Cognitive Communication 2.0 in the Classroom - Resonance of an Experience in Higher Education

Cognitive Communication 2.0 in the Classroom –
Resonance of an Experience in Higher Education
Sérgio André Ferreira1, Cornélia Castro1 and António Andrade2
1
School of Education and Psychology, Portuguese Catholic University, Oporto,
Portugal
2
School of Economics and Management, Portuguese Catholic University,
Oporto, Portugal
sergioandreferreira@gmail.com
corneliacastro@gmail.com
aandrade@porto.ucp.pt
Abstract: The communication in the classroom is often carried out on a one-to-many basis, with the teacher,
before an audience of dozens of students, playing a traditional role. In this context, still commonly practiced, it is
pertinent to introduce mechanisms of interaction mediated by technology, since research shows a significant
correlation between the use of technology, the time spent in social media and the engagement of students. In
fact, literature shows that social media has attracted the interest of academics more likely to use technology in
education, who thereby seek new ways to motivate their students to a more active learning. The adoption of
cognitive communication 2.0 morphology, in traditional contexts such in communication one-to-many, is a
challenge to be overcome. We consider so of great importance creating and evaluating resources and
pedagogical practices that are aligned with this new paradigm. In this study, we intend to make a contribution to
understanding the problematic of the morphology of cognitive communication in the context of the classroom in
Higher Education, with the integration of web 2.0 tools. On the approach to the problem, we have explored a
PowerPoint presentation with the integration of the micro blogging tool Twitter, as a basis for addressing the
characteristics of cognitive communication 2.0. For data collection a questionnaire was designed, based on
literature, and intended to evaluate several dimensions of the resource used, namely: i) pedagogical issues, ii)
technological aspects, iii) cognitive learning; iv) interactions in the classroom; v) positive behaviour in the
classroom; vi) negative behaviour in the classroom. The goals of this study are: i) to validate the instrument for
data collection, ii) to assess the perceptions of students regarding the effects of the resource and pedagogical
practices used in the classroom dynamics iii) to set in context and to relate the cognitive communication 2.0 in
the classroom with other components of the Hybrid Institutional Personal Learning Environment. This is an
exploratory type research, since it seeks to provide a greater familiarity with the problem and to identify
dimensions and items to be included in the questionnaire. The data collected will be processed under a
quantitative perspective. Considering, therefore, the nature of the study we did not seek to establish correlations
between variables, but only to identify trends, using descriptive statistics. It is expected that the results obtained
will contribute to the articulation of web 2.0 tools with traditional cognitive communication in the classroom, in
such a manner that positive impacts will result in pedagogical and technological effectiveness and thus in
students learning achievements.

Keywords: classroom; cognitive communication; learning; micro blogging; Twitter; web 2.0

1. Introduction
Information Technologies (IT), specially the “web phenomena”, have contributed to changing the way
people work together, share resources, co-produce, co-act and get involved in activities that benefit
all (Fuchs et al., 2010). Nowadays, expressions such as “collaborative learning”, “learning
communities”, “media in education”, “social media” and other similar ones, are essential in educational
investigation. However, research on these topics focuses on online environments or face-to-face
groups of limited size. Studies in which these principles are applied to a classroom with dozens of
students are rare.

In fact, research shows that the classroom has been losing its historic centrality in favour of new
agglutinating poles such as the Personal Learning Environment (PLE) and the Social Learning
Network (SLN), usually associated with spaces outside the classroom – Cloud Learning Environment.
However, despite the development of on-line learning systems and b-learning, classroom learning is
still largely dominant, and the organization of activities continues to have the classroom learning as
the nucleus. Hence the importance of designing activities and creating resources that, in conjunction
with this new paradigm, promote the exploration of the potential of the new ways of learning that
dominate the Cloud Learning Environment.

Sérgio André Ferreira et al.

This article aims to contribute to the study of the issues related with the cognitive communication
morphology in classroom lectures, as part of Higher Education, where often the communication is
done from one-to-many. To do so we started with a PowerPoint presentation with the integration of
micro blogging tool Twitter, as a basis for addressing the characteristics of communication 2.0 in
classroom in lectures of a more expository nature.

The methodology of data collection used was a questionnaire built based on literature review, with
which we intended to assess various dimensions of the resource used in classroom lectures and to
verify if the integration of Twitter in the presentation contributes to the upgrading of a cognitive
communication 1.0 (one-way communication, one-to-many, low or non-existent interaction) to
cognitive communication 2.0 (many-to-many, interaction between all the participants). The results of
this study are preliminary and intended to serve as a preliminary approach to the subject.
2. Related work: Change challenges and pedagogical innovation in
institutions of higher education through technology
New ways of communicating and interacting in a society immersed in technology are intrinsically
linked to the imposition of new ways of teaching and learning, which results in the redefinition of
political and pedagogical models. Social and economic factors call for the use of technology as
pedagogical support. Mark Prensky (2001) was the first to use the term "digital natives", which is
associated with expressions such as "residents", "Generation Y" or "Net Generation”. These students
grow up in environments immersed in technology and have different preferences and skills in key
areas related to education, particularly in making use of the immense potential of web 2.0 (Castañeda
& Soto, 2010; Kennedy et al., 2009), especially social software tools (blogs, micro blogs, sites of
video sharing, social media, wikis or podcasts), which facilitate not only the emergence of
communities of users, but also the involvement in social media.

Despite the characteristics of this new generation of students, we cannot assume that all who reach
higher education already possess the necessary skills to use web 2.0 technologies such as learning
tools (Castañeda & Soto, 2010). On the other hand, it is also observed that the Higher Education
Institutions (HEIs) are still inadequately prepared to work with students who have completely different
technical skills and learning preferences (Bennett, Maton, & Kevin, 2008).

To address this complex situation, the HEIs must create programmes and define methodologies that
enhance the use of the enormous educational potential of web 2.0. Thus, it is expected that students
will develop learning skills in this context and increase their motivation and, as a result, will increase
the chances of achieving good academic results.

In the current scenario, it matters that HEIs reconcile their conception of the educational process with
new ways of learning and student expectations. The HEIs should not overlook the fact that IT offers
the students the opportunity to control and manage their own learning beyond the institutional vision.
The globalization of the sources of knowledge, that brings the world to the school and the growing
importance of social media and collaborative work of smart mobs (Tapscott & Williams, 2008)
emphasize the value of the Social Learning Network (SLN), which creates the need for the HEIs to
evolve to a Hybrid Institutional Personal Learning Environment (HIPLE) architecture, as a bridge
between the vision of the institution and the Personal Learning Environment (PLE) of the student.

The introduction of technology in the facilitation of cognitive function in education means a challenge
for applied research with very complex and slow progress. Among the changes that have been
introduced in training models under e-learning, b-learning and face-to-face, it is in the latter where the
pace of change is slower. A. D. Figueiredo (2009) states that the HEIs’ face-to-face model is also the
most traditional one and, in essence, it is based on four functions: i) transmission of content provided
by lectures, often masterful, ii) application of concepts, iii) group work and iv) evaluation. These
functions are shown in table 1.

Therefore, the classroom continues to be a place of excellence in the communication of knowledge
that includes multiple educational concepts. In particular, there is, above all, the transmission of
information from one-to-many, dialogue, teamwork and role-playing. When technology is used it is
explored in the context of the laboratory. Personal computers, tablet PCs or smart phones are poorly
explored. In this context, highly practiced, it is pertinent to introduce mechanisms of interaction
mediated by technology, since research shows a significant correlation between the use of technology


and time spent with social media and students engagement (Chen P., 2010; Junco, Heiberger, &
Loken, 2010).
Table 1: Pedagogical face-to-face dominant model in the HEIs (Figueiredo, 2009)
Pedagogical face-to-face model
Transmission of content Lectures
Lectures
Application of concepts
Lectures and practical lessons
Practical lessons
Group work Laboratories
Projects
Tests/exams
Evaluation Projects
Essays and Presentations

In fact, it has been observed that the social media – a collection of Internet web sites, services and
practices that support collaboration, community building, participation and sharing – has attracted the
interest of academics more likely to use technology in education and who seek new ways to motivate
their students to a more active way of learning (Junco, et al., 2010).

In this study we focus on the context of the lectures, where teachers are faced with numerous
students and have the need to activate mechanisms of direct instruction, either to save time, or
because this is the teaching model that they are comfortable with. Electronic presentations as a way
to transmit knowledge are a means commonly used in these classes (James, Burke, & Hutchins,
2006).This is a reusable resource, a facilitator of discourse organization and an integrator of multiple
media which can serve different learning styles, as well as becoming a stepping stone of motivation
and it is also conducive to note taking by students.

These presentations are massively materialized on technologies such as PowerPoint and Prezi which
have mechanisms to support text, video, image, flash animation and sound, but they also have the
ability to interact with the so-called web 2.0 systems, such as the micro blogs. A PowerPoint or a
Prezi presentation can therefore be linked with the micro blogging application Twitter, allowing the
teacher the opportunity to speak to his students.

Recent research about the use of Twitter in academic work shows that although 85 % of
undergraduates have a Facebook account, teachers prefer to integrate Twitter into the process of
teaching and learning (Junco, et al., 2010). In the category of micro blogs, Twitter, designed in 2006
by Jack Dorsey, allows users to share messages up to 140 characters. This system also allows
sending messages to a direct channel specifically created to exchange information (# hashtags) and
the vote for alternative options which are placed under review (by vote tweet @ x key_word).

Individual or business initiatives (Elliot, 2011) have developed ADD-INS for Prezi and PowerPoint,
allowing the following dynamics for those who have a Twitter account (teachers and students):
Creation of a channel (not compulsory) for comments on the presentation that is being made;
Students can comment directly on Twitter what they see and listen in the classroom as well as
what they read from sharing with peers (virtual classroom);
The teacher may have prepared additional comments for each slide, that hidden in "notes", can
be sent to Twitter whenever it is projected;
The teacher can capture and project in all, or in some of the screens, what is being shared on
Twitter;
The teacher can ask multiple-choice questions that are answered on Twitter, and the percentages
of the responses for each option can be projected in a slide.
This model of communication in the classroom will increase the level of participation by: i) providing
voice and turn to all the students, ii) facilitating and asking for the participation of more reserved
students in oral participation iii) engaging the learning community in discussions about the theme and
iv) exploring the acuity of young people to use IT.


3. Evaluation methodology
As a methodological approach to the problematic of the morphology of cognitive communication 2.0 in
the context of the classroom, we used a PowerPoint presentation with the integration of Twitter. The
exploitation of this resource was made during lectures to several masters classes, at the Portuguese
Catholic University – Regional Center of Porto (Catholic – Porto). In table 2 the demographic
characteristics of the participants in this study are shown.
Table 2: Demographic aspects of the investigation
Total 122
Gender Male: 29% Female: 71%
20 to 29 years old: 37 %
Age 30 to 39 years old: 26 %
Group 40 to 49 years old: 20 %
50 to 59 years old: 17%
Marketing: 3 %
Services: 3 %
Education and Music: 15 %
Computing and Education: 3 %
Training Pedagogical Supervision: 22 %
Undergone Religious Sciences: 4 %
Wounds and Tissue Viability: 4 %
Infection and Health Care: 8 %
School Management and Organization: 15 %
Childhood Education and Special Education: 23 %

The way the operationalization of the resource was made is represented, in schematic form, in Figure
1: the integration of Twitter in PowerPoint, with reference to a hashtag #, through which students
could ask and answer questions, vote on matters presented and answer multiple choice questions.
Thus, the electronic presentation, not only had the traditional function of transmitting information from
one to many, but it was also intended to foster interaction content-students, teacher-students,
students-students. The integration of Twitter in an electronic presentation, enables, potentially, a
paradigm shift in teaching: to the one-way communication teacher-class is added the value of the
interaction teacher-student-content. The feedback given by students is an important item because it
allows the teacher to suit his speech to the class and answer students' questions and comments that
appear in real-time presentation.

Figure 1: Integrating cognitive technologies in communication
At the end of the sessions, the participants were asked to fill a questionnaire to evaluate the resource.
The convenience sampling technique was our choice. Although not representative of the population ,
this sampling technique had the advantage of being a fast and simple one and, therefore, suitable for
preliminary studies, as in this case.

The questionnaire was made based on literature review (Hu, 2011; James, et al., 2006; Kurilovas,
2007; Nesbit, 2007; Nokelainen, 2006) and consisted of 41 items spread across six dimensions: i)
pedagogical aspects, ii) technological aspects, iii) cognitive learning iv) interactions in the classroom,
v) positive behaviour in the classroom; vi) negative behaviour in the classroom. The six evaluated
dimensions include: i) issues that students identify as central in the quality of digital learning
resources associated to more direct teaching, ii) the perceived effects by students in the field of
learning, behaviour and attitudes. A Likert scale of five points was used.
4. Presentation of results
The overall results of the questionnaire indicate that the respondents recognize the pedagogical and
technological potential of the resource in the six assessed dimensions, as well as its positive effects
on the quality of learning and type of interaction. In Figure 2 the assessment on pedagogical aspects


is presented. In the seven analyzed items, the large majority of respondents evaluated the
pedagogical aspects of the course with level four, "agree" and level 5 "strongly agree." The global
average of the seven items corresponds to 55 % of responses at level 4 and 22 % at level 5, and the
importance of level 1 and 2 is negligible (0 % and 4 %, respectively).

Scale
1. Strongly disagree to 5. Strongly agree
NOP. No opinion

Legend
1. Scientifically rigorous
2. Pedagogically appropriate
3. It has the correct sequence
4. It facilitates the explanation of abstract concepts
5. It is presented clearly (spelling, grammar, ...)
6. It is easy to understand the goals
7. Appropriate level of detail

Figure 2: Pedagogical aspects
As far as the "technological aspects" is concerned (Figure 3), the respondents commented on the
appropriateness of the use of technology, design, usability, interface, added value compared to
printed material, the potential of technology in facilitating learning, building concepts and skills
development. The average of the eight items of this dimension indicates that 52 % of students "agree"
and 32 % "strongly agree" that the technology used was appropriate and that potentiated learning.
Like in the previous dimension, the number of respondents that gave unfavourable levels of answers
(levels 1 and 2) is negligible.

Scale
NOP. No opinion

Legend
1. Use of technology appropriate to the content
2. The design is appealing
3. The design facilitates the clarification of the
content
4. The resource is easy to use
5. The interface facilitates navigation
6. The resource is an added value compared to
printed material
7. The used technology facilitates learning
8. The technology helps building concepts and
developing skills

Figure 3: Technological aspects
Regarding "cognitive learning" (Figure 4), if one considers the average of the 11 items on this
dimension: 82 % of the respondents said that they "agree" (47 %) or "strongly agree" (35 %) that the
resource has positive effects. In the average of the 11 items, the value of the terms "strongly
disagree" and disagree" is located at 2 %. However, 7% of the respondents "disagree" and 1 %
"strongly disagree" that the resource facilitates taking notes (item 3).

The potential of the evaluated resource in the "interactions in the classroom" are also recognized by
the students. The average of the five presented items in Figure 5 indicates that 70 % of respondents
"agree" (40 %) or "strongly agree" (30 %) with the positive effects of the resource on this dimension.
The item 1 is the one that meets the highest percentage of negative and neutral answers: 2 %
"strongly disagree" 11 % "disagree" and 35 % "do not agree nor disagree" that the resource leads to a
better knowledge of the classmates in the classroom.


Scale
NOP. No opinion

Legend
1. It helps to improve understanding
2. It facilitates memorizing information
3. It facilitates note taking
4. It favours a more appropriate pace of
presentation
5. It facilitates fluency when transferring
information in the classroom
6. The examples presented become clearer
7. It fosters a better coordination between the
classroom activity and the texts
8. It makes learning more motivator
9. It allows the definition of several ways of
learning
10. It favours the immersion in learning and
encourages further learning of contents
11. Mobilizes prior knowledge

Figure 4: Cognitive learning

Scale
NOP. No opinion

Legend
1. It leads to a better knowledge of classmates in
the classroom
2. Promotes the will to participate in class
3. It facilitates a closer relationship with the
teacher and classmates
4. It facilitates discussion in the classroom
5. It allows participation via a technological
channel
Figure 5: Interaction in the classroom
The results in the dimension "positive behaviour in the classroom" (Figure 6) are in agreement with
those of the other dimensions. Considering the average of the 7 items, 75% of respondents "agree"
(49 %) or "strongly agree" (26 %) that the resource has positive effects on behaviour in the classroom.
The item 1, which states that the resource helps taking better notes in class, holds the highest
number of negative evaluations (1 % "disagree" and 15 % "strongly disagree"). This result is aligned
with item 7 "it stimulates coming to class to take notes (15 % of respondents answered "disagree") as
well as with item 3 in Figure 4.

Scale
NOP. No opinion

Legend
1. It helps taking better notes during the lectures
2. The visual images presented in the resource
help to remember the contents during exams
3. It allows a better understanding of the key-
points highlighted during lessons
4. It enhances attention in the classroom
5. This resource is used as a support to group
work, negotiation and dialogue in classroom
6. It helps keeping interest alive during lectures
7. Encourages coming to class to take notes on
important topics

Figure 6: Positive behaviour in the classroom
In the dimension "negative behaviours in the classroom", the scale should be read in reverse: the
more favourable views about the resource are located on level 1 and the less favourable in level 5.


Looking at Figure 7 we can conclude that: i) 36 % "agree" and 19 % "strongly agree" that the resource
increases the possibility of keeping side conversations while the teacher presents the subject, ii) 8 %
"agree" and 8 % "strongly agree" that the resource reduces the motivation to be present in class. This
figure (16 %), although low in percentage terms, assumes an important meaning and is not aligned
with the very positive evaluation made to other dimensions and iii) 24 % "agree" and 7 % "strongly
agree" that they are more likely to skip school if they know that the resource will be available on the
web.

Scale
NOP. No opinion

Legend
1. It increases the possibility of keeping side
conversations while the teacher presents the
subject
2. It reduces the motivation to be present in class
3. The probability to miss class is higher if the
students know that the resource will be available
on the web

Figure 7: Negative behaviour in the classroom
Table 3 shows the average of responses in each dimension for each course attended. Only courses
with 10 or more students were taken into consideration as it was assumed that courses with fewer
students didn’t have any statistical significance. However, it is important to state that the same class
could integrate students from various courses, which increases the dimension of students in each
session. What was meant by this analysis was to identify possible differences in opinions according to
the type of training. The students from School Management and Organization and Childhood
Education and Special Education courses are the ones that, overall, make a more positive
assessment of the resource used. On the same scale of 1 to 5, the average score for items 1 to 5
(item 6 was not considered in this average as it presents a reverse scale) was 4,3. The less
favourable reviews were noted in the course Pedagogical Supervision, with an average of 3,7.
Although the type and size of the sample do not make it possible to establish correlations between
variables, the results of this preliminary study indicate that there is material for further analysis in this
field.
Table 3: Average of results in each dimension per course
Positive behaviour in

Negative behaviour
Interaction in class.
Cognitive Learning

items 1 to 5
Technology
Pedagogy

Average
in class,
class,

Training
Undergone

Education and Music 3,8 4,1 3,9 3,8 3,8 3,2 3,9
Pedagogical
3,8 3,9 3,9 3,4 3,6 2,8 3,7
Supervision
Infection and Health
4,1 4,0 4,4 4,2 4,0 2,1 4,1
Care
School Management
4,0 4,4 4,5 4,3 4,3 2,5 4,3
and Organization
Childhood Education
4,2 4,4 4,3 4,0 4,2 2,4 4,3
and Special Education
An analysis of differences in various dimensions, by gender, was made in this study. In dimensions 1
to 5 no significant differences are visible. Gender disparities are only visible in dimension 6, which
refers to negative behaviour in the classroom (Table 4). As shown in the three items considered, male
respondents considered that the resource has more negative effects.


Table 4: Significant differences per gender
Men Women
1. It increases the probability to keep side conversations while the teacher
3,7 3,2
presents the subject
2. It reduces motivation to be present in class 2,7 2,2
3. The probability to miss classes is higher if it is known that the resource
3,1 2,5
will be available on the web

5. Results discussion and conclusions
Constructivism as a philosophy and pedagogy is now widely accepted and is close to most
contemporary theories of teaching and learning: "constructivism", "situated learning", "social
cognition", "activity theory", "distributed cognition", "ecological psychology", and "case-based
reasoning" (Jonassen, Howland, Moore, & Marra, 2003). Education policies, including the Bologna
process, give expression to these pedagogical models of constructivist nature. In line with this
perspective is the way new generations of students learn: in a more flexible way, not just playing the
role of passive consumers of information, but as active builders in their learning process. The social
media provided by web 2.0 support this new philosophy of learning based on community building,
participation and sharing.

There are several studies about the use of the web 2.0 tools potential as an approach to more
constructivist philosophies. However, few are the studies focused on classroom lectures, where the
teacher faces a class-group, consisting of several dozen of students with the need for direct
instruction, to be able to present a large volume of information in the minimum time. In this context,
which occurs often in higher education, dialogue and interaction are limited.

Figure 8 depicts the morphology of the communication process in a lecture to large groups, in which
the electronic presentation only allows one-way communication, the interaction is not favored and the
student is sent to a more passive role.

Figure 8: Cognitive communication morphology 1.0 in the context of a lecture
Mayer (Pennsylvania State University, 2010) admits the possibility of using resources more
associated with direct instruction to achieve more constructivist approaches. In this study we sought
to determine whether the integration of the web 2.0 tool Twitter micro blogging in a PowerPoint
presentation contributed to the upgrade of a cognitive communication 1.0 to a cognitive
communication 2.0 in the context of a lecture (Hu, 2011). The applied questionnaire allowed to assess
various dimensions of the resource used in the classroom and to verify the changes in the
morphology of cognitive communication. The results indicate that students recognize the potential of
the resource used in the dynamics and dimensions of a cognitive communication situation 2.0, in
particular with regard to: i) pedagogical aspects, ii) technological aspects, iii) cognitive learning; iv)
interactions in the classroom and v) positive behaviour in the classroom.


In Figure 9 the results of the resource at interaction level and the direct effects on the student’s
activity are summarized. Twitter integration favours a multidirectional communication and an increase
of the interaction between teacher-student, student-student and student-content. This leads to an
upgrade of the level of cognitive communication from version 1.0 to 2.0. The findings corroborate the
results obtained when applying this questionnaire to a smaller sample (Ferreira, Castro, & Andrade,
2011) and are aligned with other studies, namely: i) the positive effects on learning (Balanskat,
Blamire, & Kefala, 2006; James, et al., 2006; Junco, et al., 2010) and ii) the relation between the use
of technology and the student involvement in school activities (Balanskat, et al., 2006; Chen P., 2010;
Junco, et al., 2010).

Figure 9: Morphology of cognitive communication 2.0 in the context of a lecture
For future studies, it is suggested i) to extend the sample in order to validate the questionnaire and to
allow the study of correlations between variables and ii) to develop a more systemic way of research,
integrating the issue of cognitive communication 2.0 in the context of the classroom in HIPLE context.
References
Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., and Kefala, S. (2006) The ICT Impact Report: A review of studies of ICT impact on
schools in Europe, European Schoolnet in the framework of the European Commission’s ICT Cluster,
Brussels, Belgium.
Bennett, S., Maton, K., and Kevin, L. (2008) "The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence", British
Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 39, No.5, pp. 775-786.
Castañeda, L., and Soto, J. (2010) "Building Personal Learning Environments by using and mixing ICT tools in a
professional way", Digital Education Review, No.18, pp. 9-25.
Chen P., L. A. D. G. K. (2010) "Engaging online learners: the impact of web-based learning technology on
college student engagement", Computers and Education, Vol 54, No.4, pp. 1222--1232.
Elliot, T. (2011) "SAP web 2.0", [online], http://www.sapweb20.com/ (acessed on 20/05/2011).
Ferreira, S. A., Castro, C., and Andrade, A. (2011). "Morfologia da Comunicação Cognitiva 2.0 em sala de aula
no âmbito do Ensino Superior", In Proceedings of CISTI 2011 – 6ª Conferência Ibérica de Sistemas e
Tecnologias de Informação, pp. 294-300, Chaves, Portugal, June.
Figueiredo, A. D. (2009) "Estratégias e Modelos para a Educação Online", In G. L. Miranda (Ed.), Ensino Online
e Aprendizagem, Lisboa, Relógio d´Água, pp. 33-55.
Fuchs, C., Hofkirchner, W., Schafranek, M., Raffl, C., Sandoval, M., and Bichler, R. (2010) "Theoretical
Foundations of the web: Cognition, Communication, and Co-Operation. Towards an Understanding of web
1.0, 2.0, 3.0", Future Internet, Vol. 2, No.1, pp. 41-59.
Hu, W. (2011) "Mayer's SOI model" [online], http://www.personal.psu.edu/wxh139/SOI.htm (acessed on
20/05/2011).
James, K. E., Burke, L. A., and Hutchins, H. M. (2006) "Powerful or Pointless? Faculty Versus Perceptions of
PowerPoint Use in Business Education", Business Communication Quarterly, Vol. 69, No.4, pp. 374-396.
Johnson, L., Smith, L. R., Willis, H., Levine, A., and Haywood, K. (2011) The 2011 Horizon Report, The New
Media Consortium, Austin, Texas, USA.
Jonassen, D., Howland, J., Moore, J., and Marra, R. (2003) Learning to solve problems with technology, Merril
Prentice Hall, New Jersey.


Junco, R., Heiberger, G., and Loken, E. (2010) "The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and
grades", Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 27, No.2, pp. 1-14.
Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., Bennett, S., Gray, K., Waycott, J., Judd, T., Chang, R. (2009) Educating the Net
Generation – a handbook of findings for practice and policy, Australian Learning and Teaching Council,
Melbourne.
Kurilovas, E. (2007) "Digital library of educational resources and services: evaluation of components", [online],
http://bit.ly/mz7UH1 (acessed on 20/05/2011).
Nesbit, J. K. B. T. L. (2007) "Learning Object Review Instrument (LORI) Version 1.5", [online],http://bit.ly/laXZHE
(acessed on 20/05/2011).
Nokelainen, P. (2006) "An empirical assessment of pedagogical usability criteria for digital learning material with
elementary school students", Educational Technology and Society, Vol 9, No. 2, pp. 178-197.
Pennsylvania State University (2010). Mayer's SOI model”, Available:
http://www.personal.psu.edu/wxh139/SOI.htm (acessed on 20/05/2011).
Prensky, M. (2001) "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants", On the Horizon, Vol 9, Nº 5, pp.1-6.
Tapscott, D., and Williams, A. D. (2008) Wikinomics: A Nova Economia das Multidões Inteligentes, Quidnovi,
Lisboa.
Vilelas, J. (2009). Investigação – O processo de construção o conhecimento, Edições Sílabo, Lisboa

Cognitive Communication 2.0 in the Classroom - Resonance of an Experience in Higher Education

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Cognitive Communication 2.0 in the Classroom - Resonance of an Experience in Higher Education (20)

More from Cornélia Castro (13)

Recently uploaded (20)

Cognitive Communication 2.0 in the Classroom - Resonance of an Experience in Higher Education