Diane-Michel.com

Finding free education materials and sharing their whereabouts is a passion of mine. For example I have written before aboutMIT’s Opencourseware program, and also the educator’sfeesharing Website, Connexions .

Wikipedia’s Educational Outreach Programs:

1. Wikiversity

A fascinatingneweducational opportunityI recently discovered is “Wikiversity“. It was started by Wikipedia’s foundation. Although it is currently in beta, it is well worth taking a look at. The intent of Wikiversity is to help people find free learning materials to use for self-study and also create learning communities. A learning community is an ideal way to learn, as the individuals involved are all interested in the same subject area. They therefore can share new found knowledge, offer support, and opportunities for collaboration.

2. Free Software for Creating Your Own Wiki
Wikipedia is created using MediaWiki, which is a free software technology that can be used by anyone. Free software such as MediaWiki enables educators to collaborate and create learning for people around the world. According to their site: “MediaWiki is free server-based software which is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL).”

If there ever were a more marvelous concept, I have yet to hear of it. Please do support MediaWiki if you can.

3. WikiEducator
Educators will also be interested in WikiEducator which is a source for free e-learning content. According to the site, (2007):

The WikiEducator is an evolving community intended for the collaborative:

1. planning of education projects linked with the development of free content;
2. development of free content on Wikieducator for e-learning;
3. work on building open education resources (OERs) on how to create OERs.
4. networking on funding proposals developed as free content.

Free University Podcasts & Class Downloads
You may not be aware that there are alsofree educational materials and classesavailableas downloads or podcasts from some of our nation’s most prestigious universities. In this posting I would like to share some that I have found:

1. Stanford University
2. John Hopkins University
3. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4. University of California, Los Angeles
5. Yale University
6. UC Berkley
7. UC San Diego
8. Vanderbilt
9. Caltech
10. University of Edinburgh
11. Oxford
12. Columbia University

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Additional Free Learning Opportunities:
National Programme on Technology Enhanced Learning
Over 100 Web and Engineering Courses.

Mango Languages Learning
“Mango beta is an online language learning system freely available to everyone. Learn at your own pace with a suite of features that make language learning more engaging and fun.” Free language lessons in: Brazilian Portugese, French, German, Greek, Italian, Japanese, Mandarin, Russian and Spanish.

Chinesepod.com
Free Mandarin classes via MP3 downloads.

WGBH – Boston
WGBH Forum Network “Live and Archived Webcasts of Free Public Lectures
in Partnership with Boston’s Leading Cultural and Educational Organizations.

Fathom Archive:
“Range of free content developed for Fathom by its member institutions. Columbia encourages you to browse this archive of online learning resources, including lectures, articles, interviews, exhibits and free seminars. You can find additional online resources from Columbia University at ci.columbia.edu or cero.columbia.edu and from the members of the Fathom consortium at their own websites.”

American Film Institute
RAND
Cambridge University Press
University of Michigan

If you’ve ever tried to learn a language via tapes, or CD’s you know it generally doesn’t work. First, despite earnestly trying many a student usually gives up after just a month or so. Language tapes, textbooks and rote memorizationcan be quite dull to say the least.The best of intentions can quickly fade, especiallywithout a chance to practice new language within context.

Educators know that motivation is greatly increased with the learner is genuinely excited about the topic,and can see it’s use right away. Knowledge is also best created through active, self-directed curiousityrather than passively listening to a teacher or reading a book.The mind also remembers new information longer when it can be practiced right away in authentic context.

One online language learning site that seems to be a particularly good exampleis: www.chinesepod.com. The instructional design has been developed by true linguists, and their hard work and expertisedefinitely shows.The user interfacealso earns many kudos for it’sprofessionalusability and efficient functionality.The material is engaging, and the lessons are presented in a relaxedand naturalformat. Studentsself-direct their own learning by picking what material interests them anddiving right in.

The site also accomodatesmany different learning styles.Students may download the Mandarin dialogues in MP3 format and put ontoan IPod, MP3 player, or computer.Students can download PDFS to save and print, or read the dialogues on the screen. There areinteractiveflash quizzes to helpstudentstest their knowledge. Of coursestudents can also repeat the audio sections over and over at their own paceuntilthey’ve really got it. (No more embarrassing questions asking the teacher to repeat yet again!)

How does this site apply to the concept ofWeb 2.0 you might ask? Because members of Chinesepod.com activelycontribute to the learning process and to the content within the site.They can:

1. Help one another learn through asking questions in postings.
2. Express their opinions on specific lessons.
3. Provide suggestions on new topics that genuinely interest them.
4. Share with one another information and support through forums.
5. Organize and structure material through metatags and keywords.

Rays of Collective Intelligence within the Web 2.0 environment:

Web 2.0 is aboutWeb usersconnecting together and collectively creating and sharing knowledge. It is an extremely powerful and exciting concept which I find particularly compelling.It is also the basic foundationofthe theory of constructivism. Driscoll (2000),stated that “Learners, are not empty vessels waiting to be filled, but rather active organisms seeking meaning. Knowledge is constructed by learners as they attempt to make sense of their experiences. Constructivists are interested in having learners identify and pursue their own learning goals.”

Ok, moving past the theory now. Tagging is an example of how individuals determine how their own content can be organized and found by others of like mind. There is a term for this called “folksonomy”. This term was apparently coined by Thomas Vander Wal (2005).His original definitionfor the term was that “Folksonomy is the result of personal free tagging of information and objects (anything with a URL) for one’s own retrieval. The tagging is done in a social environment (shared and open to others). The act of tagging is done by the person consuming the information.”

However much to the chagrin of the originator of the term… folksonomy seems to have morphed into a new meaning now days and is generally defined as: categorizing things through “collaborative, social tagging”.

Here is another definition from Wikipedia, which I generally try to shy away from as using a solid resource, but nevertheless here it is:Folksonomies are intended to make a body of information increasingly easy to search, discover, and navigate over time. A well-developed folksonomy is ideally accessible as a shared vocabulary that is both originated by, and familiar to, its primary users.

Examples of Tagging & OrganizingCollective Intelligence

43things.com for example, is a rather clever little Website which works by individual’s simply posting their goals they would like to accomplish and then adding their own keyword tags to those goals. Then individuals around the world interested in the same goals can therefore find one another and share their thoughts. This is an intriguing concept to be sure, and a terrific way to find and develop group support and a sense of belonging. Creating a sense of community and defining social presence, is by the way, key for eliminating isolation within online learning environments.

Del.icio.us is immensely popular social bookmarking Website. Basically it is a huge storehouse of all the member’s favorite bookmarks. Once you post your favorite bookmarks obviously they are accessible by any computer. One also utilizes tags to help organize and figure out that favorite bookmark you made last week.

Other examples of tagging sites which provide a new way for people to collectively share, and connect socially include Flickr. With no specific technical knowledge one can share their photographs of family, friends, adventures and projects. In doing so one can organize, search and share stories with others around the world. The best thing it is free and also doesn’t require specific technical knowledge. However there are upgrade packages available for power users.

Now to end our discussion, here is a clever video which helps to describe Web 2.0 by Mike Wesch. “Michael Wesch is a cultural anthropologist and media ecologist exploring the impacts of new media on human interaction.”

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Driscoll. (2000). Psychology for learning for instruction. Allyn and Bacon: New York.

Del.icio.us. (2007) What is Del.icio.us? Retrieved November 25, 2007, from http://del.icio.us/about/43things.com

Flickr.com. (2007). About Flickr. Retrieved November 25, 2007, from
http://flickr.com/about/

43things.com. (2007) What do you want to do with your life? Retrieved November 25, 2007, from http://www.43things.com/about/view/learn_more

Wikipedia.com (2007). Folksonomy. Retrieved November 26, 2007 fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/folksonomy.

Vanderwal.net (2005). Folksonomy definition and Wikipedia. Retrieved November 27, 2007 from http://www.vanderwal.net/random/entrysel.php?blog=1750.

Wesch, M. (2007). Web 2.0: The machine is us/ing us. Retrieved December 2, 2007, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE&feature=related

Web 2.0. Everyone seems to be talking about it.The termis appearing more and more these days andyou may be asking yourself what does it really mean? In search for clarity, I set out to find experts in the fieldso that we might come to terms withwhat exactly Web 2.0 is. Let’s start out with one succinct statement that I foundwritten by Tim O’Reilly (2007).

“Web 2.0 is about harnessing a collective intelligence.”

This sounded intriguing. So I set out to learn more…
Web 2.0 is considered to be the second generation of the original World Wide Web. Although we aren’t using new equipment to deliver the information, it is a new way in which we perceive the Web and utilize it. Web 2.0 isn’t really new technology, it refers to “paradigm shifts” in which users create content, and utilizes “thin client computing.”

(By the way, in case your wondering, Web 2.0 is not Internet2. There really is no relationship between Web 2.0 andInternet2. Internet2is a group of colleges and organizations working to develop an ultra high speed Internet utilizing special backbone connections. However this very thought is quite intriguing. Shouldn’t Internet2 fully grasp Web 2.0 collaborative power? This provides me with an idea for the next post!)

When did this Web 2.0 thing all start?
My research from several sources seems to indicate that O’Reilly VP Dale Dougherty is the person who firststarted using the term”Web 2.0″. This was found in an article writtenby O’Reilly (2005) “What Is Web 2.0 Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software”:

The bursting of the dot-com bubble in the fall of 2001 marked a turning point for the web. Many people concluded that the web was overhyped, when in fact bubbles and consequent shakeouts appear to be a common feature of all technological revolutions. Shakeouts typically mark the point at which an ascendant technology is ready to take its place at center stage. The pretenders are given the bum’s rush, the real success stories show their strength, and there begins to be an understanding of what separates one from the other.

The concept of “Web 2.0″ began with a conference brainstorming session between O’Reilly and MediaLive International. Dale Dougherty, web pioneer and O’Reilly VP, noted that far from having “crashed”, the web was more important than ever, with exciting new applications and sites popping up with surprising regularity. What’s more, the companies that had survived the collapse seemed to have some things in common. Could it be that the dot-com collapse marked some kind of turning point for the web, such that a call to action such as “Web 2.0″ might make sense? We agreed that it did, and so the Web 2.0 Conference was born.

Here is another definition from a good resource. This information is according to Musser of O’Reilly Radar (2007):

Web 2.0 is a set of economic, social, and technology trends that collectively form the basis for the next generation of the Internet €”a more mature, distinctive medium characterized by user participation, openness, and network effects.

Web 2.0 thrives on network effects: databases that get richer the more people interact with them, applications that are smarter the more people use them, marketing that is driven by user stories and experiences, and applications that interact with each other to form a broader computing platform. The trend toward networked applications is accelerating.

This I feel is a fine definition and it works well for me. However, interestingly enough when one tries to clarify the difference between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 from the original creator of the Internet himself, Tim Berners-Lee, one realizes there is some overlap and the distinctions are not so pronounced.

Laningham(2006) in his IBM’s Developer Works interview withMr. Berners-Lee, asked for clarification on Web 1.0 vs Web 2.0. Starting out the interview, Scott Laningham said: “A common explanation out there is Web 1.0 was about connecting computers and making information available; and Web 2 is about connecting people and facilitating new kinds of collaboration. Is that how you see Web 2.0?” To which Tim Berners-Lee responded:

Totally not. Web 1.0 was all about connecting people. It was an interactive space, and I think Web 2.0 is, of course, a piece of jargon, nobody even knows what it means. If Web 2.0 for you is blogs and wikis, then that is people to people. But that was what the Web was supposed to be all along. And in fact, you know, this Web 2.0, quote, it means using the standards which have been produced by all these people working on Web 1.0. It means using the document object model, it means for HTML and SVG, and so on. It’s using HTTP, so it’s building stuff using the Web standards, plus JavaScript, of course. So Web 2.0, for some people, it means moving some of the thinking client side so making it more immediate, but the idea of the Web as interaction between people is really what the Web is. That was what it was designed to be as a collaborative space where people can interact.

Ok, there you have it. There is some discord. But the evolution of the term continues and If it helps you to understand even more clearly, Tim O’Reilly has delivered what he calls a “compact definition of Web 2.0.” Here it is:

Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an ‘architecture of participation,’and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences.

Further research from my favorite site of intellectual heavy weights – Ted.com, stated that Web 2.0 is:

…The idea of technology-enabled collaboration. Call it “hive mind,” “smart mobs” or the “wisdom of crowds” … it’s making us all smarter. The power of this phenomenon is evidenced in the open-source movement €¦Today, the most powerful instances of collaboration are not done by people consciously working with each other. Indeed, Web 2.0 is made possible by the extraordinary intelligence created by millions of individuals acting independently. TED.com (2007)

To Summarize:

The essence of Web 2.0 is that is user generated and created. Web users have moved beyond passive roles of just reading content, to creating the content themselves. We now have readily available to us a wave of social networking and content creation tools. These tools such as blogs, wikis and the like, enable us to create and share our thoughts and content quickly and efficiently. No longer are we faced with technical barriers, such as not knowing html, or the economic necessity of having to host our thoughts on a costly server.

Through world wide sharing and collaboration, the human race is socially constructing knowledge at speeds unheard of before. Constructivism states (one of the keys to educational theory) that knowledge is socially constructed as we explore, discover and share.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
References

• Giustini, D. (2007). Digital media, web 2.0 and pre-Gutenberg knowledge making. Retrieved October 31, 2007, from http://weblogs.elearning.ubc.ca/googlescholar/archives/042167.html

• Laningham (2006). IBM Developer Works interviews: Tim Berners-Lee. Retrieved October 31, 2007, from http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/podcast/dwi/cm-int082206.txt

• Musser, J. (2007). O’Reilly Radar: Web 2.0 principles and best practices. Retrieved October 31, 2007, from http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/web2report/chapter/web20_report_excerpt.pdf

• O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved October 31, 2007, from http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html

• O’Reilly, T. (2005). O’Reilly Radar: Web 2.0 compact definition. Retrieved October 31, 2007, from
  http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/10/web_20_compact_definition.html

• O’Reilly, T. (2007). What is Web 2.0: DoubleClick vs Overture and AdSense. Retrieved October 31, 2007, from http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html?page=2

• TED.com (2007). Themes: the rise of collaboration. Retrieved October 31, 2007, from http://www.ted.com/themes/view/id/19

Today, November 8, 2007 was World Usability Day. This year’s theme was Healthcare. If you are interested in viewing all the happenings, please visit here.

With over 210 events in 39 countries, this earth day style event promoted the value of user-centered design and every user’s right to ask for things that work better.

To see the usability activities related to healthcaredownload the world usability passport here: World Usability Day Passport.

Another great idea from TED:

Rice University professor Richard Baraniuk has a giant vision: to create a free global online education system that puts the power of creation and collaboration in the hands of teachers worldwide. He’s realizing that vision with Connexions, a website that allows teachers to quickly “create, rip, mix and burn” coursework — without fear of copyright violations. Think of it as Napster for education.

Connexions’ open-source system cuts out the textbook, allowing teachers to share course materials, modify existing work and disseminate it to their students — all for free, thanks to Creative Commons licensing. Baraniuk envisions Connexions as a repository where the most up-to-date material can be shared and reviewed (it’s far more efficient than waiting for a textbook to be printed); it could become a powerful force in leveling the education playing field. Currently encompassing hundreds of online courses and used by a million people worldwide, Baraniuk’s virtual educational system is revolutionizing the way people teach and learn.

“[Connexions] is trying to reshape the way academe uses both peer review and publishing. The project also has hopes of becoming a major curricular tool at community colleges.”

Inside Higher Ed