The Impact of the Read/Write Web on Learner Agency

This article scopes some of the key political elements in the higher educational use of the read/write web, or Web2.0 as it is commonly known. It investigates ways in which these tools can be used to enhance deliberative democracy, the associations between individuals and their capability for decision-making. The structuring of spaces in which individual users can come together to make decisions and act is a critical theme, and one which impacts upon the agency, access and participation, and associations that are afforded by those contexts. Where differences exist between students and/or their tutor(s), the read/write web affords tools for representing such variation. Herewith the voices of both learners and tutors are evaluated, in order to argue that the read/write web can be used positively to acknowledge difference and promote agency.

[1]  Daniel V. Eastmond.  E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online , 2003 .

[2]  S. Papert.  The children's machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer , 1993 .

[3]  Paulo Freire,et al.  Pedagogy of the Oppressed , 2019, Toward a Just World Order.

[4]  B. Massumi,et al.  The postmodern condition : a report on knowledge , 1979 .

[5]  R. Mason,et al.  Using Web 2.0 for learning in the community , 2007, Internet High. Educ..

[6]  John Elliott,et al.  Educational Research as a Form of Democratic Rationality , 2006 .

[7]  D. Smith.  Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature , 1981 .

[8]  Linda Lohr,et al.  Psychology of learning for instruction , 2005 .

[9]  P. Anderson.  What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education , 2007 .

[10]  Anne Phillips,et al.  The Politics of Presence , 1995 .

[11]  K. Gergen.  Action Research and Orders of Democracy , 2003 .

[12]  M. Schoen.  The Moral Judgment of the Child. , 1933 .

[13]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[14]  Tim O'Reilly,et al.  What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software , 2007 .

[15]  Ian Alexander,et al.  Handbook of Action Research Participative Inquiry and Practice , 2001, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[16]  Richard E. Boyatzis,et al.  Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development , 1998 .

[17]  Martin Ebner,et al.  Web 2.0 Technology: Future Interfaces for Technology Enhanced Learning? , 2007, HCI.

[18]  Lucy Yardley,et al.  Content and thematic analysis , 2003 .

[19]  Richard Hall,et al.  Delivering What Students say they Want On-line: Towards Academic Participation in the Enfranchisement of e-Learners? , 2006 .

[20]  Tom Franklin,et al.  Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education , 2007 .

[21]  Colin Lankshear,et al.  Critical literacy : politics, praxis, and the postmodern , 1995 .

[22]  I. Illich.  Tools for Conviviality , 1973 .

[23]  Ronald Barnett,et al.  Higher Education: A Critical Business , 1997 .

[24]  Ronald Barnett,et al.  Engaging the Curriculum in Higher Education , 2004 .

[25]  R. Hall.  Battery Farming or Free Ranging: Towards Citizen Participation in E-Learning Environments , 2006 .

[26]  J. Dewey.  How we think : a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process , 1934 .

[27]  A. Giddens.  Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics , 1994 .

[28]  Robin Goodfellow,et al.  Challenging E Learning in the University: Society for Research Into Higher Education , 2007 .

[29]  H. Haber.  Beyond Postmodern Politics: Lyotard, Rorty, Foucault , 1994 .

[30]  Iris Marion Young,et al.  Communication and the other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy , 1995 .

[31]  Hannah Green,et al.  Their Space. Education for a Digital Generation , 2007 .

[32]  Edmund F. Byrne,et al.  Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political , 1999 .

[33]  Vygotsky and education: Introduction , 1990 .

[34]  L. Yardley,et al.  Research Methods for Clinical and Health Psychology , 2003 .

[35]  Vivien Hodgson,et al.  Consensus, difference and ‘multiple communities’ in networked learning , 2005 .

[36]  Zemsky Robert,et al.  Thwarted Innovation : What Happened to e-learning and Why?(Keynote Presentation,Networks without Borders : Towards Cross-Cultural Learning Communities) , 2004 .

[37]  Ormond Simpson,et al.  Supporting Students in Online, Open and Distance Learning , 2000 .

[38]  Kim， Euiyoung.  On Associative Democracy , 2005 .

[39]  T. Mayes,et al.  Jisc E-learning Models Desk Study ______________________________________ Stage 2: Learner-centred Pedagogy: Individual Differences between Learners , 2004 .