Contents
I. Trends of of We Web II.. Defi II Definit nition ion of of Web Web 2.0 2.0 III. Educational Dimensions of Web 2.0 IV. Features of Web 2.0 V. Lear Learning ning theorie theoriess of Web Web 2.0 VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0 VII. Conclusion and Prospects
I. Trends of Web
• Ev Every erythi thing ng Can Can Be Done Done on the the Web
I. Trends of Web
• Webs Ca Can n Commu Communic nicate ate The Themse mselve lvess
Image of Semantic Web (Web 3.0)
II. Definition of Web 2.0 • A we web b platfo forrm where; •
appl ap plic icat atio ions ns ar aree bu buil iltt on th thee we web b
•
open op enss for for ev ever eryo yone ne as a cre creat ator or an and d a co cons nsum umer er
Tim O’Reilly (2005)
• A web system that; •
purs pu rsue uess the the de dece cent ntra rali lize zed d web web co conc ncep eptt
•
em owers the web users to artici ate in as a creator (Anderson, 2007)
III. Dimensions of Web 2.0 • Learning •
Supp Su ppor orti ting ng and and fac facil ilit itat atin ing g tool toolss and and envi envirron onme ment ntss
• Teaching •
Prov Pr ovid idin ing g auth authen enti ticc and and inst instan anta tane neou ouss reso resour urce cess
• Evaluating (Fe (Feeedback) •
Trac rackin king, g, moni monitor toring ing,, backc backchan hannel nel com commun munica icatin ting, g, and and feed feedbac back k
IV. Features of Web 2.0 • Advantages •
Great affordances
•
Easy Ea sy to us usee wi with th li litt ttle le te tech chni nica call tr trai aini ning ng
•
Info In form rmat atio ion n col colle lect ctor or an and d sha shari ring ng re repo posi sito tory ry
•
Part Pa rtic icip ipat ator ory y an and d co coll llab abor orat ativ ivee
•
The nature of continuity
IV. Features of Web 2.0
• Challenges •
Long Lo ngeevi vitty of of We Web 2.0 2.0 se serv rvic ices es
•
Diffi Di fficu cult ltie iess in be bein ing g up-t up-too-da date te of app appli lica cati tion onss
•
Over Ov erlo load adss in in tea teach chin ing g and and le lear arni ning ng ca capa paci citi ties es
•
Dist Di stra ract ctio ions ns unn unnec eces essa sary ry for for edu educa cati tion onal al pur purpo pose sess
Refresh your brain
Part 1: http://www. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDmdmqzZKBI youtube.com/watch?v=YDmdmqzZKBI
V. Learning Theories of Web 2.0
• Social Le Learning Th Theory •
Reciprocal Determin iniism
•
•
Behavior
Environment En
Motivational beliefs, Perceptions, Values, Emotions, Meanings
Obs bseerv rvat atio iona nall Lea Learn rnin ing g Th Theo eory ry
•
Attention
•
Retention
•
Reproduction
•
Motivation
•
Self-regulation
Reciprocal Determinism Environmental factors
Behavior
V. Learning Theories of Web 2.0
• Constructivism •
Learners’ Learne rs’ own con concep ceptt const constru ructi cting ng base based d on pr previ evious ous ski skills lls and knowledge
•
Individual:
•
Social: Groups
Individuals construct meaning out of what they already know and via interactions with environment (Piaget, 1970). or cultures construct meaning together out of what group or culture already knows and experiences (Vygotsky, 1978).
V. Learning Theories of Web 2.0
• Ac Acti tive ve (E (Exp xperi erien enti tial al)) Le Learn arnin ing g Th Theo eory ry •
Ask As k ques questi tion onss by par parti tici cipa pati ting ng and and col colla labo bora rati ting ng
•
Contr Con trol ol edu educat cation ional al re resou sourc rces es by ana analyz lyzing ing and cr creat eating ing
•
Rece Re ceiv ivee resp respon onse sess by cons consid ider erin ing g and and reco recons nstr truc ucti ting ng
V. Learning Theories of Web 2.0
• Connectivism •
Learning Learni ng theo theory ry that that re reflec flects ts lear learnin ning g need needs, s, prin princip ciples les,, and and processes in this knowledge- and network-based era. •
Creating co connections
•
Inte In tera ract ctin ing g wi with th ot othe herr en enti titi ties es
•
Expa Ex pand ndin ing g more more con conne nect ctio ions ns with with ope open n parti partici cipa pati tion onss
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
1. Social Ne Networking •
•
Group Communication
•
Class project
•
Peer connection
Professio ion nal Dev Development
•
Prof Pr ofeess ssio ion nal co com mmun uniica cati tion on
•
Purs Pu rsui uitt of of pe pers rso ona nall in inte terres estt
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
2. Social Reading •
•
Group Discourse
•
Class reading
•
Group di discussion
Personal cl cloud li library
•
Virtual bo bookshelf
•
Reading an anywhere an anytime
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
3. So Soci cial al Bo Book okm mar ark kin ing g •
Sear Se arch chin ing g web web kno knowl wled edge ge & Sh Shar arin ing g new new expe experi rien ence cess
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
4. Idea Bu Building •
•
•
Concept mapping
•
Organizing id ideas
•
Visual re representation
Note-taking/Memo
•
Tak akin ing g no nottes ev ever ery y mom omen entt
•
Co-editing & sharing
Idea vi visualization
•
Idea sketching
•
Coll Co llab abo ora rattiv ivee vi visu sual aliiza zati tion on
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
5. So Soci cial al Col olla labo bora rati tion on •
•
•
Documentation
•
Real time collaboration
•
Co-creating & co-editing
Visual co collaboration
•
Video conferencing
•
Scrree Sc een n sha hari ring ng & co co-e -edi dittin ing g
Colla lab boration man management
•
Project management
•
GTD (Get Things Done)
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
6. Ou Outc tcom omee Re Repr pres esen enta tati tion on •
•
•
Cre reat atin ing g Onl Onlin inee Pre Prese sen nta tati tio on
•
Prod Pr oduc ucin ing g pre prese sen nta tattio ion n onli online ne
•
Uplo Up load adin ing g ex exis isti ting ng pr pres esen enta tati tion on
Presenting Online
•
Pres Pr esen enttin ing g and and dem emon onsstr traati tio on
•
Inse In sert rtin ing g au audi dio o exp expla lan nat atiion
Sharing with others
•
Shar Sh arin ing g th throu oug gh SNS SNSss & em emai aills
•
Viewable or or do downloadable
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
7. Media sh sharing •
Tra rans nsfe ferr rrin ing g med media ia & Sha Sharin ring g file filess (fo (fold lder ers) s)
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
8. Us Usefu efull Web Web 2.0 2.0 too tools ls in in edu educa cati tion on •
•
•
Search & Find
•
Academic search engine
•
Specialized se search en engine
Audio & Video Record rdiing
•
Audi Au dio o (V (Voi oice ce)) rec ecor ordi ding ng
•
Web ca cam vi video re recording
Scre reeen Ca Capture & Recordin ing g
•
Computer sc screen capture
•
Com Co mpu pute terr scr cree een n rec ecor ord din ing g
VI. Contextual examples of Web 2.0
9. Us Usefu efull Web Web 2.0 2.0 too tools ls in in edu educa cati tion on •
•
•
Media Converter
•
Converting me media
•
Audi Au dio, o, vi vide deo o, do docu cum men entts, etc tc..
Web Page Creation
•
One cl click we web pa page cr creating
•
No need to kn know html, et etc.
Self-Publishing
•
Creating yo your ow own bo book
•
Pub Pu bli lish shin ing g onl onliine & oth other er fo form rmss
VII. Conclusion
• Ne New w learn learners ers in th thee era era of of soci social al tec techn hnol olog ogie iess •
More self-directed
•
Better equipped to obtain information
•
More reliant on interactions with others
•
More inclined to collaborate with peers
•
More oriented to be critical creators
Education Trends | Featured News John K. Waters—13 December 2011
• Two wa ways ys to be New New Lea earn rner er •
Make Ma ke the the bes bestt use use of of Web Web 2.0 2.0 soc socia iall tec techn hnol olog ogie iess
•
Impr Im prov ovee medi mediaa lite litera raci cies es in in digi digita tall know knowle ledg dgee age age
References Anderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies, and implications for education. JISC Technology and Standards Watch. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/ media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf. international practice in the use of social networking (Web 2.0) in higher education. A report •Armstrong, J., & Franklin, T. (2008). A review of current and developing international commissioned by the Committee of enquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. Retrieved from http://www.franklinhttp://www.franklin-consulting.co.uk consulting.co.uk/. /. •Bandura, A. (1977a). Self-e fcacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. s, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc. •Bandura, A. (1977b). Social learning theory. Englewood Cli s, s, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc. •Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cli s, http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media15529.pdf. 529.pdf. •Bartolome, A. (2008). Web 2.0 and New Learning Paradigms. eLearning Papers No. 8. Retrieved from http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media15 •Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. (D. M. Boyd & N. B. Ellison, Eds.) Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Communication, 13(1), 210-230. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. Retrieved from http://www.danah.org/papers/JCMCIntro.pdf. http://www.danah.org/papers/JCMCIntro.pdf. •Brown, J. S. (2008). How to connect technology and content in t he service of learning. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(8). •Bruner, J. (1973). Going Beyond the Information Given. New York: Norton. In Culatta, R. (2011). Constructivist theory (Jerome Bruner). In Instructional Design. Retrieved from http://www.instructionaldes http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/cons ign.org/theories/constructivist.htm tructivist.html. l. Academy. •Conole, G., & Alevizou, P. (2010). A literature review of the use of Web 2.0 tools in Higher Education. A report commissioned by The Higher Education Academy. http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/social-learning.htm l-learning.html. l. •Culatta, R. (2011). Social learning theory ( A. Bandura). In Instructional Design. Retrieved from http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/socia rol e of technology in education breakthrough teaching and learning. learning . In Gray, T. and Silver-Pacuilla, H., editors, Breakthrough Teaching •Dede, C. (2011). Reshaping the role and Learning, chapter 1, 1-3. Springer New York, New York, NY. Activating Students’, 2009, 7(3). Retrieved from •Farrell, J. B. ( 2009). Active learning: theories and research, Jewish educational leadership ‘Activating Learning Through Activating http://www.lookstein.org/online_journal.php?id=260. http://campustechnology.com/articles/2002/02/thee•Gilbert, S.W. (2002, February). The beauty of low threshold applications. Campus Technology. Retrieved from http://campustechnology.com/articles/2002/02/th beauty-of-low-threshold-applications.aspx. •Grifth, S, & Liyanage, L. (2008). An introduction to the potential of social networking sites in education. In I. Olney, G. Lefoe, J. Mantei, & J. Herrington (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second Emerging Technologies Conference 2008, 76-81. Wollongong: University of Wollongong. •Grusec, J. E. (1992). Social learning theory and developmental psychology: The legacies of Robert Sears and Albert Bandura. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 776-786. American Psychological Association. Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Cummins, M. (2012). The NMC Horizon Report Short List: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. • Jonassen, D. H. (1994). (19 94). Thinking Technology: toward a construc tivist design model. Educational Technology, April, 34-37. • Jonassen, D. H., & Reeves, T. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handb ook of research in educational • communications communications and technology, 693-719. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan. M acmillan. •Lemke, C., & Coughlin, E. (2009). The change agents. Educational Leadership, 67(1), 54-59. •McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M.W. (2008). Future Learning Landscapes: Transforming Pedagogy through Social Software. Innovate. The Journal of Online Education. 4(5). Retrieved from http://www.innovateon http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?v line.info/index.php?view=article&id=539. iew=article&id=539. •Murray, C. (2008). Schools and Social Networking: Fear or Education? Synergy Perspectives: Local, 6(1), 8-12. •O’Reilly, T. (2005). What Is Web 2.0. Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. O'Reilly Media, Inc. Retrieved from http:// www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html. www.oreillynet.com/pub/ a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html. •Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved from http://itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm. •Silva, J. M., Rahman, A. S., & El Saddik, A. (2008). Web 3.0: a vision for bridging the gap between re al and virtual. Paper presented at the 1st ACM international workshop on Communicability Communicability design and evaluation in cultural and ecological multimedia system, Vancouver British Columbia, Canada. Conf erence on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia •Shin, W., & Lowes, S. (2008). Analyzing Web 2.0 Users in an Online Discussion Forum. Paper presented at the World Conf erence and Telecommunications (EDMEDIA) 2008, Chesapeake, VA. technology plan 2010: Transforming American education: education: Learning •U.S. Department of Education, O fce of Educational Technology. (2010). National education technology powered by technology. Washington, D.C. •
Kangdon%Lee%
[email protected] Kangdon%Lee%
[email protected]%% %% University%of%Northern%Colorado%
This%work%is%licensed%under%the%Crea3ve%Commons% A7ribu3on9Non9Commercial9No%Deriva3ve%Works%2.0%US:% Interna3onal%Licence.%
