Download to read offline
![Refrenses 1. Utecht, Jeffrey. YouTube - Web 2.0. http://www.youtube.com. [Online] U Tech Tips, 3 8, 2006. [Cited: 8 9, 2009.] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsa5ZTRJQ5w. 2. Hafner, Kathie. Lessons Learned at Dot-Com U. - The New York Times. Times People. [Online] 5 2, 2002. [Cited: 8 15, 2009.] http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/02/technology/circuits/02DIST.html. 3. Richard, Clark E. Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media . Review of Educational Research. 53, Vols. 4 (Winter, 1983), pp. 445-459 . http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170217 . 4. Russell, Thomas. No Significant Phenomenon. North Carolina : North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1999. 5. Leggott, Mark. Fathom this Questia: eBrary’s Time Has Come? IslandScholar. [Online] 2001. [Cited: 8 17, 2009.] http://www.islandscholar.ca/fedora/repository/ir:ir-batch6-5820/OBJ/OTHER.pdf. 6. Levin, Matt and Abram, Stephen. HR MANAGEMENT: IDEAS & TRENDS NEWSLETTER. [interv.] David Creelman. Disappointment and Promise of e-Learning. New Mindsets, Toronto. http://www.newmindsets.com/resources/HRIdeasTrends_032102.PDF. 7. Ubiquitous Computing in Learning: Toward a Conceptual Framework of Ubiquitous Learning Environment. Luyi Li, Yanlin Zheng, Hiroaki Ogata, Yoneo Yano. 3, s.l. : Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2005, International Journal of Pervasive Computing and Communications, Vol. 1, pp. 207 - 216. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do?contentType=Article&hdAction=lnkpdf&contentId=1615707. 1742-7371.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/webiiandwebiii-12619056841624-phpapp01/85/How-Web-Ii-And-Web-Iii-Rescue-Web-i-15-320.jpg)
![Refrenses 8. Wikipedia. Wikipedia. Web 2.0. [Online] 8 9, 2008. [Cited: 8 9, 2008.] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0. 9. Zimmer, Michael. Preface: Critical Perspectives on Web 2.0. First Monday [Online]. 3 2, 2008, Vol. 3, 13, p. 1. http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2137/1943. 10. Utecht, Jeff. The Thinking Stick. [Online] 3 12, 2008. http://www.thethinkingstick.com/moving-from-consumer-to-producer-of-information. 11. Testing the waters for distance education in adult education programs. King, K. P. 2002, PAACE ]ournal of Life long Learning, Vol. 11, pp. 11-24. 12. Online learning in higher education: A review of research on interactions among teachers and students. Wallace, R. M. 2003, Education, communication, and Information, Vol. 2, pp. 241-280. 13. Reusable learning objects: a survey of LOM-based repositories. Neven, Filip and Duval, Erik. New York : ACM, 2002, Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on Multimedia, pp. 291-294. 1-58113-620-X. 14. Library, Ilumina Digital. The Ilumina Digital Library. The Ilumina Digital Library. [Online] April 7, 2009. [Cited: 8 2009, 19.] http://www.ilumina-dlib.org/index.asp. 15. Bennett, Kathleen, et al. The Promise and Pitfalls of Learning Objects. Educause Center for Applied Research. [Online] 3 4, 2002. [Cited: 8 17, 2009.] http://www.educause.edu/search?quick_query=Fathom+Questia+&Image1.x=59&Image1.y=12.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/webiiandwebiii-12619056841624-phpapp01/85/How-Web-Ii-And-Web-Iii-Rescue-Web-i-16-320.jpg)
![Refrenses 17. Tozman, Reuben. Another New Paradigm for Instructional Design. Learning Circuits - ASTD. [Online] 2004. [Cited: 8 23, 2009.] http://www.astd.org/LC/2004/1104_tozman.htm. 18. Kelly, Kevin. Wired 13.08: We Are the Web. Wired.com. [Online] 13.08, 8 2005. [Cited: 8 23, 2009.] http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.08/tech.html?pg=3&topic=tech&topic_set. 19. Person of the Year: You. Grossman, Lev. December 25, 2006, TIME magazine. 20. Dagger, D., et al. Internet Computing. IEEE : IEEE, May-June 2007. Service-Oriented E-Learning Platforms: From Monolithic Systems to Flexible Services. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=4196172. 21. McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding media: The extensions of man. California : McGraw-Hill, 1964. 22. Surowiecki, James. The Wisdom of Crowds. Doubleday : Garden City, 4004.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/webiiandwebiii-12619056841624-phpapp01/85/How-Web-Ii-And-Web-Iii-Rescue-Web-i-17-320.jpg)
Uploaded byDanit Isaacs
How Web Ii And Web Iii Rescue Web i
The document discusses the evolution of e-learning from Web 1.0 to Web 3.0, highlighting the shortcomings of early digital learning solutions that failed to consider diverse learning needs. It emphasizes the potential of the next generation of e-learning, driven by Web 3.0 technologies, to create more engaging and personalized educational experiences. Key elements include learning objects, digital repositories, and the importance of sharing as a fundamental aspect of meaningful learning.
More Related Content
How Web Ii And Web Iii Rescue Web i
- 1. How Web IIand Web III Rescue E-Learning Danit Isaacs The Sixth International Conference on Excellence in Academia September 1-3, 2009; Ariel, Israel
- 2.
- 3. Phases in Internetdevelopment
- 4. T he FirstGeneration E-learning – From High Hopes To Disappointment Digital texts did not meet the real needs of e-learners (6) Content was dumped into a portal without context or guidance of mediators (7) Technical skills and technological literacy - learning curve Instructor’s intuition as to the students understanding The expectations of cutting costs have not yet been met. Systems were designed to meet content needs, they were not designed to deal with the barriers of learning, such as different learning styles, multiple intelligences and learning disabilities.
- 5. Online learning toolsRecording student enrolments, Reporting progress and completions, Not on engaging learners in rich, interactive experiences. course management systems are promoted as ways to “manage” learners.
- 6. "…Media are merevehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers groceries causes change in our nutrition" (3) (Richard Clark stated in 1983)
- 7. Web IIImage from Flicker courtesy of premiardiego
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11. Learning Objects AndDigital Repositories Digital resources Reusable in different contexts Modular - each learning object is Uniquely identified and Could be of any size and type, free or not, reviewed or not, connected or not. Examples: Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL), Co-Lab (http://www.academiccolab.org/index.html) MERLOT (www.MERLOT.org)
- 12. Web III Standardizationof learning object's meta-data Cataloging online learning materials Forming searchable collections
- 13. Next Generation OfE-learning service-oriented visions support targeted personalization
- 14. Conclusion Newgeneration of E-learning facilitates genuine learning experiences driven by the human joy of sharing. Image Retrieved from : http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Sharing_Creative_Works_4
- 15. Refrenses 1. Utecht, Jeffrey. YouTube - Web 2.0. http://www.youtube.com. [Online] U Tech Tips, 3 8, 2006. [Cited: 8 9, 2009.] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsa5ZTRJQ5w. 2. Hafner, Kathie. Lessons Learned at Dot-Com U. - The New York Times. Times People. [Online] 5 2, 2002. [Cited: 8 15, 2009.] http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/02/technology/circuits/02DIST.html. 3. Richard, Clark E. Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media . Review of Educational Research. 53, Vols. 4 (Winter, 1983), pp. 445-459 . http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170217 . 4. Russell, Thomas. No Significant Phenomenon. North Carolina : North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1999. 5. Leggott, Mark. Fathom this Questia: eBrary’s Time Has Come? IslandScholar. [Online] 2001. [Cited: 8 17, 2009.] http://www.islandscholar.ca/fedora/repository/ir:ir-batch6-5820/OBJ/OTHER.pdf. 6. Levin, Matt and Abram, Stephen. HR MANAGEMENT: IDEAS & TRENDS NEWSLETTER. [interv.] David Creelman. Disappointment and Promise of e-Learning. New Mindsets, Toronto. http://www.newmindsets.com/resources/HRIdeasTrends_032102.PDF. 7. Ubiquitous Computing in Learning: Toward a Conceptual Framework of Ubiquitous Learning Environment. Luyi Li, Yanlin Zheng, Hiroaki Ogata, Yoneo Yano. 3, s.l. : Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2005, International Journal of Pervasive Computing and Communications, Vol. 1, pp. 207 - 216. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do?contentType=Article&hdAction=lnkpdf&contentId=1615707. 1742-7371.
- 16. Refrenses 8. Wikipedia. Wikipedia. Web 2.0. [Online] 8 9, 2008. [Cited: 8 9, 2008.] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0. 9. Zimmer, Michael. Preface: Critical Perspectives on Web 2.0. First Monday [Online]. 3 2, 2008, Vol. 3, 13, p. 1. http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2137/1943. 10. Utecht, Jeff. The Thinking Stick. [Online] 3 12, 2008. http://www.thethinkingstick.com/moving-from-consumer-to-producer-of-information. 11. Testing the waters for distance education in adult education programs. King, K. P. 2002, PAACE ]ournal of Life long Learning, Vol. 11, pp. 11-24. 12. Online learning in higher education: A review of research on interactions among teachers and students. Wallace, R. M. 2003, Education, communication, and Information, Vol. 2, pp. 241-280. 13. Reusable learning objects: a survey of LOM-based repositories. Neven, Filip and Duval, Erik. New York : ACM, 2002, Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on Multimedia, pp. 291-294. 1-58113-620-X. 14. Library, Ilumina Digital. The Ilumina Digital Library. The Ilumina Digital Library. [Online] April 7, 2009. [Cited: 8 2009, 19.] http://www.ilumina-dlib.org/index.asp. 15. Bennett, Kathleen, et al. The Promise and Pitfalls of Learning Objects. Educause Center for Applied Research. [Online] 3 4, 2002. [Cited: 8 17, 2009.] http://www.educause.edu/search?quick_query=Fathom+Questia+&Image1.x=59&Image1.y=12.
- 17. Refrenses 17. Tozman, Reuben. Another New Paradigm for Instructional Design. Learning Circuits - ASTD. [Online] 2004. [Cited: 8 23, 2009.] http://www.astd.org/LC/2004/1104_tozman.htm. 18. Kelly, Kevin. Wired 13.08: We Are the Web. Wired.com. [Online] 13.08, 8 2005. [Cited: 8 23, 2009.] http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.08/tech.html?pg=3&topic=tech&topic_set. 19. Person of the Year: You. Grossman, Lev. December 25, 2006, TIME magazine. 20. Dagger, D., et al. Internet Computing. IEEE : IEEE, May-June 2007. Service-Oriented E-Learning Platforms: From Monolithic Systems to Flexible Services. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=4196172. 21. McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding media: The extensions of man. California : McGraw-Hill, 1964. 22. Surowiecki, James. The Wisdom of Crowds. Doubleday : Garden City, 4004.
Editor's Notes
- #3 Web II promises to empower creativity, to democratize media production, and to celebrate the individual while also relishing the power of collaboration and social networks (9). Today, in the era of Web II - the age of the social networks, new collaborative technologies and web tools are being incorporated into E-learning, – blogs, mini-blogs, pod-casting, social bookmarking, social tagging, wikis, mobile interfaces, etc. These web tools create a learning environment which is learner-oriented, user-centered, non-hierarchical, non-linear, and a truly interactive experience. These improvements in technology are expected to bring about a better quality of learning. Web 2.0 allows learners to not only consume information, but also construct and produce knowledge of their own. It is this interaction with knowledge that leads to new understandings and provokes thinking. (10) When learners and instructors dialogue there is an opportunity for greater depths of reflection, analysis, debate, and understanding (11) (12)
- #4 WHAT ARE 'WEB 1.0' 'WEB 2.0' 'WEB 3.0‘? The terms 'Web 1.0' 'Web 2.0' 'Web 3.0' indicate different phases in the technical and social development of the Internet: 'Web 1.0' – the "readable" phase was characterized by static, flat data and content. 'Web 2.0' – the "writeable" phase was characterized by interactive data - social networking. 'Web 3.0' – the "executable" phase is characterized by dynamic applications, interactive services, and machine to machine interaction. (8) Each phase in web development has had an impact on learning technologies and has carried over to the way we practice teaching and learning.
- #5 Investment in academic E-learning products and services (eBooks, on-line courses) turned out to be unprofitable. The initial offerings of e-learning were largely portals, and streaming of books and text on to the computer screen. Because these digital texts did not meet the real needs of e-learners, people did not adopt these systems (6) Too much content was dumped into a portal without context or guidance of mediators to help understand the material. In order for e-learning to really be effective, it must be done in conjunction with person-to-person formal classroom training. (7) Using a learning system requires acquisition of technical skills and technological literacy. The use of different applications requires a whole new learning curve on how to effectively use software. Users should focus on learning the content without having to adapt to a new learning system over and over again In classroom learning, as opposed to an e-learning environment, the instructor has better intuition as to the students understanding of the material. So, s/he can adapt accordingly. When e-learning was first introduced, e-learning promoters promised a substantial saving in training costs. The expectations have not yet been met. While many e-learning systems were designed to meet specific content needs they were not designed to deal with the barriers of learning, such as different learning styles, multiple intelligences and learning disabilities.
- #6 most online learning tools have been developed during the past decade. Their focus is typically on recording and facilitating student enrolments and reporting progress and completions, not on engaging learners in rich, interactive experiences. Instead of a learning focus, online learning systems are set up to warehouse students online. Even in this age of learner-centered learning (Bonk, Wisher, & Lee, 2003; Stephenson, 2001), course management systems are promoted as ways to “manage” learners. Dr. Curtis J. Bonk June 2004 http://www.publicationshare.com/part2.pdf
- #7 The failure of first generation of e-learning has been attributed to its inability to perceive the great potential of the internet as a means of improving the quality of learning and rather use it as an administrative tool and means of delivery. As Richard Clark stated in 1983… Traditional learning methods have been around for hundreds and hundreds of years; E-learning is still in the early adoption stage. It is still a work in progress; it has not reached its potential yet. It is evolving and improving as it goes along.
- #8 The participatory web A new cultural force based on mass collaboration is evolving. Blogs, Wikipedia, open source, peer-to-peer – are driven by the mass, the power of the people . Web II is a new reality manufactured by users, not corporate interests. Bottom-up Web phenomena takeover cyber space Driven by mutual benefits of p2p sharing
- #9 Web II is a new reality manufactured by users, not corporate interests. Bottom-up Web phenomena takeover cyber space. Economically, User-created channels make no sense. Where are the time, energy, and resources coming from? From the audience. They are driven by passion. Users create content for their own delight and for the benefit of friends. New web technologies enable these creations to extend to a far wider group for no extra cost or effort . In this way, each site is part of vast and growing valuable body of creations and services - all given away for free . This gift economy is fueled by an abundance of choices. It permits easy modification and reuse . It spurs the grateful to reciprocate . The electricity of participation nudges ordinary people to invest large amounts of energy and time into creating content and sharing it. The deep enthusiasm for making things, for interacting more deeply, is a great force. This impulse for participation is steadily shifting from audience to participants, Lev Grossman of TIME magazine has stated that this revolution "Will not only change the world, but also change the way the world changes" (19)
- #10 Web II promises to empower creativity, to democratize media production, and to celebrate the individual while also relishing the power of collaboration and social networks (9). Today, in the era of Web II - the age of the social networks, new collaborative technologies and web tools are being incorporated into E-learning, – blogs, mini-blogs, pod-casting, social bookmarking, social tagging, wikis, mobile interfaces, etc. These web tools create a learning environment which is learner-oriented, user-centered, non-hierarchical, non-linear, and a truly interactive experience. These improvements in technology are expected to bring about a better quality of learning. Web 2.0 allows learners to not only consume information, but also construct and produce knowledge of their own. It is this interaction with knowledge that leads to new understandings and provokes thinking. (10) When learners and instructors dialogue there is an opportunity for greater depths of reflection, analysis, debate, and understanding (11) (12)
- #11 Before the era of Social Networks and the semantic web, every teacher would have to "invent the wheel" by creating their own teaching materials, every educator was "a lone wolf" operating on their own. There was a lot of inefficiency, replication, and time and energy were wasted creating similar materials. Web II and Web III technologies facilitate the sharing of learning objects.
- #12 LEARNING OBJECTS AND DIGITAL REPOSITORIES Learning objects are digital resources - typically small content components that are meant to be reusable in different contexts. Learning objects are modular - each learning object is uniquely identified and metadata tagged, so that they can be managed, searched, etc. (13) Learning objects could be of any size and type, free or not, reviewed or not, connected or not. (14) Learning Objects are usually not found on their own on the web but in data bases or digital repositories or libraries, those not only manage the resource, but provide many services to help find, understand, download and reuse the materials for learning or developing online courses. (15) Realizing the expense and duplication of effort and resources, that are involved in developing online courses, groups such as Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL), Co-Lab (http://www.academiccolab.org/index.html), and MERLOT (www.MERLOT.org) have led coordinated efforts to design, articulate, and support the development of parallel, reusable, cross-platform, "learning objects" (16) (17)
- #13 The vision of Web III – the semantic web, has brought about the evolution of XML (Extensible Markup Language). XML is taking the learning industry a step forward, through standardization of learning object's meta-data. This enables cataloging online learning materials and forming searchable collections. These collections serve virtual communities of faculty and students from around the world and enable them to find learning objects that are tailored to their specific learning needs. It enables them to share their learning materials and contribute to the enrichment of the body of knowledge. (Examples of such projects are MERLOT and IMS/GLC, in the U.S. and LOM in Europe) (13)
- #14 next-generation systems will be based on service-oriented visions and will support targeted personalization
- #15 Social Networks and the semantic web technologies, are now laying the foundations for the new generation of E-learning which facilitates education driven by the human joy of sharing.