This week brought about an opportunity to read an article by Tim O’Reiley on Web 2.0 . You can read the article here or if you prefer the full URL: http://oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html?page=1
The short story is Web 2.0 is used to define the characteristics of the surviving entities of the dot.com bust. 2.0 as it’s used in this article points out the differences and advantages of these dynamic web presences and how they survived where similar services did not. I found this rather interesting as I had noticed that the biggest impact the web has had for me--beyond nearly instant access to information—was the ability to tap into communities of like-minded individuals. Interaction with these communities has far surpassed what I had expected, my knowledge about things such as gardening, or vintage bicycles grew at an exponential rate.
This acquisition of knowledge was driven not only by the wealth of information shared as reference links, but also fueled by active discussion with other people who were also in the process of learning or guiding others. Somehow the feeling of community, the sharing of the experience with a cohort of others added another dimension. I don’t know how to quantify this, but I can say I’ve found it valuable. Social networking sites like facebook, myspace, and classmates.com hit on the community aspect as well. However the energy in the community is more often the ‘viral’ picture, video, or meme going around, it’s a synergy of entertainment that is often lacking the goal-oriented purpose of an interest-based community.
We were also assigned the creation of a WiKi, to introduce us to a tool that can harness the power of a community so that the community can learn from itself and serve as a dynamic reference for sharing information.
You can view my WiKi by clicking on “My WiKi” or at the long URL here: http://jameskison.pbworks.com/
This is the first WiKi I’ve ever created, but not the first I’ve ever used. The best use I’ve seen for a WiKi has been within an internal organization. Sure Wikipedia is good for looking up something on the quick, but because it can be easily modified by internet vandals, and well-meaning yet misinformed people, it’s not the best website to use in a research paper.
I learned of an excellent example of a WiKi in use last semester when I interviewed WMU’s HelpDesk to find out how they help the wide variety of students and staff with the associated plethora of technology-related difficulties. It turns out they use an in-house wiki to not only document known problems, but also add in new solutions as they find them. This way they can share the latest information throughout the organization quickly. They don’t need to wait for a web person to update the website, it’s easily updated by anyone in the organization.
I have also use a WiKi in my children’s Lego Robotics group. We use the WiKi to plan meetings, share homework assignments, divvy up snack duties, and share research findings. In the past I have used Google Docs which is a similar tool, but perhaps better suited for a smaller audience and a more defined purpose. The advantage I see with a WiKi is easier creation and linking of pages. A WiKi invites organic growth in form, where a Google doc—or any document—is more purpose specific and narrow in scope. A WiKi could be used in any number of creative and classroom research activities where you might want to encourage participation amongst many students.
No comments:
Post a Comment