Web 2.0 and Education (A) Su08
|
| The Influence of Web 2.0 on Education in a Globalized Society Authored by: Mike Lund, Tanja Hodges, Sara Schepis, |
Introduction
Globalization is a phenomenon that is spreading in all aspects of human life. The world we live in is becoming more and more interconnected with every passing day and this globalization has resulted in the recognition of commonality in basic human needs. One such need is education, which plays a pivotal role in providing opportunities in improving the lives of the people in any society. Even though the need for education is irrefutable, the way to provide for it is highly contextualized based on culture and socioeconomic structure of a region or a country. In many countries throughout the world, especially the United States, technology is spreading in the curriculum by offering new mediums of learning. Web 2.0 offers opportunities to teach and learn in innovative ways, using interactive methods of communication. Although, almost every corner of the world has seen a rapid expansion in Web 2.0, most of the development is occurring in the first world and industrialized regions in which a large percentage of the population has access to the technology and infrastructure necessary to take advantage of the tools available. However, Web 2.0 also presents its own set of challenges including the digital divide, privacy issues and adapting to ever changing technology. Web 2.0 has become a globalizing force allowing users to gather and interact with one another.
Definitions
Web 1.0
The World Wide Web (WWW) or the "Web" is a tool with endless information and features. Through advanced technology and the creation of Web 2.0, a marketing term created by Tim O'Reilly, Web 2.0 has the power to link the world and contribute to globalization. The epoch prior to Web 2.0 was Web 1.0. The name Web 1.0 did not exist until it was necessary to demonstrate there were clear differences in how people utilized the Web. Tim O'Reilly coined the term Web 2.0. In hindsight, the WWW as we used to know and understand it was a very individual experience. The internet itself grew out of a U.S. Department of Defense project known as Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET) in the late 1960s. It was the first computer network designed to link up different universities and research Think Tanks. The web browser application we use today finds its roots in the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Tim Berners-Lee, Eric Bina, and Marc Andreesen developed the world's first rich-media web browser in 1993; the browser was called Mosaic since it was able to display pictures and formatted hypertext. From there, the World Wide Web grew at an enormous rate. Programmers were responsible for building web pages and commercialization took over as the e-commerce boom came in the late 1990s. Nevertheless, browsing the web remained a very singular experience, with users viewing static web pages which were not frequently updated. Communication with others happened in isolated applications that were not interoperable or were too difficult for the average user to master. The web simultaneously became a library; a depository of information and a shopping center at the same time. Access to computer resources was not as ubiquitous as it is with broadband use today, and those who did have access relied upon slow loading times and undependable connectivity. The web remained a novelty for much of the population. Within education, the internet became a vast sea of information; much of it was poorly constructed and not very interconnected. However, the possibilities were evident as schools and libraries began to whittle through references and technology tools for classrooms were slowly developed. Search engines became the de-facto tools for reference queries. Companies that prospered in this space were Google and Yahoo, but early education technology initiatives only focused on bringing the hardware to schools en masse, without much direction on usage.
Web 2.0 is widely used as a term to describe a new trend of the WWW in which creativity, collaboration, and information sharing among its users is central to its structure and success. Tim O'Reilly created the the term "Web 2.0" more from a business standpoint. "Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the Internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform." Regardless of the focus, Web 2.0 has changed the face of the internet as we know it today and has led to exponential growth of this medium. The three major components of Web 2.0 that have promoted this type of growth are:
- The ability for users to create and share their own generated content.
- The ability to easily connect and collaborate online with other users.
- Seamless integration and connectivity between users and collaborators.
What this means is that websites are no longer the product of programmers alone. The line between the users and creators has been blurred to the extent that now the users are the creators and collaborators. In the following section we will give brief definitions of some of the current popular tools used in Web 2.0. Although a working knowledge of these tools is important, a successful website administrator must be aware of not only the new tools, but also the newer applications of existing tools which push the creative-envelope.
Content Creation and Sharing
Wikis - A wiki is a collaborative web space where users can actively edit and shape the content. A popular example of a wiki is the site Wikipedia. Within a wiki, the users are left to update, revise, and contribute content usually without any formal editing or review process. Although this is the basis of wikis, it has been the main criticism of Wikipedia, in that there is no organized, central group to review the material for factual validity. On a smaller scale, as a collaboration tool, a wiki can be very useful in creating a collection of ideas from multiple users in an informal manner. University of Illinois uses WikEd web site as a knowledge base of ideas and research within the College of Education. As defined by Ward Cunningham, the original developer of Wiki software, wikis invite users to edit or create any page using only a plain-vanilla Web browser without any extra add-ons. It promotes meaningful topic associations by making the linking process easy and it seeks to involve the visitor in an ongoing process of creation and collaboration that constantly changes the Web site landscape. (Cunningham, 2001) Wiki got its name from the WikiWiki airport shuttle in Honolulu International Airport, where Ward Cunningham was when an airport employee told him to take the WikiWiki to go between terminals.
Blogs/Microblogging - Blogs (web log, weblogs, or blog) are web sites usually maintained by an individual or organization that contain regular, serialized entries, much like a journal. Blogs allow users to post links, images, and video using a simple web interface. Blogs are usually topical in nature, and have become the vehicle for a new form of journalism that both involves and invites the general public to create their own blogs, comment on other users' blogs, and build track back links between them. The use of track back links is to illustrate what particular other sites link to a particular blog, making this sort of format particularly popular with search engines, which increases traffic to blogs. Many large web sites have deployed tools to their users which allow them to create blogs using their own servers to host the web sites, such as Blogger, Wordpress or TypePad. This has made the blog format exceedingly popular and available to many web surfers. Microblogging is a more recent tool in the world of blogging that allows users to post very short entries about what they are currently doing. Entries are limited to 140 characters and can be sent via mobile devices such as cell phones or PDAs. Twitter is a very popular microblogging tool. The microblogging format allows users to maintain an online, public stream of consciousness. Users can reply to each other, or post a question/comment, into the public cloud of users to respond to.
CMS systems - Content management systems are tools used to organize various different forms of content into a cohesive web space. Many CMS tools are focused on web site development for one or more web sites. CMS tools are popular in education for presenting online learning since they allow users to gather different documents, videos, and other online resources into an arbitrary structure as needed by the web site owner. Popular CMS tools in this space are Plone, Moodle, Sakai, and Drupal
Sharing and Making Connections With Others
Social Bookmarking applications such as del.icio.us, Digg, Diigo, and Reddit allow users to create their own heuristics for searching. It is a form of online bookmarking where individual users can both contribute to their own bookmark lists and collaborate a large list of URLs and online resources. Users define them by keyword so resources can be categorized and sorted creating new taxonomies (or to use another term "folksonomies") which dictate what is important to them. Social bookmarking activities are helpful when conducting group research with a classroom or sharing different passages of web pages to others from a distance with only a link. Users can annotate and contribute in kind to any web page through this. With some bloggers, TechnoratiDigg ratings have become a substitute for Neilsen ratings, claiming bragging rights to how many users "saved" or linked to a particular blog entry.
Social networking is an online activity which centers on users connecting with each other via messaging, status update broadcasts, and maintaining an online personal profile. Profiles are used to bring users with similar likes, dislikes, details, location, and shared interests together. Web 2.0 has led to the creation of social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace which are currently the most popular social networking sites. As these sites run on a large database of user information which is utilized by its own users to connect with one another, companies and schools have also begun to establish online presence in these sites to provide their customers or students easy access to information "on their own turf." However, the flip side is the concern for online privacy and harmful activities such as public cyberbullying and a very public volunteering of personal information by minors. This is a very serious concern among parents and educators today.
Media sharing platforms include such sites that rely on sharing and disseminating media and information. Video sharing sites such as YouTube allow users to upload videos and share them with other users. Visitors to YouTube are invited to comment and vote either by text, audio, or video. This site itself has seen phenomenal growth and has been responsible for the popularity of some dubious internet celebrities. Educational variants of YouTube are TeacherTube and Instructibles. Flickr is another media sharing site focused on photo sharing and has recently gained popularity with amateur photographers who take pictures with their cell phones and automatically upload pictures as they are shot. Users can tag images and organize them into public or private albums for sharing via email, blog, or direct link.
Making Connections With Your Content
Portal architectures and mash-ups enable users to pick and view the information they want in a tailored manner. Users can then manipulate the content and share it giving back to the community. Web 2.0 is designed to promote this sort of activity. This function is inherent in most Web 2.0 tools. Social Networking sites, such as Facebook or MySpace, offer widgets or self-contained applications that users can place on their own blogs (whether they exist on a different server or not) that display the site's content: a photo album, status update, or an online "buddy" list. A Facebook user can change their online status message and this message can appear in their instant messaging client, on their blog, and on Twitter. This interconnectedness extends to other forms of online media as well. Users can now take pictures using their cell phones and it will simultaneously post on Flickr, their blog, Facebook, and Twitter. Our group has also displayed this by "embedding" a video onto this Wiki page. This process is known as a mash-up and is popular as it opens up new avenues to utilize existing content in a new and meaningful way. Companies and manufacturers are seizing upon this idea too as cell phones and cameras come with built-in software to upload directly to these sites wirelessly as an option, just pop your user name and password into the settings of your device and network away!
A Mash-up is a particular form of data manipulation which involves using data from one site and mixing it with data from another web site or data store to create new meaning or interpretation of data. The easiest way to demonstrate this is by example. Using data from Google Maps we offer a geographical mash-up using zip code data, and other HTML content. Please refer to the link, or the image link at the end of this Wiki entry to view a Google Map of the authors' locations.
How Does Web 2.0 Relate to Other Areas?
Globalization
Globalization is the principal topic in influencing the functionality of Web 2.0 as it pertains to people’s frequent usage of the Internet to maintain contact for both work and personal endeavors. David Weinberger, writer and philosopher, suggested Web 2.0 contradicts everything that is valid about policy-making and organization. He stated, “Messiness is a virtue on the web” in his speech at the Library of Congress in the winter of 2004 (Weinberger, "Future"). Therefore, if the governments of nation states are not capable of maintaining organized societies in virtual spaces as well as definite spaces, then it is evident Web 2.0 is autonomous of governments and dependent upon another governing body, well-known as globalization.
Although the digital divide is still an issue, the fact there are people interacting and connecting from all areas of the world shows the impact Web 2.0 has on globalization. Even if some global areas do not have access to Web 2.0, due to issues which may include economy, education, and society, people from the "first world" can help connect the divide. This type of interconnectivity has become popular and has helped unite and decrease the gap in the digital divide. A recent study conducted by Valleywag indicates just how far social networking sites themselves have proliferated worldwide. (Valleywag, 2008).
New studies show globalization is more than citizens’ successful conquest over the government. That is, the purpose of Web 2.0 is not only a tool if citizens are considering a grassroots approach to overthrow their government, but it is also a collaborative tool for lifeworlds.
It should be noted that the speeding up of processes can have negative consequences. Historically, nation states did not have as much accessibility to economic, social, and cultural indicators of other nation states. World citizens need to gradually examine the differences in cultures prior to suggesting that the world is one homogeneous state. In preparing for a world which is more reliant upon the various facets of Web 2.0, there must be an attempt to standardize the rules for engaging in the virtual community if Web 2.0 is to be the new pedagogical tool. Therefore, the governments of nation states must intervene in possible culture clashes by creating policies to safeguard the rights and cultural sensitivities of citizens (Abron, 2).
Consequently, Karl Marx deliberated globalization would be the force to disengage the government’s dominance over the working class (“World”). Generally, the idea of dominance within a nation state is controlled by establishing order using a set of policies. The same control a government has over a nation state is similar to how the education system controls the content placed in the curriculum as well as the code of conduct educators and students must follow. However, due to the characteristics of Web 2.0 as an open collaborative tool, there may be a shift in the roles of the governing bodies in the educational institution. The challenge faced with the integration of Web 2.0 as an educational resource is concerning how the education system can maintain a set of policies and order in the classroom and online. Simply put, the governing bodies within the education system will be players in the Web 2.0 rather than the dominating forces controlling the content of what students are allowed to view.
There is no doubt on the international spread of Web 2.0. However, the question remains of whether more remote and technically challenged areas of the globe can take advantage of these tools in order to affect positive change. This brings multiple digital divide issues that need to be openly addressed: poverty, language, culture and technical savvy. For further illustration on globalization in a Web 2.0 technology context, please refer to a Google Earth Mash-up of social networks usage across international boundaries: http://www.wandamere.com/SocialNetworks-WorldMap.kmz
Circle of Communication
Web 2.0 deeply affects what and how we communicate with one another on a very basic level. It makes what used to be private, public, and establishes a new place for the individual in public discourse. A historical overview of communication shows that communication efforts can be divided into distinct periods. The Oral Period occurred first, by which there was no way to record this type of communication. People used hand gestures and vocalizations. Eventually spoken language came in to existence. This period was marked by a more balanced use of the senses for communication, but it favored aural endeavors. Communication in this period transpired face to face and was therefore completely interpersonal.
The invention of the Phonetic alphabet signaled the coming of a second communication period. This period moved from a more balanced use of multiple senses for communication and swerved it to a more visual bend. With this period also came the ability to store messages and send them over long distances. Marshal McLuhan suggests that the invention of the phonetic alphabet allowed for the first time “the spread of the power that is knowledge.” The third and completely revolutionizing period was the Printing Press era. In this movable type period, it was possible to quickly and accurately reproduce the written word. This brought to the world a single homogeneous point of view and led to the development of the public and the concept of nations. The masses were now capable of being reached with a consistent message, and the beginnings of the establishment for organizations to craft those consistent messages were born.
The final period in the communication continuum comes with the advent of Electronic media. These media---the telegraph, the telephone, the television, the internet, Web 2.0 technologies and beyond, are said to enhance communication while causing an “effect that is nothing less than to externalize the central nervous system” (McLuhan & Zingrone, 1995). This period is marked by a shift in perceptions about time and space and a new and different kind of connectedness. “The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the image of a global village.” (McLuhan & Zingrone, 1995) Each period seems to provide a procession of more and more individual freedoms and opportunities. This latest communication period and the creation of a “global village” suggests perhaps communication is becoming more “personalized” and we are headed back to the more tribal forms of communication, although no longer physically "in person." In a communication environment mediated by Web 2.0, questions about how the media alters meaning come to mind. Marshal McLuhan tells us that the medium is the message but what does that mean? Especially when considered through the lens of Web 2.0.
The environment provided by Web 2.0 allows for the human circle of communication to cross both continents and cultures. What this means for the arena of education is that there are more opportunities for support and advancement available than ever before. Whether we are speaking about agriculture or women’s health information, new supports are available worldwide for teaching and learning. On an individual level, peer to peer communications can provide information rich learning opportunities which were not present before. A farm worker in Iowa can now use Web 2.0 technology to network with other farmers across the country and/or across the globe to discuss concerns or procedural information. Web 2.0 promotes a web of languageand education to grow and develop into a life of its own.
Information Validity
Web 2.0 brings to the forefront concerns of validity and reliability of information available to the population in general. It has long been accepted that valid information comes from agents of established organizations and institutions. Some places from which established means of information transfer are places such as colleges and universities, news organizations like The Washington Post or The New York Times, and from traditional television reports such as CNN or The CBS Evening News. However with the emergence of Web 2.0, information dissemination is no longer centralized and relegated to agents of official organizations. Information may now be dispersed by anyone with access to a computer. Questions of validity become of central concern when we consider the case for Mass media –vs- User Generated Content. In Web 2.0 environments, such as Wikipedia, the question of validity of information is immediately obvious. In the book, The Wisdom of Crowds, by James Surowiecki, the idea that groups of people may be able to provide consistent and correct information is considered. Sorowiecki asserts in order for a group or a crowd of people to be most effective, the following four criteria must be present:
- Diversity of opinion
- Independence of members from one another
- Decentralization - no single person at the top directing the group answer
- A good method for aggregating opinions.
Sorowiecki also states if all four of these criteria are not met, we don't have a wise crowd. While Web 2.0 provides a culture in which the wisdom of many is valued, it does not consistently support the presence of all four Surowiecki criteria; therefore, questions of validity arise.
In the following two panel excerpts from Fora TV, two groups explore the questions of value and validity in Web 2.0 environments.
Panel Discussion about Does the Wiki Model Work?
Panel Discussion about Does the Web Need more Editors?
After viewing the above panels, it becomes apparent how one can see the idea of the way information validity is brought into question because of the source. Traditionally, the established organizations not only verified what was true, but they also drove the discovery process. Some troubling concerns with Web 2.0 environments are:
- Who makes the decisions about what is important to know?
- How will we know when a subject deserves a closer investigation?
- In the absence of some sort of official editing mechanism, how do we sort through the available information?
When the field of education is considered, all three concerns are important, but question three is of a particularly critical concern. The Web 2.0 environments invite all to contribute to the information and data cache available, although all contributions will not be created equally. Since the Web 2.0 world is almost exponentially increasing our access to information daily, how do we make sure we get the correct information? Additionally, there are often multiple perspectives to view a given situation from, so there may well be multiple valid versions of the truth available in a Web 2.0 world. How can educational goals be accomplished and new understandings developed in an environment that has no control over granting credibility to the information available there?
Tech Lessons Learned from the Wisdom of Crowds
Expanding the Political Arena
The Web 2.0 phenomenon has also made its way into the political arena. Government officials, politicians, diplomats, policy makers, interest groups, etc. learn about what people want and need through many types of blogs as well as videos. Web 2.0 allows for politicians to reach out and educate people via e-campaigns, blogs, social networking, and videos. For example, in the United States there has been a significant increase in the number of people who use Web 2.0 to gather information about the November 2008 elections. A recent Pew Foundation study found that almost 46% of all adults are using internet in one way or another for political purposes in this election. This is an approximately 15% increase from the 2004 election cycle (Smith and Rainie, 2008). Web 2.0 with all its tools and applications is allowing candidates to run cheaper campaigns while giving them easier access to public funding through online fund drives.
Beyond political campaigns, Web 2.0 has allowed for access to news and information across the world. Political analysts, interest groups and professors from universities have created blogs with news they think is important and news which plays a pivotal role in our daily lives. A good example of this is the blog by Professor Juan Cole, who is the President of the Global American Institute. This blog is a fine example of news and opinions on Middle Eastern affairs from a point of view which is perhaps not prevalent in the mainstream media. Interesting, Juan Cole’s article titled The First Web 2.0 President? highlights the use of Web 2.0 in the political arena by calling US presidential candidate, Barack Obama, “the first major party candidate who got where he is through the current iteration of the world wide web” (Cole).
The interconnectivity of WWW and up-to-date news and information allows the users to hold their own views, debates and discussions while maintaining anonymity. People have access to different viewpoints through their open access to these websites and blogs; although in certain countries the governments have taken action against this open access (see Internet_censorship). It is also quite easy to (intentionally or unintentionally) disseminate misinformation for political gains. As such factual validity of any claim becomes harder to substantiate causing a large majority of people to suspect most political information on the internet as propaganda (Record Percentage Of Americans Use Internet For Politics)
Cost of Web 2.0 Growth
Money is being thrown by the millions everyday to improve and produce new technology. New jobs are being created and people are being trained for jobs which do not exist yet. The expansion of Web 2.0 is extensive, and many of the Transnational Corporations are contributing to its growth. Companies like Wal-Mart and Amazon are allowing consumers not only to shop, but to read and write reviews on the products sold there, thus making the websites more “self-publishable”. Product reviews by consumers increase profitability through publicity.
The establishment of Web 2.0 required a lot of infrastructure and investment, the cost of which is still rising. According to Dow Jones VentureOne and Ernst & Young LLP in 2007, investors directed a record $464.2 million into 101 Web 2.0 deals worldwide in the first half of the year. (Blakely) If that much money was directed in 6 months, imagine how much money is going into those deals presently. With more people accessing the internet, the connection providers such as ATT and Verizon have spent more than $70 billion in the past two years to expand capacity and fortify their networks with optical technology and other capacity-enhancing gear (Cauley). Money is also being spent on implementing Web 2.0 applications to portable devices such as Personal Digital Assistance (PDA), Global Positioning Systems (GPS), and Portable Media Players (PMP), devices which are becoming increasingly popular throughout the globalized world.
Opportunities and Challenges Presented by Web 2.0
Opportunities
Opening Doors
Web 2.0 provides the opportunity to open educational doors, create content, collaborate and connect globally. We have begun to see that networking and knowledge are intertwined. This emergent quality shows how spontaneous communities of practice can occur with Web 2.0, focused on inquiry, and building knowledge independent of physical boundaries. (Wegner, 2000) Knowledge and learning is expanding and becoming more globalized, new connections are being created by the average web user, whether they are a teacher or a student. We begin to see the lines blurring as roles begin to overlap, mediated by technology. Thus this essential integration of new technology both hardware and software within school systems provides the building blocks for opening up a richer leaning environment. As quoted by Steve O'Hear in his article, “e-learning 2.0 - how Web technologies are shaping education”,
- Like the web itself, the early promise of e-learning - that of empowerment - has not been completely understood. The experience of e-learning for many has been no more than a hand-out published online, coupled with a simple multiple-choice quiz. Hardly inspiring, let alone empowering. But by using these new web services, e-learning has the potential to become far more personal, social and flexible.
The original web, defined earlier as Web 1.0, was only the base for expanding a teachers and student’s daily "e-learning" life. New availability of tools and the transforming capability of Web 2.0 technology can provide an expanded educational future.
As mentioned, Web 2.0 has the ability of opening doors to levels of learning and collaboration on a scale never seen between teacher to teacher, teacher to student and student to student. Through the use of Web 2.0 tools such as wiki’s, forums and blogs, a new world of educational experiences and learning becomes available. John Lewis's slide show “Introducing Web 2.0 Concepts” presented through a Web 2.0 application, SlideShare, provides insight on the ability of these new learning tools with “[a] day in the life…” of Samoa. This presentation, an interactive look at information through the use of Web 2.0, creates a new way to involve teachers and students in learning about Samoa, and its people, by enhancing the interaction with those of the subject, involved in the subject, and who are the subject. You don’t just learn about Samoa, you visit it, via Flikr, read about it through wiki’s and learn about it from the voice of its people through blogs. This opportunity for a media rich and robust teaching and learning experience, can truly help to enhance education and knowledge for those willing to embrace it. It is time to prepare for the Information R/evolution.
Online Education
Opportunities for online education have been available since the 1990’s, but this mode of education has greatly prospered in the last few years. According to a survey conducted by the United States Department of Education the enrollment for distance education courses grew from 750,000 in 1994-1995 to 2.9 million in 2000-2001. The revenues in the online industry were forecasted to climb from $550 million in 1998 to $11.4 billion in 2003. (Li and Irby, 2008). In this day and age, people across the world recognize the importance of quality higher education in expanding career opportunities and for a chance at a prosperous lifestyle. The pace at which new technologies are being introduced and it's associated affects on social behaviors, economics and legislation etc., is extremely rapid. This means even people with jobs must make a concerted effort to keep abreast of the issues in their respective field and are willing to make necessary adjustments to career paths or risk losing their job. It is here, online education has found its niche market. Online education grants people the flexibility needed to work at their own pace while choosing from a variety of programs which may not be offered to them otherwise. Online education has also benefited from an increasing enrollment and allocation of funds. This has resulted in the development of infrastructure, including software technology which makes the whole experience very similar to an on-campus education. Online programs use innovative technology which creates a user-friendly atmosphere for its students. One of such programs is Moodle, which is an e-learning software created by the company with the same name, based in Perth, Australia. Moodle is used for over one million courses worldwide and offers its users to interact using methods from synchronous sessions to online discussion boards. (Moodle, 2004) With the advent of programs such as Moodle, the online mode of education has become more appealing. Now with the online method of learning and using software such as Moodle, there are live class sessions where students not only can type, but have the chance to speak as well. This development allows for students and teachers to form a relationship with each other. These days, different institutions offer distance learning courses and degrees and may use mail, telecommunication and E-learning software at various levels depending upon available resources and student interests. Anyone with access to internet is a potential candidate to receive education. An increasing number of top level educational institutions such as the University of Illinois have started online programs and the job market is accepting more students that have gone through this system. Now people from distant parts of the world with different cultures, ethnicities and religious backgrounds can enroll in the same class and can share ideas in a way that was never possible with traditional classes. In a way, online education is causing the "globalization" of education creating a new class of students that have a global view of issues, be they environmental, social, financial or technology related.
Knowledge is Power
Knowledge contains the power to change minds, learn in new ways, shape one’s life, make decisions, and provide any number of opportunities. When and how to integrate Web 2.0 into education is complex; it involves beliefs about the nature of knowledge, the goals of learning, the essence of the human mind, the practice of pedagogy, and a host of practical concerns that recur anew with each generation of social, political, economic, and academic environments. If knowledge is power, then "collective" or "social" knowing presents a new perspective on that power. Take, for example, Wikipedia's subject headings on the knowledge-power relationship: the cognitive elite, intelligence, information gathering, information warfare, and technology. It is no coincidence that these are the same issues raised by Web 2.0 in schools. The debates and subjects for discussion surrounding Web 2.0 and learning are too numerous to be discussed at length here. Below are questions for educators as they consider the ways of how teaching and Web 2.0 intersect:
Cognitive elite - Has Web 2.0 taken away "cognitive elite status" from educators and other academic authorities? Has it created new elites? What does this shift in authority teach students about the reliability of information?
Intelligence (information gathering) - Is information gathering a form of intelligence all on its own? How do we teach it? How does it fit in to the other types of intelligence valued in the educational setting?
Information warfare - How does Web 2.0 and its pedagogical philosophies shape what gets included or excluded from the curriculum. What should be preserved from "traditional" and even "classical" education? Do Web 2.0 applications, such as blogging, create self-approving systems rather than an open sharing of ideas?
Gaining and using the knowledge is a key to integration and collaboration opportunities available in a Web 2.0 education environment. However, how to get the knowledge to those who need it, overcoming challenges such as "Digital Divide" will need to happen.
Challenges
Digital Divide
As mentioned, Web 2.0 provides collaboration on a scale never seen within an educational environment. However, creating and using the Web 2.0 environment comes with many challenges. The first and most logical issue which should be considered is known as the “Digital Divide.” To understand this challenge, we must understand its definition. The Digital Divide website refers to it as "the gap between those who benefit from digital technology and those who do not." It seems like a simple term to understand, but its effect is worldwide.
The digital divide is increasing as the concept of the traditional role of literacy is being disregarded as curriculum development focuses on integrating more computer technologies as key pedagogical tools to prepare students for cultural and linguistic diversity. It is assumed the concept of creating curriculum pertaining to multi-literacies commenced at the end of the Cold War. That is, The New London Group states today schools operate according to “market logic." (68) The more diverse the students are in their studies, the higher the probability it will be for global employability. Competition is key for creating a divide among gifted students, students with accessibility, indigenous students with a limited amount of accessibility to computer technologies, students of lower classes, and those students who may be disinterested in education. The competition is supported by nation states as a means to produce human capitalism for future endeavors. Yet, nation states and educators alike must consider the consequences of a total immersion of a digital classroom if it furthers the global stratified society.
The digital divide does not necessarily need to be based upon the ability to have a computer with multiple computer programs, file sharing, and perhaps having a laptop for portability. According to Christian Crumlish, author of “The Power of Many,” marginalization also occurs if people choose to disengage themselves from being as active as other digital users. An example he uses is when people opt to use Web 2.0 functions habitually or use the functions as passively as one sitting in front of a television starting at it. (65-69)
Privacy
Web 2.0 also has another major challenging characteristic. The applications used in schools are online and, more often than not, free. Many schools already use Gmail and Google for document sharing and email services (Campus Technology, 2006) and many other free tools exist from smaller companies as well. To use these free services, users must sign up for an account. A username and password often has the disguise of protecting information, giving the user a feeling of security. The user may include more information in the form of an online profile: a full name, address, phone number. Sometimes, we as educators may use these tools in a classroom, and ask students to "sign up" to these services as well. But what is the company we are handing over the information to, doing with this information?
Free tools are often driven by advertising. It may have Google ads which display ads based on keywords found in the web page. On the other end of the scale, the site may collect profile information and sell it to a company which delivers selected banner ads and media-rich pop-ups on the site. In a recent move that was decried across the internet, Facebook implemented a program called Beacon which collected information in Facebook cookies about user's purchases on "partner" sites such as Amazon, and then posted the purchase information as public status updates in the user's profiles. Facebook later publicly apologized and redesigned the Beacon program with improved privacy controls; however, this issue brought new privacy concerns to light. In this age of ever-present internet advertising, these minor annoyances are easy to ignore, which is why it is important for educators to be aware of the protections which are in place and what their responsibility is to their class in using Web 2.0 tools to teach. Schools must be aware of the protections instituted by COPPA, the actual reach of FERPA, and how all of it can be undercut by an online service's privacy policy.
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is a federal law enacted to allow schools and parents/students to engage in a dialog about the information the school releases about their children. While schools are restricted from releasing information about students' educational records, more sensitive information is completely at the disposal of the school to release at will. "Schools may disclose, without consent, "directory" information such as a student's name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. However, schools must tell parents and eligible students about directory information and allow parents and eligible students a reasonable amount of time to request that the school not disclose directory information about them. Schools must notify parents and eligible students annually of their rights under FERPA. The actual means of notification (special letter, inclusion in a PTA bulletin, student handbook, and/or newspaper article) is left to the discretion of each school." (U.S. DOE, 1974).
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA) is a federal law which grants both the Federal Trade Commission and some internet community groups the ability to enforce privacy regulations. It protects children 13 years and under, and specifies that a web site that collects information from its members or users must have a clear privacy policy which details how the web site collects verifiable parental consent to obtain information and what length it goes to protect this information. Today, in a globalized industry, we must also note these laws only apply to companies within the United States.
While schools are bound by COPPA to protect information by methods outlined by FERPA, special care should be taken to find out what is done with the student's personal information. A privacy policy must be present and include adequate statements of data protection and privacy, and any service contracts must be read very carefully to ensure companies are not revealing the personal information of students to the public or other marketing companies who may misuse the information. If a legal service contract is signed without reviewing these protections, student's privacy and even safety may be compromised.
Technology Acceptance
Along with privacy, technology acceptance is another important challenge to think about when looking at Web 2.0 integration in education today. The video, “Education Today and Tomorrow” presents the question on the usefulness of the old classroom style teaching structure in today's globally educated world. Also, how adapting to new technologies and class structures can help develop the student and prepare them for the jobs of tomorrow. These types of curriculum trends, as mentioned in this web article, "E-learning 2.0", are becoming, "learner-centered" or "student-centered" in design.
"This is more than just adapting for different learning styles or allowing the user to change the font size and background color; it is the placing of the control of learning itself into the hands of the learner. The changing demographics of the student population and the more consumer/client-centered culture in today's society have provided a climate where the use of student-centered learning is thriving. Learning is characterized not only by greater autonomy for the learner, but also a greater emphasis on active learning, with creation, communication and participation playing key roles, and on changing roles for the teacher, indeed, even a collapse of the distinction between teacher and student altogether" (Downes)
This "shift" in learning as also described in this video, “Did You Know; Shift Happens - Globalization; Information Age” gives us more insight into the changes and need for technology acceptance to prepare young minds for their future.
As the video notes “[a]ccording to former Secretary of Education Richard Riley, the top 10 jobs that will be in demand in 2010 didn’t exist in 2004." "We are currently preparing students for jobs that don’t yet exist, using technologies that haven’t yet been invented, in order to solve problems we don’t even know are problems yet.” To further underscore this statement, Rapleaf conducted a study of social network usage by age and found that usage of the popular social networks and tools, from MySpace and Facebook, to Flickr and the more "stodgier" LinkedIn, showed a large concentration in the 14-24 year old demographic. As we can see, it is imperative that developing and accepting of Web 2.0, as an educational tool, be addressed.
Recommendations for Teachers
So, what is a teacher to do in the world of Web 2.0? There is not a standard procedure for integrating the more-than-just-technology revolution of the read/write web into the classroom. “On first blush, the tools on this new Web may not seem well-suited to a climate of standardized test scores and government accountability. Some will see the constructionist, collaborative pedagogy of Weblogs, wikis, digital photo and video, and others as presenting a risk instead of a solution for a system whose students continue to struggle to stay apace of their international peers.” (Richardson, 5) One major response to Web 2.0 in education is a move towards greater scaffolding, increasing the quality, not just the quantity of information placed in, say, a blog. Increasingly, students are asked to consider the medium as well as the message of the multimodal assignments they create. For students growing up with Web 2.0 the read/write web is both deceptively simple and complex. With so much information available and edit-able in a host of formats, students and educators both need to understand knowledge-making is still hard work even if many of the variables involved in doing so have changed. For example, author H. Hewitt speaks of the “raw details” that now cover the web, especially in news-related fields. A greater need to assimilate data and be more involved in it can easily be seen as both a blessing and a curse. Even before Web 2.0 was a buzz word, there was so much information on the Web that those who went “surfing” might conceivably have drowned in it. Web 2.0 opens up the possibility that students will become deeply drawn in to knowledge creation and creativity or they might be inundated with too many opinions, subjective data, unreliable information, and a general mess. An example of the way that Web 2.0 might be integrated into an understanding of the curriculum might be an assignment known as “The Globe Project.” Students begin with a virtual globe of the world and information is added for each country over the course of a year. Not only the names of the places and capitals but clicking on each country brings up a page of interlinked information. Students who have visited there post pictures. Singers record themselves singing the national anthem. Blogs are created on travel around the world and on what can be learned from each culture, “lines” are drawn between countries and selecting them will bring up information on relations between the nations. Tabs will allow for the creation of several “layers” of the world in different times (geological history, political, etc.) There can be an endless amount of information added. Students can learn the inter-linked world of Web 2.0 does not contain an isolated fact. Teachers also use the read/write web in their educational setting. To take one example, the National Council of Teacher Education and The International Reading Association sponsor the web resource ReadWriteThink where educators can share ideas and comment on lesson plans presented.
What does it mean to embrace read/write web literacies? Here are Richardson's (2006) "Ten Shifts" in education as influenced by a "web 2.0 mentality." Each one opens up questions for educators. Are these shifts beneficial? If so, for whom? Are there weaknesses which need to be addressed? These questions cannot be answered in theory only, but will play out in the praxis of the future.
- Open content (Teachers no longer "own" the content they teach; students have huge resources available to them)
- Many, many teachers, and 24/7 learning (students have access to many experts, teachers, and mentors removed in time and space.
- The social, collaborative construction of meaningful knowledge
- Teaching is conversation, not lecture
- Know "where" learning - (knowing where to find information VS. actually knowing the information)
- Readers are no longer just readers ("readers cannot assume what they are reading has been reviewed by someone else with an eye towards truth and accuracy.")
- The Web as a notebook
- Writing is no longer limited to text
- Mastery is the product, not the test (testing what the students are able to do with information, not what information they have)
- Contribution, not completion, is the ultimate goal
People sharing what they know: from experience to hyperlinks:
It’s not just the how-to section that holds the expertise on the way to do things. The read/write web makes students experts as well as teachers. “No matter how you look at it, we are creating what author Douglas Rushkoff calls a, ‘Society of Authorship’ where every teacher and every student, every person with access will have the ability to contribute ideas and experiences to the larger body of knowledge that is the Internet.” (Richardson, 5) A Web 2.0 application can be used/studied by students to illustrate this new ‘Society’ is eHow. http://www.ehow.com/ Want to know how to hold a crocodile? Decorate for a knitting party? Abide by commuter train etiquette? Users with personal knowledge write in and tell one how to: attend a Democratic convention as a Republican, arrange for a burial in Australia, act like a mermaid, ask God for forgiveness, add condensed milk to cheesecake flan, and achieve true happiness in life. The site, like many others, allows students to build a “Personal Web” by tagging the blog posting with such interactive functions as the following:
- Rate
- Post a Comment
- Add to Favorites
- Print Article
It goes further into the social web with additional functions, letting students save and share via
Conclusion
The development of Web 2.0 has contributed to an increase in interconnectivity among a multitude of users through creativity, collaboration and information sharing. Wikis, blogs, social bookmarking, social networking and media sharing platforms are examples of how Web 2.0 has increased the ability of users to demonstrate their creativity and make connections with others. The ability to post information and for others to instantaneously respond has affected and changed the way people communicate and gather information.
The immediacy of gathering public information on Web 2.0 has created many opportunities as well as challenges. Challenges arise from the fact that anyone with computer access can post, edit and add information to various web sites. This anonymity calls in to question the validity and reliability of information posted. Other issues include the digital divide, privacy and technology acceptance of individual web users. These opportunities and challenges apply to general technology users; however there are unique opportunities and challenges in the educational realm.
Education and Web 2.0 are intertwined and it is important to acknowledge the opportunities and challenges when integrating technology into the classroom. The opportunities that are provided through Web 2.0 are especially evident in education. Learning, collaborating and other educational opportunities have drastically changed due to the rich new learning environment Web 2.0 has created. We have discussed online classes and integrating technology into the classroom as two opportunities Web 2.0 has had on education.
Although the possibilities of Web 2.0 in collaboration seem endless, there are some questions that come into play when discussing Web 2.0 and education. Although the tools available through Web 2.0 are mostly free and can be used in schools, what is their real cost? The level playing field that allows teachers from around the world to share and collaborate can only be done in one language (more than likely English), is this problematic? The primary concern are: expanding their use in schools, training in oversight of their use in an educationally effective manner and keeping an eye on standardization of free and open secure protocols in the development of these tools which would minimize cost and privacy concerns. In order for Web 2.0 and education to have a more collaborative relationship, these issues need to be addressed.
Web 2.0 has fostered a new creative and innovative world where connectivity is the key component. From the content gathered, we agree that the potential of Web 2.0 outweighs the challenges and we must learn how to transform the obstacles into opportunities. Web 2.0 has changed the World Wide Web into a globalized neighborhood that is not constrained by physical proximity, but by the validity and reliability of the information posted, read and edited.
The Process of How This Project Was Created
We created the content on this webpage using a multitude of resources. Our "lifeline" to the project has been using Google Groups. This program was selected because of its flexibility in allowing cohorts to post information at any given time. Asynchronous sessions have been necessary provided that the cohorts are located in various time zones. It is also notable to review that since cohorts have the opportunity to post at any given time, the blogs are well thought out and well written concepts. Clear and succinct points have allowed the group to progress at a rapid rate. This information is surprisingly contrary to the initial qualms of the cohorts. One concern in particular was that Google Groups would be millions of hyperlinks and disorganization. Yet, in the “organized chaos” of the forums through dividing topics into many discussion sets, we have been able to complete this wiki and learned new technologies along the way.
An additional program that we have used often was Skype. Skype, among many things, allows users to have conferences, write on whiteboards, and instant message. It has been a great resource in coordinating the details of our wiki page. We objected to using only one format for creating this site. We were curious to create a wiki by trial and error to learn the opportunities and disadvantages of blended learning. Some of the best opportunities have been discussions with cohorts that were very open in conversations as would be with some of our closest friends while maintaining a professional relationship. The most disadvantageous entity of this project has been that distance learning does not allow us to convene to be more collaborative. It has been a daunting task in coordinating among the various web sites and online conferencing tools to ensure that the cohorts are not duplicating research nor creating links that are tangent to the key focus of the thesis. Moreover, the inability to meet with the cohorts can cause confusion at times because the significance of one idiom may have a negative connotation to another cohort. Nevertheless, we all enjoyed working with one other and learned a great deal of knowledge on Web 2.0 and its influence on globalization of education. We would like to say a special thanks to Adrienne Pickett, the facilitator of this project. Adrienne, we valued and appreciated your feedback throughout the process. Thankyou!
References
Abron, Staci. "Analyzing the Global Process before Implementing Education Policy." March, 21, 2008. University of Illinois. 3 Jul 2008 <https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/abron/Analyzing%20the%20Global%20Process%20before%20Implementing%20Education%20Policy.doc>.
Barron, Dennis. "The Web of Language". 01 Jul 2008 http://webtools.uiuc.edu/blog/view?blogId=25
Blakely, Rhys. (September 17, 2007). Web 2.0 Funding Goes Global.Times Online. http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article2473532.ece
Boston Women's Health Book Collective, Inc. "Our Bodies Our Blog". 01 Jul 2008 http://www.ourbodiesourblog.org/
Cauley, Leslie. (April 27, 2008). Bringing up Broadband: Higher Traffic, Higher Costs. Tech New World. http://www.technewsworld.com/story/62672.html
Cole, Juan. (June 4, 2008). "The First Web 2.0 President?" Informed Comment. http://www.juancole.com/2008/06/first-web-20-president.html
Crumlish, Christian. The Power of Many: How the Living Web Is Transforming Politics, Business, and Everyday Life. San Francisco: Sybex, 2004.
"Does the Internet Need More Editors?" YouTube Video. 28 Mar 2008. Retrieved 30 Jun 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFz-8yBzsYM
Downes, Stephen. "E-learning 2.0". June 2008 http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articles&article=29-1.
Federman, M. (2004, July 23). What is the Meaning of the Medium is the Message? Retrieved June 19, 2008 from http://individual.utoronto.ca/markfederman/article_mediumisthemessage.htm
Fisch, Karl., McLeod,Scott.,Brenman, Jeff. "Did You Know; Shift Happens - Globalization; Information Age". June 2008 http://www.articledd.com/2008/05/10/did-you-know-shift-happens-globalization-information-age/.
"FORA tv." FORA tv - Videos Covering Today's Top Social, Political, and Tech Issues. 2008. 30 Jun 2008 <http://fora.tv/>
Forret, Peter. "Web 2.0 mememap overview". June 2008 http://blog.forret.com/2005/09/web-20-mememap-overview/.
Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J. (1999, March). Global Transformations: politics, economics and culture. What is Globalization? February 2008 from http://www.polity.co.uk/global/whatisglobalization.asp.
Hewitt, Hugh. Blog: Understanding the Information Reformation That’s Changing Your World. Nashville: Nelson Books, 2005.
Hurlburt, Sarah. "Defining Tools for a New Learning Space: Writing and Reading Class Blogs." MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching Vol. 4, No. 2 Jun 2008 30 Jun 2008 <http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no2/hurlburt0608.htm>.
"International Agriculture and Development". 30 Jun 2008 http://www.agdes.blogspot.com/
Kreis, Steven. "The Printing Press." The History Guide- Lectures on Modern Intellectual European History. (2004). 30 Jun 2008 <http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/press.html>.
Lewis, John. "Introducing web 2.0 Concepts". June 19, 2008 http://www.slideshare.net/jlewis/introducing-web-20-concepts#.
Li, Chi-Sung., Irby, Beverly. (June 2008). "An overview of online education: attractiveness, benefits, challenges, concerns and recommendations." College Student Journal. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCR/is_2_42/ai_n25454154?tag=content;col1
McCullah, Declan. "Tech Lessons Learned from the Wisdom of Crowds." CNET 14 Dec 2006 30 Jun 2008 <http://news.cnet.com/Tech-lessons-learned-from-the-wisdom-of-crowds/2100-1014_3-6143896.html>.
McLuhan, E. & Zingrone, F. (1995). Essential McLuhan. New York: Basic Books.
"McLuhan - Media is the Message." YouTube Video. 01 Feb 2007. Retrieved 30 Jun 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfS4HFcPJWU
Moodle, D. G. (2004). Moodle: A Free, Open Source Course Management System for Online Learning.
Nachwey, James. "Mass Media vs. User-Generated Content". June 30, 2008 http://www.slideshare.net/designeducation/mass-media-vs-usergenerated-content-75856/
New London Group, The. “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures.” Harvard Educational Review Volume 66.1 (Spring 1996): 60-92.
The New York Times - Breaking News, World News, & Multimedia. 30 Jun 2008. The New York Times. 30 Jun 2008 <http://www.nytimes.com/>
Nyirubugara, Oliver. "Communication Media: A Sequence of Revolutions and Evolutions." 10 Oct 2005. Retrieved 19 Jun 2008 from http://home.planet.nl/~nyiri000/Assignment%20HTIT.html.html.
O'Hear, Steve. "e-learning 2.0 - how Web technologies are shaping education". June 19, 2008 http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/e-learning_20.php.
Rapleaf Study of Social Network Users vs. Age.(June 18, 2008). RapLeaf, Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://business.rapleaf.com/company_press_2008_06_18.html.
Smith, Gene. “Atomiq: Folksonomy: social classification.” Aug 3, 2004 http://atomiq.org/archives/2004/08/folksonomy_social_classification.html
Richardson, Will. Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, 2006.
Smith, Aaron.,Rainie, Lee. (June 15, 2008). "The Internet and the 2008 Election." PEW Internet and American Life Project http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_2008_election.pdf
Surowiecki, James. The Wisdom of Crowds. 1st. Harpswell, ME : Anchor, 2005.
The world map of social networks. (June 28, 2007). Valleywag. June 19, 2008, from http://valleywag.com/tech/notag/the-world-map-of-social-networks-273201.php.
Walsh, Michael. "Information R/evolution" June 19, 2008, from http://www.classroom20.com/video/video/show?id=649749%3AVideo%3A77287.
"The Washington Post." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 21 Jun 2008, 07:49 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 02 Jul 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Post>
"Web 2.0 Panel Discussion - Does the "Wiki" Model Work?." YouTube Video. 09 Aug 2007. Retrieved 30 Jun 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rT8wdu_l4KE.
Weinberger, David. Everything is Miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2007.
Weinberger, David. “The Future of Knowledge” 14 November 2004. The Library of Congress. C-SPAN. 13 June 2008. <http://learn.ed.uiuc.edu/mod/resource/view.php?id=19760>
Weiss, J., Nolan, J., Hunsinger, J., & Trifonas, P. (2006). International Handbook of Virtual Learning Environments: Springer International Handbooks of Education.
Wenger, E. & Snyder, W. (2000) Communities of Practice: the organisational frontier, Harvard Business Review, 78(1), pp. 139-145.
"Wiki." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 21 Jun 2008, 08:54 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 22 Jun 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wiki&oldid=220732039>.
"Wiki, Globalization." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 22 June 2008, 9:30 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization>.
Woodward, Tom. “Education Today and Tomorrow.” YouTube Video. 20 Sept 2006. Retrieved Jun 2008. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fnh9q_cQcUE>
World class production: economic globalization. Link from University of Illinois’ College of Education Learning Management System. Mar. 2008 <http://moodle.ed.uiuc.edu/>
Related Images and Links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Internet_blackholes_en.png
