Web 2.0 : What I Dont Know.
mobology
2.0 technologies in his post at network learning today.
http://networklearning.blogspot.com
I like the way he's teased questions out from his experience and tried
to illuminate the issues facing educators / teachers who find them
selves drawn to the web2.0 honeypot.
I would like to add another bit from my perspective of sitting on the
other side of the mosquito / fly zapper which is between the honeypot
and the open word window.
I find myself learning an awful lot about the challenges that face my
peers at work as they try to better understand the shifts in the way
communication and technologies are shifting to accomodate the learner -
so it would seem anyway.
Everday I learn more and every day I feel more humbled as I better
understand how difficult it is for teachers / educators / designers/
managers etc. to engage in this conversation and feel safe about it and
want to continue to explore and ask questions - whilst undertaking core
work tasks, answering to mandates, meeting budgets, getting leave
approval.
The web 2.0 environment I feel poses a great deal of threat to the way
in which learning can be evidenced, archived, syndicated and networked
with others without the need to rely on the avenues which traditionally
contain courseware in intranet style reposition. The answer i think is
somewhere between the term 'complement' and 'implement' - inside vs.
outside is long gone in my opinion and I urge others to refrain from
using the terms or entertaining the joust.
The world wide web is a soup of 'ins' and 'outs'. So are LMS systems or
CMS systems. Passwords, usernames, invites, terms and conditions are
all in's and outs. It seems to be one big intranet anyway so why cant
we desist with the us and them and simply say - another place , another
space.
The main issue that I hear from people now regarding web 2.0
technologies seems to have the same resonance and repeat gripes with
that of the early adopters of open courseware, I've worked with over
the last few years within the VTE (VET) sector. The web became their
world and then it became difficult for them to work within that which
they were originally conscript to by manner of integrity.
The main issue I hear from people now regarding web 2.0 technologies is
not unlike when Windows 95 was released and the issues early adopters
of computer generated assignments came up against with the 80 per
centile group of submissions that were hand written. Many reverted back
to hand writing just to ease the pain.
The main issue I hear from people now regarding web 2.0 technologies is
not unlike when my Uncle made the switch from punchcards to floppies at
Qantas in the late seventies and the flack-attack and searchlights that
shone his way from his peers frightened by his antics. It must have
been hard to be eating lunch on your own whilst the other guffawed over
the latest ornage and brown formica tabletops that had been installed
to house the computers ( beasts) to which they would soon be chained
to.
That realisation that the resonance from the past keeps rearing it's
long winded echoing epitaph raises for me that fact that Web 2.0 may
indeed need some pedagogical interrogation in open forums which
juxtapose existing legacy systems and softwares with that of what is
being made freely available. Now. Not in long winded posts in forums.
Debates.Comics. Mobisodes. Flyers. Workshops. Zines. Leaflets dropped
from planes over disbelievers and naysayers perhaps. Anything that lets
the issues fall and get to the ground. Whats holding you back ?
If you provide access to a machine that provides you opportunity,
freeware, comminication, hope, access and open word of course you must
come to expect that it will be accessed. Just because it's free does
not mean it's not being mined.
Are we losing our IP to consortiums ? Have we 'lost' access to learning
by the fact that it's difficult to retrieve data from that which we
pump it readily into? Who does the backups ? How many passwords can we
generate and how can we remember them all in a web 2.0 world ? Whats
wicked and whats wack ? What brings you as an educator under attack and
do you think going this way will win out ?
It seems that open-and-easy web 2.0 often frightens the very punters
that seek access to that which would otherwise save their wallet, their
sanity and their conscience. Place that alongside policies and
procedural procurement, ethos of organisations seeking to protect
knowledge, to contain learning, to meet rising costs and you have a
potent mix. What the heck is web 2.0 in an educators world anyway ?
Not only is the term web 2.0 ambiguous but it also fails, in my
opinion, to define the inherent style or change in onus on the educator
having access to the technologies which govern it's use. Let me try to
expand on what that comment means.
Educators need access to investigate the tools. The internet or world
wide web acts as the vehicle for the transition of communication either
in synchronous or asynchronous mode. The sites offering freeware house
the 'content' and the agreements between individual and the web 2.0
tool provider are both complex, often mis-understood and if examined
carefully ften conflict with the ethos or policies of the very
organisation that is employing the individual to deliver !
So what makes it so difficult ?
In the case of educators first coming to grips with content being
'housed' or located anywhere but their own institutions LMS, the issues
to do with privacy and security are often the first to arise. Access to
the very technologies that educators are being encouraged to explore
within are often difficult to access through the education sector
firewalls and any executable components which enable features with
these sites are blocked or under review. Rightly so in many cases.
The question of accessibility by students to such sites falls into the
same category. Students were ( in most cases still are ) completing
courseware and depositing this in shared intranet archives whereas the
web2.0 environment enables the student to accomplish this task/s and
expand on this learning concept by having a myriad of connected sites
which blend the learning outcome across many repository points.
This places the educator at risk of connected burnout, chasing links,
joining web 2.0 environments simply to gain access to the data or proof
that student had completed an assigned task. Part-time or casual. On
the fly. From their phones.
Many teachers / lecturers give up in the foyer of web 2.0 because the
designers for such sites fail to provide adequate, simple, easy to
understand , front-up descriptions or case examples of success stories
with their web provision AND prompt accountable feedback. Forums are
often the last place an educator wishes to sift through to answer a
question or find a link.
Questions like ' What happens if their server crashes ?' start to
occur. The concerns of many organisations are entirley valid even
taking on this one question. What indeed would happen if the online
environment which the educator has ploughed hundreds of hours into has
an outage and dialogue and valuable data would be lost ? eeek!
To take this forward from the begining often means that the educator
seeking to employ such tools as part of the connected teaching and
learning environment needs to accout for the perspective of the IT
gatekeepers. I feel it will be crucial to the development of web2.0
exploration with education that the answers to the myriad of questions
are literally laid out as that - a list of questions with answers
accrued in chronological order composed and ordered by educators for
educators.
Any number of e-mentoring forums will answer individual or group
requests however it needs to be a provision of excellence in a
transparent and evolving site that takes the form of a wiki that may
achieve this task.
I ask myself ;
Where do my colloeagues employ web 2.0 technologies in their core daily
duties as opposed to explorations on an individaul level ?
What role do web 2.0 tools / technology / communication have when it is
apparent that proprietal ware that education organisations use are
bound to politically and by legacy ?
If my learners find it easier to complete tasks and immerse themselves
in communication which does not involve web 2.0 environments whats the
point of putting myself through so much angst to learn how to blog, add
widgets, de-code and syndicate transactions
In many cases the frustration that educators feel trying to engage with
such open, free and seemingly wonderful web environments are driving
them back to the cc's and the silent-whit-whispers. All because I
forgot to explain that I'm learning too.
Nuff'.