Vision of Students: Bleak or Same Old Story?

So, I get that students today are constantly connected to technology (mainly the Internet), but are such videos dumbing down this generation? Don't get me wrong, I understand that the use of technology in the classroom is a good thing, and I am fascinated by such use and support it 100 percent, but what is so wrong with a chalk or dry erase board? Are students today so technologically stimulated that anything short of a You Tube video or Facebook profile will bore the heck out of them? Personally, I don't think this is the case, but I do think such videos make today's student look like they all have ADHD or something. Take the students who held up signs that said they read only eight books a year but thousands of Email pages; it makes an impression to me that today's student isn't interested in learning but in being technologically social with their friends. Have students lost interest in school because school is not technologically savvy enough, or have students always been less interested in school and more interested in entertainment and socializing whatever the platform for such activities are for the current generation?

I think incorporating technology in the classroom is a great thing. I love teaching in classrooms on campus that have computers and audio/visual aids in them. However, I think that using technology will not keep today's student entertained. Take the student in the video that mentioned he was only interested in a small amount of what he read. There is one word for that: authenticity. It doesn't matter if students have to Email each other for a class or read an article on the Internet--I still believe students will be reluctant to do so because it's still school work and not personal or interesting to them. The ways in which we learn may be changing, but I think students are students whether they are learning with slates and chalk in rural pioneer times or surfing the Internet for a class today. They will always rather talk with friends, get in some entertainment, or turn to Facebook like the student said she does during class. Forcing students to use such applications, in my opinion, will not keep their interest if they are not using it soley for entertainment purposes. Unless, of course, one is using it for a web-based class with web-based content such as this class, right?

I'm Lost: Finding the True Definition of Web 2.0

After reading Mary Madden and Susannah Fox's article, "Riding the Waves of 'Web 2.0," I continued to feel confused as to what Web 2.0 really means? I get the idea that Web 2.0 is more user-based in its applications; however, I found some of the examples of Web 2.0 a bit ambiguous.

Social networking websites such as Facebook and Myspace seem to be named as prime examples of Web 2.0. While it is true that both social networking websites offer applications for creating autonomous profiles, it is also clear to me that users still cannot control everything on the website (Myspace appears to have these attributes more than Facebook). For instance, Madden and Fox discuss Google and its limitations for Web 2.0 capabilities. The authors write, "Google, which demonstrates many Web 2.0 sensibilities, doesn't exactly five users governing power over their own data--one couldn't, for instance, erase search queries from Google's servers." My question is this: are any web applications available that allow individuals to erase information from the site's server? If not, are any websites truly Web 2.0 by definition? Or, am I not understanding what the authors are implying by this statement?

Perplexed by my own questions and confusion regarding Web 2.0, I attempted to look up the term to see if I could find a clearer definition. Wikipedia, the supposed quintessential Web 2.0 application gave me this ambiguous definition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0, and dictionary.com, for all it's supposed Web 2.0 applications that could be used via Facebook (or so they say), couldn't come up with one single definition. Instead, it took me to the search engine ask.com where I worked my way through the mess of advertisements and links to the term Web 2.0.

Throughout my search, I was able to stumble upon the website of co-creator of the term Web 2.0, Tim O'Reilly. In a particular article, O'Reilly talks about the misuse of the term as well as the misconception of what Web 2.0 is really all about. O'Reilly tries to define Web 2.0 and admits that even he and co-creator Dale Dougherty have been confused by the term at times. Some key concepts that O'Reilly says define a Web 2.0 application are a rich user experience, the ability to harness collective intelligence, and a high level of participation. To see the entire article, click here:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html.

The article goes on to give examples of Web 1.0 vs. Web 2.0, and I was surprised to see Google as an example of Web 2.0, especially when Madden and Fox denounce Google as a Web 2.0 application.

Despite conflicting opinions regarding Google, I did get a better understanding of what Web 2.0 is....I think?

The Power of Social Networking Websites

I was reading Anya Kamenetz's article "The Network Unbound" and her suggestion of the potential power of social networking websites raised a question or two for me. I immediately thought of CNN's collaboration with You Tube to bring us the 2007 presidential primary debates. Never before were the questions to the candidates coming exclusively from a social networking website. Most would agree that both the questions and delivery of such questions were never before so entertaining and maybe even more interesting than the candidates' answers.

As more avenues are created for social networking via the Internet, the general population does not seem to have an issue embracing such technology and using it to its fullest extent. Although such advances in social networking initially appear productive, powerful, and entertaining, I've sometimes wondered if such networks could potentially become harmful and help to destroy our interpersonal skills, or is it possible that our interpersonal skills will evolve with technology? Have they already begun to do so?

Because I Have To....

Welcome to my blog!

Although I have blogged in the past, I do have to say that I am more of a research writer than a creative writer. The best blogs I've read were witty, thoughtful, and interesting--all things I can guarantee mine will not be.

With that, read if you must, and thanks for stopping by!

Shannon