Rationale of 12 Things and Web 2.0 |
12 Things and Web 2.0
Web 2.0 Tools, Technology Curriculum Integration and ICT Outcomes
Regan Holt, Amanda Hack, Lisa Ferguson & Julie Gareau
University of Alberta
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Regan Holt, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. Contact: [email protected]
Web 2.0 Tools, Technology Curriculum Integration and ICT Outcomes
Regan Holt, Amanda Hack, Lisa Ferguson & Julie Gareau
University of Alberta
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Regan Holt, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. Contact: [email protected]
Why Web 2.0?
According to Wikipedia, Web 2.0 can be defined as “websites that use technology beyond earlier websites. Web 2.0 allows users to interact and collaborate through social medias in a virtual community.” The term Web 2.0 was first coined after the dot-com crash in 2004, by Tim O'Reilly of the O'Reilly Media Group. O'Reilly used the concept of Web 2.0 to describe the necessary restructuring of web pages and how they should be made. Today, Web 2.0 allows for greater collaboration than the traditional websites that include tools that are free for users and generally do not require installation of software. These sites are highly social and allow multiple users to work on the same project simultaneously.
According to Shuen (2008), there are two directions the definition of Web 2.0 can take. The first direction comes from the technical users of the web that recognize a shift is happening; a transitional phase that has taken old web practices into a new direction through the combination of “techniques, architectures, and technologies” (Shuen, 2008). This allows for a new age of web tools and services that enable users to become part of a collective knowledge system through the use of uploading, blogging, and micro blogging. Essentially, the users “are the web” (Shuen, 2008). The other direction involves the connectedness and reciprocity of websites. New web tools encourage uploading where as in the past, downloading was the only possibility.
When reflecting on websites from the 1990s, one is able to remember the passive practice of viewing and searching for information. According to Haragon's (2010) white paper, Web 2.0 will considerably change a person's relationship with knowledge. In the past, an internet audience could only receive information through the “Three R's: Reading, Receiving and Researching” (Haragon, 2010). Now, websites appear to have no boundaries and the Three R's have been replace by the “Three C's: Contributing, Collaborating and Creating- through mediums like blogs, wikis, and twittering” (Haragon, 2010).
Understanding Web 2.0 is an important start for educators. There is no denying that students in the classrooms of the 21st Century are socially networked. The challenge is in finding ways to use their “social networked-ness” to engage their learning. Haragon (2008), suggests that educators see “the web as a conversation” and as a tool to shift paradigms. According to Pan (2010), students are digital natives who have embraced “technologies not only as tools to acquire knowledge and skills for school work but for their social life and daily activities”. The problem for Pan (2010) is that the teachers in schools do not seem to understand their students' technology needs. As Web 2.0 capabilities continue to grow it is important for educators to help students integrate this technology into their learning as well as, to help students discern good information from bad in the environment of information overload.
Nussbaum-Beach and Hall (2012) see the role of the teacher in the 21st Century as a connected educator. This requires the teacher to direct personal, professional development and collaborate in order to problem solve. By using Web 2.0 tools, these teacher competencies can be achieved without having to leave the school and by spending very little money, if any at all. According to McRel.com (2012), the following values can be brought to the educational setting through Web 2.0 tools: addressing of individual student needs, engaging interest, and increasing students' options for constructing knowledge.
How do we, as teachers, go about improving our own competencies in Web 2.0? That is where our project, “The Twelve Things” comes into being. This site is an example of a professional learning network or PLN. This was a collaborative effort between four classmates, all teachers that resided in three different provinces. This was a final project for the University of Alberta's graduate level course: Into Emerging Technologies. Through the use of Adobe Connect we met for weekly meetings using video, audio and note taking to communicate our needs and wants for our project. Using Google Groups, we posted relevant information and assignments for each other to use and collaborate on. We also used Web 2.0 tools like Feebly, Youtube, Snagit, Camtasia, Screen-O-Matic, About.me and other applications to create learning modules that educators from around the world could access and use. We came up with the concept of “12 Things” to coordinate our ideas, keeping presentations down to 12 slides and 5 minutes, as well as using the “12 Things” concept to order our modules.
So what is a personal learning network? According to the Connected Educator Starter Kit (2013), “a personal learning network consists of the connections an educator makes to extend learning; the environments and spaces created as they find their colleagues or mentors.” This type of network is an example of reciprocal learning where sharing and learning come together. According to the Starter Kit, this can become a self-directed process that is enhanced by connectedness through social networks like Twitter and Facebook. This type of self-directed process is considered a revolution of education, as it calls for the shift from traditional classroom practices towards a mindset of Web 2.0. When attempting this type of work it is important to reflect through the process. As Web 2.0 continues to grow and develop, so do educators, making the concept of lifelong learning so important. The Starter Kit (2013) suggests regular reflection of these key questions:
“What principled changes should we be making in our classrooms to ensure that we are developing in students the skill sets they will need as they face the future? Are we preparing kids for yesterday, today, or tomorrow? How can we collectively advocate best for needed policy change that will enable our teachers and students to engage in connected, authentic learning? How can we help our students be ready to learn using tools we cannot yet imagine?”
Web 2.0 and ICT Outcomes
The creation of “12 Things” is a result of a collaborative effort between teachers in three different provinces: Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. As a result, it is important in this section to look at how each province addresses information technology and communication through curricular outcomes and how Web 2.0 plays a role in achieving these outcomes.
Alberta
In the Alberta Education Rationale (2003) for the ICT program of studies, it is stated that “technology is best learned within the context of applications.” The goals of this program include engaging the learner towards life long learning, development of learners into “reflective, discerning and caring citizens”, as well as, preparing learners for entry-level positions into the workforce and beyond. This philosophy explains that technology is a way of doing things and that this program of study is focused on the new way of doing things. This is definitely a connection to the world of Web 2.0 - these tools and applications are different, as stated previously, to traditional methods of working online. According to Webopedia.com, Web 2.0 “is a second generation of the World Wide Web that is focused on the ability for people to collaborate and share information online.” The concept of Web 2.0 supports Alberta Education's rationale as being considered second generation is consistent with the concept of the “new way of doing things.” Another important highlight of this rationale is that it states: “the ICT curriculum is not intended to stand alone, but rather be infused within core courses and programs.” This statement connects to the Web 2.0 “way of doing things” as this second generation of the web involves tools that can be used to find a variety of information that focuses on inquiry, research and problem-solving.
Alberta Education has also included the ICT Illustrative Examples Database (2003) to show their expectations in using current technology in teaching practices. These three interim documents focus on the use of soft technologies that are described as processes such as mind mapping, instructional design, time management and collaboration with others, etc. These are, in all aspects, descriptions of Web 2.0 technologies.
The general outcomes for the ICT curriculum in Alberta (2003), posted on the Alberta Education website flow through K-12 inclusively. In the next three paragraphs, the connection between Web 2.0 as a way to achieve these outcomes will be described.
The first outcome is “Communicating, Inquiring, Decision Making and Problem Solving”. Through Web 2.0, students can achieve this general outcome by learning to use and communicate through a variety of technologies. As well, through social networks and forums students will be able to see alternative points of view and collaborate which aid in the inquiry process. By blogging or micro-blogging, students will have a space to critically assess information they receive. Through time management tools such as Google Calendar, students can show organizational processes. By using RSS feeds, students can show techniques that construct personal knowledge.
The second general outcome is “ Foundational Operations, Knowledge and Concepts”. By building their own personal learning networks, students will be able to understand the role of technology as it applies to them. As well, by using forums and blogs, students can understand how technology applies to societies. By incorporating the concept of digital citizenship with Web 2.0 tools, perhaps, by using a tool such as Facebook, students can demonstrate approaches to technology that are moral and ethical.
The final general outcome is “Processes for Productivity”. Students using Google Docs can simultaneously work on assignments showing that they can compose, revise, and edit text. Students can organize and manipulate data through mind mapping tools like LucidChart, Flowchart or SlickPlan. By allowing students to use mobile phones to complete assignments, students will be able to integrate various applications and interact with others. As well, students will be able to create hyperlinked resources like blogs, micro-blogs, Wikis and websites.
Saskatchewan
Just like Alberta Education, Saskatchewan Learning released a document in 2003 regarding guidelines for technology use in schools. In the Rationale of this document the following goal was highlighted: “Within the Core Curriculum context, students will acquire knowledge, skills and attitudes to incorporate computers and other technological tools in their work appropriately.” Just as Alberta, the Saskatchewan government recognizes the need to include technology in all areas of learning as a “way of being”.
This document also includes the integration of technology through K-12 learning inclusively. In the guidelines document, four general outcomes were stated as “knowledge capabilities” throughout the grade levels. The first outcome is “Information Management.” Across the grade levels, the expectation in this area is to use virtual experiences to work beyond the classroom to construct knowledge. As well, tools are expected to be used to sort, organize and create products to show learning. There is also the requirement that students develop, and continue to develop skills, to help them discern and evaluate information. This statement would reflect how Web 2.0 capabilities are creating a large amount of content, often known as “information overload” (Wikipedia, 2013). Information overload, is a current phenomenon that many students are facing. According to Badke (2010), teachers need to teach “people to work with content rather than absorbing it.” It seems that the Saskatchewan government has identified this issue and sees it as a necessary teaching focus.
The second knowledge capability is “Hardware Use and Care.” In this area, students are expected to show competencies with input and output devices both independently and collaboratively. This section is very similar to Alberta Education's “Foundational Operations, Knowledge and Concepts”. The expectations also include the concepts of safe equipment use and being aware of problems when they arise with hardware. By using Web 2.0 tools like Youtube, students will be able to independently solve problems through tutorials and also be able to use forums to find advice when dealing with technical problems in a collaborative environment.
The third knowledge capability is “Software Use and Care”. This capability requires students to “build skills in software to create, modify and import images, understand functions of operating systems, use productivity tools to edit, enter, manipulate and distribute information and locate software on the World Wide Web.” (2003) Integration of Web 2.0 would allow for all of these skills to develop through programs like GIMP, Flickr, Weebly, and Tumblr.
The final knowledge capability is “Social and Ethical Issues.” This outcome requires students to show critical awareness and understand the concepts of digital citizenship. According to Richards (2010), discussions around Web 2.0 tools are a way to teach “justice orientated” digital citizenship. The concept of understanding mass media techniques can be highlighted by events like the use of Twitter feeds to share live accounts of protests in Tehran in 2009 or how Wikipedia was used for American citizens to share knowledge and information about California's Proposition 8 to ban same-sex marriage in 2008 (Richards, 2010).
Manitoba
The most fluid and perhaps most up-to-date of all curriculums appears to be Manitoba's. On the Manitoba Education Website, a link to Literacy with ICT Across the Curriculum (2008) can be found. Under this title is the statement “A model for 21st Century Learning from K-12.” This is obviously to show support of the emergence of Web 2.0 in education, as the term “21st Century tools” is often used as a synonym for Web 2.0 tools (Wikispaces.com). Instead of calling “criteria in learning” outcomes or capabilities, Manitoba Education uses three concepts as focus for teachers to engage in to achieve student ICT literacy. This focus includes thinking critically and creatively, responsibility in terms of ethics and technology know-how. As with the Alberta and Saskatchewan, the expectation is that these skills are taught across all subject areas.
What stands out as different with the Manitoba curriculum is that each grade level has an “Interdisciplinary Multimedia Model” unit for the Early and Middle Years Curriculum. For the senior years category, there are four distinct areas: Computer Science Curriculum Framework, Senior Years ICT Curriculum Framework, Senior Years Technology Education and Web-based Course Development.
The ICT in the Early and Middle Years programs focuses on literacy across the curriculum but also includes a unit of study that is infused with Web 2.0 applications. For example, at the grade four level students study the topic: Community and Diversity. In the provided unit plan students are expected to email responses to reading circles, use mind mapping tools, create graphics, author web pages, take part in photo editing and use paint and drawing tools.
At the senior level, students are given even more options to work with Web 2.0. In the Computer Science Framework students focus on using Web 2.0 tools to develop the following general outcomes: Human Relations, Literacy and Communication, Problem, and Technology (skills). As well, students at the senior level can explore the Technology Education course. In this framework technical vocational skills can be developed through apprenticeships that develop technology related careers:
“ Technical Vocational Education (TVE) is an important part of the educational structure and plays a major role in developing a flexible and well-educated work force to address current and emerging industry and labour-market needs and allow Manitoba to compete globally” (Manitoba Education, 2008).
Under the Senior Years ICT Curriculum Framework students are offered a variety of option courses that include, but are not inclusive to: Keyboarding, 2-D Animation, 3-D Modelling, Interactive Media, Web Design, Interactive Websites, Relationship Database, and Digital Filmmaking. Web 2.0 will play a huge role in achieving the framework emphasis as providing a space where “students will learn to use today's technology for tasks in schools as well as in their private lives. More importantly, students will learn to adapt to change and be able to independently learn and use new technology as it evolves throughout their lives.” (Manitoba Education, 2007)
Finally, Manitoba Education also highlights its Web-based Course Development (WBC). This is a distant education learning program that offers any school or adult education training centre, access to implement senior year courses through online access. Although this alternative is not readily available as it is still in a development phase, it is apparent that they are preparing for this to become reality.
Web 2.0 and Teachers
As previously stated “12 Things” is an example of a professional learning network. Its purpose is to introduce educators to Web 2.0 tools through learning modules. These modules give step by step instructions on how to use a specific tool, hopefully in a delivery that is easy to understand. It is a collaboration between four teachers who wish to improve their own technology skills through the development and the process that is required in the construction of this project. The teachers involved will construct their knowledge and learning through micro-blogs like Twitter, educational blogs, Youtube tutorials, Wikis, and other forms of knowledge providers that are available through Web 2.0.
So, why should teachers embrace Web 2.0? What have we learned from our constructivist experiences in the development and creation of the “12 Things” project? Pan (2010), summarizes that students are growing up in a technology-rich environment and they come to school already familiar with a number of technology tools. What students require of their teachers is the facilitation in the integration of their technology skills towards practical applications for the real world. For students to feel confident in their technology use, teachers must help students reach “performance accomplishment” (Pan, 2010). This concept requires teachers to provide authentic learning experiences by allowing students to overcome barriers and problems. These types of experiences can be facilitated through the application of Web 2.0. By allowing students to solve problems collaboratively through participatory and collaborative tools, the connectivism of their learning will stress the development of meta-skills (Couros, 2006). Sites like Ning and Moodle create these learning environments that are reflective, student centered and use a diverse group of instructional strategies that extend student capacity to construct their learning.
Because today's students are so connected, it requires that teachers take on a connectivist approach to providing learning opportunities. There is a lot of complexities for those growing up in the digital age. At times, technology can overwhelm individuals whether it is through the concept of information overload or in the development of skills required to master a Web 2.0 application.
Couros (2010) framed the concept of open teaching, a teacher response to the networked student. “Open teaching is described as the facilitation of learning experiences that are open, transparent, collaborative and social. Open teachers are advocates of a free and open knowledge society, and support their students the critical consumption, production, connection, and synthesis of knowledge through the shared development of learning networks.” (Couros, 2010)
Couros (2010) then lists the type of activities a connectivist, open teacher would invite into their learning environment. This list included advocacy for free and/or open source tools and software, integration of free and open content and media promotion of copyleft content licenses for student production, education around copyright laws, scaffolding to support the development of personal learning networks, and advocacy for the participation and development of collaborative cultures in education and society.
Why is Web 2.0 important to teacher-librarians? According to Stephens (2011), public perception is a challenge for those who work in the library environment. Books generally connect the library experience. As more and more people move towards ebooks and using online magazines and newspapers, libraries, especially during times of government budget cuts, can end up seeming as an irrelevant expense to the public. Stephens (2011) states that libraries must continue to evolve. To keep the existence of libraries in communities, library user involvement must continue to increase. Teacher-librarians must emerge as leaders of the Web 2.0 movement. As a leader of educators, the development of skills through web applications will make the teacher-librarian an invaluable resource for any school. By engaging users through Facebook fan pages, Weebly websites, and library Twitter accounts there is a breakdown in geographical barriers that allows for a community of readers and learners to come together. Web 2.0 is essential for the future of libraries. The concept of libraries as a holder of books and hard copies must be replaced by a space where library users can “connect, collaborate, create and care.” (Stephens, 2011).
Conclusion
In conclusion, the hope of completing the “12 Things” project is the acquisition of Web 2.0 skills to enhance the learning environments of our home schools. By working together on a professional learning network, across the geographical barriers that come from living in different provinces, it is the experience of connectiveness in the learning that will hopefully frame our ability to construct new and emerging teaching practices. These practices will embrace the constructivist approach that Couros (2010) describes as open teaching.
From the experiences involved with creating “12 Things” the importance of “do it yourself” professional development has come to the forefront. This concept may be the most exciting part of the Web 2.0 movement in education. Although many educators may feel intimidated with the emerging technologies and the constant reshaping and reforming that occurs within the context of using these tools, there are an incredible amount of resources available for educators to combat their fears. Nussbaum-Beach and Hall (2012) highlights the possibilities and shift in power,
“Technology offers constant opportunities for self-directed and self-selected learning. Educators – through connections with each other, new research, and continually evolving content- have opportunities to interact, reflect and focus without control by experts. That autonomy can generate far-reaching changes in teacher perspectives and school culture as educators begin to feel ownership of their own learning.”
So how does one “succeed as a connected learner”? ( Nussbaum-Beach and Hall, 2012) Firstly, one must know where we are. According to Nussbaum-Beach and Hall (2012), we need to recognize that the world is changing, emerging technologies make it easier to connect, collaborate and learn together. As well, taking part in conversations that shift us from expert to learner are valuable. This will help us to embrace the 21st Century learners in our schools and help them to develop the literacies they require for their futures.
Without saying, there are going to be challenges and roadblocks along the way to becoming a connected educator. By creating a strong professional network that provides support from and for members, the motivation to continue during the trying times should remain. Networks such as Teacher 2.0 and Classroom 2.0 are valuable resources for educators just starting out into the world of Web 2.0. Nussbaum-Beach and Hall (2012), are convinced that as technology magnifies the potential for learning across communities will transform education for all that are involved.
“Things do not change; we change.”
-Henry David Thoreau
According to Wikipedia, Web 2.0 can be defined as “websites that use technology beyond earlier websites. Web 2.0 allows users to interact and collaborate through social medias in a virtual community.” The term Web 2.0 was first coined after the dot-com crash in 2004, by Tim O'Reilly of the O'Reilly Media Group. O'Reilly used the concept of Web 2.0 to describe the necessary restructuring of web pages and how they should be made. Today, Web 2.0 allows for greater collaboration than the traditional websites that include tools that are free for users and generally do not require installation of software. These sites are highly social and allow multiple users to work on the same project simultaneously.
According to Shuen (2008), there are two directions the definition of Web 2.0 can take. The first direction comes from the technical users of the web that recognize a shift is happening; a transitional phase that has taken old web practices into a new direction through the combination of “techniques, architectures, and technologies” (Shuen, 2008). This allows for a new age of web tools and services that enable users to become part of a collective knowledge system through the use of uploading, blogging, and micro blogging. Essentially, the users “are the web” (Shuen, 2008). The other direction involves the connectedness and reciprocity of websites. New web tools encourage uploading where as in the past, downloading was the only possibility.
When reflecting on websites from the 1990s, one is able to remember the passive practice of viewing and searching for information. According to Haragon's (2010) white paper, Web 2.0 will considerably change a person's relationship with knowledge. In the past, an internet audience could only receive information through the “Three R's: Reading, Receiving and Researching” (Haragon, 2010). Now, websites appear to have no boundaries and the Three R's have been replace by the “Three C's: Contributing, Collaborating and Creating- through mediums like blogs, wikis, and twittering” (Haragon, 2010).
Understanding Web 2.0 is an important start for educators. There is no denying that students in the classrooms of the 21st Century are socially networked. The challenge is in finding ways to use their “social networked-ness” to engage their learning. Haragon (2008), suggests that educators see “the web as a conversation” and as a tool to shift paradigms. According to Pan (2010), students are digital natives who have embraced “technologies not only as tools to acquire knowledge and skills for school work but for their social life and daily activities”. The problem for Pan (2010) is that the teachers in schools do not seem to understand their students' technology needs. As Web 2.0 capabilities continue to grow it is important for educators to help students integrate this technology into their learning as well as, to help students discern good information from bad in the environment of information overload.
Nussbaum-Beach and Hall (2012) see the role of the teacher in the 21st Century as a connected educator. This requires the teacher to direct personal, professional development and collaborate in order to problem solve. By using Web 2.0 tools, these teacher competencies can be achieved without having to leave the school and by spending very little money, if any at all. According to McRel.com (2012), the following values can be brought to the educational setting through Web 2.0 tools: addressing of individual student needs, engaging interest, and increasing students' options for constructing knowledge.
How do we, as teachers, go about improving our own competencies in Web 2.0? That is where our project, “The Twelve Things” comes into being. This site is an example of a professional learning network or PLN. This was a collaborative effort between four classmates, all teachers that resided in three different provinces. This was a final project for the University of Alberta's graduate level course: Into Emerging Technologies. Through the use of Adobe Connect we met for weekly meetings using video, audio and note taking to communicate our needs and wants for our project. Using Google Groups, we posted relevant information and assignments for each other to use and collaborate on. We also used Web 2.0 tools like Feebly, Youtube, Snagit, Camtasia, Screen-O-Matic, About.me and other applications to create learning modules that educators from around the world could access and use. We came up with the concept of “12 Things” to coordinate our ideas, keeping presentations down to 12 slides and 5 minutes, as well as using the “12 Things” concept to order our modules.
So what is a personal learning network? According to the Connected Educator Starter Kit (2013), “a personal learning network consists of the connections an educator makes to extend learning; the environments and spaces created as they find their colleagues or mentors.” This type of network is an example of reciprocal learning where sharing and learning come together. According to the Starter Kit, this can become a self-directed process that is enhanced by connectedness through social networks like Twitter and Facebook. This type of self-directed process is considered a revolution of education, as it calls for the shift from traditional classroom practices towards a mindset of Web 2.0. When attempting this type of work it is important to reflect through the process. As Web 2.0 continues to grow and develop, so do educators, making the concept of lifelong learning so important. The Starter Kit (2013) suggests regular reflection of these key questions:
“What principled changes should we be making in our classrooms to ensure that we are developing in students the skill sets they will need as they face the future? Are we preparing kids for yesterday, today, or tomorrow? How can we collectively advocate best for needed policy change that will enable our teachers and students to engage in connected, authentic learning? How can we help our students be ready to learn using tools we cannot yet imagine?”
Web 2.0 and ICT Outcomes
The creation of “12 Things” is a result of a collaborative effort between teachers in three different provinces: Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. As a result, it is important in this section to look at how each province addresses information technology and communication through curricular outcomes and how Web 2.0 plays a role in achieving these outcomes.
Alberta
In the Alberta Education Rationale (2003) for the ICT program of studies, it is stated that “technology is best learned within the context of applications.” The goals of this program include engaging the learner towards life long learning, development of learners into “reflective, discerning and caring citizens”, as well as, preparing learners for entry-level positions into the workforce and beyond. This philosophy explains that technology is a way of doing things and that this program of study is focused on the new way of doing things. This is definitely a connection to the world of Web 2.0 - these tools and applications are different, as stated previously, to traditional methods of working online. According to Webopedia.com, Web 2.0 “is a second generation of the World Wide Web that is focused on the ability for people to collaborate and share information online.” The concept of Web 2.0 supports Alberta Education's rationale as being considered second generation is consistent with the concept of the “new way of doing things.” Another important highlight of this rationale is that it states: “the ICT curriculum is not intended to stand alone, but rather be infused within core courses and programs.” This statement connects to the Web 2.0 “way of doing things” as this second generation of the web involves tools that can be used to find a variety of information that focuses on inquiry, research and problem-solving.
Alberta Education has also included the ICT Illustrative Examples Database (2003) to show their expectations in using current technology in teaching practices. These three interim documents focus on the use of soft technologies that are described as processes such as mind mapping, instructional design, time management and collaboration with others, etc. These are, in all aspects, descriptions of Web 2.0 technologies.
The general outcomes for the ICT curriculum in Alberta (2003), posted on the Alberta Education website flow through K-12 inclusively. In the next three paragraphs, the connection between Web 2.0 as a way to achieve these outcomes will be described.
The first outcome is “Communicating, Inquiring, Decision Making and Problem Solving”. Through Web 2.0, students can achieve this general outcome by learning to use and communicate through a variety of technologies. As well, through social networks and forums students will be able to see alternative points of view and collaborate which aid in the inquiry process. By blogging or micro-blogging, students will have a space to critically assess information they receive. Through time management tools such as Google Calendar, students can show organizational processes. By using RSS feeds, students can show techniques that construct personal knowledge.
The second general outcome is “ Foundational Operations, Knowledge and Concepts”. By building their own personal learning networks, students will be able to understand the role of technology as it applies to them. As well, by using forums and blogs, students can understand how technology applies to societies. By incorporating the concept of digital citizenship with Web 2.0 tools, perhaps, by using a tool such as Facebook, students can demonstrate approaches to technology that are moral and ethical.
The final general outcome is “Processes for Productivity”. Students using Google Docs can simultaneously work on assignments showing that they can compose, revise, and edit text. Students can organize and manipulate data through mind mapping tools like LucidChart, Flowchart or SlickPlan. By allowing students to use mobile phones to complete assignments, students will be able to integrate various applications and interact with others. As well, students will be able to create hyperlinked resources like blogs, micro-blogs, Wikis and websites.
Saskatchewan
Just like Alberta Education, Saskatchewan Learning released a document in 2003 regarding guidelines for technology use in schools. In the Rationale of this document the following goal was highlighted: “Within the Core Curriculum context, students will acquire knowledge, skills and attitudes to incorporate computers and other technological tools in their work appropriately.” Just as Alberta, the Saskatchewan government recognizes the need to include technology in all areas of learning as a “way of being”.
This document also includes the integration of technology through K-12 learning inclusively. In the guidelines document, four general outcomes were stated as “knowledge capabilities” throughout the grade levels. The first outcome is “Information Management.” Across the grade levels, the expectation in this area is to use virtual experiences to work beyond the classroom to construct knowledge. As well, tools are expected to be used to sort, organize and create products to show learning. There is also the requirement that students develop, and continue to develop skills, to help them discern and evaluate information. This statement would reflect how Web 2.0 capabilities are creating a large amount of content, often known as “information overload” (Wikipedia, 2013). Information overload, is a current phenomenon that many students are facing. According to Badke (2010), teachers need to teach “people to work with content rather than absorbing it.” It seems that the Saskatchewan government has identified this issue and sees it as a necessary teaching focus.
The second knowledge capability is “Hardware Use and Care.” In this area, students are expected to show competencies with input and output devices both independently and collaboratively. This section is very similar to Alberta Education's “Foundational Operations, Knowledge and Concepts”. The expectations also include the concepts of safe equipment use and being aware of problems when they arise with hardware. By using Web 2.0 tools like Youtube, students will be able to independently solve problems through tutorials and also be able to use forums to find advice when dealing with technical problems in a collaborative environment.
The third knowledge capability is “Software Use and Care”. This capability requires students to “build skills in software to create, modify and import images, understand functions of operating systems, use productivity tools to edit, enter, manipulate and distribute information and locate software on the World Wide Web.” (2003) Integration of Web 2.0 would allow for all of these skills to develop through programs like GIMP, Flickr, Weebly, and Tumblr.
The final knowledge capability is “Social and Ethical Issues.” This outcome requires students to show critical awareness and understand the concepts of digital citizenship. According to Richards (2010), discussions around Web 2.0 tools are a way to teach “justice orientated” digital citizenship. The concept of understanding mass media techniques can be highlighted by events like the use of Twitter feeds to share live accounts of protests in Tehran in 2009 or how Wikipedia was used for American citizens to share knowledge and information about California's Proposition 8 to ban same-sex marriage in 2008 (Richards, 2010).
Manitoba
The most fluid and perhaps most up-to-date of all curriculums appears to be Manitoba's. On the Manitoba Education Website, a link to Literacy with ICT Across the Curriculum (2008) can be found. Under this title is the statement “A model for 21st Century Learning from K-12.” This is obviously to show support of the emergence of Web 2.0 in education, as the term “21st Century tools” is often used as a synonym for Web 2.0 tools (Wikispaces.com). Instead of calling “criteria in learning” outcomes or capabilities, Manitoba Education uses three concepts as focus for teachers to engage in to achieve student ICT literacy. This focus includes thinking critically and creatively, responsibility in terms of ethics and technology know-how. As with the Alberta and Saskatchewan, the expectation is that these skills are taught across all subject areas.
What stands out as different with the Manitoba curriculum is that each grade level has an “Interdisciplinary Multimedia Model” unit for the Early and Middle Years Curriculum. For the senior years category, there are four distinct areas: Computer Science Curriculum Framework, Senior Years ICT Curriculum Framework, Senior Years Technology Education and Web-based Course Development.
The ICT in the Early and Middle Years programs focuses on literacy across the curriculum but also includes a unit of study that is infused with Web 2.0 applications. For example, at the grade four level students study the topic: Community and Diversity. In the provided unit plan students are expected to email responses to reading circles, use mind mapping tools, create graphics, author web pages, take part in photo editing and use paint and drawing tools.
At the senior level, students are given even more options to work with Web 2.0. In the Computer Science Framework students focus on using Web 2.0 tools to develop the following general outcomes: Human Relations, Literacy and Communication, Problem, and Technology (skills). As well, students at the senior level can explore the Technology Education course. In this framework technical vocational skills can be developed through apprenticeships that develop technology related careers:
“ Technical Vocational Education (TVE) is an important part of the educational structure and plays a major role in developing a flexible and well-educated work force to address current and emerging industry and labour-market needs and allow Manitoba to compete globally” (Manitoba Education, 2008).
Under the Senior Years ICT Curriculum Framework students are offered a variety of option courses that include, but are not inclusive to: Keyboarding, 2-D Animation, 3-D Modelling, Interactive Media, Web Design, Interactive Websites, Relationship Database, and Digital Filmmaking. Web 2.0 will play a huge role in achieving the framework emphasis as providing a space where “students will learn to use today's technology for tasks in schools as well as in their private lives. More importantly, students will learn to adapt to change and be able to independently learn and use new technology as it evolves throughout their lives.” (Manitoba Education, 2007)
Finally, Manitoba Education also highlights its Web-based Course Development (WBC). This is a distant education learning program that offers any school or adult education training centre, access to implement senior year courses through online access. Although this alternative is not readily available as it is still in a development phase, it is apparent that they are preparing for this to become reality.
Web 2.0 and Teachers
As previously stated “12 Things” is an example of a professional learning network. Its purpose is to introduce educators to Web 2.0 tools through learning modules. These modules give step by step instructions on how to use a specific tool, hopefully in a delivery that is easy to understand. It is a collaboration between four teachers who wish to improve their own technology skills through the development and the process that is required in the construction of this project. The teachers involved will construct their knowledge and learning through micro-blogs like Twitter, educational blogs, Youtube tutorials, Wikis, and other forms of knowledge providers that are available through Web 2.0.
So, why should teachers embrace Web 2.0? What have we learned from our constructivist experiences in the development and creation of the “12 Things” project? Pan (2010), summarizes that students are growing up in a technology-rich environment and they come to school already familiar with a number of technology tools. What students require of their teachers is the facilitation in the integration of their technology skills towards practical applications for the real world. For students to feel confident in their technology use, teachers must help students reach “performance accomplishment” (Pan, 2010). This concept requires teachers to provide authentic learning experiences by allowing students to overcome barriers and problems. These types of experiences can be facilitated through the application of Web 2.0. By allowing students to solve problems collaboratively through participatory and collaborative tools, the connectivism of their learning will stress the development of meta-skills (Couros, 2006). Sites like Ning and Moodle create these learning environments that are reflective, student centered and use a diverse group of instructional strategies that extend student capacity to construct their learning.
Because today's students are so connected, it requires that teachers take on a connectivist approach to providing learning opportunities. There is a lot of complexities for those growing up in the digital age. At times, technology can overwhelm individuals whether it is through the concept of information overload or in the development of skills required to master a Web 2.0 application.
Couros (2010) framed the concept of open teaching, a teacher response to the networked student. “Open teaching is described as the facilitation of learning experiences that are open, transparent, collaborative and social. Open teachers are advocates of a free and open knowledge society, and support their students the critical consumption, production, connection, and synthesis of knowledge through the shared development of learning networks.” (Couros, 2010)
Couros (2010) then lists the type of activities a connectivist, open teacher would invite into their learning environment. This list included advocacy for free and/or open source tools and software, integration of free and open content and media promotion of copyleft content licenses for student production, education around copyright laws, scaffolding to support the development of personal learning networks, and advocacy for the participation and development of collaborative cultures in education and society.
Why is Web 2.0 important to teacher-librarians? According to Stephens (2011), public perception is a challenge for those who work in the library environment. Books generally connect the library experience. As more and more people move towards ebooks and using online magazines and newspapers, libraries, especially during times of government budget cuts, can end up seeming as an irrelevant expense to the public. Stephens (2011) states that libraries must continue to evolve. To keep the existence of libraries in communities, library user involvement must continue to increase. Teacher-librarians must emerge as leaders of the Web 2.0 movement. As a leader of educators, the development of skills through web applications will make the teacher-librarian an invaluable resource for any school. By engaging users through Facebook fan pages, Weebly websites, and library Twitter accounts there is a breakdown in geographical barriers that allows for a community of readers and learners to come together. Web 2.0 is essential for the future of libraries. The concept of libraries as a holder of books and hard copies must be replaced by a space where library users can “connect, collaborate, create and care.” (Stephens, 2011).
Conclusion
In conclusion, the hope of completing the “12 Things” project is the acquisition of Web 2.0 skills to enhance the learning environments of our home schools. By working together on a professional learning network, across the geographical barriers that come from living in different provinces, it is the experience of connectiveness in the learning that will hopefully frame our ability to construct new and emerging teaching practices. These practices will embrace the constructivist approach that Couros (2010) describes as open teaching.
From the experiences involved with creating “12 Things” the importance of “do it yourself” professional development has come to the forefront. This concept may be the most exciting part of the Web 2.0 movement in education. Although many educators may feel intimidated with the emerging technologies and the constant reshaping and reforming that occurs within the context of using these tools, there are an incredible amount of resources available for educators to combat their fears. Nussbaum-Beach and Hall (2012) highlights the possibilities and shift in power,
“Technology offers constant opportunities for self-directed and self-selected learning. Educators – through connections with each other, new research, and continually evolving content- have opportunities to interact, reflect and focus without control by experts. That autonomy can generate far-reaching changes in teacher perspectives and school culture as educators begin to feel ownership of their own learning.”
So how does one “succeed as a connected learner”? ( Nussbaum-Beach and Hall, 2012) Firstly, one must know where we are. According to Nussbaum-Beach and Hall (2012), we need to recognize that the world is changing, emerging technologies make it easier to connect, collaborate and learn together. As well, taking part in conversations that shift us from expert to learner are valuable. This will help us to embrace the 21st Century learners in our schools and help them to develop the literacies they require for their futures.
Without saying, there are going to be challenges and roadblocks along the way to becoming a connected educator. By creating a strong professional network that provides support from and for members, the motivation to continue during the trying times should remain. Networks such as Teacher 2.0 and Classroom 2.0 are valuable resources for educators just starting out into the world of Web 2.0. Nussbaum-Beach and Hall (2012), are convinced that as technology magnifies the potential for learning across communities will transform education for all that are involved.
“Things do not change; we change.”
-Henry David Thoreau
References:
Alberta Education (2003). “Outcome Organization,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://education.alberta.ca/media/453069/pofs.pdf).
Alberta Education (2003). “Information Technology, “ retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://education.alberta.ca/apps/ict/pofsie3.pdf).
Couros, A., (2010). “Chapter 6: Developing Personal Learning Networks for Open and Social Learning,” In Emerging Technologies in Distance Education, Athabasca University Press.
Haragon, S. (2008). “Moving Toward Web 2.0 in K-12 Education,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2008/10/moving-toward-web-20-in-k-12-education).
Manitoba Education (2007). “Senior Years Information and Communication Technology.” Retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/ict/framework.pdf).
McRel.com, (2012). “Web 2.0 and its Role in Teaching and Learning, “ retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://www.mcrel.org/about-us/hot-topics/ht-web-2point0).
Nussbaum-Beach, S. & Hall, L. (2012). The Connected Educator: Learning and Leading in a Digital Age, Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Pan, S. (2010). “The Relationship Between Teachers' Self-Efficacy and the Integration of Web 2.0 tools in K-12.” UMI Dissertations Publishing, pp. 45-55.
Powerful Learning Practice (2013). “Connected Educator Starter Kit,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://www.digilitleic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/connected-educator-starter-kit-2013.pdf).
Richards, R. (2010). “Digital Citizenship and Web 2.0 Tools,” In Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Vol. 6, No. 2 pp. 516-522.
Saskatchewan Learning (2003). “Information and Communication Technology Skill Checkpoints,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://bit.ly/189xcpq).
Shuen, A. (2008). “Web 2.0 (electronic resource): A Strategy Guide,” Sebastopol, California: O'Reilly Media.
Webopedia.com Retrieved on 18 October, 2013, (http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/W/Web_2_point_0.html).
Wikipedia.org (2013). “Information Overload, “ retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_overload).
Wikispaces.com (2013). “Web 2.0/21st Century Tools,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://web20-21stcentury-tools.wikispaces.com).
Alberta Education (2003). “Outcome Organization,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://education.alberta.ca/media/453069/pofs.pdf).
Alberta Education (2003). “Information Technology, “ retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://education.alberta.ca/apps/ict/pofsie3.pdf).
Couros, A., (2010). “Chapter 6: Developing Personal Learning Networks for Open and Social Learning,” In Emerging Technologies in Distance Education, Athabasca University Press.
Haragon, S. (2008). “Moving Toward Web 2.0 in K-12 Education,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2008/10/moving-toward-web-20-in-k-12-education).
Manitoba Education (2007). “Senior Years Information and Communication Technology.” Retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/ict/framework.pdf).
McRel.com, (2012). “Web 2.0 and its Role in Teaching and Learning, “ retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://www.mcrel.org/about-us/hot-topics/ht-web-2point0).
Nussbaum-Beach, S. & Hall, L. (2012). The Connected Educator: Learning and Leading in a Digital Age, Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Pan, S. (2010). “The Relationship Between Teachers' Self-Efficacy and the Integration of Web 2.0 tools in K-12.” UMI Dissertations Publishing, pp. 45-55.
Powerful Learning Practice (2013). “Connected Educator Starter Kit,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://www.digilitleic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/connected-educator-starter-kit-2013.pdf).
Richards, R. (2010). “Digital Citizenship and Web 2.0 Tools,” In Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Vol. 6, No. 2 pp. 516-522.
Saskatchewan Learning (2003). “Information and Communication Technology Skill Checkpoints,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://bit.ly/189xcpq).
Shuen, A. (2008). “Web 2.0 (electronic resource): A Strategy Guide,” Sebastopol, California: O'Reilly Media.
Webopedia.com Retrieved on 18 October, 2013, (http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/W/Web_2_point_0.html).
Wikipedia.org (2013). “Information Overload, “ retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_overload).
Wikispaces.com (2013). “Web 2.0/21st Century Tools,” retrieved on 18 October 2013, (http://web20-21stcentury-tools.wikispaces.com).