Class Communication Options: Making the Most of Web-based Tools

Abstract

Tools such as Blackboard and D2L are available today for managing class information and keeping students up-to-date. However, as technology improvements increase the number of tools available on the Web for all purposes, instructors have opportunities to improve class communication by using tools that were not designed specifically with education in mind. These Web-based tools are seen as options that can either augment or fully replace the use of tools that universities make available for instructors. This paper first outlines three broad class communication categories: content distribution, asynchronous communication and synchronous communication. With each categorization, tools are discussed, and URLs associated with the tools are provided. This article contributes to the growing literature on Internet technologies that can be leveraged to improve the classroom experience.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Back

, & Bailey

(2010). Web services and widgets for library information systems. Information Technology & Libraries, 29(2), 76–86.

Boostrom

R. E.

Jr , Kurthakoti

, & Summey

J. H.

(2009, Spring). Enhancing class communications through segregated social networks. Marketing Education Review, 19(1), 37–41.

Boostrom

R. E.

Jr (2010). The effect of 3D virtual environments on consumer perceptions and purchase intent. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI 3426650)

(The) Campus Computing Project (2010, October). The 2010 Campus Computing Survey. Retrieved March 15, 2011 from http://www.campuscomputing.net/sites/www.campuscomputing.net/files/Green-CampusComputing2010.pdf.

Calongne

C. M.

(2008). Educational frontiers: Learning in a virtual world. EDUCAUSE Review, 43(5), 36–48.

Caravella

, Ekachai

, Jaeger

, & Zahay

(2009, Spring). Web 2.0: Opportunities and challenges for marketing educators. Journal of Advertising Education, 13(1), 58–63.

Chicioreanu

T. D.

(2010). An awe-some online presentation tool-Prezi. Petroleum-Gas University of Ploiesti Bulletin, Educational Sciences Series, 62(1A), 202–09.

Duffy

(2009, January 9). Lenovo buys into Nortel virtual shopping app. Network World. Retrieved March 15, 2011 from http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/010909-lenovo-nortel.html.

Eckman

(2010, Spring). It's not new to them: Using Ning.com to enhance student engagement in the study of social Web marketing and Web 2.0 direct response methods.. Journal of Advertising Education, 14(1), 15–19.

10.

Grudman

(2008). Mapping an approach for successful content management. Information Management Journal, 42(5), 60–64.

11.

Holloway

(2010). Software's silver lining. Profit, 29(4), 11–12.

12.

Korchmaros

J. D.

, & Gump

N. W.

(2009). Evaluation of using course-management software. College Teaching, 57(3), 161–66.

13.

Liaw

S-S.

(2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system.. Computers & Education, 51, 864–73.

14.

Miller

, Brown

, & Robinson

(2002). Widgets on the Web. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(2), 24–28.

15.

Muñoz

C. L.

, & Towner

T. L.

(2010, Spring). Social networks: Facebook's role in the advertising classroom. Journal of Advertising Education, 14(1), 20–27.

16.

Pfeil

, Ang

C. S.

, & Zaphiris

(2009). Issues and challenges of teaching and learning in 3D virtual worlds: Real life case studies. Educational Media International, 46(3), 223–38.

17.

Wernet

S. P.

, Olliges

R. H.

, & Delicath

T. A.

(2000). Postcourse evaluations of WebCT (Web Course Tools) classes by social work students. Research on Social Work Practices, 10(4), 487–504.

18.

Wood

, Wetsch

L. R.

, Solomon

M. R.

, & Hudson

(2009, Spring). From interactive to immersive: Advertising education takes a virtual leap of faith. Journal of Advertising Education, 13(1), 64–72.