Expert Answer :[Academic] Strategies for the communication and co

  

Solved by verified expert:please check the attached files to take a look into the presentation structure and the article that I choose.The presentation spouse to be 10 layers maximum.I’ve an example file for more information!
academic_journal_article_instructions.docx

contentserver.pdf

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Expert Answer :[Academic] Strategies for the communication and co
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Assignment 1
Academic Journal Article Seminar Presentation
Instructions for preparation
1. Select an idea, concept or theory from an academic journal article from ONE
of your units (eg. Introduction to Marketing, Business Law, Introduction to
Management, etc…) to summarise, explain, analyse and present to the class.
You will then need to lead a class discussion on the issues which arise from the
journal article.
2. Your journal article should be related to the topic you intend to research
and use in assignment 2 (essay).
3. Prepare an explanation of your selected item using Power Point or similar
program.
4. Headings for Power Point slides: you should use the headings below to
organize your PPT slides:

Source of item:

Title of text selection and main point/issue (Briefly, what is it about?)

Area of specialisation:

Background/Context of the topic of the research article

Summary of main points, concepts and ideas (in point form)

Questions from the class (based on summary of article)

Analysis and Evaluation of the Issues – Class Discussion

Questions for the class – you will need to write 2 or 3 questions for the
students to conduct a class discussion.

Proposed essay topics for assignment 2 – you must indicate what topic or
topics you are interested in researching for your essay. This should be
related to the article topic, but this is not essential.
5. However, you may also include other information of your own choice. Note: Do
not include too much information on each slide and keep to the suggested
time.
* Note:
• See the unit outline for detailed information about the content and
structure of the seminar presentation
• See sample PPT presentation on Moodle
Comunicar, n. 54, v. XXVI, 2018 | Media Education Research Journal | ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3293
www.comunicarjournal.com
Strategies for the communication and
collaborative online work by university
students
Estrategias para la comunicación y el trabajo colaborativo en red de
los estudiantes universitarios
Dr. Isabel Gutiérrez-Porlán is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Didactics and School Organization at the
University of Murcia (Spain) (isabelgp@um.es) (http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8533-109X)
Marimar Román-García es is Predoctoral Scholarship Holder in the Department of Didactics and School Organization
at the University of Murcia (Spain) (mariamar.roman@um.es) (http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2392-8173)
Dr. María-del-Mar Sánchez-Vera is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Didactics and School Organization at
the University of Murcia (Spain) (mmarsanchez@um.es) (http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4179-6570)
ABSTRACT
The impact that Information and Communications Technologies have in the way today’s young people communicate and interact
is unquestionable. This impact also affects the educational field, which is required to respond to the needs of twenty first century
students by training them in acquiring new skills and strategies to deal with a changing and uncertain future. In this study, which
involved 2,054 university students from all Spanish Universities, it delved into the knowledge of networking strategies and tools
used by these students for the effective development of communication processes and the implementation of strategies for collaboration and communication. It has been developed a non-experimental quantitative methodology and the technique used for
collecting information was a questionnaire. The results show that all of them use the Internet to communicate and they have a
great use of basic tools to collaborate and interact, but they prefer social networks for being in contact with their peers and establishing relationships. It has been found that students do not have the idea of the Internet as a place to learn. This fact implies
new challenges to be solved by Universities, to optimize the possibilities of the networks and institutional platforms as an environment to learn collaboratively.
RESUMEN
El impacto que las tecnologías de la comunicación tienen en la forma en la que los más jóvenes de hoy en día se comunican y
relacionan es incuestionable. Dicho impacto afecta también al campo educativo, al que se le exige que dé respuesta a las necesidades de los estudiantes del siglo XXI, formándoles en la adquisición de habilidades y estrategias para afrontar un futuro cambiante y lleno de incertidumbre. En este estudio, en el que han participado 2.054 estudiantes universitarios de todas las universidades españolas, se profundiza en el conocimiento de las estrategias y herramientas en red empleadas por estos estudiantes para
el desarrollo efectivo de los procesos comunicativos y colaborativos. Se ha realizado un diseño de investigación no experimental,
de tipo exploratorio basado en el uso del cuestionario como instrumento de recogida de información. Los resultados muestran
un mayor uso por parte del alumnado de herramientas básicas de Internet para el trabajo colaborativo mientras que para estar en
contacto con sus compañeros y establecer relaciones prefieren las redes sociales. Se ha encontrado que no existe por parte de
los estudiantes una concepción de la Red como espacio de aprendizaje, por lo que se plantean nuevos retos a resolver por parte
de la institución universitaria de cara a que sus estudiantes optimicen las posibilidades de la Red como lugar en el que aprender
colaborativamente.
KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE
Digital communication, collaboration, interaction, learning, Internet, students, university, PLE.
Comunicación digital, colaboración, interacción, aprendizaje, Internet, estudiantes, universidad, PLE.
Received: 2017-05-03 | Reviewed: 2017-06-25 | Accepted: 2017-07-28 | Preprint: 2017-11-15 | Published: 2018-01-01
DOI https://doi.org/10.3916/C54-2018-09 | Pages: 91-99
Comunicar, 54, XXVI, 2018
92
1. Introduction
In recent years the Internet has become, above all, a huge provider of tools that have been developed to enable
user participation and communication among those users. Tim O´Reilly defined Web 2.0 as the new paradigm
regarding how we use the Internet, in which tools are platforms for users to use and which foster communication
(O´Reilly, 2005). When O’Reilly penned this reflection in 2005, the main tools were blogs and wikis, which had
transformed how information was published and shared. While this in itself was considered a communication
revolution, the social networks boom in 2009-2010 (Observatorio de Redes Sociales, 2011) has further enhanced
the idea of the web as a platform in which communication is the fundamental component. The Internet, the network of networks, has always provided communication among its users through tools like email, forums, and chat
rooms. These applications have served to broaden and diversify the channels of communication to the extent that
today’s web, based on communication and mobile technologies, is considered to be Web 3.0 (Kolikant, 2010),
which goes beyond the definition of a semantic web.
Whatever definition we choose to adopt, what we believe to be important is that the way we have been communicating and relating to each other over the web in recent years is what has changed our online behavior. The
new channels and ways of communication have led to changes in various environments, which means that there
are implications for education which need to be valued. If today’s environment has changed in this way, the obvious
question is what can we, in the world of education, do to enable students to learn to develop the basic skills required
for online communication. This is important not only at the professional level, encouraging young people to cope
well in a changing environment but also at the personal level since online communication also affects how young
people build their own identities (Bernete, 2010).
An additional consideration is that today’s university students are known as “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001),
because they were born into a technology environment and, therefore, have developed specific skills and attitudes
which condition their learning. The “digital native” concept has had a knock-on effect on the world of education,
although it has been surpassed in subsequent terms, like “digital resident” coined by White and Le Cornu (2011).
Indeed, terms abound as Gisbert and Esteve (2011) show, e.g., “digital learners”, “Generation Y” (Lancaster &
Stillman, 2002; Jorgensen, 2003; McCrindle, 2006) “Generation C” (Duncan-Howell & Lee, 2007) or “Google
Generation” (Rowlands & Nicholas, 2008) all of which underlines how important it is to understand that today’s
university students represent a generation that was born into a world that had already been transformed by technology where the rules of the game are different, especially when working with information. Hence, the normal
development, values, and history of this generation are technology driven. Students do not learn better with ICT
because they are digital natives, although they do find it easier to move in these digital environments. Nevertheless,
we do need to work with students on basic information management and the development of communication skills.
Prensky (2009) indicates that his description in 2001 is interesting, but that the revolution of webs means that
we should really be talking about “digital wisdom” if we are to understand that human beings have to draw on their
natural capacities with existing technologies because they increase and enhance the opportunities for communication and collaboration.
Whether or not we call them digital natives, what we have is a generation that uses technologies differently.
Various studies have thrown up data of interest:
• 26.25 million Spaniards connect to the Internet regularly; 1.45 million more than in 2013. Of these, 20.6
million connect up every day, i.e., 78% are constantly connected (Fundación Telefónica, 2014).
• Children aged 10 to17 years mainly use instant messaging (Whatsapp) to communicate, while they use the
Internet in general for school tasks and to search for information (Spanish Home Office, 2014).
• Youngsters who frequently use social networks are those who also use other types of tools like blogs and wikis
(García-Jiménez, López de Ayala, & Catalina-García, 2013).
• 53.2% of teenagers between 14 and 16 mention new contacts with whom they are in touch mainly online,
so this technology is acting as a mechanism for socialization and support of these friendships (Sánchez-Vera,
Prendes, & Serrano, 2011).
• Those who make the most use of social networks are also those who are most frequently active online when
seeking and sharing contents (García-Jiménez & al., 2013).
• University students have a positive attitude toward social networks (especially Facebook) for educational
purposes and for keeping in contact with colleagues (Espuny, González, Lleixá, & Gisbert, 2011).
As we saw earlier, the importance of ICTs in how young people communicate today is beyond question. So
© ISSN: 1134-3478 • e-ISSN: 1988-3293 • Pages 91-99
the time is ripe to ask whether the way young people use the web affects their learning, which leads us to the idea
of the PLE (Personal Learning Environment). PLE is an issue that has been catching researchers’ attention (Chaves,
Trujillo & López, 2015). The concept joins two foci of research: student centered learning processes, and how
technologies affect or may affect them.
While some authors take a more technological approach to PLEs (Mödritscher & al., 2011), others, like
Castañeda and Adell (2013), adopt a more pedagogical stance, in which the PLE is understood not only as a set of
tools but also as information processing the connections established with other people and the creation of knowledge itself. Thus, a PLE would comprise three fundamental parts (Castañeda & Adell, 2011):
• Reading tools and strategies through which information is accessed and managed.
• Reflection tools and strategies related to the places
where I write and participate.
Students do not learn better with ICT because they are
• Relation tools and strategies related to the environdigital natives, although they do find it easier to move in these
ments in which I am in
contact with others.
digital environments. Nevertheless, we do need to work with
It is the last category that
students on basic information management and the
interests us in this paper.
Within it, we can include
development of communication skills. Prensky (2009)
the concept of Personal
Learning Network (PLN) to
indicates that his description in 2001 is interesting, but that
refer to the tools, mechathe revolution of webs means that we should really be talking
nisms, and activities that we
set in motion when commuabout “digital wisdom” if we are to understand that human
nicating with others, when
we share resources and
beings have to draw on their natural capacities with existing
when we exchange informatechnologies because they increase and enhance the
tion (Castañeda & Adell,
2013; Marín & al., 2014).
opportunities for communication and collaboration.
The great advantages of the
web are the communication
possibilities that it affords. This
is important because knowing
what tools and strategies university students use means we can devise the strategies to improve their skills as well as
provide better online relations concerning their future professional development. PLE theory states that the personal
environment that we all have can help us to self-regulate our learning, from setting our goals to a final self-evaluation
(Chaves & al., 2015).
This view of the PLE is linked to the idea of a society in constant change that demands updates as well as
ongoing, lifelong training to adapt to those changes (Coll & Engel, 2014).
The research we present here stems from the project known as CAPPLE (Competences for Lifelong Learning
based on the use of PLEs. Analysis of future professionals and proposals for improvement). The project is funded
by the Spanish Ministry for Economy and Competitiveness, and its main aim is to study and learn more about the
PLEs of final year students in all subjects at Spanish universities. The starting point is the need to train future professionals in the use of telematic tools and learning strategies so that they are in a better position to create and take
advantage of the best opportunities throughout their professional lives (Prendes, 2013).
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Aims
The aim of this paper is to obtain a deeper knowledge of the online strategies and tools that students use,
especially in the area of communication. We seek to answer the question: What type of online strategies and tools
do university seniors (final year) use to communicate and collaborate with others? Hence, the objectives to meet
are:
© ISSN: 1134-3478 • e-ISSN: 1988-3293 • Pages 91-99
Comunicar, 54, XXVI, 2018
93
Comunicar, 54, XXVI, 2018
94
• To ascertain and describe how final year university students use telematic tools for online communication and
collaboration.
• To analyze students’ online preferences and tools when carrying out group projects along with the importance
they give to various aspects proper to learning and online collaboration.
• To observe the data and results obtained concerning the sex of the participants and the branch of knowledge
to which they belong.
2.2. Research design
The research is empirical and seeks to gather information of a descriptive type with no between group
comparisons and no manipulation of variables. It is therefore non-experimental, of an exploratory nature, and uses
a questionnaire to collect the data (Ato & al., 2013, Pardo, Ruiz, & San Martín, 2015).
The research was carried out in five work phases between 2013-2017 (Prendes, Castañeda, Ovelar, &
Carreras, 2014): a theoretical review of PLEs and earlier studies; design and validation of the tool; data collection;
data analysis; and, description of the participating students’ PLEs.
2.3. Sample
The study was comprised of 2054
final year degree students at Spanish universities. Females accounted for 69.67%
and males for 30.33%. Since it would
have been impossible to access the whole
population because volunteer students
were targeted, the sampling was non-probabilistic. Although the sample is broad, it
is not representative, and no inferences
can be made for the population as a
whole. The graph below shows the distribution of the participants by area of
knowledge.
Figure 1. Distribution of participants by area of knowledge.
2.4. The tool
A questionnaire that was used, was built on theoretical models of PLEs (Castañeda & Adell, 2011, 2013), selfregulated learning (Anderson, 2002; Martín, García, Torbay, & Rodríguez, 2007; Midgley & al., 2000; Pintrich,
Smith, García, & McKeachie, 1991) and communication and ICT competences (Prendes & Gutiérrez, 2013).
The questionnaire was subjected to a three-step validation procedure: expert judgment cognitive interviews and
pilot study. Finally, psychometric tests were applied to test for the reliability of the scale, returning a Cronbach alpha
of reliability of 0.944.
The questionnaire was comprised of 48 items. It was administered through email. The final version and the
complete validation process can be found in Prendes and others (2016). In the following link, we will find the full
questionnaire: https://goo.gl/ta93A8.
3. Analysis and results
3.1. Data analysis
Consistent with the research approach, a descriptive analysis was made; and the results of which, regarding the
communication and strategy tools and collaborative work used by the students interviewed, are given below
(as percentages). Due to the very nature of the variables (they are all categorical), and with the idea of going a step
further in the research, associations were made using contingency tables and Pearson’s X2 test for the independence
of the chi-squared statistic and the contingency coefficient C.
3.2. Results
3.2.1. Online communication and use of tools
None of the students interviewed stated that they did not communicate online. The most popular tool for
© ISSN: 1134-3478 • e-ISSN: 1988-3293 • Pages 91-99
communication is email (79.12%), followed by social network tools (75.52%). It was determined that the use of
social networks is associated with students’ interest in learning X2 (9, 2047)=796.934a, p<0.001, c=0.529 and with their preference to publish new information they generate on social networks X2 (9, 2054)=387.805a, p<0,001, c=0.399. Regarding areas of knowledge, students of Health Sciences use email the most (80.95%), while those in Engineering and Architecture use it least (76.47%). Regarding sexes, females (81.01%) state that they use basic tools for communication, which is more than males (75.19%). If we address the use of social media tools about the various areas of knowledge, we find that students of Social and Legal Sciences top the list (79.47%), while students of Engineering and Architecture are at the bottom (63.32%). By gender, females again make greater use of social network tools for communication (78.48%) than do males (68.53%). When asked about the value they give to the criticisms and opinions of other users when communicating online, two-thirds (66.85%) of the interviewees claim that they take these into account. No differences were found according to sex or to the area of knowledge to which they belong. 3.2.2. Use of tools to favor collaboration and interaction with others The following results take us a step further into aspects of communication, and they add to our knowledge of students’ preferred tools when collaborating and interacting with others (social network tools, emails, chats, video conferences, messaging). The general data show that students prefer messaging tools (41.19%), followed by email (27.65%) and then social ... Purchase answer to see full attachment

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code ESSAYSHELP