most recently has involved the use of social media and eâlearning 2.0. This ... programme on the completion of each year with certification. If the student.
Improving student learning through assessment for learning using social media and eLearning 2.0 on a distance education degree programme in Sri Lanka
Hakim Usoof (Umeå University, Sweden) Gihan Wikramanayake (University of Colombo School of Computing, Sri Lanka) Abstract This study is part of a larger study into assessment practices on a large distance education programme in Information Technology (BIT) based at the University of Colombo, School of Computing (UCSC), Sri Lanka. The overall development in which it is set is co‐ordinated by the National E‐learning Centre of Sri Lanka based at UCSC. This project is involved in a longer‐term study into summative assessment for the promotion of higher order thinking on the part of students working on the BIT programme. This programme involves annual enrolment of around 1500 students who work at a distance with variable levels of support from local study centres. Against this background there has been a continual process in place for improving failure and drop out rates through the use of technology enhanced learning, which most recently has involved the use of social media and e‐learning 2.0. This paper will address the question of the ways in which the design process has resulted in improving the student learning experience and in doing so will draw on data from questionnaires and interviews directly with students.
Background
The University system Sri Lanka has a state University system. The total number of Universities in Sri Lanka is 15 in number with a total of 58,500 students and 3800 academics. In addition to these, there are 9 other institutions that come under the University Grants Commission (UGC). There is also one institution that awards degrees in IT and Computer Science, which has no affiliation to the UGC but is sanctioned by the Government to award degrees. These Universities and the Institution award degrees of their own. There are also many other private institutions, which are not sanctioned by the Government to award degrees. These institutions act as proxies of foreign Universities that offer degrees in Sri Lanka. The admission into the Universities and Institutions under the UGC is through the results of the G.C.E. Advance Level (A/L) examination, which is a national examination conducted by the Ministry of Education. The subjects’ students offer at the G.C.E A/L examination dictates, which study programmes the students may follow in University. From the total of 200,000 who sit for the examination each year, 120,000 qualify with the minimum marks required for University admission. Currently, the Universities in Sri Lanka can accommodate about 20,000 new admissions per year which is about 10% of the total number of student sitting for the A/L examination and 16% of the total number that qualify for admission to the Universities (Central Bank, 2006). These students follow courses full‐time on‐campus (internal). Similar to primary and secondary
1
education, tertiary education is free in Sri Lanka. In addition to this, students may be entitled to a monthly scholarship during their stay at University. In addition to these full‐time internal degrees offered by the Universities and Institutions, there are also study programmes referred to as external degrees. In most occasions, the individuals reading for these are part‐time students and take the courses off‐campus (external). The admission to these degree programmes may be based on the G.C.E A/L results and/or through a qualifying examination. The BIT degree programme The BIT degree programme is conducted by the UCSC. It is an external degree where students with an interest in Information Technology (IT) can follow three year study programme. The students have the option of continuing or leaving the programme on the completion of each year with certification. If the student achieves above a minimum criteria in his or her examinations, the student is awarded the Diploma in IT (DIT) at the end of the 1st year and the Higher Diploma in IT (HDIT) at the end of the 2nd year and at the end of the final year, he or she will be awarded the degree of Bachelor of IT (BIT). Students who follow the BIT study programme have a diverse level of education and also have diverse objectives. Following are some of the most common categories of students who take the BIT study programme:
Individuals vying for a degree soon after their Advanced Level examination Individuals following parallel degrees or seeking a second degree in different subject areas or related subjects areas Individuals from the IT industry or expecting to obtain a career in the IT industry (May already posses a degree in a different subject area or a diploma in IT or Computer Science) Individuals vying for a degree despite failing the Advanced Level examination Individuals looking for a Foundation in IT leading only to DIT.
The number of students following the BIT programme varies greatly among years but the number of students progressing through the programme follows a similar pattern. In certain years the dropout rate has been as high as 55%. The failure rate and the dropout rate have been identified as a major issue of the BIT study programme. The limited assistance for learning from the UCSC and the issues in the assessment system have been identified as problem areas during the analysis of the BIT degree programme.
2
Learning and Teaching in the BIT degree programme The students in the BIT degree programme use various study methods. Attending private institutes that conduct classes for the BIT study programme, self‐studying and group studying have been identified as the most common methods of preparing for the exam. It is very common for students to use a combination of these methods. But it is important to point out that some students only use self‐studying. The students in most cases have access to the student manuals (detailed text about subject matter) created for each course, reference books, BIT Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) with Online learning content, assignments, practice tests, etc., CDs with TV programmes and videos and, Notes and handouts given by the institutions they attend classes. The UCSC plays a very limited role in the actual learning process and act as a more administrative body. The administration of students and the preparation, conducting and marking of examination and the accrediting students are the main activities conducted by the UCSC. The learning process is aided by the UCSC by the designation of a detailed syllabus with the learning outcomes, the topics to be covered and specific references, development of the student manuals and creation of assignments and practice tests and on‐line learning content. The BIT VLE has been added by the SIDA funded eBIT project in an attempt to improve the support provided for learning. The VLE consists of online learning content, documents, slideshows, videos and forums and runs on Moodle. The students do not have any direct contact with the academic staff who handle the courses. The lecturer in‐charge of the course has a distinct set of activities that he or she has to perform. They are preparing the course syllabus, developing the student manual, moderating the content developed for VLE, creating TV and Video programmes, creating the assignments and practice tests and creating and marking the final examination. The lecturer gets paid separately for his contribution to the BIT degree programme, but the work done is not accumulated to his University workload. In its latest attempt to aid the students’ learning process, the UCSC has allocated an e‐Facilitator (a dedicated individual) for each course to address student questions. Current Assessment At the end of the course, the students sit for an examination conducted by the UCSC at a designated examination centre. The final examination contributes 100% marks in determining the final grade of the student for the particular course. The examination centres may be located in a few major cities in Sri Lanka as well as some other countries that have a substantial number of students. The year 1 examination consists of 40‐60 Multiple Choice questions (MCQs) while structured questions are introduced from year 2 onwards. These questions bare an inclination towards testing factual knowledge rather than higher order skills, which also encourage students to rote learning. Literature too supports this fact that MCQs encourage rote learning (Scouller 1994 1998, Gipps 1994, Paxton
3
2000). Another identified issue is the guessing factor when dealing with MCQs. Prior to the current syllabus revision, the BIT exams discouraged guessing in answering by penalizing wrong answers, this method was changed in the revised syllabus to improve pass rates and also increase the student’s level of confidence by penalising students for guessing within the question, instead of carrying forward the negative mark to the next question as it was before the 2006 revision. Innovative MCQ development such as “confidence measurement” (Farrell & Leung 2004, Davis 2002) and “computer adaptive testing” (Conole & Warburton 2005) still may be adapted to solve this issue, but it still does not fully eliminate the guessing factor and the argument that MCQs feed the answer rather the student constructing the answer. The possibility of guessing adds to the issues of validity of the MCQ assessment system used in the BIT study programme. Another identified issue is the language problem of students. The BIT study programme is conducted in English, which is the second language to the majority of the students. This also causes issues that some students find it difficult to understand the question, thus creating unfair assessment by them. Computer Literacy and Internet penetration in Sri Lanka According to a survey done in 2004, Sri Lanka has a 10% computer literacy rate, which varies from a high of 20% in the Colombo district to a low of 3% in the Monaragala district. The Internet penetration is about 0.7% and this too varies from a high of 1.8% in the Western province to a low of 0.1% in Uva, North Central and Sbaragamuwa provinces (Department of Census and Statistics, 2004). Since 2002 the introduction of General Information Technology (GIT) as a subject for G.C.E A/L students ICT being a subject from 2008 in the G.C.E O/L exams have helped improve the Computer Literacy of students leaving school (De Silva, 2007). Current literacy rate is claimed to be reaching 30% (Daily News, 2009).
Progression of Technology in the BIT The BIT degree programme, which commenced in 2000, has undergone three major revisions, which can be classified into three phases. 1. Pre‐LMS from 2000/01 to 2002/03 (First three years) The learning assistance provided for students during this phase was mainly the following; • Static www.bit.lk website to provide information • Detail syllabi with recommended text books • Model papers and Model answers • Some PowerPoint slides • A few lessons through TV • Private Institutional support
4
2. LMS from 2003/04 to 2005/06 (Next three years) – Introduced LMS with practice quizzes and unsupervised assessments that has to be passed in addition to the final examination to be qualified for Diploma and Higher Diploma certificates. More support was offered to students during this phase. They included • More dynamic website • Detail syllabi with Learning Objectives, recommended text books and reference page numbers • Practice quizzes and Assignments • Introduction of a Collaborative Learning model Drawbacks of this phase were the facts that it lacked Constructive alignment between syllabus, learning resources and assessment. Also the failure of the Collaborative learning model was a key drawback. The repercussion was a negative impression that the BIT lacked student‐ learning support. Furthermore, there was a lack of connection between continuous assessment and end semester examinations. 3. eBIT from 2006/07 onwards (two batches so far) – e‐learning content, quizzes and activities for year 1 and activities and quizzes for year 2. A radical change occurred in this phase with much more support for students’ learning through a strict adherence to Constructive Alignment between Syllabus, Learning Content and Assessment. The implementation of rich learning content and learning activities aimed at improving students’ learning was a vast improvement over the previous phase. Another improvement was the introduction of Formative Assessment and the creation of a clear relationship between Formative and Summative assessment in the eBIT phase. The use of Forum and Chat facilities within the BIT VLE to enhance student interaction and collaborative learning is also a key difference in the eBIT phase. The use of ‘UCSC TV’ for streaming related programmes is another initiative to help students in their learning process. The creation of a social network instance called the eBIT Community using the Elgg is also another attempt to use Social Media for students’ collaborative learning and interaction. Previously BIT students had very little opportunity to get their issues and questions addressed. The introduction of an e‐Facilitator for each course has helped address this issue in the eBIT phase. The three phases have been compared to each other considering two factors, the Enrolment and Progression of students. Enrolment Enrolment refers to the number of registered students for a particular academic year of the BIT degree programme. This can be looked at in two different views. First the numbers of new students joining the BIT degree programme and second the numbers of students remaining within the entire BIT degree programme.
5
For example, the 1st year Enrolment for 2007/08 was 1558 students. The Average 1st Year Enrolment for the three phases is 3630 for the Pre‐LMS, 1678 for the LMS and 1377 for the eBIT. The drop in enrolment can mainly be accredited to the fact that during the inception, most students thought they could “just do a degree” and also the fact that a conception was created that the BIT was difficult to follow and lacked student support. The average enrolments for the three years (including repeat candidates) during the three phases were 5358 for the Pre‐LMS, 4398 for the LMS and 3663 for the eBIT (is expected to become around 4000 with the 2008/09 intake). In the 2007/2008 Academic year, the BIT degree programme saw 781 students progressing to Year 2 for the first time and 284 students progressing to Year 3 for the first time with some of them having very few repeat papers. It is important to mention that there is a cross batch effect on the figures, for example the 1st Year students of the LMS‐phase of academic year 2005/2006 would be in the eBIT phase as 3rd Year students in the academic year 2007/2008. Progression Progression can be looked at as, how many students continue to progress through the degree programme achieving at least the minimum required results to progress to the next year of study. It can also be considered as an indicator for students passing their exams. Academic Year
1st time success to proceed from Year 1 to Year 2 (%)
Dropouts from previous Year 1 (%)
Obtained CIT/DIT (%)
1st time success to proceed from Year 2 to Year 3 (%)
Dropouts from previous Year 2 (%)
Obtained ACIT/HDIT (%)
2000/2001 2001/2002 2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008
12 9 12 22 21 21 51 45
46 54 50 54 50 46 37 36
4 6 10 13 13 14 16 17
N/A 38 53 63 58 50 57 51
N/A 12 14 23 16 13 13 26
N/A 14 20 32 30 30 30 33
Table 1. Student progression indicators and achieving certification Year 1 to Year 2 The VLE of the BIT degree programme provide first year students with student manuals for each course, e‐leaning content, practice quizzes, assignments, learning activities and CD with TV programmes. The first year students have a great deal of learning support and can also call upon the assistance of an e‐ Facilitator assigned for each course.
6
A fourfold improvement in progression of first year students to the second year can be seen when comparing the Pre‐LMS phase to the eBIT phase and a twofold improvement when comparing the LMS phase to the eBIT phase of the BIT degree programme. The average first time successes were 11% for the Pre‐LMS phase, 21% for the LMS phase and 47% for the eBIT phase. Year 2 to year 3 Unlike for the first year students, the second year students do not receive as much support from the VLE. They are provided with quizzes and learning activities. When comparing the second year figures, it is important to note that repeat students benefited from the fact that the Math II and Computer Networks papers were made optional. There is no considerable difference in the first time success rates between the three phases of the BIT. Even though there has been an increase in the number of students achieving the HDIT certification, it is not visible as a percentage since there is an increase in the number of students following the second year. The average first time successes were 51% for the Pre‐LMS phase, 55% for the LMS phase and 51% for the eBIT phase. From the above figures, it is clear that there is a great improvement in the first year of the BIT degree programme in student passing and student retention, but there is no change in the figures for the second year. The considerable technology‐enhanced learning support provided for students in the first year and the lack of such considerable support in the second year, shows a clear relation to the improvement in the high dropout rate in the first year and the lack of such a change in the second year. It is clear that extremely high dropout rate, which was a key issue of the BIT, has been addressed to a certain extent by the advent of technology‐enhanced learning in the first year. Furthermore the numbers of new students enrolling in the BIT degree program has stabilised at around 1500. This figure may even grow with the BIT programme beginning to gaining a reputation as a study programme that provides Distance Education and supports student learning.
Social Media and the BIT There have been several attempts both by the UCSC and BIT students too create a presence on the Internet using social media. The UCSC has created an eBIT community using the Elgg environment as an attempt to create collaborative learning and encourage student interaction. Furthermore, Moodle Forums and Chats are being currently used not only to encourage collaborative learning and student interaction, but also to address student issues and questions via the e‐Facilitators. The UCSC has also used a YouTube account in addition to ‘UCSC TV’ to provide accessibility for students to view the BIT TV programmes. In addition to the UCSC initiative, students and Institutions that cater to the BIT syllabus have taken their own initiatives. These include eight groups on
7
Facebook, one Google group, a Blog and a video sharing on Magnify.net. The membership varies from 21 to 307 in these networks. It is observed through many student comments for example; “Heya evry1. Great c ya all in 1 place!!!!!!!!” “I think this is a better way to share information about what we know & what we want to know about the newest systems & technology. So that it'll be a big deal to achieve our goals in life. So dear mates, if you've got anything new just use this group to spread that among all of our BIT friends.” And the following is a response (original text of student) to an email interview of the BIT student on the question “Do you think that students' online contributions to the community (posting links, discussing, commenting, helping other etc.) should be rewarded by some marks for the BIT assessment?” “People normally contribute to a community because their tech interest and when they are experienced about the same problem. For example if someone asks a question about C++ programming and if I knew it well, then I'm very glad to answer that question and share the facts. It should be rewarded, like other communities do look at the daniweb.com site, they using a "points" and "star" system to reward the members who contribute. that should be added to the member profile and his badge. for example if you are good contributor in the form C++ , when you gone to a C++ job interview you can say I'm a member of this community that have this points and this number of solved number of threads in C++. But it should not be mix with the assessment marks, cause it will be another overhead. use the interest not force them. and it's not actually fair to give some marks for the contributions for this community cause exam is a different thing” that students have expectations of providing and gaining help and building a social network with fellow BIT students. Even though there are encouraging signs in the initial stage of creating or joining a social network of the BIT, there seems to be a lack of motivation and responses for the community to flourish. This could be due to that fact that online‐learning communities depend on some key factors (Hiltz, 1998); 1. Behaviour moulded, modelled and encouraged by the instructor. There have been not many activities that have been introduced in the BIT that encourage, mould and model collaborative learning and building of community. 2. Software structures that will support group collaboration. Moodle, the Elgg environment, Facebook and other social media sites have provided the software structures needed to support group collaboration, but students do see some issues with these too, evident by the following comment “I see the elgg user interface isn't looking good and nt user friendly personally”. 3. Learner’s ability and willingness to participate regularly.
8
Limited access to the Internet, time management issues of BIT students especially part time students who are employed, bandwidth issues, lack of online social networking experience and lack of taking responsibility for their own learning too may be the reasons for the lack of progress in collaborative learning in these social networks. Furthermore the deficiencies in expressiveness and a Cultural factor of not asking questions too may affect the progression of the social Network.
Learning Communities & Collaborative Learning An inherent issue in the BIT degree program is the lack of a Teacher. This creates an environment where the student is isolated unless that student attends an institute that caters to the BIT syllabus. One solution for this scenario is to create an online learning community where the students collaborate in learning and take responsibility for their own and their peers’ learning. Mioduser, Nachmias et.al. (1999), and Mioduser and Nachmias (2002) define a learning community as a novel educational system based on the combination of three components: a virtual community (social dimension), hosted by an appropriate virtual environment (technological dimension), and embodying advanced pedagogical ideas (educational dimension). Ludwig‐Hardman and Dunlap (2003) define a learning community as a group of people, connected via technology mediated communication, who actively engage one another in collaborative learner‐centered activities to intentionally foster the creation of knowledge, while sharing a number of values and practices, including diversity, mutual appropriation, and progressive discourse. What is clear in both these definitions is that there are three elements that are key; a technological element, a social element and an educational element. Even if one of these elements were missing, there would not be a learning community. As Lowell and Persichitte (2000) say “simply requiring learner interaction in asynchronous environments does not promote a sense of community”. The three factors Hiltz (1998) mentions can be clearly related to the above elements and can also be identified in Figure 01 that depicts a Conditional Matrix by Brown (2001) where the darker shades define higher engagement in class and dialogue, and feelings of belonging to a community.
9
Figure 01. Conditional Matrix for community (Brown, 2001)
Student perspective on assessment Survey A survey was carried out to obtain the students’ perspective on assessment. An online questionnaire was posted on the LMS of the BIT degree programme. The questionnaire targeted 1st year students of the BIT degree following the Computer Systems I course. The total number of respondents was 45. The total number of students who viewed the questionnaire were 121, hence a 37% response ratio. 73% of the respondents were male, which is close relation to the gender ratio of BIT students. Majority of the students who took this questionnaire were following the BIT degree programme in order to pursue a career in the IT industry or to gain knowledge in ICT. Furthermore, 76% followed the study programme as part‐ time while about 50% of the candidates are employed. While majority of the students were taking the degree after their advance level examination, about 10% were pursuing a parallel degree or completed a bachelor’s degree. 64% of
10
the students were either following or hoping to follow an additional study programme. Results • Regarding type of exams and grading methods, students preferred Computer based continuous online assignments from home the most, followed by paper and pencil tests. The least preferred were printed reports/dissertations. 67% preferred end of course exams coupled with continuous assignments as their most preferred grading method, while 22% preferred continuous assignments during the course deciding the final grade. • 100% of the respondents thought that audio and video in addition to text and graphics would help them express their knowledge better, while 82% preferred a change in the way they are assessed in BIT, 29% preferred practical test the most, 24% preferred web portfolios/online exams and 16% preferred Open book/take home tests. As the preferred mode of expression, 64% preferred written and typed text, 62% audio‐video and 67% Graphics and Images. • In the issue of Language of study, 86% had at least a ’C’ grade for O/L English and 67% had at least a ‘C’ grade for A/L English. 51% followed were hoping to follow an additional English course. 60% preferred to use a different language to English as their preferred language of expression. • 80% thought that time pressure during examinations affected the quality of their answer, 38% felt nervous and scared during exams. Furthermore, 82% thought that they performed better in real life than in examinations. But ironically, the 53% thought that exams were fair in assessing their real ability and knowledge. On preference of Assessment types, the most preferred were MCQs, Open Book/Take home tests and Practical Tests. The least preferred were Reports/Dissertation and Essay Type papers. • As for study methods for the BIT programme, 82% would use Self‐Study, 13% Face‐to‐Face group study, 20% online Group study and 58% would attend Group Classes. • 93% and 96% often used computers for Education and Internet for Education respectively • With regard to studying, Passing exams were the main purpose of 18% of the students and 13% thought that passing exams was the most important aspect. 58% of students also stated that the study method they use for Multiple Choice Question exams are different from how they study for non‐ MCQ exams. 93% of the students had experienced MCQ exams; only 13% and 29% had experienced Reports/Dissertation and Viva/Interviews respectively. 47% had experienced Web Portfolios/Online exams. Findings 1. Students prefer continuous assessment with an end examination. 2. Students prefer the use of multi‐media for examinations. 3. Students have an acceptable command of English, but majority prefer their own mother tongue. 4. Students lacked confidence about the assessment system and methods.
11
5.
6. 7.
In addition, standardised examinations affected students in a negative way. Majority of students self study, and about 42% have very little interaction with other students or Teachers. Students were used to using computers and the Internet for Education. Students have varying experiences with different types of assessment.
Assessment Design Since there is very little or no Teacher involvement in the BIT degree programme, students have very little interaction with teachers and hardly get any feedback. Furthermore, there is very little peer‐interaction among students since there is not always a common class they attend. Students are also diverse with many following the BIT part‐time. The solution suggested to address this issue is to create assessment with peer‐assessment so that it builds a community of learning. Social‐Constructivist Assessment is a suggestion where students may use different media and social media technologies to create their assignments and also provide feedback to their peers. This is also in line with the concept of “Lifelong Assessment” (Boud, 2000). The assessment designed takes into consideration theories on Learning Communities and the students’ perspective on assessment. In a study done by Brown (2001), her students defined three degrees of community. 1. Making Acquaintances/Friends 2. Community Conferment 3. Camaraderie The design of activities in this online collaborative environment will target the achievement of at least the first two degrees, thereby leading to the third degree, where students will go beyond a simple peer relationship. Activities such as icebreakers (Dixon, Crooks and Henry, 2006), forum discussions, group problem solving and peer‐assessment, etc. supported with different peer‐rating strategies will aim to build a cohesive learning community. In a previous study of the BIT programme, it was identified that students were aware of the importance of Formative Assessment and “Assessment for Learning” (Andersson, 2008). Furthermore, her study showed that students’ value peer‐collaboration and its importance to improving learning. Her findings were confirmed in my results, thus the assessment model must have a formative assessment, with the purpose of Assessment for Learning. According to Greenhow, Robelia and Hughes (2009), Today’s graduating students face technological competencies that emphasize the capacity for innovation, leadership, multidisciplinary collaboration, collective problem identification, and resolution in a dynamic, digital environment. Hence Assessment methods that promote factual learning and do not support the nurture of multiple skills need to be replaced with alternate assessment methods. Furthermore, according to Gulikers, Bastiaens and Krischner (2004), in
12
a model attempting to assess higher order thinking process and competencies, the assessment has to change from being summative to also serving a formative goal of promoting and enhancing student learning. Gulikers further goes onto state that this purpose requires alternative assessments because standardized, multiple‐choice tests are not suitable for this. Taking into consideration the students’ view, students have identified the power of multi‐media for expressing their knowledge, and they have expressed their preference to use Web Portfolios/Online examination. Hence the use of Social Media such as Blogs, Wikis, and Video Sharing etc. would help students to tackle assessment in more creative ways, addressing issues of Higher‐order skills than simple MCQs. Even though the majority refer to the use of their mother tongue as the preferred language of expression, with the current issues of Localization of systems and availability of resources and expertise, the Language issue would not be readily addressed at this juncture. With a high percentage of students having above ‘C’ grades for English would allow for this. Furthermore, about 50% of students were or were hoping to follow an additional English course. The recently commenced Pre‐BIT course, referred to as the Fundamentals of IT course (FIT) has included an English course to support students in improving their English Language skills. Attempting to make assessment “time‐and‐place independent” would to a certain extent negate negative aspects of standardised examinations. Furthermore including the “student perspective” in the Assessment would build confidence of students in the Assessment system (Stiggins, 1999).
Discussion
The analysis of the different phases of the BIT degree programme has shown that there has been a clear improvement in the student dropout rates and first time passing of exams in the first year, which was supported through technology‐ enhanced learning, but did not show a change in the figures of the second year, which was not provided such considerable support. This pattern can only be attributed to careful design consideration of the first year of the eBIT phase aimed at improving support for student learning. Even though there has been clear success in the design for learning, the attempts to create a learning community and a collaborative learning environment have not been as successful. The main reason that can be attributed to this seems the lack of activity modelling and encouragement for community building and creation of collaborative learning. The solution planed as a pilot project for a group volunteer first year students following the Computer Systems I course will use community building and collaborative learning activities to encourage the creation of a learning community and use peer‐assessment as the building block for learning within
13
the community. The pilot study will be used to design future learning communities and assessment activities aimed at promoting learning and improving the BIT degree programme.
Conclusion The overall review of the BIT programme and the observation of student activities reiterate the fact that there is room for further improvement of student learning through increased support through e‐Leanring 2.0. Furthermore student participation is required in form of informal learning for effective and active use of social media. It is clear that further support needs to be provided by means of encouragement and Community building activities in order to stimulate the students’ social networking.
Acknowledgements
The researchers wish to express their deepest gratitude to; The Swedish Program for ICT in Developing Regions (SPIDER) for the support provided for the National eLearning Centre Project. The BIT Students for their support in providing feedback. Dr. Ruvan Weerasinghe, Director UCSC. Dr. Priyantha Hewagamage, Coordinator, National eLearning Centre. BIT Academic and Administrative Staff. Prof. Brian Hudson for his valued guidance and motivation.
Reference Andersson, A. (2008). Seven major challenges for e‐learning in developing countries: Case study eBIT, Sri Lanka. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT. 4 (3). Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education. 22 (2), p151‐167. Brown, R.E. (2001). The process of community‐building in distance learning classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 5 (2), p18‐35. Central Bank of Sri Lanka (2006). Annual Report of the Monetary Board to the Hon. Ministry of Finance. Colombo: Central Bank of Sri Lanka. p53. Conole, G and Warburton, B. (2005). A review of computer‐assisted assessment. Association for Learning Technology journal. 13 (1), p17. Daily News (2009). Megadevelopment projects launched for country's future generation . Available: http://www.dailynews.lk/2009/08/08/news22.asp. Last
14
accessed 8 Aug 2009. Davies, P (2000), Computerized Peer Assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International. 37 (4), p346‐355. De Silva, C.H. (2007). Information Technology Education in the Sri Lankan School. System: Challenges and Perspectives. Available: http://telearn.noe‐ kaleidoscope.org/warehouse/256_Final_Paper_(001730v1).pdf. Last accessed 5 Sep 2009. Dixon, J.S, Crooks, H and Henry, K. (2006). Breaking the ice: Supporting collaboration and the development of community online . Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology. 32 (2), p99. Farrell, G and Leung, Y.K. (2004). Innovative online assessment using confidence measurement. Education and information technologies. 9 (1), p5. Gipps, C (1994). Beyond Testing: Towards a theory of educational assessment. London: Falmer Press. p20. Greenhow, C, Robelia, B and Hughes, J.E. (2009). Now?Should We Take Learning, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age: Web 2.0 and Classroom Research: What Path . Educational Researcher. 38 (4), p246. Gulikers, J.T.M, Bastiaens, T.J and Kirschner, P.A. (2004). A five‐dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology, Research and Development. 52 (3), p67. Hiltz, S, R. (1998). Collaborative Learning in Asynchronous Learning Networks: Building Learning Communities. Available: http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b /80/17/5a/cc.pdf. Last accessed 8 Mar 2009. Lowell, N.O and Persichitte, K.A. (2000). A Virtual Ropes Course: Creating Online Community. Available: http://www.sloan‐ c.org/publications/magazine/v4n1/lowell.asp. Last accessed 13 Aug 2009. Ludwig‐Hardman, S and Dunlap, J.C. (2003). Learner Support Services for Online Students: Scaffolding for success. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 4 (1), p197. Mioduser, D and Nachmias, R . (2002). WWW in Education: An Overview. In: Adelsberger, H, Collis, B and Pawlowsky, M Handbook on Information Technologies for Education & Training. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer. p23‐43. Mioduser, D, Nachmias, R, Oren, A and Lahav, O. (2000). Web‐supported emergent‐collaboration in higher education courses. Journal of educational technology & society. 35 (3), p94.
15
Paxton, M. (2000). A linguistic perspective on multiple choice questioning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 25 (2), p109. Satharasinghe, A. (2004). Computer Literacy of Sri Lanka 2004. Available: http://www.statistics.gov.lk/cls2004/index.htm. Last accessed 15 Aug 2009. Scouller, K and Prosser, M. (1994). Students' experiences in studying for multiple choice question examinations . Studies in Higher Education. 19 (3), p267‐279. Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method on students' learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education. 35 (4), p453‐472.
16
