The two do seem quite similar to eachother but there is a difference. Whereas the semantic web improves the accurancy, sufficiency and, as a result of that, more streamlined World Wide Web by understanding the meaning of actual words and thus making links between different thing Web 3.0 does similar thing but by linking different things together by suggestion. So it could be said that the semantic web is the more savvy/advanced one of the two.
Web 3.0 is the current web 2.0 growing into the new, more advanced 3.0 version whilst the semantic web is built as an extention to our current web 2.0. Quite often the two are branded Web 3.00 together. It could be well possible that, as both ideas are continuesly developing more and more, the two will ultimately merge together with the semantic web becoming an extention to web 3.0 and web 3.0 heavily using the semantic principles toether combining a new webs experience.
Time will tell.
Thursday, 26 March 2009
5) What is the 'semantic web'?
Well, one of the first things I found when searching for information about the Semantic Web was:
semanticweb.org a whole wiki dedicated to the concept of the semantic web.
The front page of this wiki gives a rough describtion of the term:
The front page of this wiki gives a rough describtion of the term:
"The Semantic Web is the extension of the World Wide Web that enables people to share content beyond the boundaries of applications and websites. It has been described in rather different ways: as a utopic vision, as a web of data, or merely as a natural paradigm shift in our daily use of the Web. Most of all, the Semantic Web has inspired and engaged many people to create innovative semantic technologies and applications."
But what does that actually mean?
Essentially, is is based on design principles, collaborative working groups and several technologies that allow users to make use of it. The Semantic Web has been in development for quite a few years and is based on the ideal of Tim Berners-Lee from the World Wide Web Consortium. Only in recent years have the concepts of the Semantic Web started to materialise and a lot of features of The Semantic Web are still "in the pipeline" so to speak.
Semantics are all about the MEANING of what is being said (unlike Syntax, which is all about HOW you say something), and when we keep that in mind the whole Semantic Web business begins to seem a little bit less vague. In essence the goal of the semantic web is to make hardware and someware smarter and able to understand what kind of things we want from the by analysing how we use it. By being able to understand what information we consume and share actually means, rather than just what it says it can searching and sharing information across users a lot more accurate. It is basically taking the web that we have now (arguable that's 2.0 or 3.0) and develops it further, making it more intuitive and ultimately better and more accurate by linking words with meanings.
But what does that actually mean?
Essentially, is is based on design principles, collaborative working groups and several technologies that allow users to make use of it. The Semantic Web has been in development for quite a few years and is based on the ideal of Tim Berners-Lee from the World Wide Web Consortium. Only in recent years have the concepts of the Semantic Web started to materialise and a lot of features of The Semantic Web are still "in the pipeline" so to speak.
Semantics are all about the MEANING of what is being said (unlike Syntax, which is all about HOW you say something), and when we keep that in mind the whole Semantic Web business begins to seem a little bit less vague. In essence the goal of the semantic web is to make hardware and someware smarter and able to understand what kind of things we want from the by analysing how we use it. By being able to understand what information we consume and share actually means, rather than just what it says it can searching and sharing information across users a lot more accurate. It is basically taking the web that we have now (arguable that's 2.0 or 3.0) and develops it further, making it more intuitive and ultimately better and more accurate by linking words with meanings.
"I have a dream for the Web [in which computers] become capable of analyzing all the data on the Web – the content, links, and transactions between people and computers. A ‘Semantic Web’, which should make this possible, has yet to emerge, but when it does, the day-to-day mechanisms of trade, bureaucracy and our daily lives will be handled by machines talking to machines. The 'intelligent agents' people have touted for ages will finally materialize."
Wednesday, 25 March 2009
4) Is there a potential problem being stored up for people if 'education' is tailored to fit into their cultural and personal preferences?
As nice & delightful it might be to have the educational system tailored to fit into a person's cultural and personal preferences, there should be a limit on this. The studying period might indeed go by much easier this way, but the "big wide world" students are then launched into aren't one they are ready for as employers do NOT offer such a customisable environment.
In terms of the digital native/immigrant debate this is relevant aswel:
If the education process is completely altered to suit the digital-world the digital native students live in they will then come to expect the "actual" world to work in the same way. And there's a whole stumbling block in Prensky's theory. If education needs to change, so does everything else at the same time, as students, after being educated, are supposed to be able to work in a society wich includes many different people of many different agegroups, digital natives and immigrants and both will keep existing in this "real world" for quite some time before only the natives are left.
In terms of the digital native/immigrant debate this is relevant aswel:
If the education process is completely altered to suit the digital-world the digital native students live in they will then come to expect the "actual" world to work in the same way. And there's a whole stumbling block in Prensky's theory. If education needs to change, so does everything else at the same time, as students, after being educated, are supposed to be able to work in a society wich includes many different people of many different agegroups, digital natives and immigrants and both will keep existing in this "real world" for quite some time before only the natives are left.
Tuesday, 24 March 2009
2) What difference to all this might the 'digital divide' make?
To socioeconomically related access issues within a society?
The way people are divided right now is likely to only widen the digital divide of which we speak. The CofP of digital natives may be unlikely to let a digital immigrant into their ways and could become a very closed group indeed which stops the digital immigrants from developing their technological skills as they are unlikely to receive help from the digital natives. One of the main purposes of a CofP is social learning, so digital natives will arguably always keep eachother up to data on "the latest" when it comes to new websites, tools, online communities, gadgets and technologies while digital immigrants are running behind having great difficulty keeping up with the ever changing world of the digital natives.
This is deffinitely a problem when it comes to situation where the two group work together, like education, where the teachers (immigrants) are having great difficulty in uderstanding and therefore correctly addressing their pupils (natives). Educational institutions such as schools do introduce new IT facilities but are still finding it hard to keep up because the evolution of technologies is shared within the Digital Native CofP and not communicated to the immigrants in the same way.
This does assume that all the pupils (or anyone else from the digital-native's generation for that matter) are actually able to use and are familiar with these technology-inflicted social changesin their own lives. However, for economic reasons mainly, not all of these younger (under 28) people are zactually in a position where they have access to these technologies intheir own lives and there they might not be too keen on any changes made by mainstream society and, as a part of that, the educational system, as to what is expected from people of this generation as they aren't part of it and will have as much difficulty (and will be left behind just as much) as other age-specific digital immigrants. So basically, the divide bewteen natives and immigrants isn't just a matter of agegroup, but also of whether or not people have been able to adapt these changes.
To global access issues across countries and regions?
The digital divide between the western world and 3rd world countries is a huge one, mainly because in the western world the financial sithuation makes for a great percentage of the population to be able to use and familiarise themselves with digital technologies where in the third world the great mjority of people do not have access to these kind of technologies at all.
The situation is almost a much bigger version of the problem described above. The Western countries, all familiar with these technologies are contantly improving their technologies and the third world ends up limping behind. (At the moment they might
Fast forward a few decades where digital natives are the only people left in the western world: technologies has completely changed western society as a whole in the way we interacts as well as the way our social practises are shaped. While Western society has gotten into the habit of communicationg, socialising, delling, buying, educating and practising politics using these technologies it will differ even more from society AND POLITICS in the third world countries.
The two parts of the world will arguable, over the years, grow more and more seperate from eachother creating an even wider digital divide, and through this a wider divide in politics, economics, education, everything. Alienating the two from each other.
The way people are divided right now is likely to only widen the digital divide of which we speak. The CofP of digital natives may be unlikely to let a digital immigrant into their ways and could become a very closed group indeed which stops the digital immigrants from developing their technological skills as they are unlikely to receive help from the digital natives. One of the main purposes of a CofP is social learning, so digital natives will arguably always keep eachother up to data on "the latest" when it comes to new websites, tools, online communities, gadgets and technologies while digital immigrants are running behind having great difficulty keeping up with the ever changing world of the digital natives.
This is deffinitely a problem when it comes to situation where the two group work together, like education, where the teachers (immigrants) are having great difficulty in uderstanding and therefore correctly addressing their pupils (natives). Educational institutions such as schools do introduce new IT facilities but are still finding it hard to keep up because the evolution of technologies is shared within the Digital Native CofP and not communicated to the immigrants in the same way.
This does assume that all the pupils (or anyone else from the digital-native's generation for that matter) are actually able to use and are familiar with these technology-inflicted social changesin their own lives. However, for economic reasons mainly, not all of these younger (under 28) people are zactually in a position where they have access to these technologies intheir own lives and there they might not be too keen on any changes made by mainstream society and, as a part of that, the educational system, as to what is expected from people of this generation as they aren't part of it and will have as much difficulty (and will be left behind just as much) as other age-specific digital immigrants. So basically, the divide bewteen natives and immigrants isn't just a matter of agegroup, but also of whether or not people have been able to adapt these changes.
To global access issues across countries and regions?
The digital divide between the western world and 3rd world countries is a huge one, mainly because in the western world the financial sithuation makes for a great percentage of the population to be able to use and familiarise themselves with digital technologies where in the third world the great mjority of people do not have access to these kind of technologies at all.
The situation is almost a much bigger version of the problem described above. The Western countries, all familiar with these technologies are contantly improving their technologies and the third world ends up limping behind. (At the moment they might
Fast forward a few decades where digital natives are the only people left in the western world: technologies has completely changed western society as a whole in the way we interacts as well as the way our social practises are shaped. While Western society has gotten into the habit of communicationg, socialising, delling, buying, educating and practising politics using these technologies it will differ even more from society AND POLITICS in the third world countries.
The two parts of the world will arguable, over the years, grow more and more seperate from eachother creating an even wider digital divide, and through this a wider divide in politics, economics, education, everything. Alienating the two from each other.
1) How might Wenger's notions on practice communities relate to Prensky's on education?
Yes, there is a way in which the two different theories from Prensky & Wenger do link together, I think.
Wegner's theory of the communities of practise predominantly talks about groups of individuals who, because they share the same goals and, I guess, ideologies & practises, improve themselves and establish themselves more trhough communicating to eachother.
Meanwhile Prensky theorises about how digital natives's these days have a completely different set of social practises because of the way they use technology, which, he claims, has caused these younger people to differ from others (digital immigrants) in the way they communicate, research, socialise, shop, learn etc. etc. etc.
You could well argue that this group of people, with their own new set of social standards, social practises, ideologies and aspirations is therefore a good example of a Community of Practise.
Wegner's theory of the communities of practise predominantly talks about groups of individuals who, because they share the same goals and, I guess, ideologies & practises, improve themselves and establish themselves more trhough communicating to eachother.
Meanwhile Prensky theorises about how digital natives's these days have a completely different set of social practises because of the way they use technology, which, he claims, has caused these younger people to differ from others (digital immigrants) in the way they communicate, research, socialise, shop, learn etc. etc. etc.
You could well argue that this group of people, with their own new set of social standards, social practises, ideologies and aspirations is therefore a good example of a Community of Practise.
Friday, 20 March 2009
Week 9 | Q3 Should education 'stretch a person do you think? (What do you mean by 'stretch'?)
Well, it all depends on what is meant by the term "stretch". I guess the first thing that springs to mind is urging (almost forcing?) pupils and students to perform to the best of their abilities. By raising the bar with each semester (or year) and that way allowing students to gradually develop their skills and knowledge: improving themselves and "plugging into their potential".
I guess this unit is also "stretching" students by "forcing" them into different methods of learning than the ones we used in different units. As mentioned in the lecture on several occasions, though, there doesn't seem to have been much forcing students into it as people got on with it quite well, quite quickly. Possibly because the current bunch of students are well-developed Digital Natives to be "ready" for learning in this alternative, digital way. Who knows? ;)
Week 9 | Describe the daily frustrations of a fictional neo-luddite at university now in the UK.
A neo-luddite would probably struggle with quite a few things in Uni. For example, handbooks are posted online rather than handed out, time tables are online, lecturers EMAIL students about lecture cancellations and other VITAL information. On the social side of things (s)he's also going to miss out as most of people events and parties are communicated on Facebook rather than IRL. A lot of discussion about work also taken place on Facebook and MSN. The neo-luddite would find it hard to keep in contact with friends as all that takes place with the use of social networking and mobile telephones and the degree will suffer because of the lack of access to things like blackboard and MChome where essential information is found.
Submission of assessments would pretty much be impossible as they need to be typed and printed and, in some cases on some courses, actually handed in electronically.
So yeah, basically, it couldn't be done. A Neo-luddite would not fare well at a modern day university at all because the courses as well as the social part of uni life heavily rely on digital technologies.
Submission of assessments would pretty much be impossible as they need to be typed and printed and, in some cases on some courses, actually handed in electronically.
So yeah, basically, it couldn't be done. A Neo-luddite would not fare well at a modern day university at all because the courses as well as the social part of uni life heavily rely on digital technologies.
Week 9 | Describe the experience of a fictional technophile student in 2020.
Well, first of all, 2020 is only 11 years ago, and if we look at the the situation 11 years ago from now the changes are there, but not THAT ground breaking. Yes, the web has changed a lot, it delivers more interactivity and multimedia than it did back in 1998, but education has only adapted to it a little bit. How the web is going to change in the next 11 years is hard to predict, I am assuming that Web 3.0 and the Semantic Web are developping further and that phones, music downloads and other "past-time" platforms will also have advanced a lot. But if the education system doesn't pick up the pace the technophile student of the future could well be a very frustrated man indeed. The uni is currently moving into digital submissions and I trust all submissions, or nearly all submissions, will be handing in that way by then. But the technophile students would probably not be happy with the fact that there, i think, WILL still be physical lectures, seminars and tutorials providing face to face contact with lecturers and peers. Further in the future there might not be, but at this short span of time of only 11 years I don't think Education is moving on quite that fast.
Week 9 | The biggest threat to "digital culture" as a concept.
One of my relatives (early 30s) seems to be a bit of a mixture of the two. One the one hand he uses online technology, but only for a limited number of things. He DOES download music, legally, but is reluctant to use eBay because he finds it a bit dodgy. Does email, and does have MSN but doesn't use Facebook.
The things he does use he uses just as well as anybody else but doesn't seem to let the technology change his social practices as much as digital natives are supposed to do, but does show the ability to use all the technology as well as them. He just doesn't seem as interested in it. And that's one notion that Prensky seems to ignore, he argues that everyone who grows up with these technology actively uses and let them influence they social practises, but my relative does show that there is also the factor of personal choice, or even if they are actually interested enough in these technologies to adapt them all.
The things he does use he uses just as well as anybody else but doesn't seem to let the technology change his social practices as much as digital natives are supposed to do, but does show the ability to use all the technology as well as them. He just doesn't seem as interested in it. And that's one notion that Prensky seems to ignore, he argues that everyone who grows up with these technology actively uses and let them influence they social practises, but my relative does show that there is also the factor of personal choice, or even if they are actually interested enough in these technologies to adapt them all.
Week 9 | The Youngest digital immigrant
This one's actually quite hard to find as the absolute majority of the people around me that are in the age group of the digital natives actually ARE. One of my friends doesn't seem to embrace technology quite the same as most of us, but the fact he goes to uni means he kind-of has to. Uni email, handbooks thatare only online and things like that have meant that he has been forced to more or less embrace new technologies, but, with a lack of interest and experience in it, he doesn't seem to use it as one of his main forms of socialising and he always seems to run behind asking what things actually ARE that we are talking about. I guess that is regular digital immigrant behaviour but I find it hard to pin-point HOW he ended up not being part of the group of digital natives. Perhaps his lack of interest in these things have meant that he's started developing his technological skills while other developed them while growing up.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
