Personalised and Self Regulated Learning in the Web 2.0 Era: International Exemplars of Innovative Pedagogy Using Social Software.

By Catherine McLoughlin, Mark J. W. Lee. 2010

945 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Research findings in recent years provide compelling evidence of the importance of encouraging student control over the learning process as a whole. The socially based tools and technologies of the Web 2.0 movement are capable of supporting informal conversation, reflexive dialogue and collaborative content generation, enabling access to a wide raft of ideas and representations. Used appropriately, these tools can shift control to the learner, through promoting learner agency, autonomy and engagement in social networks that straddle multiple real and virtual learning spaces independent of physical, geographic, institutional and organisational boundaries. As argued in this article, however, in order for self-regulated learning to come to fruition, students need not only to be able to choose and personalise what tools and content are available, but also to have access to the necessary scaffolding to support their learning. Emerging practices with social computing technologies, a number of examples of which are showcased in this article, signal the need for pedagogies that are more personal, social and participatory. The authors conclude with a discussion of some of the key implications for practice, including an outline of the current challenges faced by tertiary educators.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0def837a5b24fd143fd91d7b27b469b72f3f5b81

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Self-regulated out-of-class language learning with technology (2011, background): “Technology provides venues and makes it easy for learners to regulate their language learning (McLoughlin & Lee, 2010).”
Features students really expect from learning analytics (2016, background): “Personalized learning environments can help to foster students’ skills to manage, monitor, and reflect their own learning (McLoughlin & Lee, 2010).”
Personalised learning: lessons to be learnt (2012, background): “Claims include sociocultural, pedagogical, motivational and pragmatic justifications, as well as appeals to its role in curricular reform (Hargreaves, 2005 ; Paludan, 2006 ; Sebba et al , 2007 ; Blanchard, 2009 ; Drexler, 2010 ; McLoughlin & Lee, 2010 ).”
Technology Acceptance, Technological Self-Efficacy, and Attitude Toward Technology-Based Self-Directed Learning: Learning Motivation as a Mediator (2020, background): “…use (Kennedy et al., 2008), perceived usefulness of technology (Goodyear and Ellis, 2008; Teo, 2011), perception of the utility of technological resources (Clark et al., 2009), and the scaffolding available in supporting the technology-enhanced learning experience (McLoughlin and Lee, 2010).”
Personalising learning: Exploring student and teacher perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course (2015, background): “As for the teacher, it means increased time commitment to design and implement blended/flipped classes (Means et al., 2010).”
Openness and praxis: Exploring the use of open educational practices in higher education (2017, background): “Theories of social learning such as social constructivism and sociocultural theory emphasise the importance of learners being actively involved in the learning process (Conole & Oliver, 2006; McLoughlin & Lee, 2010).”
The role of social media in higher education classes (real and virtual) - A literature review (2013, background): “…of social media in general and the saturation of SNSs in particular, many higher education instructors have looked to the technology to mediate and enhance their instruction as well as promote active learning for students (Anderson, 2007; Eijkman, 2008; McLoughlin & Lee, 2010; Selwyn, 2010).”
Examining the relationship between English language learners’ online self-regulation and their self-efficacy (2017, positive): “…learning environments provide EFL learners with promising opportunities for improving their language learning both inside and beyond the classrooms (McLoughlin & Lee, 2010), more studies are needed for better understanding language learners’ self-regulatory mechanisms in online settings (Lai & Gu,…”