2. Conference Sponsors
The organisers gratefully acknowledge the support of the following sponsors for their significant
contributions.
1

3. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by
any electronic, mechanical or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including
photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
2

4. Contents
Foreword .......................................................................................................................................... 5
4th Annual LIN Conference – October 27th, Ashling Hotel, Dublin ........................................................ 6
Sub-theme 1 – First Year Experience .................................................................................................. 7
Applying a three-step model to first year course design to champion creativity and satisfy the
evolving objectives of business education .................................................................................... 7
1
Jeff Taylor, 2Conor Horan .......................................................................................................... 7
Social Media and/in Education- where do you stand? ................................................................ 15
Geraldine McDermott .............................................................................................................. 15
Shared Social Video in Higher Education ‘Blended’ Business Programmes ................................. 26
Denis Cullinane ........................................................................................................................ 26
Action Accounting: supporting the first year student ................................................................. 38
Frances Boylan, Tony Kiely, Alice Luby ..................................................................................... 38
Seeking a New Level – an examination of the factors that affect Level 7 first year Engineering
Students in DIT ............................................................................................................................ 48
Domhnall Sheridan, Michael Carr, Anselm Griffin ..................................................................... 48
Changing Minds: challenging student attitudes to introductory physics ..................................... 59
Regina Kelly, Leah Wallace ....................................................................................................... 59
Integrating theory and practice: enhancing assessment in the First Year ................................... 67
Elizabeth Noonan, Geraldine O’Neill, ....................................................................................... 67
Sub-theme 2 – Diversity of the learner Experience .......................................................................... 75
The Importance of Body Language to International Students ..................................................... 75
Brian Toolan ............................................................................................................................ 75
Enhancing Student Learning Experience and Diversity of Learning Styles Through Project Based
Learning and Continuous Assessment ......................................................................................... 77
Kevin Furlong ........................................................................................................................... 77
Charting the learning journey of a group of adults returning to education ................................. 88
Des Mooney ............................................................................................................................ 88
Learner Experience with the MyElvin Social Network for Practicing Languages ......................... 98
Darragh Coakley, Maria Murray ............................................................................................... 98
Work placement blogs to harness diverse learning experiences and foster a community of
practice ..................................................................................................................................... 108
Julie Dunne ............................................................................................................................ 108
Taking the LEAD: Reflections on enhancing employability skills development? ....................... 116
Jen Harvey, Sinead McNulty, Rachel O’Connor, ...................................................................... 116
3

5. Sub-theme 3 – STAFF DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................ 123
Engaging and preparing students for future roles – community-based learning in DIT ............. 123
Catherine Bates ..................................................................................................................... 123
Managing a time effective assessment process to maximise a quality learning experience ..... 132
Jen Harvey, Dublin Institute of Technology ............................................................................ 132
THE NEST PROJECT: AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH TO TEACHER TRAINING ................................ 140
Pauline Logue Collins, Kate Dunne, Dr. Angelika Rauch .......................................................... 140
Lecturers are doin’ it for themselves The experience of MUGS in GMIT ................................... 156
Miriam Mc Sweeney, Nicholas Canny and Patricia Mc Cann ................................................... 156
“Different ways of knowing” - Fostering Learners engagement in the creation and dissemination
of knowledge via motivational self systems and life-wide learning experiences. ..................... 168
Valerie Mannix ...................................................................................................................... 168
Evaluation of impact of professional development training in the area of technology enhanced
learning ..................................................................................................................................... 178
Michael McMahon ................................................................................................................. 178
4

6. Foreword
Welcome to the 4th Annual Learning Innovation Network (LIN) Conference in the
Ashling Hotel in Dublin. LIN is the flagship teaching and learning initiative for the
institutes of technology (IoT) sector in Ireland and is managed by the LIN Co-
ordination Group, supported by Institutes of Technology Ireland (IOTI). LIN aims
to disseminate and promote best practice and innovation in teaching and learning
at sectoral level. It is in the area of academic professional development (APD) that
LIN has made its most distinctive contribution. Within the last year LIN has had a
number of milestone achievements, the validation of the postgraduate diploma in
Learning, Teaching and Assessment being chief among those achievements. This programme will be
formally launched at the conference this year. LIN operates as a collaboration project between
thirteen Institutes of Technology and Dublin Institute of Technology. The seminal contribution and
ongoing support of DIT for this initiative from the outset must be acknowledged at this time. This
has been instrumental in making LIN the success it is today. Within participating institutes, members
of staff from a wide range of academic departments and students’ support services complete LIN
programmes. Therefore LIN has established itself as an inter-departmental as well as an inter-
institutional project.
We anticipate the conference will provide much opportunity to share experiences and discuss
developments and innovations in the provision of a quality higher education to an ever more diverse
student body. We hope that you find the conference beneficial to your professional practice, that
the material presented will assist you in meeting the challenges of Enhancing the Learning
Experience and that you have the opportunity to meet and form new networks with colleagues from
across the sector who face similar challenges.
Best Wishes,
Dr. Richard Thorn
Director of Flexible Learning, IOTI
National Higher Education Strategy Project Manager, HEA
5

7. 4th Annual LIN Conference – October 27th, Ashling Hotel, Dublin
CONFERENCE THEME
Enhancing the Learning Experience: Learning for an Unknown Future (Barnett, 2004) 1
SUB-THEMES
 The first year experience
 Diversity of the learner experience
 Staff development for learning / Innovation in teaching and learning
ABOUT THE CONFERENCE ORGANISERS
LIN - The Learning Innovation Network - was established in 2007 with the aim of 'working
collaboratively to enhance Learning and Teaching in Institutes of Technology’. The project was a
three year collaborative project between the thirteen Irish Institutes of Technology and Dublin
Institute of Technology. Funded by the Strategic Innovation Fund (Cycle 1) LIN received the highest
possible rating from the Gordon Davis SIF review. As a result, LIN has secured further funding to
sustain its activities under the auspices of the SIF 2 Flexible Learning project. LIN’s priority is the
provision and support of Academic Professional Development (APD) opportunities within the sector
and we recently validated the modular Postgraduate Diploma in Learning Teaching and Assessment.
LIN is run by the LIN Co-ordination Group and each institute has a LIN contact. The LIN contacts are
listed in the table below.
Contact Institute
Nuala Harding Athlone Institute of Technology
Daniel McSweeney Institute of Technology Blanchardstown
Anne Carpenter Institute of Technology Carlow
Stephen Cassidy Cork Institute of Technology
Jen Harvey Dublin Institute of Technology
John Dallat Dundalk Institute of Technology
Mary Anne O’Carroll Dun Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology
Aedin O’hEocha & Carina Ginty Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology
Denis McFadden Letterkenny Institute of Technology
Terry Twomey Limerick Institute of Technology
Stephanie Donegan Institute of Technology Sligo
Rose Cooper Institute of Technology Tallaght, Dublin
Brid McElligott Institute of Technology Tralee
Carol O’Byrne & John Wall Waterford Institute of Technology
Niamh Rushe LIN Co-ordinator – IOTI
Marion Palmer Chair of the LIN Co-ordination Group
1
Barnett, R. (2004) Learning for an Unknown Future. Higher Education Research and Development, 23 (3), pp.
247-260.
6

8. Sub-theme 1 – First Year Experience
Applying a three-step model to first year course design to champion
creativity and satisfy the evolving objectives of business education
1Jeff Taylor, 2Conor Horan
1
Dublin Business School, 2Dublin Institute of Technology
Abstract
This paper discusses the objectives of business education at third level and proposes
creativity and associated skills be placed at the forefront of the first year experience. As
business teaching is increasingly conducted by authority rather than creativity there exists a
necessity to ensure students new to the college experience are challenged and encouraged
to engage in harnessing their creative potential during their first academic year. This paper
will develop the need for first year course design, to follow the 3 steps outlined in the model
(Provide Opportunities for Creative Behaviour (before); Develop Skills for Creative Learning
(during); and Reward Creative Achievements (after).) to allow students the freedom to
explore the business discipline in their own unique manner while maintaining the check and
balances required from Quality Assurance. This paper will show how this template should be
considered during programmatic design and reviews with consideration to continuous
assessment design, in order to allow course lecturers the freedom to both design and
reward continuous assessment with creative skills in mind.
Introduction
At the start of every academic cycle, students eagerly, excitedly and almost certainly
nervously enter into the world of higher education. Business schools are no exception, and
first year students begin their journey for knowledge with a raw enthusiasm. It is at this
juncture that institutions have the most flexibility with which to nurture and develop
business leaders of the future.
Higher education is often a forum for creative products such as inventions, medical
discoveries, entrepreneurial endeavours, books and stage productions. However, Torrence
(1977) laments that too often these accomplishments have been achieved outside of college
requirements and sponsorship. He continues that dissertations and theses, usually regarded
as original contributions, tend to be evaluated for correctness of methodology rather than
in terms of originality, power, and worth of ideas developed and tested.
Business education has become an important part of the young and upcoming executive’s
preparation for success in business (Van der Colff, 2004). Here it is argued that in order for
business graduates to contribute in the evolving economy business schools must equip
students with diverse talents cultivated by creativity. It is proposed that such an innovative
skill set should be fostered from the outset, and that course design be the tool to champion
the cause of creativity.
A simple three-part process, derived from earlier work on creativity in the classroom by
Torrence (1977) is proposed to facilitate course design in allowing student imagination and
7

9. individuality to prosper. This three-stage process is before, during and after: Provide
Opportunities for Creative Behaviour (before); Develop Skills for Creative Learning (during);
and Reward Creative Achievements (after). By incorporating this process, course review and
course design will cultivate an atmosphere of broad skills development.
The weight of present evidence indicates people fundamentally prefer to learn in creative
ways (Torrence, 1977). Currently the proposed model for creativity is not employed by
Business Schools and introducing this model to influence course design a creative
environment can be cultured to the benefit of the scholarship of business undergraduates. It
is argued herein that the implementation of this model is of significant relevance in first
year in order to connect students to a more creative environment.
The Role of the Business School
It is common to review a business school’s curriculum and bear witness to the provision of
courses in management, marketing, retail and more. Orr (1991) describes the modern
business school curriculum as being a world “fragmented into bits and pieces called
disciplines and sub-disciplines”. He argues the consequence of such institutional design is a
graduating student, despite 12 or 16 or 20 years of education, devoid of any broad
integrated sense of unity and their surrounding environment. The current trend in
education is increasing specialization into narrowly defined academic disciplines, coupled
with departmental and other institutional barriers to collaboration amongst faculty and
amongst students. All too often university organizational structure prohibits faculty from
pursuing their creative ideas. (Bacon, 2010).
Recently there have been calls to treat university students as customers. As customers,
students are implicitly encouraged to adopt the passive attitude of receiving a service,
rather than actively participate and become equal stakeholders in their studies (Furedi,
2006). As a result, the conceptual difference between studying in a university and being
taught in a school has become blurred. With this in mind, it is absolutely essential that first
year course design break the current teaching and learning methods and allow students
embark upon a new path of self directed learning. Indeed, Graham (2002) notes that there
is a qualitative difference between pupils – who are for the most part directed by others –
and students who are expected to be more self-directed.
Should a business school not be educating students for more than just an understanding in a
limited field of commerce and allowing their faculty the freedom to implement unique
teaching approaches? It has long been argued that education is ‘the most personal, the
most intimate, of all human affairs’ (Dewey, 1903). It is within education more than
anywhere else that character, and intelligence of the individual be celebrated. Indeed,
Furedi (2006) mourns the absence of intellectual stimulation and challenge on
contemporary campuses. There is a compulsion of modern institutions to force all kinds of
facts, techniques, methods and information into the mind of the student, with little regard
for how and with what effect it will be used (Orr, 1991). It would be wise of modern
business schools to revisit the work of Dewey (1903) who would suggest the remedy is not
to have one expert dictating educational methods and subject-matter to a body of passive,
recipient students, but the adoption of intellectual initiative, discussion, and decision
throughout.
8

10. As a consequence, as Furedi (2006) is concerned with the proliferation of undergraduates
who are profoundly bored by their university experiences, now is the time to champion
Dewey’s (1903) call for initiative and innovation.
The challenge for business schools is thus ever evolving. Likely challenges facing leaders will
be immeasurably diverse across several disciplines from technology to psychology to ethics
to the environment and the political arena. The implication for management educators is
clear. They have to ensure to develop the cross-disciplinary skills necessary for future
leaders and managers to ensure organisational success (Van der Colff, 2004). This position is
supported by Bosch and Louw (1998) who argue that business Schools, as pivotal role-
players in developing managerial competence, cannot escape their responsibility to deliver
appropriately educated business executives, who, through their intellectual skills and
community sensitive values, may lead future transformation processes. It would be remiss
of business schools to persist with the status quo and fail to engage in the call for a more
rounded business graduate.
Furthermore, an international trend with regards to skills development is the shifting world
of work. The new economy requires a set of skills that is fundamentally different to that
which was traditionally appropriate. Skills demanded by the new labour market include
innovation, entrepreneurship and critical thinking as the cornerstone of the new global
leader (Van der Colff, 2004). According to the authors the management skills that are most
in demand right now include:
an ability to contribute to the strategic development of the organisation;
an ability to take a broad holistic view of management issues, including the capacity
to see issues in the context of an evolving internal and a changing external
environment;
the capacity for imagination and creativity as well as analytical skills;
interpersonal skills, group work, team projects, negotiation, networking and other
critical social skills;
personal learning skills, especially the ability to learn from, and help others learn
from experience; and
an ability to analyse critically management problems at a strategic level.
As can be seen these skills focus on the universal skills with broad applicability, regardless of
the direction a student may take upon graduation. Self directed development will allow a
student develop the associated management skills. Course design should facilitate this
development.
Business schools are compelled to embrace creativity and interdisciplinary skills. Crucially,
course design can be tailored to champion creativity from the outset, providing first year
undergraduate students the skills they require to develop and hone their creative
sensibilities throughout their studies. The modern skills in demand include imagination,
creativity, an awereness of broad contexts, and personal learning. With this in mind the
merit of model proposed in this paper becomes ever greater, alluding to the necessity of
broad cross-disciplinary skills.
9

11. The overarching objective of teaching in a university context is to provide the best learning
environment possible for students, so that they can develop the capability to achieve the
learning outcomes of the units being taught (Blount and McNeill, 2011). This paper contests
that such a learning environment can be developed by implementing the model proposed
below.
Proposed Model to support Creativity and its impact on Course Design
Given the evolving demands of business schools there exists a developing requirement for
graduates to possess a broad range of skills. Every person’s education is their own personal
journey upon which they should be encouraged to experiment and investigate material in
their own unique way. Current business course design reinforces passivity, monologue,
domination, and artificiality (Orr, 1991). This current business academic stasis contrasts
significantly to future objectives of business schools. A simple three-step process is derived
from the work of Torrence (1977) on creativity in the classroom. It is proposed that this
process be implemented into programmatic review and course/module design. By
embracing such an initiative the cycle of conformity can be broken. Course design is the
ideal format with which to champion creativity.
Creativity is the ability to produce work that is both new and valuable (Martins, 2011). New
means unusual, unique, new point of view, varied, original, breaking from existing patterns
and contributing something to the field which was not there before. Valuable indicates that
the product meets a need or solves a problem; it is useful, effective, and efficient, serves a
purpose and contributes to society. This definition proposed by Martins (2011) from his
literature review on creativity highlights key attributes that business school objectives
demand of modern graduates.
Additionally, this definition of creativity reveals that it is still very subjective. The subjectivity
of creativity makes it hard to measure and can be considered to be a major obstacle for
Quality Assurance in academia where a more quantifiable quality is desired. The model
outlined here stresses the importance of creativity, yet allows the rigours of Quality
Assurance to hold steadfast.
10

12. Before: Provide Opportunities for Creative Behaviour:
A very practical way of providing conditions for creative learning is to offer a curriculum
with plenty of opportunities for creative behaviour. Torrence (1977) proposes that this can
be done in many ways, by making assignments which call for original work, independent
learning, self-initiated projects and experimentation. Blount and McNeil (2011) insist
assessment provide engaging and challenging opportunities for students to test and apply
what they have learned. By directing a student to complete a non-examination assessment
with defined parameters such as method of submission, required word count, required
formatting style, prescribed reference quantity and much more limitations, naturally the
scope for innovation is curtailed.
Creativity is served by an environment that welcomes new ideas. Creativity needs a certain
level of tolerance for unusual or even subversive people and ideas (Sutton, 2001). The
challenge here it is for course design to be both agreeable by Quality Assurance moderators
and yet flexible enough to embrace such unusual and undefined ideas.
A business school adopting this model would design courses and assessments with language
that allows lecturers and programmatic reviewers the flexibility in the method of
assessment and the marking criteria. While substance of work is still of value, credit should
be available within the parameters set out in the course/assessment design for unique
methods of submission and evidence of creativity and independent learning.
During: Develop Skills for Creative Learning:
Learning in creative ways requires certain skills not required by authority – the skills and
strategies of inquiry, creative research and problem solving (Torrence, 1977). Further
creativity literature expresses that students ought to be encouraged to use their
imagination in art and design, music, dance, imagination, role-play and stories. While it may
be easy to argue that music and dance have no obvious link business academics, it is not the
11

13. place of course and assessment design to educate students out of creativity and into
conformity (Robinson, 2007). If a student excels at an extra-curricular activity, they ought to
be encouraged to bring these external talents into a classroom environment. How this may
manifest itself should be an unknown, and should be dependent on the various gifts and
abilities by a particular group of students. One such example of this is a marketing project
which saw a group of students performing various pieces of music of varied moods as a
background effect to the same TV car advert, highlighting the sensory capabilities of the
viewer and the importance of music to the advertising effect.
This model, correctly implemented into course design, would allow students the
opportunities to challenge their creative abilities. By witnessing their peers succeed in their
creative academic endeavours, a student may be encouraged to compete or participate in
the same process with the same enthusiasm. If this mindset was encouraged from first year,
upon completion of a three to four year degree course students will have born witness to a
wide range of broad talent and learning methodologies, and would no longer be limited to
classroom and textbook learning.
After: Reward Creative Achievements:
Creative thinking should be legitimate and rewarding (Torrence, 1977) and seeking out
creative avenues should be reflected in a student’s grades. He continues that educational
research has indicated repeatedly that people tend to learn along the lines they find
rewarding. In order to meet with the future objectives of business schools, then course and
assessment design must embrace any means by which to reward creative behaviour.
Students are rewarded not only in grades but they should feel as if their effort has been of
value to themselves personally, and not merely as a completion of a task or academic
purpose.
If course design prescribes every method by which learning outcomes ought to be achieved,
curiosity is neglected. Students are rewarded via the voyage of discovery, answering their
own questions via self initiated learning rather than answering a set question during
assessment. Students should be encouraged to manage their own learning since the
assessment and evaluation should be their personal concern and can ultimately only be
judged according to their criteria (Rae and Gray 2003). It is essential that this be established
from the outset in first year, students should be aware that they are the driving force
behind their education, and this should be reflected in course design. If courses and
assessments are too regimented, then it follows that students will not engage with the idea
of academic ownership. In contrast however, were a student afforded the environment to
tackle key subject matter in their own innovative manner, the sense of ownership would be
greatly increased and be much more worthwhile and rewarding.
Self initiated learning is another outcome of the implementation of this model. Torrence
(1977) argues that overly detailed supervision, too much reliance upon prescribed curricula,
and attempts to cover too much material with no opportunity for reflection interfere
seriously with such efforts. Attempting to cover vast amounts of information can result in
student apathy as they feel unengaged with the material.
12

14. Finally, course design should provide a chance for learners to learn, think and discover
without threat of immediate evaluation (Torrence, 1977). Within this construct, this model
proposes that the first year learning experience by markedly different than that of final and
interim years. In order to foster creativity, the burden of heavily graded pieces of work
should be introduced slowly and incrementally over the degree delivery period. Having
uniform assessment techniques from first year through to graduation heaps excess pressure
on first year students unfamiliar with the process, and who will be reluctant to challenge
convention. Rather, this paper proposes that first year course design allow a greater
flexibility, free from the shackles of excess grading, in order to encourage creativity and a
learning momentum. The remit of Quality Assurance remains as quantitative grading criteria
will exist in greater detail in later years of a degree programme; however, a first year
programme should be more open to the growth and maturing of its students.
Conclusion
Modern business school must develop a way of learning that is entirely appropriate to the
learning needs of future managers, that continually engages student interest and that brings
about internalized changes in the way the student thinks (Rae and Gray, 2003). The model
proposed recognises that students have various abilities and indeed, various reasons for
participating in different degree programmes. Embracing creativity is to recognise that
students have different needs, different bases of knowledge, different interests and
different learning modes. This paper seeks to encourage business schools to implement the
model outlined above into first year course and assessment design in order to address the
nuances and differences in student individuality. Business course objectives demand
creativity is at the forefront of learning for years to come. Implementing this model will
support creativity amongst first year students via course and assessment design.
The model itself acts as a guideline, itself a champion of simplicity, benefiting from greater
scope and interpretative flexibility. Much as the model advocates creativity and freedom of
expression, so to it should be implemented by business schools in their very own creative
manner with freedom and interpretation varying from business school to business school.
The model is not prescriptive, nor should it be. How one business school implements the
model may be markedly different from how another school uses it. No two situations will be
identical, so uniformity cannot be the ideal. Likewise, no two students are identical, and the
potential for innovation is limitless, and it is not up to colleges to limit that potential, rather
to encourage it, and develop it.
References
Bacon, C.M, et al. (2010) “Creation of an integrated curriculum” International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 193-208
Blount, Y and McNeill, M (2011) “Fostering independent learning and engagement for
postgraduate students - Using a publisher-supplied software program”, International Journal
of Educational Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 390-404.
Bosch, J.K. and Louw, L. (1998) “Graduate Perceptions on the Status and Nature of South
African MBA Programmes” Centre for Applied Business Management, UPE.
13

15. Furedi, Frank (2006) “Where Have All the Intellectuals Gone?” Continuum Publishing,
London.
Graham, G. (2002) “Universities: The recovery of an idea.” Thorverton, Imprint Academic.
Martens, Yuri (2011) “Creative workplace: instrumental and symbolic support for
Creativity”, Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL, London, Vol. 29 No. 1/2, pp. 63-79.
Orr, David (1991) “What Is Education For? Six myths about the foundations of modern
education, and six new principles to replace them.” The Learning Revolution, Winter 1991,
Page 52, Context Institute. pp. 499-507.
Rae, John and Gray, Harry, (2003) "Strategic leadership: A learning partnership",
Development and Learning in Organizations, Vol. 17 Iss: 5, pp.16 - 18
Robinson, Ken (2007) “Schools kill creativity” TED Conference, Ted.com,
www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html Accessed September
26th, 2011.
Sukirno D.S. and Siengthai S. (2011) “Does participative decision making affect lecturer
performance in higher education?” International Journal of Educational Management, Vol.
25 No. 5, 2011 pp. 494-508.
Sutton, R. (2001), “Weird Ideas That Work: 11 1/2 Practices for Promoting, Managing, and
Sustaining Innovation”, Alan Lane/Penguin, London.
Torrence, E. Paul (1977) “Creativity in the Classroom: What research says to the teacher.”
National Education Association, Washington, D.C.
Van der Colff, Linda (2004) “A new paradigm for business education - The role of the
business educator and business school” Management Decision, Vol. 42 No. 3/4, 2004
About the Authors
Jeff Taylor BSC, MSC (International Business)
Jeff is currently engaged in research into business education while lecturing in Dublin
Business School and the Institute of Business and Technology.
Having completed both a degree and masters from the Dublin Institute of Technology, Jeff
worked in academic quality assurance before pursuing lecturing in marketing. With industry
experience predominantly in the event management industry Jeff’s teaching interests
include event and project management and marketing.
Jeff’s research interests lie in the role and scope of business education and developing
creativity within academia.
Conor Horan BBLS, MBS (Marketing)
Conor.horan@dit.ie
14

16. Conor is a research methodologist, who has previously lectured and researched in the
Smurfit School of Business (UCD), and as a guest lecturer at the Czech University of Life
Sciences.
Conor has an honours Master in Business Studies (Marketing) from the Smurfit School of
Business and a Bachelors in Business and Legal Studies. He has researched in the area of
online marketing and e-commerce strategy. His Phd research is in the area of Inter-
Organisational Knowledge Creation and Markets-as-Networks. Conor is also a member of
the Industrial Marketing & Purchasing Group (IMP). Conor is currently completing his PhD at
the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
Conor has taught a range of courses from Marketing Management to Business Research
Methods. He is also published in a number of referred journals including the Journal of
Business Research, Journal of Strategic Marketing and Industrial Marketing Management.
_______________________________________________________
Social Media and/in Education- where do you stand?
Geraldine McDermott
Athlone Institute of Technology
The journey of a thousand miles begins with just one step (Lao Tzu)
As different forms of social media continue to become part of our students’ daily lives,
should we go beyond our comfort zones of previous teaching modes and engage with more
cutting edge channels? Is there a chance that the student who fails to engage in a
traditional setting will be more engaged if we use Facebook or Twitter or Second Life? Do
we need to bridge the gap between the digital native and the digital immigrant?
This paper will address this gap and make suggestions for reasonable educational initiatives
to address it.
To maximize engagement and encourage deeper learning, educators must endeavour to
find the best delivery method for his or her subject area. Today, most educators are aware
of the value of online resources for learning and almost all Irish third-level institutions have
embraced the virtual learning environment as an additional portal for their students. For
example, in recent years Learning Management Systems, such as Moodle or Blackboard,
have been adopted by almost all third-level institutions in Ireland. Classified as a content
management system (CMS), a learning management system (LMS) or a virtual learning
environment (VLE), this platform provides Higher Education Institutes with many
opportunities to support flexible learning and e-learning, both synchronously and
asynchronously.
15

17. However, while many still function as document repositories, the added value for students
lies in the ability of an LMS to become a complete learning environment and educators are
increasingly engaging with the Web 2.0 activities provided by the VLEs to promote both
individual and collaborative learning.
As a stepping stone to using Web 2.0 within education, the VLE has provided educators with
the opportunity to test the validity of activities in a controlled environment. The theory of
social constructionism, which underpins Moodle in particular, sits well within the framework
of Web 2.0 technologies, where user-generated content is the main focus. Social
constructionism posits that “learning is particularly effective when one constructs
something for others to experience” (Forment, 2007) The emphasis is on the interaction
(teacher-student, student-student and activities such as forums, journals and wikis, already
integrated into the VLE invite users to create and communicate; enhancing the learner
experience.
Student engagement with these activities has shown that there is scope for moving beyond
the traditional approaches and exploring other Web 2.0 possibilities. The popularity of social
media in the wider community has prompted many in education to investigate and discuss
its usefulness, but the real challenge is to invite the larger population of educators to join
this discussion.
Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) define social media as "a group of Internet-based applications
that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0 and that allow the
creation and exchange of user-generated content." The graphic below, created by Fred
Cavazza (2009) attempts to categorize some of the most popular social media tools available
today.
Figure 1: Social Media Landscape
16

18. Such a classification is extremely useful given the transient nature of social media websites.
What is popular now will almost certainly soon be out of date and replaced by the next
social media ‘miracle’. Nelson (2010) cites the example of Friendster, which was replaced by
MySpace as the most popular networking site in 2004, while MySpace quickly lost
customers to Facebook as its community grew.
The increase in the use of online social games has been facilitated by the advent of the Xbox
and Playstation live platforms and online games incorporated into social networking sites
(e.g. Angry Birds) are enjoying unprecedented levels of success (Morrison, 2011). Although
the hype surrounding virtual worlds (e.g. Second Life) has lessened since their introduction,
the number of users still passed the 1 billion mark in October 2010. (Watters, 2010)
The statistics relating to the usage of the main social media websites are indicative of the
extent to which they have become part of our reality and many communities have
embraced the opportunities they provide us with to reach a global audience.
Facebook has amassed more than 800 million users globally since its launch in 2004, with in
excess of 350 million active users currently accessing Facebook through their mobile
devices. (http://www.facebook.com, 2011). According to research by Amas (2011), the
Facebook app is the most used smartphone app amongst Ireland’s 1.94 million Facebook
users. YouTube’s 490 million unique users 2 spend approximately 2.9 billion hours on its
website every month, while there are over 175 million Twitter accounts worldwide with in
excess of 200 million tweets per day.
Against a backdrop of such impressive figures, many within the education community have
recognised that they cannot ignore social media and have begun to explore what social
media can offer their disciplines. Priego (2011) argues that “academics are trained to
manage data streams and to make informed appraisals of the sources we find. These skills
suit social media perfectly” and it is this evaluation of social media tools for learning that
educators can easily engage with. In addition, since alternative forms of assessment and
student engagement are hot topics at the moment, there is an appetite to look beyond the
traditional methods to find something more meaningful to the learner.
Experiences with TEL: a qualitative analysis
The discussion surrounding social media in education prompted the team responsible for
the delivery of the LIN module on Technology Enhanced Learning in AIT to incorporate a
number of social media elements into its design. This module fits into the overall framework
for LIN CPD (see figure 2) on a pathway towards a Postgraduate Diploma in Learning and
Teaching and was delivered over the second semester of the academic year 2010-2011.
2
This figure refers to the main YouTube website & doesn’t include embedded videos or videos watched on
mobile devices.
17

19. Figure 2: LIN’s Flexible Pathway to Postgraduate Diploma
The two main objectives for including a social media element were to encourage discussion
about the role of social media in education and to give participants an opportunity to use
and evaluate social media tools as part of the module. Outlining the benefits and challenges
of social media, Page (2011) refers to the importance of the experiential process of learning.
The aim was to give participants the student experience and allow them to evaluate social
media tools from a learner’s perspective, as well as from the educator’s perspective.
The group (n=12) made up of lecturers came from the following disciplines:
Creative Arts Life& Physical Sciences
Software Engineering Administration
Hospitality, Tourism & Leisure Music Technology
Business Web design
Languages
Choosing from the myriad of social media tools is a challenge for the newcomer. Different
specialisations require different skills to be evaluated and the group engaged in an energetic
discussion about the potential intrusion of educators into the personal space of the student.
Moodle was the VLE of choice and participants were required to contribute to a number of
online discussion forums, in addition to maintaining a Wordpress blog for the duration of
the module. Two classroom sessions were organised to allow for group discussion; one face-
to-face and one using the distance classroom Adobe Connect with a chat window to
facilitate interaction. Participants were invited to follow the TEL blog, which included a
Twitter feed and were provided with training in the use of the social media tools.
In order to gain insight into the participants’ knowledge of social media, they were asked
the following questions:
Do you use social media?
Five participants indicated they didn’t use social media at all, while one had used
Soundcloud, three had a Twitter account and three had set up a blog.
18

20. What does social media mean to you?
“Social networking - new way of interacting”
“Tools which facilitate communication between learners, not just via teacher”
“Sites for online group interaction”
“Using web technologies to encourage communication”
“A way of communicating with a wider audience through social networking tools”
“I suppose using any of the technologies that allow interaction”
“It is a tool to communicate with a wider audience”
“Computer technology with interaction with people”
“Anything that allows people to interact with each other: student-teacher, student-
student”
“Any web technology that allows learning to take place”
“Any media that allows communication”
The group was also invited to reflect on Bloom’s digital taxonomy, created by Andrew
Churches (2009), which attempts to incorporate web 2.0 technologies into Bloom’s original
taxonomy.
Figure 3: Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy
Looking at Bloom’s digital taxonomy, what are your views on incorporating social media
into your modules?
“Good ideas for L&T strategies and assessment”
“It will credit to students who are using these mediums when working in groups and doing
presentations”
“Applying and creating - the importance of good design should not be underestimated in the
LO”
“It’s good to see that perhaps the educationalists are catching up......”
“How much extra time has it taken you to incorporate this into your classes, as it seems
endless...”
19

21. “Have you found student performance has improved?”
“It's because it's such a massive area that keeping track of the resources /tools is crucial, it
seems to me.”
“That’s what I'm hoping for that they (students) interact outside the 2hr class/lab”
Given that “effective teachers are by definition reflective practitioners” (Kapranos, 2007, p8),
the group was also invited to reflect on whether they could (or would) incorporate social
media into the delivery or assessment of their individual subject areas. At the end of the
module, the participants were asked if the discussion on / use of social media tools during
the TEL module to help [them] gain a better understanding of these?
“Absolutely! Exposure to the range of tools and potential of these from an educational
perspective was great. To hear the experience of participants who had used some of the
social media tools was useful.”
“The TEL module definitely inspired me to explore the world of social media, and although I
know I’m only at the tip of the iceberg I have actually begun using it more.”
“Have I gained a better understanding yes, I would have been familiar with a lot of the tools
but to actually use them no. It may be just me, but I didn't use the blog after the course, I
think it depends on the person. I'm not usually a forum person (usually a lurker...) but I liked
helping out some of the other participants with problems.[…]
[…] the discussion of social media did help me understand social media better.
Finally, they were asked if they had actually used any social media activities into their
teaching since completion of the module.
“I am using Moodle blogs/journal and Moodle discussion forums. I also use YouTube. Have
not ventured into twitter/Facebook etc. as I do not think these are used for work purposes
(personal opinion!) by our students and they are already distracted enough!”
“I now routinely use YouTube clips in class. Whereas before I might have vaguely mentioned
it to the students, now I use the clips as a learning tool.
I now use forums on Moodle, routinely for news and information, Q&A, but this year I’m also
using them for formative assessment.
One of my lab groups are using a Wordpress blog to write up a lab report.
And finally I use Twitter for my own research. One of the big issues I had before was trying
to keep up with the most current research in my area, now I get tweets from the main
players so I feel like I am part of the action again. As tweets are so concise I find that I can
scan through them easily and decide what I want to investigate further when I have the
chance.”
“[…] I'm afraid I haven't been very innovative this semester - more of the same stuff -
Forums, Journal etc. […]I have to say I am not a great fan of Facebook. If you haven't
checked in in a couple of days, it doesn't show you ALL the activity. . If only people would
move over to Google Plus...”
“No would be the answer. […]I did put a help forum on my moodle page for each of my
classes, but so far no posts. Some of the activities on social networking don't lend themselves
to some engineering courses, my subject are mathematical (programming etc.) so getting
20

22. them programming versus discussions for me is better, I would like to encourage more of the
problem solving forum as this could be good but so far no joy.”
The conclusions one could draw from the first iteration of this module, is that educators are
actively seeking new ways to connect with students and social media may provide them
with a channel that is both familiar and appealing. The on-going narrative from academics
indicates that communication and interaction are central themes in our teaching. While we
are at different places in this social media stream and may indeed be digital immigrants, we
are also the gatekeepers of these technologies within education. Recognising that the
change is already here and we must adapt or lose contact with future generations is an
important decision that academics must make.
First year student engagement
Having discussed the relevance of social media within the community of educators, it was
appropriate to explore what learners thought and to this end a survey of first year students
was carried out during a 10 day period in October 2011 in Athlone Institute of Technology in
an attempt to find out a little more about the social media habits of students arriving into
Higher Education, and whether they believe there could be cross-over between their
personal networks and their formal learning. Ruth Page (2011) refers to a recent JISC study 3
in the UK which showed that “while undergraduate students engaged actively with social
media in their personal lives, they weren’t always sure of its relevance to their learning”. This
pilot survey focused on ascertaining if this was also true of Irish students entering third level
education.
First years were chosen primarily because they have spent their teenage years in the
company of Bebo and Facebook, and would fit the description of Prensky’s digital native
perfectly. According to Prensky (2010), these digital natives have adopted new technologies
readily, using them to create and communicate within their own online and offline
networks. Baird & Fisher (2005) refer to the “neomillenial student”, who is part of a world
where smartphones are ubiquitous, social networking sites their preferred means of
communication and always-on connectivity allows access to a global learning community.
The survey was distributed to students on a range of programmes across the four Schools
within the Institute, namely Business, Humanities, Science and Engineering Respondents
(n=202) included a mix of mature students (<23 years) (25%) and school leavers (39%). The
majority of respondents were female, with only 25% of respondents male.
Initially, they were asked if they had heard of or if they had an account with a range of social
media sites.
3
Joint Information Systems Committee, with the aim of encouraging the use of digital technology in research,
teaching and learning. See http://www.jisc.ac.uk/.
21

23. Interestingly, a number of students hadn’t considered their VLE to have a social media
element until this point. Also, everyone who completed the survey had heard of Google,
Facebook and YouTube, whilst a large number had never heard of the two most popular
blogging tools, Wordpress and Blogger (155, 102 respondents respectively) or the virtual
world Second Life (156 respondents).
Students were also asked about their usage patterns on their favourite social media sites
and not surprisingly, Facebook was the most popular, followed by Google and YouTube.
How often would you access the site you rated your most favourite?
About Several Several
Once per
Never Less often once per times per times a
day
week week day
No. of
0 0 3 39 40 117
respondents
What did you do on your last visit to a social networking site (e.g. Facebook, Bebo, MySpace,
LinkedIn, etc.)?
22

24. Moving from their personal space into education, students were asked if they had used any
of the social media tools listed as part of their coursework.
Google Docs
Micro-blogs
Networking
YouTube
realities
Moodle
Forums
Virtual
games
Social
Social
Email
Blogs
Sites
No. of
59 79 7 80 15 40 8 2 131 188
respondents
There has been a notable increase in the use of YouTube as a teaching tool, with 39% of
respondents saying they had used YouTube as part of their coursework. The collaborative
tool, Google Docs was used by 40% of respondents, but one wonders if the initiative was led
by the instructors or the students.
Interestingly, while Moodle has been adopted by the Institute as the VLE of choice, only 93%
said they had used it for their coursework, where one would expect usage to be at 100%.
Finally, students were asked if they thought that the activities listed should be included as
part of their coursework:
23

25. Again, it is interesting to note that in most cases students were in favour of using these new
channels within an educational context, with both social networks (52%) and online videos
(62%) garnering most support.
Conclusion
Our educational system exists within an ever-changing social and economic environment. In
Ireland, the National Strategy for Higher Education (NSHE) was borne out of a need for
rationalisation and will shape our educational system of the future. This report makes
reference to the role that technology will play in the ‘institutional change’ to come. Bradwell
(2009), quoted in the NSHE, 2011, p.48, suggests that “the internet, social networks,
collaborative online tools that allow people to work together more easily, and open access to
content are both the cause of change for universities, and a tool with which they can
respond”.
Over the course of our professional lives as educators, the tools we will use to reach our
students will change a number of times, yet each tool will be approached with caution, until
its usefulness within education is clearly identified. But for now our generation of students
is, to quote Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, “WTF – Wiki Twitter Facebook”.
References
Amas (2011) State of the Net. [Internet], 21. Available from: http://amas.ie/online-
research/state-of-the-net/state-of-the-net-issue-21-summer-2011/7-mobile/ [Accessed 10th
October, 2011].
Baird D. and Fisher M. (2005) Neo-millennial user experience design strategies: utilizing
social networking media to support "always on" learning styles. Journal of Educational
Technology Systems, 34 (1), pp. 5 – 32.
24

26. Bradwell, Peter. (2009) The Edgeless University – Why Higher Education must Embrace
Technology London: Demos 2009, p.8. See http://
www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/edgelessuniversity.pdf. Quoted in
Department of Education. (2011) National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 [ONLINE]
Available at: http://www.hea.ie/files/files/DES_Higher_Ed_Main_Report.pdf. [Accessed 18
November 2011]
Bloom’s digital taxonomy concept map [Online image]. Available from: <
http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Bloom%27s+Digital+Taxonomy >
Forment, M. (2007) A Social Constructionist Approach to Learning Communities: Moodle. In:
Lytras, M and Ambjörn Naeve. ed. Open Source for Knowledge and Learning Management:
Strategies Beyond Tools. London, Idea Group Publishing, pp.369- 380.
Kaplan A., and Haenlein, M. (2010) Users of the world, unite! The challenges and
opportunities of social media. Business Horizons 53 (1), pp.59-68.
Kapranos, P. (2007) 21st Century Teaching & Learning Kolb Cycle & Reflective Thinking as
part of teaching, creativity, innovation, enterprise and ethics to engineers. In: International
Symposium for Engineering Education, 2007, Dublin. Dublin, Dublin City University, pp.3-11.
Learning Innovation Network Flexible Pathway to Progression [Online image]. Available
from: <http://www.linireland.com/lin-pg-diploma.html>
Morrison, C. (2011) An In-Depth Look at the Social Gaming Industry’s Performance and Prospects on
Facebook [Online]. Available at: http://www.insidefacebook.com/2011/01/24/an-in-depth-look-
at-the-social-gaming-industry%E2%80%99s-performance-and-prospects-on-facebook/
[Accessed 9 October 2011].
Nelson, P. (2010) From Friendster To MySpace To Facebook: The Evolution and Deaths Of
Social Networks [Online]. Available at:
http://www.longislandpress.com/2010/09/30/from-friendster-to-myspace-to-facebook-the-
evolution-and-deaths-of-social-networks/ [Accessed 12th October 2011].
Priego, E. (2011) How Twitter will revolutionise academic research and teaching. Higher
Education Network 12 September [Internet blog]. Available from: <
http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2011/sep/12/twitter-
revolutionise-academia-research > [Accessed 21 October 2011]
Social Media Landscape. (2008) [Online image]. Available from:
<http://www.fredcavazza.net/2008/06/09/social-media-landscape/ > [Accessed 10th
October 2011].
25

27. Watters, A. (2010) Number of Virtual World Users Breaks 1 Billion, Roughly Half Under Age
15 [Online]. Available at:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/number_of_virtual_world_users_breaks_the_1_bi
llion.php [Accessed 12th October 2011].
Prensky, M. (2001) Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 (5) October, pp. 1-
6.
_______________________________________________________
Shared Social Video in Higher Education ‘Blended’ Business Programmes
Denis Cullinane
Dun Laoghaire Institute of Art Design and Technology
Introduction
The term ‘Web 2.0’ was first used by O’Reilly Media (O'Reilly, 2005) as a means of capturing
the evolution of the web to what has also been called the ‘read/write web’ or ‘the social
web’. ‘Web 2.0’ is used to describe web applications and services such as blogs, wikis, social
bookmarking/tagging, content management and collaboration, social networking sites,
virtual worlds and digital media sharing sites such as Flickr and YouTube. ‘Web 2.0’ or ‘Social
Web’ is being increasingly used internationally in nearly all areas of higher education,
including academic, administrative and support areas (Franklin & Armstrong, 2008).
YouTube has been one of the most successful media sharing ‘Web 2.0’ sites since its
inception in April 2005, and is estimated to have more than 1bn ‘views’ of its video content
per day. Many media outlets and educational institutions now have dedicated channels on
YouTube for their video content.
Although YouTube is primarily perceived as an entertainment video site, it has a growing
volume of educational video content posted by educators, students and professionals from
all sectors of business and education. It was this ever growing number of ‘educational
videos’ on YouTube and other video sharing sites like Vimeo, TED, and Blip TV that
contributed to the impetus for this study. This research was conducted to explore the
student experience of using ‘Web 2.0’ or social media shared video in blended business
education. Approximately 155-160 videos from digital media sharing sites were used to
introduce emerging Internet and new media applications and technologies to business,
enterprise and arts management students. The majority of the videos were from social
media sharing sites such as YouTube, TED, and Blip TV. The videos were used extensively in
the classroom and online in the Blackboard Virtual Learning Environment (VLE).
There were two objectives for this study:-
To explore the use of shared social media videos as part of an eLearning
resource in a blended business classroom scenario.
26

28. To monitor and obtain student opinions on the eLearning resource used in
class and online on the Blackboard VLE as part of the teaching and learning of ‘Web
2.0’ or ‘Social Media’ applications as tools for the worlds of business, enterprise and
arts management.
The research methods that were used in the study were:-
Ongoing observation of student use of the video content in computer
laboratory sessions.
Semi-structured ‘in situ’ interviews with individuals and small groups of
students at the end of the term. All the interviews were digitally recorded.
Analysis of written reflective review reports at end of year from students on
their usage of the VLE and other applications incorporating a section on the video
content used to introduce the concept of ‘Web 2.0’ Apps' and other learning related
material.
Results and Discussion
The study resulted in qualitative data from observations, interviews, and written reports
from 108 of a potential 140 students across three cohorts. Coding of the statements was
conducted to provide a method for identifying trends in the student attitudes about the
online resource and its video content in particular. Qualitative analysis was limited to
identification of recurring themes in the students’ responses across all data sets; data
gathered by observations of students use in-class, data gathered from semi-structured
interviews, and data gathered from Year End Report comments on video content in the
course.
Analysis of the gathered data was by transcription of all observations and interviews and
then repeated processing of the statements to identify themes. This was achieved by
extracting statements that were all commenting on the same key issues - technical,
navigational, and educational. These extracts were combined with extracts of comments
made in written review reports submitted by students at year end. The range of themes that
emerged from the data analysis is summarized and discussed under the following headings:-
Technical Implications of VLE Embedded Video Content
Screen Design Considerations
Educational Value of Shared Social Video
Curriculum Design Implications of Shared Social Video
Technical Implications of VLE Embedded Video Content
Observation of student usage of the video content embedded in the VLE revealed that
initially there were a number of issues interfering with the effectiveness of the online video
content in the lecture and laboratory sessions.
Access to the VLE was problematic for many students in the first 3 months of
the year due to password, account, server or Java applet issues.
Delays in the loading of video content, if accessed through the VLE, while
direct access to the source site was often quicker. This encouraged students to
‘double click’ on the embedded video in the VLE and then access the source site
directly thus ‘by passing’ any associated text or links in the VLE interface. Students
reported that such delays only occurred while accessing the VLE video on campus.
27

29. Audio element of video was not accessible on campus as students may not
have personal earphones and library PCs may not have sound cards installed. Thus
students were often reliant on the in-built sound systems in the classrooms and
computer labs to hear the content of video chosen by lecturer. It took some time for
students to become familiar with the practicalities of using multimedia in their
learning routine as they did not use such features to any great extent in other
business modules.
Issues around browser compatibility with VLE also had some effect on the
user experience as various browser applications such as Opera & Firefox often
rendered the VLE screen layout differently.
Observing the student engagement with the VLE was an opportunity to assist and guide
their exploration and to gather informal feedback and make ‘field notes’. Some continued
to report ‘technical issues’ throughout the study. Similar issues have been reported by
Williams (2002) as being one of the major barriers to students using technology and have
been highlighted in the JISC Info Kit website entitled Effective Use of Virtual Learning
Environments (2009).
Screen Design Considerations
Navigation limitations of the VLE module interface were strongly evident. As the homepage
interface was being developed on an ongoing basis there were often times when the
interface was challenging for students to navigate through. Thus screen design in the VLE
can be a barrier to student learning with online video, which has to be overcome. While
some students disliked the user interface of the VLE and decided to bypass the VLE and
access videos directly on the source sites, other students liked the pre-selection of videos
from the multitude that are on the source sites such as YouTube. They appreciated the work
conducted in selecting the videos and the structure or scaffolding that the VLE gave to the
use of video in their learning. This may be due to the VLE interface acting as a kind of blinker
to filter out the surrounding distracting content on source sites.
These findings are consistent with findings of Kay and Knaack (2007) that ‘organization of
the layout, learner control, clear instructions and theme were critical hotspots where the
use of learning objects enhanced or inhibited learning’ (p.24). Poor navigational design is
often included under the general heading of poor usability, but navigational complexity was
singled out as a particular problem in VLEs by several respondents in a study by Dunn
(2003).
The empirical study by Parizotto-Ribeiro, Hammond, Mansano, & Cziulik, (2004) found a
positive relationship between aesthetics and perceived usability when using a VLE. The
implementation of instruction design principles and procedures is thus ever more important
in an increasingly complex blended learning environment incorporating online shared social
media such as video.
Educational Value of Shared Social Video
Of the 107 students who submitted reports 76% commented positively on the video content
in the VLE with 24% not commenting on the use of video in the online resource supporting
the programmes.
28

30. There was a range of opinions and attitudes expressed in the interviews and the reports
towards the video content and the medium through which it was delivered. Videos are not
for everyone and about 24% of students appeared to be indifferent to them and did not use
them to any great extent as they may have considered video a waste of time in an
educational context.
This seems to concur with Carvin (2007) and Snelson and Perkin’s (2009) reports on
educational value and that, for some students, the use of social video is not serious enough
in an educational setting and they may consider it as detrimental in terms of time.
Conversely about 76% of students believed that videos are a good way to learn, a different
way to learn, a break from reading lots of text and a good way to get ‘the big picture’ on the
use of Internet Applications in business. This is consistent with the findings of Conole et al
(2008) that ‘students are using a different range of e-learning strategies and appropriating
the tools to meet their own needs’ (p.522).
Of the 81(76%) students, who commented critically on the online video content, all were
generally favourable for mostly the same reasons that online video is easy and interesting to
use in a learning situation. This is in alignment with research showing that nearly four-fifths
of college students (79%) agree that the Internet has a positive impact on their college
experience (Jones, 2002).
Curriculum Design Implications of Shared Social Video
The reasons for 26 (24%) of students not making any comment on the video content in their
reports can only be deduced from observations made in-class and by some of the negative
comments received in both the interviews and in the reports.
Videos need to be relevant and related to learning activities and assessment; they need to
be short and direct. They may not engage many of the learners unless they have specific
relevant information. The need for such video to be ‘coupled with hands on learning’, as
indicated by Duffy (2008, p.125) and also argued by Karpinnen (2005) and the seminal work
of Laurillard (1993) in which she argues that ‘knowledge must be used in authentic activity
in order to form a full understanding of the knowledge and how it operated’ (p.17).
Most students also seemed to prefer good quality and short duration videos as first
indicated by research into educational film in the 1920s as described by Saettler (2004).
Snelson & Perkins (2009) indicate how ‘the idea of short single concept film relates well to
the current video clip phenomenon’ (p.11).
Conclusions and Recommendations
The range of shared online video content suitable for use in Higher Education is becoming
extensive and is likely to do so over the coming years. Incorporating such video into the
learning environment is also becoming easier. However as outlined by Karppinen (2005),
Snelson (2008)and Bonk (2008) videos are just one component in the complexity of a
blended classroom activity.
29

31. In this study a range of approximately 160 social media shared videos were used in a
blended business classroom to introduce students to emerging new media Internet
applications and technologies. In the face-to-face classroom or computer laboratory it was
observed that these videos were an important asset in attracting and maintaining student
attention and creating a context for learning tasks and discussions in business related topics.
In the blended business classroom online video is only part of the learning mix and there are
advantages and disadvantages in the use of such video online in the Blackboard VLE. The
design of the VLE user interface needs to be monitored to ensure that it is user friendly and
supportive of the learning process. In today’s world of engaging social media sites like
Facebook and Twitter the danger of information overload and subsequent learner switch off
is very apparent. However there is also a possible advantage of the VLE, which can act as
filter to remove related distracting information and replace it with information to guide the
learning tasks and activities associated with an embedded video.
The purpose and content of the video has to be apparent to students. Some students may
have low expectations of what can be learned from video and may not be visual learners.
Thus the content needs to be both relevant and be seen to be relevant. Linking activity with
the video appears to be important to most learners as highlighted by Karppinen (2005).
In this study it would appear that many higher education business students like the concept
of learning with shared social video but it needs to be short in duration, relevant, focused
and linked with assessment and learning outcomes. Students appear to like the addition of
video to the mix of learning materials in a blended classroom but also need guidance and
support in using it to maximum effect. The design of the user interfaces and the learning
activities and assessment procedures are key to its success.
From the lecturer angle it is a time consuming process to pre-select videos for use in
teaching and online virtual learning and it might be better to allow the students to become
involved in this process and thus become active in constructing their own perspective on the
knowledge of a particular subject or topic. In the year following this study, a video
production project was built into the assessment for one cohort of students and it proved
very successful. Thus the task was moving in the direction advised by Karppinen (2005) of
being active, constructive, collaborative, conservational, contextual, guided, emotionally
involving and engaging.
More research, like that of Burden and Atkinson (2007, 2008 ) on developing a video
learning designs framework to engage learners in higher level cognitive activities using ten
different ‘learning designs’ in a variety of ‘learning spaces’, is required. Their initial learning
designs included stimulation-engagement, narrative or storytelling, collaborative,
conceptual, problem solving, student authoring, empathy or role play and figurative or
allegorical uses of video.
This increasing use of social web-based video in education indicates the need for evaluation
studies designed to investigate the potential value or pitfalls in this rapidly evolving
phenomenon (Snelson, 2008). The kinds of ‘digital pedagogies’ that work in these digital
social spaces and how they are perceived and experienced by students was one of the
questions remaining to be answered (Hemmi, Bayne, & Land, 2009). Further research is also
30

32. required on the forms of ‘technoliteracy’ required by students to manage and produce
academic knowledge within such spaces (Kahn & Kelner, 2005).
References
Aesthetics and perceived usability of VLEs: preliminary results. Parizotto-Ribeiro, R, et al. 2004. 2004.
HCI 2004 Proceedings . pp. 217-221.
An Assessment of Faculty Usage of YouTube as a Teaching Resource. Burke, S, Synder, S and Rager,
R C. 2009. 1, 2009, Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Pratice, Vol. 7, pp. 1-7.
http://ijahsp.nova.edu ISSN 1540-580X.
Burke, S, Synder, S and Rager, R C. 2009. 1, 2009, Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Pratice, Vol.
7.
An Assessment of Faculty Usage of YouTube as a Teaching Resource. Burke, Sloane C, Ryder, Shonna
and Rager, Robin C. 2009. 1, Jan 2009, The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice,
Vol. 7.
Analysis Based Problem solving: making analysis and reasoning the focus of physics instruction.
Leonard, J. W., Gerace, W. J. and Dufresne, R. J. 2002. 2002, Science Teaching, pp. 1-23.
Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Mayer, R E and Moreno, R. 2002. 1, 2002, Educational
Psychology Review, Vol. 14, pp. 87-99.
Beyond Content: Developing Transferable Learning Designs with Digital Video Archives. Burden,
Kevin and Atkinson, Simon. 2008. Chesapeake, VA : ACCE, 2008. In Proceedings of World
Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008. pp. 4041-4030.
Bielawski, L and Metcalf, D. 2003. Blended eLearning: Integrating knowledge, performance support,
and online learning. Amherst, MA : HRD Press, 2003.
—. 2003. Blended eLearning: Integrating knowledge, performance support, and online learning. .
Amherst, MA : HRD Press, 2003.
Blended Learning in Virtual Communications Classroom: Student Reflections on a Multimedia Course.
George-Palilonis, Jennifer and Filak, Vincent. 2009. 2009, Electronic Journal of eLearning, pp. 247-
256.
Blended Learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Garrison, R and
Vaughan, H. 2004. 2004, Internet and Higher Education, pp. 95-105.
Blended Learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Garrison, R and
Vaughan, H. 2004. 2004, Internet and Higher Education, pp. 95-105.
Bonk, Curtis J. 2009. The World is Open: How Web Technology Is Revolutionizing Education. San
Francisco : Jossey-Bass, 2009.
31

33. —. 2008. YouTube Anchors and Enders: The Use of Shared Online Video Content as a Macrocontext
for Learning. PublicationShare. [Online] 23rd March 2008. [Cited: 13th June 2010.] Paper presented
at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) 2008 Annual Meeting, New York, NY..
http://www.publicationshare.com/SFX7EED.pdf.
Cann, Alan J. 2007. Podcasting is Dead. Long Live Video. Bioscience Education eJournal. [Online]
2007. [Cited: 18th August 2010.] http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol10/beej-10-
C1.pdf.
—. 2007. Podcasting is Dead. Long Live Video. Bioscience Education eJournal. [Online] 2007.
http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol10/beej-10-C1.pdf.
Carvin, A. 2007. Learning now:At the crossroads of Internet culture and education. YouTube 101: Yes
it's a real class. [Online] 18 September 2007. [Cited: 20 August 2010.]
Classroom response systems: a review of the literature. Fies, C. and Marshall, J. 2006. 2006, Journal
of Science Education and Technology.
Clickers in the large classroom: current research and best practice tips. . Caldwell, J. 2007. 2007, Life
Sciences Education, pp. 9-20.
Cloudworks: Social Networking for learning design. Conole, Gráinne, et al. 2008. Melbourne :
Ascilite, 2008. Proceedings ascilite Melbourne 2008. pp. 187-196.
Cognitive Pronciples of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Moreno, R and
Mayer, R E. 1999. 1999, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 91, pp. 358-368.
Cohen, J. W. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
Cohen, L, Mannion, L and Morrison, K. 2007. Research Methods in Education. New York : Routledge,
2007.
Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. 2009. Higher Education in a Web 2.0
World. London : The Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience, 2009. p.
www.clex.org.uk.
Deal, A. 2007. Teaching with Technology White Paper: Podcasting. Educause CONNECT. [Online]
2007. [Cited: 10 August 2010.] http://connect.educause.edu/files/CMU_Podcasting_Jun07.pdf.
'Disruptive technologies', 'pedagogical innovation': What's new? Findings from an in-depth study of
students' use and perception of technology. Conole, Grainne, et al. 2008. 2, 2008, Computers and
Education, Vol. 50, pp. 511-524. Available online www.sciencedirect.com.
Conole, Grainne, et al. 2007. 2007, Computers and Education, pp. 511-524.
Dunn, S. 2003. Return to SENDA? Implementing accessibility for disabled students in virtual learning
environments in UK further and higher education. Sara Dunn VLE Report. [Online] 2003. [Cited: 27th
August 2010.] http://www.saradunn.net/VLEreport/documents/VLEreport.pdf.
32

34. 2009. Effective Use of Virtual Learning Environments. JISC infoNet. [Online] 2009. [Cited: 27th August
2010.] http://www.bisinfonet.ac.uk/InfoKits/effective-use-of-VLEs/intro-to-VLEs/introtovle-moving-
forward/introtovle-issues.
E-Learning: The Hype and the Reality. Conole, G. 2004. 12, 28th Sept 2004, Journal of Interactive
Media in Education. www- jime. open. ac. uk/ 2004/ 12].
Engaging the YouTube Google-Eyed Generation: Strategies for Using Web 2.0 in Teaching and
Learning. Duffy, Peter. 2008. 2008, Electronic Journal of e-Learning, pp. 119-130. available online at
www.ejel.org.
Evaluating the learning in learning objects. Kay, Robin H and Knaack, Liesel. 2007. 2007, Open
Learning, Vol. 22, pp. 5-28.
Exploring the synergy between pedagogical research, teaching and learning in introducotry physics.
Wallace, L. 2010. Dublin : NAIRTL, 2010. LIN Conference: Flexible Learning.
Facilitating an authentic learning experience in introductory physics at the Limerick Institute of
Technology. Wallace, L. and Boyle, L. 2010. Dublin : Castel, 2010. SMEC2010: Inquiry based learning:
facilitating authentic learning experiences in science and mathematics. pp. 19-24.
Factors Influencing the Usage of Websites. Heijden, van der H. 2003. 2003, Netherlands Information
and Management, Vol. 40, pp. 541-549.
Faculty Perceptions on the Use of Video in a Hybrid Faculty Orientation Course. Arakaki, Margret.
2009. Hawaii : Technology Colleges Community (TCC) Worldwide Online Conference, 2009. TCC
Proceedings 2009. pp. 1-5.
Felder, R. 2011. Learning Styles. Resources in Science and Engineering Education. [Online] 14 August
2011. [Cited: 10 September 2011.]
http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Learning_Styles.html.
Franklin, T and van Harmelen, M. 2007. Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in Higher
Education. UK. s.l. : JISC, 2007.
Franklin, Tom and Armstrong, Jill. 2008. A review of current and developing international practice in
the use of social networking (Web 2.0) in higher education. Manchester : Frankling Consulting &
CLEX, 2008.
Franklin, Tom and van Harmelen, Mark. 2007. Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in
Higher Education. UK : JISC, 2007.
From Silent Film to YouTube: Tracing the Historical Roots of Motion Picture Technologies in
Education. Snelson, Chareen and Perkins, Ross. 2009. 2009, Journal of Visual Literacy, Vol. 28, pp. 1-
27.
Graham, C. 2006. Blended learning systems. Definitions, current trends and future directions. [book
auth.] C Bonk and C Graham. The handbook of blended learning: Global persoectives, local designs.
San Francisco : John Wiley and Sons, 2006.
33

35. —. 2006. Blended learning systems. Definitions, current trends and future directions. [book auth.] C
Bonk and C Graham. The handbook of blended learning: Global persoectives, local designs. San
Fransico : John Wiley and Sons, 2006.
Guardian Online. 2010. University guide: Open University Our at-a-glance guide to the Open
University. Guardian.co.uk/education. [Online] 8 June 2010. [Cited: 9 June 2010.]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/may/10/universityguide-open-uni.
Heller, P. and Heller, K. 1999. Cooperative Group Problem solving in physics. University of
Minnesota Physics Education Research and Development. [Online] 1999. [Cited: 10 September 2009.]
http://groups.physics.umn.edu/physed/Research/CGPS/GreenBook.html.
How are universities involved in blended instruction? Oh, Eunjoo and Park, Suhong. 2009. 3, 2009,
Educational Technology and Society, Vol. 12, pp. 327-342.
Interactive engagement vs traditional methods: a six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data
for introductory physics courses. Hake, R. R. 1998. 1998, American Journal of Physics.
JISC. 2008. Evaluation the Tanglible Benefits of E-learning. Newcastle : JISC, 2008.
Jones, S. 2002. Pew Internet & American Life Project. The Internet Goes to College: How students are
living in the future with today's technology. [Online] 15 September 2002. [Cited: 21 August 2010.]
http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2002/PIP_College_Report.pdf.pdf.
Jumping on the YouTube bandwagon? Using digital video clips to develop personalised. Burden,
Kevin and Atkinson, Simon. 2007. Singapore : s.n., 2007. ASCILITE. p. Poster.
Jumping on the YouTube bandwagon? Using digital video clips to develop personalised learning
strategies. Burden, Kevin and Atkinson, Simon. 2007. s.l. :
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/burden-poster.pdf, 2007. In
ICT:Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singpore 2007. pp. 96-98.
Just in Time Teaching: active learner pedagogy with www. Novak, G. and Patterson, E. 1998.
Cancun, Mexico : s.n., 1998. International conference on computers and advanced technology in
eduation.
Keelan, Jennifer. 2007. YouTube as a Source of Information on Immunization: A Content Analysis.
Journal of American Medical Asociation. [Online] 5 December 2007. [Cited: 13th June 2010.]
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/298/21/2482.
Keelan, Jennifer;. 2007. YouTube as a Source of Information on Immunization: A Content Analysis.
Journal of American Medical Asociation. [Online] 5 December 2007. [Cited: 13th June 2010.]
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/298/21/2482.
Keller, J. 2006. Motivational Design. ARCS Model. [Online] 2006. [Cited: 29 August 2011.]
www.arcsmodel.org.
Knight, R. D. 2002. An instructors guide to introductory physics. San Fransisco, CA : Addison Wesley,
2002.
34

36. Kristen Purcell. 2010. State-of-Online-Video . Pew Internet and American Life Project. [Online] 3rd
June 2010. [Cited: 10th June 2010.] http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/State-of-Online-
Video.aspx.
Kuhlmann, Tom. 2009. The rapid elearning Blog-Are Your E-Learning Courses Pushed or Pulled?
Articulate. [Online] 19 May 2009. [Cited: 21 October 2011.] http://www.articulate.com/rapid-
elearning/are-your-e-learning-courses-pushed-or-pulled.
Laurillard, D. 1993. Rethinking university teaching. A framework for the effective use of educational
technology. London : Routledge, 1993.
Learner and Instructioal Factors Influencing Learner Outcomes within a Blended Learning
Environment. Lim, Hun Doo and Morris, Lane Michael. 2009. 4, 2009, Educational Technology and
Society, Vol. 12, p. 282 293.
—. Lim, Hun Doo and Morris, Lane Michael. 2009. 2009, Educational Technology and Society, p. 282
293.
Learning online: a review of recent literature in a rapidly expanding field. Williams, C. 2002. 3, 2002,
Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 26.
Learning to think like a physicist: a review of research based instructional strategies. Van Heuvelen,
A. 1991. 1991, American Journal of Physics, pp. 891-897.
LeCompte, M and Preissle, J. 1993. Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research.
London : Academic Press, 1993.
—. 1993. Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research. 2nd . London : Academic
Press, 1993. p. 108.
Lorencova, Viera. 2008. YouTube Dilemmas: The Appropriaton of User-Generated Online Videos in
Teaching and Learning. Currents in Teaching and Learning. Fall, 2008, Vol. 1, 1, pp. 62-71.
—. 2008. YouTube Dilemmas: The Appropriaton of User-Generated Online Videos in Teaching and
Learning. Currents in Teaching and Learning. Fall, 2008, Vol. 1, 1.
Marsh II, G E, McFadden, A C and Price, B P. 2004. Blended Instruction: Adapting conventional
instrument for large classes. The Univerisity of Alabama : Institute for Interactive Technology, 2004.
Mayer, R E and Moreno, R. 1998. A cognitive theory for multimedia learning:Implications for design
principles. [Online] 1998. [Cited: 10 August 2010.] http://www.unm.edu/~moreno/PDFS/chi.pdf.
—. 2002. Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Educational Psychological Review. 2002, Vol.
14, 1, pp. 87-99.
Mayer, R E. 2001. Multimedia Learning. New York : Cambridge University Press., 2001.
Mazur, E. 1997. Peer Instruction. New Jersey : Prentice Hall, 1997.
35

37. Meaningful Learning with Digital and Online Videos: Theoretical Perspectives. Karppinen, Paivi.
2005. 2005, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) Journal, pp. 233-
250.
Micolich, Adam. 2008. How I learned to stop worrying and love YouTube. University World News.
[Online] 2008. [Cited: 13th June 2010.]
http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20081127124726106.
Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Burke Johnson, R and
Onwueguzie, Anthony J. 2004. 7, 2004, Educational Researcher, Vol. 33, pp. 14-26.
New Approaches, new vision: capturing teacher experiences in a brave new online world. Connolly,
Michael, Jones, Cath and Jones, Norah. 2007. 1, 2007, Open Learning, Vol. 22, pp. 43-56.
No single cause: Learning gains, student attitudes, and the impacts of multiple effective reforms.
Pollock, S. J. 2004. 2004. Physics Education Research Conference.
O'Reilly, T. 2005. What is Web 2.0? O'Reilly Media. [Online] 2005. [Cited: 9th August 2010.]
http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html.
Purcell, K. 2010. State-of-Online-Video. Pew Internet and American Life Project. [Online] 3rd June
2010. [Cited: 10th June 2010.] http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/State-of-Online-Video.aspx.
Purcell, Kristen. 2010. State-of-Online-Video. Pew Internet and American Life Project. [Online] 3rd
June 2010. [Cited: 10th June 2010.] http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/State-of-Online-
Video.aspx.
Reconstructing Technoliteracy: a multiple literacies approach. Kahn, K and Kelner, D. 2005. 3, 2005,
E-Learning, Vol. 2, pp. 238-251.
Redish, E. F. 2003. Teaching Physics with the Physics Suite. Hobokern, NJ : John Wiley & Sons, Inc,
2003.
Replicating and understanding successful innovations: Implementing tutorials in introductory physics.
Finkelstein, N. D. and Pollock, S. J. . 2005. 2005, Physical Review Special Topics - PER, pp. 1-13.
RL-PER1: Resource letter on physics education research. McDermott, L. C. and Redish, E. F. 1999.
1999, Te American Journal of Physics.
Rossett, A, Douglis, F and Frazee, R. 2003. Strategies for building blended learning. Learning Circuits.
[Online] 2003. [Cited: 9th June 2010.] http://www.essentiallearning.net/news/Strategies for Building
Blended Learning.pdf.
Saettler, P. 2004. The evolution of American educational technology. . Greenwich : CT: Information
Age Publishing, 2004.
Screen design: a location of information and its effects on learning. Aspillagae, M. 1991. 3, 1991,
Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, Vol. 18, pp. 89-92.
36

38. Snelson, Chareen and Perkins, Ross. 2009. From Silent Film to YouTube: Tracing the Historical Roots
of Motion Picture Technologies in Education. Journal of Visual Literacy. 2009, Vol. 28, pp. 1-27.
Sokoloff, D and Thornton, R. 2004. Interactive lecture demonstrations, active learning in
introductory physics. s.l. : Wiley, 2004.
Studying conceptual change in learning physics. Dykstra, D. I., Boyle, C. F. and Monarch, I. A. 1992.
1992, Science Education, pp. 615-652.
Success factors for blended learning. Stacey, Elizabeth and Gerbic, Philippa. 2008. 2008. Proceedings
Ascilite Melbourne 2008. pp. 964-968.
—. Stacey, Elizabeth and Gerbic, Philippa. 2008. 2008. Proceedings ascilite Melbourne 2008. pp.
964-968.
The appropriation and repurposing of social technologies in higher education. Hemmi, Akiko, Bayne,
Sian and Land, Ray. 2009. 2009, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, pp. 19-30.
The constructivist view in science education- what it has to offer and what should not be expected
from it. Duit, R. 1994. Concepcion, Chile : s.n., 1994. Proceedings of the International conference
"Science and Mathematics for the 21st century: towards innovatory approaches.
the implication of cognitive studies for teaching physics. Redish, E. F. 1994. 1994, American Journal
of Physics, pp. 796-803.
The New Media Consortium & EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. 2010. The 2010 Horizon Report.
Stanford : The New Media Consortium, 2010.
The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different
media. Mayer, R. 2003. 2003, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 13, pp. 125-139.
—. Mayer, R. 2003. 2003, Learning and Instruction, pp. 125-139.
The relationship between high school students' motivational and metacognitive factors in science
learning and their science achievment. Lan, W. and Skoog, G. 2003. Chicago, Illinois : s.n., 2003.
American Educational Research Association 2003 Annual Meeting.
The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Ericsson, K., Krampe, R. and
Tesch-Romer, C. 1993. 1993, Psychological Review, pp. 363-404.
Towards characterising the relationship between students' interest in and their beliefs about physics.
Perkins, K. K., et al. 2005. 2005. Proceedings of the PERC.
Ward, K. 2003. An Ethnographic Study of Internt Consumption in Ireland: Between Domesticity and
the Public Participation. DCU : European Media and Technology in Everyday Life Network, 2003.
Web-based Video in Education: Possibilities and Pitfalls. Snelson, Chareen. 2008. Hawaii :
Technology, Colleges, Community(TCC) Worldwide Online Conference, 2008. TCC 2008 Proceedings.
pp. 214-221.
37

39. What makes physics difficult. Ornek, F., Robinson, W. and Haugan, M. 2008. 2008, International
Journal of Environmental and Science Education, pp. 30-34.
YouTube comes to the classroom. Adam, A and Mowers, H. 2007. 50, 2007, School Library Journal,
pp. 408-412.
YouTube Dilemmas: The Appropriaton of User-Generated Online Videos in Teaching and Learning.
Lorencova, Viera. 2008. 1, s.l. : Worchester Edu/Currents, 2008, Vol. 1, pp. 62-71.
YouTube: An Innovative Learning Resource for College Health Education Courses. Burke, Sloane C
and Synder, Shonna L. 2008. 11, 2008, International Electronic Journal of Health Education, pp. 39-
46.
_______________________________________________________
Action Accounting: supporting the first year student
Frances Boylan, Tony Kiely, Alice Luby
Dublin Institute of Technology
Introduction
The Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT) is one of the largest and most innovative higher
education (HE) institutions in Ireland with over 1,545 academic staff and approximately
20,000 registered students. Emphasising distinction in learning, teaching, scholarship,
research, and support for entrepreneurship, DIT combines the academic excellence of a
traditional university with career-focussed learning and discovery. It is also committed to
nurturing innovation and creativity and making higher education accessible to all
(www.dit.ie/about/about-dit/mission). All efforts to facilitate student-centred learning,
enhance the first year experience, and improve first year retention rates, are whole-
heartedly supported, and indeed encouraged, at DIT. In addition, given the government’s
plan to double by 2013 the number of students with sensory, physical and multiple
disabilities participating in HE, DIT is faced currently with the challenge of promoting an
inclusive learning environment and supporting its staff adapt their teaching approaches to
accommodate these students.
This paper details a project initiated by a cross-faculty group of accounting lecturers who
were concerned about the number of first year students experiencing difficulties with
accounting modules and so not engaging with the subject, particularly those for whom the
traditional classroom setting can prove a barrier to their learning. Furthermore, the needs of
dyslexic students became apparent early in the project and so their specific learning needs
were factored in also.
Anxious to improve and enhance the learning experience of these students, and encouraged
by the body of research available on the educational value of simulations and games for
learning, the team explored the feasibility of developing interactive online accounting
38