Question 2

When discussing the role collaboration and constructivism has within education, I feel the following image is paramount:

We are all spiders working together to create a huge web of information- we are all contributing, sharing and collaborating togetheron the platform of WEB2.0.  

“A social constructivist learning approach” has been proposed as a way to think about learning using social networking technologies (hardware and software). Connectivism and Constructivist Learning have also been proposed as a way to provide a theoretical basis for online learning.

 “Constructivism does not claim to have made earth-shaking inventions in the area of education; it merely claims to provide a solid conceptual basis for some of the things that, until now, inspired teachers had to do without theoretical foundation.” – von Glasersfeld

 [flashvideo width="425" height="350" filename="http://www.teachertube.com/flvideo/6042.flv" /]

So the first question that arises is what is meant by constructivism? The term refers to the idea that learners construct knowledge for themselves—each learner individually (and socially) constructs meaning—as he or she learns. Constructing meaning is learning; there is no other kind. Therefore we have to focus on the learner in thinking about learning (not on the subject/lesson to be taught) and there is no knowledge independent of the meaning attributed to experience (constructed) by the learner, or community of learners.There are two main subsets of research that the constructivist approach to teaching and learning is based on; they are cognitive psychology and social psychology. Piaget (1972) is considered as one of the chief theorists among the cognitive constructivists, while Vygotsky (1978) is the major theorist among the social constructivists.  Secondly what is Connectivism and how can it be used in education?

When discussing the uses of Web 2.0 in the classroom, it is important to note that the theory of connectivism is being applied. Connectivism ‘ is the integration of principles explored by chaos, network, and complexity and self-organization theories’ (Siemans, 2004). This includes understanding that Web 2.0 is constantly changing and being developed and strategies must be worked on to ensure students are receiving the most up to date educational tools available to them over the internet.

 George Siemens can be heard here talking about Connectivism and its implications for education:
http://www.elearnspace.org/media/Connectivism_IOC/player.html  

Learning and teaching in the classroom is becoming increasingly easier due to the influx of many new technologies and a myriad of software. Web 2.0 is seen as the new and improved, second generation of internet usage; Web 1.0 is the first generation. No longer is web work based upon getting information form the web; now Web 2.0 is about constructing knowledge collaboratively on the web. Web 2.0 is engaging and active compared to the passive and un-engaging Web 1.0 applications- ideal for the digital classroom. Made possible through advancements in technology, Web 2.0 applications (Facebook, MySpace, Blogs, Wiki’s, iGoogle, Flickr, RSS Feeds and YouTube. Etc) are effective teaching and pedagogical tools. These provide a platform for social networking through a medium that allows for sharing, informing, communicating and interacting. Having experienced a semester of learning in the Web 2.0 environment and being involved in learning using these methodologies, I see there are several key issues for teachers in the following areas: 

A.     The way in which the teacher conveys new information

Constructivist teaching is based on the constructivist learning theory, which holds that learning should build upon knowledge that a student already has, and that learning is more effective when a student is actively involved in the construction of knowledge, rather than when he/she is passively listening to a lecture. Thus, the learners give meaning to the knowledge based on their personal experiences. Characteristics of Constructivist TeachingOne of the primary goals of using constructivist teaching is that students learn how to learn by giving them the training to take initiative for their learning experiences.According to Audrey Gray, the characteristics of a constructivist classroom are as follows:

•        the learners are actively involved

•        the environment is democratic

•        the activities are interactive and student-centered

•        the teacher facilitates a process of learning in which students are encouraged to be responsible and autonomous

In the constructivist classroom, the teacher’s role is to prompt and facilitate discussion. Thus, the teacher’s main focus should be on guiding students by asking questions that will lead them to develop their own conclusions on the subject.With Web 2.0 technologies, the teacher must LEAD by example, and not resort back to BOSS principles.(Glasser) 

B.     The encouragement of collaboration among students

“The quest for knowledge is the result of innate curiosity in everyone. Find a way to nurture this drive in children, and they will consume knowledge as thirsty person drinks water.” –Greg Henry Quinn, 365 Meditations

Humans are social beings with an innate desire to belong, so teachers need to structure their WEB2.0 application and lessons around this fundamental need.(Dreikurs)

Coming together is a beginning;
keeping together is progress;
Working together is success.
Anonymous 

 C.     Classroom management Methods

Students who sit in boring classes where their brains are screaming out for stimulation and dying from tedium will create their own stimuli. That’s when the spit balls will start flying, the bits of rubber will be flicked around the room, the notes will be passed and interference with other students will begin to occur. To harness this creativity and collaboration teachers need to get on board with the digital classroom and implement Web 2.0 applications. This new technology allows for a more open and collaborative classroom where communication, learning and creativity occur.The use of ICT in classrooms has been found to enhance motivation and self-esteem; this can be put down to the active engagement of learners, where self-regulation and control over learning are encouraged by the teacher, peers (and parents). This ‘non-intervention’ process allows learning to occur naturally and progressively through co-operation, and is modelled upon Glasser ‘s(1992) and Roger’s (1989)model of classroom management where students need area met and good behaviour ensues – a need for belonging, power, freedom, fun. All these ‘basic needs’ are addressed throughout Web 2.0 applications where the children have ‘responsibility and self-direction’ of their self- constructed (fun) learning (Glasser, 1992). 

Glasser - “We almost always have choices, and the better the choice, the more we will be in control of our lives.”  GlasserThus William Glasser espoused that good behavior comes from good choices and that all behaviours, both positive and negative, are purposeful communication. Glasser believed that by listening to student’s misbeaviours, we could arrive at an understanding of the student that would improve communication. A central tenant of Glasser’s Choice Theory is the belief that we are internally, not externally motivated. According to Glasser, we are driven by five genetic needs: survival, love and belonging, power, freedom, and fun. Glasser’s ‘hierarchy of needs’ is a useful starting point for thinking about what may be motivating student’s behaviour, also leading us to look at what is happening in the classroom rather than at the individual student’s behaviour. Motivation in education and student behaviour will come about through altering the way classrooms function instead of trying to change the students’ behaviour. Lessons can potentially become boring if students are not engaged and at the same time expected not to misbehave. Glasser says this is like asking someone who is standing on hot tar to stand still and stop complaining. Glasser suggests that a key way of changing this traditional classroom function is to move away from “boss” teaching to “lead” teaching. I believe this will activate a positive learning environment, giving students much more independence, responsibility and choice about the things they do (eg what and how they study).

Dreikurs – Rudolf Dreikurs main focus is on establishing a classroom which is democratic in nature and gives students a sense of belonging. This is put in place when students have some voice as to the functions, purpose and tasks of the classroom. Mutual trust between the teacher and students is therefore required.

Dreikurs maintains that “discipline makes no use of punishment.” He further believes that students have different levels of misbehavior. These misbehaviors occur in a progressive manner. The child first tries to get attention. If this does not work, the child will misbehave further in an effort to achieve power over the teacher or others. When attention or power do not gain the student sufficient status, they seek revenge. They believe they can only feel significant if they hurt others. After all else fails, the student then displays inadequacy. This is also called “learned helplessness.” The student sees themselves as a complete failure. They feel others will leave them alone if others see them as inadequate.
Helping students to find legitimate ways to satisfy their needs can terminate inappropriate behaviour:

The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be ignited. (Plutarch) 

By implementing Bloom’s taxonomy within the learning process of Web 2.0 technologies the teacher is able to ensure that learning occurs at a higher level.Bloom’s Taxonomy is a classification of thinking organised by level of complexity. It gives teachers and students an opportunity to learn and practice a range of thinking and provides a simple structure for many different kinds of questions and thinking. Typically a teacher would vary the level of questions within a single lesson – aiming towards higher-order thinking. This questioning should be used purposefully to achieve well-defines goals.Emphasis is placed upon its use as a “more authentic tool for curriculum planning, instructional delivery and assessment” (oz-TeacherNet, 2001). 

1.                   REMEMBERING: The learner is able to recall, restate and remember learned information.

 2.                  UNDERSTANDING: The learner grasps the meaning of information by interpreting and translating what has been learned.

3.                  APPLYING: The learner makes use of information in a context different from the one in which it was learned.

4.                  ANALYSING: The learner breaks learned information into its parts to best understand that information.

5.                  EVALUATING: The learner makes decisions based on in-depth reflection, criticism and assessment.

6.                  CREATING: The learner creates new ideas and information using what has been previously learned.

Higher level questions are those requiring complex application, analysis, evaluation or creation skills. Questions at higher levels of the taxonomy are usually most appropriate for:

•                      Encouraging students to think more deeply and critically

•                      Problem solving

•                      Encouraging discussions

•                      Stimulating students to seek information on their own  

The role of the teacher and the students also varies within the classroom when Higher-Order thinking and a deeper Surface learning is underway. For instance:

Remembering: Classroom Roles for Remembering

 Understanding: Classroom Roles for Understanding

 Applying: Classroom Roles for Applying

  Analysing: Classroom Roles for Analysing

  Evaluating: Classroom Roles for Evaluating

 Creating: Classroom Roles for Creating

  “What children learn depends not only on what they are taught but also how they are taught, their development level, and their interests and experiences…. These beliefs require that much closer attention be paid to the methods chosen for presenting material…” – Understanding the Common Essential Learnings, Saskatchewan Education, 1988. (p.10) 

Web 2.0 allows for engaged, collaborative learning, within which learners are able to access environments, tools and resources (including form other learners) at their own pace, in their own time and from wherever they may be. This empowers learners with responsibility for their own learning, so the Web 2.0 applications often act as catalysts for authentic learning experiences. Ultimately, the implication of Web 2.0 offers new possibilities for teacher professional development, student engagement and meaningful school-community integration.  

 Question 1

We have developed a Learning project using Web 2.0 Technologies. This was a project that we (Melissa, Rhiannon and myself) have put together for a group of 4 year 12 Advanced English students and their parents to work ion collaboratively.

A) www.tellingthetruth.pbwiki.com

B) Key issues that we struggled with when working on this wiki include:

• SETTING THE TASK

Setting a suitable task for the students (and most importantly, one that would include the parents). This task needed to be building upon students prior knowledge (Piaget, Vygotsky) from the HSC course, but then still has to present something new, engaging and accessible. This needs to be an engaging task, and one that is relevant to today’s world. The inclusion of such a hands-on ICT focused task, works on the premise of, “Tell me, and I forget. Show me, and I remember. Involve me and I understand.”

• ARE THE STUDENTS MOTIVATED TO LEARN

New approaches to learning necessitate new approaches to teaching. For instance; high- order thinking skills, constructivist approaches, multiple- intelligences, the different ‘habits of mind’, employing a wide range of assessment techniques & using computer based technology to enable students to gain information & develop. Therefore, this set task is an online collaborative project that includes students and parents. By implementing the 16 Habits of Mind in the task, we are able to encourage and motivate our students. The rapid development of computer and Internet technologies has dramatically increased the ways of teaching and learning. Among these new approaches, online Web-based education has become a promising field, especially for social interaction and collaboration. This set task aims to highlight Vygotsky’s theory, that “social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of cognition.” (Vygotsky, 1978). So the issue then arises of whether the students are actively engaged in social interaction, this was another key concern that needed to be addressed so that the students remain motivated to learn throughout the course of the task. However, we had to ensure that all the students (and parents) are contributing in an equal manner.

• ARE THE PARENTS / GUARDIANS INVOLVED IN THE CONSTRUCTION AND LEARNING

Again, this helps motivates the students, as they are now taking on the role of the teacher- teaching their parents/guardian the ways of web, and showing teaching them just how important and relevant such applications are to their studies. The aim of this assignment is to associate and engage both students and parents with ICT. Web 2.0 is an innovative wave of technology adding more appropriate educational value to the World Wide Web.

• ARE STUDENTS CONSTRUCTING THEIR OWN KNOWLEDGE, OR DOES IT WORK ON THE PREMISE OF WEB 1.0

Web 2.0 acts as a platform for users to contribute and construct their own knowledge (refer to constructivist theory), unlike that of Web 1.0 which centres around the searching and locating of information contributed by others. Web 2.0 is seen as the new and improved, second generation of internet usage; Web 1.0 is the first generation. No longer is web work based upon getting information form the web; now Web 2.0 is about constructing knowledge collaboratively on the web. Web 2.0 is engaging and active compared to the passive and un-engaging Web 1.0 applications- ideal for the digital classroom. So ultimately, our set task needs to build upon this idea of the students constructing their own knowledge; which plays upon Bruner’s theory that “learning is an active process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their current/ past knowledge” (Bruner, 1966).

• IS THERE A WIDE USE OF MULTI-MEDIA IMPLEMENTED IN THE SET TASK Considering this task builds and relies upon Web 2.0 technologies, this component was always essential within the learning process. Students are required to implement a variety of multi-media (sound, video and images, plus include hyperlinks and tagging). It is the teachers (our) role to lead by example, so we too have therefore included a variety of multi-medias.

• DOES THE SET TASK CATER TO THE DIFFERENT LEARNING STYLES AND INTELLIGENCES

In a classroom there are no two students who learn the exact same way as another, and it is the role of the teacher to understand and cater for this. After much consideration this group assessment task caters for a variety of Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences. It caters for students who are:

• SPATIAL – Visual media (such as required vide footage and images) help students acquire concrete concepts, such as object identification, spatial relationship, or motor skills where words alone are inefficient.

• BODILY/KINESTHETIC – the opportunity to perform in the video task caters to the students who learn best through movement, because they communicate well through body language and be taught through physical activity, hands-on learning, and role playing.

• INTERPRESONAL – this set task gives students the opportunity to work in a group dynamic, where they share, collaborate and contribute to the final outcome

• INTRAPERSONAL – students are required to reflect upon the experience individually, requiring personal reflection, thought and sentiment

• LINGUISTIC –The set task of writing a newspaper article, appeals to the learners who have highly developed auditory skills and often think in words. By catering for the different learning styles, we are able to meet the needs of all our students, and build upon their individual gifts and talents.

• DOES HIGHER LEARNING OCCUR

By implementing Bloom’s Taxonomy within our group project (note: this is Year 12 Advanced Task), we are able to encourage our student’s to achieve a higher- order thinking as we enhance surface and encourage deeper learning. However, this was a constant issue to maintain, so as to not fall back into the easier lower order-thinking of just recalling and listing key features.

Within the set task students are required to achieve the higher/upper thinking required in cognitive development.

Firstly they are asked to CREATE a newspaper article relevant to the set headline (this then builds upon their knowledge and understanding of the requirements of newspapers articles, and applying them in this set context). The students are again to CREATE a video/footage by putting together these known elements to form a coherent and functional whole; this is building upon all previously learnt cognitive understandings. Next the students are required to UNDERSTAND, APPLY and ANALYSE relevant images in relation to their previous knowledge and understanding of the topic/concept- Telling the Truth. Throughout the entire task, students are required to reflect, REMEMBER, ANALYSE and EVALUATE their contribution to the task, their understanding of key concepts and the success of the completed project. Students are required to reflect descriptively on their progress, provide a self- reflection and a critical reflection. Within this journal, the students are making judgments based on criteria and standards through checking and critiquing. By incorporating Bloom’s taxonomy within this set group project we are ensuring that our students are achieving higher order thinking, necessary for the completion of the HSC course and assessments.

C) “All misbehavior is the result of a child’s mistaken assumption about the way he can find a place and gain status” (Dreikurs, 1968, p. 36).

 Rudolf Dreikurs main focus is on establishing a classroom which is democratic in nature and gives students a sense of belonging. This is put in place when students have some voice as to the functions, purpose and tasks of the classroom. Mutual trust between the teacher and students is therefore required.

Dreikurs maintains that “discipline makes no use of punishment.” He further believes that students have different levels of misbehavior. These misbehaviors occur in a progressive manner. The child first tries to get attention. If this does not work, the child will misbehave further in an effort to achieve power over the teacher or others. When attention or power do not gain the student sufficient status, they seek revenge. They believe they can only feel significant if they hurt others. After all else fails, the student then displays inadequacy. This is also called “learned helplessness.” The student sees themselves as a complete failure. They feel others will leave them alone if others see them as inadequate.

Helping students to find legitimate ways to satisfy their needs can terminate inappropriate behaviour:

• Attract attention – People by their very nature are social beings with an innate desire to belong.

• Exercise power

• Exact revenge

 • Display inadequacy

Dreikurs model is an ideal one for enhancing student empowerment. Dreikurs’ model promotes a democratic classroom that has a friendly and inviting nature, opportunities for leadership, co-operation, acknowledgement, guidance, encouragement and shared responsibilities; helping students become self-disciplined.

Dreikurs central focus was on constructive behaviour rather than destructive discipline. He believed that teachers should have a democratic classroom and teaching style, for helping students gain a sense of belonging (genuine goal). He believed that in this manner students would have a social interest: a condition in which students come to see that it is to their advantage to contribute to the welfare of a group.

Classroom management and Collaboration are key ingredients for creating a positive learning environment, which in turn will reflect upon student motivation levels.

As stressed by Dreikur’s the need for collaboration and self worth is vital to a student’s motivation to learn. This in turn works when fellow peers can encourage and motivate each other, through acceptance of each other gust, talents and values.

Web 2.0 is essentially an increasing range of software hat supports a variety of technologies for open and collaborative communication, learning and creativity. Discuss 

Students who sit in boring classes where their brains are screaming out for stimulation and dying from tedium will create their own stimuli. That’s when the spit balls will start flying, the bits of rubber will be flicked around the room, the notes will be passed and interference with other students will begin to occur. To harness this creativity and collaboration teachers need to get on board with the digital classroom and implement Web 2.0 applications. This new technology allows for a more open and collaborative classroom where communication, learning and creativity occur. This essay will explain the role and application of Web 2.0 in schools in accordance with behavioural and cognitive learning theories, plus explain how such technology allows for creative, learning community.  

Learning and teaching in the classroom is becoming increasingly easier due to the influx of many new technologies and a myriad of software. Web 2.0 is seen as the new and improved, second generation of internet usage; Web 1.0 is the first generation. No longer is web work based upon getting information form the web; now Web 2.0 is about constructing knowledge collaboratively on the web. Web 2.0 is engaging and active compared to the passive and un-engaging Web 1.0 applications- ideal for the digital classroom. Made possible through advancements in technology, Web 2.0 applications (Facebook, MySpace, Blogs, Wiki’s, iGoogle, Flickr, RSS Feeds and YouTube. Etc) are effective teaching and pedagogical tools. These provide a platform for social networking through a medium that allows for sharing, informing, communicating and interacting.

Effective ICT use goes hand in hand with a deep understanding of learning theories and the various factors that make learning a unique experience for each individual. Web 2.0 technologies provide a useful set of tools for achieving cooperative and collaborative learning, and it recognises the value of encouraging learners to actively construct their own learning and meaning.  The way learners interact with ICT has changed over time (and is sure to continue), reflecting different learning theories in action. Early use of computer in the classroom tended to be restricted to drill and practice applications or word processing (WEB 1.0). Rapid developments in Internet and Web usages, and a relative improvement in teachers’ and students’ skill levels in using ICT applications, has resulted in an increase in creative and interactive, internet-based activities, web-page design and electronic publishing and podcasting. Each of these ICT uses has its merit, depending on the goals of the learning experience, and each is informed by current learning theories.

Web 2.0 plays a significant role in promoting cognitive learning principles in the classrooms. Cognitive theorists such as Piaget emphasised active problem solving and meaning-making on the part of the learner. Piaget and Vygotsky pointed out the importance of social interaction in learning. One of the key characteristics of Web 2.0 is collaboration, both between machine and user, and between several users. These applications have the capacity to function as ‘intellectual partners’ to promote critical thinking and higher order cognitive processing (Voithofer, 2007). Text, voice, music, graphics, photos, animation and video are combined to promote thinking and encourage learners to accomplish creative, higher-level tasks. They provide a range of resources for students to use in problem solving, thinking, reflecting and collaborating with others within physical classrooms and across the globe in virtual learning contexts.  It is also argued that Web 2.0 technologies, with their potential for interactivity, are more conducive to active and engage learning than more traditional-centred approaches. According to its advocates, the constructivist classroom that integrates Web 2.0 provides students with a ‘complex laboratory in which to observe, question, practise and validate knowledge’ (Dillon, 2004). In such classrooms, the emphasis is on learning with, not from or about, Web 2.0.

Collaboration among learners is another defining characteristic of constructivist classrooms (Jonassen, 1994). Web 2.0 has strong potential for social interactivity and for supporting collaboration and student-centred learning. For example, it is possible for virtual communities of learners on the internet to work in small collaborative groups to achieve a common goal; this is achieved through the implementation of a wiki. The heterogeneous grouping of learners around computer based tasks can assist in creating zones of proximal development and be beneficial for all students (Vygotsky, 1934). Such Web 2.0 technologies provide opportunities for students to build shared meaning (Dillon, 2004).

With its potential for addressing the needs of students on an individual basis, Web 2.0 can be particularly useful for catering to student’s individual learning styles, accordance with Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1983). Web 2.0 applications allow for a use of multiple multimedia- audio, visual and linguistics- all content based activities that allow students to perceive, transform and modify concepts so as to develop a shared meaning and understanding. The main drawcard of Web 2.0 is the inclusion of both the intrapersonal domain (individual learning through the blog) and interpersonal domain (collaborative learning through the group wiki).

The use of ICT in classrooms has been found to enhance motivation and self-esteem; this can be put down to the active engagement of learners, where self-regulation and control over learning are encouraged by the teacher, peers (and parents). This ‘non-intervention’ process allows learning to occur naturally and progressively through co-operation, and is modelled upon Glasser ‘s(1992) and Roger’s (1989)model of classroom management where students need area met and good behaviour ensues – a need for belonging, power, freedom, fun. All these ‘basic needs’ are addressed throughout Web 2.0 applications where the children have ‘responsibility and self-direction’ of their self- constructed (fun) learning (Glasser, 1992).

 ICTs have the capacity to transform learning, teaching and communication in educational settings. The key to success, however, is how the technologies are used. There are five main applications of Web 2.0 technologies, and these allow for open, collaborative and creative learning; 

·         BLOGGING

Perhaps the most powerful Internet tool is the blog, an online journal that is continuously updated by its author or authors. Blogs are Web sites that facilitate instantaneous publication and allow for feedback from readers. They’ve been used to form professional development communities, both within one school and across continents. Within the classroom, a blog may aid in brainstorming generating discussion, and also as a diary for students to critically reflect on teaching and learning.

·         WIKIS

A wiki is a communal, subject-specific Web site where users are free to add and/or edit content. When it comes to Internet-based collaboration, there’s nothing easier to use. In schools, wikis enable groups of students (parents), teachers, or both to gather content and share written work.

·         SOCIAL NETWROKING

These are often called “social content-sharing sites,” the most notable being MySpace and Facebook, where members create profiles, network, and share opinions, photos, and audio-visual content.  Both can act as a classroom tool for a classroom community. As it can be employed as an effective pedagogical tool (consider Constructivist Learning). Teachers can use sites like MySpace or Facebook as a tool for developing a sense of community with students where everyone feels free to contribute (consider Glasser’s Reality therapy Theory). Both Myspace and Facebook allow for multi-tasking, as they are both highly organized and highly structured. There is nothing more boring for students then sitting at their desks writing pages of notes, at least this way there is an opportunity for engagement and excitement.

·         SOCIAL BOOKMARKING  

Through social bookmarking, web users share their sources of information by allowing anyone to copy their RSS feeds. Folksonomic tagging is then intended to make a body of information increasingly easy to search, discover, and navigate over time. For instance, Del.icio.us is a social bookmarking site; the primary use of del.icio.us is to store your favourites/bookmarks online, which allows you to access the same bookmarks from any computer and add bookmarks from anywhere, too. It also allows for social networking so one is able to view/share networked friend’s favorite sites as well. For a classroom environment, del.icio.us is recommended because it acts as a link-log for research and through collaboration it is a much more efficient and effective search engine.  

·         PODCASTING

Podcasting enables Web sites to provide visitors with audio and/or video recordings that can be listened to and watched at any time. There are about as many social networking sites as there are interests, and among favorites are podcasting Flickr (and subsequently Photobucket), where photographs are posted and shared, and the video-sharing site YouTube (and subsequently TeacherTube). Again, like most other Web 2.0 programs, these applications work on a share principle, and when used in the design of lessons they promote and build visual literacy skills in students. 

Web 2.0 allows for engaged, collaborative learning, within which learners are able to access environments, tools and resources (including form other learners) at their own pace, in their own time and from wherever they may be. This empowers learners with responsibility for their own learning, so the Web 2.0 applications often act as catalysts for authentic learning experiences. Ultimately, the implication of Web 2.0 offers new possibilities for teacher professional development, student engagement and meaningful school-community integration.

REFERENCES

• Dillon, P. (2004, June). ‘Trajectories and Tensions in the Theory of Information and Communication Technology in Education’. British Journal of Educational Studies, accessed from http://web.ebscohost.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/ehost/pdf?vid=5&hid=108&sid=f50d0c1b-c9ca-4554-a69a-3f3da6b28170%40sessionmgr106 [ October 17, 2007]
• Glasser, W. (1992). The Quality School: Managing Students without Coercion. 2^nd edn. New York: Harper Collins
• Johassen, D.H (1999). Learning With technology: A constructivist Perspective. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill.
• Krause, Kerri-Lee., Bochner, Sandra & Duchesne Sue., (2006) Educational Psychology for Learning and Teaching. 2^nd edn, Victoria: Thomson
•  M.K. Meyerhoff, (2005). ‘The Real World Value Of Multiple Intelligences’, Education Horizons, NeiTA: Australia 
• O’Reilly, T., What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, accessed from:  http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html, [25 October 2007] 
•  Voithofer, Rick., (2007). ‘Web 2.0: What is it and how can it apply to teaching and teacher preparation?’, The Ohio State University, available at http://education.osu.edu/rvoithofer/papers/web2paper.pdf [17th October, 2007] 

semantic web…. 8years in the making

when searching the web- searches meaning

when google searches the web- searches words

google is controling the web, by personalising their web page

The following are six general approaches for how wikis could be implemented around schools.

Approach 1: Student Journaling
Instructors want students to journal for a number of reasons: to demonstrate writing proficiency, to expose understanding (and misunderstanding) of conceptual knowledge, to establish the habit of regular reflection, and to engage in meta-cognitive reflection, to name a few. The wiki allows students to journal for their own benefit, or for peer or instructor review.

Approach 2: Personal Portfolios
By enabling students to collect and organise digital assets such as class notes, images, Web resources, and PowerPoint slides, the wiki can help learners to make connections between and among those assets.

Approach 3: Collaborative Knowledge Base
In the more classic use of the wiki, groups can use the environment to create a shared knowledge base of information. This can be used to allow students to develop a project in small groups, to work on a small piece of a larger class project, or even to have students themselves create and maintain the course Web site.

Approach 4: Research Coordination and Collaboration
The wiki allows multiple collaborators who are separated by physical space to collect ideas, papers, timelines, documents, datasets, and study results into a collective digital space. Researchers can also use the space to store draft files for their papers: MS Word, LaTEX, or even writing directly into the Web pages of the wiki. Additionally, funders and junior researchers can be given “read only” access to all or certain parts of the space.

Approach 5: Curricular and Cross-Disciplinary Coordination
As departments become increasingly creative in their efforts to accommodate more students in a distributed/blended learning environment, curricular coordination among faculty and T.A.s gets increasingly important. The wiki allows for departmental personnel, instructors, and teaching assistants to organize common course assets, such as syllabi, office hours, and assessments, without having an endless email chain or difficult to schedule face-to-face meetings.

Approach 6: Conference and Colloquia Web Site/Coordination
Many departments, schools, and scholarly centers at the university have academic conferences and colloquia. By allowing presenters and attendees access to add and edit content, the conference wiki can serve as a resource before, during, and after the event itself. The wiki can also be used by conference administrators as a means of organizing the event.

Of course, there are many other ways to use the wiki in an academic setting.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

so…..

Having successfully mastered the various web 2.0 technologies, and have already had the experience of working collaboratively, we were now set the challenge of designing a project for a group of 4 students to work on collaboratively.

Through our study we have already looked at the main issues and themes that emerged when using web 2.0 technologies (see below); and we will need to keep these in mind when constructing a Learner Project designed to incorporate as many as possible.

1. How are students motivated to be engaged in this kind of learning?
2. Is the collaboration being done in a way that requires all to contribute equally?
3. Does this web 2.0 technology really add educational value and improve learning?
4. How do students effectively communicate when working together using web 2.0?
5. What happens to students who do not have access, or the skills to use the web 2.0 applications?
6. How reliable is the information, what should be used and how private should it be?

In order to create this Learning Project we are required to follow a structured approach (scaffold of learning)

• Review articles and research on leading minds in the field of Web 2.0 technologies – minimum 5 works [http://www.cs.tcd.ie/Sara.Bradshaw/portfolio/research/respaper.doc]
• Clearly identify your topic – must be your teaching major, and choose appropriate syllabus dot points
• Research Hattie’s Characteristics of an Expert Teacher, and attempt to meet this criteria in your group project http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/RC2003_Hattie_TeachersMakeADifference.pdf
• Research Bloom’s Taxonomy – Newer Version, and make sure you are operating at the higher order of thinking http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Bloom%27s_Taxonomy
• Research Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences, and make sure you are catering for a variety of learning styles http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html
• Make sure you are following the developing the lesson scaffolding (keeping in mind Piaget, Vygotsky, Glasser, Reikurs, Cantor, Skinner, Bloom and Gardner’s theories and methods)
• Need to also consider the motivations of learning, and the factors upon which they depend
• MUST include a variety of Web 2.0 technologies through which the students (and PARENTS must play a integral role in the task) will be able to learn collaboratively

This task follows the premise: WE LEARN BEST WHEN TEACHING OTHERS

This slideshow aims to highlight the role web 2.0 technologies have in the classroom.Web 2.0 allows people to work collaboratively, so that they are able to get actively involved in creating the content they are learning. The user is able to contol his/her personal data and onformation.The slides aim to highlights the pro’s and con’s for using web 2.0 technologies in the classroom- the advantages totally outweigh the disadvantages!By looking at specific examples: blogs, wikis, RSS, social bookmarking we are able to see the fundamental place web 2.0 has in our required teaching methods.

Animoto is a new mashup tool that lets you create a video from your images and music. The service overall could be likened to a slide show creator, but what animoto has done is incorporate a patent-pending artificial intelligence technology to offer something a bit more unique. Mimicking tools that are used by professional directors and editors, Animoto will consider the images and music that you’ve submitted for the creation of a video ‘mashup’. The end result will be more like a movie trailer than a regular slideshow. Others in this realm include Photobucket, Eyespot, which has recently launched a media platform for advertisers, and Fliptrack.This Web 2.0 application is a great tool for collaborative learning through which the students (and teacher) could make their own movie clips suitable to their learning and study. This could be a great exercise in class or even a large assignment they could take home where together students are to research a topic and make a movie in its regard.

Online communication can provide:
 flexibility of access anywhere, anytime
 student interaction
 enhancement and complements face to face educational activities
 prompt and efficient feedback
 sharing of information including electronic files
 a sense of group community among students.
 group task accomplishment
 collaborative learning and problem-solving
 peer review and tutoring
 opportunities for critical and creative thinking
 opportunities to develop written communication skills

The slideshow aims to highlight the key differences between web1.0 applications compared to web 2.0 applications, plus the evolution and advantages of the two.“web 2.0 is people”- what more can I say!?!

The new “social Web” or Web 2.0 is gradually having an impact in schools as teachers and students begin to explore the potential of social networking, blogs, shared online features and wikis.  These technologies are giving rise to new educational opportunities – social collaborative learning. As time goes on, teachers are increasingly becoming familiarized with these new technologies and are using blogs and wikis more and more.

The presentation compares the worker 1.0 with a worker 2.0, highlighting the benefits of working with WEB 2.0 (both in the classroom environment and the real world).

It also suggests the creativity of its nature, how innovative it is and the need to be intellectually present when contributing, because authority comes from knowledge rather than power when using Web 2.0 as a community.

Web 2.0 applications have ensured awareness, engagement, sharing and learning amongst co-workers, students, friends and colleagues.

Stephen Collins from ‘AcidLabs’ has implemented and incorporated photographs from a variety of public photo sites- iStockphoto.com, LuckyOliver.com and Flickr.com- all of which I hope to implement in my teaching.

“Back to School with the Class of Web 2.0″ – Brian Benzinger    A total collection of all the software of Web 2.0 With the start of the new school year, many teachers and students are seeking new products and technologies to help them through their upcoming academics. With the increase of teachers using blogs and wikis, and students networking and utilizing online tools, the demand for easier and more efficient ways of learning is on the rise. To me, the growing interest for web-based learning is amazing, which brought me to thinking; what if I were to consolidate some of the helpful online products and services that can help students, teachers and administrators alike? Well, I convinced myself. The following is a compilation of Web 2.0 products that I’ve personally researched and tested. These services are grouped into two main categories: “Tools”; and “Office ApplicationsR21;. Some more specific services include: organizers, grade books , research tools, document managers, diagrams, and more. There are going to be three parts to the “Back to School with the Class of Web 2.0″ series:

http://www.solutionwatch.com/519/back-to-school-with-the-class-of-web-20-part-3/ I hope that this series becomes a valuable resource for students, teachers, and school administrators alike.  

Facebook, more so than Myspace, can act as a classroom tool for a classroom community. As it can be employed as an effective pedagogical tool (consider Constructivist Learning). Teachers can use sites like MySpace or Facebook as a tool for developing a sense of community with students where everyone feels free to contribute. 

Facebook would be more appropriate and safer to use in the classroom, as viewing of ones profile is set to friends only (Private). This is not the case with Myspace, where any ‘Joe-Blog’ can check out your profile. As access has to be approved, it limits the risk of predators.  

Students will be able to collaboratively and constructively work together. This Web 2.0 software allows for social networked learning and is far more creative and challenging than just word processing (Web 1.0).  

Every student has their own unique gifts and talents and these can be capitalized upon in such a unique task/application. Especially in Myspace where multimedia (youtube, podcasts, photo slides) can be applied to add a touch of colour and difference.  Students can work within their group (school peers) only, and can offer constant support and guidance to fellow students on the ‘Wall’. (The teacher can use this application as well, making comments daily on work progress etc.) 

Both Myspace and Facebook allow for multi-tasking, as they are both highly organized and highly structured. There is nothing more boring for students then sitting at their desks writing pages of notes, at least this way there is an opportunity for engagement and excitement. Just like my Networked Learning Blog!!!

REMEMBER STUDENTS LEARN:

10% of what is read

20% of what is heard

30% of what is seen

50% of what is seen and heard

70% of what is discussed with others

80% of what is experienced personally

90% of what they teach to someone

  vs. 

Many users are choosing sides when it comes to two of the most popular networking Web sites today, www.Facebook.com and www.myspace.com 

Both sites aim to serve the same basic purpose: creating communities and connecting people with common interests. Registered users on both sites can benefit socially, professionally or romantically due to the availability of information on the large population of users. While this is true for both, the sites have their differences. 

  Although some users are members on both sites, many have a favorite among the two. “I prefer MySpace to Facebook,” said Lisa Hartman, a senior psychology major. “MySpace is better. It is more advanced. You can put videos on your page and it’s more individual. Facebook is more one-dimensional.”Darrell Flynn, a senior sociology major, belongs to MySpace and refuses to join Facebook. “MySpace is not just students, it’s a whole community,” Flynn said. “Bands and random people can join. It’s nice because of the personalization, you can really make your page your own.” In the online networking community, the personalization of one’s profile is a huge selling point.Jen Muser, a sophomore math major, says her heart belongs strictly to Facebook. “MySpace is ghetto looking. It just doesn’t look as nice as Facebook,” she said.

With the growing population on both Facebook and MySpace, it’s rare to find someone who doesn’t belong to either one.

My own personal response to Myspace and  Facebook.

I found signing up to both sites quite easy, the only problem was the time it took to load all my favourite movies, music, television shows etc… but this I feel was more my indecisiveness than a problem with the software. I had already been affiliated with Myspace for the last year, having been introduced (peer pressured) into last year by friends, and needless to say I became immediately hooked. With the ability to search, message, blog and comment, plus load music, pictures and video clips – what is not to love?!? 

I was new to Facebook, and had intentionally avoided it, afraid that it would be another form of procrastination (and that it has). With the numerous application and various groups, I am finding Facebook just as addictive. However It does not allow for the personalization and creativity that Myspace does, thus targeting its older demographic. Plus I can already see the bruises piling up from all the super poking! 

In my eyes, and no doubt the other 100000+ people who have already signed up, Facebook is the new Myspace (branching out from its original targeted audience of just college students) 

MySpace now receives more daily hits than Google, and is second only to Yahoo as the Web’s busiest destination. The median age range of MySpace users is 18-24. Facebook is a similar site targeted explicitly to college students. The numbers of students who use this site on a regular basis is similarly staggering. On both sites, students compose profiles describing themselves in order to make or maintain relationships with others. Students form and join groups, reflect on their lives through blog entries, and document them by posting photographs. In both cases students are creating self-representations, seeking to convince an audience to understand themselves in a particular way. 

These technologies and associated software have enabled learning to occur as a result of connection with people and knowledge. These connections are made in real time and real life, but also in a virtual time and virtual reality.