An evaluation of the usage of Web 2 - IEEE Xplore

An Evaluation of the Usage of Web 2.0 among Tertiary Level Students in Malaysia Kamaluddeen Usman Danyaro 1, Jafreezal Jaafar 1, Rod Allan A. De Lara 2, Alan G. Downe 3 1

Department of Computer & Information Sciences Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia 2 School of Engineering Science & Technology, KDU College, 47400 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia 3

Department of Management & Humanities, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract—Web 2.0 is increasingly becoming a familiar pedagogical tool in higher education, facilitating the process of teaching and learning. But this advancement in information technology has further provoked the problems like plagiarism and other academic misconduct. This paper evaluates the patterns of use and behavior of tertiary level students towards the use of Web 2.0 as an alternative and supplemental eLearning Portal. A total of 92 students’ data were collected and analyzed according to [1] 'Self-Determination Theory' (SDT). It was found that students use social websites for chatting, gamming and sharing files. Facebook, YouTube and Wikipedia are ranked as the most popular websites used by college students. It also reveals that students have an inherent desire of expressing ideas and opinion online openly and independently. This sense of freedom makes students feel more competent, autonomous or participative and find learning to be less tedious. Therefore, this report, recommends educators to adopt strategies for acknowledging students’ feelings and activities online to reinforce positive behavior effective learning. Finally, we discussed the implications of Web 2.0 on education. Keywords-Web 2.0, Students’ behavior, Social networking, Cognitive development, e-learning 2.0, Self-Determination Theory

I.

INTRODUCTION

The process of education involves the provision of identifying the needs and means to motivate students to learn. This includes inculcating a desire to self-assess one's learning needs; as the old English adage says ''you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink." This means that learning is not a natural consequence of teaching. For learning to transpire, the desire to acquire knowledge must be internally driven and not exogenously dictated by educational systems or by pedagogical techniques. Education thrives in diversity, and is facilitated by four self-directed activities i.e. observation, interaction/ communication, actions (through trial and error) and reading. It is for these reasons, that technology-based strategies are becoming a permanent and indispensable feature in education, designed to unlock students' inhibitions to

978-1-4244-6716-7/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE

learning. Moreover, social networking sites have rapidly become a popular means of communication and learning activities for many institutions across the world [2]. This revolutionizes the way people communicate, collaborate and engage in social knowledge and behavioral learning. But more importantly, the effectiveness of the use of social networks/Web 2.0 as a learning tool is supported by strong empirical evidence that suggest tremendous positive effects on students' social behavior and learning outcomes [3]. Moreover, the ability of sites to maintain high usage rate, which is something that conventional eLearning portals could not do before, has encouraged eLearning developers to incorporate many of the interactive features of Web 2.0 in today's eLearning portals, such as forums, discussion boards, blogs, Wikis, podcasts, social bookmarking and many more [4]. So, now, school discussions can be held in eLearning portals featuring the latest Learning Management Systems (LMS) with similar ease and enjoyment as those experienced in social networking sites. In addition to the added features of Web 2.0 the latest LMS contains enhanced feedback and assessment mechanisms and Content Management Systems (CMS) which each program administration. Two of the leading LMS available are: Moodle and Blackboard. In comparison, Moodle is an open source application which means its source code is freely available for customization or modification, or simply for outright adaptation; while the Blackboard is proprietary software commercially available worldwide [4]. On the contrary, the use of the Internet as a medium of teaching and learning has also led to rampant increase in the incidence academic misconduct such as plagiarism and coursework outsourcing, and behavioral problems such as cyber-bullying and privacy abuses. This problem is highlighted in one case, as reported by the Guardian Online Newspaper, where a staff at the City University of London has allegedly committed plagiarism [5]. A similar case happened in one of the public universities of Malaysia, Universiti Putra Malaysia, where two lecturers were seriously admonished for

committing plagiarism [6]. The irony is that, plagiarism is not restricted to students alone, but also faculty members of learning institutions. Although, it is more common among students than teachers, which consequently impugns the academic integrity of learning outcomes. The aim of this investigation is to study how college students use social networking websites as a supplementary tool for learning. It also attempts to evaluate students’ behavior and attitudes towards Internet use, particularly on Web 2.0, as a medium of learning. Towards this ends, it will offer answers to the following specific questions:    

How the college students use Web 2.0 as a learning instrument? How do college students view social networking websites as a teaching and learning tool? Are there evident links between students' academic performance and the degree of utilization of Web 2.0 for learning? Are there positive behavioral responses indicative of learning resulting from the use of social networking websites? II.

METHOD

A total of ninety two (92) college and university students from different levels and fields of study were considered for this survey research. Inferential statistical techniques, using binomial distribution techniques in estimating population proportions were used in generalizing some survey results. Likewise, the central limit theorem involving one sample mean was used in estimating the population distribution of sample mean obtained from the Likert Scales used in the questionnaire. The questionnaire was tailored according to the SDT and Psychological Needs Theory [21, 10] which classified internet user’s motivational behavior according to three general goals: Need for Autonomy, Need for Competence Feedback, and Need for Relatedness. The inclusive periods of data collection were from September – December 2009. The analysis in this research is based on the 'Self Determination Theory or SDT' by [7], which is rooted on the psychological needs theory by [1]. Both of these theories attempts to understand student learning from the perspective of students' innate psychological needs and satisfaction gained from human social development [8]. In connection with this, SDT postulates that students' behavior in the Internet is primarily driven the same innate human desires for personal achievement, which also serve as the motivational force behind student's usage of the Internet. SDT also relates enjoyment with intrinsic motivation that describes students' natural inclination towards spontaneous interest and exploration [9]. On the other hand, [10] describes SDT as akin to understanding the natural propensity of humans to be curious about one's environment and interest in learning and developing one's knowledge. But more importantly, the motivational forces behind the use of the Internet for sharing and acquiring knowledge are said to observable, and therefore measurable, through three basic psychological manifestations of human needs for social growth i.e. autonomy, relatedness

and competence. Although, some of these behavioral artifacts cannot be measured directly, not to mention the relative difficulty of obtaining reliable data on relevant psychological needs (e.g. motivation, interest and satisfaction), SDT has received widespread acceptance for understanding and investigating student's motivational desires to use the Internet for learning purposes. This research pits students' views between popular networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, Bebo, YouTube, Blogs and Wikis; and familiar eLearning systems like Blackboard, Moodle, and Kolej Damansara Utama or KDU College's own KCN network (KDU Community Network). A total of 92 survey responses were collected for this study, all obtained from the college's student population in its Pataling Jaya Campus (Malaysia). Data from this research is not discriminated according to the ‘Disciplines of study' because it assumes that fairly high level homogeneity exists among students in its attitudes and motivation behind Internet use, regardless of their discipline of study. This is also done in order to highlight students' general views of internet-enabled learning environments, and less on their perspectives about their curriculum. A. The extent to which Web 2.0 improve the cognitive development of human The fast integration and appreciation of social networking sites are an indication of its growing acceptance in mainstream society, affecting the lives of millions of people and changing the way people live and communicate with each other [2]. This closely simulated social interactions in the physical (real) world; and when viewed in light of the growing social pressures in real life, explain the catalytic effects of social networking sites on the virtual world, which single-handedly caused its immense population boom. Facebook for example claims to have more than 400 million active users (face book. com), after only less than 10 years in operation, since its inception in 2003. By comparison, MySpace has approximately 70 million unique users in the U.S. and over 100 million active users every month around the world, after only 6 six years of operation. In other words, if Facebook and MySpace are countries, they would easily rank as the 3rd and 12th most populous countries in the world, respectively. But these technological advancements did more than just change the way people interact with each other, it also claims to have changed the way people 'acquire and process information for learning purposes. There is also an ensuing change of mindset with regards to traditional views on education that resulted from these unstructured and undirected forms of communication. For one, the manner at which students' receive information and process them to knowledgeable skills, are not limited to information and instructions directed to them by educators. According to [11] this mental process of converting information to useable skills—traditionally received through eyes and ears—is critical to the formation of knowledge and has strong foundations in cognitive science. Thus, the development of instructional materials for eLearning purposes must consider how technology impacts

these cognitive processes, particularly in learning and how to utilize peoples' ability to self-organize in virtual communities. This also implies the need for educators to alter the focus of education from school-centered to a learner-centered environment. Many of the early pioneers of Web 2.0 have recognized this need to move away from conventional learning environments, and to allow students with greater selfdetermination on their learning experience. Many schools have given students the power to collaborate, participate, and share their learning experiences with others, as an effective means of developing critical and scientific thinking skills, as well as to build meaningful consensus on academic issues. Also, students are found to learn better with the use of visual formats e.g. font types, formats and colors that stimulate, both, the long term memory and visual cortex of the brains [11]. This also allow the students to effortlessly navigate through the Webpage and identify relevant contents for easier mental processing, thus relieving stress and anxiety. With respect to this, computers must be viewed as an efficient vehicle, yet fun and easy-to-use, for combining motor skills, languages, images and symbolic manipulation through practical activities to serve as effective learning and teaching instruments. B. The behavior on Social Webs: Does it motivate students? According to [12] recent research findings give credence to the importance of The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and SDT for studying knowledge-sharing behavior and basic human psychological human needs. But on the contrary, [13] believe that SDT is directed at controlling peoples' social activities and influencing their level of satisfaction towards their usage of the Internet by designing contents that appeal to their basic psychological needs. While notion of controlling peoples' activities in an unregulated environment seems counterintuitive to self-determination; evidence shown by [14] suggests that limiting and controlling teachers' behavior in classrooms showed high levels of internationalization, resulting to greater self-directed learning. [12] postulates three general pedagogies of eLearning i.e. cognitivism, behaviorism, and constructivism, but their potency hinges, to a large extent, on the person's unique characteristics, motives and internal desire to learn. In other words, a person's attitude and desire for knowledge are interrelated factors of learning. Although there are debates surrounding the relationship between motivation and learning outcomes, it is generally accepted that high levels of motivation is a necessary but an insufficient condition for directed learning to transpire. This nonetheless highlights the significance of motivation as part and parcel of the entire education process. But many teachers fail to realize this significance, and feel that motivation is not a crucial part of their roles as educators. These teachers remain adamant on new teaching practices and become staunch supporters of teaching methods during their time as students, and those that were handed to them by previous generations [15]. In contrast, modem teaching strategies inculcate the role of motivation as an indispensable tool for teaching and unlocking student's potentials. 1t emphasizes on independent learning in a teacher-facilitated environment. But more importantly empirical studies find that high level of

motivation results to positive impacts on the fulfillment of basic students [16]. Although SDTs are generally regarded as universal (in principle) and has been applied across social and cultural boundaries [12, 16], it is incontrovertible that SDTs and related motivational theories on learning needs to make room for social and cultural adjustments. Hence, it is equally essential that one recognizes to view teaching and learning from different socio-cultural contexts; in much the same way as one views human needs to be culturally motivated. However, [15] pointed out knowledge construction as another issue of web 2.0 that offers innovative methods of engaging students in the construction of knowledge and pedagogical motivation. Therefore, an affordance of web 2.0 learning can be carried out in real contexts that involve meaningful acts such as delivering learning simulations within reach of both the teachers and the students. C. Privacy and Ethical issues of Web 2.0 Despite the many benefits of free and open communication afforded by the Internet, students need to be aware of the hazards of sharing and posting information online [17]. The Internet is crawling with viruses, worms, and other malicious applications embedded in unsuspecting websites and downloadable software. Many of this malevolent software are capable of stealing users' personal identifiable information stored in ' cookies.' Cookies are pieces of information generated by web servers each time a user visits certain websites that requires users to key in personal identifying information such as passwords and other personal settings. This information is then stored in the user's computers and is retrieved and used by that particular website each time the user revisits it. In this way, the user does not always have to re-key his/ her passwords and re-adjust its settings each time he/ she visits these website [18]. Social networking websites use these cookies. Thus, if students are reckless in their Internet activities, particularly in posting and sharing information on the Web, it is possible for viruses and worms to steal information containing these cookies for some ulterior purpose. This problem is quite alarming considering that most students between the ages of 18 to 24 years are unaware of privacy, safety and security issues in the Internet [2]. But in spite of the negative reactions of many Internet users on the use of cookies to store user's personal information [19], it remains an important and useful feature for many websites [20]. Moreover, the continued popularity of websites which uses these cookies negates the contentions of [19] that these websites receives low trust ratings and patronage from internet users; notwithstanding the fact that almost all Web 2.0 sites that use http-headers uses cookies. In addition to causing privacy woes, cookies have also been accused of causing computers to slow down, but this is considered less of a concern, the greater concern is the lack of global privacy standards which hampers any meaningful intervention to regulate the use of personally-identifiable information contained in cookies. The lack of regulation in the Internet means that websites owners must learn to self-regulate and impose upon themselves codes of ethical practices that will

win the trust and confidence of Internet users. Some websites publish their privacy policies in their End Users License Agreements (EULA), citing specific directives on how it intends to use or limit the use of users' personal information. But protecting privacy in social networking sites are little bit more complicated, based on the fact that a user's profile is easily accessible to third parties, with or without owners' permission [20]. In Facebook, its default policy limits the information displayed in your profile to your networks and other reasonable community limitations. Thus, before academic institutions can take advantage of the power of these social networking sites and develop appropriate pedagogy for an Internet enabled learning environment, it must equally address the problems of protecting users’ privacy, while at the same time protecting the integrity of its learning outcome. III.

EMPIRICAL RESULT

A. Analysis of students’ behavior on e-learning portals and Web 2.0 patterns Survey shows that Facebook, Wikipedia and Youtube are the three most popular social networking websites among tertiary student (see Table 1.1). Statistically, it can be estimated that between 32.90% and 43.06% of college students use Facebook on a daily basis, compared to YouTube’s 13-22% and Wikipedia’s 6.87–13.13%. But more importantly these statistics show a significant variation in the frequency of use of various social networking websites, where Facebook shows a significantly higher usage compared to all others. Perhaps, what sets Facebook apart from other social networking sites are its unique features and diverse social applications that entice students to use it practically on a daily basis. Although, Facebook is not widely recognized for its educational use, despite having a few educational applications available for its users, it offers a friendly and open environment for structured and unstructured communication, which could also lead to academic discourses. As learning gradually shifts towards virtual classroom environments, and physical interactions among students are greatly reduced, the need to simulate social environments becomes a critical component of learning. This is what Facebook has been able to successfully emulate. Ironically, the use of proprietary and non-proprietary educational portals is significantly less popular compared to social networking websites. This is not only evident of inefficient use of resources and a loss of investment from the part of the institutions that offer these learning portals, but it is also symptomatic of a change in social behavior among students, particularly those behavior that relates to learning. This change in behavior pertains to the student’s greater need for autonomy and self determination. Such observation is supported by [21] which postulate the need for autonomy, competent feedback and relatedness as an indivisible component of learning and acquiring information in the internet. This also signifies that students are having a greater desire to take ownership and control over their learning and information needs.

S o c ia l N e tw o rk in g S ite s

P o p u la rity In d e x (h ig h e s t = 8 )

F a ce b o o k

5 .9 9

Y o u tu b e W ik ip e d ia

5 .4 5 4 .6 4

S ch o o l e L e a rn in g P o rta l

3 .6 6

W e b B lo g g in g

2 .6 6

B la c k b o a rd

2 .6 4

F rie n d s te r

2 .6 1

T w itt e r

2 .3 4

M y S p a ce

2 .3 3

P o d ca stin g

2 .0 8

Bebo

1 .9 5

M o o d le

1 .7 2

T ra n s la tio n S e v e ra l T im e s a W e e k W e e k ly to S e v e ra l T im e s a W e e k M o n th ly t o W e e k ly L e ss T h a n O n ce a M o n th R a re ly (le ss th a n o n ce p e r s e m e ste r) R a re ly (le ss th a n o n ce p e r s e m e ste r) R a re ly (le ss th a n o n ce p e r s e m e ste r) R a re ly (le ss th a n o n ce p e r s e m e ste r) R a re ly (le ss th a n o n ce p e r s e m e ste r) R a re ly (le ss th a n o n ce p e r s e m e ste r) R a re ly (le ss th a n o n ce p e r s e m e ste r) R a re ly (le ss th a n o n ce p e r s e m e ste r)

Table 1.1

B. The Need for Autonomy The open and free flow of communication that the internet offers has basically removed the dominance of educational institutions in providing learning instructions to students, and dictating the course of their studies. For educational institutions this has implications on three fronts: 1) To recognize the expanding role of information technologies in providing new tools for delivering educational services, and forging global (formal or informal) networks of ‘school communities’; 2) To develop pedagogies to suit the changing social behavior of students; and 3) To utilize open source platforms for learning. In addition, to providing greater autonomy to students to acquire information in the internet, educational institutions must also learn how to redesign its eLearning portals; because according to the survey, more than half of the students (53.26%) find that the school’s eLearning portals are boring or not interesting (see Table 1.2). There are a number of possible reasons for this. First, eLearning portals are said to be very static, offering one-way information flow with little or no interactive capability. Second, it also does not provide unstructured discussions, typical in physical classroom conversations. Although discussions in eLearning portals are permitted through ‘Discussion Forums’ the use of these virtual discussion rooms limits the richness of conversations among students. In other words, eLearning portals fail to simulate physical learning environments, in so far as promoting learning through formal and informal communication. And lastly, it provides limited social and gaming applications. A number of literatures support the significance of Games as an instrument and prominent feature of learning [22, 23]. These literatures support the idea of integrating the entertainment and educational properties of games in designing learning environments. Impliedly, most educational portals today have been designed with little coherent understanding of the significance of developing holistic and meaningful learning experiences. Students would not find eLearning portals boring if not for this fact.

Level of Psychological Appeal No. of Respondents 1 Not Interesting At All 10 2 Lackadaisical 12 3 Boring 27 4 Somewhat Interesting 20 5 Very Interesting 23 --------------------92 mean Score

Percentage of Responses 10.87% 13.04% 29.35% 21.74% 25.00% --------------------100% 3.37

Cumulative Frequency 10.87% 23.91% 53.26% 75.00% 100.00%

Table 1.2

C. The Need for Competence Competence can be referred as the gaining or feeling effectively in one’s ongoing collaboration within the educational or social environment, which provides users the sense of aptitude to fulfill a task. Based on the survey, most college students (58.70%) feel a high level of competence in accomplishing their academic tasks from the use of electronic sources of information. Statistically, this survey results translate to an average of 53.56 to 63.83% of all tertiary students feeling a sense of competence. This is particularly true for the youths of today who are aptly labeled as ‘Generation C.’ This particular group of people are said to be technologically savvy and possesses a global character and preference, which they acquired from their exposures in the digital world. But, their academic performance thrives in autonomous, independent and student-centered learning environments that allow them to direct their own learning and incorporate their practical skills with learning outcomes ([24] cited in [25] [26]). It is also essential for new learning environments, whether virtual or physical environments, to acknowledge student’s feelings about their activities and to provide regular feedbacks on their performance, while at the same time relieving pressure associated with the deluge of information coming out of eLearning portals, and the control exercised by learning institutions on the social life of the students. The high level of competence acquired by these students from the use of technological tools, are also indicative of the effectiveness of computers as a medium of instruction and as an instrument of learning. It can also be concluded, based on the high-level of competence gained by students with the use of eLearning portals, that the current design of eLearning portals is sufficient to the needs of tertiary students. Despite the fact that many students feel that these learning portals are boring and lack social interactive features. This suggests that students find the need for social interaction as secondary only to their learning needs. In other words, students tend to give learning a higher priority over socialization. Level of Competence Yes (High Level) No Idea No (Low/ No Level)

No. of Respondents 54 32 6 ----------------------92

Percentage of Responses 58.70% 34.78% 6.52%

Table 1.3

On the other hand, some 29.82% - 39.75% of tertiary students feel indifferent of the impacts of eLearning portals on

their sense of competence. These students are found to have a higher rate of sense of enjoyment and greater need for social interaction, and whose academic performance (and satisfaction) are tied with their abilities to balance both their learning and social needs. But while this research suggests that these students are currently a minority of the general student population, it is expected to rapidly expand with the continued virtualization of the social world. Literatures suggest that the readiness of adult learners is closely related to the development task of his/ her social role ([27] cited in [25]). Consequently, the development of learning environments should be tied with the students changing social roles. D. The Need for Relatedness The need for relatedness refers to the feeling of being connected with others. Statistically, some 68.19% - 77.46% of all tertiary students feel a strong sense of relatedness with the use of social networking and eLearning portals. This shows that students maintain high level of socialization and interaction with their families, friends and classmates; in spite of growing academic pressures brought by persistent inundation of information and instructions coming from instructors and academic institutions. Level of Relatedness Yes No

No. of Respondents 67 25 Total 92 -----------------------

Percentage of Responses 72.83% 27.17% 100.00%

Table 1.4

The use of Wiki’s, File-sharing, Chatting and Tagging are found to be the most popular social tools/ activities used by students to remain in contact with one another. IV.

CONCLUSION

The use of Web 2.0 or social networking websites have become a significant and seemingly permanent part of student’s culture, lifestyle and learning. In reaction to these changing behavioral or cultural patterns of learning, academic institutions (and academic system designers) have learned to integrate or interface many of the important features in Web 2.0 into their LMS, Blackboard, Moodle and other academic systems, not only for purposes of enriching the visual and user appeal of the system, but more importantly to offer a more holistic virtual environment for students. On the other hand, students perceive Web 2.0 as an effective and efficient tool to share information and hold academic discourses, beyond the intended original use of Web 2.0. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We would like to thank Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS for funding the presentation of this paper at the conference.

REFERENCES [1] E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan, "The 'what' and 'why' of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior," psychological inquiry, vol. 11, 2000, pp. 227–268. http://www.updatenet.net/images/7/75/Selbstbestimmung_Deci_Ryan _2000.pdf [2] Ofcom “Social networking qualitative research report”, UK Ofcom office of communication, unpublished, April 2008, http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media_literacy/medlitpub/medlitpub rss/socialnetworking/

[14] B. Flyvbjerg, “Five misunderstandings about case-study research,” qualitative inquiry, vol. 12, April 2006 pp. 219-245. http://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/2/219 [15] L. Simões and L. B. Gouveia “Web 2.0 and higher education: pedagogical implications,” Proceedings of the 4th international Barcelona conference on higher education, vol. 2, 2008, http://web.guni2005.upc.es/media/0000000500/0000000523.pdf [16] L.G. Pelletier and E. C. Sharp, “Administrative pressures and teachers’ interpersonal behavior in the classroom,” Theory and Research in Education, vol. 7, 2009, pp. 174–183. http://tre.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/7/2/174

[3] H. Huijser, L. Kimmins and P. Evans “Peer assisted learning in Fleximode: developing an online learning community”, Australasian Journal of Peer Learning, vol. 1, 2008 pp. 51-60. http://eprints.usq.edu.au/4674/1/Huijser_Kimmins_Evans.pdf

[17] G. Lorenzo, “Catalysts for change: information fluency, Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and the new education culture,” New York Lorenzo Associates, unpublished, 2007. http://www.edpath.com/stn.htm

[4] S. Downes, “eLearn Magazine,” 2005, http://elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articles&article=29-1

[18] V. Mayer-Schönberger, Cookie Central, 2008, http://www.cookiecentral.com/c_concept.htm

[5] C. Corrigan, “Guardian News”, 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/jul/28/academicplagiarism

[19] A. D. Miyazaki, “Online privacy and the disclosure of cookie use: effects on consumer trust and anticipated patronage,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, vol. 27, AMA, 2008, http://www.marketingpower.com/AboutAMA/Pages/AMA%20Publi cations/AMA%20Journals/Journal%20of%20Public%20Policy%20M arketing/TOCS/summary%20spring%2008/Onlinejppmmay08.aspx

[6] K. Chapman, UPM lecturers hauled up over plagiarism, September 2009. http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/9/15/nation/4713248 &sec=nation [7] R. T. Wigand, R.T. Benjamin and J. H. Birkland, "Web 2.0 and beyond: implications for electronic commerce,” Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Electronic commerce, 2008. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1409550 [8] G. Denis and Jouvelot, P. “Motivation-driven educational game design: applying best practices to music education,” ACM international conference proceeding series, vol. 265, 2005, pp. 462465. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1178477.1178581 [9] L. Xie, A. N. Antle and N. Motamedi, "Are tangibles more fun? comparing children's enjoyment and engagement using physical graphical and tangible user interfaces," Proceedings of the second international conference on tangible and embedded interaction, pp. 191-198, 18-20 Febuary 2008. http://portal.acm.org/toc.cfm?id=1347390&idx=SERIES11433&type =proceeding&coll= [10] C. P. Niemiec and R. M. Ryan, “Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom,” Theory and Research in Education, vol. 7(2), 2009, pp. 133-144. http://tre.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/7/2/133 [11] F. Alonso, G. López, D. Manrique and J. M. Viñes, “An instructional model for web-based e-learning education with a blended learning process approach,” British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 36(2), 2005 pp. 217–235. http://aulatika.net/app/download/1629822702/An+instructional+mod el+for+web-based+e-learning+education.pdf [12] M. Gagné, “A model of knowledge-sharing motivation,” human resource management, vol. 48, 2009, PP. 571– 589. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122519824/abstract?CR ETRY=1&SRETRY=0 [13] R. M. Ryan and C. P. Niemiec, “Can an empirically supported framework also be critical and liberating?,” Self-determination theory in schools of education, vol. 7, 2009, pp. 263–272. http://tre.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/7/2/263

[20] P. Fernandez, “Online social networking sites and privacy: revisiting ethical considerations for a new generation of technology,” Library Philosophy and Practice, March 2009. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-200184520/onlinesocial-networking-sites.html [21] E. L. Deci, “Large-scale school reform as viewed from the selfdetermination theory perspective,” Theory and Research in Education, vol. 7, 2009, pp. 244–253, http://tre.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/7/2/244 [22] D. W. Shaffer, K. D. Squire, R. Halverson, and J. P. Gee, "Video Games and the Future of Learning," Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 87(2), 2005, pp. 104-111. http://graphics.tudelft.nl/~rafa/myPapers/bidarra.LG2007-2.pdf [23] J. Kirriemuir, Ceangal, A. McFarlane, "Literature Review in Games and Learning" Future lab, Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol, Unpublished Report, 2004, http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/04/53/PDF/kirriemuir-j2004-r8.pdf [24] M. S. Knowles, The making of adult educator: An autobiographical journey, 1st ed., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Pub. 1989. [25] K. Cercone, "Characteristics of adult learners with implications for online learning design," AACE Journal, vol. 16(2), pp. 137-159. 2008, http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/ualturki/Digital%20Library/Characteristics% 20of%20Adult%20Learners%20with%20Implications%20for%20On line%20Learning%20Design.pdf [26] D. J. Navarro, M. D. Lee, H. Nikkerud "Learned Categorical Perception for Natural Faces," ARC-reporting perspective, 2005, http://www.psychology.adelaide.edu.au/personalpages/staff/danielna varro/papers/NavarroLeeNikkerud2005_faces.pdf [27] S. B. Merriam and R .S. Caffarella, Learning in adulthood. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999.