THE NET GENERATION NEED TO BE SELF REGULATED THAN EVER: Using Web 2.0 Technologies For Enhancing Self-Regulated Learning



We are trying to educate the Net Generation. Do we educators aware of the characteristics of this new generation? They expect to be able to remix and share material often by way of social networking sites that provide tools and access to other users. Activities in these spaces are becoming increasingly important to help them develop of their own identities, but the effect of these developments on learning is still uncertain. It is hard to ignore the power of these effects while young people across the globe have embraced information technology. Educators have to find a way to intersect the school curriculum and the preferences and perceptions of the technology-age students' who are needed to be motivated in technology based active learning environments which are social, participatory and which are supported by rich media. What about the pedagogical needs of those learning environments? It is important to consider that using developing technologies in education brings out greater personalisation of learning. Students need to be self regulated to be succesful in student centred, indepented learning environments. Social media can be used as an opportunity for this pedagogical change in education (Albion, 2008; Maddux, Liu & Johnson, 2008; McLoughlin & Lee, 2010).

New social media applications are transforming the Internet from a read-only (Web 1.0) environment to a read-write ecology that many are calling Web 2.0 technologies that are becoming popular in teaching and learning environments. Among them several online collaborative writing tools, like wikis and blogs, have been integrated into educational settings (Heafner & Friedman, 2008; Rosen & Nelson, 2008). This article reviews current uses of Web 2.0 technologies as self-regulatory tools for enhancing learning.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Web 2.0 technologies, wikis, blogs, self-regulated learning.

Tam Metin:



Albion, P. R. (2008). Web 2.0 in Teacher Education: Two Imperatives for Action. Computers in the Schools, 25(3–4), 181-198.

Azevedo, R. & Hadwin, A.F. (2005). Scaffolding se,lf-regulated learning and metacognition : Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33, 367-379.

Azevedo, R. & Jacobson, M.J. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: a summary and critical analysis. Educational Tech Research Dev, 56, 93-100.

Azevedo, R., Moss, D.C., Johnson, A.M. & Chauncey,A.D. (2010). Measuring cognitive and metacognitive regulatory processes during hypermedia learning: Issues and challenges. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 210-223.

Bandura, A. (1997). Cognitive Functioning. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control (pp. 212-240). Newyork: Freeman.

Berk, R. A. (2009). Teaching Strategies for the Net Generation. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 3(2), 1-24. ,

Brodahl, C., Hadjerrouit, S. & Hansen, N.K. (2011). Collaborative Writing with Web 2.0 Technologies: Education Students’ Perceptions. Journal of Information Technology Education:Innovations in Practice, 10, 73-103.

Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In Weinert, F. E., & Kluwe, R. H. (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65-116). New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Cheon, J., Song, J., Jones, D. R., & Nam, K. (2010). Influencing Preservice Teacher’ Intention to Adopt Web 2.0. Services. Journa,l of Digital Learning in Education, 27 (2), 54-64.

Cifuentes, L., Xochihua, O.A. & Edwards, J.C. (2011). Learning in Web 2.0 Environments: Surface learning and chaos or deep learning and self-regulation. The Quaterly Review of Distance Education, 12(11), 1-24.

Heafner, T. L., & Friedman, A. M. (2008). Wikis and Constructivism in Secondary Social Studies: Fostering a Deeper Understanding. Computers in the Schools, 25(3–4), 288-302.

Kumar, S., & Vigil, K. (2011). The Net Generation as Preservice Teachers: Transferring Familiarity with New Technologies to Educational Environments. Journal of Digital Learning in Education, 27 (4), 144-151.

Maddux, C. D., Liu, L., & Johnson, L. (2008). Web 2.0: On The Cups of a Revolution in Information Technology in Education. Computers in the Schools, 25(3–4),159-162.

McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M.J.W. (2010). Personalised and self-regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Technology, 26 (1), 28-43.

Moos, D.C., & Azevedo, R. (2009). Self-efficacy and prior domain knowledge: to what extent does monitoring mediate their relationship with hypermedia learning? Metacognition and Learning, 4, 197-216.

Niess, M. L., Van Zee, E. H., Gillow-Willes, H. (2010). Knowledge Growth in Teaching Mathematics, Science with Spreadsheets: Moving PCK to TPACK through Online Professional Development. Journal of Digital Learning in Education, 27 (2), 43-52.

Pan, S.C., & Franklin, T. (2011). In-Service Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, Professional Development, and Web 2.0 Tools for Integration. New Horizons in Education, 59(3) , 28-40.

Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (1), 33-40.

Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Teaching role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41 (4), 219-225.

Rosen, D., & Nelson, C. (2008). Web 2.0: A New Generation of Learners and Education. Computers in the Schools, 25(3–4), 211-225.

Schraw, G. & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7 (4), 351-371.

Schraw, G. (2002). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In Hartman, H. J. (Ed.), Metacognition in Learning and Instruction: Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 3-16). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Steffens, K., & Underwood, J. (2008). Self Regulated Learning In A Digital World. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 17(3), 167–170.

Thomas, D. A., & Li, Q. (2008). From Web 2.0 to Teacher 2.0. Computers in the Schools, 25(3–4),199-210.

Winnie, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30 (4), 173-187.

Winnie,P.H. & Nesbit, J. C. (2009). Supporting self-regulated learning with cognitive tools. In D.J.Hacker, J.Dunlosky&A.C.Greasser (Eds.), Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 259-277). New York: Routledge.

Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-regulation involves more than metacognition: a social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychologist, 30 (4), 217-221.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: a social cognitive perspective. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.), Handbook of selfregulation (pp. 13-39). San Diago: Academic Press.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Campillo, M. (2003). Motivating self-regulated problem solvers. In Davidson, J. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 233-262). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2004). Self-regulating intellectual processes and outcomes: A social cognitive perspective. In Dai, D. Y., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Motivation, Emotion, and Cognition:Integrative Perspectives on Intellectual Functioning and Development (pp. 323-349). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers


  • Şu halde refbacks yoktur.





Not: Dergimizde ingilizce olarak yayınlanan makalelerden yayın kurulumuz tarafından seçilenlerin ERIC'te taranmak üzere başvurusu dergimiz ilgilileri tarafından yapılmaktadır.

Creative Commons Lisansı

Bayburt Üniversitesi dergilerine ait içerikler Creative Commons Alıntı-Gayriticari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

ISSN: 1307-1076