After reading the discussion of Web
2.0 on Wikipedia, and following many of the links, this is what I gathered.
Web 2.0 is sometimes called the "Participatory Web" based on an architecture for interaction. Where Web 1.0 is represented by traditional static pages; Web 2.0 is represented by server-side software that is more interactive and made for content sharing which is free from the hassle of formating issues. This is made possible by XML as compared to HTML technology. It encompasses a social phenomenon of creating and distributing Web content itself, characterized by open communication, decentralization of authority and freedom to share and re-use.
I especially like the description based on the article by Tim O'Reilly where he described
"Like many important concepts, Web 2.0 doesn't have a hard boundary, but rather, a gravitational core. You can visualize Web 2.0 as a set of principles and practices that tie together a veritable solar system of sites that demonstrate some or all of those principles, at a varying distance from that core."
Figure 1 shows a "meme map" of Web 2.0 that was developed at a brainstorming session during FOO Camp, a conference at O'Reilly Media.
As for the article on social software (Dalsgaard C. 2006 Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning - EURODL), this is my reflection for it.
As schools implement e-learning, it will be important to do more than replicate their paper-based predecessors on a data-base-type Learning Management System. We need to consider the individuality, creativity, and ownership of students in these e-learning tasks. We may want to consider incoporating emerging Web 2.0-type technologies to motivate and engage students.
Having said this, we as educators need to be aware of the issues related to the use of Web 2.0 technologies in our teaching. Below are some comments to the use of a common Web 2.0 application in wiki.
The last 20 lines of the transcript from the video Web 2.0 … The Machine is Us/ing Us
is as follows:
"...
The Web is no longer just linking information…
The Web is linking people…
Web 2.0 is linking people…
…people sharing, tracing, and collaborating…
Wikipedia
Web 2.0
edit this page
We’ll need to rethink a few things…
We’ll need to rethink copyright
We’ll need to rethink authorship
We’ll need to rethink identity
We’ll need to rethink ethics
We’ll need to rethink aesthetics
We’ll need to rethink rhetorics
We’ll need to rethink governance
We’ll need to rethink privacy
We’ll need to rethink commerce
We’ll need to rethink love
We’ll need to rethink family
We’ll need to rethink ourselves"
One common application of Web 2.0 is Wikipedia, or online encyclopedia. Based on the design architecture principles of Web 2.0, any user, be it identified or anonymous, can edit the resource. The key issue then lies in the anonymity and frequency of these edits. The reliability and reality of these resources are determined not by factual truths of its sources but by the online collective concurrence of a group of users. We may be reminded that certian realities are socially and culturally constructed, but that does not necessary mean that they are true.With the reliability issue of Wiki at the foreground, some schools are prohibiting or banning the use of Wiki as a citation source. The eSchool news article quotes Neil Waters as saying that Wikipedia is a great place to start your research, but a terrible place to end it. Hence, until Citizendium is ready to replace Wiki, we need to prepare our students to possess the necessary information literacy skills to evaluate the different truths in any resource they encounter, even Wikipedia, lest they be blinded to the social and cultural biases that shape those resources they find.
4 comments:
Web 2.0 certainly makes us re-evalute the way we use the internet and to some extent the way we live. It's no longer just for isolated research or entertainment. It has shaped the way our children are developing - below is a really interesting (I think)site about the Generational differences. I am in the fortunate position of having 3 teenage sons who have managed to educate me in some of the ways Gen Y communicate -they're experts at multi-tasking (except when it comes to chores;p)
http://www.mccrindle.com.au/wp_pdf/NewGenerationsAtWork.pdf
It seems to me that Web 2.0 incorporates existing and new innovations that allow people to interactively connect with one another! Those of us who use the web with younger students need to bwe aware of safety issues. Also for all students need to be aware of other welfare issues such as bullying- we've seen the consequences of that through what happened in Werribee and got posted on youtube and myspace pages.
AndrewL
The other element of Web 2.0 that I find fascinating is both its ability to “mash up” content – text, audio, video, and image – and the users' ability to create new content in ways that only high-end editing equipment could have just a few years ago. For instance, it is now possible for a student to create his or her own digital story with content that is licensed under Creative Commons, mix it into a Flickr slideshow or Jumpcut video, add some podsafe music, and then come up with something completely new. Moreover, the ability of web 2.0 tools to mash information, too, like in Wesch’s video with the Flickr maps, makes for an interesting set of new web-based applications that have the potential to reshape how we think about information.
Troy
Thanks Troy for your comment. This idea of remixing and creating new content from various online cultural niches can be beneficial to students. It puts their narrative and formal analysis skills to work as they need to understand the original works well before conjuring up newly mashed digital content from them.
Post a Comment