Web 2.

0 Described

Web 2.0 are websites and applications that use user-generated content for end- users and are
characterized by greater user interactivity and collaboration, more pervasive network connectivity, and
enhanced communication channels. Coined by Darcy DiNucci in her article "Fragmented Future" and
popularized by Tim O'Reilly and Media Live International in 2004 (Lipika, 2016), Web 2.0 was featured in
Time magazine's Person of the Year award for 2006. BBC news service of June 2009 reported Web 2.0 as
the millionth English word (Anderson, 2010).

Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as a
platform and any attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform (O'Reilly, 2006).
Stern (n.d.) stated that Web 2.0 describes the changing trends in using World Wide Web technology.
Web design aims to enhance creativity, secure information sharing, increase collaboration, and improve
the functionality of the Web as we know it (Web 1.0).

Although Web 2.0 suggests a new version of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to any actual change
in technical specifications but rather to changes in how software developers and end users utilize the
Web (Stern, n.d.). Web 2.0 is characterized by greater user interactivity and collaboration, more
pervasive network connectivity, and enhanced communication channels.

n.d.):

Web 2.0 websites typically include some of the following features/techniques (Stern,

1.Search. The ease of finding information through keyword searching

2.Links. Guides to essential information and the pages to which they are linked

3. Authoring. The ability to create constantly updating content that is co-created by users

4.Tags. Categorization of content by creating tags that are simple, one-word descriptions to facilitate
searching

5. Extensions. Automation of pattern matching for customization by using algorithms

6. Signals. RSS (Real Simple Syndication) technology is used to create a subscription model that notifies
users of any content changes.
What are Web 2.0 tools?

Web 2.0 tools can very broadly be defined as end-user applications that require dynamic
interaction, social networking, or user interfacing between people and information. They almost
always have accompanying websites and associated apps for smart devices. In a Web 2.0
environment users decide how they want to use, interact with, and create information. This
contrasts with earlier Web 1.0 environments where one simply read static information on the
Web (Morrison & Lowther, 2005).

In addition, users have the ability to generate and manipulate content from multiple locations in a
Web 2.0 environment. Users can add images, videos, or links to other media content. Students
have unlimited opportunities to individualize the content they embed in their products, and the
ease of use of these tools encourages student creativity. Unlike traditional pen and paper type
responses, students are not limited by their own artistic abilities, page-length, or word count
limits. Students will often go beyond the basic expectations of an assignment because these tools
facilitate students’ creative processes.

Familiar examples of Web 2.0 sites and tools include wikis and blogs (PBworks and WordPress),
social networking sites (Facebook and Twitter), image and video hosting sites
(Flicker and YouTube), and applications to generate Web content for education, business, and
social purposes (Wikipedia, Weebly, and Instagram). It is important for teachers to remember
that the magic is not necessarily in the tool itself; teachers must first consider their objectives for
the lesson as well as the purpose of the student response project. The right tool can help students
synthesize their learning, engage more deeply with the content of a lesson, and interact with
other learners in more meaningful ways than traditional response projects or assignments.

Benefits of Web 2.0 tools

One of the benefits of Web 2.0 tools is their ease of use. Most students find these tools to be
intuitive and user-friendly. Because of this, there is little time wasted in learning how to use the
programs. The tools facilitate interactive learning and innovative responses to assignments and
assessments. Students see their ideas take shape quickly, and they are rewarded with
professional-looking results. It is also easy to edit the projects as they are being developed so
students tend to take more risks during the creative process. This ease of use combined with the
quality of the finished products increases students’ self-efficacy, and it motivates students to
engage more earnestly and actively in the content of their responses.

Web 2.0 tools also can facilitate authentic interactions with content and with other learners.
These tools offer students opportunities to solve real-world problems and to collaborate in
meaningful ways with peers in face-to-face or online classrooms. Students have the freedom to
customize their responses using multimedia or multiple modalities. Unlike a term paper or more
traditional response project, no two projects look exactly alike. Students’ individual
interpretations and representations of their conceptual understandings can easily be shared with
others, thus increasing the learning opportunities for all.

Sample student work

Padlet. Padlet is a multipurpose tool acting as an electronic corkboard where students can post
ideas, photos, images, videos, or documents. This digital corkboard is both versatile and easy to
use. The user can control the privacy settings on the Padlet to allow others to add content or
simply to view existing content. Viewers do not need an account to post comments, and the
owner of the Padlet retains full control to moderate or delete comments. In the assignment
displayed here, students created questions in advance of a Skype visit with a children’s book
author. The link was shared with the author in advance so that he could see the types of questions
students would be asking.

Examples connected to other disciplines: Padlet could be used in any content area classroom for bell-
ringer activities or exit tickets at the end of class. Marketing students could use Padlet as a corkboard to
post effective print ads or links to digital ads. Political science students could use Padlet as a place to
collect campaign slogans and reflect on their significance.
Limitations of Web 2.0 tools

While Web 2.0 tools offer many advantages for instructors and students alike, they are not the
perfect solution for all educational challenges. The tool must actually enhance the learning
process, not simply add unnecessary tasks for students to complete. If students can communicate
their understanding of the learning objectives without technology, then a more traditional
response assignment may suffice.

Instructors must also consider all of the steps in the process of using the tool. Does a particular
tool work on all types of computers and tablets, or will students need to use a certain type of
device? Does the tool require students to create their own account, or does the teacher create a
class account for students to use? Does the tool work with the Learning Management System
(such as Blackboard or Course Compass)? Is the tool accessible for students with disabilities?
Does the tool protect students’ privacy?

Instructors must also consider the complexity of the tool to be used and how much time it will
take to teach the tool itself. Students who are experienced with technology will access new tools
with greater ease than students who are timid with technology. In face-to-face classes, instructors
can demonstrate how to use the tools and be present to help students troubleshoot any problems
that arise. In distance learning courses, this process may be more cumbersome. Instructors can
make screen shot videos to show students the step-by-step procedures, but some students have a
low tolerance for troubleshooting problems on their own.

There is also a danger of over-using these tools. Even the most novel and engaging tool can
become passé if it is assigned too often or used unnecessarily. Web 2.0 tools have a better chance
of sustaining student engagement if they are used judiciously and purposefully.

Difference of Web 2.0 and Web 1.0

Web 1.0 started with the advent of the internet. However, over time, users found out the limitations of
Web 1.0. Web 1.0 was upgraded to Web 2.0 to live up to the current internet usage, which was well-
managed, advanced, and devoid of the limitations of Web 1.0 (Jain, 2009).

Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 are:

1.Connectivity. Connectivity in Web 2.0 is more reliable and carries more for users than in Web 1.0.

2.Usage. Web 2.0 comes with added features that enable users to share opinions. Web 2.0 has more
commercial usage than 1.0.

3.Advanced browsers. Initially, Web 1.0 was about HTML. Web 2.0 has been upgraded to XML, which is
more advanced and faster.

4. Movability. Web 2.0 allows the user to get to any desired page with just a click, which was not present
in Web 1.0 because of its static nature.
5.Support. Compared to Web 1.0, there is ample infrastructure to support Web 2.0-based applications.

Text-Ba

6.Dynamic system tools. The software used in Web 2.0-based applications is AJAX, more powerful than
that of Web 1.0.

7.Interactions. In Web 1.0, users can only visit sites. Differently, in Web 2.0 applications, users can offer
comments or opinions.

In summary, Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 are like classroom activities; Web 1.0 is the lecture, and Web 2.0 is
about discussions and exchanging opinions.

Web 2.0 in Education

Web 2.0 offers students new opportunities to take more control of their learning and create customized
information, resources, tools, and services. Web 2.0 also encourages a broader range of expressive
capabilities, facilitates more collaborative ways of working, enables community creation, dialogue, and
knowledge sharing, and creates a setting for learners to attract authentic audiences (Stern, n.d.).

Bower (2015) provides a comprehensive analysis of the typology of Web 2.0 technologies, shown in
Figure 29. The typological analysis resulted in 37 types of Web 2.0 technologies arranged into 14
clusters. The types of Web 2.0 learning technologies, their the following matrix. descriptions, and
example tools for each category identified by Bower (2015) are given in the following matrix