Web 2.0 for engaging and collaborative learning in higher education Essay

weave 2.0 for engaging and collaborative learning in high training - Essay ExampleClassroom 2.0 physical exertions asynchronous learning to promote collaboration among large numbers of users, instead of consuming one-way information, which is common in Classroom 1.0. Some educators are concerned, however, with the adoption of Web 2.0, because it may not serve their specific teaching needs and it may not always be aligned with learners skills and interests (Bennett et al., 2012 Yoo & David, 2011). Other educators think that Web 2.0 is a powerful enabling technology for students (Churchill, 2011 Sistek-Chandler, 2012). This essay aims to negotiate differences in the perceptions of Web 2.0 because of different beliefs in the set up of Web 2.0 on learning. Web 2.0 promotes learning through providing diverse tools for engaging and collaborative learning. Web 2.0 contributes to synchronous and asynchronous learning in higher education because it assists student content creation and sh aring, promotes self-regulated learning and teamwork, and supports critical and reflective participation. Opponents of Web 2.0 assert that students have different Web 2.0 skills and these differences can produce cognitive charge up that can interfere with deep learning. Cifuentes, Alvarez Xochihua, and Edwards (2011) well-read that the cognitive load from Web 2.0 interfered with deep learning due to students varying Web 2.0 skills. ... The authors stressed the importance of Web 2.0 in enhancing student content creation and sharing, but the inexperience of the students with these tools may prove disconcerting to them enough to not understand its value in their education. Cifuentes, Alvarez Xochihua, and Edwards (2011) in like manner stressed that not all students understood the objectives of using Web 2.0. This article emphasizes the role of instructors in mediating learning through providing clear learning objectives in the use of Web 2.0. Teachers must consider these issues, bef ore introducing Web 2.0 into learning practices. Technology skills and learning goals can impact how Web 2.0 will be used and select by both teachers and students alike. Students and teachers may have different interests and preferences too, when it comes too Web 2.0, which can affect how Web 2.0 is accepted and used in actual consort settings. Yoo and David Huang (2011), in Comparison of Web 2.0 Technology Acceptance Level Based on Cultural Differences, examined the role of culture in accepting Web 2.0. They learned that Koreans and Americans have different preferences, when it comes to Web 2.0 technologies. If instructors are not aware of these preferences, they might not be able to motivate their students in maximizing Web 2.0 for learning. Bennett et al. (2012) noteworthy that teachers also have varying perceptions on the importance of Web 2.0 in teaching and learning. Some teachers continue to believe that face-to-face communication is still the top hat way of learning, bec ause actual presence can stimulate deep learning. Others believe that Web 2.0 presents interesting ways of engaging students. Clearly, differences in how Web