HE in a web 2.0 world.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience (clex)
Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World
47.5% of staff
79.9% of students
Web 2.0 – why should you care?
The ‘Social Web’ (Shirky, 2003) is a term coined by Clay Shirky to describe this move to ‘interactive’ and ‘many to many’ websites and software as opposed to the early websites which were ‘broadcast’ and ‘one to many’ (Selwyn & Grant, 2009).
The life of an undergraduate is the most technologically advanced, influenced and ‘mediated’ than ever has been (Clex, 2009, Ipsos MORI, 2008, Selwyn, 2009, Ziegler, 2007). The technology is inherent and intrinsic their everyday ‘mundane’ life (Beer & Burrows, 2007). Linked with ‘being a student’ (Selwyn, 2009)
Simon described the Facebook group as
a positive, simple and easy way of communicating
Zoe was in agreement saying, “it was just an easy way of letting us know stuff”.
To make a pedagogical comparison, Web 2.0 is not a didactic, lecture-based delivery of information but inquiry-based discovery through group collaboration.
Collaborative technologies and ways of working
Clex (2009a) states that “young people inhabit the Web 2.0 world with enviable ease” (p.1) and that these technologies enable “instant communication, collaboration, information creation, participation and sharing” (p.1) which are the ‘soft skills’ employers demand (Clex, 2009, p.9).
We should not presume all students have the same prior knowledge or experience.
Student ownership - What is the purpose?
Of the session, the resource, the technology, the outcome?
If a staff member chooses to inhabit the site or set up a group, careful thought must be given to why they want to interact with students there and what they hope to achieve by doing so. They must choose their methods appropriately; if it is to set up a public forum, the students need to be included in this discussion – do they want that and why is it relevant to them? Preparation, discussion and collaboration are suggested to make the space jointly owned.
Literature review of use of Web 2.0 in HE - Evolving review of current literature in the area
Beer, D & Burrows, R. (2007) Sociology and, of and in web 2.0: some initial considerations. [online] Sociological Research Online, Vol. 12, No. 5 Available from: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/5/17/html [Accessed 20.03.09].
CLEX. (2009) Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World, Report of an independent Committee of Inquiry into the impact on higher education of students’ widespread use of Web 2.0 technologies. [online). Available from: http://www.clex.org.uk. [Accessed on 12.05.09].
Ipsos MORI. (2008) Great Expectations of ICT. [online) JISC. Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/publications/greatexpectations.aspx [Accessed 15.05.09).
Selwyn, N. & Grant, L. (2009) Researching the realities of social software use – an introduction. Learning, Media and Technology, Vol, 34, No. 2, p.1-9.
Selwyn, N. (2009) Faceworking: exploring students' education-related use of Facebook. Learning, Media and Technology, Vol. 34, No. 2, p.157-174.
Shirky, C. (2003) Social software and the politics of groups.[online] AVailble from: http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_politics.html [Accessed 25.05.09].
Ziegler, S. (2007) The (mis)education of Generation M. Learning, media and Technology, Vol. 32, No. 1, p.69-81.