The function of Technology in the classroom

Learning Theories


Traditional schoolroom acquisition is based on the Behaviourist Theory. The instructor initiates actions and interactions. Students learn passively as they listen to the instructor and memorize what is being taught in order to remember this information at a ulterior phase. Learning happens when cognition is transferred from the instructor to the pupil. The pupil responds to stimuli. Reinforcing the ensuing behavior increases the chance that the behavior will happen once more. B. F. Skinner ( 1968 ) gathered much of the experimental informations that form the footing of the Behavioural acquisition theory. Behaviour is either strengthened or weakened by the presence of a wages or penalty. Behaviorists believe that the scholar starts off as a clean slate and behavior is shaped through positive or negative support. Learning is hence defined as a alteration in behavior in the scholar. The Behaviourist theory of larning does non develop the pupil ‘s ability to work with other pupils in group state of affairss.


The footing of the Constructivist theory is that larning happens when cognition is constructed through staging in the encephalon. Understanding is constructed measure by measure through active engagement. Lev Vygotsky ‘s ‘Social Development Theory ‘ is one of the foundations of the Constructivist theory. He believed that societal interaction is required in the development of apprehension and that community plays a cardinal function in this societal interaction. Vygotsky suggested that ‘The Zone of Proximal Development ‘ ( ZPD ) and the ‘More Knowledgeable Other ‘ ( MKO ) form the footing of the staging for which to construct understanding on. The ZPD is the distance between a pupil ‘s ability to make a undertaking under the instructor ‘s counsel ( or peer coaction ) and the pupil ‘s ability to make the undertaking on their ain. Harmonizing to Vygotsky acquisition occurred in this zone. The MKO refers to person who has a better apprehension or higher ability degree with respect to the undertaking than that of the scholar. The MKO is frequently the instructor but could besides be the scholars peer ( Santrock, 2004 ) .

In a constructivist schoolroom the accent is on the pupil ‘s ownership of the acquisition through building their ain significances. These pupils are non merely the consumers of cognition but besides the manufacturers of cognition ( Oldfather, 1999 ) . Constructivism has become an appealing option to traditional educational patterns. It promises to make womb-to-tomb active scholars who can use their accomplishments to allow demands of the hereafter.


Jean Piaget studied the procedure of cognitive development. He investigated the psychological development of kids. He called for instructors to understand the stairss of development in a kid ‘s head. He believed that for a kid to understand he/she had to detect for themselves. This would enable the kid to be productive and originative and non merely merely reiterating what they heard from their instructor ( Piaget, 1973 ) .

Cognitive psychologists began to concentrate their attending on the development of mental abilities. Bruner ( 1966 ) stated that topics should non be taught in order to “ bring forth small populating libraries on that topic ” but that pupils should take portion in acquiring the cognition for themselves. “ Knowing is a procedure non a merchandise ” .

Multiple Intelligences

Often intelligence is measured by exam consequences and school classs. Alfred Binet tried to invent a type of step that would foretell the success or failure of primary school kids ‘s classs. This was the bow smuggler of the IQ trial. In the 1980 ‘s a psychologist Howard Gardner identified that people have different cognitive strengths every bit good as cognitive manners ( Gardner, 1983 ) . Gardner proposed eight types of intelligences. The intelligences are like endowments and gifts and there are many different combinations. These Intelligences can besides be strengthened in the person.

Isabella stewart gardners ‘ ( 1999 ) eight intelligences are:

1. Verbal/Linguistic: the ability to utilize linguistic communication to depict events and/or sensitiveness to the significance and order of words.

2. Logical/Mathematical: ability to utilize Numberss in order to depict or use in personal day-to-day life and/or to hold the ability to use the aesthetics of mathematics or logic to work out jobs

3. Musical: the ability to understand and develop music and/or sensitiveness to flip, tune, beat, and tone.

4. Spatial: ability to visually comprehend the universe and/or to creatively show thoughts into visuals.

5. Bodily/Kinesthetic: ability to utilize the organic structure and to manage objects skillfully and/or ability to construct and fix.

6. Interpersonal: ability to understand people and relationships and/or aid people solve jobs.

7. Intrapersonal: ability to understand oneself and others and/or ability to organize others.

8. Naturalist: the aptitude for detecting nature and /or ability to recognize and sort characteristics of the environment.

As a response to Gardner ‘s theory many instructors changed their position of how pupils learn. They accepted that all pupils learn otherwise and that these differences should be reflected in instruction. Gardner stated that pupils “ must be given the chance to work on certain subjects in deepness, in item alternatively of holding a wide overview of everything in a stiff curricular system ” ( Gardner, 1991 ) .


In 2005 George Siemens proposed another acquisition theory which recognises the impact that engineering has on society and ways of geting cognition. He called this theory Connectivism. He surmised that larning in the digital age occurs through interaction with assorted beginnings of cognition ( e.g cyberspace, larning platforms ) and communities of engagement ( e.g. societal webs ) . His larning theory is based on persons linking with each other and with engineering. Learning is achieved by recovering information from one ego, others and machines join forcesing to make cognition ( Siemens, 2005 ) .

Learning Manners

Learning Manners

“ Learning manner is the manner persons concentrate on, absorb, and retain new or hard information or accomplishments. It is non the stuffs, or schemes that people use to larn: those are the resources that complement each individual ‘s manner. Style comprises a combination of environmental, emotional, sociological, physical, and psychological elements that permit persons to have, shop and utilize cognition or abilities ” ( Exceptional Children,1983 ) .

Jody Whelden, a psychotherpist, counsellor and instructor concluded that “ each acquisition manner is like an instrument in an orchestra, childs need to cognize what instrument is theirs and how they fit into the orchestra. ” She acknowledged that instructors who know what larning manners suit their pupils are traveling to be more successful in acquiring through to their pupils.

Along with Vida Groman, ( a instructor, adviser and healer ) they conducted a workshop in 1996 on “ Learning Styles-Creating More Success for Students. ”

They concluded that Learning manners are based by and large on three tracts to larning ; ocular ( sight ) , kinaesthetic ( organic structure, esthesis, gesture ) , and auditory ( sound ) ; and three provinces of consciousness: witting, subconscious and unconscious. By uniting these and other factors, you can place a individual as falling into one of six acquisition manners. A learning manner is identified by linking tracts and provinces of consciousness. Whelden and Groman said cognizing acquisition manners can assist instructors in the schoolroom to “ assist kids believe and larn to the best of their abilities ” and besides to understand behaviors that might stand in the manner of larning ” .

They identified Six Learning Styles for the schoolroom

Show and Tellers ( V-A-K )

These learn best through reading and bask stating narratives. They are good pupils but shy off from athletics

Seer / antennas ( V-K-A )

These learn best by making as they were shown and tend to inquire eternal inquiries. Normally prefer group work.

Leaderships of the Pack ( A-K-V )

These learn by learning others. May have trouble larning to read and compose but have an extended speech production vocabulary.

Verbal gymnasts ( A-V-K )

These are good communicators who love facts and have to speak to understand. May non be good at athleticss.

Rolling wonderers ( K-V-A )

These learn best in purdah. Do n’t necessitate verbal direction to make physical undertakings. Can go overwhelmed by listening.

Movers and groovers ( K-A-V )

These need to utilize their organic structures in order to larn – frequently labeled overactive. Reading and composing may be really hard.

( As described by writer Dawna Markova, 1996 )

A basic consciousness of larning manners can help instructors in assisting kids think, learn and act to the best of their abilities. The aim of instruction should be to assist pupils “ construct their accomplishments in both their preferred and less preferable manners of larning ” ( Felder 1996 ) .

Multi Intelligences attack in the schoolroom

In a traditional schoolroom puting the verbal-linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences are the 1s most often used. In order to ‘tap in ‘ to pupils whose strengths and abilities can be found in other intelligences a more balanced course of study that incorporates the humanistic disciplines, self-awareness and communicating may be utile.

Even though the ‘Multiple Intelligence ‘ theory was non addressed to instructors but to psychologists, the educational community embraced Gardner ‘s theory. ‘Multiple intelligence ‘ is a natural manner to construction larning in school schoolrooms as all pupils are different and respond otherwise to assorted manners of direction. A schoolroom that embraces the ‘Multiple Intelligences ‘ acquisition manner will see the function of the instructor displacement from the traditional instruction and larning function to a modern manner of instruction and acquisition. The function of the pupil besides changes. The pupil becomes more responsible for their acquisition and the relationship between instructor and scholar alterations.

Katrin Becker ( 2003 ) acknowledges that it is non possible to to the full ‘understand ‘ something without affecting more than one ‘intelligence ‘ . That to merely declaim a piece does non turn out that something has been to the full ‘understood ‘ but if it can be “ transferred from one signifier of look to another ” so it can be assumed that ‘understanding ‘ was achieved.

In Elizabeth Hope ‘s paper “ Dissemination of Information for kids ” she concludes that there is a great demand for instructors to believe ‘outside the box ‘ and research different ways of pass oning with their pupils. Teachers frequently lose chances to make their pupils because they prefer to utilize tradition methods of learning alternatively of prosecuting in different attacks. This consequences in “ deficiency of motive, opposition, misperceptions, failure and unreflective work from the pupils ” . She acknowledges that the “ ideal schoolroom addresses the many-sided demands of the kids and entices immature heads to spread out and research the unknown ” .

Group Work

Working in Groups

When working in a group, cognition is shared among the group. The group are non larning passively as in traditional schoolroom acquisition. They are active participants larning with and from their equals. This type of larning aids pupils to develop higher order thought and deeper apprehension of what they are larning ( Palloff & A ; Pratt, 2005 ) .

The chief accent of group work is that the “ Centre of larning prevarications within the group ” . When making a undertaking or activity the group offers common aid to its members, which in bend leads to common acquisition ( Unesco, 1981 ) .

Smaller group sizes of four or five pupils are better than larger groups. Larger groups restrict pupil engagement and so provide less learning chances. With a smaller group size each pupil is given an chance to increase their acquisition and accomplishments ( Cooper, 1990 ) . Students working in little groups tend to larn more of what is being taught and retain the information longer. Working in collaborative groups besides appears to be more fulfilling for pupils ( Johnson, Johnson, and Smith, 1991 ) .

The Primary Professional Development Service offer the undermentioned advice when sing the group size for primary school collaborative group work

aˆ? The shorter the clip available, the smaller the group should be, as there is less puting up clip, and the kids have more clip to be heard.

aˆ? The larger the group, the more adept kids must be in footings of bend pickings, and the more support they will necessitate to treat the task/learning.

aˆ? The nature of the undertaking or the resources available may order the size of the group.

Steiner ( 1972 ) offers four classs of undertakings which should be considered when contemplating group work.

Disjunctive undertakings

These undertakings require merely one member of the group to be capable of accomplishing. This does non let other members of the group to take part as they can trust on the more knowing member to accomplish it.

Conjunctive undertakings

These undertakings require each group member to lend and if the undertaking is successful so the whole group should hold acquired satisfactory acquisition.

Linear undertakings

These undertakings refer to group work where each extra group member has something to add to the overall end product.

Discretionary undertakings

These undertakings allow group members to hold discretion in how they combine their attempts.

Group work and ICT

The debut of computing machines into schoolrooms tends to increase communicating and coaction among pupils ( Chernick & A ; White, 1981 ) . Students prefer to work together at the computing machine than on their ain ( Muller & A ; Perlmutter, 1985 ) . Working at the computing machine together is more fun and gratifying which in bend increases the pupils ‘ intrinsic motive leting for a more satisfied scholar who is more likely to retain the cognition learned for thirster ( Dev, 1997 ) . Using computing machines for collaborative group work can suit different acquisition manners and civilizations more easy. Research has shown that kids working in little groups, and interacting with computing machines can hold good effects on acquisition and development, particularly among immature kids ( Stanton, Neale, & A ; Bayon, 2002 ) .

Experiences at the University of Hagen in Germany, who have been utilizing assorted on-line instruction methods for over 10 old ages, found that pupils are much more motivated when larning on-line and that the dropout rate is diminishing. The feedback they receive has been wholly positive for their online instruction methods. They besides found that for some groups, communicating extended longer than the continuance of their pupils surveies ( Feldmann, 2006 ) .

Feldmann ( 2006 ) defines three group types in the context of e-learning. These are

The Study Team

The survey squad would usually be within one school or university. They would be an informal group of assorted sizes. These groups continue through the complete clip of the pupil ‘s surveies and offer communicating and support for its members.

The Learning Team

These groups are similar to the survey squad groups but would be more involved in collaborative acquisition for exam readying and offer ( along with communicating and support ) motive to its members in the readying of tests.

The Working Team

The chief difference between this group and the old two is that this group ‘s intent is really clearly described to its members. There is a peculiar end to be achieved. The other difference between this group and the others is that coach counsel is indispensable for the group ‘s success.

Communication and Collaboration

The Irish primary school course of study acknowledges the importance of communicating between pupils and provinces that in a “ quickly altering society effectual interpersonal and intrapersonal accomplishments and accomplishments in communicating are indispensable for personal, societal and educational fulfillment ” ( Curriculum, 1999 ) .

Communication and coaction with other pupils provokes activity, makes larning more realistic and stimulates motive. The focal point is on the scholar ‘s ability to mentally build significance of their ain environment and to make their ain significance enabling pupils to go more active and independent scholars. Evidence suggests that for many scholars “ the chance to prosecute in societal, collaborative acquisition is per se prosecuting ” ( Becta, 2008 ) .

In 1965 Vygotsky wrote, “ What kids can make together today, they can make entirely tomorrow ” ( Johnson & A ; Johnson, 1994 ) . The Irish primary School course of study acknowledges the importance of collaborative work in the schoolroom. In its debut it states that the “ experience of collaborative acquisition facilitates the kid ‘s societal and personal development, and the pattern of working with others brings kids to an early grasp of the benefits to be gained from co-operative attempt ” ( Curriculum, 1999 ) .

Learning through communicating and coaction, assists instructors in a specific aim through a shared activity, by agencies of societal interactions among members of the group. Working in collaborative groups has societal and academic benefits for kids ( Dillenbourg, 1999 ) .

Haiwei Jin ( 2009 ) offers five principals of design for making an effectual acquisition faculty for concerted acquisition.

The principal of student-centred

Learning is achieved by pupils detecting and building intending through active geographic expedition.

The rule of inducement

The inducement is to excite motive. The “ focal point of inducements is to better the pupils involvement in larning to run into the acquisition demands ” . Jin describes public presentation as a individual ‘s “ ability and degree to excite ” . He suggests that strong motive can do up for weak ability.

The principal of sharing

Knowledge is shared either through direct communicating or exchange of paperss with group members and/or instructors.

The principal of Interaction

For effectual coaction there must be interaction among pupils. The basic effectual interaction is communicating.

The principal of Feedback

Leting pupils know the consequences of their acquisition will heighten the “ function in advancing the scholar to larn harder ” . “ Instantaneous feedback is more effectual than delayed feedback ” .


Motivation plays a major portion in larning. It is the difference between a pupil larning something superficially or for good. “ Student motive of course has to make with pupils ‘ desire to take part in the acquisition procedure ” ( Lumsden 1994 ) . When “ kids ‘s self-esteem and assurance are raised ” so “ their motive to larn is increased ” ( Curriculum, 1999 )

Extrinsic motive refers to a scholar who learns “ in order to obtain some wages or avoid some punishment external to the activity itself, ” such as school classs or instructor blessing ( Lepper, 1998 ) .

Intrinsic motive refers to the satisfaction and sense of achievement a learner gets from larning. The scholar is motivated to larn because he/she enjoys it irrespective of whether it brings an immediate wages or non ( Covington, 1998 ) . If a pupil is per se motivated they will retain information thirster ( Dev, 1997 ) and are more likely to be womb-to-tomb scholars who will go on to educate themselves outside of the schoolroom ( Kohn, 1993 ) .

Holt ( 1987 ) found that members of a group showed decreased motive when they were non psychologically connected. If the group can be made to count to it ‘s members so motive and coaction are increased. One manner of doing a group affair to it ‘s members ( particularly kids ) is to include activities that the group see as ‘fun ‘ . This is increase interaction and motive within the group taking to group committedness to the undertaking in manus.

Technology in the schoolroom

Technology in the schoolroom

Today ‘s coevals of scholars no longer are satisfied having information passively in the schoolroom but alternatively want to detect for themselves and go “ synergistic with the acquisition ” ( Tapscott, 1998 ) . In 2008 the UNESCO released the ICT Competency Standards for instructors – Execution Guidelines. It states “ To populate, larn, and work successfully in an progressively complex, information-rich and knowledge-based society, pupils and instructors must use engineering efficaciously. ” In 2007 Becta published a study which highlighted the benefit of utilizing engineering for larning. In the study it states that “ instructors and students are extremely positive about the impact that utilizing engineering can hold on motive and battle ” . It does admit the fact that in a batch of instances engineering is still being used for whole category learning alternatively of “ back uping independent or little group larning ” . The study acknowledges that “ Where engineering is used to back up acquisition, even if utilised strictly to heighten bing pattern, we can now be confident there is a positive general impact on larning results ” ( Becta. 2007 ) . Students are more motivated and engaged in their acquisition when they are active and hold some control over the learning procedure ( Anderman & A ; Midgley, 1998 ) .

Using computing machine based applications “ can heighten how kids learn by back uping four cardinal features of acquisition: ( 1 ) active battle, ( 2 ) engagement in groups, ( 3 ) frequent interaction and feedback, and ( 4 ) connexions to real-world contexts ” ( Roschelle, 2000 ) . The usage of computing machines enables pedagogues to heighten the quality of larning for their pupils. New computing machine engineering applications nurture constructivist course of study ends as they involve and motivate pupils as they actively learn. Students can work together in groups and give support and aid ( MKO ) where needed. Emerging computing machine engineerings allow instructors to offer larning in new ways “ offering new chances for learner control, single and societal building of cognition and larning through coaction and conversation ” ( Becta, 2007 )

Using computing machines allows for communicating and coaction between pupils. This will ensue in “ different and contrasting positions ” , which will develop a “ rich and robust cognition base ” ( Sulaiman et al 2004 ) .

The Irish Context

The Irish primary school course of study acknowledges the importance of incorporating ICT into the Curriculum. In its debut it states “ The course of study integrates ICT into the instruction and acquisition procedure and provides kids with chances to utilize modern engineering to heighten their acquisition in all topics ” ( Curriculum, 1999 ) .

In 2000 the Irish Government launched an ICT programme to incorporate ICT into the Irish educational system. In 2008 an allotment of a‚¬252 million was made available to the National Development Plan for the ‘ICT in schools programme ‘ . A study commissioned by the Department of Education and Science ( 2008 ) acknowledges that “ Learning is altering ” and that “ a polar force in conveying about this alteration is the usage of information and communications engineering ( ICT ) ” It goes on to admit that when ICT is used efficaciously it “ enriches acquisition and enhances learning. It invigorates schoolroom activities and is a powerful motivational tool that encourages scholars to come on in more individualized and autonomous ways ” . ( Dep, of Ed and Science 2008 )

Despite all the ICT enterprises computing machine engineering in the Irish schoolroom is still being seen as a topic to be learned alternatively of a tool to back up acquisition ( McGarr, 2009 ) . It is likely that the usage of ICT in schools is connected to the instructor ‘s competency in utilizing ICT applications. If this is the instance instructors should have equal preparation in the usage of ICT and its application to curriculum topics ( Eivers, Shiel, Perkins & A ; Cosgrove ) .

McGarr and Kearney ( 2009 ) conducted a survey to determine the “ function of the instruction principal in advancing ICT usage in little primary schools in Ireland ” . The survey involved questioning 13 primary school principals and their position of ICT in their schools. The survey found that the principals were ab initio enthusiastic with the national ICT in schools initiative in 2000. However its debut added more demands to their places as principals. This along with “ deficiency of up to informations resources, hapless degrees of proficient support and clip ” were identified as the chief grounds for ICT non be utilized efficaciously. Decisions from the survey suggest that principals should n’t be given the excess load of being “ responsible for the leading of ICT ” and foreground the demand for “ alternate theoretical accounts of support and leading ” . They suggested that the formation of a web of similar sized schools “ supplying pedagogical leading in the countries of ICT ” could be effectual. Besides schools join forcesing with one another “ sharing theoretical accounts of good pattern ” could promote effectual and good duologue between instructors about the usage and future usage of ICT in the schoolroom.

Web 2.0

Web 2.0

The term “ Web 2.0 ” was coined in 2004 by Dale Dougherty, a vice-president of O’Reilly Media Inc. ( Anderson, 2007 ) to establish new web web applications where the web is used as a platform. Software applications are built upon this web platform as opposed to upon the desktop. Web 2.0 is an “ umbrella term that is used to mention to a new epoch of Web-enabled applications that are built around user-generated or user-manipulated content, such as wikis, web logs, podcasts, and societal networking sites ” ( Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2010 )

Before Web 2.0 the cyberspace was ‘static ‘ or ‘read-only ‘ . Information was published to web sites and accessed by the reader. However, with the debut of Web 2.0 it has now become as easy to make or ‘write ‘ content, as it is to entree and read it. The reader can now besides be a author of information. The web has changed from a “ read-only medium to one where anyone can print and portion content and easy join forces with others ” ( Richardson, 2006 ) . Research has shown that pupils “ experience a sense of ownership and battle when they publish work online and this can promote attending to detail and an overall improved quality of work ” ( Becta, 2008 ) .

Merchant ( 2009 ) offers four characteristic characteristics of Web 2.0 infinites

Presence: Web 2.0 infinites “ encourgages users to develop an active presence ” online.

Alteration: Web 2.0 infinites “ allows users to associate one application to another or import objects and characteristics from one infinite to another ” .

User-generated content: Web 2.0 infinites “ are based upon content which is generated within and by the community of users instead than provided by the site itself ” .

Social engagement: Web 2.0 infinites “ provide an invitation to take part ” .

Web 2.0 in the schoolroom

More and more pupils are utilizing Web 2.0 applications in their leisure clip. In 2008 Becta carried out major research into the usage of Web 2.0. The studies found that “ immature scholars are fecund users of Web 2.0 engineerings in their leisure clip but that the usage of Web 2.0 in the schoolroom was limited. ” Adapting these applications within the schoolroom environment would assist “ to promote pupil battle and increase engagement ” ( Becta, 2008 ) .

Sword and Leggott ( 2007 ) offer “ seven rules for instruction the Ne ( x ) T coevals ” .

1. Relinquish authorization

2. Recast pupils as instructors research workers and manufacturers of cognition

3. Promote collaborative relationships

4. Cultivate multiple intelligences

5. Foster critical creativeness, and

6. Trade assignments that look both frontward and backward

7. Promote resiliency in the face of alteration

Halsey ( 2007 ) acknowledges that “ through careful planned and thoughtful integrating ” the first six could be achieved in a primary school schoolroom utilizing Web.2 tools. She argues that the 7th principal is “ possibly more applicable to the instructor ” .

The usage of Web 2.0 applications allow instructors to offer larning in new ways. They allow for “ new chances for learner control, single and societal building of cognition and larning through coaction and conversation ” . ( Becta, 2008 )

Evidence suggests that for many scholars prosecuting in societal and collaborative acquisition is “ per se prosecuting. Web 2.0 practicians on a regular basis noted that even more untalkative scholars made powerful parts to online coactions ” ( Becta, 2008 ) besides report that even though pupils use collaborative infinites online e.g. societal webs, they do n’t “ ever do the connexion between these societal infinites and their possible as platforms for larning ” . Teachers need to back up scholars to “ utilize these familiar tools to back up acquisition, and to back up them in developing the accomplishments needed for this ” .

Learning Platforms/Virtual Classrooms

The manner in which people learn is altering invariably and as a consequence the when, where and how pupils learn demands to maintain gait with this alteration. With the debut of ICT in the schoolroom new avenues of acquisition opened up. A recent tendency in instruction has seen larning alteration from the traditional manner in which pupils learn with the debut of larning platforms or practical schoolrooms. Learning platforms or practical schoolrooms are footings covering a assortment of different merchandises, all of which support acquisition by the usage of a assortment of digital applications which can be uploaded to a shared online environment. Since the debut of Web 2.0, larning platforms and practical schoolrooms are going more platitude in the schoolroom. These on-line environments can supply pupils with “ new, prosecuting larning experiences and back up the development of effectual acquisition techniques for all acquisition manners. It enables kids to take part and go on their acquisition in a safe, familiar environment, both inside and outside school ” ( Becta, 2009 ) .

When used efficaciously, these new engineerings help do larning more effectual and besides extend the pupils larning outside the schoolroom therefore leting larning to go on in the place. When used efficaciously, these new engineerings help do larning more effectual and besides extend the pupils larning outside the schoolroom therefore leting larning to go on in the place. In a recent ( 2010 ) recent publication on larning platforms by Becta it states “ Effective communicating and coaction aid do learning more efficient. Learning platforms besides enable school leaders to develop new patterns to pull off and supervise acquisition and learning results ” .

If the design of a learning platform is non perfect it will impede the development of successful concerted acquisition ( Haiwei Jin, 2009 ) . Three chief jobs were identified in current acquisition platforms ( Mou Zhan-sheng ; Guo Xi-yue ; Chen Ji-chao, 2009 ) “ 1. Excessive sorts and Numberss of agents ; 2. Concentrating on mold, non on execution ; 3. Paying much more attending to the agent itself and disregarding the nature of collaborative acquisition ” . If a acquisition platform is designed right it “ enhances learning involvement, larning effects and communicating and collaborative competencies of pupils ” .