Research Article

‘Virtual sphere’ in the framework of knowledge strategy and the function as common educational tool: Knowledge societies in COVID-19 era

Ayhan Dolunay 1 *
More Detail
1 Near East University, Nicosia, CYPRUS* Corresponding Author
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(1), January 2023, e202304, https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/12840
Published: 15 January 2023
OPEN ACCESS   1005 Views   743 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Habermas’ (1974) concept of the ‘public sphere’ (öffentlichkeit) enabled the bourgeoisie to participate in the process of discussing social issues and making various decisions which were influential in the formation of the laws regulating social life. Same time, it is an important common educational tool. Although the public sphere refers to citizens expressing their idea in a society, the virtual sphere has rapidly moved on to the Internet environment using social media. Within the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has spread to many countries and has been causing serious repercussions as a pandemic. The use of digital technologies has increased significantly during the pandemic, and they have helped transform people’s lives. In this context, Discussion of virtual sphere has also gained importance. Codification and personalization types of knowledge strategy will be followed in this study by conceptualizing a framework, which will be designed by understanding the virtual sphere in a society. There is still a literature gap the relationship between public sphere and virtual sphere as well as the lack of understanding for the integration of knowledge strategies (codification and personalization) with virtual sphere 1.0 and 2.0 in the context of tacit and explicit knowledge. The main problematic issue of this study revolves around how two type of knowledge strategies could be used by virtual spheres 1.0 and 2.0. Two propositions which will be expected to contribute to the literature were developed in the study to understand the roles of two types of knowledge strategies in relation to virtual sphere variants regarding the digital society and knowledge society.
Keywords: digitalization, codification strategy, COVID-19 era, knowledge strategy, virtual sphere 1.0, personalization strategy, virtual sphere 2.0

CITATION (APA)

Dolunay, A. (2023). ‘Virtual sphere’ in the framework of knowledge strategy and the function as common educational tool: Knowledge societies in COVID-19 era. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(1), e202304. https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/12840

REFERENCES

  1. Avşar, Z., & Öngören, G. (2010). Bilişim hukuku [IT LAW], Türkiye Barolar Birliği Yayınları [Union of Turkish Bar Associations Publications], İstanbul.
  2. Babacan, M. E., Haslak, I., & Hira, I. (2011). Sosyal medya ve Arap Baharı [Social media and the Arab Spring]. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi [Journal of Academic Reviews], 6(2), 63-92.
  3. Bonk, C. J. (2009). The world is open: How web technology is revolutionizing education. Jossey-Bass.
  4. Cetin, C., & Anuk, O. (2020). COVID-19 pandemi sürecinde yalnızlık ve psikolojik dayanıklılık: Bir kamu üniversitesi öğrencileri örneklemi [Loneliness and resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: A sample of public university students]. Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi [Eurasian Journal of Social and Economic Studies], 7(5), 170-189.
  5. Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in higher education. http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/EvidenceNet/Conole_Alevizou_2010.pdf
  6. Demirkiran, H. (2019). Psychological need: Belonging to the group. http://www.devrimgazetesi.com.tr/psikolojik-ihtiyac-gruba-ait-olma/
  7. Dolunay, A. (2018). Dijital çağda yasal ve etik kodlar çerçevesinde basın kak ve özgürlükleri: KKTC örneği [Press rights and freedoms within the framework of legal and ethical codes in the digital age: The example of TRNC]. On İki Levha Yayıncılık [Twelve Sheets Publishing].
  8. Dolunay, A., Kasap, F., & Kececi, G. (2017a). Freedom of mass communication in the digital age in the case of the Internet: “Freedom House” and the USA example. Sustainability, 9(10), 1739. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101739
  9. Dolunay, A., Kasap, F., & Oguc, C. (2017b). Educational qualification of social media: A search for new public sphere. In Proceedings of the 17th International Educational Technology Conference (pp. 722-731).
  10. Elmas, R., & Geban, O. (2012). Web 2.0 tools for 21st century teachers. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(1), 243-254.
  11. Falay, N. (2014). Kamusal alanın oluşumu, dönüşümü ve iktisadi boyut [Formation, transformation and economic dimension of the public sphere]. Journal of Life Economics, 1(2), 51-70. https://doi.org/10.15637/jlecon.22
  12. Franklin, T., & van Harmelen, M. (2007). Web 2.0 for content for learning and teaching in higher education. http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/148/1/web2-content-learning-andteaching.pdf
  13. Gelber, N., Dilworth, N., Elliott, W., & Bradley, L. (2021). Virtual education revolution during the COVID-19 pandemic: The introduction of national educational rounds in sport and exercise medicine. Canadian Medical Education Journal, 12(2), e120-e121. https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.70949
  14. Greiner, M. E., Böhmann, T., & Krcmar, H. (2007). A strategy for knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(6), 3-15.‏ https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270710832127
  15. Habermas, J. (1974). The public sphere: An encyclopedia article. New German Critique, Autumn(3), 49-55. https://doi.org/10.2307/487737
  16. Habermas, J. (1991). “A reply”. In A. Honneth, & H. Joas (Eds.), Communicative action. MIT Press.
  17. Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N., & Tierney, T. (1999). What’s your strategy for managing knowledge? The Knowledge Management Yearbook 2000-2001, 77(2), 106-116.‏
  18. Hwang, T. J., Rabheru, K., Peisah, C., Reichman, W., & Ikeda, M. (2020). Loneliness and social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Psychogeriatrics, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610220000988
  19. Koroglu, C. Z., & Koroglu, A. M. (2013). Klasik kamusal alan modelleri ve Türkiye’nin kamusal alan tecrübesi üzerine genel bir değerlendirme [A general evaluation on classical public space models and Turkey’s public space experience]. International Journal of Social Science, 6(4), 913-936. https://doi.org/10.9761/JASSS785
  20. Krishnamurthy, B., & Cormode, G. (2008). Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. First Monday, 13(6). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v13i6.2125
  21. Kurbakova, S., Volkova, Z., & Kurbakov, A. (2020). Virtual learning and educational environment: New opportunities and challenges under the COVID-19 pandemic. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Education and Multimedia Technology (pp. 167-171). https://doi.org/10.1145/3416797.3416838
  22. Liu, H., Chai, K. H., & F. Nebus, J. (2013). Balancing codification and personalization for knowledge reuse: A Markov decision process approach. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(5), 755-772.‏ https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2013-0127
  23. Lu, J., Lai, M., & Law, N. (2010). Knowledge building in society 2.0: Challenges and opportunities. In M. S. Khine, & I. M. Saleh (Eds.), New science of learning: Computers, cognition and collaboration in Education (pp. 553-567). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5716-0_27
  24. Malhotra, Y. (2004). Why knowledge management systems fail: Enablers and constraints of knowledge management in human enterprises. In C. W. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management 1 (pp. 577-599). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24746-3_30
  25. Malkoc, I. B. (2018). Twitter as a macro cyber public sphere: An analysis of “trending topics” of Turkey. Sosyoloji Notları [Sociology Notes], 2(1), 100-126.
  26. McLuhan, M. (1994). Understanding media: The extensions of man. MIT Press.
  27. Melton, J. V. H. (2011). Aydınlanma Avrupasında kamunun yükselişi [The rise of the public in Enlightenment Europe] (Trans. F. B. Aydar). Bogazici University Publishing.
  28. Naik, U., & Shivalingaiah, D. (2008). Comparative study of Web 1.0, Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 [Paper presentation]. 6th International CALIBER, University of Allahabad, Allahabad, February 28-29 & March 1, pp. 499-508.
  29. O’Reilly, T. (2007). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & Strategies, 65, 17-37.
  30. Ozudogru, S. (2014). Bir Web 2.0 uygulaması olarak bloglar: Blogların dinamikleri ve blog alemi [Blogs as a Web 2.0 application: The dynamics of blogs and the blogosphere]. The Turkish Online Journal of Design, Art and Communication, 4(I), 36-50. https://doi.org/10.7456/10401100/005
  31. Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: The Internet as a public sphere. New Media & Society, 4(1), 9-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614440222226244
  32. Papacharissi, Z. (2009). The virtual sphere 2.0: The Internet, the public sphere and beyond. In A. Chadwick, & N. P. Howard (Eds.), Routledge handbook of internet politics (pp. 1-35). Routledge.
  33. Prashnig, B. (2006). Learning styles and personalized teaching. Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd.
  34. Prensky, M. (2009). H. sapiens digital: From digital immigrants and digital natives to digital wisdom. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 5(3), 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
  35. Punie, Y., & Cabrera, M. (2006). The future of ICT and learning in the knowledge society. European Communities. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/03e680c0-5b65-4b91-92e9-20b59a7da904/language-en
  36. Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community: Homestanding on the electronic frontier. MIT Press.
  37. Richman, D. D., Whitley, R. J., & Hayden, F. G. (2016). Clinical virology. ASM Press. https://doi.org/10.1128/9781555819439
  38. Rigel, N. (2005). Kadife karanlık [Velvet dark]. Su Publishing.
  39. Timisi, N. (2005). Sanallığın gerçekliği: İnternetin kimlik ve topluluk alanlarına girişI [The reality of virtuality: the Internet’s entry into the realms of identity and community]. In M. Binark, & B. Kilicbay (Eds.), İnternet, toplum, kültür [Internet, society, culture] (pp. 89-105). Epos Publications.
  40. Timisi, N. (2015). Önsöz [Preface]. In S. E. Karakulakoglu, & O. Ugurlu (Eds.), İletişim çalışmalarında dijital yaklaşımlar Twitter [Digital approaches in communication studies Twitter] (pp. 7-12). Heretik Press Release.
  41. Venkitachalam, K., & Willmott, H. (2017). Strategic knowledge management–Insights and pitfalls. International Journal of Information Management, 37(4), 313-316.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.02.002
  42. Westmattelmann, D., Grotenhermen, G. R., Sprenger, M., & Schewe, G. (2021). The show must go on–virtualization of sport events during the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(2), 119-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1850186
  43. WHO. (2019). Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/middle-east-respiratory-syndrome-coronavirus-(mers-cov)?gclid=CjwKCAiA5Y6eBhAbEiwA_2ZWITqvEPSqQl4erFgdJM3kTYKlhbheKjR7lS9dYDFiJ-1h-4HmPgguERoCr3sQAvD_BwE
  44. WHO. (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 65. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/situation-report---65
  45. Zack, M. H. (2002). Developing a knowledge strategy: Epilogue. In N. Bontis, & C. W. Choo (Eds.), The strategic management of intellectual capital and organizational knowledge: A collection of readings (pp. 268-276).‏ Oxford University Press.
  46. Zanjani, M. S., Mehrasa, S., & Modiri, M. (2008). Organizational dimensions as determinant factors of KM approaches in SMEs. International Journal of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, 2(9), 1015-1020.