text:
Web 2.0 and Emerging Learning Technologies/Introduction

=Introduction and Historical Background Information: What is Web 2.0? What does emerging technologies mean?=

Web 2.0 and Participatory E-Learning
Web 2.0 is a metaphor that implies a paradigm shift in the manner by which web technology is used. Web 2.0 refers to the "read - write Web"; that is, users can not only read what is on the Web, but can also contribute to its contents. In December 2006, Time Magazine named “you” as the person of the year. Web 2.0 (also called the Read-Write Web) empowers learners to generate ideas and comments online (active learning) rather than simply reading or browsing someone else’s comments (passive learning). In effect, instead of passive consumption-based learning, we live in a participatory age where learners have a voice and potentially some degree of ownership over their own learning. Here at the start of the twenty-first century, emerging technologies – such as online photo albums, blogs, wikis, podcasts, ebooks, YouTube videos, massive multiplayer online games, simulations, virtual worlds, and wireless and mobile computing – are generating waves of new opportunities in higher education, K-12 schools, corporate training, and other learning environments.

Learners are immersed in an increasingly digital world, and we need to understand the educational implications of this shift. Many [WHO?] are suggesting today's learners want richer and more engaging learning experiences but the evidence to support these claims is sketchy at best. Instructors across educational sectors are exploring and sharing innovative ways to use technology to foster interaction, collaboration, and increased excitement for learning. '''Unfortunately, as any high school student will tell you, this is far less common than most would hope. [I am uncomfortable making this claim without evidence).''' In response, it is time to take advantage of the new participatory learning culture where learners build, tinker with, explore, share, and collaborate with others online. It is also time to exploit free and open educational resources, opencourseware, learning portals, and open source software across educational sectors and income levels.

This wikibook, therefore, will be a journey into the learning technologies (i.e., nature), pedagogical opportunities (i.e., nurture), and the people, societies, and cultures where this is happening now! In fact, this wikibook got its start in a course on Web 2.0 and Participatory e-learning taught by Professor Curt Bonk at Indiana University in Bloomington. Students from Indiana University as well as Indiana State University, Beijing Normal University in China, the Open University of Malaysia in Kuala Lumpur, and National Chiao Tung University in Hsinchu, Taiwan were among the initial participants. We invite anyone else around the planet who is interested in this topic to contribute to this wikibook on "The Web 2.0 and Emerging Technologies (The WELT).

Some people are interested in how Web 2.0 relates to e-learning. Web 2.0 technology activates the learner. These are tools for learning and a part of e-learning. They do not necessarily equate with e-learning. But we need all such tools in the learning arsenal! There are so many choices and opportunities today. In effect, Web 2.0 personalizes the learning and allows for more voices to be heard.

As Charles Wedemeyer (1981) at the University of Wisconsin noted decades ago, we have entered an age when eyeball-to-eyeball learning is no longer necessary. In a June 2001 lecture, Michael Moore notes that:

"Since the invention of distance education in the 19th century, their core mission was to open access to those who are denied opportunity in the conventional system. Back in 1970, when I went to the United States to work with Charles Wedemeyer —who is the father of all that we are doing, and I hope you've read enough of the literature to recognise his name—, he had in the office, on the wall of his office, a picture of a little boy in rags; he was a Russian serf boy, and he was looking through the door to the very nicely dressed children inside the classroom —they were wealthy children, they were having an education. The little boy was at the door looking in. When he wrote his book, Charles Wedemeyer called his book Learning at the Backdoor, and that kind of captures the emotion that the early distance educators had —that they were providing opportunity to people who were otherwise denied opportunity." (Moore, 2001; see [])

While distance education opportunities continue to increase, Moore worries that emerging technologies, especially online ones, have widened the digital divide instead of reducing it, since access to the Internet is, of course, required. It would be interesting to get Wedemeyer's perspective on this. As people like Wedemeyer would have hoped, there are many options to "eyeball-to-eyeball" learning today including videoconferencing, blended learning, fully online learning, etc. With each of these delivery systems, come options for instructors as well as learners. The right mixing or balancing grants learners more choice and self-determination in their own learning. When done thoughtfully, effective online instructors do not simply teach but moderate, coach, and assist in the learning process. It is a time for empowering learners!

As such we should foster situations with Web 2.0 wherein learners contribute to their own learning. You can do this by creating and publishing a cross-cultural Wikibook on Web 2.0 technology as we have done here. You can do this through anchoring instruction in videos found in YouTube, TeacherTube, Splashcast, CurrentTV, BBC News and World Reports, CNN Videos, etc., as well as having your students create their own YouTube and other online videos. Of course, you can also do this by having blog on their experiences in a course and then share those blogs or comment on each others' ideas. And they might even create a few class podcasts or vodcasts related to topics in the course. There are myriad possibilities.

We have enough experience with Internet-based learning to know that there are many ways for learners to learn collaboratively with others as well as in more solitary pursuits. There are countless electronic collaborators (Bonk & Kim, 1998) in one's learning journeys; Web 2.0 has simply made that more evident and exploitable. The chapters in this wikibook, The WELT, are intended as a compendium of ideas, stories, examples, and cases wherein educational technology is making a difference in the life's of learners around the world. We hope you enjoy it!

'References'

Bonk, C. J., & King, K. S. (Eds.). (1998). Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Moore, M. G. (2001, June 6). Distance education in the United States: The state of the art. Series of lectures on the educational use of ICT and virtual education. Retrieved December 3, 2007, from []

Wedemeyer, C. A. (1981). Learning at the back door: Reflections on non-traditional learning in the lifespan. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Introduction
Web 2.0 has been a hot topic since 2005. It was originally presented by O’Reilly Media, a well-known media company publishing books and websites. And it's a phrase that refers to a new generation of web-based communities and hosted services such as social networking sites, wiki, communication tools, and folksonomies. These websites give web users an extensive space to reveal themselves such as sharing their experiences, views, opinions and interests as well as web users take advantage of web application technologies while they surf the web.

What is Web 2.0? Richard MacManus (year) posted his definition of web2.0 as read-write web that, “Well I prefer the succinct "The Web as Platform", because I can then fill in the blanks depending on who I'm talking to. For corporate people, the Web is a platform for business. For marketers, the Web is a platform for communications. For journalists, the Web is a platform for new media. For geeks, the Web is a platform for software development. And so on.”(p. x) Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices. Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an "architecture of participation," and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences (O’Reilly, 2005).

The Characteristics of Web2.0

The web2.0 is a revolutionary phenomenon. I list some of the most basic characteristics of the websites using the web2.0 concept:

•	The read/write web.

•	The web as a platform.

•	Rich user experiences.

•	Data as the driving force.

•	An architecture of participation.

•	Harnessing collective intelligence.

•	A rich, interactive, user-friendly interface.

•	Leveraging of popular trends, including blogging, social tagging, wikis, and peer-to-       peer sharing.

•	Inclusion of emerging web technologies like RSS, AJAX, APIs(and accompanying mashups),Ruby on Rails and others.

•	Open source or sharable/editable frameworks in the form of user-oriented “create    your own” APIs.

The Technologies of web 2.0 Web2.0 is not a new network technology but a network application. The technology infrastructure of Web 2.0 is complex and evolving. It includes the use of content syndication, server software, standards-based browsers that have extensions and plugins, client applications, and messaging protocols. All these advanced technology provides Web 2.0 with dissemination, creation, and information storage capability. There are a number of major techniques that Web 2.0 website uses. Some of them include:

•	CSS, semantically valid XHTML markup, and Microformats.

•	Significant and clean URLs.

•	Aggregation of RSS/ATOM data.

•	Syndication of data in RSS/ATOM.

•	REST or XML Webservice APIs.

•	Some social networking aspects.

•	Support posting to a weblog

The Techniques Services of web 2.0

•	Mashups

•	Tagging

•	Tag clouds

•	Folksonomy

•	Blogging

•	Wikis

Popular Examples of Web 2.0 Based Websites Web2.0 websites are build on participatory web based applications focusing basically on user experience and collaboration. Here are some websites utilizing the web2.0 technologies:

1. YouTube –

The concept of YouTube is very simple.It allows the users to share their videos with entire world and upload others.

2. Wikipedia –

The most famous online encyclopedia wherein the users contribute by writing the articles, definitions, etc. It is completely edited and maintained by the users.

3. MySpace –

This website allows users to create their own profile, blog, friend list and personal homepage adding whatever you want on it (text, images, videos, links, etc)

4. Flickr –

This website allows users to upload their photographs and share it with anyone and everyone.

5. Facebook –

Facebook is a social utility that connects people with friends and others who work, study and live around them. People use Facebook to keep up with friends, upload an unlimited number of photos, share links and videos, and learn more about the people they meet.

Reference

O’Reilly, Tim.“What is Web 2.0? Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software.” Everything Tim: tim.oreilly.com. 30 Sept. 2005. 25 Jan. 2006.

O’Reilly, Tim.“Web 2.0: Compact Definition? ”O'Reilly Radar. 01 Oct. 2005. 03 Mar. 2006.


text:
Web 2.0 and Emerging Learning Technologies/Next Generation

= The Next Generation of Learners =

Who Fits This Mode?
We live in a society of the advanced technology while facing a series of technological evolution. In the book, The World is Flat by Thomas L. Friedman, he mentioned that during his time, if the children didn't eat food, parents would say that many Africans have no food to eat, you have to finish it. But, now in the Information Age[1], if the child does not study hard, the parent warns that a Chinese and Indian child will surpass them and take away some future career.

Remember that a support call (1-800-XXX-XXXX) can be diverted to any part of the world. Currently, many U.S. firms are outsourcing their support department to other parts of the world, using Skype. The borders of the world are beginning to melt away as the internet brings us all a few keystrokes away from the information we need. Our educational system must change to meet the needs of today's learners.

First we must consider the type of learner that we are trying to instruct. This TeacherTube video gives a good profile of today’s students: http://www.teachertube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=40c570a322f1b0b65909&page=1&viewtype=&category=tr. Related to all the factors given in the video, people call this new generation by a diverse set of names, such as Generation Xw:Generation X, Generation Yw:Generation Y, Nestersw:Nester, and the Internet Generationw:Internet generation. YouTube is an online free video sharing website. Here, I call them the Net Generation based on a definition from Tapscott’s Growing Up Digital book.

Much has been written about describing the characteristics of the Net Generation, but who are they and how do they differ from the former generations. Oblinger and Oblinger (2005) described that “Net generation learners -- students who were born in the 1980s and later” (p. 1.2). It should be emphasized that most of the claims about this generation are not based on empirical research. Instead, they are speculative in nature or based on anecdotal observations. Sue Bennett, Karl Maton and Lisa Kervin have written an excellent review of the net generation literature that was published in the British Journal of Educational Technology http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bpl/bjet/2008/00000039/00000005/art00002. There is a blog that is attempting to promote a more informed and evidence-based discussion of the generational issue and its relevance to post secondary education: http://netgennonsense.blogspot.com/

Claims about the Net Generation can be sorted into two categories. One of them is describing their learning styles, and the other is focusing on their lifestyles. Both styles will affect the students’ ways of learning.

Learning styles:

1.	Learn from Experimentation. Billings (2004) stated that the Net Generations like to discover new things and learn from hands-on experiences (p. 104). They prefer learning by doing rather than being told what to do or reading static books. These students are able to intuitively use a variety of IT devices & browse the Internet. They like to tinker with the up-to-date electronic gadgets, such as iPods, MP3 players, and cell phones. These students like that because they can touch and play with these devices. They also like to explore the Internet to learn something new, to make new friends, to make your own photo album, or to learn a new tools for blogging and more. They enjoy learning through self-discovery and taking the initiative to learn new tools.

2. 	Prefer visual learning. Due to the prevalence of technology in their lives as they developed, the Net Generation feels comfortable in the media-rich environment, surrounded by different kinds of digital devices such as computers, LCD projectors, PDAs, iPods, MP4 and iPhones. Living in this multimedia environment, the Net generations exposes themselves to the interactive computer games and movies, whether they are at home or at school. TV and computers provide rich visual effects which has resulted in them becoming more accustomed to receiving input in this mode. Oblinger and Oblinger (2005) stated that “the Net generations’ text literacy may be less well developed than previous generations (p. 2.5).”

When the Net Generation looks for information online, not only will they try different search engines (like Google and Yahoo), but they also search for interactive materials from YouTube.com. Net generations use RSS, Really Simple Syndication, which allows users to choose to receive "feeds" or "newsfeeds" from blogs, news services, and other websites (p. 23). This generation is comfortable with Google's Adsense, which is a service that delivers advertisements to a searcher based on the content of that person’s searches.

At times the separation between virtual reality and reality is not as well-defined for these Net generation students. Linden-virtual money in Second Life might be hard to differentiate from real money, especially when there is an established exchange rate Anshe Chung is the richest person in Second Life, while CNN plans to open an I-Report hub in Second Life . They are fond of learning from latest visual aids and are comfortable with the sound effects whenever they update their information. Net Generations also like to create Avatar roles on the Internet. An avatar is a virtual representation of a person created for use in online spaces such as Second Life or computer games. Many people often have several avatars and may elect to use different avatars depending on the setting. It is also important to note that an avatar need not be an actual representation of how the person looks in physical world.

From the educator’s perspective, using hard copy books might not be effective for arousing the Net Generation’s attention and interest in learning. Instead, they may prefer to search the Internet for more interactive materials from sites such as YouTube.com.

In this sense, the visual learning style that the Net Generation prefers is shaped by the culture and the environment of developed and developing countries, because society exposes them to a media-rich environment every day. On the Internet, they also do not feel as lonely, because they can interact with a group of people with the similar interests. For example in YouTube, it is possible to connect with someone by simply clicking on the person’s profile and viewing their favorite video clip. Additionally, under the permalinkw:Permalink, one can see the link to this video and from there can explore more videos. Thus, connections and community can be fostered through the use of these types of rapid, convenient social-networking tools.

3.	Like to work in groups. The Net Generation enjoys working on teams with peers, using collaborative tools like Google Apps. In general, these students are more likely to prefer learning in a supportive environment with teamwork. An activity, such as a Wiki project, that can be undertaken with their instructors and peers, is probably preferred by the Net Generation more than an individual assignment.

This learning characteristic fits Vygotsky’s zone of proximal growth theory. Lefrancois (1997) explained that Vygotsky’s zone of proximal growth was defined “the individual’s current potential for further intellectual development (p. 98).” The Net Generations like to build up their learning by working with peers, because the slower learners are supported by the fast learners, and they learn by scaffolding the knowledge from each other. If learning is taken as to be an individual task without support from peers, more students will be left behind. As a result, the Net Generation fits Vygotsky’s scaffolding theory, because most of them like to work in groups with their classmates. They gain confidence and support when cooperating with peers, and they scaffold knowledge together. Learning is not only for the individual. There is nothing to be ashamed of if you do not understand when you first learn something new; rather, they like to share their experiences in groups. Google has developed many innovative applications to create a good working environment for these learners.

4.	Have short attention spans and multi-task well. The media-rich environment that the Net Generation has become accustomed to appears to have shortened their attention span. If you ask them to work on the same thing for hours, it would probably overwhelm or frustrate them. They will probably enjoy the activities more if they can get several things done simultaneously, because they can usually shift attention rapidly from one task to another. They are generally able to multi-task better than their parents and can split their attention between different activities. Oblinger and Oblinger (2005) observed that “They like to parallel process and multi-task…. They thrive on immediate gratification” (p. 2.14). Thus, an instructor should not be surprised by seeing a student listening to music, surfing the Internet, and talking to friends on the phone while doing homework. These diverse activities are all part of the Net Generations’ daily lives.

5.	Edutainment. The word “Edutainment” is a combination of two words: education and entertainment, which refers to educational entertainment or entertaining education. Content of product provides user with specific skills development or reinforcement learning within an entertainment setting. Think about what happen when education is combined with entertainment. According to Wikipedia, “Edutainment typically seeks to instruct or socialize its audience by embedding lessons in some familiar form of entertainment: television programs, computer and video games, films, music, websites, multimedia software, etc.”

Compared to the older generations’ perspectives towards education, the Net Generation believes that learning has nothing to do with teachers’ authority. Instead, learning is considered interactive and involves fun activities. They prefer teachers infusing games and activities into the curricula. Shih & Hung (2007) stated that from the Net generations’ perspective, learning can be easier and more interesting (p. 20). Teachers cannot keep students’ attention by teaching them from a content-only curriculum. Integrating games into education seems to be an up-to-date and interactive way to increase students’ interests and enhance their motivation. Additionally,students are more engaged in sharing ideas among them.

Recently, more educators have supplemented standard curricula with simulations and games as supplementary. They discovered that these enhancements have increased students learning interests and motivated them to engage in the learning content.

Education should bring positive influences to students with the entertaining activities. For example, the Korea Game Academy is an affiliated organization of the Korea Game Development & Promotion Institute, a public institute dedicated to the growth of the game industry and game education in Korea.

6.     '''Copy & Paste. ''' For the Net Generation, almost all content can be copied and pasted or cut and pasted from the Internet. Though this ability is a convenience over typing or creating other forms of content, it can lead to issues of plagiarism.

7.	Agree on life-long learning, E-,U- and M-learning. Pursuing knowledge and degree is not the only the privilege for teenagers to doctoral students. The concept of continuous education and life-long learning has become more common to the Net Generation. They are curious, and these students like to learn and consider new ideas. What they have learned is not unchangeable or stagnant, and they perceive knowledge as not being static. They keep updating and constructing knowledge and keep abreast of trends and current issues. Furthermore, the Net Generation prefers to individualize and customize their learning environment according to their current needs.

The term U-learning stands for ubiquitous learning, which can occur anytime, anywhere. Unlimited learning is another way to consider the word U-learning. In the past, people might have thought that once they have finished their education, they were done with school and were free to get into the real world. However, living in the Information Age, people are eager to learn more than before, and this is particularly true of the Net Generation. One example of the great potential of U-learning is the fact that MIT now offers free online course materials.

The world keeps progressing and so do the young Net Generations. Therefore, E-learning and U-learning are right to fit their specialized desires and needs, because they are able to pace themselves in learning without perceiving the constraints of place and time. There is little doubt that in the future, learning solutions and services will be integrated into a whole host of mobile devices. “These devices can take the form of handheld computers or personal digital assistants, mobile phones including the new Smartphone, iPods... video players... Tablet PCs, and even wearable devices. They can be connected through a desktop, a laptop, or a network, either wired or wireless" (retrieved December 6, 2007, from http://adlcommunity.net/mod/wiki/view.php?id=142&page=Mobile+or+Ubiquitous+Learning).

Lifestyles or Living Styles:

1.	Are always “on” connectivity. The Net Generation is connected by cell phones and computers. In fact, their cell phones and computers are usually on, and they fear missing calls and messages. In addition, they are wired by using MSN, Yahoo messenger, AOL, and Skype to chat with their friends, regardless of their location. This group generally feels comfortable living in virtual communities like Second Life, being connected by the means listed above and being reached by their friends at all times of day or night. They seem unable to eliminate the social networking from their lives. They also have several ways to connect wirelessly, including Bluetooth .

2.	Prefer Googling than going to the library. Whenever the Net Generations need information, their initial search is most likely to “Google” the information. Going to the library is not close to the top of their choices. From the Net Generation's perspective, it is faster and more efficient to find information online, including searching for the terms and explanations in Wikipedia.org -- the largest online encyclopedia website and a collaborative, public effort. Similarly, many consider the Google search engine a time-saving approach to finding the information they need. All they have to do is type the keywords and press the "enter" to see numerous results within seconds. The Net Generation also uses tags, one-word descriptors assigned to bookmarks on del.icio.us, to organize and create easily-remembered keywords for those web bookmarks.

3.	Like E-commerce. For the Net Generation, it is possible to do chores online, even order pizza and ask for delivery. Instead of going out shopping, they can browse the Internet for ideal items on different websites, comparing the price, and reading other peoples’ comments before they buy the products. They often believe that almost everything can be done via the Internet, and they want to save their time by using the online services. The same thing can refer to the online banking services. Compared to the Net Generation, their parents’ generation does not have enough faith in the online banking. The parents’ mistrust of online banking or E-commerce may be due to the lack of confidence in using computers in their daily lives. Windham observed the behavior of the Net Generation and concluded that when they go out and shop, they always choose to pay with credit cards or Debit cards (2005, p. 5.14). This group generally finds it easier to manage their banking accounts online than using more traditional ways, such as having an account books and paper checks lying around on the table. The Net Generation is definitely the wired or wireless generation. They feel very comfortable with using online services. For example, many might consider PayPal the faster and easier payment tool than going to their parents’ bank.

4.	Feel ease meeting strangers online. The Net Generations are generally more open-minded in their thinking; they favor diversity and differences; and they enjoy sharing information online that older individuals might consider private. They commonly use blogs as an online dairy, upload personal photos to Facebook, share their lives and thoughts via the online platform, and team up with friends on online games. Thus, they feel at ease and comfortable meeting new people in virtual settings. To older individuals, the Net Generation wants to be the focus of attention and enjoy living under a virtual spotlight.

The Net Generation also uses the web to meet people in the real world. For example, if a person is planning a trip abroad and desires to have an immersive cultural experience with the locals, that traveler can connect with people by going to http://www.homestayweb.com. However, for their parents’ generation, taking such risks was probably unacceptable.

Another way to interact with people online is to use collaborative tools, such as Google Apps, an online program that is free for educational purposes. Google Apps comes with a calendar, email with 4 gigabytes, chat, blog and more. One of the most powerful tools is the online docs, which are accessible at any time. The collaboration element comes in when you invite others to view and collaborate in these Google Apps.

5.	 Make good use of free online resources. These learners view the World Wide Web as a platform for sharing information all over the world. Generally, the Net Generation knows where and how to download music, movies and e-books. Although the violation of copyright law has been a consistent issue with sharing copyrighted materials online, the Net Generations continue to use peer-to-peer computer networks to share files.

Tapscott (1998), the writer of Growing Up Digital, stated that the Net Generation consumers have five characteristics. First, they expect options. Consider the number of TV channels that offer young people many options for their needs and desires. These Net Generation can make decisions about the available options, especially in the modern living environment. For the Net Generations, they are growing up in this environment which offers them options to choose what they want from what appears to be abundant resources.

Second, they like customization. The One-size-fits-all standard is no longer suitable for the Net Generation's needs. They want to be cool, be unique, and extraordinary. If a customizable product exists, they are willing to save and pull out all their money to pursuit the uniqueness. The third characteristic is related to the second: they want to change their minds. If you think the Net Generation will be loyal to a brand that they really love, you might be wrong. Unlike the older generation’s loyalty to the specific brand names, the Net Generation will not adhere to just one kind. They like to compare things within different brands and not necessarily buy all kinds of stuffs in one brand. They have the right to mix and match the products they like.

Fourth, they want to try it out. Before buying things, they like to test and manipulate the products and then decide if they want to make the purchase. They like to compare goods before making their minds. Last but not least, they focus on function and real value. Epstein (1998) states that “The Net Generation are not impressed with technology---They care about what technology can do for them.” Overall, the Net Generation is more practical. They do not care about brands at all. Whatever function can meet their needs, they will use it.

Things we should be concerned about

As there are many advantages that the Internet brings to learners and teachers, there are some problems to note. The technology and Web development really help teacher to design and demonstrate visual and interactive learning. “NCLB (No Child Left Behind) requires educators who teach core academic subjects-including reading, language arts, mathematics and science-to teaching skills”(Melinda, 2007). Melinda questions whether or not all these online courses can be qualified and match the school purposes or policy. Due to the growth of distance and online learning, schools should devote resources to the creation of 'digital' or 'virtual' classrooms. In addition, instructional designers should develop interactive and appealing online courses to attract students' learning interests.

Now students have more choices in their learning environment. Some like face-to-face interaction in the classroom, while some full-time workers have to choose online courses. However, students learning autonomy and self-regulation will be the critical factor in determining the success of the students' online learning. Students who do not like online courses say that they have difficulties in managing their time and do not know how to handle online classes. As a result, students' sense of isolation and autonomy in online course environments seems to be another main issue we should consider.

Moreover, due to the expansive growth of distance learning in the world, students and teachers do not need to go to school and can have classes at the most convenient place and time. However, they may lose their chance to connect with each other. Alfred and Kirk consider that students and teachers lack of social relationship and there is distance between people. These online courses can not be like traditional classes that allow people to have eye-contact, a sense of humor atmosphere, using inclusive pronouns... and other situations (Alfred P and Kirk T). In my opinion, the task of minimizing students' feelings of isolation in an online course is related to the instructors' curriculum design. It is another issue we need to consider.

Conclusion

We need to be cautious about how we make use of the claims that have been made about this generation. Educators have been too quick to accept uncritically the claims. Claims based on speculation and anecdotal observations have been repeated a though they were fact. As mentioned earlier almost none of the claims are based on empirical research. These characteristics listed above are mainly describing the Net Generation's learning and living styles. Not only do students need basic computer literacy to use the newest technology to facilitate their learning, but the educators must keep pace with the learners. The instructors must be aware of the current student's learning preferences and design an up-to-date curriculum to meet the Net Generation's learning needs but this must be based on evidence,not speculation.

References:

Bennett, S. Maton K. & Kervin, L. (2008). The `digital natives' debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786.

Billings, D. (2004, May/Jun). Teaching learners from varied generations. The ''Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 35''(3), 104-105. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from ProQuest Education Journals.

Epstein, J.H. (1998, April). The net generation is changing the marketplace. The Futurist, 32(3). 14. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from ProQuest Education Journals.

Geck, C. (2006, February). The generation Z connection: teaching information literacy to the newest net generation. Teacher Librarian, 33(3), 19-23. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from ProQuest Education Journals.

Generation C. An emerging consumer trend and related new business ideas. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from http://www.trendwatching.com/trends/GENERATION_C.htm

Lefrancois, G.R. (1997). Psychology for teaching. (9th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

McNeely, B. (2005). Using technology as a learning tool, not just the cool new thing (chap. 4). In Oblinger, D.G & Oblinger, J.L. (Eds.), The next generation learner. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen

Oblinger, D.G. (2004, July 21). The next generation learner. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from http://www.nwacc.org/archive/conferences/2004_Spring_Board_mtg/oblinger.pdf

Oblinger, D.G, & Oblinger, J.L. (Eds.). (2005). Educating the net generation. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen

Roberts, G. (2005). Technology and learning expectations of the net generation (chap.3). In Oblinger, D.G & Oblinger, J.L. (Eds.), The next generation learner. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen

Shih, T. K., & Hung, J.C. (2007). Future directions in distance learning and communication technologies. Hershey: Information Science Publishing.

Skiba, D.J. (2006, May/Jun). Collaborative tools for the net generation.'' Nursing Education Perspectives. 27''(3). 162-163. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from ProQuest Education Journals.

Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: the rise of the net generation. New York: McGrow-Hill Companies, INC.

Windham, C. (2005). The student’s perspective (chap.5). In Oblinger, D.G & Oblinger, J.L. (Eds.), The next generation learner. Retrieved October, 1, 2007 from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen

Wati Abas, Z., Kaur, A.,Tengku, P. N., & Tengku, S. (2007, January). Trends and Issues in Educational Technology. UNITEM Sdn Bhd. (p.219)

Gen Y: How This Generation Will Affect Web 2.0 in the Workplace?
The next generation of tech-savvy young go-getters nicknamed Generation Y is used to mobile and Web 2.0 collaborative technologies. Web 2.0 is delivering the ability to communicate instantly, collaborate, share data, and work from anywhere. This chapter will cover the challenges and demands that Generation Y will make on Web 2.0 in the workplace.

Gen Y comes close to the Baby Boomer population in size (exceeds 70 million). This generation is always-on, always-connected and feels that it is their right to be continuously plugged in to the Internet and to each other. According to Goldenburg, “These people are largely responsible for purchasing 1 billion cell phones in 2006 (compared to 1 billion cell phones sold before 2006), driving the 100-millionth iPod sale in April 2007, and spending on average 8.5 hours per day digitally connected.” (Goldenberg, 2007)

Although everyone has come across a young person that is a know-it-all, remember that type of person has always been out there for every generation. Overwhelmingly, Gen Yers are found to be hardworking, entrepreneurial, startlingly authentic, refreshingly candid, and wonderfully upbeat. (Welch, 2007)

The 16 –to 25-year-old kids of baby boomers are entering the workplace with different ideas, values and expectations than their older counterparts. They are brash, confident, demanding, and have no fear of authority. Businesses are finding that they will need to accommodate this new crop of workers. (Myers, 2007) According to Ranstad USA’s annual World of Work study, Gen Y workers use desktop computer, facsimiles, land-line telephones, cell phone, laptop computers and PDAs for work purposes less than any other generational group surveyed. (Technology, 2007)

There will be tasks and challenges placed upon businesses using Web 2.0, but if adopted they can make a business more productive and successful. Those who do not accept the changes will find themselves falling further and further behind. The biggest challenge seems to be getting Gen Yers to use Web 2.0 for work purposes. It is obvious that they are very knowledgeable on how to use the devices.

The attitude of Gen Y in workplace
High expectations of self: They aim to work faster and better than other workers.

High expectations of employers: They want fair and direct managers who are highly engaged in their professional development.

Ongoing learning: They seek out creative challenges and view colleagues as vast resources from whom to gain knowledge.

Immediate responsibility: They want to make an important impact from the first day on the job.

Changing: Generation Yers don't expect to stay in a job or even a career, for too long.

Goal-oriented: They want small goals with tight deadlines so they can build up ownership of tasks.

Work-life balance: Unlike Boomers who tend to put a high priority on career, today's youngest workers are more interested in making their jobs accommodate their family and personal lives. They want jobs with flexibility, telecommuting options and the ability to work part-time.

There are two video clips on CBS 60 minutes program talk about Gen Y(Millennials)issues

Preview: The 'Millennials'  http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3475131n

The Millennials Are Coming! http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3486473n

How will Gen Y affect Web 2.0?
There will be no limits for technology.

According to an article in the Indianapolis Star, Kristen Fuhs Wells was at home trying to relax and checking her Gmail account, she was disturbed to find a message announcing that she has been added as a friend to a facebook account. This is normally a good thing and a part of everyone’s life. However, this was different. The invitation had come from the chief executive of the company where she works. (Knight, 2007)

After cleaning up her account and making sure there was nothing unsuitable for him to see, she accepted the invitation. However, facebook was no longer a safe comfortable place for friends to learn a little more about you. It has become open season for the professional world. Bosses, colleagues and prospective employers are checking out Facebook and Myspace to get a glimpse of the real you.

In this case, her employer was just trying out the features and wanted to find a friend as a newcomer to Facebook. He actually sees potential for the sites as a professional tool. It is now catching on as a workplace tool. Ernst & Young has 16,000 employee-members on its Network and Citigroup has 8500.

According to an article in Business Week, employers can try too hard. The Millennials look up to the generations that preceded them. They don’t want those in positions of authority to think at their level and use their lingo. They feel that it is very artificial and they don’t want to friend their boss on Facebook. They feel that this puts their company into places they are protective of. (Welch, 2007)

The new water cooler is now on the web

Starcom MediaVest Group found that their workers spend a portion of their workday on a social network. So they decided that in instead of fighting it they would launch a network of their own, for employees only, called SMG Connected. Since April, 2007 more than a third of the company’s workers have signed up for their own pages and create profiles that outline their jobs, list the brands they admire, and describe their values.

Companies hope to leverage their skills and contacts by luring employees to a network. The Film Foundation in Los Angeles is using Lotus Connections to help manage an educational film program. Workers can share calendars, chat, blog, and archive research documents. They believe they can cut in half the time it takes to create materials by having members brainstorm, prepare budges, and review each other’s work on the network.

A 29 yr. old PhD student in the Sociology Department of the University of California wrote an essay that says that they are social class distinctions between Facebook and MySpace. Facebook is for WASPS (upper-middle-class professionals and/or their children) and MySpace is for poor kids (disc jockeys, musicians, skateboarders). (Toyoung, 2007) There seems to be a U vs. non-U online social networking. What opportunities and problems this will create will be interesting as more online social networking is created in the workplace. It might be a Gen Y vs. Pre-Gen Y social networking.

New spaces will be created to share information

Indianapolis, IN recently created an online site (indy.com) where individuals interested in their city can create a profile in a living, breathing community. After a profile is created the user can post photo galleries, write restaurant and movie reviews, comment on local arts and entertainment stories, and talk with other members. If used correctly, businesses can take advantage of the new spaces to change their marketing to appeal to prospective customers in their city or region.

Services Need to e Available

Banking industries are seeing the key to their success being a multichannel approach (including branch, phone, and ATM) combined with shifts in the values touted in product and messaging. Web-based financial management and the availability of ATMs at a bank will be the things that will cause a Gen Y consumer to choose one bank over another. For convenience they also prefer alerts from a text message or e-mail. Acquisition and retention of Gen Y costumers will focus on what is important to them: time savings, multichannel availability, financial management, and convenience. (Dyke & Garascia, 2007) More financial management in business will be done online. It will be interesting to see the changes in the financial industry.

It’s-All-On-The-Web-For-Free

Gen Y believes that everything can be found on the web. If the answer is not online, you are more than likely asking the wrong question. More information is available than they can keep in their heads and on their desks. It can always be Googled later. Everything is re-retrievable.

Research will be different but an improvement. There will be customizable search engines on different subject areas and possibly an online catalog that allows user to add annotations and to create Webliographies they can share with their peers that remembers what they have already viewed and makes recommendations based on their interests. (Bates, 2007)

Although the web has many opportunities for research, there are always issues. Information overload will be an issue. What information is valuable and how do you find time to read all of it? Solutions such as wikibooks, blogs and customizable search engines will become more common and important in screening the information.

Copyright issues will also be present. Not only are you responsible for giving others credit, you also need to protect your ideas. Sharing is becoming more common, but there is a fine line in business for what should not be shared.

It should be noted that both of these issues have been problems with printed as well as electronic. In some ways electronic has become easier to use because it is searchable. However, the amount of information is overwhelming. For example, this wikibook has added more content on tWeb 2.0. I just need a couple of hours to read it all.

Training will be downloaded and done at the learner’s convenience

Online training will be more and more common. JC Penny's has a training program that can be done at the employee's register. Featured satellite-based broadcasts can be downloaded and viewed at the employees’ convenience. They can interact with the broadcast by using the keypad. In the near future, district managers that are more mobile will be able to download the training to an iPod. Security screens are part of the units so the only way to access the unit is to input a security code. (Amato-McCoy, 2007)

Problems with scheduling training to fit everyone's schedule will no longer be an issue. However, supporting and providing the support they will need for this type of training to be available on the register and on an iPod will be a possible problem. However, the benefits seem to out weight the problems in this area.

Example of Web 2.0 Uses by Gen Y

 * 1) Log into local network “Facebook”
 * 2) Receive notice from eBay that their bid was a winner (purchasing company equipment)
 * 3) Login to PayPal and transfer money to pay for equipment
 * 4) E-mail notification that the equipment has been purchased
 * 5) Check StubHub to see if local NBA basketball team has tickets for international clients
 * 6) Use Skype to call the clients and tell them that you were able to get the tickets to an event
 * 7) Check to see if there are any applicants to the classified ad you put on Kijiji
 * 8) Get directions to the basketball game on MapQuest or Google Maps and make online reservations for dinner
 * 9) Research Wikipedia on China’s Culture – rebriefing for entertaining clients
 * 10) Check the wikibook you created on your local network discussing new mfg process
 * 11) Look on YouTube to see if there are any new videos on the process
 * 12) Check the pictures that a salesperson put on flickr showing a new production line in Georgia
 * 13) Go to whoissick.org and check for local sicknesses – you woke with a headache and are a little concerned
 * 14) A reminder appears on your desktop for you to attend a meeting on Second Life
 * 15) After the meeting, you make plans to go to the game room to relax and brainstorm with some colleagues

''After all – once your 9:00 meeting is completed – over half of the tasks you planned on doing are done by 10:00. You can’t help but wonder what they ever did before Web 2.0.''

Conclusion
Generation Y will force companies to think more creatively about work-life balance. Companies will need to adapt, but not all Web 2.0 technologies will be useful in business. Mashups which mix data from internal and external sources will be used in new ways. (Dornan, 2007)

The web is finally delivering the ability to communicate instantly, collaborate, share data and work from anywhere and as a result is changing the way businesses operate. There is a possibility that if you are over 25 and do not develop the skills and attitudes required for a Web 2.0 workplace, you may end up as redundant as an old typewriter. (It's, 2007)

What's next?

Rumors of Web 3.0 are on the horizon. According to an interview by Tim Reilly on YouTube, he believes that the next step will be applications pieced together that are fast, small, customizable, with social networks and e-mails that can be used on phones, PC's, etc. that are designed to work everywhere and distributed virtually. Who knows what is next? en:Web 3

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Web 2.0 and Emerging Learning Technologies/Digital Divide

=Overcoming the Digital Divide (e.g., One Laptop Per Child, The Global Text Project) =

Introduction
There has been an exponential growth in technologies worldwide in recent years, particularly the rise of Internet use and its related applications. Over the years, policy makers and social researchers on every continent and in every country have grown increasingly concerned over a societal split between those who have access to the computers and Internet and those who do not; or the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’. However, although the digital divide is often discussed in terms of technology, with increased internet accessibility and availability of technology, the digital divide is becoming more an issue of knowledge. It seems that for each sign the gap is shrinking (e.g., reduced storage and telecommunications costs, inexpensive MP3 players for literacy training, free online podcasts of language lessons, etc.), there are signs it is widening (e.g., teachers in rural schools and in third-world countries lack training to effectively integrate technology in instruction that other teachers have access to, dozens of new and emerging learning tools available only to those with Internet access, third world government hesitations to acquire inexpensive technologies for school children, etc.). The U.S. National Telecommunications and Information Administration, popularized a term the “Digital Divide” to describe the disparity in access to technology between the rich and the poor(Warschauer, 2003). The phrase has also been used in an international context to describe the status of information technology at a global level.

The digital divide has become a metaphor to describe the perceived disadvantage of those who either are unable to or do not choose to make use of technology in their daily life. This inequality in access to technology deserves our attention because it is assumed that the benefits of information and learning resources that are contained within these technologies is a huge benefit for learners and educators. No citizen in the twenty-first century should be without Internet access, especially those in the developed or fast developing parts of the world (Cullen, 2001). With the rapid market growth and technological disruption opportunities created by the ICTs (Information and Communication Technologies), people without ICT access and knowledge will be unable to compete in the new global ‘knowledge-based economy.' In this new economy, the sources of competitive advantage are high knowledge-intensity and fast adoption of new technology (Wong, 2002).

Definitions of the Digital Divide
The definition of the digital divide mostly focuses on the differential access to computers and the Internet among people in a society. Factors that are usually associated with access to the new information society include socioeconomic status, gender, age, educational backgrounds, and geographic location. People who are usually considered disadvantaged in their access to or knowledge of technology include people with low incomes, people who have few educational qualifications or have low literacy levels, the unemployed, elderly people, people in rural areas, people with disabilities, single parents, women, and young girls (Cullen, 2001).

In 2001, White households were still more likely to own a computer and have Internet access at home than Black or Hispanic Americans. But the proportion of Black and Hispanic computer and Internet users is growing at a faster rate than the proportion of White users (NTIA, 2002). In terms of geographic location, urban residents are far more likely to have access to computer services than their counterparts (Wilson, Wallin, & Reiser, 2003). Studies also found that although there has been a gap between male and female use of technology between 1998 and 2001, women increased their Internet use and closed the gap during that time period. In 2001, 53.9% of men and 53.8% of women were using the Internet (NTIA, 2002).

In 2007, according to the survey conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project (2007) between February 15 – March 7, 2007, the size of the digital divide seems to have been shrinking for many groups. Seventy-one percent of men go online, as do 70% of women. Elderly people are among the least likely group to use the Internet; only 32% of elderly people use the Internet, as compared to 87% of people aged 18 – 29. Seventy-eight percent of English-speaking Hispanics use the Internet, compared with 73% of non-Hispanic White and 62% of non-Hispanic Blacks. Internet use of people in the urban and suburban areas is reported slightly higher than people from rural areas. People with an annual household income less than $30,000 are among the group least likely to have access to and use the Internet. Seven out of ten people with an annual household incomes between $30,000 and $49,999 go online.

Table adapted and modified from a survey report conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project (2007) between February 15 – March 7, 2007,

The Digital Divide Redefined
Evidently, the definition of the digital divide seems to emphasize the binary description of availability of computers and the Internet in households. Warschauer (2003) suggests that this binary definition fails to do justice to the complex reality of various people’s differing access to technology. Warschauer uses the example of an American who surfs the Internet on a computer at a local library once a month as a “have not” whereas someone in the developing country with the same profile might be considered as a “have.” This example is a good illustration of the lack of consideration of the context in which technology is used when discussing the definition of the digital divide. Warschauer (2003) further explains that this type of understanding led to the assumption that the problem of the digital divide could be easily tackled by providing more computers and Internet access. Christopher Dede has also labeled this idea as the “fire” model, as it implies that the mere presence of a computer will generate learning or development, just as fire gives warmth (as cited in Warschauer, 2003).

Warschauer (2002, 2003) furthers elaborates on the problematic notion of the provision of equipments as the ultimate solution to a complex social problem. He investigated several community technology projects around the world and found that many well-intended projects often faced unexpected problems which hindered the effective integration of technology into people’s lives. A consideration of how people can use computers and the Internet is therefore important in any effort to install new technology into an environment that lacks it.

Warschauer (2002) argues that there are several misconceptions about the digital divide. For example, in the US, African-American people are often portrayed as being technological disadvantaged, when in fact Internet access among Blacks and other minorities varies tremendously by income group – with divisions between Blacks and Whites decreasing as income increases. Also, the digital divide framework fails to promote social development since it overemphasizes the importance of the physical presence of computers. He suggests that the goal of using ICT with marginalized groups is not to overcome a digital divide, but to further a process of social inclusion. He therefore offers a redefinition of the digital divide to take into account a variety of factors related to physical, digital, human, and social resources so that social development can be enhanced through the effective integration of ICT into communities.

Summary of the digital divide redefined:

Probably you can explain more about the impacts of the digital divide in some different areas e.g., education, enterprise, etc.

The Digital Divide in the Global Contexts
There is also a dramatic difference in access to ICTs in the developed and less developed nations. The rich Western countries, including North America, Europe, and Australia, are at one end of the continuum and the poor Asian, South American, and African countries on the other end. Sources from the Japanese-based Center for the Research and Support of Educational Practice (CRSEP) indicate that only 6% of the world’s entire population has access to the Internet (Cabanatan, 2002).

Table adapted and modified from a report on access to the Internet (Cabanatan, 2002).

The digital divide in the global context extends well beyond questions related to access to the Internet for ordinary people. It includes access to the more necessary information resources, such as full-text databases and online journals, leaving researchers in developing nations, that lack such access, excluded from knowledge that may be vital to national development. Free and open source resources and free access to online books and journals is currently being employed in several projects and initiatives (e.g., The Global Text Project) to directly address this issue.

The digital divide seems to be more complex than it initially appeared. In each global region, there is also a divide between the well-developed countries and countries that are less developed. For example, in Asia, there is a gap between more advanced countries, such as Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, and those that are not as developed such as Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, China, and India. In terms of gender, only 22% of Asia’s 48 million Internet users are women, even if they constitute half of the region’s population (Wong, 2002). As a result, the digital divide is only partly about access; it perhaps more accurately reflects issues that have segmented societies in the world: gender, urban/rural, and income. Asia is a good example of this segmentation because it has countries, and regions within different countries, at every point along the development continuum. The number of 22% of Asia’s 48 million Internet users perhaps changed in the past five years.

Overcoming the Digital Divide
Several attempts from various organizations have been made to overcome the digital divide. Projects such as the Global Text Project and One Laptop per Child Program illustrate efforts from countries with advanced technologies, such as the US, to reach out to other countries in the lower end of the digital divide. There are concerns, however, with Western views and knowledge resources being exported to Eastern cultures.

International organizations have also provided attempts to overcome the digital divide in many regions of the world. A case in point is in Asia, where international and regional organizations, such as the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), established regional programs to minimize the digital gap within the region and the nation. '''Not only the international organizations but also many governments in their countries devoted to overcoming the digital divide. Is there any case to illustrate the federal or state government help overcome this disadvantage?'''

The Global Text Project http://www.globaltext.org/team.html
With increasingly expensive textbooks, many students in the U.S. are struggling with the cost of education. Textbooks in some disciplines, including business and the sciences, are significantly more expensive than other areas such as English. This project aims at supplying textbooks to developing countries, giving them a chance to benefit from textbooks in various fields such as business and education. These textbooks will be delivered in the form of open content electronic textbooks that will be freely available from a web site. Not only does the Global Text Project attempt to provide textbooks to developing countries, the organization attempts to engage students and teachers worldwide in developing and improving the quality of the book. For example, creating cases and exercises that draw on local contexts, as opposed to focusing solely on cases in North American situations, as the key examples in current textbooks. Such localization of content should boost adoption and satisfaction with the content of these books. The Global Text organization plans to develop two new books, a business fundamentals text and an introductory information system text. These books will be written in English and translated into Arabic, Chinese, and Spanish.

This project is distinct in the way it attempts to foster collaboration between users and creators of the textbooks. Users are invited to provide feedbacks and offer some advice or exercises for the future classes to use. As a result, the users will not only use the text but also need to think about how to improve it. In addition, students have access to the whole textbook, not partial, as provided in many open course materials. Students can, therefore, take time to read and digest information at their own pace.

One Laptop per Child program http://laptop.org/en/index.shtml
One Laptop per Child program has been created to distribute the XO laptop to children in developing countries. This nonprofit organization was founded by Nicholas Negroponte, Co-founder and Director of MIT Media Laboratory. The XO laptop embodies theories of constructionism, which emphasizes “situated learning” as the fundamental educational experience. A computer uniquely fosters learning by allowing children to “think about thinking,” in ways that are otherwise impossible. The XO will allow children to explore the world, exposing them to unlimited knowledge and to their own creative and problem solving potential.

The organization plans to distribute the XO laptop, a flexible, ultra-low-cost, power-efficient, responsive, and durable machine, to children in developing countries. To achieve its highly marketed low cost, the XO is built from free and open-source software. The Foundation is currently not yet accepting applications for the funding of Special Laptop Programs. They hope to activate the program before the end of 2007. However, for two weeks in November 2007, a project called “Give 1 Get 1” was initiated to promote XO laptop donations in North America. Anyone could purchase two XO laptops for $399 and donate one of them to children in developing nations while keeping one for him/herself. In early 2007, the B2 iteration of XO was ready for its debut. B3 followed in May 2007, and pallets of B4 machines arrived in OLPC offices on July 6, 2007.

David Pogue (2007), a popular reporter and K-12 keynote speaker from the New York Times, reviewed the latest version of the XO laptop, now in final testing, and found that the XO laptop has many distinctive features. Even though not comparable to regular standard Mac or Windows laptops, the XO laptop exhibits many technological breakthroughs, some of which may not be available on any other laptop. For instance, it runs on lithium ferro-phosphate, which costs $10 to replace, and is good for 2,000 charges – versus 500 on a regular laptop battery. In addition, it consumes 2 watts, compared with 60 watts or more on a typical laptop. Importantly, the screen of the XO is bright and razor sharp (1,200 x 900 pixels) and switches to black and white when in direct sunlight thereby enabling the user to read the screen. The XO offers regular wireless Internet connections and mesh networking. Mesh networking allows all the laptops to see each other instantly, without any setup and without an Internet connection. With the mesh networking, one laptop can get online if someone on the mesh network has an Internet connection. Users can also show documents, pictures, music, or books with people on the mesh network.

In his review, Pogue (2007) suggested that the biggest obstacle to the XO’s success is not technology, but fear. These concerns include the fear of overseas ministers of education that if they change the status quo in schools, they might risk their jobs. Additional fears include those of big-name manufacturers who worry that the XO will steal their market share of the 2-billion-person laptop market. Finally, some critics argue that the poorest nations need food and medicine more than computers.

(The conception of OLPC is ideal, and it can also average the digital divide. The low-price computer will be the trend to let almost everybody can afford the computer and use it to learn and get information. But some criticisms like described above such as there are not sufficient food, water, and electricity in some developing country and or the Third World country which in the flames of war, why child there need a laptop?)

UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization)
At the international level, organizations, such as UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization), have also played a vital role in providing ICT training to bridge the digital divide in the Asia-Pacific region. They have established a program called The Next Generation of Teachers Project, aiming to provide ICT training and supports for post-primary teachers in the Asia-Pacific regions. Microsoft and Cisco Systems also serve as key partners in this project.

In China, UNESCO initiated a project called Bridging the Within-Country Digital Divide in Education, which aims at bridging the within-country digital divide in education between the under-developed western and the developed eastern regions of China. The western region accounts for over 50% of the country’s land area but only 3% of its population. Out of the 45 million Internet users in China, only an extremely small percentage are in the western region. For example, there are only 0.5% of Internet users in the Gansu province, one of the three main provinces in the western region. This program, therefore, attempts to promote the use of ICTs in the western region by providing in-service teacher training, curriculum development, and development of innovative and modern textbooks. A lot of attention will be paid to search for innovative, practical, and affordable policies and models that could eventually close the digital gap within this massive and fast-growing country.

SEAMEO (The Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization)
Likewise, there have been efforts put forward by sub-regional organizations in Asia, such as ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and SEAMEO (The Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization) to formulate plans to promote ICT education. For example, there was an implementation of SEAMO IT plan that will establish SEAMO INNOTECH, which specializes in educational innovation and technology, to train teachers and principals in technology. There was e-ASEAN Task Force that developed activities geared towards creating a common IT market, enhancing physical infrastructure, human development, promoting e-commerce, and supporting e-governance (Cabanatan, 2002). These examples illustrate efforts from sub-region organizations to enhance their citizens’ ability to compete in the regional and global level and bridge the digital divide in the Asia-Pacific region.

Conclusions
Clearly, there are many organizations, initiatives, and projects that are addressing the digital divide today. While questions and concerns seem to pervade each attempt to reduce the gap, each of these projects offers something unique that assists people around the world having access to online resources necessary for learning in the 21st century. The coming decades will hopefully witness the resulting benefits from this increased access as the learners of today become social, economic, political, and educational leaders of tomorrow. Each of us must ask ourselves, "what can I do to help?"

Web Resources

 * One Laptop per Child Program

http://laptop.org/en/vision/index.shtml

 * The Global Text Project

http://globaltext.org/

 * The Next Generation of Teachers Project

http://www.unescobkk.org/index.php?id=3430

 * Bridging the Within-Country Digital Divide in Education in Western China Project

http://www.unescobkk.org/index.php?id=1231

 * The Digital Divide Network

http://www.digitaldividenetwork.org/

 * Digital Divide.org

http://www.digitaldivide.org/dd/index.html

 * Youth for Technology Foundation

http://www.youthfortechnology.org/frames.html

 * National Telecommunications and Information Administration

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/anol/index.html

 * The digital divide: The resource list (UCLA)

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/chu/digdiv/

 * Wikipedia chapter on the digital divide

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

 * Wikipedia chapter on global digital divide

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

Interesting articles on global digital divide

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4296919.stm
 * Global digital divide narrowing

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2001/09/ishaq.htm
 * On the global digital divide

http://www.marymount.k12.ny.us/marynet/StudentResources/technology/clVIII/webquest/wqddintro.html
 * Global digital divide WebQuest