Accès gratuit
Numéro
Pédagogie Médicale
Volume 16, Numéro 1, février 2015
Page(s) 65 - 77
Section Nouvelles technologies éducatives
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2015010
Publié en ligne 13 août 2015
  1. Le Monde. Facebook franchit la barre du milliard d’utilisateurs. Le Monde, 2012 [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2012/10/04/facebook-franchit-la-barre-du-milliard-d-utilisateurs_1770255_651865.html
  2. Cartledge P, Miller M, Philipps B. The use of social-networking sites in medical education. Med Teach 2013;35:847-57. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Viau R. L’impact des TIC sur la motivation à apprendre. In: Viau R. la motivation en contexte scolaire. Bruxelles : De Boeck 2009, Chap. 6.
  4. Serres M. Les nouvelles technologies : révolution culturelle et cognitive. In: l’INRIA a quarante ans, institut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique, 10-11 décembre 2007, Lille. [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://www.acgrenoble.fr/ien.bourgoinashnord/IMG/pdf_Texte_de_la_conference.pdf
  5. Karsenti T, Charlin B. Analyse des impacts des technologies de l’information et de la communication sur l’enseignement et la pratique de la médecine. Pédagogie Médicale 2010;11:127-41. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences]
  6. Conole G, Delaat M, Dillon T, Darby J. “Disruptive technologies”, “pedagogical innovation”: What’s new ? Findings from an in-depth study of students’ use and perception of technology. Computers & Education 2008;50:511–24.
  7. Gunawardena C, Hermans MB, Sanchez D, Richmond C, Bohley M, Tuttle R. A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice with social networking tools. Educ Media Int 2009;46:3–16. [CrossRef]
  8. Prensky M. Digital natives, digital immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon 2001;9:1-6.
  9. Frand JL. The information-age mindset: changes in students and implications for higher education. Educause Review 2000;35:15-24
  10. Boulé F. Hautement différente : la génération Y, un défi de taille pour l’enseignement médical. Pédagogie Médicale 2012;13:9–25 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences]
  11. Deschryver N, Mishra P, Koehleer M, Francis A. Moodle vs. Facebook: Does using Facebook for Discussions in an Online Course Enhance Perceived Social Presence and Student Interaction? In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), 2009, Charleston, SC, USA:329-336. ISBN 1-880094-67-3
  12. Karpinski AC, Duberstein A. A Description of Facebook Use and Academic Performance Among Undergraduate and Graduate Students. In: American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. San Diego, CA, 2009.
  13. The Nielsen company. Social Networks/Blogs Now Account for One in Every Four and a Half Minutes Online Newswire 2010 [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2010/social-media-accounts-for-22-percent-of-time-online.html
  14. Gray K, Annabell L, Kennedy G. Medical students’ use of Facebook to support learning: insights from four case studies. Med Teach 2010;32:971–6. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Giordano C, Giordano C. Health professions students’ use of social media. J Allied Health 2011;40:78–81. [PubMed]
  16. Pimmer C. Linxen S, Gröhbiel U, Jha AK, Burg G.. Mobile learning in resource-constrained environments: a case study of medical education. Med Teach 2013;35:1157‑65. [CrossRef]
  17. Cain J, Scott DR, Akers P. Pharmacy students’ Facebook activity and opinions regarding accountability and e-professionalism. Am J Pharm Educ 2009;73:104. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Caruso J, Salaway G. The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2007. ECAR Key Findings 2007 [On-line]. Disponible sur : https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERS0706/EKF0706.pdf
  19. Ipsos MORI. Great expectations of ICT: How higher education institutions are measuring up. Joint Information Systems Committee 2008 [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/jiscgreatexpectationsfinalreportjune08.pdf
  20. Madge C, Meek J, Wellens J, Hooley T. Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: “It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work”. Learning, Media and Technology 2009;34:141‑55. [CrossRef]
  21. King S, Greidanus E, Carbonaro M, Drummond J, Patterson S. Merging social networking environments and formal learning environments to support and facilitate interprofessional instruction. Med Educ Online 2009;14:5. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Estus EL. Using facebook within a geriatric pharmacotherapy course. Am J Pharm Educ 2010;74:145. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Vincent AH, Weber ZA. Using Facebook Within a Pharmacy Elective Course. Am J Pharm Educ 2011;75:13c. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Cain J., Policastri A. Using Facebook as an informal learning environment. Am J Pharm Educ 2011; 75:207. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Waxman HC, Lin MF, Michko GM. A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Teaching and Learning With Technology on Student Outcomes. Learning Point Associates, Meta-analysis of technology, 2003 [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://treeves.coe.uga.edu/edit6900/metaanalysisNCREL.pdf
  26. Burns T, Ungerleider C. A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Networked ICT in Education. A State of the Field Report to the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada and Industry Canada 2003 [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://phase2.cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/55/SystematicReview2003.en.pdf
  27. Pelaccia T, Delplancq H, Triby E, Leman C, Bartier J-C, Dupeyron J-P. La motivation en formation : une dimension réhabilitée dans un environnement d’apprentissage en mutation. Pédagogie Médicale 2008;9:103-21 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences]
  28. Kirschner PA, Karpinski AC. Facebook and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior 2010; 26:1237–45. [CrossRef]
  29. Metzger AH, Finley KN, Ulbrich TR, McAuley JW. Pharmacy Faculty Members’ Perspectives on the Student/Faculty Relationship in Online Social Networks. Am J Pharm Educ 2010;74:188. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Cain J. Online Social Networking Issues Within Academia and Pharmacy Education. Am J Pharm Educ 2008;72:10. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Thompson LA, Dawson K, Ferdig R, Black EW, Boyer J, Coutts J, et al. The Intersection of Online Social Networking with Medical Professionalism. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23:954–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Ophus J, Abbitt J. Exploring the potential perceptions of social networking systems in university courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 2009. [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://jolt.merlot.org/vol5no4/ophus_1209.htm
  33. Marquet P. e-Learning et conflit instrumental. Recherche & formation 2012;68:31‑46.
  34. Lebrun M. Théories et méthodes pédagogiques pour enseigner et apprendre : quelle place pour les TIC dans l’éducation ? 2e éd. Bruxelles : De Boeck Supérieur, 2007.
  35. Lebrun, Marcel. méthodes actives... pour favoriser l’apprentissage. Motivations et Interactions. 2èmes journées de la eFormation, Aix en Provence, 2010.
  36. Daalsgard C. Social networking sites: Transparency in online education. Paper presented at the European University Information Systems Organisation. [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://eunis.dk/papers/p41.pdf
  37. Oblinger D, Hawkins B. The myth about no significant difference. Educause Review 2006;41: 14-5
  38. Ramage TR. The « no significant difference » phenomenon: A literature review. Parkland College. 2002 [On-line]. Disponible sur : http://spark.parkland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=ramage_pubs
  39. Russell TL. The No Significant Difference Phenomenon: A Comparative Research Annotated Bibliography on Technology for Distance Education. 5e éd. (1re éd. 1999) Chicago : IDECC, 2001.
  40. Regehr G. It’s NOT rocket science: rethinking our metaphors for research in health professions education. Med Educ 2010;44:31–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Les statistiques affichées correspondent au cumul d'une part des vues des résumés de l'article et d'autre part des vues et téléchargements de l'article plein-texte (PDF, Full-HTML, ePub... selon les formats disponibles) sur la platefome Vision4Press.

Les statistiques sont disponibles avec un délai de 48 à 96 heures et sont mises à jour quotidiennement en semaine.

Le chargement des statistiques peut être long.