Author: Deb G

Introduction

Bryan Alexander’s article “Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning” relays the emergence and importance of Web 2.0 in information discovery. It highlights a number of important aspects of Web 2.0 including social networking, microcontent, openness, and folksonomy, and than continues on to describe how it can enhance pedagogical ideologies. Each of these characteristics will be examined below.

Information on the Internet is presented in a variety of ways. Graphics and multi-media now define the Web, challenging the very definition of literacy. Information flows in numerous directions and paths offering the ‘reader’ or ‘visitor’ multi-layered information. Web 2.0 is based on interactions between people in asynchronous and synchronous communication, offering flexability and accomodation. This has a significant impact on our society, education system and our culture.

Definition

There is much debate over the definition of Web 2.0. Alexander (2008) defines Web 2.0 as “…a way of creating Web pages focusing on microcontent and social connections between people” (Alexander, 2008, p. 151). Wikepedia defines Web 2.0 as “…commonly associated with web applications which facilitate interactive information sharing, interoperability, user-centered design and collaboration on the World Wide Web” (Wikepedia, 2009). Many argue that this is not something that is a recent technological invention, but more of an evolution of sorts.

Social Networks

Social networking is one of the major characteristics of Web 2.0. This includes listservs, Usenet groups, discussion software, groupware, Web-based communities, blogs, wikis, podcasts, and videoblogs, which includes MySpace, Facebook and Youtube (Alexander, 2008). Facebook alone has thousands of users, allowing people to stay connected using a variety of methods.

 “Social bookmarking is a method for Internet users to share, organize, search, and manage bookmarks of web resources” (Wikepedia, 2009). Social bookmarking and networking are constantly evolving, changing and metamorphing ways to acquire knowledge and stay connected. It allows various people from around the world to bond together and engage, where otherwise this would not be possible. It enlarges the definition of community and links people by topic, concerns, human interest, educational needs, political perspectives, etc. For example, Twitter allows people to instantly communicate with their ‘followers’. This type of social networking was used recently during the American Presidential campaign to keep voters and constituants in touch. Instant messaging allows spontaneous contact with others, which is strongly associated with the characteristics of immediacy within our society.

Microcontent

One critical aspect of social networking is microcontent. Microcontent is an important building block of the Web as information is in bite size pieces that can be accumulated, edited, manipulated and saved. Microcontent allows participants to contribute small pieces of information that can take little time and energy, is easy to use, and provides foundational pieces to web pages. An example of this is Blogs and Wikis.

Openness

Another characteristic that Blogs and Wikis share is openness and accessibility. Openness is “…a hallmark of this emergent movement, both ideologically and technologically” (Alexander, 2006, p. 34).  Users are considered the foundation in this information architecture (Alexander, 2006), and therefore play a pivotal role in developing, creating and designing spaces. Participation is key and Web 2.0 encourages openness and participation from all.

Folksonomy

“A folksonomy is a system of classification derived from the practice and method of collaboratively creating and managing tags to annotate and categorize content” (Wikepedia, 2009). Managing tags and collecting information from peers is an important aspect of social networking and Web 2.0. Tags and hyperlinks are two of the most important inventions of the last 50 years (Kelly, 2006). By linking pages each book can refer to multiple other books. References and text are endlessly linked to each other, creating exponential knowledge.

Pedagogical Implications

There are many pedagogical implications that come with the advent of Web 2.0. A list of beneficial websites, ideas and tools for teaching with Web 2.0 applications were put together by myself, using Webslides, and can be found at http://www.diigo.com/list/etec540debg/head-of-the-class-with-web-20. These tools can be a valuable asset in the classroom. 

Social bookmarking can play a role in “collaborative information discovery” (Alexander, 2006, p. 36) allowing students to connect with others, follow links and research references. It can also enhance student group learning, build on collaborative knowledge and assist in peer editing (Alexander, 2006).

“The rich search possibilities opened up by these tools can further enhance the pedagogy of current events” (Alexander, 2006, p. 40).  This allows students to follow a search over weeks, semester or a year (Alexander, 2006). The ability to analyze how information, a story or an idea changes over time allows collaboration between classes and departments and provides the ability to track progress (Alexander, 2006).

Wikis and Blogs can chronicle student’s development over a semester, provide occasions for partnering and discussion, and provide opportunities to practice literacy skills and communication techniques. Blogs and Wikis can give each student a voice and provide equal opportunities for all participants. Storytelling provides creativity and allows students the opportunity to tell their own story. Chat can develop critical thinking skills while podcasting and voicethread can develop opportunities for documentation and interaction.

 The interactivity that Web 2.0 offers encourages group productivity and consultation. Projects like connecting students with real-time astronauts or with sister schools in another country heightens learner interest. Whether it is Science fairs or projects, English literature, history or social studies, Web 2.0 can enhance the multiple aspects of the learning paradigm.

Alexander’s arguments are compelling, however, he does not address the downside of Web 2.0. This would include cyberbullying, cyber-predators, web cameras used for pornography, and the unreliability of the Internet. Accessibility and openness is all inclusive, meaning right and wrong information can be contributed. Learners need to be taught how to find reliable sources on the Web while sifting through mountains of information with a critical eye. The Internet is a Pandora box of sorts – the good comes with the evil. Not every technology and Web innervation has acceptable pedagogical implications, or can be used appropriately in the classroom. Applications can be unstable, come with technical issues, and can be cost prohibitive for those that come with licenses.  Applications are tools to be used to assist in learning and not to replace exceptional teaching methods. However, even with multiple tools available, teachers may not use them as they may not be available for every class, they do not have the knowledge to use them, or find them too time consuming.

The Future

The future of Web 2.0 is Web 3.0, which will be a highly interactive and user-friendly version. The advancement of the above characteristics will ideally enhance applications that are already being used, and provide new applications/opportunities for learning. Skills that are developed in the classroom now will prepare students with the necessary skills that they will require in their future workplaces.

Conclusion

The evolution of the Web will continue to ebb and flow and evolve over time, bringing learners and creators together (Alexander, 2006). Gone are the days of ‘reading’ web pages, which are now designed to be more interactive and purposeful, inundating the user with myriads of information. The availability of social networking, microcontent, folksonomy and openness on the Web will continue to provide learners and educators with multiple learning opportunities. With guidance from the educator, learners can be provided with positive learning outcomes, while using multi-layered applications.

References

Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning? Educause Review, 41(2), 34-44. Retrieved April 5, 2008, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0621.pdf

Alexander, B. (2008).Web 2.0 and Emergent Multiliteracies. Theory into practice.47(2), 150-60. Retrieved July 20, 2009, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405840801992371

Kelly, K. (May 2006). Scan this Book. The New York Times.

Wikepedia. (2009). Folksonomy. Retrieved November 11, 2009 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy

Wikepedia. (2009). Social bookmarking. Retrieved November 11, 2009 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_bookmarking

Wikipedia. (2009). Web 2.0. Retrieved November 11, 2009 from  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0

Introduction

  Kevin Kelly articulates in “Scan this Book”, (New York Times, May 2006) the concept of the virtual library. The dream has always been to have “…in one place all knowledge, past and present” (Kelly, 2006, p.1). There are two common themes throughout the paper: one of access and the other of relationships. There are a number of hurdles presented, including ownership and copyright laws.

The universal library will change the concept of the book and the nature of what we call libraries (Kelly, 2006). “The collective intelligence of a library allows us to see things we can’t see in a single, isolated book” (Kelly, 2006, p. 5). Universal access will break down the barriers and change the concept of knowledge acquisition.

However, is having ‘all’ knowledge in one place realistic? Can we not find the knowledge we need already present on the Internet? Will greater access to text increase society’s wisdom and present knowledge and preserve our history and maintain our present culture? Is text we presently have available to us through the written work in libraries and on the Internet sufficient, or what is it lacking? These questions appear not to be answered in Kelly’s article.

There is a lot of information in this article, but I would like to focus on the access to virtual libraries, and their relationships with books and with people. The virtual library devises a new culture of interaction and participation, which changes how readers interact with books and the individual (Kelly, 2006).    

Access

 Kelly explains that the universal library will be accessible to all. “We can provide all the works of humankind to all the people of the world. It will be an achievement remembered for all time, like putting the man on the moon.” (Kelly, 2006, p.1). He also reiterates that the process will be  “…truly democratic, offering every book to every person” (Kelly, 2006, p. 1). O’Donnell (n.d.) cites total inclusiveness and access to the virtual libraries as the ideal (p. 2). One needs to wonder how this process can truly be democratic when any country or individual who does not have the technology will not be able to access a universal library, or have a vote in the ‘democratic process’. Google has taken on the initiative to scan, and also glean the benefits, of creating a central location to accumulate all the knowledge and information of the world. With these ambitions come many barriers.

The digital divide continues to persist throughout the world. The article continues by telling the reader that the people who will most benefit will be the underserved by ordinary paperback books (Kelly, 2006). Countries and people who presently do not have access to libraries, or money to buy books will still not be able to access the virtual library as the technology, which costs money and resources to obtain, will still not be available. While those who do have access (equipment and the Internet), searching, creating and access will be inherently free.

The virtual library will allow a new infrastructure within a library setting. A reader will be able to access the library from anywhere and will be able to access multiple books at one time. With the mass production of the book came improved access to the written text. Mass production also provided the availability of cheap books to individuals (individual ownership) and libraries now had a large quantity of books at their disposal (Kelly, 2006).

Relationships

Digital libraries will keep books and people connected in new and various ways to each other. This is inherently done through the ‘link’ and the ‘tag’, which are considered one of the most important inventions of the last 50 years (Kelly, 2006). By linking pages, each book can refer to multiple other books. Bibliographies and references can be automatically linked to other bibliography and reference lists, making it easier to research and follow a theme, topic or idea. Books will now have relationships with each other. “The process can continue indefinitely as the reader moves through textual space that, in the case of the World Wide Web, can extend throughout the Internet”(Bolter, 2001, p.27). The interlinking of information forms communities of knowledge that are linked with new meaning and worth.

When books are interconnected, four things occur:

1. Books on the fringes will find a wider audience
2. History will be recorded
3. Society will cultivate a new sense of authority
4. A new infrastructure will develop, allowing never seen before services and functions (Kelly, 2006).

Hypertext also allows various connections and associations. “The connections of a hypertext constitute paths of meaning for the author and for the reader. Each topic may participate in several paths, and its significance will depend on which paths the reader has traveled in order to arrive at that topic” (Bolter, 2001, p. 35). With hypertext the writers and creators can now interact, create and communicate with a computer screen that has no equivalent in oral language (Bolter, 2001). Along with hypertext comes the significance of ‘search’.

The function of search has altered the concept of knowledge acquisition. Search adds social and inherent value to what you are looking for (Kelly, 2006) and creates connections as new information is linked with existing information. Searching allows access and gives the reader the control and freedom of discovery.

Barriers

Kelly states that there are a number of barriers that are present to block the universal digital library from occurring; including lack of books, copyrights, intellectual property laws and the very logistics of scanning a copious amount of books. Presently there is a lawsuit against Google for copyright infringement as laws surrounding intellectual property, particularly of the deceased, continue to burden Google’s objectives.

Conclusion

Many books add more value than one book. The task of organizing all knowledge and information is an onerous one. Linking text with tags, hypertext and search functions allow relationships between readers and text. Organizing knowledge to be easily accessible and at the same time to prevent obscurity, is an arduous task which is laden with barriers. Is it a realistic goal to bundle all knowledge in one place? Only Google has the answer.

References

Bolter, D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2^nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kelly, K. (May 2006). Scan this Book. The New York Times.

O’Donnel, J. (n.d.). The Virtual Library: An Idea Whose Time Has Passed. Retrieved from http://web.archive.org/web/20070204034556/http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/virtual.html

Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology

By Neil Postman

Introduction

            How has our culture changed because of technology? Are the effects of technology positive or negative? Do we get to decide which technology society keeps and what we disregard? Are we just ‘tools of our tools’ (Postman, 1992)?

            As technology’s pace continues to hit warp speed, we see an ever changing, increasingly new list of benefits and burdens; and changes to our culture, which had not been anticipated. We may learn from this that it is a mistake to suppose that any technological innovation has a one-sided, limited effect (Postman, 1992).

Blessing and Burden

            Technology is a myriad of discoveries that can be akin to Pandora’s box; both good and evil emerge. Society is unable to stop the advancement or progress of either. Postman (1992) states that once the hand of technology is played in society, it does what it was designed to do. A good example of this is the Internet. The Internet was originally designed by the US military as a tool for communication. The original creators could not have foreseen the magnitude and impact that the Internet would have on society. It allows society to build and create new forms of communication and business that is constantly being rediscovered; it also advances social ills like child pornography and gambling. It can create chaos and change culture at the same time. Unforeseen consequences do arrive, and therefore the discoverer is not always the best judge of the good or harm that is a result of an introduction of a new invention in society (Postman, 1992).

Technology Changes our Culture

     Changes the power structure.

Technology produces an elite group that has been given undeserved authority, prestige and power (Postman, 1992). Unfortunately, this power structure is not distributed equally (Postman, 1992). Countries that do not have the capability of developing or using technology fall quickly behind the rest of the world.

Power changes hands without warning and is unpredictable, creating power struggles and shifts. Technology provides the elitists with weapons that only encourage this unbalance of power.

     Influences the masses.

Postman (1992) states the obligatory truth that the medium is the message. The medium and the message are influenced by each other due to the fact that “…embedded in every tool is an ideological bias, a predisposition to construct the world as one thing rather than another, to value one thing over another, to amplify one sense or skill or attitude more loudly than another” (Postman, 1992, p, 13). This has the ability to influence the individuals who are receiving the message via the innovative modern medium.

     Changes our lexicon.

Our very language and definitions have been altered by technology. New words have been added to accommodate our new possessions, like ipod, RAM, memory stick, etc. Words are now redefined by the new paradigm in which technology creates.

     Redefines our values.

Technology changes our ideologies, theories, context, ideas of freedom, truth, fact, wisdom, and history (Postman, 1992). It changes our context in that it influences our reference point in society and history. It changes what we think about and how we think about it (Postman, 1992).

Technology challenges our understanding of what is real. “…New technologies change what we meant by ‘knowing’ and ‘truth’; they alter those deeply embedded habits of thought which give to a culture its sense of what the world is like; a sense of what is the natural order of things, of what is reasonable, of what is necessary, of what is inevitable, of what is real” (Postman, 1992, p. 12). When a culture changes the context in which they live, a paradigm shift occurs, influencing the very structure and foundation on which society rests.

     Changes our community.

            Our community is no longer the people who live next door. Our community is the entire world. The very arena in which thought and ideas are developed (Postman, 1992) is impacted by technology. Society is constantly ‘wired’ via e-mail, voicemail, fax, Blackberry, texting, cell phones; keeping us connected to everyone at all the times. It changes our environment, and how we use the tools determines our work places and private spaces.

     Changes our worldview.

Technology promotes a certain worldview; when this view is challenged, an institution feels threatened. When this occurs, a culture feels threatened (Postman, 1992). “…New technologies compete with old ones- for time, for attention, for money, for prestige, but mostly for dominance of their world-view” (Postman, 1992, p.16). Society’s worldview changes according to what we have been exposed to. Therefore, those who control our exposure, also control our views of family, society, ethics, etc.

     Changes us.

How do we process the many megabytes of information that is thrown at us everyday? Information overload, techno-stress, carpal tunnel syndrome, user frustration and technosis are symptoms of our constant changing technological environment. The quantity and quality of information is uncontrolled. Authority of authors and creators are not questioned, challenging us to give authority to those individuals who did not earn it and do not deserve it.

Conclusion

There are many benefits and burdens to technology. It does not add or subtract to our culture, it indeed changes everything (Postman, 1992). Technology has far reaching affects that impacts our culture in varied ways- both positively and negatively. Society can change, adapt and metamorph to accommodate and live with new technology and the innovations and creations that it produces. Or it can allow the degradation of our culture to remnants of a civilized and orderly existence.

Do we have any choice but to surrender to the technology age? Yes, but only if you want to be left behind. 

References

Ong, Walter. (1982.) Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word.   London: Methuen.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology.     New York: Vintage Books.