IRMA-International.org: Creator of Knowledge
Information Resources Management Association
Advancing the Concepts & Practices of Information Resources Management in Modern Organizations

Web 2.0 Technology Use by Students in Higher Education: A Case of Kenyan Universities

Web 2.0 Technology Use by Students in Higher Education: A Case of Kenyan Universities
View Sample PDF
Author(s): Rhoda K. Gitonga (Kenyatta University, Kenya)and Catherine G. Murungi (Kenyatta University, Kenya)
Copyright: 2015
Pages: 10
Source title: Advancing Higher Education with Mobile Learning Technologies: Cases, Trends, and Inquiry-Based Methods
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Jared Keengwe (University of North Dakota, USA)and Marian B. Maxfield (Ashland University, USA)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-6284-1.ch015

Purchase

View Web 2.0 Technology Use by Students in Higher Education: A Case of Kenyan Universities on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

Web 2.0 technologies are technologies on the Internet such as blogs, wikis, and online forums that allow people to create, share, collaborate, and communicate their ideas. Blogs are known to enhance team cooperation and foster a learning community within the class. Wikis have been used to promote group work. Online discussion forums assist with problem-based learning. Facebook/Twitter have the potential to support social learning through community networking services such as wall pasting, chatting, content-sharing, and tagging. Despite the enormous potential and apparent cost effectiveness of new learning media for facilitating social-networked learning, problem-based learning, and promoting group work, its application by institutions of higher learning in developing African countries is low. The purpose of the study was to investigate the use of Web 2.0 technologies in teaching and learning in Kenyan universities. The researchers used surveys to collect data for this study. The findings reveal that the use of Web 2.0 technologies by students in Kenyan universities was quite low. Finally, other implications need to be explored in the context of the study, including the learners and the Web 2.0 technology resources available.

Related Content

Agah Tugrul Korucu, Handan Atun. © 2017. 18 pages.
Larisa Olesova, Jieun Lim. © 2017. 21 pages.
JoAnne Dalton Scott. © 2017. 20 pages.
Geraldine E Stirtz. © 2017. 25 pages.
Enilda Romero-Hall, Cristiane Rocha Vicentini. © 2017. 21 pages.
Beth Allred Oyarzun, Sheri Anderson Conklin, Daisyane Barreto. © 2017. 21 pages.
Nikolina Tsvetkova, Albena Antonova, Plama Hristova. © 2017. 24 pages.
Body Bottom