Thing # 2

Why does 2.0 matter? I enjoyed watching the videos, although I have to admit, I watched the 1st one, The Machine Is Us/ing Us a couple of times because the music and speed of the changes made me dizzy. I had seen Shift Happens at staff meeting before and seen the MISD version of A Vision of K-12 Students Today there as well. When I saw them at the meeting, they were shown, I think, to shock us(administrators ) into the reality of our current students and our current world. Unfortunately, sometimes the people who are charged with leading an organization are those who are seasoned with wisdom and age, and can often resist looking into the newest ways to reach students and teachers.

As I go through these first of the 23 things, I feel somewhat like I think an ELL student feels...confronted with massive amounts of unfamiliar vocabulary-blog, facebook, wiki, twitter, podcast, RSS. Additionally there is a whole group of terms that I understand in other contexts but don't have any background knowledge of how they're used in this technology arena...remixing ( apparently not to stir it again), linking (nothing to do with joining hands or arms) and tagging (not the game of my youth.) The only way for me, like the ELL student, to become familiar with the vocabulary is to immerse myself in the terminology and accept my approximate definitions as I build my knowledge through experience.

I agree with the Reluctant Blogger who said she worries about the divide between "the connecteds and the not connecteds. " Is 2.0 going to further polarize an already fragmented society? I know it's here (technology, that is) and I have to acknowledge it and embrace it, but I still worry about the consequences for the future.

When I read the article , A Day in the Life of Web 2.0, it made me think of something Frank Smith, a noted reading researcher, said. He stated that we can never truly reread anything because once we have read something, our frame for understanding has changed. We have more knowledge about the topic than before we read it, we have more familiarity with the vocabulary in the text...in short, we have altered the structure of our brains as pertaining to that particular topic. Therefore we can never truly reread it with the same results. Heavy, isn't it? But I think it accurately describes 2.0 as well. As each person reads and adds to or otherwise interacts with what is posted, the content changes and as the content changes, we change. The professionals in this article all display an open, adventurous attitude to learning using 2.0 and their students will be better for it, I think. I still sometimes wonder about how to teach kids to filter what they read and see and to read critically, not blindly accepting things just because they saw them on the Internet. I don't work directly with students, but with teachers. I'm exploring all the possibilities a 2.0 world offers me to communicate with teachers in a more direct and meaningful way.