Web 2.0: trendy nonsense?

Slideshow Transcript

1. Slide 1: web 2.0: trendy nonsense? Steven Warburton King’s College London steven.warburton@kcl.ac.uk
2. Slide 2: where are we now?
3. Slide 3: identifying trends • social nature of learning • social-constructivism and situated learning • negotiated meaning through dialogue • collaboration, community and creativity • socio-technical and cultural changes • ambient technology, ubiquitous computing • fluidity between individual, group, community and networks • web-natives, digital natives, net generation • web 2.0 » read/write web -> consumer becomes producer » complexity, emergent behaviour and emergent classifications » the rise of social software
4. Slide 4: discussion fora social recommendation IRC & discovery instant messaging blogs social tools wikis social bookmarks collaboration social networks
5. Slide 5: e-learning: dominant models, developments and drivers • reusable learning objects • quality frameworks • standards (SCORM, LOM, QTI) • digital repositories (silos) • scripted learning activities (IMS LD) • content delivery and assessment driven (VLE) • a hierarchical industrial model that can respond to increasing student numbers and pressures on staff time
6. Slide 6: web 2.0 in education • what is the problem to which web 2.0 technologies are posited as a solution? • how does the rhetoric of web 2.0 stand up to close scrutiny? • what questions are these technologies asking of ‘us’, our values, our teaching and our institutions
7. Slide 7: problematising web 2.0
8. Slide 8: consumers becoming producers • blogs, wikis, YouTube, podcasts, slideshare, del.icio.us and so on inevitably leads to: • mass amateurisation • information rich but knowledge poor • incoherence • information overload • not what I know but who I know or where to find it? • open systems = chaos?
9. Slide 9: collaboration: individual, group, community and networks • what are our motives for collaboration and cooperation? • what conditions support strong community formation? • emergent behaviours (critical mass) • groups vs. networks or groups to communities – in networks what happens to: • trust • identity (work on the self) • and shared purpose
10. Slide 10: Stephen Downes whiteboard brain dump on the essence of group vs. network
11. Slide 11: personalisation • personal = choice = problematic (how do we know how to make these choices?) • personal = private = problematic (institutions should respect privacy?) • there is a distinct lack of clarity between between customisation and personalisation?
12. Slide 12: next generation - what generation? • where is the evidence for next generation learners? • where are the next generation tutors • the student body is always in a state of change unlike our academics?
13. Slide 13: formal and informal learning spaces • in a web 2.0 world of disruption and the blurring of formal and informal how do students: – develop critical self awareness? – judge value and quality (disciplinary knowledge boundaries, assessment)? – develop intellectual tools? – engage in purposeful activities (metacognition, competencies)?
14. Slide 14: what are the ethical issues raised by web 2.0? • personal - implies freedom from censorship • public domain vs. respect for student privacy • risk - exposing and sharing our thinking • traces - e.g. permanence of blogs posts • student visibility / invisibility (the quiet learner) • tracking as control • identity - adding personal spin, managing reputation • what are our responsibilities, where are we accountable?
15. Slide 15: does a web 2.0 approach work in practice? evaluating wikis: • introducing new tools does not change practice • wikis conflict with traditional assumptions about authorship and intellectual property: – why share?: receiving credit for contributions, selfish motive? – consent: contributions being revised or deleted • content knowledge can be improved, but this takes time • quality can be maintained if versions ready for quality assessment are identified • students can be reluctant to contribute to wikis • visual and design options are limited - wikis are not presentation software • are wikis easy to use? they require network literacy: writing in a distributed, collaborative environment source: a variety of case studies, see http://del.icio.us/stevenw/wiki-workshop-2006-11
16. Slide 16: • the floodgates are open how do we respond? • architecture or ecology? • do these technologies support our underpinning educational values?
17. Slide 17: what do institutions say?
18. Slide 18: we are afraid, very afraid there seem to be two recurring themes: • fear of losing control by levelling the authority structures • fear of losing control by levelling authority structures is web 2.0 is going to put me out of a job?
19. Slide 19: we have seen it all before • institutional weariness at having to keep pace with constant technological innovation when pedagogy has barely shifted? • where is the evidence for the rhetoric of the Internet being applicable to education? • the bubble will burst, these technologies will be socialised and tamed (but to what?) - a natural evolution
20. Slide 20: are we looking at a paradigm shift? one that is individual, institutional, cultural or?
21. Slide 21: closed and open systems, hierarchies vs. networks, nupedia to wikipedia Brooks Law (1975) Linus’ Law • • As the number of “Given enough eyeballs, all programmers N rises, the bugs are shallow” (Linus work performed also scales Torvalds) as N, but the complexity and vulnerability to mistakes rises or as N squared • “Conceptual integrity in turn • Given a large enough beta- dictates that design must tester and co-developer base, proceed from one mind, or a almost every problem will be very small number of characterised quickly and the agreeing resonant minds” fix obvious to someone.
22. Slide 22: what do we see in the future? what questions do we need to ask?
23. Slide 23: key ideas • appropriation: understanding the use of technologies as being a locally situated phenomenon and a process of negotiation of meaning occurs at these sites • context: a particular technology (wiki) used in an educational activity or context is not the same as the technology (wiki) used to collaborate and document a workshop
24. Slide 24: context (pedagogical approach)? collaborative networked e-learning? formal or informal setting? mixed mode or distance education? learner at centre learner social software expectations personalised negotiation of meaning motivation networked experience & competencies collaborative time creative