During this session, the need for Web 2.0 in the field of education will be discussed. After the presentation, you, the Board of Directors will have a better idea of how Web 2.0 has evolved and where it is going. If your organization has the desire to change the world through effective educational tactics, then Web 2.0 is a must have for your organization to give learners the opportunity to have a world class education. Are you equipped for the challenge?
The educational industry is in need of more options to learn at the convenience of the learner. Therefore, collaboration, sharing, global diversity, flexibility, convenience, common work spaces and storage spaces are needed. Collaboration and sharing is vital to developing ideas and discovering academic concepts. A vast amount of knowledge can be achieved within a diversified group from multiple backgrounds. The ability to work together in one place on the Web, from all parts of the world, is a dynamic situation that fosters creativity and knowledge.
During the research process, it was found that Tim Berners-Lee and Robert Cailliau developed Web 2.0. Web 2.0 offers services that are not packaged but are cost effective. The data sources that are used become richer and more beneficial as more people use them. Users are trusted and considered co-developers because their ideas impact Web 2.0’s upgrades and customer self-service is exercised. Users collectively build intelligence when collaborating through Web 2.0 applications.
Web 2.0 is applied on Wikis, blogs, Flickr, Google, Tagging, Wikipedia, delicious, Facebook, MySpace, You Tube, RSS Feeds, and many more. The lead thinkers of Web 2.0 were Tim O’Reilly and John Battelle. Web 2.0 was built upon the World Wide Web, it was an extension to Web 1.0. It involves the users by allowing customers to build businesses online and publishing knowledge with others collectively. Information can be built by a team anywhere, anytime, on one document. Customers can build businesses, and publish valuable knowledge collectively. Since Web 2.0 is an online production, it does not need a manufacturer.
During the development stages, Web 2.0’s problems consisted of clarification of the innovation itself. The words “Web 2.0” were used without many people truly understanding what it meant. It was a piece of jargon for a long time that was “tossed” around through out professional and casual conversations. Also, Web 2.0 easily exposes files and data on computers to hackers and spam. This innovation is targeted to anyone that is seeking information and/or wants to publish on the web collaboratively. This collaboration may be for professional purposes or for leisure.
Web 2.0 was produced on the basis of Lotus mashup technology. The services are available online and are usually marketed through an annual conference as well as Web 2.0 compatible technologies. The innovation is distributed to anyone with Internet access and connects to the World Wide Web.
The diffusion process of Web 2.0 began in 2006 and still continues today. It is in the latter stages now and will reach its confirmation stage in about 5 years. Therefore, there is plenty of time for organizations such as yours to adopt this effective innovation to reach maximum potential.
Web 2.0 has been diffused through conversations online and in-person, as well as during conferences. The online conversations occurred through email, blogs, wikis, and social networks such as MySpace or Facebook.
This is a visual that depicts Web 2.0’s adoption on an S-curve. As you can see, the innovators began to adopt in 2006, and the innovation reached its peak in 2009. However, the laggards are currently adopting. Uniquely, the innovation will begin another cycle of adoption in the near future particularly due to new features.
Media specialists, technology specialists, and technology support teams are innovators of Web 2.0 because they are the main source of technological information for instructors or others that may need to use these components. Technology savvy teachers and new graduates take on the new innovation to apply within their classrooms immediately. They are open to the modern technologies and persuade others like the laggards to implement the innovation by sharing the product’s advantages, and participating in a trial period. Laggards are usually veteran teachers that can be persuaded by disclosing improvement overtime, comparing other valued products, and sharing user testimonials. Web 2.0 is useful because it shows product results and benefits in comparison to similar products.
Decentralization is a better choice of diffusion for Web 2.0 because teachers and other educators would have a chance to be a part of the diffusion process. Their ability to give input and make decisions through horizontal networking is imperative because of their first hand knowledge of students’ needs and response to the innovation. Educators would be able to evaluate student progress after using the product and collaborate amongst colleagues to determine a collective results and possible solutions.
Many people may have the opportunity to be change agents, but true change agents are able to influence others in regard to the need for change and provide information that clarifies the need. Also change agents diagnose the problem at hand and determine the best way to address it, using certain resources. After the change agent influences others to change, action is taken to began the adoption process.
Critical mass has been reached because many higher education students are actively utilizing Web 2.0 applications such as social networking, wikis, blogs, Google docs, e-portfolios, and so on. The massive use on the post-secondary level has already started to trickle down to the secondary and elementary level. Therefore, this way of education will be pushed or diffused from top (university) to bottom (preschool).
Are you ready to increase the world of knowledge? The field of education is in need of student interactions that foster critical thinking, including collaboration and sharing amongst students and teachers at their convenience. Students and teachers need to be able to work on common documents, projects, and assignments as a team, but in various locations across many states and countries. Therefore, Web 2.0 is highly recommended because it permits group discussions and team work no matter the location or time of day, with the use of blogs, wikis, social networks, and other Web 2.0 sharing applications. As a result, students are able to effectively learn endlessly with others in the comfort of their own homes or anywhere else. Will the Board of Directors upgrade their organization by adopting Web 2.0 today?
Storyboard Mosley C
Storyboard for Innovation:Web 2.0<br />By Crystal Mosley<br />1<br />
Need<br />Collaboration and sharing information<br />Global diversity<br />Flexibility and convenience<br />Common work and storage space<br />2<br />
Research<br />Developers: Tim Berners-Lee and Robert Cailliau<br />Findings: Web 2.0- <br />Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability <br />Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them <br />Trusting users as co-developers <br />Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service <br />Harnessing collective intelligence <br />3<br />
Research Continued <br />Examples: Wikis, blogs, Flickr, Google, Tagging, Wikipedia, del.icious, Facebook, MySpace, You Tube, RSS Feeds, etc.<br />Lead Thinkers: <br />Tim O’Reilly and John Battelle<br />Production: <br />Built upon the World Wide Web (W3 or Web 1.0) platform to involve the users, allowing customers to build businesses, and users to publish valuable knowledge collectively.<br />4<br />
Development<br />Development Problems: <br />Clarifying and explaining the innovation. Considered a “piece of jargon” that no one truly understood what it meant. <br />Criticisms include hackers and spam easily exposed to files and data on computers. <br />Intended Audience: <br />Anyone that is seeking information and/or wants to publish on the web in collaboration with others (experts and non-experts).<br />5<br />
Commercialization<br />Production/Manufacturing: <br />Developed on the basis of Lotus mashup technology<br />Packaging: <br />Service/software available online<br />Marketing: <br />O’ Reilly Media annual conferences <br />Web 2.0 technologies<br />Distribution: <br />Available to anyone with Internet access and connects to the World Wide Web. <br />6<br />
Time Line of Diffusion for Web 2.0<br />2006-2007: Knowledge Stage<br />2008-2009: Persuasion Stage<br />2010: Decision Stage<br />2011-2013: Implementation Stage<br />2014-2015: Confirmation Stage<br />Supportive information for timeline decision. http://globalhumancapital.org/?p=675<br />7<br />
Adoption and the S-Curve<br /> Early Late <br /> Majority Majority *Innovation went thru another adoption curve. <br />Early<br /> Adopters<br />Innovators<br />Laggards<br />http://globalhumancapital.org/?p=675<br />9<br />
Perceived Attributes of Web 2.0<br />Innovators :<br />media specialists, technology specialists, and technology support team<br />Early Adopters:<br />technology savvy teachers and new graduates (1st year teachers)<br />Laggards-:<br />veteran teachers<br />Most Useful Perceived Attributes:<br />observability and relative advantage will show product results and benefits<br />10<br />
Critical Mass<br />Centralized vs. Decentralized<br />Decentralization is the preferred diffusion system<br />Horizontal networking amongst peers<br />Shared diffusion decision <br />Users experiments with the product<br />Informal evaluations<br />Problem-centered approach<br />11<br />
Change Agents<br />Key Change Agents: Teachers, administrators, and parents that are willing and determined to address the needs of the students within the school and community.<br />Use of Seven Roles: <br />Identify and discuss a need<br />Exchange information with others that can help impact the process of change<br />Analyzing the problem<br />Develop possible solutions and began action<br />Determine level of stability and respond accordingly<br />12<br />
Critical Mass<br />Web 2.0 has reached critical mass<br />Many students (higher education) use:<br />Social networking<br />Wikis<br />Blogs<br />Google docs<br />E-Portfolios<br />or other Web 2.0 supported tools<br />Web 3.0 is developing<br />13<br />
Champion’s Role<br />Need for Innovation- <br />Collaborating and sharing<br />Globalization<br />Common work area <br />Convenience <br />Innovation Match to Need-<br />Web 2.0 Capabilities<br />Users interact with other users<br />Website content can be changed<br />Applications: blogs, wikis, social <br />networking, video sharing, mashups, etc.<br />14<br />