The study was designed around themes of developing professionalism,career management and reflective practice. However, as Dan explains:“Many traditional learning environments have been slow to respond tothe users needs, with many systems that are years behind in terms ofusability and functionality.”

Firstly, the researchers attempted to define ‘today’s learner’, whotypically has high expectations of ICT (e.g., interactive technology),they multi-task in all areas of life, and expect entertainment.

Then it was the case of using the right Web 2.0 tools for theproject. “It took us a long time to get the right technology,” explainsDan. “We decided to avoid Facebook and we chose a system that wouldfocus on the network rather than accounts.”

“The system supported student feedback and appraisal, and there werediscussion threads and activities, and ‘friend’ features. Of course thesocial aspect was very popular.”

What Robinson and colleagues found was that students were very waryof the network. “They saw it as a ‘fake Facebook’, and they alreadyhave their own online communities and avenues of communication.”

However, the study did highlight that using Web 2.0 technology inmedical education can provide interesting and stimulating technology,it can be motivating and engaging for the students, and it helps buildrelationships. Interestingly, although academic activities werefrequently used by the students, the most popular pages were social.

Another issue was how the university itself has adapted to using Web2.0 technology. “It soon became apparent that universities in generalaren’t used to dealing with third party websites,” Robinson says.

Issues such as who owns the copyright, and how is the safety of thesite guaranteed will need to be resolved before universities can fullyembrace these new technologies.
Clearly there is still a long way to go, but this pilot studyhighlighted the potential benefits of utilizing Web 2.0 for medicaleducation.