Below are some of the notes I took at the talk given by Malcolm Brown, Dartmouth.
The Once and Future CMS
Two forceful emergents, more long lasting and more powerful than transient gizmos, are:
- mobility (iphone) and decentralization that comes with that
- web 2.0 shaping expectations and environments very rapidly
We can figure out the future CMS using the following equation:
Web 1.0 / Web2.0 = current CMS / future CMS
Step 1 Learning: "The person who is doing is the person who is learning (the most)" points to activity as the most single important component of learning.
Prof. Chris Jernstedt: the more activity the more the learning grade goes up. (Not sure how lerning is measured, 80ies psychology research)
Step 2: Web 2.0
What is it?
It is a broker for information, connecting people to content instead of providing content: user -> google/ebay/amazon -> content
- gets more useful the more people use it (in most cases), eg User reviews, wikipedia, flickr, etc, etc (how exatly is "better" defined?)
- is open technology: open source code, data and content
- sees lightweight technology models: ajax, GE, maps etc
- provides rich user experiences: ajax desktops, GE maps
- is characterized by diversity: see ehub - www.emilychang.com/go/ehub
Compare web1.0 and web 2.0
for example: Enciclopedia Britannica vs Wikipedia
publishing vs participation
personal website vs blogosphere
they, the media (big companies) vs we, the media
big content vs micro content
authority vs collective
best sellers vs long tail
control vs cooperation
==> teaching paradigm vs learning paradigm !!
Sometimes we need teaching (Zach). These are just different models, not necessarily preferences, you may decide. Is the controversy teaching vs learning a bit outdated, are there new ways of thinking of these paradigms? We need to be aware of the dangers of web 2.0 for learning.
We need to think about wasy how to integrate these things.
Examples for CMS 2.0 opportunities are: enable mashups, tagging and bookmarking, "flickr-ed" way of managing content, use themes not just courses: Why cant we have content organized over time, more like a portfolio, or information aggregation over years. Peer tutoring collaborations, social spaces: have informal learning spaces online, social note taking. And more.
For example Google docs: collaboration and publication built into the space.
Web 2 ties to the learning paradigm, It is active, social, interactive (like learning paradigm) and is where students are and brings learner centered functionality.
Educause research: study J B Caruso (ECAR) sep 2006 with 18k sample of 1st year students shows: CMS is mostly used for syllabus, online readings grades, trassignments, discussion quizzes exams feedback to assignments. Similar result UW-Milwaukee 2002 so mostly adminstrative tasks.
There is an advantage to take some administrative off the instructor (Joseph). The problem used to be getting people to collabrate. Early on we had to moderate, today students go off on their own. (Matt) and it also mirrors exactly my experience. But what about faculty, this seems to be harder (in Humanities?).
Do we need CMS, why would you have it (Matt). Are browsers the right environment to a CMS? Do we need to rethink the notion of a CMS alltogether? CMS can help to to integrate.
If 1/3 of students use gmail, to what extent will CMS end up on Google?