change in the roles played by teachers and students may also be disruptive of more traditional ways of learning; although its use is not always potentiated for innovation. The expectation is for teaching and learning practices to change along with an effective integration and innovative use of CTs in education. Keeping up-to-date with the information related to the adoption of CTs by HE and to its' impact on the teaching and learning practices, has become more and more difficult due to the vast and fragmented publications, leading to the need of serious and expedite systematising. That is the ultimate goal of the online information visualization tool proposed by the ongoing project.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to all the members of the project TRACER for their contributions. Thanks also to FCT, the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology for financially supporting the project under reference PTDC/CPE-CED/113368/2009 COMPETE:FCOM P-01-0124-FEDER-014394.

REFERENCES

2007 Horizon Report. The New Media Consortium and EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative.

Armstrong and Franklin, T., J., (2008). A review of current and developing international practice in the use of social networking (Web 2.0) in higher education: Franklin Consulting.

Batty, M., Crooks, A., Hudson-Smith, A., Milton, R., Anand, S., Jackson, M., and Morley, J., (2010). Data mash-ups and the future of mapping. JISC, Bristol. Bielschowsky, C. L., W., Mason, R.; Sangra, A. and

Hasan, A., (2009). Reforming Distance Learning Higher Education. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/Zmn9m

Blin, F., and Munro, M., (2008). Why hasn't technology disrupted academics' teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory. Comput. Educ., 50(2), 475-490. Brown, S., (2010). From VLEs to learning webs: the

implications of Web 2.0 for learning and teaching.

Interactive Learning Environments, 18(1), 1 - 10.

Comission, E., (2001). Plano de acção eLearning - Pensar o futuro da educação. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/1TV5C

Conole, G., and Alevizou, P., (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education.

Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University, retrieved February, 17, 2011.

Crook, C., Cummings, J., Fisher, T., Graber, R., Harrison,

TRACINGTHEEMMERGINGUSEOFCOMMUNICATIONTECHNOLOGIESINHIGHEREDUCATION-A LiteratureReview

C., Lewin, C., Oliver, M., (2008). Web 2.0 technologies for learning: the current landscape – opportunities, challenges and tensions. In Becta (Ed.): Becta.

Dalgarno, B., Lee, M. J. W., Carlson, L., Gregory, S., and Tynan, B., (2011). An Australian and New Zealand scoping study on the use of 3D immersive virtual worlds in higher education. Australasian Journal of

Educational Technology, 27(1), 1-15.

Downes, S., (2005). E-learning 2.0. eLearn Magazine,

2005(10). Retrieved from http://goo.gl/UQ6Lv

Ellis, R. A., Ginns, P. and Piggott, L., (2009). E-learning in higher education: some key aspects and their relationship to approaches to study. Higher Education

Research & Development, 28(3), 303-318. Retrieved

from http://goo.gl/0avHb

Freitas, S., (2008). Serious Virtual Worlds: A scoping study JISC e-Learning Programme: JISC.

Garrison, D. R. and Kanuka, H., (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105.

Grodecka, K., Wild, F. and Kieslinger, B. (Eds.). (2009).

How to Use Social Software in Higher Education: iCamp Project.

Harinarayana, N. and Raju, N. V., (2010). Web 2.0 features in university library web sites. Electronic

Library, The, 28(1), 69-88.

Katz, R. N., (Ed.). (2008). The tower and the cloud:

Higher education in the age of cloud computing:

Educause.

Li, Y. and Li, W., (2011). Developing a learning

ecosystem of higher education enabled by Netvibes.

Paper presented at the Electrical and Control Engineering (ICECE), 2011 International Conference on Yichang.

Motiwalla, L. F., (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation. Computers & Education, 49(3), 581-596.

O'Reilly, T., (2005). What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. O’Reilly Media. Retrieved from

http://goo.gl/sKB6A

Pedró, F., (2009). New Millenium Learners in Higher Education: Evidence and Policy Implications. Paris: OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation.

Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J. and Witty, J. V., (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134-140.

Santos, Pedro, L., Ramos, F. and Moreira, A., (2011, 10-12 July 2011). Sapo Campus: what users really think

about an institutionally supported PLE Paper

presented at the PLE Conference 2011, Southampton. Schlosser, L. A. and Simonson, M., (2009). Distance

Education: Definitions and Glossary of Terms (Third

ed.): Information Age Publisher.

Selwyn, N., (2007). The use of computer technology in university teaching and learning: a critical perspective, Editorial, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, pp. 83-94. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/GvsNm

Sharples, M., Taylor, J. and Vavoula, G., (2007). A Theory of Learning for the Mobile Age (pre-print). In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage

Handbook of Elearning Research (pp. 221-247).

London: Sage.

Siemens, (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory.

International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved from

http://goo.gl/jr9of

Tripathi, M. and Kumar, S., (2010). Use of Web 2.0 tools in academic libraries: A reconnaissance of the international landscape. The International Information

& Library Review, 42(3), 195-207.

Wesch, M., (2009). From Knowledgeable to Knowledge-Able: Learning in New Media Environments. “New

Media Technologies and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning”.

CSEDU2012-4thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation