Social Bookmarking

Social bookmarking has become a popular aspect of social networking for professionals because it allows groups to share and search for relevant information and resources in an efficient way. Social bookmarking features can be added to your favourite internet browsers such as Firefox, Chrome, Explorer or Safari by installing a plugin via the tools menu. Popular social bookmarking plugins include Diigo, Delicious and Evernote. Social bookmarking apps can also be installed on mobile devices such as IPads and Android phones or tablets. The web browser plugins and mobile apps can be synced to one account so that all your bookmarks remain live and are the same on each chosen device. Information professionals who research, share and collaborate can use features of Diigo in a more efficient ways than traditional methods of web browser bookmarking, emailing and or posting links on a blog. Diigo features allow users to annotate (highlight) webpages and share that annotation with their social network via a social bookmark (See Image One). Evernote also provides sharing features that allow social bookmarks to be posted on Facebook and Twitter (See Image Two).

Social bookmarking apps and plugins have a useful feature called a tag. Adding a tag to a bookmark is an extra step but there are social bookmarking benefits for professionals. A tag adds searchable metadata to the bookmark and this is useful because semantic search scripts can locate information containing the tag data from a range of different locations and display it all in a list on the same page. Searching metadata tags can be a quick way to locate resources for specific course topics such as Modern History (See Image Three). Further, when used ethically, the information/ resource can be shared and collaborated on among multiple individuals in an efficient way (Ruffini, 2011; Keiser, 2012). Barsky and Purdon (2006) highlight the useful nature of tagging folksonomies for the development of social networking groups who seek to share information from new digital resources. Vander Wal (2007) argues that folksonomies are adding value to the professional use of social bookmarking across social networks that are seeking to filter relevant information and resources in an efficient way. The Diigo website (previously also known as furl.net) allows members to form, join and organised into social networking groups that can share and locate resources in one place using social bookmarking taxonomies (folksonomies) to organise the information. Information professional who are seeking to research, share and collaborate can use those features of Diigo  (diigobuzz, 2009) in a more efficient way than the traditional methods of web browser bookmarking, email and or posting links on a blog. Google has responded to the technological developments made by Diigo, Delicious and Evernote by releasing their own Google Bookmarks application that also syncs/ stores bookmarks across profiles/ devices and enables sharing of social bookmarks within google+ circles and other social networks (Kawasaki, 2014).

Despite some concerns about the nomenclature of folksonomies (Rosenfold, 2005), Specia and Motta (2007) highlight their increasing value in the development of a more democratic ‘bottom up’ taxonomy of information hierarchy. Modern search engines can work with tags using Web 3.0 affordances and students who research, share and collaborate using tags may find exciting avenues for self directing their education activities. A significant potential for teachers is that the use of tagging can be integrated into more innovative research, sharing and collaborative tasks that move toward a more student centred environment for the classroom.

References:

 

Barsky, E., & Purdon, M. (2006). Introducing Web 2.0: social networking and social bookmarking for health librarians. Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association, 27(3), 65-67. https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/id/1809/c

 

diigobuzz (2009). Diigo V4: Research ~ annotate, archive, organize. Vimeo. http://vimeo.com/6747389

 

Fitzpatrick, J. (2010). Five Best Bookmark Management Tools. Lifehacker. http://lifehacker.com/5540019/five-best-bookmark-management-tools

 

Kawasaki, G. (2014). What the Plus+. http://www.guykawasaki.com/what-the-plus/ and https://ssl.gstatic.com/s2/oz/content/WhatThePlus.pdf

 

Keiser, B. E. (2012). Social Bookmarks for the 21st Century. Online-Medford, 36(4), 19. http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/ps/i.do?&id=GALE|A296045478&v=2.1&u=csu_au&it=r&p=EAIM&sw=w&authCount=1

 

Rosenfold, L. (2005). Folksonomies? How about Metadata Ecologies? http://www.louisrosenfeld.com/home/bloug_archive/000330.html

 

Ruffini, M. F. (2011). Classroom Collaboration Using Social Bookmarking Service Diigo Classroom Collaboration Using Social Bookmarking Service Diigo. http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/classroom-collaboration-using-social-bookmarking-service-diigo

 

Specia, L., & Motta, E. (2007). Integrating folksonomies with the semantic web. In The semantic web: research and applications (pp. 624-639). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/motta/papers/SpeciaMotta_ESWC-2007_Final.pdf
Vander Wal, T. (2007). Folksonomy. online posting, Feb, 7. http://archive.dconstruct.org/2006/understandingfolksonomy.

 

What is Web 2.0?

The development from static html website pages to Content Management Systems (CMS) such as this WordPress (Web 2.0 tool) blog has enabled website users to publish information to the internet via a user friendly interface like a word document instead of having to code the page line by (hypertext) line. CMSs allow users to be producers of collaborative systems as distinct from Web 1.0 users who were often only able to consume the work of the publisher because they did not have enough technical knowledge to code in html. web2.jpeg

The interfaces for users to add materials to CMSs are varied and include simple forum pages like ubuntuforums.org to multi media collaborative websites such as facebook.com. People can work on the same project together, discuss their shared interests, upload and view each others photos, videos and portfolios using Web 2.0 applications (Ishizuka, 2010). Tim Berners- Lee, the inventor of the modern internet (Swartz, 2013), has also coined the term Web 3.0 to describe the next stage of web design that increases the individualisation of personalised searches more efficiently by using semantics (Berners-Lee and Fischetti, 2000). Advocates of the semantic Web 3.0 such as Aaron Swartz have worked with Tim Berners- Lee on the development of a framework that facilitates the searching of website data by other web servers (Swartz, 2013) and free up the internet’s data for everyone. Swartz (2002) argued convincingly that savvy Web 2.0 applications need to retain users trust by utilising Web 3.0 frameworks with semantics to make their information available to them as Wikipedia had done with their whole database as an XML file. Educational Web 2.0 applications that support these semantics such as MOODLE and Mahara have developed frameworks that are viable for users to collaborate on across institutions because they are able to import and export their own CMS/ LMS data.

 Importing questions into a MOODLE quiz (Daniels, 2012):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdPSHa4qUbE

Exporting portfolios from Mahara (McNie, 2009):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnFx0NHn4Ls

Swartz’ ideas are important in the Web 2.0 corporate environment where users’ data can be deleted permanently without the ability to save and reuse it as shown with the demise of Google reader. In education environments the use of Web 2.0 tools needs to be considered carefully from this technical point of view because if information professionals are to develop relationships with the community there needs to be a transparency for users who contribute. Designers and maintainers of Library 2.0 websites for example need to be aware of the need for proper tools that allow Open Access to information so there are clear and coherent policies in relation to data use. The Australian Federal Government (AFG, n.d.) have developed a range of policies about Web 2.0 use and planning strategies to assist in the development of sustainable approaches for these new collaborative mediums. Hopefully with some proper planning and strategic vision the problems experienced by the National Library of New Zealand (NLNZ, 2009) when developing their use of Web 2.0 tools can be avoided.

The growth in popularity of social networking websites such as Facebook, Twitter and Google+ also offer potential areas for Web 2.0 environments because they allow users to present a ‘mash up’ of their experiences by linking to a range of social media and related Web 2.0 websites. Web 2.0 tools such as Mozilla popcorn allow users to collaborate in engaging ways and include a range of dynamic information made available through open knowledge principles. Information professionals should seek to develop the use of these new Web 2.0 tools in a sustainable way so that the reality of an open Web 3.0 can be realised.

References:

(AFG) Australian Federal Government. (n.d.) Government 2.0 planning and governance, Web Guide. http://webguide.gov.au/web-2-0/

Berners-Lee, T., Fischetti, M., & Foreword By-Dertouzos, M. L. (2000). Weaving the Web: The original design and ultimate destiny of the World Wide Web by its inventor. HarperInformation.

Branson, D., (n.d.) Web 2.0 online course http://moodlecommons.org/course/view.php?id=14

Daniels, D.  (2012). Tutorial Moodle Importing, Editing and Previewing Questions in Moodle Quiz. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdPSHa4qUbE

Ishizuka, K. (2010). People Who Need People. School Library Journal, 56(2), 32.

McNie, N., (2009) Mahara 1.2 Import/Export demo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnFx0NHn4Ls

(NLNZ) National Library of New Zealand, (2009) Web 2.Nautical. http://librarytechnz.natlib.govt.nz/2009/11/web-2nautical.html

O’reilly, T. (2009). What is web 2.0. ” O’Reilly Media, Inc.”.

Swartz, A. (2002). The semantic web in breadth. WWW-address: http://logicerror. com/semanticWeb-long.

Swartz, A. (2006). Who writes wikipedia. available at link, 72.

Swartz, A. (2013). Aaron Swartz’s A Programmable Web: An Unfinished Work. Synthesis Lectures on The Semantic Web: Theory and Technology, 3(2), 1-64.

Assessment Item 1 – Social Networking

Social networking is a set of personal relationships formed from family, friends, colleagues and online identities that communicate via web 2.0 technologies such as Facebook. Traditionally a social network has been an individual’s personal social connections and face-to-face social interactions (Grieve, Indian, Witteveen, Anne Tolan and Marrington, 2013). A social network is a fundamental component of personal socialisation and De Rosa, Cantrell, Hawk and Jenkins (2007) report that Web 2.0 technologies such as Facebook have facilitated the interaction between users who share interests. Ellison (2007b) highlights the varied interests of social networking sites (SNSs) as focus areas for scholarly discussion because as well as supporting pre- existing relationships SNSs connect strangers who may share interests. The shared interests of SNS users focus on diverse topics such as partnerships, politics, recreation, religion, education and pop culture news. Concern about children from ‘Generation Like’ being manipulated by marketing tools via their online interest groups is increasing (PBS 2014). Research by Grieve, Indian, Witteveen, Anne Tolan and Marrington (2013) that investigates children’s use of SNSs has also found positive health effects on the wellbeing of participants.snshistory

Howard Rheingold (cited in Ishizuka, 2010) suggests that there are a range of digital literacies required for using social networking applications such as twitter because a sophisticated approach is needed to judiciously discern through the flow of feeds. Social media aggregators such as Gwibber, Hotot and Friends are savvy applications for desktops, tablets and phones that assist in keeping up to date with Facebook and Twitter timelines. My main social networking experiences have been in forums such as Ubuntu forums where collaborative approaches to technical ICT issues are approached. If Duolingo ticks all of the ‘social networking’ boxes then it would be an important collaborative way to develop my social network as well as my linguistic skills. I am currently developing the use of social media plugins for students with our MOODLE and Mahara websites so that they can sign in, get updates and message using their preferred identities. I have also developed JOOMLA websites with blogs, community forums and twitter feeds for my classes where notifications about the course can be sent to the members. Our school has recently developed ‘official’ Facebook and Google+ business pages after years of discussion and sporadic negative student experiences with social networking websites. Navigating through the challenging online environments, official policies and community concerns is a demanding task that this subject can help with. Providing the best education experience for our school community through the use of social networking (rather than social media using us) is a skill that I would like to develop while completing INF506.

Links:

Twitter – https://twitter.com/IainHocknull

Google+ – https://plus.google.com/+IainHocknull/posts

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/iain.hocknull.5

References:

De Rosa, C., Cantrell, J., Havens, A., Hawk, J. & Jenkins, L. (2007). Sharing privacy and trust in our networked world: A report to the OCLC membership. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC.

Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007a). The benefits of Facebook ‘‘friends’’: Social capital and college students use of online social networking sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1143–1168.

Ellison, N. B. (2007b). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.

Grieve, R., Indian, M., Witteveen, K., Anne Tolan, G., & Marrington, J. (2013). Face-to-face or Facebook: Can social connectedness be derived online?.Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 604-609.

Ishizuka, K. (2010). People Who Need People. School Library Journal, 56(2), 32.

PBS Frontline (2014) Generation Like http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/generation-like/