Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
Sandra Schaffert
sandra.schaffert@salzburgresearch.at
Information Society Research
Salzburg Research
Salzburg, Austria
Abstract
Since the new generation of Internet technology, called Web 2.0, has been introduced, a change of
how users are dealing with the World Wide Web has been get into going. If access to the web is
available, today nearly anyone can actively participate and communicate online. Of course this
recent evolution of the web influences also the field of education. Former e-learning was mainly
characterized by the use of content offered within learning management systems. Nowadays so
called “Social Software” enables new possibilities and didactical approaches. In this paper we give
a short overview of how Social Software can support cooperative learning and how new
technologies can enhance higher education in a meaningful new way. After a short introduction to
the basics of cooperative learning different social software applications are classified and described.
Practical examples are presented to show the general usage. In the end we conclude that these
technologies have great impact on teaching and learning, as it will help to enhance education at
universities.
Nevertheless, in the early years of computer supported learning the social aspects of learning had
been overseen or ignored. Research and practice concentrated on the possibilities of programmed
learning, implementation of instructional design and artificial intelligence. Since the beginning of
the 1990ies, with Internet services such as electronic mail, Usenet and the World Wide Web, the
role of peers and tutors in computer supported learning environments gained more and more
attention. First research on computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) analyzed for
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
example the collaboration of pupils in schools in different cities corresponded via Quickmail and
their development of common project work (Campione, Brown & Jay, 1992).
Current “Social Software” technologies and applications are characterised by their high potential of
bringing people together through facilitating communication and collaboration. We use the term
“Social Software” as the sum of all old and new forms of tools and applications that can be or are
ordinary used for communication and collaboration. Due to the success of the online encyclopaedia
Wikipedia, the Wiki technology (now) has become a famous example of an invention of a very
simple way to create and edit Webpages in a collaborative way.
In this chapter we describe how current social software can be used and already is in use in higher
education within different forms of cooperative learning arrangements. For this, we have included
new tools that seems especially usable in cooperative learning settings. Some of them were taken
from some Web’s “best of”-lists of tools8 for learning and teaching or were found reading current
publications about social software for learning. Especially for European projects, which have been
co-financed by the European Commission, the Prolearn3and the I-Camp4 projects are to be named in
this context.
working together. The online communication is not always, but often asynchronous;
(ii) Blended learning setting
The learners meet in reality and additionally online but normally not parallel. The online
communication usually is asynchronous;
(iii) Classroom group work setting - with 10 to 25 learners
Every learner additionally and parallel to “real” communication participates through
networked computers or mobile phones on the group interaction
(iv) Lecture hall learning setting
The learners use networked computers or mobile phones to facilitate interaction and
feedback loops in big groups of more than 40 people parallel to a (interactive) lecture.
Besides these settings, which are institutionally organised and known as “formal” learning settings,
cooperative learning also occurs in informal, self organised or incidental learning while being
online. Learning can be initiated and supported by being actively involved in a community of
learners or interests; it can also be the result of (or reflection on) things seen or done in
collaboration with others, more loosely connected persons in the Web, such as unknown or
anonymous editors of a Wikipedia page. (Informal) online learning communities and groups are
using different tools or platforms in the Web. Nevertheless, there are some Websites that are
explicitly developed for cooperative learning: Grockit5 develops a learning game; Livemocha6 and
Busuu.com7 are language learning platforms where every learner serves as a teacher in her/his
native language.
In the following, we concentrate on formally arranged cooperative learning settings in the field of
higher education. In general, the following examples and descriptions cannot be seen as usual
practice in higher education nor for current students’ abilities and experiences within the Web (cf.
Ebner Schiefner & Nagler, 2008a; Jadin & Zöserl, 2009; Nagler & Ebner, 2009). The majority of
these examples are innovative and not common experiences in current higher education. In the
following, we introduce typical applications and (first) experiences in higher education according to
the above mentioned three types of characteristics of Social Software, which are communication,
collaboration and collaborative enrichment. The focus of this contribution is not to describe these
tools in detail, but to give some examples how they can be used for different settings of cooperative
learning in higher education.
Of course communication is possible with the help of various tools, applications and programs.
This includes discussion forums and Web chats (e.g. Tinychat8), but also distributed communication
channels as Weblogs or micro-blogging tools. (Micro-) blogging, including text posts but also
podcasts, is often described as personal online journal. Nevertheless it allows learners to easily
interact by commenting or interlinking. Besides these Web tools, instant messaging services allow a
sort of private, real time chat room for two or more people, e.g. Skype9. Conference systems
additionally allow presenting the own screen or presentation slides.
Micro-blogging
Micro-blogging can be seen as latest variant of blogging where messages are posted more or less
instantly and users are updating their activities, thoughts, everyday experiences, moods and feelings
constantly. Living in an online stream becomes reality. Templeton (Templeton, 2008) defines
micro-blogging as “a small-scale form of blogging, generally made up of short succinct messages,
used by both consumers and business to share news, post status updated and carry on
conversations.” Currently an enormous trend towards integrating micro-blogging activities is
8
http://tinychat.com/ (last view: August 2009)
9
http://skype.com/ (last view: August 2009)
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
observable. Facebook10, Friendfeed11 and Twitter12 are the most famous applications for exchange
small pieces of data amongst a huge worldwide community. Different research works pointed out
that micro-blogging must be seen as a new form of communication (McFedries, 2007) to exchange
mainly four types of messages (Java et al., 2007) – daily routines, simple conversation, sharing
information or reporting news.
Similar to other studies about the use of Short Message Services (SMS) for learning purposes
(DuVall, 2007) micro-blogging can serve in higher education for the following reasons:
• Exchange of information, thoughts, ideas amongst people of same interest (Ebner &
Schiefner, 2008b)
• To enhance the classroom discussion about specific topics and for recording research
activities on the Web or in general (Ebner & Maurer, 2008c)
• To reporting live from events, lectures and presentations (Ebner, 2009a; Reinhardt et al.,
2009)
To overcome well known problems of big lecture halls (Anderson et al., 2003) – missing feedback,
fear to ask during a lecture and the only-one-speaker syndrome – different research studies address
to bring more interactivity to the classroom and with that opportunities for cooperative learning. In
10
http://www.facebook.com (last visit: August 2009)
11
http://friendfeed.com/ (last visit: August 2009)
12
http://twitter.com/ (last visit: August 2009)
13
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi (last visit: August 2009)
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
former years most projects concentrate on the use of Personal Digital Assistents (PDAs) in
combination with Servers.
Further Tools
Finally there are some hints to further communication possibilities to arrange and coordinate
learning activities. For example, students can use tools to sort their notes digitally (e.g. postit17) and
share them with their colleagues online. Mobile access allows doing it just in time and anywhere.
But not only notes also arranging groups, projects or learning meetings can be arranged by using
appropriate Web 2.0 tools (e.g Doodle18). In the end the whole learning process can be planned,
recorded and shared (e.g. PlanItEasy19) even with modern mobile phones (e.g. EduCate20).
14
http://www.bedu.com/ (last visit: August 2009)
15
http://classinhand.wfu.edu/ (last visit: August 2009)
16
http://www.ipsi.fraunhofer.de/concert/index_en.shtml?projects/past_projects/studeo (last visit
August 2009)
17
http://www.lokalguide.com/postit/ (last visit: August 2009)
18
http://www.doodle.com (last visit: August 2009)
19
http://www.planiteasy.de/ (last visit: August 2009)
20
http://www.ikonstrukt.com/ (last visit: August 2009)
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
Collaborative development
Web 2.0 technologies made collaborative work much easier as known before. Users can contribute
to the World Wide Web without any knowledge of any programming language, even HTML
scripting. Tim O’Reilly (O’Reilly, 2005), who named it for the very first time, summarized this step
towards a World Wide Web where “users are generating the content”. From the learning and
teaching perspective beyond communicating the exchange of digital data as well as any information
gets possible. In the following the most interesting collaboration applications are described and how
they can be used in higher education scenarios.
Wiki
The concept of Wikis, which was introduced for the very first time by Bo Leuf and Ward
Curringham in 1995 (Leuf & Curringham, 2001), bases on the idea that users create, edit, revise,
extend or link articles within an online platform. The most famous used Wiki system is the well-
known online encyclopaedia Wikipedia21, where thousands contributors voluntarily write on
creating the world’s largest open content project. Concerning the use in higher education Wikis are
appropriate tools for collaboration amongst a group of learners (Jaksch et al., 2008) or even
classrooms (Ebner et al., 2008d). Furthermore learners can create their own learning and
collaboration space for documentation. Very new research work also combines the method of geo-
tagging (pictures enhanced by global geo-coordinates) and Wiki technology to allow field work to
display locations in real-time using additional services like Google Maps (Safran et al., 2009).
Sharing Documents
A very important aspect in online collaboration is to exchange files and documents between users.
Each learner should have access to the latest version of the collaborative work. Therefore different
online tools help to organize and manage this purpose. On the one side, there are applications that
allow similar to the Wiki principle to create and edit the document online and to export it at last to
the appropriate format (e.g. Google Docs22, Writely). On the other side, there are also numerous
online services that are providing Web space for placing documents that can be accessed by small
desktop applications or within common local file-management systems (e.g. Dropbox23).
In any case the possibility of distributed collaborative working will be one of the next major steps in
the online world called “Cloud Computing”. It can be expected that participating in different
services on the Web and collaborating between learners and learners as well as learners and
teachers will increase enormously.
Weblogs
Regarding the use of Weblogs for collaborative development in higher education there are mainly
two possibilities:
• Aggregation of Weblogs
Each learner conducts his/her own Weblog for reflection, documentation and exchange and
hyperlinks to other contributions using methods like trackback and pingback (Helen &
Wagner, 2006). With other words a learner network is built, a blogosphere for learning and
teaching purposes.
• Cooperate Blogging
In this case all learners are using the same Weblog for their contributions. This form is used
when users are writing about the same topic over a period of time. Examples show that the
21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page (last visit: August 2009)
22
http://docs.google.com (last visit: August 2009)
23
http://www.getdropbox.com (last visit: August 2009)
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
content of the lecturers becomes more student-centred and student-driven. Lecturers have to
moderate the whole process (Ebner & Maurer, 2007).
Further Tools
Further interesting applications are concerning the possibility to collaborate in real-time. For
example, learners can develop some sketches collaborative just-in-time by using online whiteboards
(e.g. skrbl24), write a short essay instantly (e.g. etherpad25) or create mind maps (e.g.
mindmeister26). Even the construction of timelines or concepts and their relationships (e.g.
Conzilla27) (Palmer and Naeva, 2005) can be realized collaborative online. Klamma (Klamma et al.,
2007) pointed out that all these features are leading to a collaborative adaptive learning platform
based on semantic technologies. They improve the existing learning environments by fulfilling the
users’ needs by supporting their highly challenging learning tasks.
Social Bookmarking
Social Bookmarking describes the possibility to store bookmarks online and to tag them with
keywords. Del.icio.us28, the most famous application further allows to share and to comment the
bookmarked items among their users. In higher education social bookmarking helps to share items
of research and online resources within a huge group of learners. Within a very short time frame
(Ebner, 2009c) the search results are provided automatically to the whole learning community.
Annotation
The enhancement of Websites by personal comments is called annotation. For example, the tool
Hylighter29 allows highlighting any online text passage and to provide any note for a group of
learners. Even in the very first time of the World Wide Web first research took place to combine a
number of HTML-Pages to one structured online resource where users are able to search, discuss or
annotate it (Dietinger & Maurer, 1998). Today, first real-life experiments are carried out where
learners can share notes in real-time with other students in classrooms and therefore enhance the
ongoing presentations.
Mobile Tagging
A special form of tagging is called mobile tagging, which can be described as the use of two-
dimensional barcodes readable by a mobile phone (Kato & Tan, 2005). Such “mobile tags” are
capable and powerful possibilities to transfer data from a physical object (such as printouts, paper)
to the mobile device. The content becomes encoded to an image of small quadrates of different size
and different number. This image can be printed and placed on any layer. By mobile device the
image is scanned and the content is decoded by adequate software. In higher education first
24
http://www.skrbl.com/ (last visit: August 2009)
25
http://etherpad.com/ (last visit: August 2009)
26
http://www.mindmeister.com/de/home (last visit: August 2009)
27
http://www.conzilla.org (last visit: August 2009)
28
http://del.icio.us (last visit: August 2009)
29
https://www.hylighter.com/hylighter/website/index.html (last visit: August 2009)
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
attempts show that there are great benefits when such online resources are part of the learning
material. Learners can easily scan the barcode from their printouts and watch the online resource
just in time on their mobile device.
The use of technology in education strongly depends on the questions how we can improve the
quality of education and how we can benefit from it. For example, digital collaboration with the
help of Wiki systems leads to new possibilities that had not been imaginable within a paper-based
learning scenario. Furthermore tagging enhances learner’s content in a new meaningful way and
makes the content shareable und reusable. Micro-blogging as described in previous chapters must
be seen as a complete new form of communication – talking to a cloud, without knowing if anyone
will read or even react to it. As cooperative learning is very often a part of open educational
practices, where learners have the possibilities to organize their own learning within their groups as
active partners, changes of learning and teaching behavior is not only a matter of such new tools.
Also the existing learning culture within the institution or the teaching abilities and attitudes of
lectures are (amongst others) crucial aspects of teaching in higher education that has to be taken into
account for a successful implementation or usage of such new tools for cooperative learning (cf.
Schaffert, 2009).
Additionally, we have to bear in mind that such tools are not built especially for learning settings. It
is up to the researchers and every single user to find out whether learners can benefit from it or not.
Furthermore it can be expected that the number of available applications is still increasing and
digital possibilities will reach new dimensions. This dramatic growth leads to the assumption that
teachers and learners of tomorrow will be confronted with a huge amount of possibilities as well as
more and more digital information and data. To overcome the problem of endless abundance mash-
up technology will become of higher importance. Mash-ups are considered to be a concept and
technology for merging content, services and applications from multiple Web sites in an integrated,
coherent way (Tuchinda et al., 2008). Furthermore by studying learner habits it will be possible to
recommend learners appropriate tools and content as for example first research work points out (e.g.
REMASHED30). The concept of using mash-ups combined with recommendations leads a step
toward a complete personalized environment – called “Personal Learning Environment” (PLE)
(Schaffert & Hilzensauer, 2008). With the aid of a PLE users should have the chance to arrange
their digital environment in dependence to their personal needs. Otherwise the concept of “Cloud
Computing” (use of different Web based tools) for learning purposes will not realizable.
A further very interesting aspect for digital enhanced collaborative learning will be the technology
of wireless mesh networking which is already realized within the OLPC (One Laptop Per Child)
project31. Whenever an OLPC laptop participates in a mobile ad-hoc network with other laptops it
can forward packets across the network cloud. With other words computers in the cloud get
30
http://remashed.ou.nl/ (last visit: August 2009)
31
http://www.laptop.org/en/ (last visit: August 2009)
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
automatically connected to each other and exchange date and information. Collaboration will be
possible just in real time within a classroom setting, which allows working on one digital document
in real time by different learners or on any other learning activity.
Beside the technology aspects, of course many questions concerning the practical experiences and
real life settings are occurring. For example, even if cooperative learning is often a inspiring, funny
and motivating way to learn and to teach, there are several challenges practitioners know, e.g. the
“free rider”-effect, when a group member makes no contribution and let the others work, or the
“sucker”-effect, when the main contributor gets more and more angry, because (s)he it the only one
who works (see e.g. Renkl, Gruber & Mandl, 1996, 135ff). This means that using technology for
education forces to rethink didactical approaches and the way education should be changed to
improve quality.
References
Anderson, R.J., Anderson, R., Vandegrift, T., Wolfman, S. & Yashuhara, K. (2003). Promoting
Interaction in Large Classes with Computer-Mediated Feedback. In: Designing for Change in
Networked Learning Environments, Proceedings of CSCL 2003, Bergen, pp. 119-123.
Barlett-Bragg, A. (2003). Blogging to Learn. 24.01.2007,
http://knowledgetree.flexiblelearning.net.au/edition04/pdf/Blogging_to_Learn.pdf (last visited:
August 2009).
Bell, M. (2001). Online Role-play: anonymity, engagement and risk. In: Education Media
International, Vol. 38 (4), pp. 251-260.
Bollen, L., Juarez, G. & Hoppe, H.U. (2006). Mobile Notes: Mobile Devices in Creative
Discussions, Kaleidoscope Convergence Workshop, Amsterdam: Netherlands, http://hal.archives-
ouvertes.fr/hal-00190508/en/ (last visit: August 2009).
Campione, J. C., Brown, A. L., & Jay, M. (1992). Computers in a community of learners. In:
Computer-Based Learning Environments and Problem Solving. E. D. Corte, M. C. Linn, H. Mandl,
& L. Verschaffel (eds.). New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 163-188.
Dietinger T. & Maurer H. (1998). GENTLE – General Network Training an Learning Environment,
Proc. of ED-MEDIA98 / ED-TELECOM 98, Freiburg, pp. 274–280.
Dulík, T. (2009). Communication. In: K. Grodecka, F. Wild & B. Kieslinger (eds.), How to Use
Social Software in Higher Education. I-Camp Project. URL: http://www.icamp.eu/wp-
content/uploads/2009/01/icamp-handbook-web.pdf
DuVall, J. B., Powell, M. R., Hodge, E. & Maureen E. (2007). Text Messaging to Improve Social
Presence in Online Learning. In: EDUCAUSE, 3, pp. 24-28,
http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/TextMe
ssagingtoImproveSocialPr/161829 (last visited: August 2009)
Ebner, M.; Scerbakov, N. & Maurer, H. (2005). New Features for eLearning in Higher Education
for Civil Engineering. In: E-Learn - World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government,
Healthcare & Higher Education, Vancouver, pp. 635-642.
Ebner, M. & Maurer, H. (2007). Blogging in Higher Education. In: Proceeding E-Learn 2007,
Quebec City, Canada, pp. 767-774.
Ebner, M. & Schiefner, M. (2008a). Microblogging - more than fun? In: Proceedings of IADIS
Mobile Learning Conference 2008, Inmaculada Arnedillo Sánchez and Pedro Isaías ed., Portugal,
pp. 155-159.
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
Ebner, M., Schiefner, M. & Nagler, W. (2008b). Has the Net-Generation Arrived at the University?
oder Studierende von Heute, Digital Natives? In: Zauchner, S., Baumgartner, P., Blaschitz, E.,
Weissenbäck, A. (eds.), Offener Bildungsraum Hochschule, Waxmann, pp. 113-123.
Ebner, M. & Maurer, H. (2008c). Can Microblogs and Weblogs change traditional scientific
writing? In: Proceedings of E-Learn 2008, Las Vegas, pp. 768-776.
Ebner, M.; Kickmeier-Rust, M. & Holzinger, A. (2008d). Utilizing Wiki-Systems in higher
education classes: a chance for universal access? In: Universal Access in the Information Society,
2008, Berlin: Springer.
Ebner, M. (2009a). Introducing Live Microblogging: How Single Presentations Can Be Enhanced
by the Mass. In: Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching (JRIT), 2 (1), pp. 91-100.
Ebner, M. (2009b). Interactive Lecturing by Integrating Mobile Devices and Micro-blogging in
Higher Education. In: CIT - journal of computing and information technology, accepted (in print)
Ebner, M. (2009c). How Web 2.0 Enhance Knowledge Construction in Civil Engineering. In: A.
Starcic and M. Kovac (eds.), University & Industry - Knowledge Transfer and Innovation, WSEAS
Press, Athen, pp. 77-101.
Garrison, D. R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of
reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. In J. Bourne & J. Moore (eds.), Elements of
quality online education: Practice and direction. Volume 4 in the Sloan C Series, Needham, MA:
The Sloan Consortium,
http://sln.suny.edu/sln/public/original.nsf/dd93a8da0b7ccce0852567b00054e2b6/755285ffb5847a4
385256c3c006246ea/$FILE/Learning%20Effectiveness%20paper%20-%20Garrison.doc (last
visited: August 2009)
Gräsel, C.; Bruhn, J.; Mandl, H. & Fischer, F. (1997). Lernen mit Computernetzen aus
konstruktivistischer Perspektive. In: Unterrichtswissenschaft, 25, pp. 4-18.
Helen, S. & Wagner, C. (2006). Weblog Success: exploring the role of technology. In: International
Journal of Human Computer Studies 64, pp. 789-798.
Hornung-Prähauser, V., Geser, G., Hilzensauer, W. & Schaffert, S. (2007). Didaktische,
organisatorische und technologische Grundlagen von E-Portfolios und Analyse internationaler
Beispiele und Erfahrungen mit E-Portfolio-Implementierungen an Hochschulen. Salzburg.
http://edumedia.salzburgresearch.at/images/stories/e-portfolio_studie_srfg_fnma.pdf (last visited:
August 2009).
Holzinger, A. (2002). Multimedia Basics, Volume 2: Learning. Cognitive Fundamentals of
multimedial Information Systems, Laxmi, New Delhi.
Jacksch, B., Kepp, S.-J. & Womser-Hacker, C. (2008). Integration of a Wiki for Collaborative
Knowledge Development in an E-Learning Context for University Teaching. In: A. Holzinger (ed.),
HCI for Education and Work, Berlin: Springer, pp. 77-97.
Jadin, T. & Zöserl, E. (2009). Informelles Lernen mit Web-2.0-Medien. In: bildungsforschung,
Jahrgang 6, Ausgabe 1, URL: http://www.bildungsforschung.org/Archiv/2009-01/Web2.0/
Java, A., Finin, T., Song, X. & Tseng, B. (2007). Why we Twitter: Understanding microblogging
usage and communities, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Joint 9th WEBKDD and 1st
SNA-KDD Workshop.
Kato, H. & Tan, K.T. (2005). 2D barcodes for Mobile Phones, Proceedings of 2nd International
Conference on Mobile Technology, Applications and Settings, p. 8.
Klamma, R., Chatti, M. A., Duval, E., Hummel, H., Hvannberg, E. T., Kravcik, M., Law, E.,
Naeve, A. & Scott, P. (2007). Social software for life-long learning. In: Educational Technology &
Draft Version – Originally published in: Computer-Assisted Teaching: New Developments; Brayden A. Morris and
George M. Ferguson (Ed.); 2010; ISBN: 978-1-60876-855-4; p. 151-156
from & where they’re going, Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems, Denver
(CO), pp. 347-348.
Templeton, M. (2008). Microblogging defined, http://microblink.com/2008/11/11/microblogging-
defined/ (last visited: August 2009).
Tuchinda, R., Szekely, P. & Knoblock, C. (2008). Building MahsUps by Example, ACM
Proceedings of IUI 2008, Maspaloma, Spain.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA).
Wenger, E. (2002). Cultivate Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge, Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.