it4L

Oh dear. Did I miss something? Have I fallen asleep at the wheel again? What’s this Web 2.0 that seems to all the buzz, and why wasn’t I aware of Web 1.0? What can have changed so radically that we need a new designation? (It doesn’t look any different). What’s the fuss about?

It seems that there is a crescendo of murmuring about the way the web is used. Just like many I was happy to use the web just to find information, and to buy train tickets, books and the like; transactions were generally of a monetary nature. Using the web was a solitary one-way experience. But the times, they are a-changing…the web has got two-way. You and I can share thoughts, review each others’ work, add to each others’ efforts - we can work together! And learning will be made more effective through the collaborative spaces that we create. (You and I are learners on a journey, yes? So the same is true for those learners in our classrooms…)

When Sir Tim Berners-Lee invented the Web, it was always intended as a two-way conversation rather than simply an information resource:

“The original idea of the web was that it should be a collaborative space where you can communicate through sharing information.
The idea was that by writing something together, and as people worked on it, they could iron out misunderstanding.”

(from the BBC)

Until very recently it was relatively difficult for someone to put content onto the Web. It required a degree of technical skill and know-how to firstly write a web page and then publish it. In contrast, the recent explosion of web applications that enable individuals to add content is changing the way we use the web. Through blogging, tagging and social bookmarking communities are building that share values and interests, and our learners need to be taught to be a part of this revolution.

In his Learning 2.0 article, Stephen Downes says:

If we analyze each one of the web 2.0 technologies, particularly as they are applied to learning, we will see that they are each of a kind. They give people a voice. They allow people to make choices. They expand individual capabilities and capacities. They reduce the amount of direction, and increase autonomy. What we get in web 2.0 is a freer and more democratic web, one where people can read and listen to each other, at their their own pace and in their own way, instead of to AOL and the New York Times (though these too remain among the choices). And, importantly, that’s why people are taking to these technologies.

We’re doing our learners a disservice if we don’t at least make them aware of the new technologies on offer.

Blogs

It is relatively easy to create your own blog (usually just a registration process - email me if you want to experiment in a safe environment) but after it’s done you have your own global publishing platform, and all which that entails. It might be useful to you to post your lesson notes onto the blog, whereupon your learners could add comments by using “trackbacks” to their own blog. (A trackback is something that places the response on the learner’s blog into the comments section on the teacher’s blog).

Imagine a scenario where the members of your A level class each has their own blog onto which they make regular reflective postings about their own learning. By harnessing the two-way aspect of trackbacks you can ask them to comment on lesson notes that you have prepared, perhaps a piece of pre-reading - and their writings appear as comments on your blog as soon as they post them. Even more powerful is that those learners are then empowered to respond to anybody’s blog; so a piece of online reading that they are given has the potential to involve them in a global conversation.

Wiki

Imagine a document that anybody could add to or amend. People within the global community (or a subset of that if you want to tie it down) could construct a document that would grow to contain the sum of their knowledge on the topic. It also sounds like a recipe for mischief and chaos, unless the people who use it show some social responsibility and refrain from “vandalism” ie purposefully ruining somebody else’s work. Wiki allows you to see who made the changes so the spoilers can be tracked down; it can always be rolled back to a prior version of the page to remove any vandalism. To me, that’s the underlying usefulness of wiki, that it has the capacity to instil a sense of collective responsibility for a job well done; there are far more responsible people out there than spoilers, and the spoilers can be blocked from the site if their behaviour persists.

The biggest example of this technology being used is Wikipedia, an online encyclopaedia that anyone can contribute to or amend (you need to be registered these days, but that’s only a formality). If you disagree with an entry, you can change it or join the discussion attached to it.

I’m a shade behind the zeitgeist in discussing this but reading guys like Steven Bryant, Will Richardson, Stephen Downes and listening to the podcasts from the Web 2.0 conference last year have given me reason to ponder about why we’re not fully harnessing the power of the ubiquitous web and the new applications that are freely available out there. The collaboration is the key - that learners prepare material fit for a worldwide audience and expect that audience to take part.

How will it change learning? Take a look at FanFiction for instance; a site where individuals can write their own stories and have them made available to a global audience for review and critique. What better incentive for making sure your work is of high quality?

Our learners are already using sharing techniques to communicate. Sites like Xanga, myspace, ourmedia and many others, they are already sharing content on the web. The power is out there for the harnessing - I am sure teachers can find ways of using these tools creatively.