Module 7: Web 2.0
Module 7 discussed a gamut of Web 2.0 technologies including Wikipedia, Google, Xing, YouTube, FaceBook, MySpace, Second Life, Flickr (photo sharing), Blogging (personal diary), and the like. The statistics that were provided were eye catching such as YouTube housing 70 millions clips, to MySpace having 100 million user profiles, to Flickr having a repository of 180 million photos. The basis of this model emphasizes seeing Web 2.0 as a business model, as a bundle of technologies and a set of social practices.
Each of the required readings brought varying perspectives to Web 2.0. Specifically, O'Reilly (2005) thinks of Web 2.0 as "a veritable solar system" and "global brain." O'Reilly (2005) also states, "The web 2.0 lesson: leverage customer-self service and algorithmic data management to reach out to the entire web, to the edges and not just the center, to the long tail and not just the head." I totally agree as the Web must extend in all directions to accommodate all involved. After all, look at the huge successes of EBay and Amazon. I like the thought of "harnessing collective intelligence" as it brings intelligent minds together, hence the "wisdom of crowds."
O'Reilly (2005) also speaks of RSS, a concept that I knew little about until reading this article. RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication which allows individuals not only to subscribe and link to pages, but also it allows subscribers to be notified each time the page changes. This would be great for stock quotes and weather updates. I had also never heard of housingmaps.com which integrates Google maps with Craigslist apartment list and home purchase data. What a novel idea. As I continue to read about Web 2.0 the same phrases keep popping up: "control over data" "competitive advantage" "simultaneously" "span multiple devices" "integration" "cost effective scalability" and "collective intelligence."
Zimmer (2008) takes a more critical perspective of Web 2.0 technologies and relates the unintended consequences it parlays, specifically "an architecture of exploitation that capitalism can benefit from." Zimmer (2008) also sees 4 main components of Web 2.0: technology, economic, users and philosophy and thus having these ingredients lessens the chances of domination of the Internet by media and telecommunication providers. How true, as companies struggle to exploit, monopolize and take over.
Anderson (2005) takes the educational stance on Web 2.0. He makes a great statement from the start, "It is likely that the implicit requirement for self motivation reduces accessibility to many students who have little exposure to, or sufficient experience with, programming that is not structured and orchestrated by a live teacher." How true as we have somehow created a lazy generation, yet they can also be described as savvy digital natives. Interesting to note, Anderson (2005) makes the statement, "social presence is correlated with student satisfaction and higher scores on learner outcomes" (p. 2). So all the talking, texting, and chatting really does pay off.
Goodfellow (2007) also had some great points to ponder such as using the term "digital goods" in reference to web pages to "social networking" indicating the viewing and sharing of said websites (p. 3). Goodfellow (2007) also uses the term "user-generated content" to establish ownership of content created by the masses (p. 3). A final and stunning revelation Goodfellow (2007) makes is "The university VLE (virtual learning environment) is in danger of being seen as outdated" (p. 18). What a closing statement for this module at technology as a whole is dynamic and what is new this morning may be old news this evening.
Required readings included the following:
Anderson, T. (2005). Distance learning - Social software’s killer ap? Retrieved, from the World Wide Web: http://auspace.athabascau.ca:8080/dspace/bitstream/2149/2328/1/distance_learning.pdf
Goodfellow, R. (2007) The impact of emerging Web 2.0 internet practices on future developments in teaching and learning . Paper presented at the Learning Futures conference, Leicester University .
O'Reilly, T. (2005). What Is Web 2.0 Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. Retrieved January 31, 2007, from the World Wide Web: http://www.oreillynet.com/lpt/a/6228
Zimmer, M. (2008). Preface: Critical perspectives on web 2.0. First Monday, 13(3).
