Both services offer easy signup, though I liked that WP offered templates. Of course I’m a bit biased—we’ve been using PB in class and I’ve gotten used to it. In no way do I consider myself an expert, but it seems that PB offers more tools for an administrator, thus it becomes more useful in an educational setting, where a teacher can allow students to only have access to certain items. WP appears more collaborative and the site is much more oriented to the social aspect of wikis, where all have an equal say. Both require some technical knowledge—word processing skill helps, basic web knowledge such as hyperlinks or rss is useful and basic navigation and image editing are required if you’d like to add graphics. While both offer ease of use, ease is relative.
Also on both there is versioning, allowing one to revert back to previous iterations of the wiki site, it’s not obvious how or what the advantages are to a novice user. Then the novice’s site gets obliterated and they wish they could just revert to…hey versioning, now I get it! I guess my point is that wikis are not really for the novice user. As simple as both purport themselves to be they seem to be high maintenance.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Knowledge, Information and Education
I was struck by the thoughtful descriptions B&D provide in their assessment of knowledge and information. I had never really thought much about the difference but it’s so clear now. It’s probably naïve of me to say this—teachers probably have a thorough understanding of the difference.
A wonderful analogy B&D provide is the idea that if NASA wanted to land on the moon again, they’d basically have to start from scratch. The data and information necessary to go to the moon exists but the knowledge base—scientists, mission experts—have all long since retired or passed away. Further this attests to a knowledge community. The “community of practice” allows members of the community to learn from each other toward a common objective and to understand all aspects of the task at hand.
So how does this relate to our current education system? In terms of early education (k-12) the community may be analogous to the classroom. But I wonder if this isn’t more of a communal attempt to acquire information. Which of course makes sense because a strong informational base is required before attempting a more focused application of that information. No one expects 10th graders to build a car, but they should have the beginnings of good math and physics skills to do so. Beyond primary education the idea of community learning is shown in internship and residency programs for doctors. The information is there, but a medical degree is merely a component to being a good doctor. It takes years of practical application of information to deal with the complexities of medical conditions and human behavior.
The knowledge-information concept strikes a chord with me with regard to the “No Child Left Behind” paradigm. I’m no educator, so feel free to tear this apart, but it seems that NCLB is test focused, thus students are taught what they need to pass required tests. This would be a major shift from the idea that information is only a component of knowledge. Kids know how to take a test but they are not acquiring skills to apply that information so that it grows into knowledge.
A wonderful analogy B&D provide is the idea that if NASA wanted to land on the moon again, they’d basically have to start from scratch. The data and information necessary to go to the moon exists but the knowledge base—scientists, mission experts—have all long since retired or passed away. Further this attests to a knowledge community. The “community of practice” allows members of the community to learn from each other toward a common objective and to understand all aspects of the task at hand.
So how does this relate to our current education system? In terms of early education (k-12) the community may be analogous to the classroom. But I wonder if this isn’t more of a communal attempt to acquire information. Which of course makes sense because a strong informational base is required before attempting a more focused application of that information. No one expects 10th graders to build a car, but they should have the beginnings of good math and physics skills to do so. Beyond primary education the idea of community learning is shown in internship and residency programs for doctors. The information is there, but a medical degree is merely a component to being a good doctor. It takes years of practical application of information to deal with the complexities of medical conditions and human behavior.
The knowledge-information concept strikes a chord with me with regard to the “No Child Left Behind” paradigm. I’m no educator, so feel free to tear this apart, but it seems that NCLB is test focused, thus students are taught what they need to pass required tests. This would be a major shift from the idea that information is only a component of knowledge. Kids know how to take a test but they are not acquiring skills to apply that information so that it grows into knowledge.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Ma.gnolia/Del.icio.us
Wh.at give.s wi.th the f.un.ky pu.n.ctua.tion? Aesthetically speaking, Magnolia has a nicer looking interface and I like the simplicity of the start page. Functionally, they are similar but I gravitate to Delicious because I’m biased—I started with Delicious, learned how to use it and now I prefer it. From that standpoint, it seems that Magnolia’s target audience is anyone new to social bookmarking. There just isn’t enough about Magnolia to warrant abandoning Delicious. With that in mind:
- Both offer fairly simple bookmarking, descriptions, tagging, etc.
- Both offer the ability to bookmark a site through your browser. In Magnolia they’re bookmark applets, or bookmarklets. I think this is ridiculous English, or ridinglish.
- Magnolia offers a unique MacOS tool to allow you to bookmark through Dashboard—cool.
- Both have prominent and useful “Help” pages. Probably a testament to how new this technology is to many people.
- Magnolia has an “Import from Delicious” tool, but not the other way around.
Slashdot
Like Delicious, Slashdot is a social bookmarking site but incorporates the ability to submit stories you’ve written. The site seems to aim itself at “nerds” though its popularity has made it a site for all. Or maybe you earn a “nerd” merit badge just by being a subscriber. As a browser, the site is much simpler to use, with subject headings taking the reader directly to posts of stories on certain subjects—technology, books, science, etc. Personally I find this site a much more technical than Delicious, also a bit more confusing to use. Want to see your bookmarks? Click on “Firehose”. Want to see your tags? Click on “bookmarks”. The page to add bookmarks was not readily obvious, nor was the page to add stories. Getting the impression that Slashdot bugs me?
OK the journal aspect of Slashdot is interesting. Subscribers may journal with the option to either “publish” or not—that is, make your journal posts available for all Slashdot readers or to keep them private. This feature gives the impression that Slashdot is trying to be everything—social bookmarking site, blogging site and nerd nirvana.
OK the journal aspect of Slashdot is interesting. Subscribers may journal with the option to either “publish” or not—that is, make your journal posts available for all Slashdot readers or to keep them private. This feature gives the impression that Slashdot is trying to be everything—social bookmarking site, blogging site and nerd nirvana.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Information exce(r)ss
I think like most good things, moderation is key. So does RRS contribute to information overload? It certainly can. I use it to subscribe only to what I want to keep track of and of those things, I don’t keep up to the minute with every update. I use my aggregator as a convenient way to visit multiple information sources but I’m not addicted to information.
However there are some out there who are. For these people, I think RSS and aggregators are the crack pipes of information intake. Certainly the technology is useful but I think sometimes that just because we can, doesn’t mean we should. RSS gives us the ability to acquire information quickly and conveniently, but how good is the information? The web is filled with dubious information sources, sites with repugnant ideologies and criminal activities. Unfortunately RSS benefits visitors of these sites too. There’s always a caveat.
However there are some out there who are. For these people, I think RSS and aggregators are the crack pipes of information intake. Certainly the technology is useful but I think sometimes that just because we can, doesn’t mean we should. RSS gives us the ability to acquire information quickly and conveniently, but how good is the information? The web is filled with dubious information sources, sites with repugnant ideologies and criminal activities. Unfortunately RSS benefits visitors of these sites too. There’s always a caveat.
Feed, part deux
Anderson completes his fictional take on the future but I couldn’t, or maybe didn’t, appreciate the heavy handed approach to this cautionary tale. Of course, as mentioned in a previous post, I can understand how kids are becoming more and more creatures of technology, alienated and socially inept outside of their online worlds. That said, I think that today we are still far from the cruel world of Feed, though I wonder if the technology were available today, how many would adopt the technology into their lives and how many would revolt against it? A civil war of technology.
As for the society depicted in the novel—I think humans would become extinct before it got to this level. Darwin would rear his head and the frail nature of the humans of Feed would have been their undoing. Perhaps this is what the lesions are indicative of—a devolution of humans as bitstreams take over. Sort of reminds me of the world of “The Terminator”, where humans are just in the way of technology.
By the way, I “read” this entire novel via the technology of my iPod, where I was tortured by lame dialog, futuristic commercials and the noise of The Feed. I took frequent breaks and cleansed my aural palate with Coltrane—Blue Train, 1957. Oh yeah.
As for the society depicted in the novel—I think humans would become extinct before it got to this level. Darwin would rear his head and the frail nature of the humans of Feed would have been their undoing. Perhaps this is what the lesions are indicative of—a devolution of humans as bitstreams take over. Sort of reminds me of the world of “The Terminator”, where humans are just in the way of technology.
By the way, I “read” this entire novel via the technology of my iPod, where I was tortured by lame dialog, futuristic commercials and the noise of The Feed. I took frequent breaks and cleansed my aural palate with Coltrane—Blue Train, 1957. Oh yeah.
New to me 2.0.1
So another new 2.0 technology I’ve come across is online photo editing. One such site:
http://www.pixlr.com/
Even the concept of online photo editing is both terrific in its technology and fascinating in how quickly this technology has hit the mainstream. A mere 10 years ago this technology was a pipedream, inhibited by the immense processing power required. Not to mention the skill level of the user. As a photographer I’m perplexed by the fading away of film. I enjoy the instant gratification of digital, but I lament that many photographers are losing their technical skill, ironically, by not learning the concepts of depth of field, fast shutter speeds or how to create effects with analog tools.
Of course the functionality of this site is really impressive, on par with Photoshop Elements. One may crop, rotate, sharpen, resize or add filter effects. The tools are limited and simplified for novice users but this is an incredibly handy online image editor. The online application was developed by a Swedish team of programmers. The API is available for those who would like to incorporate use of the editor on their site, though they encourage that use be for non-commercial purposes.
I’m intrigued by what may be possible for online image databases with something like the toolset provided here. Currently there are simple tools, such as panning, zooming or rotating, available on many image browsing sites, but what if one could add sharpening, or control brightness and contrast to enhance image study? I’m convinced that it’s online tools like this that will drive the next level of functionality for image libraries.
http://www.pixlr.com/
Even the concept of online photo editing is both terrific in its technology and fascinating in how quickly this technology has hit the mainstream. A mere 10 years ago this technology was a pipedream, inhibited by the immense processing power required. Not to mention the skill level of the user. As a photographer I’m perplexed by the fading away of film. I enjoy the instant gratification of digital, but I lament that many photographers are losing their technical skill, ironically, by not learning the concepts of depth of field, fast shutter speeds or how to create effects with analog tools.
Of course the functionality of this site is really impressive, on par with Photoshop Elements. One may crop, rotate, sharpen, resize or add filter effects. The tools are limited and simplified for novice users but this is an incredibly handy online image editor. The online application was developed by a Swedish team of programmers. The API is available for those who would like to incorporate use of the editor on their site, though they encourage that use be for non-commercial purposes.
I’m intrigued by what may be possible for online image databases with something like the toolset provided here. Currently there are simple tools, such as panning, zooming or rotating, available on many image browsing sites, but what if one could add sharpening, or control brightness and contrast to enhance image study? I’m convinced that it’s online tools like this that will drive the next level of functionality for image libraries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
