Presentation on theme: "Michael Hannafin University of Georgia. ARPANET (late 1960s-early 1980s) BBN links to/from US universities (1971-1973) Internet emerges Internet."— Presentation transcript:
Michael Hannafin University of Georgia
ARPANET (late 1960s-early 1980s) BBN links to/from US universities ( ) Internet emerges Internet Development (early 1980s-today) ARPANET shuts down (1990) Internet 2/NSFNet established for research Public access (domains, IP service providers) World-Wide Web (1990s-today) Democratization of Internet Pages and Browsers v. Coding and scripting Individual/personal v. corporate/educational applications One-to-one communication ( , Skype, chat) Web 20: Emergence of social media
Important distinctions Individual/group sharable repositories (Google Docs, Sakai)sharable repositories Distributed research/knowledge building communitiesresearch Remote undersea exploration teamsundersea exploration International R&D collaborationscollaborations Business networking sites (LinkedIn)LinkedIn
Specify and clarify defined “core” knowledge- skill required or expected Anticipate and address “public” misconceptions, challenges to core understanding “Target” and utilize specific SM apps aligned with goals and objectives Stimulate, sustain and direct understanding via SM Differentiate impact on “learning” (knowing) from “performing” (deciding/acting)
Hoaxes (AP: GE to “repay” tax refund (April, 2011)) Hoaxes Source credibility (Pierre Salinger Syndrome: downing of TWA 800 (July, 1997)) Reliability of information and source(s) (competing, contradictory (OMB v. political party cost-benefit estimates of Obama health care reform) Reliability of information and source(s) Motivation/agenda of contributors (advocacy, political, economic (e.g., Maddow (MSNBC) v. O’Reilly (FOX)) Control/accuracy, interpretations, and inferences (Arab Spring, Egyptian resistance)Arab Spring Unpredictable, unregulated consequences (Wikileaks criteria for submission-inclusion)Wikileaks Inherent bias (left-right, socio-political, self-serving spin) Inherent bias
Whose “story” is being conveyed? how/why? Students will access/use SM; plan accordingly Clarify and distinguish “core” from socially- constructed knowledge-skill Be wary of and ready to address socially generated “truths” and “facts” SM, per se, has no underlying ethics or quality control mechanisms Anticipate and address common misconceptions, challenges The “enemy” will create own (competing) realities
Familiar to GenX/GenY? Which criteria will guide decision(s)? Which SM make sense? Why? Contribution(s) to goals/objectives? Problems, issues, complications? Risks, rewards?