Volume Two - Academic Conferences

Andy Coverdale
the participant interviews, and further dissemination will play an increasing role in the remaining
participant interviews. enabling a negotiated understanding of their use of web 2.0. Outside the
limitations of the researcher-participant relationship described here, opportunities for a shared, critical
and reflective dialogue should be seen as important for the development of effective social media
practices.
References
Becher, T. and Trowler, P. R. (2001) Academic tribes and territories (2nd Ed.) Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Bennett, S., Maton, K. and Kervin, L. (2008) “The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence”, British
Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 775-786.
British Library and JISC (2009) “Researchers of tomorrow: A three year study tracking the research behaviour of
'Generation Y' doctoral students. Interim Research Report 1: Summary Report”. London: Education for
Change.
Brooks, C. and Fyffe, J. (2004) “Are we comfortable yet? Developing a community of practice with PhD students
at the University of Melbourne”, Ascilite Conference, Perth.
Chang, R., Kennedy, G. and Petrovic, T. (2008) “Web 2.0 and user-created content: Students negotiating shifts in
academic authority”, Ascilite Conference, Melbourne.
Chiang, K.-H. (2003) “Learning experiences of doctoral students in UK universities”, International Journal of
Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 23, No. 1-2, pp. 4-32.
Conole, G. (2010) “Facilitating new forms of discourse for learning and teaching: harnessing the power of web
2.0 practices”, Open Learning, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 141-151.
Cumming, J. (2010) “Doctoral enterprise: a holistic conception of evolving practices and arrangements”, Studies
in Higher Education, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 25-39.
Deem, R. and Brehony, K. J. (2000) “Doctoral students’ access to research cultures – are some more unequal
than others?”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 149-165.
Engeström, Y. (1987) Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research.
Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engeström, Y. (1993) Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave
(Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp. 64-103.
Engeström, R. (1995) “Voice as communicative action”, Mind, Culture, and Activity, No. 2, pp. 192-214.
Feuer, M. J., Towne, L. and Shavelson, R. J. (2002) “Scientific culture and educational research”, Educational
Researcher, Vol. 31, No. 8, pp. 4-14.
Janson, A. and Howard, L. (2004) “The odyssey of PhD students becoming a community of practice”, Business
Communication Quarterly, Vol. 67, No. 2, pp. 168-181.
McAlpine, L., Jazvac-Martek, M. and Hopwood, N. (2009) “Doctoral student experience: Activities and difficulties
influencing identity development”, International Journal for Researcher Development, Vol. 1, No. 1.
Nardi, B. A. (1996) Activity theory and human-computer interaction. In B. A. Nardi (Ed.), Context and
consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 69-103.
Prenksy, M. (2001) “Digital natives, digital immigrants”, On the Horizon, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 1-6.
Procter, R., Williams, R. and Stuart, J. (2010) “If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use
web 2.0”, London: Research Information Network.
Selwyn, N. (2010) “The educational significance of social media – a critical perspective”, Ed-Media conference
2010, Toronto.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998) Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing
grounded theory (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Thomson, P. and Walker, M. (2010) Doctoral education in context: The changing nature of the doctorate and
doctoral students. In P. Thomson & M. Walker, The Routledge Doctoral Student’s Companion. London:
Routledge. 9-26.
Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, meaning and identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2010) Activity systems analysis methods: Understanding complex learning
environments. New York: Springer.
916