1. D. DeWitt, Norlidah Alias & Saedah Siraj,
Department of Curriculum & Instructional Technology,
Faculty of Education,
University Malaya
Kuala Lumpur
Paper presented at:
International Educational Technology Conference (IETC 2015)
Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
27 - 29 May 2015.

2. 1. Introduction
2. Problem Statement
3. Purpose of the Study
4. Method
5. Results and Discussion
6. Conclusions and Implications
Teacher, can I have
the internet
password. I need
to check my email.
I thought he
wanted to go
to the toilet

3.  Malaysia Education Blueprint
2015 - 2025 (Higher Education)
 Innovative students
◦ mastery of core subjects
◦ mastery of general knowledge about the world
◦ solve problems by applying, creating, and
connecting knowledge,
◦ use experiential and technology-enabled learning
models for personalised and engaging learning
experiences
Higher level thinking
Teach facts and concepts
More importantly skills:
• acquiring
• Internalizing
• applying and
• creating new knowledge (Ronen &
Pasher, 2011).

4. Research Objectives
In this study an instructional model using a
collaborative learning tool Padlet is implemented to
determine if it can be used for creating new
knowledge.
The following research questions:
 To what extend does the processes of acquiring,
internalization, creation, sharing and application of
knowledge occur during instruction?
 What are the participants’ perceptions of the
interactive debate on Padlet?

5.  Innovative students
Higher level thinking
Teach facts and concepts
More importantly skills:
• acquiring
• Internalizing
• applying and
• creating new knowledge
(Ronen & Pasher, 2011).
Cognitive
and social
processes
during
interactions
Need new
Models of
instruction
for
collaboration
and
knowledge
creation in
higher
education

8.  Design of the Study
Introduction to
Padlet
Instruction on
design of virtual
interactive debate
Implementation
Debate on Virtual
Wall, Padlet:
10 minutes:
Proposers; 10
minutes : rebuttals;
10 minutes:
proposers again;
10 minutes : final
rebuttals.
Questionnaire
(KMQ and SSQ),
Interviews Content
Analysis of written
Communications
Sample
40 First-year
undergraduates
volunteers in a
public university

9. The task:
 To identify the advantages and disadvantages of ICT.
 Students divided into 2 groups.
 An interactive debate on a virtual wall, Padlet, between the 2
groups to list advantages, and disadvantages of ICT in an
interesting and meaning way manner.
 Tasks were done online synchronously in the computer
laboratory during the class.

10. .
Data collection
 Data collected on completion of the tasks through surveys
using questionnaires:
 Triangulation of data from the interviews and the content
analysis of the written documentation of the tasks
Knowledge Management
Process (Kappes & Thomas,1993)
Description
Knowledge Acquisition
Selection of accurate and suitable information, from
internet search or otherwise, to be included in the
documentation
Knowledge Internalization
Reference to prior knowledge made; organizing and
reorganizing the information
Knowledge Creation
Ideas and ways of using the technology for
counseling that is not copied from other sources,
but may be innovated from others
Knowledge Sharing
The information is not hidden but shared with others
freely
Knowledge Application
Knowledge of the use of the tool is applied
specifically to the counseling consultation and work
environment
Instrument
The Knowledge Management Questionnaire (KMQ)
Application of KM processes in interactive debate on Padlet
(Biasutti & El-Deghaidy, 2012).
5-point Likert
Scale KMQ was reliable above the 0.70 standard of reliability, with
a total Cronbach alpha of 0.86.

11. All of the students (digital natives) have never used a
virtual wall like Padlet.
All had succeeded in using Padlet for the task.
Background information on participants’ experience with wiki
All participants were ‘digital natives’
who use social media tools (all of them
use the microblog, Facebook).

12. Domain Mean Std. Deviation
Knowledge Acquisition 4.2750 .57926
Knowledge Internalization 4.1750 .50630
Knowledge Creation 4.1000 .76962
Knowledge Sharing 4.6875 .46254
Knowledge Application 4.4286 .57492
Table 1: Min and standard deviation on Knowledge domains
RQ 1: To what extend does the processes of acquiring,
internalization, creation, sharing and application of knowledge
occur during instruction?

13. RQ 1: To what extend does the processes of acquiring, internalization,
creation, sharing and application of knowledge occur during instruction?
Domain Evidence
Knowledge
Acquisition
“I got to learn new knowledge that was
useful”.
“Many things I did not know, until my friends
shared on the wall”.
“Got to know a variety of ideas that was
shared.”
Observation showed that the students were
actively searching for knowledge using search
engines such as Google. This included
pictures, text, web pages and videos.
As the students searched for information,
they had to evaluate to determine if the
information and materials were relevant.

14. RQ 1: What knowledge management processes occurred during
the solution of the task?
Domain Evidence
Knowledge
Internalization
“I am able to express my ideas better”
“ Able to get others viewpoint and
broaden my knowledge.”
Observation:
This knowledge of the advantages and
disadvantages of ICT had to be
internalized so that new knowledge could
be created among the students.
Students had to use their internalized
knowledge to summarize the information
acquired, or to depict it in graphic form.

15. RQ 1: What knowledge management processes occurred during
the solution of the task?
Domain Evidence
Knowledge
Creation
“Generated new ideas”
“I thought out of the box, creatively and critically, got to train
my mind to think fast and accurately.”
This was However, most of the new knowledge created was
shown through different ways of displaying the knowledge
acquired. The community of learners, the first-year
counseling students, were also learning new things by
observing their friends posts.

16. RQ 1: What knowledge management processes occurred during
the solution of the task?
Domain Evidence
Knowledge
Sharing
“exchanged opinions” ; “Shared opinions openly and
positively with friends.”
“Sharing encouraged better and stronger ideas among us”.
“Information was rapidly shared directly with the group”
The sharing gave the learner a responsibility to ensure
information posted was accurate and well-organized.
Knowledge
Application
“ With Padlet I am able to learn to think fast”
“ The sharing with my friends enabled me to understand
the issues from different perspectives”
“I am able to connect all the information from my friends
post to come up with important information.”
The processes led to the internalization and application of
knowledge:

17. New ICT tool
Knowledge sharing
for community
Interaction and
Collaboration on wall
New Knowledge
created
New application in
practice

20. RQ 2: What are the participants’ perceptions of the interactive debate on
Padlet?
Table 2: Min and standard deviation on Student Satisfaction
Items Mean S. D.
I like to see my friends comments on Padlet 4.5385 0.5970
Padlet enables me to share ideas with my friends 4.7436 0.4385
Because of Padlet, my class members are able to reach
an agreement
4.3077 0.7579
I developed new ideas from the activities on Padlet 4.7436 0.4935
I learned new concepts from the other posts on Padlet 4.4872 0.5991
I learned through collaborative learning with Padlet 4.5128 0.6789
The materials posted on Padlet were clear 3.9744 0.6405
The materials posted on Padlet were useful 4.2564 0.6400
The activity on Padlet was challenging 3.5641 1.0595
I got ideas on the advantages and disadvantages of ICT
from the materials posted on Padlet
4.5128 0.5057

21.  Padlet can be used for an interactive debate for learners to
create new knowledge.
 Interactive debates using a web 2.0 tool for collaboration
enabled the KM processes of acquiring, internalizing, sharing
and applying knowledge to generate new knowledge.
 The generation of new knowledge encouraged higher level
cognitive processes.
Design of instruction using Padlet for interactive debates
was useful for collaboration and creating new knowledge
Collaboration and sharing information for generation of
knowledge enabled processes such as modeling
Encourages creativity and innovation
Combination with other web 2.0 tools and new
instructional models needs to be investigated

22. Thank you