I also freely admit that my hang-up here is silly and I’m taking myself a bit too seriously – as soon as you start arguing about terminology and semantics you know you’ve passed a threshold of some kind LOL

On the other hand, part of my thinking on this dates back to my experiences with tech support. I come from a technical support background and over time I’ve come to recognise and appreciate the importance of being aware of the perspectives of the users – especially the new ones. There is an enormous amount of diversity in technical terminology that most people just can’t keep up with – so I think we need to be mindful of how we go about describing very complex and/or abstract technical ideas – especially when they incorporate so many different facets (cultural, technical, educational, identity, etcetera).

Generally speaking it’s why I personally try to use plain English in explanations rather than tech-speak or edu-speak – I think people find it much less threatening to explore new ideas when they’re couched in a familiar language.

The other concern/gripe I have about the “Web 2.0″ phrase is that it doesn’t sufficiently articulate the importance of the cultural element in the social software / social media landscape. Increasingly I’m seeing people talk about incorporating tools like blogs and wikis into the classroom, and yet too frequently they place them within the old paradigm where classroom social structures / hierarchies are formal and rigid and students aren’t afforded much flexibility or freedom in how they use, personalise or customise the tools – and are essentially unable to make them their own or begin to express or explore their own digital identities.

To me when I talk about Web 2.0, these notions of participatory culture and identity are core and fundamental and really can’t or shouldn’t be separate from the discussion – hence why I tend to spell it out much more explicitly.

Nonetheless though you’re points are quite important too – new users are inevitably not hung-up on terminology or semantics. They just want to explore the landscape that people are increasingly talking about. So I think nurturing and encouraging this passion is really important. As exposure continues I think it’s inevitable (or at least I hope it is) that people will start to develop a more holistic grasp of the sociological implications of social software. Perhaps that’s where people like you and I come in – help introduce these concepts along the way so people are thinking bigger than the technology.

Anyway thanks again for your comments. I hope this has smoothed things over a bit!

Cheers,

Mike

Having read your explanation here, I do understand what you mean and agree that the true meaning of the concept “Web 2.0″ is far too big and wide to be clearly and universally understood; it far surpasses its flimsy label that is so carelessly tossed about as a catch-all phrase.

As we know too well from the world of policy and its clinging burrs of buzzwords, language is often worn like fashion, and Web 2.0 is the style of the day, quickly fading now among the early trendsetters.

I think that’s why I bristled at your tweet — I perceived it as arrogance because I thought you were implying that the concept or phrase was old-fashioned, out of style, last-year’s model… but I guarantee there are huge numbers of educators who still are uncomfortable with even Web 1.0 and need to understand the difference before we ever dump the labels or move on. Believe it or not, when I explain the difference between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 to a group of non-techie teachers, they GET it, because of the language. Web 1.0 – they can only read and look; Web 2.0 – they can participate. Wow! And they’re excited about the progress! What better motivation for embracing and exploring newer technology than that?

I was told once to “stop acting so high and mighty about your tech-i-ness” (actual words). I decided to stop thinking that the rest of the world thinks like I do; I can tweet and learn and explore, but I can also practice tolerance and patience while everyone catches up — or while they go by on another path. And by the way, lots of people know more than I do about many other things!

Here’s a post I wrote about intellectual bullying a while back:

http://edutwist.com/elin/?p=1115

P.S. I don’t think you’re bullying, by the way. I see where you’re coming from. You want accurate language, not careless language — I get that. But since it’s still around, let’s be sure to explain Web 2.0 and not just throw the nomenclature out with the bathwater.