‘What are the implications of information 2.0 upon learners?’

Pencils and computers are both tools.

There are many different views on the World Wide Web and internet, as well as web 2.0, and come with this comes with is implications and conflicting views. This includes views from the disruptivists and postmodernists. Postmodernist views that everyone has their own truth – there is no one point. Drisruptivist are people come from different points. Hegial said you learn through discussion.

There is also a theory called ‘the machine is using us Web 2.0’, where you don’t have to have something just have text but as videos and pictures. We are in a position in this information society that is everything is possible and connected. It is already happening already that you have electric gadgets such as getting the fridge to tell you what you have in your fridge and whether it has gone out of date. The machine will order and arrive without you telling it. There is also a gadget that will know that you are ill before you do by connecting with your doctor – the gadget will analyse you.

One of the issues of Web 2.0 and the web is reliability is an issue online you always have to check the source. You need digital literacy’s to read between the lines and check the quality and accuracy. People will judge content and change it. It is an evolution of content on web. There is one reason why wikipedia is becoming more credible and trustworthy, objective, complete and well-written. It also asks you how knowledgeable you are on the subject.

Defining what things mean to you is tagging and then everyone collaborating about it – which can only be done otherwise done if everyone is in the same place. Folksomomy is what a community and society does to show what is important to them and anything that is online, for example, blogging, slideshows, twitter also has this ability. This is how teachers and students alike organise their content.

Mark Prensky studies this and suggested a theory of digital natives and digital Immigrants. The problem with using Web 2.0 technology in school is predominantly teachers attitudes. Prensky states “Digital Immigrant teachers assume that learners are the same as they have always been, and that the same methods that worked for the teachers when they were students will work for their students now.” And he describes Legacy content as: “reading, writing, arithmetic, logical thinking, understanding the writings and ideas of the past – the traditional curriculum” and the future content as: “content is to a large extent, not surprisingly, digital and technological. But while it includes software, hardware, robotics, nanotechnology, genomics, etc. it also includes the ethics, politics, sociology, languages and other things that go with them. This “Future” content is extremely interesting to today‟s students.”

Daniel Channeler studied blogging, which is one of the web 2.0 technologies, and suggests that in the act of writing…we are written’. What does this mean? The way that you express yourself isn’t your own way because you were taught to write. Although, when you write you reveal a bit of yourself. When you write you write a permanent mark into it. It’s provisional – when you delete something on the internet it is still there so you.

You start to understand what you are thinking when you are speaking or listening because thoughts are abstract. You find evidence and revise what you thought. You have to adapt and change to the digital world.

Reference

Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants By Marc Prensky (2001) [PDF Online] http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf [Accessed 22nd January 2012]

Advertisements