Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Web 2.0 Tools For Higher Education Literature Review by Brian J King
Web 2.0 Tools For Higher Education Literature Review by Brian J King
To understand the role of web 2.0 and how it is altering the education of today’s learners it
is essential to understand the role of what is known as web 1.0. According to Hastings (CEO of
Netflix) “Web 1.0 was dial-up, 50K average bandwidth, Web 2.0 is an average 1 megabit of
bandwidth and Web 3.0 will be 10 megabits of bandwidth, which will be the full video Web, and
that will feel like Web 3.0” (Web 1.0). According to Flew in his book New Media (3rd edition) he
describes the differences in web 1.0 versus web 2.0 “move from personal websites to blogs and
blog site aggregation, from publishing to participation, from web content as the outcome of large
up-front investment to an ongoing an interactive process, and from content management systems
to links based on tagging (folksonomy)” (Web 1.0). O’Reily of O’Reily Publishing coined the
term Web 2.0 at the first Web 2.0 conference in 2004 as “Web 2.0 is the business revolution in
the computer industry caused by the move to the Internet as a platform, and an attempt to
understand the rules for success on that new platform” (Web 2.01 With these new advances in
technology and design principles for creating social and participatory applications we must
acknowledge the need of Prensky’s digital natives that have grown up with technological
advancements and playing online games, using social networks, etc. Prensky also asserts “We
need to invent Digital Native methodologies for all subjects, at all levels, using our students to
guide us” (Prensky). The technologies have been altered as well as the wiring of neural networks
in Digital Natives; for our education system to continue to flourish we must invent ways of
engaging these learners with the newest technologies that best match their learning styles.
Prensky stated that “today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was
designed to teach” (Prensky 2001). Today’s learners that are involved in K-16 level education are
members referred to as Millennials or the net generation. Coyle states (as part of research from
Howe and Strauss, 2000) that there are several important attributes of millennials and that point
to a need for a new approach to learning from and teaching to/with these millennails:
1
Will be referred to as LMS or LMS’s throughout the rest of this document.
King 3
“Collaborative learning is popular with millenials, increasing computer use among all teens and
the use of beepers and cell phones suggest Millennials spend time tracking down and
communicating with friends and family, Millennials appear more teamlike, Millenial teens are
hard at work on a grossroots reconstruction of community, teamwork, and civic spirit, and lastly
Millenials are adept at high tech research skills and using this research in real life” (Coyle,
Originally found in Howe and Strauss (2000). A gap between the educators and those to be
educated exists today and needs to be changed to meet the needs of Prensky’s digital natives.
“Today’s students are ‘native speakers’ of the digital language of computers, video games, and
the Internet. They process information and act differently than previous generations. Digital
immigrants have had to adopt; their ‘accents’ are discernible” (Prensky 2001). To meet the needs
of this entire generation of Millenials the education system must be re-tooled and a paradigm
shift in our education system is imminent or our education system will be educating these people
using pedagogies that are just not made for how this Millenial digital native group speaks and
learns.
Paradigm Shift
Tapscott notes that education is traditionally oriented with learning models with the focus
being on the instruction; where the term teacher has the implication that the teacher transmits or
broadcasts information to students. Content experts develop and design the curriculum (assumed
to be the teacher) and give one-way broadcast type messages to be lectured, read, or in some
other way assigned to the student. The Internet and other new media forms empowers and
centers the learning experience on the individual learner as opposed to those broadcasting it (the
teacher), this centers the learning on the student and allows them to create rich individualized
learning experiences. (Tapscott, mff.org). Ficek a Computer Science professor at Minnesota State
University Moorhead states that “While Learning Management Systems like WebCT and
Blackboard are course-centered and largely faculty-driven, Ficek says PLE’s2 are largely learner-
centered and have four key features: communication and collaboration, formal and informal
2
Personalized Learning Environments
King 4
learning, flexible roles and structures, and electronic portfolios and organizers” (Bart/Ficek).
Thompson similarly states that in the web 2.0 age where personal media flourishes students will
VanSlyke utilize a similar description of the paradigm shift that is taking place with these
learners and the tools they have to utilize; “The . . . describes are surrounded by digital media to
such an extent that their brain structures may be different from those of the last generation”
(VanSlyke). These learners described by Bart, Ficek, VanSlyke, and Prensky all point towards
the idea that education is moving towards and/or needs to move towards delivering learning that
is delivered on a flexible schedule and one that is not already set to a specific time, place, or
learning pace.
Various Web 2.0 tools will be essential to be implemented to assist in the educational
transformations that need to take place to meet the needs of the digital natives that Prensky and
VanSlyke discuss to ensure the personalized learning environments are properly created and
implemented to meet the rapidly changing needs of the learner of the 21st century. These tools are
by no means a comprehensive list nor are they all proven to be effective in creating these specific
King 5
learning environments although many of these tools are predominantly what would be included
as web 2.0 applications or tools. The tools & technologies that will be discussed are: social
and social networking. This is not an exhaustive list of all web 2.0 applications although this
touches on the most important research for using these tools and technologies in various ways to
enhance educational content, delivery method, and overall the paradigm shift that takes place
because of these potentially disruptive tools being implemented and how they have been
implemented and the research to support their use to benefit higher education.
Social Bookmarking
Alexander notes that social bookmarking sites such as del.icio.us facilitate a new kind of
collaborative research because “finding people with related interests can magnify one’s work by
learning from others or by leading to new collaborations” (Alexander). Grosek asserts that social
bookmarking services form a collective intelligence and allow users to have a more up-to-date
research and makes it easier to find new and relevant sources. This creates what Grosek refers to
as architecture of participation. (Grosek). Alexander also notes these social bookmarking sites
“can offer new perspectives on one’s research, as clusters of tags reveal patterns (or absences)
not immediately visible” (Alexander). Several other social bookmarking sites are gaining
popularity although Yahoo’s del.icio.us is generally the most widely known and discussed in
research. The ability to collaborate and share resources and visualize information (tag clouds) is
tremendous and offers large opportunities for small groups working together or even entire
classes to collectively tag and organize content as well as to combine this with other resources
from the entire del.icio.us community with the same tag(s). This meets the needs of the Digital
Natives Prensky discusses and allows the learner to go on a quest and more exploratory less
Collaborative Authoring
Collaborative authoring covers several sets of tools including Google Docs, Wikis,
pbwiki.com, blogs, etc. These tools are generally used as extensions of the classroom and for
various other collaborations. Alexander states “Blogs can be used to expand course activities
beyond the four walls of the classroom, so students are writing for a worldwide audience instead
of only for classmates and the instructor. Student motivation may increase when their writing can
be read by thousands instead of a handful of their peer students” (Alexander). Ferris and Wilder
note that integrating collaborative authoring tools into coursework is essential “Pedagogigically
one can imagine writing exercises based on these tools, building on the established body of
collaborative composition practice . . . these tools offer an alternative platform for peer editing,
supporting the now traditional elements of computer mediated writing” (Alexander, Ferris,
Wilder). Downes states that blogs can be used to have instructors provide course information and
King 7
embed URLs to connect course content (Downes). Furthermore one of the best examples of
employing the use of web 2.0 tools (especially social bookmarking, collaborative authoring
tools, etc.) would be the web 2.0 pedagogical practice at a Columbia University course where
students study the capabilities of social bookmarking, wikis, blogs, and other tools to employ
them directly for their own coursework (Mejias). In a 2007 study conducted by JISC3 on web 2.0
services they found some very interesting and essential data to note. They found that Wikipedia
is very popular with usage ranging between 70 and 84 percent across all the age groups included
in the survey. They also state that this is mainly the group of users that are using Wikipedia and
wikis to read the content as opposed to specifically contributing; they also state that because
around 50% of all Wikipedia use is for study educators and educational institutions must
recognize the power of Wikipedia and teach students how to use it in combination with other
research techniques to gain breadth and depth of knowledge in a particular subject matter
(Faughnan). Included in the appendix are the results of the JISC survey as they are important to
view although difficult to discuss without the visual representation of the survey results, these
results and entire study are licensed under the Creative Commons license. A new tool EdModo
just released into public-beta. Twitter is being used for numerous services such as for public
relations, class announcements, etc. According to Grossek “People use twitter to communicate,
ask questions, to ask for directions, support, advice, and to validate open-ended interpretations or
ideas by discussing with the others” (Grossek). In the blog AcademHack.com the author
discusses the methods he utilizes to gain academic use out of twitters micro-blogging tool: class
chatter, to create classroom community, get a sense of the world and it’s opinion (through the use
of twitter’s public timeline), track a word or content matter, track a conference, obtaining instant
feedback, following a professional or famous person, rule based writing, maximize the teachable
Virtual Worlds
3
Joint information systems community
King 8
4
Virtual Worlds and MMOG are both very important aspects to review in the web 2.0
movement into higher education. While these are not specifically web 2.0 tools they do provide
the same elemental framework and culture for participation and content creation that other
services such as collaborative-authored wikis and social bookmarking do. These tools such as
display art and museums, teach architecture students how to model buildings, etc. Bowling
Green State University has a SecondLife island that has several faculty members teaching virtual
classes out of this virtual world, or to supplement face-2-face interaction. More information can
be found about the Bowling Green State University SecondLife island and the courses being
SecondLife to teach various graduate level classes; additionally he discusses the integration of
Google Earth (http://earth.google.com) with the newly released Ancient Rome 3d plugins that
have 3d renderings and information attached to the buildings dating back to June 21, 320AD, this
is an excellent way for students to be empowered and to explore geographic regions they may
not physically have the capacity to access, see artifacts that otherwise may be no longer
4
Massive Multi-player online games
King 9
References
http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-and-learning/technology-trends-in-higher-
(2008, January 23). academhack >> Blog Archive >> Twitter for Academia. Retrieved
http://academhack.outsidethetext.com/home/2008/twitter-for-academia/
http://technologysource.org/article/digital_natives_digital_immigrants/ (VanSlyke)
Alexander, B. 2006. Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning? EDUCAUSE
December 2008.
UNIVERSITY. 1-273. [EDITORS NOTE: THIS WAS FOUND ON OHIOLINK, BUT I COULD
http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articles&article=29-1
Dodge, B (2008, November 14). One Trick Pony. Retrieved December 1, 2008, from When in
webquest.htm
Ferris, S. P. and H. Wilder. 2006. Uses and potentials of wikis in the classroom. Innovate 2 (5).
educational-activities
Web 1.0. (2008, November 9). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 18:04, December
Web 2.0. (2008, December 8). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 18:19, December
Thompson, J. 2007. Is Education 1.0 ready for Web 2.0 students?. Innovate 3 (4).
[Editors note: The article is reprinted here with permission of the publisher, The Fischler School
Mejias, U. 2006. Teaching social software with social software. Innovate 2 (5).
Prensky, M (2001, October ). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 No. 5,
%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf