Chapter 7 Web 2.0 Learning Environments in Distance Learning

Chapter Outline Mistaken Perceptions The Net Generation Current Use of Course Management System Software Web 2.0 Disrupts Distance Learning Constructs for Web 2.0 Learning Environments Cognitive Dimension Social Dimension Networking Dimension Integration Dimension Collaboration Community District Structure and Processes Architecture of Learning Authority Destructions Personal Learning Space The Strengths of Web 2.0 Tools Planning Personal Learning Space Professional Development

Chapter Questions What are the key characteristics leaders need to have when integrating Web 2.0 tools to support learning? What are the products to deliver that leaders need to understand (i.e., how might teachers be trained so they understand correctly that online learning technology is to deliver knowledge and skills, not just content)? How can leaders encourage teachers and students to build differentiation/personalized learning?

Chapter Questions, con’t How can leaders provide effective training on a regular basis to assist teachers with integrating different Web 2.0 tools that support their learning and/or their work? How can leaders facilitate a learning community and community learning—that is, understanding, knowledge, or learning that grows beyond individual members of a community—to aggregate collective intelligence via social networking and connecting?

Disruptive Innovation The theory of disruptive innovation, an innovation that, by its implementation, disrupts the status quo. The theory of disruption can provide researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with a new perspective on increasingly effective, affordable, and accessible educational opportunities in our society.

The Net Generation The extent of technology use by students, particularly by the net generation—people born after 1980, suggesting that these students fundamentally differ from previous generations in the way they process information, communicate, and, learn—is a critical issue in distance learning…These students prefer to receive information quickly and are adept at processing information, multitasking, and using multiple/multimodal communication channels to access information and communicate with friends and tutors.

Web 2.0 Web 2.0 technologies support, encourage, and provide Web space for content published by the user rather than the Web site designer or developer, disrupt current distance learning technology…Current distance learning technology is essentially more individualistic and objective while the philosophies inherent in Web 2.0 technology are more social and subjective.

Constructs for Web 2.0 Learning Environments Cognitive Dimension Social Dimension Networking Dimension Integration Dimension Collaboration Community

District Structure and Processes Web 2.0 technology emphasizes the fundamental shift from information to communication, more specific in social communication/interaction. Effective Web 2.0 integrations would require each individual student to manage his or her Web 2.0 tools to meet his or her learning goals.

Architecture of Learning A key characteristic of Web 2.0 is user participation—the “wisdom of the crowds,” the “architecture of participation”—mashups, remixing, and coconstruction are fundamental and widespread practices in Web 2.0. In contrast, despite the general increase in group collaboration in recent years, educational systems fundamentally revolve around individual testing—evidencing of attainment of a level of knowledge and understanding against a set of predefined criteria.

Authority Destructions Social constructivism is a more student-centered approach to learning that emphasizes the need for coconstruction of knowledge (please see Chapter 5). Traditionally, education and the way teaching occurs are divided into subject fields…This model has been increasingly challenged in the last few decades as subject domains fragment and diversify and as knowledge seems to expand exponentially. It is no longer possible for any individual to be an expert in his or her field, with an understanding of the full scope of his or her domain. Web 2.0 copes with a complex and changing knowledge domain; fundamental to Web 2.0 practice is that no one individual is expert and rather all individuals are part of a social network of others.

Personal Learning Space It is evident that the new technologies now enable individuals to personalize the environment in which they work or learn, appropriating a range of tools to meet their interests and needs; such personal learning environments have been considered an alternative to institutionally controlled virtual learning environments, such as CMSs or LMSs.

Planning Personal Learning Space A few examples that distance learning teachers and their principals can integrate to support individual students’ learning spaces. Integrate social networking sites Content with discussions, Wiki’s Social communication, Twitter or Jaiku Virtual meetings Flashmeeting or Skype Quiz/informal assessments, Blog Quiz Web platforms, Zotero/Delicious Sharing: Collaborative sharing is the key to social learning. Google Docs, FileURLs, SlideShares, YouTube, and Diigo

Professional Development Three major steps are critical in teacher technology training. (1) Online teachers must become “performers,” those who can facilitate online students to manage their individual learning spaces. This means online teachers would employ Web 2.0 technologies before assigning students to do so. (2) Districts should assist teachers with identifying a purpose for adopting Web 2.0 technologies so they know how to design their curriculum effectively and then how to assess this innovation. (3) Districts should assist teachers with relating Web 2.0 technologies to the goals of the course and help show how they fit in and benefit students.

Key Principles for Leaders to Know 1. Products to deliver: Provide training to teachers so they understand correctly that online learning technology is to deliver knowledge and skills, not just content. 2. Web platform: Provide effective training via a Web platform to model effective educational services/pedagogy. 3. Personalization and choice: Encourage teachers and students to build differentiation/personalized learning.

Key Principles for Leaders to Know, con’t 4. User positioning: Allow and encourage teachers and students to take control of their own data to create personal learning environments. 5. Services, not packaged software: Provide effective training on a regular basis to assist teachers with integrating different Web 2.0 tools to support their learning and/or their work. 6. Architecture of participation: Allow and empower teachers to organize their learning model via participation, creating, editing, organizing, retrieving, and tagging contents.

Key Principles for Leaders to Know, con’t 7. Re-mixable data source and data transformations: Schools should provide multiple Web 2.0 tools, but they may have duplicate functions to allow teachers to select their own tools. Assist teachers with aggregating and connecting various forms of data/content. 8. Software above the level of a single device: One piece of software doesn’t result in effective learning. Software should be seen as constant evolving services, rather than items that are updated or upgraded on a regular basis. Schools should update and identify new software to support teachers.

Key Principles for Leaders to Know, con’t 9. Harnessing collective intelligence, or aggregate intelligence that develops through community learning via social networking and connecting within a learning community: Integrate various Web 2.0 tools to create and foster a healthy social learning community for teachers to learn from each other and exchange effective online technology strategies.