نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 1دانشجوی دکتری برنامه ریزی درسی،گروه علوم تربیتی، واحد اصفهان (خوراسگان)، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اصفهان، ایران

2 2استاد گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

3 3دانشیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران

4 4دانشیار گروه علوم تربیتی، واحد اصفهان (خوراسگان)، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اصفهان، ایران

چکیده

هدف از این پژوهش، شناخت مهمترین موانع و تدوین راهبردهای برنامه درسی برای استفاده اساتید از شبکه اجتماعی درامر آموزش و یادگیری است. در این مطالعه از روش کیفی و شیوه تحلیل داده‌های کیفی مبتنی بر نظریه زمینه‌ای استفاده شد. نظریه زمینه‌ای سه عنصر اصلی دارد که عبارتند از مفاهیم، مضامین و مقولات و محور اصلی روش نظریه زمینه‌ای به شمار می‌رود. در این پژوهش 54 سند با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند به دقت مورد مطالعه و بررسی قرار گرفت و نکات کلیدی آنها یادداشت برداری شد. سپس بر اساس تشابهات، کدهایی به موارد مشابه اختصاص پیدا کرد و کدهای اختصاص داده شده در کشف مقوله‌های استنتاج شده استفاده گردید. با اتکا به منابع و اسناد، مقوله محوری تعیین و از طریق برقراری ارتباط میان مقوله محوری و مقوله‌های فرعی و مفاهیم مرتبط نظریه زمینه‌ای تدوین و طراحی شد. بر مبنای نظریه که از اسناد و منابع نظری به دست آمد، مهمترین موانع به ترتیب اهمیت، نبود امکانات فنی مناسب، عدم زیر ساخت‌های آموزشی و شناخت ناکافی اساتید به دست آمد و مبتنی بر آن راهبردهای سه گانه‌ای تدوین شد که از میان این راهبردها کسب مهارت‌های فنی مهمترین راهبرد و برقراری تعامل پویا در تدریس و مهارت‌های شناختی مرتبط با شبکه اجتماعی در اولویت دوم و سوم قرار داشت. در پرتو شناسایی موانع و راهبردهای به کار گیری شبکه اجتماعی در آموزش می‌توان به بهبود مهارت‌های تدریس و یادگیری دست یافت.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The study of the impact of the disincentive factors and strategies for using social networks on the teaching and the effective learning

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hassan saemi 1
  • , kourosh fathi vajargah 2
  • Mohammad attaran 3
  • ahmad ali foroughi abari 4

چکیده [English]

Considering the social networks, recognizing the most important obstacles in front of the teachers as well as achieving some strategies for using them in education were the chief aim of this study. The qualitative and the analysis of qualitative data methods, based on the grounded theory, have been used in this study. This theory is consisted of three main elements as: concepts, contents, and issues. Using purposive sampling, 54documents were studied carefully and their significant points were noted down. According to the similarities, some codes were assigned to the similar cases. These codes, then, were used to discover the extracted issues. Depended on the sources and the documents, the primary category was determined. Establishing the relationship between the primary and the secondary category with related concepts, the grounded theory has been designed.
According to the theory obtained from the theoretical documents and the resources, some of the most important obstacles recognized as: lack of suitable technical facilities, lack of educational infrastructures, and inadequate knowledge of the teachers. Three strategies have been designed among which acquiring the technical skills is the most important strategy and establishing dynamics interaction in teaching and cognitive skills related to the social networks are the second and the third ones, respectively. In the light of recognizing the obstacles and introducing the needed strategies, social networks can have a great impact on both teaching skills and learning.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • education
  • Curriculum
  • Social networking strategies
  • Effective learning

Ajjan, H. Hartshorne, R (2008). Investigating Faculty Decisions to Adopt Web 2.0 Technologies:Theory and Empirical Tests. Internet and Higher Education 11, 71-80. Anonymous , A (2007): 2020 system. Retrieved December6, 2007 from. .http://www .2020systems.com/internet-ad-glossary-r-z.html. Arthur, J. K, Adu-Manu K. S , Yeboah C (2013).A conceptual framework for the Adoption of Social NetworkTechnologies (SNTs) in Teaching – case of Ghana. IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues, Vol. 10, Issue 5, No 2. Bates, A.W (1997).Restructuring the university for technological. [on-line] Avallable: http://bates . cstudies. Ubs. Ca/ Carnegie/ Carnegie html.[4 feb.2006] Bersin , J 2008 .Social Networking and Corporate Learning // Certification Magazine. – MediaTec Publishing Inc– No. 10(10). – P. 14–14. Boyd, D.M, Ellison , N.B (2008).social networking sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of computer- mediated communication, 13,210-230. Ellison, N B, steinfield , lampe , c( 2007). The benefits of face book” friends:” social capital and college students use of online social network sites . Journal of computer – mediated communication, 12(4) 1143-1168. Dennis ,K (2007). Technologies of civil society: communication, participation and mobilization, innovation, 20(1), 19-35. Garrison, D. R , Anderson .T (2004). E-learning in the 21st century, Translator : Mohammad Atttaran, Tehran: minstitute of Technological Development smart schools. [Persian[. Glaser, B. G, Strauss, A (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Gooding, L, Locke, A, Brown, S. (2007).social Networking technology: place and identity inmediated communities, journal of community applied social psychology 17, 463-476. Goulding, C (2002). Grounded theory: A practical guide for management, business and market researchers. London: Sage. Holcom ,b , Lori ,B , Brady, Kevin,P , Smit, Bethany V (2010). The emergence of education networking: can non- commercial, education- based social networking sites really address the privacy and safety concerns of educators. Vol.6,No.2. Hung ,H.T, Yuen ,S (2010). Educational use of social networking technology in Higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(6), 703-714. Jalal, A, Zaidieh ,Y( 2012). The Use of Social Networking in Education: Challenges and Opportunities, World of Computer Science and Information Technology Journal (WCSIT) ISSN: 2221-0741 Vol. 2, No. 1, 18-21. Jones , N ,Blackey, H, Fitzgibbon , K , Chew ,E( 2010). Get out of MySpace! Computers & Education, 54(2010), 776-782. Laurillard , D (2003) Rethinking university teaching :a frame work for the effective use of educational technology .London: Routledge. Lenhart, A, Madden, m (2007).Teens, privacy & online social networks: how teens manage their online identities and personal information in the age of MySpace Washington, DC: Pew internet & American Life project. Lincoln, Y. S, Guba, E. G (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Mertens, D. M (2005). Research and evaluation in education and psychology.Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi. Moore, G.C, Benbasat, I (1991). Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation.Information Systems Research, 2(3): p. 192-222. Murray, C (2008). Schools and social networking: Fear or education? Synergy, 6(1), 8-12. Newman, W. L (1997). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. USA: Allen & Bacon. Ofcom (2008). Social Networking. A quantitative and qualitative research report into attitudes, behaviours and use. Ofcom. Office of Communication . UK. http ://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media_ literacy /medlitpub/medlitpubrss/socialnetworking/report.pdf Pernsky, M (2001) digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Pernsky, M (2009) -From Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom H. Sapiens Digital) Pettenati M.C, Ranieri, M (2006). dal se alle reti: nuove pratiche di social networking per la collaborazione in rete . in bonaiuti/ G.(2006). Learning 2/. Erickson: trento. Proceeding. 2006. Rezaei rad Mojtaba,(2012),Identifying the success factors in e-learning programs, Journal of Research in curriculum planning,Vol 9.No 6,pp106-115[Persian[. Roblyer M. D, Mcdanie, l M(2010). Webb, Marsena. Herman,James. Witty,Vince James. Finding on facebook in higher education:A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites, 134-14 . Sandars, j (2007). The use of new technology to facilitate learning through personal Networks, work Based learning in primary care, 5,5-11. Selwyn, N (2008). Web 2.0 applications as alternative environments forinformal learning - a critical review, in OECD-KERIS expert meeting.Alternative learning environments in practice: using ICT to changeimpact and outcomes. Sharepor Mahmoud ,(2007). role of social networks in reproducing educational inequality,Education Quarterly,vol23. No.3[Persian[. Shin, S, Lim, K (2009). The effects of different instructor facilitation approaches on students’interactions during asynchronous online discussions, Computer & Education, 53, 759-760. Sylvester, D. E, McGlynn, A. J (2009). The Digital Divide, Political Participation, and Place. Social Science Computer Review, 28 (1), pp.64-74. Taylor, P, Keeter, S (2010). MILLENNIALS: A Portrait of Generation Next. Confident. Connected. Open to Change. Pew Research Center. http://pewsocialtrends.org/assets/pdf/millennials-confident-connected-open-to-change.pdf The Horizon report (2007):EDUCAUSE learning initiative. Retrieved December 6, 2007 from http://www.nmc.org/ pdf / 2007- horizon-Report.pdf Thompson, R.L, Higgins, C.A (1991).Personal Computing: Toward aConceptual Model of Utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1): p. 125- Tiffany , A. Pempek, Yevdokiya A. Yermolayeva, Sandra l. Calvert (2009): College student’s social networking experiences on face book. Journal of Applied Developmental psychology 30, 227-238. Wildbit (2005). Social Networks Research Report. Wildbit. http://tidbit.wildbit.com Vara ,V 2007.face book open its pages as a way to fuel growth. Wall street journal .may 21:http://online.wsj.com/article/ SB11797139789000917 7.html.