Web 2.0, teaching, and learning: early 2007. Plan of the talk 1.Web 2.0 in late 2006 2.Web 2.0 rich media 3.Pedagogies 4.Web 2.0 storytelling (Middlebury

Web 2.0, teaching, and learning: early 2007

Plan of the talk

1. Web 2.0 in late 2006

2. Web 2.0 rich media

3. Pedagogies

4. Web 2.0 storytelling

(Middlebury waterfall, spring 2006)

Thematics

• Emergence in

time and space

• Pedagogy

• Dynamic information ecologicy

(Radio Open Source blog/podcast, 2006)

One metaphor

Web 2.0 and education is like gaming and education: awareness is challenging

• Huge, financially and quantitatively successful worlds

• Global and rapidly developing• Bad anxieties, policies, and media

coverage• Perceived lack of seriousness

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/audience

I. Web 2.0

The term: Tim O’Reilly, 2005

• Expands “social software”

• Draws on Web history

I. Web 2.0

• Microcontent, rather than sites or large documents

I. Web 2.0

• Multiply authored microcontent, rather than sites or large documents

I. Web 2.0

• Open content and/or services and/or standards

(Pepysblog, 2003-)

I. Web 2.0

• Network constructivism

(Pepysblog, 2003-)

I. Web 2.0

• Data mashups

I. Web 2.0

• O’Reilly: perpetual beta

I. Web 2.0

• AJAX-based projects

I. Web 2.0

• O’Reilly: platforms for development

I. Web 2.0

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

I. Web 2.0

Research: wikis are textually productive-Viégas, Wattenberg, Dave (IBM, 2004)

I. Web 2.0

News-gathering: wikis are textually productive(OhMyNews! , WikiNews)

I. Web 2.0

Web 2.0 components, movements• collaborative writing platforms: the blogosphere

I. Web 2.0

• Addressable content chunks

I. Web 2.0

• Distributed, attached conversations

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

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

Web 2.0 components, movements: social objects

http://flickr.com/

•Photo sharing:

Flickr

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

Reach of Flickr• 26 million

searchable, shareable images in Flickr (December 2006)

• Metadata is good enough

• Gaming inspiration

(Ben Harris-Roxas, 2006)

I. Web 2.0

Web 2.0 enables the Web office

• Example: Google Spreadsheets

http://spreadsheets.google.com/

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

“…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

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

Social object principles: tagging

Flickr is one influential and leading tagging project

I. Web 2.0

“Home

Owain

Hestia

Chickens

Ripton”

I. Web 2.0

Folksonomy

User benefit

• Search

• Retrieval

• Self-awareness

http://del.icio.us/

for DoctorNemo

I. Web 2.0

Community surfacing• Ontology

• Concepts • Collaborative research

I. Web 2.0

Case study, tagging museums:

the Steve project

I. Web 2.0

Tagging museums: the Steve project

• Expert discourse, controlled vocab

I. Web 2.0

Tagging museums: the Steve project

• Users tag differently• Curators get it

(Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2004)

I. Web 2.0

Tagging libraries: PennTags

• Coded locally

• Also tags the open web

http://tags.library.upenn.edu/

I. Web 2.0

Components, movements

• Mixing and mashing:

the RSS feed

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

Social news:

• Memeorandum, Tailrank, Digg, TechMeme

II. Rich media and Web 2.0

Web 2.0 influences rich media

• Podcasting


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…”


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)


What’s happened since February 2004?


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


What’s happened since? Neologisms:

• godcasting

• nanocasting

• podfading

• podsafe

• podspamming

• podvertising• porncasting


Web 2.0 influences rich media: video

(Gootube? Suetube?)


Videoblogging

(vlog?

vog?)

Rocketboom, Amanda Congdon(already moved on)


Web 2.0 influences rich media: audio

Freesound archive•DIY copyright•Social networking values

http://freesound.iua.upf.edu/


(Second Life, 2004-present)

Web 2.0 influences rich media: social gaming and Web 2.0?

III. 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

III. Pedagogies

Teaching with Web 2.0: it’s not all new

Earlier pedagogies

• Journaling

• Media literacy

III. Pedagogies

Teaching with Web 2.0: CMS involvement

• Moodle modules

III. 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.“”

III. Pedagogies

Teaching with Web 2.0: Blackboard Beyond

(Kevin Creamer, March 10 2006)

III. Pedagogies

Teaching with Web 2.0: principles

• Distributed

conversation

• Collaborative

writing

• Object-oriented

discussion

http://smarthistory.blogspot.com/

III. Pedagogies

Teaching with Web 2.0: more principles

• Ease of entry

• Personalization

III. 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

III. 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.”


III. 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.”


III. 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)


III. Pedagogies

Teaching with Web 2.0: blogging

• Distributed

conversation

• Collaborative

writing

• Object-oriented

discussion

III. 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…”

III. 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)

III. 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

III. Pedagogies

Wiki pedagogies

• Collective research

• Group writing

• Document editing

• Information literacy

• Discussion

• Knowledge accretion

III. Pedagogies

Social object pedagogies• Prompts• Discussion object• Composition materials

III. Pedagogies

Social object pedagogies• Annotate details• Remix (“Make it mine”)

Edugadget

http://www.edugadget.com/2005/05/07/flickr-creative-commons

III. Pedagogies

RSS pedagogies• Shaping Web reading• Pushing student-created content (mother

blog, Feed to Javascript)• Web 2.0 wrangling

III. 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

III. 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

III. 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. Web 2.0 storytelling

Web 2.0 storytelling

• Nonfiction (Pulse)

• Fiction (“I Found a Camera…”)

• ARGs

• Public intellectuals


Lonelygirl15

• One YouTube

• Another YouTube

• Myspace

• Blogs

• Discussion frenzy

• Media attention(2006-)


Flickr and storytelling

• Tell a story in 5 frames group

“Gender Miscommunication”(Nightingai1e, 2006)





“Gender Miscommunication” (Nightingai1e, 2006)


Flickr and storytelling

• In the Tell a story in 5 frames group, 'Alone With The Sand'

(moliere1331, 2005)

National Institute for Technology and Liberal Education http://nitle.org

NITLE blog http://b2e.nitle.org

NITLE Lab http://nitle.org/index.php/nitle/laboratory

Documents

Web 2.0, teaching, and learning: early 2007. Plan of the talk 1.Web 2.0 in late 2006 2.Web 2.0 rich media 3.Pedagogies 4.Web 2.0 storytelling (Middlebury