Connecting workgroups and dropbox Classrom and web 

Context in source publication

Context 1

... transformation in the teaching methods, giving way to virtual environments, where the learning process is based on interactivity to educate students, leading to the acquisition of new skills. In parallel with the increasing use of ICTs, the European Space for Higher Education has led to growing concerns about a new model of teaching / learning, student-centered. Concepts such as “skills or abilities” emerge as relevant and key criteria in the new approach to higher education. In line with authors such as (Amhag, Jakobsson 2009; So, Brush 2008; Wheeler, Yeomans, Wheeler 2008; Wolff 2010; Biasutti, EL-Deghaidy 2012) social constructivist learning theory was used as a theoretical framework with a shift from a teacher-centred methodology to a student-centred methodology. In this framework, the main objective of this paper is to analyze the use of the SN and dropbox in blended learning by University students. We try identifying this method, over the student’s performance (learning out- come). Following (Levy, Dickerson, Teague 2010) while pedagogical developments and research were largely focused on e-learning, the beginning of this century saw the emergence of the concept of blended learning. Bliuc (Goodyear, Ellis 2007: 4) state that “blended learning” describes learning activities that involve a systematic combination of co-present (face-to-face) interactions and technologically-mediated interactions between students, teachers and learning resources’. As mention (López-Pérez, Pérez-López, Rodríguez-Ariza 2011) the success of blended learning is not only the result of the simple integration of ICTs with the FTF approach (De George-Walker, Keeffe 2010). In situations where student numbers by classroom are high, this type of resource provides greater opportunities to comprehend and extend the knowledge presented (Osguthorpe, Graham 2003; Singh 2010). The use of blended learning resources may produce changes in learning patterns and practices. We integrate the Knowledge management (KM) as a design tool because of the pedagogical importance that is reaching (Yeh, Huang, Yeh 2010). As mention this au- thors KM involves knowledge sharing, creation, validation, presentation, distribution and application (Bhatt 2001; Holm 2001). Recent studies have used KM (Yeh, Huang, Yeh 2011; Biasutti, EL-Deghaidy 2012). In this section, we present the participants, the resources and methods used to determine whether the objectives of this study have been achieved. The participants were sophomores of Economics and Business Administration, in the course of Operations and Business Processes. Table 1 shows the technical details of the survey. They had to perform work in a group. The work accounted for 50% of the note. The other 50% was the final exam with 40%, the remaining 10% of individual work. The work was involved in the manufacturing process of a product or service. Students had to incorporate the various concepts and techniques studied during the course. For example, determining the project network (CPM, PERT), plant layout, production planning, etc. Students studying and working also independently proposed themes and concepts. The sum of these activities was evaluated in a final mark. As men - tion (López-Perez et al. 2011) learning outcomes are of a multi-dimensional nature; they may reflect acquired skills and competences, and knowledge received, or be measured by students’ experiences or by their degree of satisfaction. The final marks has been used as a measure learning by (Broad et al. 2000; Drennan, Rohde 2002; Dowling et al. 2003; López-Perez et al. 2011) among others. Demographic information was collected on participants` gender, access to the inter- net, hourly of daily Internet usage and its purpose, in addition to previous experience with social networks and dropbox. Tables 2 and 3 shows participants ́ demographic data and opinion the work done, resources and support received by the teacher. We have created a SN () to facilitate interaction between students and between them and the teacher. The SN can be used for different purposes, but have a common and important initiative of maintaining existing social ties and / or form new connections between users (Cliff et al. 2006; Ellison et al. 2006; Boyd & Ellison 2008). Although students were encouraged to search for software, documentation, vid- eos, the network has a wealth of information fostering especially the use of free software (Openproject, WinQSB, Day, Sistrat, etc.). Figure 1 shows an image of the network and the evolution of interactions of the participants over time. We use software UCINET v. 6 (Borgatti et al. 2002) for the representations. Using dropbox, the working groups kept the different versions of the work. It could also access the results of the computer programs used by students. The teaching material was accessible through a website (or WebCT). In classroom, explaining both concepts and practical and discussed issues related to work. Figure 2 shows the network structure (simplified) of the working groups and dropbox and with the classroom. One closed question instrument were used to assess the results and the processes induced by the SN and dropbox in the activities. The questionnaire was structured into two blocks. One is about the demographics and opinion the work done, re- sources and support received by the teacher (see Tables #1 and #2). The other for assessing the application of Knowledge Management (KM) processes. This instru- ment has been used recently by (Yeh, Huang & Yeh 2011; Biasutti, EL-Deghaidy 2012). A developed description of the relationship between KM and education can be found in these authors. First we apply the factor analysis; we can find five types of knowledge within KM. As mention Biasutti and EL-Deghaidy (2012: 863); Knowledge acquisition re- fers mainly to the strategies, tools and methods that could be used in order to finding and acquiring information. Knowledge internalization after information has been found and accessed, the next step is linking this information into previous mental schemata. Knowledge creation considering previous knowledge, it starts from the collection of existing knowledge, ending with storage process and passing by processes of coding and classification of knowledge. Knowledge sharing process is the key to enhance the externalization and dissemination of knowledge. Knowledge application and innovation process represents the stage where decisions are made and is the ultimate goal of KM. It refers to the process of applying what one has learned to the job at hand. Second we apply cluster analysis for form groups of students with homogeneous characteristics, but different among the groups, for which a cluster analysis is appropriate. According (Voss 2003) blended learning is a recent development in education, combining face-to-face classes with e-learning modules. Some authors mention the advantages of applying this methodology in relation with didactic flexibility or reducing costs, especial - ly compared to traditional classes a large number of students (Woltering, Herrler, Spitzer, Spreckelsen 2009). As mention (López-Perez, Perez-López, Rodriguez Ariza 2011) pre- vious studies have reported that the quality and results of learning are affected when students utilize only such methods, possibly due to a) the lack of interaction with the teacher and other students (Laurillard 1993); b) procrastination in asynchronous learning (Lim 2002); c) the reduced motivation to read learning materials online (Lim, Kim 2003). In our case we assume that the use of blending learning will be a positive effect on to students. In particular, as a result of factors such as utility (Ozkan, Koseler 2009). Students overcome the difficulties of the resources available and also perceive their util - ity. His work thus becomes something encouraging and satisfactory. The motivation to learn is one of the variables that have most often been studied in the field of education (Lim, Morris 2009). Data collected through the questionnaire KM, were analyzed using statistical analy- sis (Factor analysis and cluster analysis). Alpha coefficients ranging from 0.80 to 0.91 were all above the 0.70 standard of reliability and the total Cronbach-α was 0.87. As is known, with factor analysis the aim is to obtain a new set of variables (factors), fewer in number than the original variables, which allows a clearer interpretation. Determining the number of factors to retain is, as (Rummel 1970) points out, in part discretionary, and is left to the researcher’s judgement. However, and as (Stewart 1981) notes, we should mention that there are various criteria to help to decide the number of significant factors, such as retaining the factors with characteristic root or eigenvalue greater than 1, which is the criterion chosen in this work. The (Bartlett 1950) test allows us to reject the null hypotheses of no significant correlation ( c 2 = 4567.7; p = 0.000), meaning that it is appropriate to carry out this analysis. Likewise, the KMO test = 0.84 is also suitable. Following the criteria mentioned, we obtain 3 factors with and eigenvalue grater than1 (as can be see Table 4, whose explanatory power is 63.1%. The interpretation of these factors is carried out as a function of the variables with most influence in them, previously carrying out varimax rotation to help in the interpretation of the results. We use, depending on sample size, the cutoff value of 0.6 (Hair et al. 1999). The first factor , which explains 46,7% of the variance, presents a high positive as- sociation with seven items in three group. First group of items #15, #14, #16 (I tried to bring out the best practices, I applied my knowledge to the activities, I have downloaded and adapted best practices to my activities) representing knowledge application . Second group of items #5 and #6 (I updated the job permanently, I rated the new information in an organized), ...