Kristi’s Third Post
August 4, 2009
Taking the rhetoric of personal agency from an idea to the nuts and bolts is an interesting transition. While looking at the use of Web 2.0 technologies by educators, we began using the social bookmarking site Diigo (www.diigo.com). In addition to other functions, Diigo allows its users to bookmark a location, and apply annotations to a document. Then, future users viewing the same material will not only see the information on the web, but also the annotations.
Example:
In an article Connectivism that I have bookmarked on Diigo, Siemens (2004) states “Connectivism also addresses the challenges that many corporations face in knowledge management activities. Knowledge that resides in a database needs to be connected with the right people in the right context in order to be classified as learning. Behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism do not attempt to address the challenges of organizational knowledge and transference.”
When logged into Diigo, I see the above section highlighted and that a comment was posted in May 2009 stating “This, seems to me, to be about culture. We do learn in a culture, in an environment. This is the first time that I have read where the culture itself is learning. It reminds me of John Steinbeck and his theory of group dynamics in The Grapes of Wrath. Although Steinbeck seems to say that the environment has a “mind” of its own, connectivism seems to be saying that this “mind” can be harnessed and integrated in individual learning, in fact needs to.”
So, five years after this article was written, users are still able to collaborate and continue to brainstorm among each other in order to further develop the author’s thoughts and ideas.
In our survey of Web 2.0 in academia, I focused on the personal use of Web 2.0 for respondents. In the comments, many users indicated that although they used social networking sites, they limited their use due to the loss of privacy. Some respondents did not know what Web 2.0 technology was. One of the most important findings of this survey was the lack of definition of the use of Web 2.0 technologies within academia. In Monica’s post, she discusses “…the negotiated space in between [opposing viewpoints on the use of Web 2.0 technologies in academia] where values can be found.” In uncovering this definition, this middle ground allows for the flexibility inherent in the developing uses and definitions of Web 2.0 in academia.
When using Web 2.0 technologies, our survey respondents by far (88.4 percent), indicated that they were most likely to use them for long-distance social networking. Similar to what Shirley noted in her post about companionship and has been documented previously, this sort of use is common and popular. In the respondents that appreciated the benefits to Web 2.0 technologies, this connectedness remained one of the key benefits to using Web 2.0 technologies in personal lives.
Blogging was also a popular tool for personal use. One respondent noted that “Certainly, this means that there will be many other voices to be heard, but part of writing, part of becoming persuasive with language, is rising to the top and getting your voice heard. This is one major reason I incorporate blogging into my first year writing curriculum, because it gives my students some perspective on audience.” I think this audience ties back to personal agency. The approach is not simply writing, but finding means to be heard. Through this, students may develop a better understanding of the meaning behind being heard.
Elizabeth’s one-way rhetoric poses an interesting research situation. By being half of the social exchange and limited interactions within the users, it is difficult to determine what sort of picture will emerge. In our survey, multiple respondents indicated that they used online dating sites, even if they did not find other forms of Web 2.0 technology useful in their personal lives. The desires for connectedness and socialization are strong. When looking at our social character historically, it seems only natural that we would integrate Web 2.0 technologies in order to meet and connect in the most basic of ways.
