ppt 33

Web 2.0, teaching, and learning: early 2007: 

Web 2.0, teaching, and learning: early 2007 ACM SIGUCCS Savannah, 2007

Plan of the talk: 

Plan of the talk “Web 2.0” in early 2007 Web 2.0 and rich media Mobility Pedagogies Web 2.0 storytelling (Middlebury, Vermont, spring 2006)

Thematics: 

Thematics Emergence in time and space Pedagogy Dynamic information ecology Weak technological determinism (Radio Open Source blog/podcast, 2006)

One metaphor: 

One metaphor Web 2.0 and education is like gaming and education: awareness of it is challenging Huge, financially and quantitatively successful worlds Global and rapidly developing (BBC Viking Quest, 2006; Gwen, 2006)

One metaphor: 

One metaphor Web 2.0 and education is like gaming and education: awareness is challenging Bad anxieties, policies, and media coverage Perceived lack of seriousness (Rome: Total War, 2004)

One metaphor: 

One metaphor Web 2.0 and education is like gaming and education: intersections are possible Take advantage of preexisting projects Mod/warp/hack DIY Literacy: IF and audience (World of Warcraft, 2004-present)

Historical antecedents: 

Historical antecedents But first, a bit of media literacy criticism: “[T]his discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves. …”

Antecedents: 

Antecedents And: “…The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, and you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth…”

Antecedents: 

Antecedents Even worse: “… they will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be tiresome company, having the show of wisdom without the reality.” -Plato, Phaedrus (370 or so BCE) Jowett translation

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 The term’s history: Tim O’Reilly, 2005 Draws on Web history Expands “social software”

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Microcontent, rather than sites or large documents Gliffy

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Multiply authored microcontent, rather than sites or large documents

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Open content and/or services and/or standards (Pepysblog, 2003-)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Open microcontent + multiple authors = network constructivism (Pepysblog, 2003-)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Data mashups (Flickr + Google Maps)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Perpetual beta (O’Reilly, now history)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 AJAX-based projects? Also Flash, HTML…

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 O’Reilly: platforms for development

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Web 2.0 components, movements Collaborative writing platforms: the wiki way

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Research: wikis are textually productive -Viégas, Wattenberg, Dave (IBM Historyflow, 2004)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 News-gathering: wikis are textually productive (OhMyNews! , WikiNews)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Web 2.0 components, movements collaborative writing platforms: the blogosphere

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Addressable content chunks

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Distributed and/or attached conversations

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 State of the blogosphere 57 million blogs tracked by Technorati: “As of October 2006, about 100,000 new weblogs were created each day… the doubling of the blogosphere has slowed a bit (every 236 days or so…” (David Sifry, November 2006) Chart follows…

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 State of the blogosphere, more 12 people million using three platforms, including LiveJournal: majority women (Anil Dash, MeshForum 2006) Diversity: diaries, public intellectuals, carnivals, knitters, moblogs, warblogs home and abroad…

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Web 2.0 components, movements: social objects http://flickr.com/ Photo sharing: Flickr

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Reach of Flickr 100 million images, as of Feb 2006 As of October 2006, 4 million Flickr members (3/4 not in the US) 1 million photos uploaded each day (http://www.radioopensource.org/photography-20/ )

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Reach of Flickr 26 million searchable, shareable images in Flickr (December 2006) (Ben Harris-Roxas, 2006)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Reach of Flickr: Game Neverending, 2002-2003 “The secret is, even though it's called Game Neverending, it's not really a game at all. It's a social space designed to facilitate and enable play. The game-elements are there to provide both the constraints and the building blocks of interaction - since the thing you'll notice about the kind of play I'm talking about above is that it is the kind of thing that goes on between people.” -Stuart Butterfield, Mindjack interview, 2003 http://www.mindjack.com/feature/gne.html

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Reach of Flickr (Ben Harris-Roxas, 2006) Its metadata is “good enough” Did popular CMS/ LMSes keep higher education from contributing?

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Web 2.0 enables the Web office Example: Google Spreadsheets http://spreadsheets.google.com/

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 What can we learn from this? Ton Zylstra: “In general you could say that both Flickr and delicious work in a triangle: person, picture/bookmark, and tag(s). Or more abstract a person, an object of sociality, and some descriptor...”

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 “…In every triangle there always needs to be a person and an object of sociality. The third point of the triangle is free to define[,] as it were.” -http://www.zylstra.org, 2006 (emphases added)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 What can we learn from this? Jyri Engesrom is succinct: “The fallacy is to think that social networks are just made up of people. They're not; social networks consist of people who are connected by a shared object.” -http://www.zengestrom.com/, 2005

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Social object principles: tagging Flickr is one influential and leading tagging project

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 “Home Owain Hestia Chickens Ripton”

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Folksonomy User benefit Search Retrieval Self-awareness http://del.icio.us/ for DoctorNemo

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Community surfacing Ontology Concepts Collaborative research

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Case study, tagging museums: the Steve project http://www.steve.museum/

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Tagging museums: the Steve project Expert discourse, controlled vocab

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Tagging museums: the Steve project Users tag differently Curators get it (Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2004)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Tagging libraries: PennTags Coded locally Also tags the open web http://tags.library.upenn.edu/

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Tagging in the world: Amazon.com gets it

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Social bookmarks: del.icio.us (See also FURL, Connotea, CiteULike, Harvard’s H20, Scholar.com, RawSugar, Shadows, etc) http://del.icio.us/DoctorNemo

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Components, movements Mixing and mashing: the RSS feed (Bloglines)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Social object: the person FaceBook MySpace LinkedIn ZoomInfo CyWorld “Less than four years after its launch, 15 million people, or almost a third of the country's population, are members.” (BusinessWeek, September 2005)

I. Web 2.0: 

I. Web 2.0 Social news: Memeorandum, Tailrank, Digg, TechMeme

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 Web 2.0 influences rich media Podcasting

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 How old is the term? “With the benefit of hindsight, it all seems quite obvious. MP3 players, like Apple's iPod, in many pockets, audio production software cheap or free, and weblogging an established part of the internet…”

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 How old is the term? “… all the ingredients are there for a new boom in amateur radio. But what to call it? Audioblogging? Podcasting? GuerillaMedia?” (Ben Hammersley, The Guardian February 12, 2004)

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 What’s happened since February 2004?

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 What’s happened since? “More than 22 million American adults own iPods or MP3 players and 29% of them have downloaded podcasts from the Web so that they could listen to audio files at a time of their choosing.” -Pew Internet and American Life study, April 2005

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 What’s happened since “podcasting” in 2001? Neologisms: godcasting nanocasting podfading podsafe podspamming podvertising porncasting

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 Web 2.0 influences rich media: audio Freesound archive DIY copyright Social networking values http://freesound.iua.upf.edu/

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 Web 2.0 influences rich media: video (Gootube? Suetube?)

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 Videoblogging (vlog? vog?) (Rocketboom, Amanda Congdon) (already moved on)

II. Rich media and Web 2.0: 

II. Rich media and Web 2.0 (Second Life, 2004-present) Web 2.0 influences rich media: social gaming and Web 2.0?

III. Mobility: 

III. Mobility Found on BBC site, June 2005 Everything in cyberculture, just: Ambient Accelerated Annotated

III. Mobility: 

III. Mobility Devices proliferate, obviously

III. Mobility: 

III. Mobility Your own personal walled garden, or pocket global village?

III. Mobility: 

III. Mobility Pedagogies Information on demand Time usage changes Class/world barrier reduction Swarming Personal intimacy with units Spatial mapping Mobile, multimedia, social research Distributed conversations

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: it’s not all new Web 1.0, internet pedagogies Hypertext Web audience Discussion for a Collaborative document authoring Groupware

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: it’s not all new Earlier pedagogies Journaling Media literacy

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: CMS involvement Moodle modules

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: Blackboard Beyond “Chief Executive Officer Michael Chasen... explained, "Just as the Web 2.0 is facilitating a change in the way people interact online, e-Learning 2.0 represents a transformational shift for how the Internet can improve education. Blackboard is excited to work with our clients to help shape and accelerate this transformation.“”

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: Blackboard Beyond (Kevin Creamer, March 10 2006)

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: Blackboard Beyond

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: principles Distributed conversation Collaborative writing Object-oriented discussion http://smarthistory.blogspot.com/

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: more principles Ease of entry Personalization Public intellectuals

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: “net.gen”: “Fully half of all teens and 57 percent of teens who use the Internet could be considered Content Creators, according to a survey by the Pew Internet & American Life Project.” http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/PIP_Teens_1105.pdf

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: “net.gen”: “33 percent of online teens share their own creative content online, such as artwork, photos, stories or videos. 32 percent say that they have created or worked on webpages or blogs for others, including groups they belong to, friends or school assignments.” http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/PIP_Teens_1105.pdf

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: “net.gen”: “22 percent report keeping their own personal webpage. 19 percent of online teens keep a blog, and 38 percent of online teens read blogs. 19 percent of Internet-using teens say they remix content they find online into their own artistic creations.” http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/PIP_Teens_1105.pdf

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: “net.gen”: “Teens are often much more enthusiastic authors and readers of blogs than their adult counterparts. Teen bloggers, led by older girls, are a major part of this tech-savvy cohort.” (Pew Internet and American Life, November 2005) http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/PIP_Teens_1105.pdf

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Teaching with Web 2.0: blogging Distributed conversation Collaborative writing Object-oriented discussion

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies University of British Columbia uses: “as personal logs/ journals to keep track of work/learning activities” as digital photo albums as potential e-portfolio tools…”

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies “…Currently, UBC is using weblogs…: as course web pages, encouraging discussion and collaboration as private management and communication tools for large campus groups, administrative teams, and communities of practice to easily update online newsletters to keep a collection of useful, searchable links” (http://weblogs.elearning.ubc.ca/home/about.php)

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Wiki pedagogies Collective research Group writing Document editing Information literacy Discussion Knowledge accretion

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Web video pedagogies Archiving Digital storytelling Web video information literacy Falling Sand, Zombie version

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Social object pedagogies Prompts Discussion object Composition materials

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Social object pedagogies Annotate details Remix (“Make it mine”) Edugadget http://www.edugadget.com/2005/05/07/flickr-creative-commons

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies RSS pedagogies Shaping Web reading Pushing student-created content (mother blog, Feed to Javascript) Web 2.0 wrangling

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Podcasts and teaching: profcasting Bryn Mawr College: Michelle Francl, chemistry Duke: Classroom recording Learning objects: Gardner Campbell, University of Richmond Duke: Course content dissemination Information literacy

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Podcasts and research Public intellectual Out of the Past Engines of Our Ingenuity Napoleon 101 In Our Time Trudi Abel, “Digital Durham and the New South” (Duke University, 2006) Duke: Field recording

IV. Pedagogies: 

IV. Pedagogies Blog problem: privacy Contrary to class safe space (Gary Kornblith) Culture of too much disclosure Problem increasing archivally Some responses Can block comments and/or readers Teachable moment: what is privacy in 2007? Complement other practices

IV. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

IV. Web 2.0 storytelling Web 2.0 storytelling Nonfiction (Pulse) Fiction (“I Found a Camera…”)

IV. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

IV. Web 2.0 storytelling Web 2.0 storytelling: ARGs Distributed Cross-platform Collaborative Examples: A. I., ILoveBees, Perplex City, NIN

V. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

V. Web 2.0 storytelling Lonelygirl15 One YouTube Another YouTube Myspace Blogs Discussion frenzy Media attention (2006-)

V. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

V. Web 2.0 storytelling The return of serial media: Flickr and storytelling Tell a story in 5 frames group “Gender Miscommunication” (Nightingai1e, 2006)

V. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

V. Web 2.0 storytelling

V. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

V. Web 2.0 storytelling

V. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

V. Web 2.0 storytelling

V. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

V. Web 2.0 storytelling “Gender Miscommunication” (Nightingai1e, 2006)

V. Web 2.0 storytelling: 

V. Web 2.0 storytelling Flickr and storytelling: collaboration, workshopping, community In the Tell a story in 5 frames group, 'Alone With The Sand' (moliere1331, 2005)

A question of divided architectures: 

A question of divided architectures (Valdis Krebs, 2004)

Slide 97: 

NITLE blog http://b2e.nitle.org NITLE Lab http://nitle.org/index.php/nitle/laboratory National Institute for Technology and Liberal Education http://nitle.org