Blogs & Wikis in education

Stephen Downes (2008) stated on his blog that Web 2.0 “was not about specific web technology applications. Web 2.0 is rather about how we organize the web, and how we approach the web.” This is the best definition of Web 2.0 that I have heard thus far.

Catalano (2005) suggested that blogs could be used to keep parents updated. At first I did not understand why someone would use a blog, the comments section was all I could think about, then I realized that a blog could be used as an online newspaper that allows the reader to make editorial comments for each article. Parent access is definitely an issue, but if it isn’t there, then no one will benefit from it. I would not use it for a class site, but it definitely has merit as a school communication tool.

Wikis work wonders as a collaborative class tool, because then the teacher does not have to pair up for peer edits, but has the eyes and knowledge of the entire class, and if it is opened to the school or public, then millions may visit and edit pages to help students develop writing skills.

The most valuable part of the wiki in my opinion is the history. I love that feature. If you mess up a page, it is not deleted forever, just reload the previous version. I visited a wiki that I had done for a Walden course, and someone had gone in and place question marks all over the page, no text was visible, just question marks, as if they held down the key. I went to the history and saw that it was a guest, not even a member of the space, or anyone wanting to leave an email address. So I reloaded the previous page version.

Collaborative editing, multiple editors, and I loved the example of Sunflowers in the wiki article by Arreguin (2004). I also loved the fact that the citation was already in APA format ☺

Michael Wesch’s Presentation to Library of Congress http://weblogg-ed.com/ he mentions that Web 2.0 is about linking people… “Linking people in ways that we’ve never been linked before.” I greatly enjoyed the video and saw the implications of what my school could do as I examined the Galileo website http://galileoweb.org/

Richardson (2006) and Wesch both discuss how easy it is now to publish images and audio on the web. I never thought of YouTube as a weblog, but that is indeed one use for it.

School websites become dynamic with the introduction of blog spaces according to Richardson (2006, p. 26). He states that links are another “key characteristic of Weblogs” (p. 19). Wesch mentions the anonymity of not being watched or stared at directly. It allows students to open up and feel free to write or publish videos without judgment. This could encourage students who are shy to really communicate on various topics whereas they may never speak in class.

Richardson’s idea of scaffolding the blogging process is definitely a must at any level. Teachers and students alike cannot be asked to just start doing something that many of them are not familiar with, especially not in an educational capacity. Audience makes a difference when typing responses. It would definitely improve the reading and writing for this generation.

Barriers are always parent access and student-to-computer ratios.
My class post would have been earlier had I not taken the hour to listen and watch the Michael Wesch video. Now I know why it was at the top for so long… it beat the Super Bowl videos.

I thought it interesting in chapter 4 that Richardson stated that the “Discussion” section of a wiki is the blog. The concept of blogs took two chapters to discuss and seem to have a different connotation than a simple web log like is found in wikis. In some wiki discussion areas, the text cannot be edited and images cannot be used. It feels more like a simple asynchronous chat session than the full blown Blog provided by Blogger or YouTube.

References:
Arreguin, C. (2004). Wikis. In B. Hoffman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Technology. Retrieved September 25, 2008, from http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/wikis/start.htm

Catalano, F. (2005). Why blog. T.H.E. Journal. Retrieved September 25, 2008, from http://www.thejournal.com/articles/17616_8

Downes, S. (2008). Web 2.0 and Your Own Learning and Development: Video recording, Retrieved September 25, 2008, from http://www.downes.ca/

Richardson, W. (2006). Chapter 1: The read and write web. In Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Wesch, M. (2008). “An anthropological introduction to YouTube” video of Library of Congress presentation. Retrieved September 25, 2008, from http://mediatedcultures.net/ksudigg/

Web-based training in action

Eneroth (2005) discussed his experience with a web-based training program:

“The distance education course forced the organisers and participants to relate, and interact with, a shared framework or mind-set. The purpose being to help local entrepreneurs support a more sustainable tourism. Placing this framework on a web-based educational platform accessible at all times, at least in theory, made it a focal point regardless of geographical boundaries. Although Internet access was low, preparing, supporting and working with the booklet version of the course, raised a number of issues to be dealt with. A process that deepened the cooperation between the project managers in Costa Rica and Sweden, brought new dimensions to team couple relations, strengthened relations with the municipality hosting the program and built a bridge between University and society.”

Kruse (2004) wrote that “most WBT programs are still comprised of text and graphics alone.” This is considered a disadvantage given that the contribution of web-based learning to the educational experience is through the hypermedia aspects as described by Alessi and Trollip (2001). The interactivity provides the global communication and motivation for students to continue reading and learning on a given topic. The communication aspect of the web is essential to the training process. In the Eneroth case, it united participants from Costa Rica and Sweden.

According to Stennes (2008), “web-based learning cannot replace, and will probably never replace, traditional learning.” This is seen in the above distance education quote by Eneroth (2005) where the participants had to use the booklets in order to be “on the same page,” but still used the Internet (when the connection worked), to communicate globally.

References:

Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (2001). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Eneroth, C. (2005, September 30). 10. Trimming CIU program: What were the added values? In Web pedagogy for educators: Exploring the field of collaborative learning at a distance. Retrieved September 21, 2008, from http://t42distanceeducation.blogspot.com/

Kruse, K. (2004). Using the Web for learning: Advantages and disadvantages. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from
http://www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art1_9.htm

Stennes, B. (2008). Advantages and disadvantages of web-based learning. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.resourcesunlimited.com/Advantages_and_Disadvantages_of_Web-based_Learning.asp

Adventure Learning

I had a really hard time seeing the difference between Adventure Learning and Constructivist strategies, given the definitions from the text and the wacked out world of Walczak.

Constructivism is simply students creating meaning for themselves. There are other factors involved such as motivation and classroom structures that facilitate collaboration and exploration, but really, it's up to the student to learn. This is what we see in Walczak's world. The student takes the initiative and goes for as long as she can, and as far as she wants in the curriculum. She decides what the visual and other sensory inputs mean by interpreting them according to her own precepts. It is a constructivist environment. What strategies were missing? I don't really know.


References:
Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (2001). Chapter 1: Introducation. In Multimedia for learning: Methods and development (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Walczak, D. (2003). Encompassing education. In Department of Commerce, Visions 2020: Transforming education and training through advanced technologies (pp. 60-64). Government Report. Computer technology and multimedia in education doc sharing 8823. Los Angeles: Laureate Education.

Virtual living 2020

The world described by Walczak is frightening to me. Children would not be raised by their parents. They would be prompted by feeding machines that sing to them and show them pleasant images. The need to go to various places would become obsolete for so many. Why see ruins of the Roman arenas when the virtual machines can take you there with sight and sound?

It does not mean that a life with little actual physical involvement is such a bad thing (though there will still be those who fix the machines that will fix the machines running the virtual world). This impersonal environment would actually decrease violence, car accidents, and other fatalities and injuries caused by the everyday hustle and bustle of billions of people trying to get around each other.

It is just unnerving to me that we could be in a place, possibly in the near future, where human touch is not a necessity. Research shows that babies that are breastfed versus bottle fed are actually smarter, but what if the baby could not tell the difference between its mother and the virtual breast?


Reference:
Walczak, D. (2003). Encompassing education. In Department of Commerce, Visions 2020: Transforming education and training through advanced technologies (pp. 60-64). Government Report. Computer technology and multimedia in education doc sharing 8823. Los Angeles: Laureate Education.

Wk_1 Walden8823 reflections

This will be a weekly post on my personal reflections on the readings, course material, and new technologies...

This week's readings peeked my interest in terms of looking at what the future might bring. It is interesting to see how educators envision the coming classroom. There are so many social factors that must be accounted for when redesigning schools, that in 2020, less than 12 short years from now, I really doubt that much will have changed. It seems to take more than a decade for any significant baby steps. Perhaps, by 2020, there will finally be one-to-one computing in the public schools, but that's probably about it.

The articles showed holographic images and virtual MUD environments being used on a daily basis. I would be quite surprised if this were the case. I am also curious to know what will happen in another 20 years, to all the data that just sits on cyberspace with no home. There are webpages from my college days, that if I go through a back door, are accessible on the university server. There are emails piling up, that when it gets too much, they just give you more space to store it. What will happen when there is too much backlog and unused data just sitting in storage? Will it be a problem? Will it be deleted? How long is too long?

I'm reminded of the beta video system. VHS tapes won the battle. Now, it's the DVD's turn to bump VHS (just as CD's have replaced audio-cassette players in cars). What happens to the obsolete technology? There are still vinyl records and record players out there, but how long will that last?

Schools will be looking at a major reconstruction in the near future... how near, it is difficult to say, but a change is definitely coming.