King 1

Web 2.0 and Education

Literature Review of Tools & Technologies to Enhance Education

By: Brian J. King

Bowling Green State University
kingbri@bgsu.edu
 King 2
Introduction

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.

Net-Generation Learners & Their Learning

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

arrive expecting a transformative form of education (Thompson). Additionally Prensky &

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.

Figure 1 - Broadcast Learning to Interactive Learning (source: Coyle)

Web 2.0 Technologies

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

bookmarking, collaborative authoring, virtual worlds/MMOG, blogs/microblogs, e-portfolios

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

linear educational exploration.

 King 6

Figure 2 - Web 2.0 Tag Map (source: Web 2.0, wikipedia.org)

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

(http://edmodo.com) is similar to the micro-blogging service Twitter (http://twitter.com) and was

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

moment, a public notepad, and writing assignments (Twitter for Academia).

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

SecondLife (http://secondlife.com) are used to create simulations, give interactive presentations,

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

taught at the BGSU Virtual Campus in Second Life Courses Page

(http://www.bgsu.edu/secondlife/page55976.html). Dodge discusses using Google Earth and

SecondLife as well as other massive multiplayer online games/environments as he uses

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

structurally sound or available today (Dodge).

4
Massive Multi-player online games
 King 9
References

http://www.mff.org/edtech/article.taf?_function=detail&Content_uid1=109 Tapscott, mff.org

http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-and-learning/technology-trends-in-higher-

education-how-web-20-tools-are-transforming-learning/ Mary Bart & Ficek

(2008, January 23). academhack >> Blog Archive >> Twitter for Academia. Retrieved

December 1, 2008, from Twitter for Academia Web site:

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

review, 41 (2): 33-34. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0621.pdf. Retrieved 1

December 2008.

Coyle, J (2007).WIKIS IN THE COLLEGE CLASSROOM: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF

ONLINE AND FACE-TO-FACE GROUP COLLABORATION AT A PRIVATE LIBERAL ARTS

UNIVERSITY. 1-273. [EDITORS NOTE: THIS WAS FOUND ON OHIOLINK, BUT I COULD

NOT FIND THE SPECIFIC JOURNAL IT IS INCLUDED IN, IT IS A DISSERTATION FROM

A PhD STUDENT AT KENT STATE UNIVERSITY]

Downes, S. 2004. Educational blogging. EDUCAUSE Review, 9 (5): 14-26.

http://www.educause.edu/pub/er/erm04/erm0450.asp. Retrieved 1 December 2008.

Downes S. 2005. E-learning 2.0. eLearn Magazine. October 17.

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

Rome, Do a Webquest Web site: http://webquest.org/bdodge/2008/11/when-in-rome-do-a-

webquest.htm

Ferris, S. P. and H. Wilder. 2006. Uses and potentials of wikis in the classroom. Innovate 2 (5).

http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=258 (accessed December 2, 2008)

Grossek, G. Using DEL.ICIO.US in Education. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from Scribd.com

Web site: http://www.scribd.com/doc/212002/Using-delicious-In-Education

 King 10
Grossek, G, & HOLOTESCU, C Can we Use Twitter for Educational Activities?. Retrieved

December 2, 2008, from http://www.scribd.com/doc/2286799/Can-we-use-Twitter-for-

educational-activities

Glogoff, S. 2005. Instructional blogging: Promoting interactivity, student-centered learning, and

peer input. Innovate 1 (5). http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=126

(accessed December 8, 2008)

Web 1.0. (2008, November 9). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 18:04, December

8, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Web_1.0&oldid=250642401

Web 2.0. (2008, December 8). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 18:19, December

8, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Web_2.0&oldid=256635574

Thompson, J. 2007. Is Education 1.0 ready for Web 2.0 students?. Innovate 3 (4).

http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=393 (accessed December 1, 2008).

[Editors note: The article is reprinted here with permission of the publisher, The Fischler School

of Education and Human Services at Nova Southeastern University.]

Mejias, U. 2006. Teaching social software with social software. Innovate 2 (5).

http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=260 (accessed December 2, 2008)

Prensky, M (2001, October ). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9 No. 5,

Retrieved November 20, 2008, from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-

%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf