No 14 - Journal of Social Informatics / Revista de Informatica Sociala

The conclusion of our statistical analysis is that the great number of students with low interest forindividual study based on the wiki resources is mainly due to the low frequence of teacherfeedback, low attendance of face-to-face meetings (no compulsory attendance was stipulated at thebeginning of the semester) and, finally, the students’ own type of involvement in the learningactivity, namely slow start and increased frequency after mid-semester and at the end-of-semesterintervals, when assessment constraints became imminent.4. CONCLUSIONSDue to the transition to the semantic web where most activities are carried out under the sign ofcollaboration and the results of numerous studies/ surveys attesting Web 2.0 technologies’beneficial impact on learning, we have decided to introduce the wiki as a component of a blendedlearning approach to learning English for Specific/Academic Purposes.Our research will continue with corrections and adaptations of the wiki platform in order to meetthe needs of students by creating a balance of face-to-face meetings and wiki presence, a regularfeedback pattern teacher-students and distributing tasks and assessment/ self-assessment activitiesduring the semester interval.A long-term goal would be to identify student profiles based on an interdisciplinary approach(cultural, educational, demographic, language level dimensions) that would allow us to personalisethe collaborative learning process into more efficient working groups. This would help us build adetermining/defining pattern of relationships based on methods from the game theory that wouldhelp optimise the learning process and bring about enhanced professional, social and personalresults for all parties involved.REFERENCES1. Carver, D., (1983). Some propositions about ESP. In The ESP Journal no. 2, pag: 131-137.2. Constructivismul in educatie, http://inovatie.numeris.com.ro/E.Noveanu-Constructivismul.pdf.3. Digital competitiveness: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/item-detaildae.cfm?item_id=64994. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., O'Malley, C., (1996). The evolution of research oncollaborative learning. In E. Spada and P. Reiman (eds). (1996). Learning in Humans andMachine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science. pag: 189-211. Oxford: Elsevier.5. Doise, W., Mugny, G., (1984). The social development of the intellect. In Doise, W. andMugny, G., (1984). Dezvoltarea socială a intelectului. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Oxford:Pergamon Press.6. Drugan, T., Achimas, A., Tigan, S., (2005). Biostatistică, Editura SRIMA, Cluj-Napoca.7. Eurostat. Information Society Statistical Data, (2009). URL: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/information_society/data/main_tables. Accessed 22 December 2010.8. Flash Eurobarometer nr. 260, (2009). Students and Higher Education Reform, URL:http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_260_en.pdf Retrieved 10 March 2010.9. Freeman, R. E., (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman PublishingInc., Marshfield, MA.10. Friedman, M., (1962). Capitalism and Freedom. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.11. Goodsell, A., Maher, M., Tinto, V., Leigh Smith, B., MacGregor, J., (1992). What IsCollaborative Learning? in Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education, TheNational Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment at Pennsylvania StateUniversity.12. Harmer, J., (2007). English Language Teaching, Pearson. Longman.13. Harriman, G., (2010). Learning 2.0: fad, new pedagogical, or something else?, http://www.grayharriman.com/learning2.htm. Retrieved 30 March, 2010.