Week 10 - Web 3.0

There's alot of websites which actually compare the semantic web with web 3.0 because of their similarites in making the web smarter. However when i was looking at this website it seemed like Web 3.0 was more advanced http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2102863,00.asp. Not only does it try to improve search engines, but it also embraces a

• '3-D Web' - where a user becomes involved in this completely different world.
• A 'Media-Centric Web' - where a user can incorpate other pieces of technology to improve their search results.
• A 'Pervasive Web'- a web that is 'everywhere'. Such of like a mini 'Big Brother'

Im pretty sure that a Neo-Luddite might want to end it all when Web 3.0 comes around.

Week 10 - What is the 'Semantic Web'?

Semantic Web isn't a completelyt new idea but an extension of web 2.0. A concept coined by Tim-Berners Lee who saw how the web can somehow be improved, especially in terms of search engines. Berners-Lee observes that although search engines show much of the Web's content, they have little ability to select the pages that a user really wants or needs. For example,because of the hypertext link, 'anything can link to anything. Therefore there could be a mix match of commercial and academic material. At 'one end theres fice-second TV commerical to poetry' and then 'on the other end we have databases, programs and sensor output'.

However semantic web is trying to change all this. It will change how the current internet is made for humans and not for machines to understand. The semantic web is a vision of information that is understandable by computers, so that they can perform more of the tedious work involved in finding, sharing, and combining information on the web, rather than it involving human interaction




Berners-Lee, T (2001) 'The Semantic Web' http://www-personal.si.umich.edu/~rfrost/courses/SI110/readings/In_Out_and_Beyond/Semantic_Web.pdf

Week 10 - Is there a potential problem being stored up for people if education is tailored to fit into their cultural and personal preferences

Of course there is a problem is there's tailored to fit into someones personal preferences, because how would that ever work? If everyone had their own preferences in what they wanted a course to be like, how much work they wanted, what aspects they found boring and therefore didnt want to learn about it, then there would be no structure to anything.

Some people find maths pointless. Does that mean that people shouldn't learn math unless they wanted to. I have encountered many times, where i've absolutely dreaded a course because either it was too hard i wasn't interested. This doesn't mean that it didnt mean that i just didnt bother, i gave it a go and after i felt like although it may have been hard, it stretched my education. I always thought that learning in German in secondary was pointless as their are many other main languages to learn, however believe it or not i tooka school trip to Austria, and there were many occassions where i was able to talk to the people there, i felt like it was totally worth it.

Week 10 - How might Wengers notions on practice communities relate to Prenskys on Education

There are some aspects of Wenger that can be applied to the work of Prensky. Wenger (1991) described a Community of Practice as 'a set of relations among persons, activity and world, over time and in relation with other tangential and overlapping CoPs'. Wenger studied the ways in which people naturally work and play together. Communities of practice are groups of people who share similar goals and interests. In pursuit of these goals and interests, they have common practices, work with the same 'tools' and express themselves in a 'common language'. Through these aspects they are able to form a community.

This ideology could be related back to Prenskys concepts of the 'digital native' and the digital immigrants'. They both are two different communites. The 'digital natives' have a 'common language' which bonds them all together, they know how to communicate with eachother, they can use technology in the same way and are able to learn. Whereas, the 'digital immigrants' have a completely different language, which puts them into a different community.

Not only this but they both speak strongly on learning. Prensky thinks that the education system needs to be changed, so that these 'digital natives' aren't being taught by an older generation who still believe in structure and endless amounts of books etc. Wenger then would believe that this could be achieved 'learning' an organisation can sustain their communties of practice and 'thus become effective and valuable as an organisation'. Therefore if people learn how to communicate with eachother, change could occur. In 1998 Wenger would describe this through the concept of 'negotiation of meaning'. If a negotiation between a 'digital native' and a 'digital immigrant' occurs, then there could be change.

Week 9 - d) daily frustrations of a fictional neolddite at university now in the UK

The term 'Luddite' came from the Industrial Revolution. A luddite was against the shift from people to machines doing most of the work. From the 1970's the Neo-Luddite was born, these were people who were against the use of technology and sometimes even chose life without the use of technology altogether. Their even against the use of life supprt machines which i find really odd.

Anyways heres Jim. He attends university. Although it was extremely hard for him as applying for uni involved the use of UCAS on the computer. Anyways he's here and wants to get stuck in. His first day of uni is very difficult. He is unable to look at his timetable as it needs to be accessed by logging onto his lincoln account. So he has to walk to the faculty office and they are able to tell him.

He attends his first seminar, and gets along fine with everyone. He disapproves with the use of a powerpoint as an introduction but listen anyways. The tutor then asks the seminar to form a group and swap mobile numbers and email addresses. There's absolutely no way for Jim to put down anything as he's never used email before and doesn't approve of mobile phones. So he has to write down his address so that if someone wants him, they have to visit him, which doesn't humour the rest of his group very well and from the on feels shut out.

He obtains bad marks because he writes he handwrites his essays and when he's asked to do presentations, he stands in front of the class with a flip board and a few pens, trying to express his opinions, whereas is fellow students are able to produce a powerpoint, with video's and images. He is shut out from social events because they are all organised on Facebook or through text. He feels shut out from most aspects of university life and finally drops out.

Week 9 - c) A person known to you who most threatens the notion of native/immigrant in digital culture

Well i could stick to my Uncle who is 45 and is finds computers natural. Supposedely anyone who's born before 1980 aren't capable of using computers and are considered a 'digital immigrant'. However im a 'digital native' and i'm forever asking him to fix my computer, as i've managed to get a virus, or i ask if he can sort out my internet because i've lost my connection. I've been to him for computer advice more than i've been to Mcdonalds. I'm even able to talk to him on IM and he uses the same language as what i do, he doesn't have an 'accent' like Prensky explains. He is more like a digital native than i'll ever be. I'm still learning about computers and i should be fluent in technology according to Prensky.

Week 9 - b) The youngest digital immigrant you know

The youngest digital immigrant is my step dad. I would to say my younger brothers and prove Prensky wrong but my stepdad who is 39 is absolutely useless. Everytime i go home, he asks me to do something, like to even change his mobile phone ringtone or upload some photos onto the computer. Im sure my youngers brothers who are 9 and 10 would be able to tell him now. He is learning though and is now on facebook chatting away. He just isn't as capabable of using a computer as my uncle who is a couple of years older than him. Maybe it comes with the job, my uncle having to learn about computers because of work? Maybe not though cause i know loads of family members who can use computers and their jobs dont need the use of computers. Who knows.

Week 9 - a) The oldest digital native you know

the oldest digital native i know is my uncle, he is 45. His job is based around computers and works for the American Air Force. He says he cant tell me much about his work because its 'secret' ha, but i know that on a day to day basis he specialises in being an IT Technician. I know Prensky once stated that the young and old use computers different, but i think that that my uncle uses computers just the same as any other youngster. After work, he would be on the internet, chatting on IM, buying and selling things, scanning photo's onto his computer etc. So even though he uses computers for work, he also uses it for entertainment purposes too. He is quite capable of using computers and definately a digital native in my books.

Week 9 - Should Education Stretch A Person?

In this context i think 'stretch' means to ensure that a person who's in education is able to get to their full potential. Sometimes people dont see education as a big deal, their not interested in higher education and only go to school because they have to. They dont mind if their grades are average but as long as they pass or even if they dont, it ok. I think education should definately stretch a person. If i hadn't of come to uni, i would have ran away from the thought of any presentation, but the more i do, the better i get and the less nervous i become, its only because i've had to do the presentations that i've done them, if i was given an option i would of chose the alternative.

Week 8 - Article 5 Abstract

Prof. Jim Lengel tries to explain how 'simply owning a computer abd subscribing to the interent does not bring you the advantage of connectedness, its what you do with it that counts'. Simply put, what Lengel tries to show is that young people aren't using their computers correctly, a divide stretched by entertainment pulling in one direction, and education in the other. He interviews a couple of his students to try and prove his theory, but it lacks in proper research methodology for the most part. His idea's are interesting as its a new approach to the 'digital divide' and shows hows it not just the young and old that use the net differently, but its actually the young that are using technology differently between themselves. What was left out of the equation was why?

Week 8 - Article 4 Abstract

Writing in 2004, Marc Prenksy develops his 'digital divide' concept from education, into how a young people behave online. The whole article is expressing how the way that these young people 'digital natives' behave online compared to older people 'digital immigrants'. He splits these differences into a variety of catergories, for example

• how the two groups communicate differently (email, IM, chat)
• how the two groups share differently (blogs, webcams ect)
• how the two groups exchange differently (music, movies, humour)
• how the two groups create differently (avatars, sites, mods)

The main part of his argument is how that because of the two differences in behaviour, the 'digital natives' are moving forward, whereas the 'digital immigrants' are 'afraid of the new technology'. A person cold either agree with his work or disagreem , however what Prensky has done right, is form a basis for argument. Many theorists have either followed him or offered an alternative. He is the king of the 'digital divide'.

Week 8 - Article 3 Abstract

Momino and Menesis decide steer away from the usual arguments on the ‘digital divide’ and talk about other theorists, for example Lievrouw (2000), DiMaggio & Hargattai (2001), who after much research on this subject seemed to be over shadowed by Prensky. What this article goes to explain, are the ‘digital inequalities’ for children, how it’s the lack of access to technology might create ‘digital illiteracy’, children need to learn about technology by using it and if they cant get their hands on it, then they become divided by everyone who can.

What is apparent is that this article isn’t about what technology does to the children, but what children do with it and how they can get to it. Ultimately there’s more of a focus on social aspects rather than a young and old difference. Therefore shedding light on a completely different ‘digital divide’, the divide between the ‘rich’ and the ‘poor’.

Week 8 - Article 2 Abstract

This article by Don Tapscott is in short, a timeline of how media has changed. By using his own experiences and a few references. His main argument is how there's a 'net generation'. A generation that consists of 0-20 year olds, who have different habits to their predecessors, 'they learn, work, play, communicate, shop, and create communities very differently than their parents'. Their use of media is different and find tv unfulling.

This article may not be relevant as it probably was back in 1998 but it does reflect on how the digital divide started and reflects back to Prensky's work, suggesting that this new 'net-generation' are the 'digital natives' and their parents being 'digital immigrants'. The article is split up into sections, with Tapscott explaining how these children cope with education, leisure time and fit this new media into their everyday lives.

Tapscott is explaining his views on american technological changes, however being that the UK runs alongside America in terms of technological change, and on some scale countries have become americanised, a reader like myself could easily understand what the author of this article is saying.

Week 8 - Article 1 Abstract

Livingstone and Bovill not only reflect on some digital divides like the work of Marc Prensky's, on how teachers may be 'digital immigrants' when the article states that 'teachers are increasingly faced with children with different computer experience and expertise', but the article also expressed other digital divides, between the children themselves. The article emcompasses how changes in the media are now being reflected in everyday lives and are being assimilated. Not saying how this reflects every child, but stating that it depends on lifestyle factorsa, gender and access. Therefore showing a divide between the children instead of it being between referred to age, like Prensky.

The article is based on numerous amounts of research, and although it may not be relevant today, it does give an account of how media has shifted; shedding some light on new media and saying how 'converging screen technologies may be contributing to the blurring of boundaries between information, education, work and entertainment', which although was a concern for Livingstone and Bovill in 2003, is still a concern nowadays, with numerous arguments stating that new media affects a children in some way, good or bad.

Therefore the article looks at how children consume media, the effect that it has on education, traditional media and a look at some aspects of new media.

Week 8 - List of Articles

1) Livingstone, S., Bovill, M. (2003) 'Young People, New Media, Media Culture Online' http://www.mediacultureonline.de/fileadmin/bibliothek/livingstone_young_people/livingstone_young_people.pdf [accessed 25/3/09]

2) V. Tapscott (1998) 'Growing up Digital: The rise of the Net Generation' http://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/jan98/feat_6/digital.html [accessed 25/3/09]

3) Mominó, J.M., Meneses, J. ‘Digital inequalities in children and young people: A technological matter’ http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/0/36/38359326.pdf [accessed 25/3/09]

4) Prensky, M. (2004) 'The emerging online life of the digital native: what they do differently because of technology and how they do it' http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky-The_Emerging_Online_Life_of_the_Digital_Native-03.pdf [accessed 25/3/09]

5) Lengel, J (2009) 'Teaching with Technology: The Digital Divide' http://www.powertolearn.com/articles/teaching_with_technology/the_digital_divide.shtml [accessed 25/3/09]

Week 8 - Article 5 Criticism

This article looks at approach to the 'digital divide', so far we've looked at the young and old, who has access and who doesn't and no its education against entertainment. Prof. Jim Lengel explains its useful for their to be technology present within education, however when he asked his pupils about 'what they actually know how to do with a computer', he gives some of his students responses to which one of them responded 'I do instant messenger with my friends, we email, and I surf the web. For what? Oh. movies, news, sports, that kind of stuff' because his pupils didnt mention anything about using computers for educational purposes, it seems like he's basing this one bit of information (which by the way is not representative of all of his students im sure), and going off on a massive tangent, saying how young people dont know how to use their computers effectively when it come to using them for learning. The fact that his lack of statistics and representative data ensure that his findings dont seem professional, its his actual conclusion. I know that i use my computer for entertainment purposes, by i always know how to use it productively. His theory lacks references and statistics and therefore makes this article seem unacademic and therefore hard to believe.

Week 8 - Article 4 Criticism

What better way to disagree with the 'digital divide' concept than to go to the main author of it. The main problem that i have with Prensky is that i feel that he stereotypes the two groups too much, he doesn't offer any other opinion but his own and i cant get over how someone who's a 'game designer' could say that 'digital natives' and 'digital immigrants' game differently, but the way he's describing how a young person may game, is similar to himself and if he was using his own theory he therefore wouldn't be a digital immigrant, and so basically shooting himself in the foot. After reading many other articles on the 'digital divide', who use the word 'divide' in other ways, i find myself more and more disengaged with what Prensky's saying. I can accept that at times young people are better at using technology than their parents, but i also know loads of adults who are perfectly fine. Becoming computer literate is a learning curve and anyone, if they have the access can learn the ropes. I have loads of older family members on 'facebook' and they use it more and in the same way as i do. Prensky doesn't think of the individual but thinks of the whole picture, which is wrong because everyone uses technology differently.

Week 8 - Article 3 Criticism

The article is composed by research carried out on 6,602 in depth questionnaires, being a representative sample of 350 primary and secondary schools in Catalonia (Spain). At first glance i thought that because of the different culture, the findings may be completely different and impossible in relating it back to some of the previous work that i've looked at. However i actually enjoyed reading this article. Despite the fact that the research doesn't even have a date, the lastest reference used was back in 2005, and the authors aren't recognisable with a background that hints at the authors being worthy of reading, what they do state are different approaches, that when i was questioning Prensky's work has been acknowledged, for example i questioned the access of technology. If a child doesn't have access to a computer, then how can they be working at become literate and therefore be considered a 'digital native'. This article however looks at these 'digital inequalities'

Their work sometimes looks at both sides of the argument, but there is one point that i may disagree with, the issue of a parent being a childs main educational agent, also passing on their uses of technology to their children. I disagree with this as i think children are autonomous, i think that a child would just use technology whether their parents use it or not.

Also the article may be easy to read but their main aim is to use the research to offer 'elements of reflection' for educators to try and make the technology more available. However i think society has already taken care of that already, with many schools adopting technology for kids no matter what their inequalities.

Week 8 - Article 2 Criticism

Article 2: On the surface this article seems note worthy however as i read, i realised that the article lacked on theoritical concepts and bibliographic sources. Most of what Tapscott stated was backed up by his personal experiences and although it was put across in a way that was easy to read, it felt like there was no substance and i had to use my knowledge to tie up loose ends. If i was an outsider of new media, i wouldn't trust it. Especially as like the first article, it kinda outdated being wrote in 1998; for example he makes a statement about 'how there's a decline in television viewing hours because viewers have no real power', unlike the internet. I think that putting that into todays society, would completely put the statement out of place. Think of 'channel 4 on demand' and the 'iPlayer', these can be accessed through the internet, plus tv has even evolved over the years, with its increase in digital television and therefore more choice, interactive tv etc. Tapscott may of referred to Prensky's work by stating that 'traditional approaches to education are linear' and kids dont like a structure but because this was a tiny section of the whole article, the rest of it being examples of his life and a run down of a history of old media, then the added fact that this was wrote in 1998 makes this article less appealing.

Week 8 - Article 1 Criticism

Article 1: This article may have been relevant when it was written in 2003. However, with the technology changing all the time, the article's claims seem to be outdated. For example, within the text a statistic was given saying how only around '1 in 5 (19%)' of children had used the internet. Now im taking a guess, but i doubt that the figure would be the same 6 years on. With change in acessibility of the internet nowadays, for example the increased access of the internet, whether its wireless or on mobile phones and how education system are making more units based around computer technologies, i could imagine that that the figure would have an increase. The article even states how music plays a significant role in their social interactions, which is fair enough but then it says how they would swap CD's and Video's with eachother. There findings on how depending on access, children and young people generate their own styles of media use is an interesting concept, and if applied more to new media, this article would be quite interesting as it does shed some light on a 'digital divide', but this 'digital divide' is just not as relevant to others.

Week 8 - What Is Digital Immigration

After looking at many different articles on 'digital immigration' i now can try and explain the concept in my own words. An 'immigrant' is a person that has moved someone new and so has to adapt (assimilate) to their surroundings. A 'digital immigrant' an analogy which shows how a person has to adapt not to surroundings but to technological changes. These are people who were born prior to 1980. These people don't find technology natural, and they have still have various accents, Prensky, a main contributer to 'digital immigration' says that a person with a 'thick accent', would ring someone up and ask if they had received their email.

On the other hand, there's the 'digital natives', people who were born between 1980 -1994. They have grown up with technology, they understand text message language, they can multitask and find technology natural to them.

Marc Prenksy uses these two concepts within the education system and says how the teachers are 'digital immigrants' and teaching 'digital natives' with different needs and therefore these teachers need to change their approach to teaching these kids, otherwise they'll become 'bored'. These teachers focus on step by step approaches, an array of textbooks which don't fit in with todays kids.

The main debate over digital natives is based on two key claims

1. that a distinct generation of 'digital natives' exist
2. that education must be changed to meet the needs of the 'natives'

There has been many different approaches to Prensky's concepts. Bennett, Maton & Kervin (2008) state how its merely a moral panic. Based on Cohen 1972, they describe how a concensus has been made that these 'native' school kids need a change in education style, without any arguments being made. As there's not much evidence to back up what Marc Prensky suggests.

Whilst looking at Prensky's concept i thought how much of what he was saying may have been relevant at the time, but now i think its become outdated. It says that 'digital immigrants' are people who were born before 1980. Nowadays i think there's an array of people who are able to use technology just as well as people who may be considered 'digital natives'. Personally i think, Prensky persumes that these 'natives' all had access to these technlogies. What if a child was born between 1980 and 1994, but didnt come into contact with technology and to this day doesn't have a wide knowledge. Ultimately, this would suggest that their traits are somewhat like a 'digital immigrant'. I think Prensky should allow more leverage. There's some people that could be hard to place. I know some adults who can use technlogy better than i can.

Im not dismissing Prensky, but i think that you cant just take what he says at face value. I think Dave Kenyon said the other day that we've been the best group so far to take this unit (maybe not me lol) and he suggested how it might have been because we have more knowledge of how to use the internet, compared to previous years. This could possibly be linked back to Prensky, maybe we are more 'native' than others, i just dont think that someone should be defined exclusively as a 'digital native' or 'a digital immigrant' because of age, i think it just depends on the individual, whether they've had access to technology, wheher they prefer old technology to new etc.

Week 8 - Website Url's

• Website 5 -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Immigrants

• Website 4 -

www.cheeps.com/karlmaton/pdf/bjet.pdf

• Website 3 -

www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf

• Website 2 -

http://educationalissues.suite101.com/article.cfm/digital_natives_and_digital_immigrants

• Website 1 -

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=digital+immigrant

Week 8 - Website Criticism 5

This was a very risky website as anyone can input data into it. It shows a short summary of what 'digital immigrants' and in fact has some use as it focuses more on where the anology came from and on Prensky's concept of 'accents', which in other articles have been overlooked by his work on education.

It says that the site was modified on February 4th 2009, which is the most recent article that i've looked at so far. However if i was to compare this website to the others, i would say that this site would only be useful if it was an introduction to 'digital immigration' or like me a summary, as it only gives account of what the term is. There are argument for and against. Moreover, one argument is very strange and applies Prenskys work with 'Eloi and Morlocks' which are fictional species based on H.G Wells 1985 for his novel 'The Time Machine'. I suppose it could be linked to this concept but to me it seems to be a perculiar link.

Furthermore, there are other references, which if backed up with previous websites makes sense. Ultimately like i wrote, this site would be useful for an introduction or a summary, nothing more. It lacks in extensive reliable information.

Week 8 - Website Criticism 4

This website is very recent, which already makes the article on 'digital immigration' relevant and probably more relevant to the user as previous websites have shown articles that were written years ago and may now be outdated. It states how theres three writers, all from an academic background, which is promising. Prior to this i read someones blog, who worked for a mobile company, they said how 'digital immigrants' are just ignorant, no references but just based on experience. I decided not to focus my attention to this.

The article has 'draft' written on it, which said to me that maybe it wasn't finished properly, spelling mistakes etc. However as i read through the article, it was very easy to read, it had an array of references, which are all listed in a Harvard style at the bottom and most importantly it took both stances. It didnt preach about 'digital immigration', it said how it may be flawed,

Out of all of the websites so far, this is by far the most all rounded, not only did it tell me more about Prensky's work, but also answered many queries that i had from reading other websites.

Therefore, its up to date, uses references and comprises of a full academic argument.

Week 8 - Website Criticism 3

Already knowing that Marc Prensky is a main spokesmen on 'digital immigration', this article at first glance shows me that i can trust what im going to read. However you might then question whether it then might be biased; by the end i find this apparent. Again there's no counter arguments, im starting to think that their aren't any, but there must be.

However this didnt mean that i didn't agree with what Prensky wrote. He took the term 'digital immigrant' and 'digital native' from what i already knew and placed it within our educational system and whilst i was reading the article i felt myself argreeing with his statements 'digital immigrant teachers assume that learners are the same as they've always been, and that the same methods that worked for the teachers when they were students will work for their students now'. Then again whilst i was at school, this may have been the case, because he was writing in 2001, which might suggest that there has been changes and that there's no longer a divide between the 'immigrant' teachers and the 'native' students.

The site was useful, then again it may or may not be out of date, im sure that at the time however that what he was writing about did hold some truths, with many examples running throughout the text, 'monkey wrench' for example.

Week 8 - Website Criticism 2

3) In your blog criticise each website (without giving details that would send a reader directly there) in terms of up-to-dateness, usability and practicing what it preaches.

Compared to the first website i found, this website offers more insight into 'digital immigration' and even as far to state the opposite 'digital natives'. After reading the article within the website, i felt like i understood the concept more clearly. However there's still some flaws.

The article does shine light on Marc Prensky, apparently crediting the term 'digital native', what this does, is make the article seem more reliable, as the article has been written by Greg Creuy; there's a hyperlink that the user can click on to look at his profile and by doing so you can see whether the author is credible. This is beneficial but its also nice to know that a published author (Marc Prensky), who actually came up with the term, is acknowledged.

Moreover, there's no counter arguments, it seems that as a user, you have to take everything at face value, which definately isn't the case.

The date is very recent which is a plus as technology is changing all the time, so what a person might have said a few years ago, might not fit into todays society.

Ultimately, i dont know whether its the article that i disagree with or with the actual concept itself, but i found that the two terms 'digital native' and 'digital immigrant' were two broad. Whilst i was reading i thought 'surely theres a someone who could fit between the two'. Someone who remembers 'telephones that had to be attached to the wall by a cord', but then also find the use of technology 'natural'. The article states that 'digital immigrants' would still choose their 'dusty photo' over uploading them onto their computer. Well what if they prefer looking at their photo's that way and its not because they just cant use the technology? what if they have a mix between the two. Would they still be considered a 'digital immigrant'?

The site is useful for people who don't know anything about the concept. However it lacks in counter arguments. Therefore it seems less academic.

Week 8 - Website Criticism 1

3) In your blog criticise each website (without giving details that would send a reader directly there) in terms of up-to-dateness, usability and practicing what it preaches.

Considering that i didnt know what 'digital immigration' was before i looked on the website and now i have a slight knowledge, gives an indication that the site was useful. However because there's two definitions that are both different, how could i possibly determine which one is the right definition in this context

First definition: Somebody who has popped up on an Internet site because of clicking on a link (sometimes accidentally). They don't have the slightest idea where they are at, but read the site information out of curiosity, and occasionally buy items if they are listed for sale.

Second definition: Someone who grew up before the digital age and is fairly new to the internet. Basically anyone over the age of 28

This however isn't the websites fault, its my knowledge of what 'digital immigration' is. However because the website is very basic. There's no theorists to back up the statements which brings up whether a user can even trust the sites information anyways. There is a rate system which allows visitors to the site to click a 'thumbs up' or 'thumbs down' icon, but as a new visitor, its hard to know what the rating system is, if someone was to click a thumbs down is that because the statement isn't true or is it because they just dont like how its worded.

Overall a very basic website which needs to be backed up by other sites with more information.

Week 7 - ICS Distance Learning Courses

When i first looked at distance learning, especially in regards to China, i spoke of how i didn't think it should be the sole contributor to our learning unless it was pyschically impossible to learn otherwise, this still being my thoughts as i look into 'ICS'; http://www.icslearn.co.uk/ , an organisation that provides people the option to study at home. As i looked through the site, it told me how there were many benefits to the programme such as;

• Learn in your own time
• Learn while you earn
• Learn to earn
• Supported open learning

The website states that over '13million' people have benefited from the programme with '150 courses' on offer, from GCSE's, to BA Honour degree's. This all seems fantastic but there are some questions to raise about distance learning. For instance there are options for oversea students to be involved, however they have 'to come to the UK' to sit exams. Therefore this isn't really providing some people with distance learning.

Moreover, then there's the issue of whether you can trust this site in giving you proper resources that will be recognised when you graduate. It says it in writing, but if someone never has to come into face-to face interaction with them, then how would they truely know, as they are potentially anonymous. I watched 'Watchdog' on BBC1 a couple of months ago which showed how the company 'skillstrain' provided a student with out of date material, when he paid enormous amounts of money to the company. I couldn't find the original link to the programme but found a forum which goes into depth about it. http://www.certforums.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=28705

Ultimately thats the main issue with distance learning, the face-to-face interaction. The ICS website does state that there is a 'student community' which allows them to interact and learn with other students, ICS members and experts. As a member of the community they'll be able to share information, engage in discussions, browse our resource library, and voice opinions through student surveys. This is all well and good but this brings up earlier arguments about communities online, will people respond to what you have to say straight away or will you be waiting days for a response? will some people be lurkers and not share information with you?. I personally feel that the best responses are recieved in person, when your talkin to someone face-to-face, you get feedback straight away and there's not a constant reliance on technology.

Week 7 - Africa eLearning

The first thing i noticed on the eLearning Africa website was the news article on 'cholera'. Basically it stated that many schools in Zambia have to remain closed until the outbreak of cholera has been calmed. The alternative for education, that Prof Sinkala has provided is technology 'Pupils would not have to miss their lessons as they would access their teachers’ lessons through either an Internet cafe or from home or any convenient place arranged for that matter,". You could question whether this would still leave many people at a disadvantage because of a potential digital divide, who really has access to these computers and the technology, who can afford them? John Zulu, a grade 12 student counter argues this by suggesting that these gadgets are 'more affordable' and how it might 'be easier for all students to access these eLearning programmes on the radio, which was an ICT product that was found in almost every home, including rural households'. Then again this is a student thats saying this, there's no real statistical evidence to suggest that this is true.

Nevertheless, the fact that these children can't go to school anyway, would make elearning a potential option in the mean time. As schools aren't shut down just because of cholera, but if theirs strikes, bad weather and politcal unrest too.

Week 7 - China - Distance Learning

On 29th June 1982, the Chinese Minister of Education stated that 'the radio and television university has opened a new channel of developing another means of higher education and is a method of running universities, which is welcomed by the masses. It can train more people who can be used for the modernization project of the country in a faster and more economical way'. So basically what he's saying is that people are able to use the mediums of radio and television to learn at a distance.


However i'm going to be critical. As i was reading through Zhao Yuhui's article on distance learning, i felt like the whole system is an act of brainwashing, with many disadvantages to go with it. The system is comprised with an organisational structure, the top of the hierachy being the Central Radio and Television University, who are under the direct leadership of the State Education Commission (formerly called the Ministry of Education). The CRTVU, is responsible for making teaching plans and teaching materials. Altogether, are 4 levels of distance learning, the last level consists of work stations, which puts the students into groups for studying, and in cases the people responsible for setting up these stations are people that work in a 'particular industry', now this may question whether these people are capable of teaching the students, Yuhui brings this up by saying how there's 'a shortage of qualified staff for research on distance education'.

Furthermore this way of learning relies on multimedia, consisting of radio, television and even printed media. Printed media can be 'course books', 'reference books' and 'study guides', all of which are provided by the CRTVU. This is when i started to question distance learning. It has been stated that 40 million copies of these 'course books' have been published (and this was in the 80's), with the number of students in higher education being from '0.7 per cent in 1975 to 4 per cent in 1987'. The thought that this organisation is teaching all these people is a scary one, surely everyone would be gettin the same information, would anyone question what they see or hear, or would they take it as it comes and believe everything. This reminds me of a friend saying how she went to a Catholic school and when she was studying RE, instead of learning about other religions like me, all she got told was about the Catholic faith. I think this is wrong, people should be faced with other opinions, and be able to argue with what their taught.

Anyways, there's also the time that these radio and tv programmes are broadcasted, with '4pm-11pm' being very perculiar to me. Looking at table 4 there's some small print that states that in '1981, no students were enrolled because of insufficient transmission time'. This is a whole year of nobody being taught, what if a student is in their final year and therefore cant finish off their studies. Seems like there's an over reliance on the media. Something that i'm not doing anymore, as i already finished this blog 20mins ago but my the 'save button' didnt seem to work so im here writing it out again.

Nevertheless, im not saying that we should completely dismiss this way of learning altogether, i just dont think that it should become the only way of obtaining higher education. This approach has had some success, with what Yuhui says 'has given a second chance for yound school leavers' and it also gives people access to learning when the option of going to a proper university just isn't an option. I just prefer a face-to-face involvement at uni. Engineering majors in China 'have to go to factories to gain practical experiences during their vacations' and students doing 'laboratory-based courses cannot obtain their credits until they have completed their required practical experiments. If these students were actually at university, they wouldnt have to give up their vacation time to achieve something that would of been available to them on campus, during the semester. I think people to choice distance learning, if the distance from a univeristy campus is too far and so this is their only alternative, if not i just dont see why people should rely on a tv or radio.