home

La funcionalidad de Web 2.0 se basa en la arquitectura existente de [|servidor web] pero con un énfasis mayor en el software dorsal. La redifusión solo se diferencia nominalmente de los métodos de publicación de la gestión dinámica de contenido, pero los servicios Web requieren normalmente un soporte de [|bases de datos] y [|flujo de trabajo] mucho más robusto y llegan a parecerse mucho a la funcionalidad de Internet tradicional de un [|servidor de aplicaciones]. El enfoque empleado hasta ahora por los fabricantes suele ser bien un enfoque de [|servidor universal], el cual agrupa la mayor parte de la funcionalidad necesaria en una única plataforma de servidor, o bien un enfoque [|plugin] de servidor Web con herramientas de publicación tradicionales mejoradas con interfaces API y otras herramientas. Independientemente del enfoque elegido, no se espera que el camino evolutivo hacia la Web 2.0 se vea alterado de forma importante por estas opciones. Web 2.0 technologies provide teachers with new ways to engage students in a meaningful way. "Children raised on new media technologies are less patient with filling out worksheets and listening to lectures" [|[41]] because students already participate on a global level. The lack of participation in a traditional classroom stems more from the fact that students receive better feedback online. Traditional classrooms have students do assignments and when they are completed, they are just that, finished. However, Web 2.0 shows students that education is a constantly evolving entity. Whether it is participating in a class discussion, or participating in a forum discussion, the technologies available to students in a Web 2.0 classroom does increase the amount they participate. Will Richardson stated in // [|Blogs], [|Wikis] , [|Podcasts] and other Powerful Web tools for the Classrooms//, 3rd Edition that, "The Web has the potential to radically change what we assume about teaching and learning, and it presents us with important questions to ponder: What needs to change about our curriculum when our students have the ability to reach audiences far beyond our classroom walls?" [|[42]] Web 2.0 tools are needed in the classroom to prepare both students and teachers for the shift in learning that Collins and Halverson describe. According to Collins and Halverson, the self-publishing aspects as well as the speed with which their work becomes available for consumption allows teachers to give students the control they need over their learning. This control is the preparation students will need to be successful as learning expands beyond the classroom." [|[41]] Some may think that these technologies could hinder the personal interaction of students, however all of the research points to the contrary. " [|Social networking] sites have worried many educators (and parents) because they often bring with them outcomes that are not positive: [|narcissism], gossip, wasted time, 'friending', hurt feelings, ruined reputations, and sometimes unsavory, even dangerous activities, [on the contrary,] social networking sites promote conversations and interaction that is encouraged by educators." [|[43]] By allowing students to use the technology tools of Web 2.0, teachers are actually giving students the opportunity to learn for themselves and share that learning with their peers. One of the many implications of Web 2.0 technologies on class discussions is the idea that teachers are no longer in control of the discussions. Instead, Russell and Sorge (1999) conclude that integrating technology into instruction tends to move classrooms from teacher-dominated environments to ones that are more student-centered. While it is still important for them to monitor what students are discussing, the actual topics of learning are being guided by the students themselves. Web 2.0 calls for major shifts in the way education is provided for students. One of the biggest shifts that Will Richardson points out in his book //Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms// [|[42]] is the fact that education must be not only socially but collaboratively constructed. This means that students, in a Web 2.0 classroom, are expected to collaborate with their peers. By making the shift to a Web 2.0 classroom, teachers are creating a more open atmosphere where students are expected to stay engaged and participate in the discussions and learning that is taking place around them. In fact, there are many ways for educators to use Web 2.0 technologies in their classrooms. "Weblogs are not built on static chunks of content. Instead they are comprised of reflections and conversations that in many cases are updated every day [...] They demand interaction." [|[42]] Will Richardson's observation of the essence of weblogs speaks directly to why blogs are so well suited to discussion based classrooms. Weblogs give students a public space to interact with one another and the content of the class. As long as the students are invested in the project, the need to see the blog progress acts as motivation as the blog itself becomes an entity that can demand interaction. For example, Laura Rochette implemented the use of blogs in her [|American History] class and noted that in addition to an overall improvement in quality, the use of the blogs as an assignment demonstrated synthesis level activity from her students. In her experience, asking students to conduct their learning in the digital world meant asking students "to write, upload images, and articulate the relationship between these images and the broader concepts of the course, [in turn] demonstrating that they can be thoughtful about the world around them." [|[44]] Jennifer Hunt, an 8th grade language arts teacher of pre-Advanced Placement students shares a similar story. She used the [|WANDA] project and asked students to make personal connections to the texts they read and to describe and discuss the issues raised in literature selections through social discourse. They engaged in the discussion via wikis and other Web 2.0 tools, which they used to organize, discuss, and present their responses to the texts and to collaborate with others in their classroom and beyond. The research shows that students are already using these technological tools, but they still are expected to go to a school where using these tools is frowned upon or even punished. If educators are able to harness the power of the Web 2.0 technologies students are using, it could be expected that the amount of participation and classroom discussion would increase. It may be that how participation and discussion is produced is very different from the traditional classroom, but nevertheless it does increase.

[ [|edit] ] Web-based applications and desktops
[|Ajax] has prompted the development of websites that mimic desktop applications, such as [|word processing], the [|spreadsheet] , and [|slide-show presentation]. In 2006 [|Google, Inc.] acquired one of the best-known sites of this broad class, [|Writely]. [|[45]] [|WYSIWYG] [|wiki] and [|blogging] sites replicate many features of PC authoring applications. Several browser-based " [|operating systems] " have emerged, including [|EyeOS] [|[46]] and [|YouOS] .(No longer active.) [|[47]] Although coined as such, many of these services function less like a traditional operating system and more as an application platform. They mimic the user experience of desktop operating-systems, offering features and applications similar to a PC environment, and are able to run within any modern browser. However, these so-called "operating systems" do not directly control the hardware on the client's computer. Numerous web-based application services appeared during the [|dot-com bubble] of 1997–2001 and then vanished, having failed to gain a critical mass of customers. In 2005, [|WebEx] acquired one of the better-known of these, [|Intranets.com], for $45 million. [|[48]]

[ [|edit] ] XML and RSS
Many regard syndication of site content as a Web 2.0 feature. Syndication uses standardized protocols to permit end-users to make use of a site's data in another context (such as another website, a browser plugin, or a separate desktop application). Protocols permitting syndication include [|RSS] (really simple syndication, also known as web syndication), [|RDF] (as in RSS 1.1), and [|Atom], all of them [|XML] -based formats. Observers have started to refer to these technologies as [|web feeds]. Specialized protocols such as [|FOAF] and [|XFN] (both for social networking) extend the functionality of sites or permit end-users to interact without centralized websites.

[ [|edit] ] Web APIs
Web 2.0 often uses machine-based interactions such as [|REST] and [|SOAP]. Servers often expose proprietary [|Application programming interfaces] (API), but standard APIs (for example, for posting to a blog or notifying a blog update) have also come into use. Most communications through APIs involve XML or [|JSON] payloads. REST APIs, through their use of self-descriptive messages and [|hypermedia as the engine of application state], should be self-describing once an entry [|URI] is known. [|Web Services Description Language] (WSDL) is the standard way of publishing a SOAP API and there are [|a range of web service specifications]. [|EMML], or Enterprise Mashup Markup Language by the [|Open Mashup Alliance] , is an XML markup language for creating enterprise mashups.