CC BY-NC-ND
0Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedía - Social and Behavioral Sciences 103 (2013) 290 - 298
13th International Educational Technology Conference
Development of an integrated learning environment with knowledge management for cultivating student critical thinking
skills
Yen-Ting Lina, Min Joua*
"Department of Industrial Education, National Taiwan Normal University, 162, He-ping East Road, Section 1, Taipei Taiwan 10610, R.O.C
Abstract
With the development of information technology and popularization of internet web-based applications, students nowadays are prone to rapidly browse information, making them incapable of analyzing or integrating information received. Hence, knowledge management and critical thinking skills have in recent years become an important topic in tertiary education. In order to develop student critical thinking skills, this study proposed a learning environment integrating web applications based on a knowledge transformation model. Students should be able to undergo a knowledge transformation process to strengthen critical thinking skills by using popular web applications integrated in the proposed learning model. To evaluate the effect of the proposed approach, 40 university students were invited to participate in a semester-long experimental course. The students were then evaluated after the course. Results showed that the proposed approach was able to effectively improve student critical thinking skills. In addition, students were also satisfied with the courses and teaching methods implemented in the experimental course used in the study.
© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of The Association of Science, Education and Technology-TASET, Sakarya Universitesi, Turkey.
Keywords: Knowledge management, critical thinking, web application
1. INTRODUCTION
Increased popularity of computers and Internet connectivity allowed students to easily obtain and share information. Hence, students are increasingly prone to scan and skim over information rapidly, and as a result, many were unable to analyze or integrate information, affecting their higher order thinking, creativity and their
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +886-2-7734-3347; fax: +886-2-2392-9449. E-mail address: joum@ntnu.edu.tw
1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of The Association of Science, Education and Technology-TASET, Sakarya
Universitesi, Turkey.
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.337
abilities to think critically. Thus, knowledge management that emphasizes knowledge creation, application, acquisition, sharing and internalization became an important research topic in recent years (Ungaretti & Tillberg-Webb, 2011). Continuous exchange of explicit and implicit knowledge was used to train students in higher levels of thinking skills and achieve the objectives of knowledge transformation. The principles of knowledge transformation referred to in this study were based on the theories of knowledge creation proposed by the Japanese scholars Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). When members of an institution share knowledge through interactions and exchanges, the value of the knowledge would be elevated initiating knowledge transformation and creation in the entire organization.
The era of Web 2.0 also saw the emergence of many Internet services and programs such as Flickr, Wikis, WordPress and Google. These services are accessible and free, and their easy-to-use interfaces and powerful functions made them extremely popular. Many of these services have also become indispensable tools for some. Many papers have therefore pointed out that these Internet services and programs have the potential as useful educational tools for students and instructors in carrying out meaningful educational activities (Lin, & Jou, 2013; Schneckenberg, Ehlers, & Adelsberger, 2011; Thompson, 2007).
With this background in mind, this study has proposed an educational environment with a knowledge transformation model that integrated Google services. The objectives of the proposed environment would be to help promote student critical thinking skills and knowledge management processes. In order to assess the effectiveness of the proposal, an experiment was conducted in a college-level course that utilized the proposed environment in a Taiwanese university. Results showed that both instructors and students were pleased with the proposed approach, and the approach had effectively improved student critical thinking skills.
2. Literature Review
Teaching students how to think critically has become an important topic in education (Astleitner, 2002; Facione, 2007; Paul, 1995). This is because critical thinking is a basic element in knowledge development (Yeh, 2009). One of the most well-known definitions of critical thinking was made by Ennis (1991) who defined critical thinking as "reasonable reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do" (p. 1-2). Moore and Parker (2009) provided another definition for critical thinking as "the careful application of reason in the determination of whether a claim is true" (p. 3).
In order to facilitate student's critical thinking skills, several researchers have identified argumentation as a key process in critical thinking and must be carried out through peer interaction and collaboration involving knowledge sharing and knowledge co-creation (Norris & Ennis, 1989; Moore & Parker, 2009). Moreover, engaging in social interactions, each student provides opportunities and resources for other participants to discuss and construct knowledge collaboratively that may cause disequilibration, knowledge inconsistency, opposability of perception and ideas, and inadequacy of logical reasoning and strategies for individual, which will facilitate higher-orfer thinking skills, such as critical thinking skill (Slavin, 1992; Yu, Liu, & Chan, 2005).
Additionally, a reflective mind is the hallmark of critical thinking (Schroyens, 2005). Thus, many research concluded that improving self-awareness and mindfulness would help develop reflective practices (Collier, 1999; Tillema, 2000; Yeh, Huang, & Yeh, 2011), provide adequate feedback, and improve self-awareness and mindful learning (Titone, Sherman, & Palmer, 1998). Some investigations also pointed out that interaction with other participants may help improve self-reflection, idea exchange and further development for mindful learning (Steele, 2001).
3. Approach of an integrated learning environment with knowledge transformation model
This study proposed an educational environment with Google services based on a knowledge transformation model, SECI (Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internalization) model that would encourage learners
to go through the process of knowledge transformation with Google services to improve their critical thinking skills. Figure 1 shows the educational environment framework. Google services used by this study as educational tools include Google Plus, Docs, Blogger and Sites. The tools would help learners undergo the four processes of socialization, externalization, combination and internalization where tacit and explicit knowledge would be continuously transformed from one form to another in a knowledge spiral. The process would then help to improve critical thinking skills. The following describes the processes in detail:
Fig. 1. A web application supported knowledge transformation model
• Socialization
Socialization is a process where tacit knowledge is transformed into another form of tacit knowledge. The process incorporates communication, observation, adaptation and practice to share and absorb knowledge, passing it on through subtle or immersive influences to create new personal tacit knowledge. In order to promote student observation and adaptation in socialization, this study incorporated Google Plus to construct webpages for the instructed course. Course participants would form study groups and socialize via the course webpage to improve student-instructor and student-student interaction and exchange of information. Students could also implement self-discipline via the socialization process (Piaget, & Garcia, 1974).
• Externalization
Externalization takes place when the individual uses text, analogies, pictures, film or other media to transform personal experience, techniques and other tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. This study incorporated Google Docs to help students analyze and externalize their tacit knowledge. Students would be able use various functions provided by the service to use texts, pictures and other explicit media to externalize their tacit knowledge and create explicit knowledge.
• Combination
In combination, individuals systematically analyze, categorize and combine existing explicit knowledge with explicit knowledge received through different types of information media or language symbols. This study utilized Google Blogger to help learners analyze, categorize, combine, structuralize, and evaluate existing explicit
knowledge. As students compose blog articles to share with their instructors and peers, they would be systematically combining and presenting various types of explicit knowledge.
• Internalization
Internalization is the process where explicit knowledge is transformed through symbolization and specification into tacit knowledge. To facilitate this process, this study used Google Sites to assist student collaboration as well as interaction. Students would use Wiki-based mechanisms in Google Sites to conduct collaborative projects with their peers. We hoped that the processes of organizing and compiling data would allow reflective processes for the students to internalize explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge.
The focus of the proposed approach was to facilitate knowledge transformation amongst the participants and enhance their critical-thinking skills through continuous interchange of knowledge sharing, internalization, and co-creation via class-based and online learning activities.
4. Experiment
4.1. Research instrument, measures and goals
Feedback questionnaires were utilized in order to evaluate the impact of the proposed learning environment to students in terms of instruction and learning. The questionnaires included assessments on student critical thinking and satisfaction of the proposed environment. A detailed description is provided in the following text:
• Critical thinking: This study implemented the traditional Chinese version of the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) Form A to assess student critical thinking skills (Facione, 1990). The CCTST is a 34 item, multiple-choice test designed for college students, graduate students, and adult professionals. The maximum obtainable score in CCTST was 34 points. The CCTST assesses five areas of critical thinking (analysis, evaluation, inference, induction, and deduction), and the test was implemented before and after the students undergo the learning environment. The internal consistency of CCTST Form A, measured by Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20), is 0.70.
• Satisfaction: This study utilized an SSQ (Student Satisfaction Questionnaire) with a five-point Likert scale to assess student satisfaction (Biasutti, 2011). The questionnaire was divided into 3 sections - Google services, Didactic Material, and Professor.
4.2. Experimental design, participants and procedure
To evaluate the proposed integrated learning environment, the environment was used in a semester-long course (17 weeks) on product design and assessed through a quasi-experiment. The participants were 40 university students with an average age of 20 years. Course content and lesson activities include professor lectures, class discussions, online discussions, after-class exercises and practical projects.
Figure 2 shows the experimental procedure. Students would fill in a CCTST Form A questionnaire at the beginning of the course. Relevant literature observed that most students were relatively unclear on the means of incorporating similar programs in their learning environment, even though they were seemingly adept in internet services and applications through daily use and exposure (Ng, 2012). Therefore, instructors would first provide students with correct user concepts and the guidelines of incorporating Google services into class activities, and give extra help for the few students who had never used Google services before. A course page was also constructed and administered by the course instructor on Google Plus before classes formally begin. The course page would help extend the time and space for student-instructor and student-student interaction, even when outside the physical classrooms and lesson times. With the conclusion of the course, students would fill in a second CCTST questionnaire form and SSQ form to evaluate their feedback on the entire course.
Product Design Learning
Participants (40Ss)
Prc-qucstionnairc of critical thinking skills
Learning with treatment
Post-questionnaire of critical thinking skills
Questionnaire of satisfaction toward teaching and learning
Conclusion
Fig. 2. Experimental process
5. Experiment
5.1. Critical thinking survey
Participating students were asked to take a CCTST Form A questionnaire before and after undergoing the learning activities to help assess their critical thinking skills. Preliminary analysis results revealed that the mean and standard deviation of the post-test (16.00 and 2.32) were slightly better than those of the pre-test (15.35 and 3.13). Additionally, a paired t-test was used in order to assess differences between student critical thinking before and after the learning activities. Results of the analyses, as shown in Table 3, show that student critical thinking increased significantly after going through the learning activities.
Table 1. Paired-samples t-test on the critical thinking skills of the students
Group N Mean S.D. ¿(39)
Critical Thinking Skills After participating in the learning activity 40 16.00 2.32 -2.292*
Before participating in the learning activity 40 15.35 3.13
5.2. Student satisfaction survey
Student Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ) was used to assess student feedback on the proposed approach. The Cronbach's alpha value of the questionnaire items was 0.855. Table 4 shows the statistical results. Cronbach's alpha values for the three factors of Google Service, Didactic Material and Professor were 0.881, 0.870 and 0.831 respectively. Hence, we could see that students showed high degrees of satisfaction with respect to Google services, the didactic materials as well as the professor's instructions used during the learning.
Table 2. Students' satisfactions towards the learning process
# Item SA & A (%) Neutral (%) D&SD (%) Mean
Google service
1 I like seeing other students interact with materials I had posted on each Google service 55.0 35.0 10.0 3.53
2 Use of Google services helped me share ideas with the other students 65.0 22.5 12.5 3.78
3 My group was able to come to a consensus by using Google Services 50.0 27.5 22.5 3.45
4 I had learned through information exchanges with other students via Google services 62.5 32.5 15.0 3.50
5 Use of Google services promoted knowledge transformation 70.0 17.5 12.5 3.70
6 I felt comfortable seeing other students reply or edit content I had posted 62.5 30.0 7.5 3.63
Didactic Material
1 Was clear 60.0 27.5 12.5 3.73
2 Was useful 65.0 25.0 10.0 3.73
3 Was challenging 72.5 25.0 2.5 3.90
4 Provided ideas for learning 67.5 17.5 15.0 3.70
5 Was connected to my background 80.0 15.0 5.0 3.98
Professor
1 Was friendly towards individual participants 60.0 32.5 7.5 3.75
2 Was dynamic and energetic in leading the learning activities 70.0 25.0 5.0 3.90
3 Made participants feel welcome in discussions 66.5 27.5 10.0 3.75
4 Encouraged participants to express ideas 65.0 25.0 10.0 3.78
5 Stimulated cooperation between participants 65.0 17.5 17.5 3.63
6 Stimulated formation of the online community 65.0 22.5 12.5 3.73
7 Gave feedback during activities 72.5 22.5 5.0 3.85
8 Gave appropriate suggestions 72.5 22.5 5.0 3.80
9 Helped in solving problems 65.0 27.5 7.5 3.73
6. Discussion
Participants developed critical thinking skills described in previous sections during their participation in the proposed integrated learning environment. The positive impact of the course was a result of several factors, such as the implementation of an appropriate pedagogical approach, an interactive technology tool, clear and organized didactic material, opportunity for participant collaboration, and support and feedback provided by the online tutor (Blass & Davis, 2003; Garrison & Anderson, 2003). In order to provide a clear discussion of these elements, this research shall evaluate the results based on three contexts - social, knowledge and technology.
6.1. Social context
Instructors play important roles in facilitating learning processes and implementing a learner-centered approach in the educational environment (Bower & Hedberg, 2010). In this study, the course instructor would
stimulate and promote student interaction and collaboration in lectures and the online platform. The instructor would play the role of an observer and encourage students to express personal thoughts and give appropriate feedback to students as required instead of providing traditional one-sided lectures. The Professor section in the SSQ investigation allowed us to know how students felt about the professor's role. Students provided positive feedbacks for the professor in terms of encouraging student discussion and expression of personal opinions, promoting peer collaboration, and guiding students in various learning activities. Additionally, results in the Google service section of the SSQ indicated that students were largely pleased when interacting with their peers via Google services. Therefore, in addition to the instructor, technology also played an important role in the social aspect. The online environment was simple yet efficient, expediting collaborative work, experience sharing, and peer support in the interdisciplinary project (Biasutti, 2011; Bliuc, Ellis, Goodyear, & Piggott, 2011; Bold, 2006; Hew & Cheung, 2008).
6.2. Knowledge context
Knowledge construction is not confined to an individual. Rather, it is a social process carried out between individuals, groups and organizations. The task of sharing individual knowledge or information after learning requires students to translate (encoding) and recall (retrieval) information as needed (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). In the process of knowledge sharing, learners must figure out which information is important and worth sharing, and determine the methods of sharing it effectively. To accomplish the tasks of encoding and retrieving, students have to engage in various forms of information-processing activities such as rehearsal, organization, or elaboration in order to clarify relationships between pieces of information and compare newly acquired information to previous personal cognition (Gagne, 1985; Wittrock, 1979). The participants felt knowledge transformation processes in the proposed approach helped them create, share, transfer, and acquire knowledge mainly by social interaction. CCTST results concluded that participant critical thinking skills had improved. Participants were also engaged in searching for different knowledge aspects (concepts, ideas, videos, and pictures) that could be included in their interdisciplinary projects and were motivated to use Google services as a modern didactic tool.
6.3. Technology context
Despite the developments and popularization of modern technologies, they would often negatively affect the teaching and learning effectiveness of instructors and students (Zheng & Yano, 2007). From the teaching perspective, it appeared that different characteristics and functions of technology have the potential in helping instructors design a variety of teaching plans. However, inconsistencies in personal preferences and skills of the instructors would result in wide ranges of teaching performance and environments. Similarly, from the learning perspective, different technological preferences and skills amongst learners would also result in differences in learning attitudes and performance. It is therefore important for educators to eradicate or lower technological barriers imposed against students and instructor. Teaching activities must only incorporate appropriate technologies to make effective teaching and learning possible. In this research, Google services were applied with the objectives of helping students transform their knowledge. Student feedback on the effectiveness of the application in knowledge creation, sharing and transformation was assessed by a specific section titled "Google service" in the student SSQ. The section consisted of 6 items, and the resulting score was 3.60 out of 5.
7. Conclusion
This study proposed an integrated learning environment with knowledge management model to develop student critical thinking skills. An experiment was conducted in a product design course at a university in Taiwan.
Two questionnaires were used to assess participant feedback. Results of the questionnaires revealed that the participants appreciated the use of the proposed approach to support the course.
7.1. Contribution of the proposed environment to knowledge transformation and critical thinking
Internet popularity and developments are increasing rapidly in the modern society. Students now enjoy extremely accessible information, and became increasingly prone to rapid browsing or skimming of information. This superficial intake of information negatively affected higher levels of thinking skills and significant gaps in critical thinking skills amongst students. As a result, students were unable to flexibly use what they had learned to solve daily problems. To tackle this issue, this study proposed an integrated learning environment that could help students go through knowledge transformation processes, thereby promoting their critical thinking skills. The proposed approach could also provide significant assistance in training corporate and industrial professionals in the future. Additionally, the proposed learning environment could be used for other courses. Tertiary education is the cradle of corporate professionals. Only by improving student abilities in critical thinking would we be able to augment research and development capabilities of our corporations and industry and improve the competitiveness of our economy.
7.2. Limitations and future work
A limitation to this study was that the approach could not be conducted in a traditional classroom as not every student owns tablet PCs or smart phones. However, this issue should be resolved in the future with the increased popularity of such mobile devices. Another limitation was that although the majority of the participants were familiar with web applications in their daily lives, few understood the means of using these applications to support their learning (Ng, 2012). Therefore, course instructors had to give students explicit instruction and information on the educational uses of web applications.
Finally, the future direction of this study would be to apply appropriate web applications in strengthening the proposed learning environment for various subjects, disciplines and educational pedagogies. Further investigation would allow us to analyze specifically the learning effects amongst participants and develop suitable solutions to support the proposed approach by using application program interface (API).
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of this study by the National Science Council of Taiwan, under the Grant No. 99-251 l-S-003 -034 -MY3.
References
Astleitner, H. (2002). Teaching critical thinking online. Journal ofInstructional Psychology, 29(2), 53-76.
Biasutti, M. (2011). Student experience of a collaborative e-learning university module. Computers & Education, 57(3), 1865-1875. Blass, E., & Davis, A. (2003). Building on solid foundations: establishing criteria for e-learning development. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 27(3), 227-245.
Bliuc, A. M., Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., & Piggott, L. (2011). A blended learning approach to teaching foreign policy: student experiences of learning through face-to-face and online discussion and their relationship to academic performance. Computers & Education, 56(3), 856-864. Bold, M. (2006). Use ofwikis in graduate course work. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(1), 5-14.
Bower, M., & Hedberg, J. G. (2010). A quantitative multimodal discourse analysis of teaching and learning in a web-conferencing environment - the efficacy of student-centred learning designs. Computers & Education, 54(2), 462-478.
Collier, S. T. (1999). Characteristics of reflective thought during student teaching experience. Journal of Teacher Education, 50(3), 173-181.
Ennis, C. (1991). Discrete thinking skills in two teachers' physical education classes. The Elementary School Journal, 91(5), 473-486. Ennis, R. H., Millman, J., & Tomko, T. N. (1985). Cornell critical thinking tests level Xand level Z — manual. Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Facione, P. A. (1990). The California critical thinking skills test (CCTST): forms A and B. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press.
Facione, P. A. (2007). Critical thinking: what it is and why it counts. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press.
Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York, Holt: Rinehart and Winston.
Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A frameworkfor research and practice. Abingdon: Routledge.
Hew, K. F., & Cheung,W. S. (2008). Attracting student participation in asynchronous online discussions: a case study of peer facilitation.
Computers & Education, 51(3),1111-1124.
Lin, Y. T., & Jou, M. (2013). Integrating Popular Web Applications in Classroom Learning Environments and Its Effects on Teaching,
Student Learning Motivation and Performance. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(2),157-165.
Moore, B. N., & Parker, R. (2009). Critical thinking (9th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy?. Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065-1078..
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge —creating company: How japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York, Oxford University Press.
Norris, S. P., & Ennis, R. H. (1989). Evaluating critical thinking. Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Paul, R.W. (1995). Critical thinking: how to prepare students for a rapidly changing world. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
Piaget & Garcia,R.(1974).Weight and Its Compositions with Spatial Dimension, Understanding Causality. New York : W.W. Norton & Company.
Schneckenberg, D., Ehlers, U., & Adelsberger, H. (2011). Web 2.0 and competence-oriented design of learning—Potentials and implications for higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(5), 747-762.
Schroyens, W, (2005). Knowledge and thought: An introduction to critical thinking. Experimental Psychology, 52(2), 163-164.
Slavin, R. (1992). When and why does cooperative learning increase achievement? Theoretical and empirical perspectives. In R. Hertz-
Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups (pp. 145-173). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Steele, D. F. (2001).Using sociocultural theory to teach mathematics: A Vygotskian perspective. School Science and Mathematics, 101(8),
404-415.
Thompson, J. (2007). Is education 1.0 ready for web 2.0 students? Innovate, 3(4).
Tillema, H. H. (2000). Belief change towards self-directed learning in student teachers: Immersion in practice or reflection on action. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5-6), 575-591
Titone, C., Sherman, S., & Palmer, R. (1998). Cultivating student teachers' dispositions and ability to construct knowledge. Action in Teacher Education, 19(4), 76-87.
Ungaretti, A. S., & Tillberg-Webb, H. K. (2011). Assurance of learning: Demonstrating the organizational impact of knowledge management and e-learniang. In J. Liebowitz and M. S. Frank (Eds.), Knowledge management and e-learning (pp. 41-60). Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.
Wittrock, M. C. (1979). The cognitive movement in instruction. Educational Researcher, 8(2), 5-11.
Yeh, Y. (2009). Integrating e-learning into the direct-instruction Model to enhance the effectiveness of critical-thinking instruction. Instructional Science, 37(2), 185-203.
Yeh, Y. , Huang, L., Yeh, Y. (2011). Knowledge management in blended learning: Effects on professional development in creativity instruction. Computers & Education, 56(1), 146-156.
Yu, F. Y., Liu, Y. H., & Chan, T. W. (2005). A web-based learning system for questionposing and peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(4), 337-348.
Zheng, Y., & Yano, Y. (2007). A framework of context-awareness support for peer recommendation in the e-learning context. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 197-210.
