Search

This conceptual article argues that the second language (L2) curriculum must incorporate broader notions of literacies, associated with the development of new digital genres. This article shows how the affordances of social tools can affect and enhance L2 learners’ writing practices and broaden their understanding of genre. As they become fully aware of the qualitative changes that social tools bring to the writing process, instructors will see the benefits of their integration in the L2 writing classroom. The article argues for the need to (1) question and redefine L2 writing pedagogy by reevaluating literacy, writing genres, and associated instructional practices in the L2 classroom; (2) acknowledge the acute transformation from traditional notions of literacies to notions of digital literacies; (3) recognize the affordances of social tools and argue how L2 learners can more efficiently acquire and practice digital literacies; and (4) provide pedagogical frameworks to foster L2 writing in an increasingly digital age. Finally, the article's conclusion highlights valuable avenues for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role of social tools in massive open online courses (MOOCs) is essential as they connect participants. Of all the participants in an MOOC, top contributors are the ones who more actively contribute via social tools. This article analyses and reports empirical data from five different social tools pertaining to an actual MOOC to characterize top contributors and provide some insights aimed at facilitating their early detection. The results of this analysis show that top contributors have better final scores than the rest. In addition, there is a moderate positive correlation between participants' overall performance (measured in terms of final scores) and the number of posts submitted to the five social tools. This article also studies the effect of participants' gender and scores as factors that can be used for the early detection of top contributors. The analysis shows that gender is not a good predictor and that taking the scores of the first assessment activities of each type (test and peer assessment in the case study) results in a prediction that is not substantially improved by adding subsequent activities. Finally, better predictions based on scores are obtained for aggregate contributions in the five social tools than for individual contributions in each social tool. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past 15 years the Web has transformed the ways in which we search for information and use it. In more recent years, we have seen the emergence of a new array of innovative tools that collectively go under the name of 'Web 2.0', in which the information user is also increasingly an information producer (i.e., prosumer), by sharing or creating content. The success of Web 2.0 tools for personal use is only partially replicated in the professional sphere and, particularly, in the academic environment in relation with research and teaching. To date, very few studies have explored the level of adoption of Web 2.0 among academic researchers in their research and teaching activity. It is not known in what way how and how much Web 2.0 is currently used within research communities, and we are not aware of the drivers and the drawbacks of the use of Web 2.0 tools in academia, where the majority of people is focused either on research or on teaching activities. To analyse these issues, i.e. the combined adoption of Web 2.0 tools in teaching and research, the authors carried out a survey among teaching and researching staff of the University of Breda in The Netherlands. This country was chosen mainly because it is on the cutting edge as far as innovation is concerned. An important driver in choosing the Breda University's academic community was the fact that one of the two authors of this survey works as senior researcher at this university. The purpose of our survey was to explore the level of adoption of Web 2.0 tools among the academic communities. We were interested in investigating how they were using these tools in the creation of scientific knowledge both in their research and teaching activity. We were also interested in analysing differences in the level of adoption of Web 2.0 tools with regard to researchers' position, age, gender, and research field. Finally, in our study we explored the issue of peer reviewing in the Web 2.0 setting. In particular, we investigated whether social peer review is regarded by researchers as a viable alternative to the current closed peer review system (single-blind or double blind). We approached about 60 staff members, but only 12 faculty members completed the survey fully. This means that our results can only be regarded as exploratory, but we still believe that they represent a complementary perspective with respect to previous studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Waste sorting behavior is an important factor in reducing raw material usage through recycling programs and seeking circular economy implementation. Despite huge efforts to promote sorting behavior, in Lithuania 6 percent do not sort waste at all. The main tools which can promote this behavior are informational, social, convenience and financial. However, to the best of our knowledge, no research has analyzed the impact of all these tools on sorting behavior: this analysis revealed which tools were the most effective and to which policymakers should pay the most attention. Furthermore, we analyzed whether the identified tools really contribute to waste sorting behavior, including statements about the current situation in the model. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to investigate the impact of informational, social, convenience and financial tools – and the real situation – on waste sorting behavior. Referring to a representative survey conducted in Lithuania, the results showed that, according to respondents, only informational and financial tools had significant impact on waste sorting behavior, which was insignificantly affected by social and convenience tools. Considering the real situation, the current situation of convenience and social tools significantly influenced waste sorting behavior. Meanwhile, the current level of the informational aspect negatively and insignificantly determined waste sorting behavior. Therefore, this study provided practical insights for policymakers into which tools contribute to waste sorting behavior, and how to promote it effectively. • Informational, social, convenience and financial tools impact were analyzed. • According to respondents' opinion, only informational and financial tools had significant impact. • Social and convenience tools insignificantly effected waste sorting behavior. • Current situation of convenience and social tools significantly influenced waste sorting behavior. • Current level of informational aspect insignificantly determined waste sorting behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]