What is the 'semantic web'? and How does it differ from web 3.0?

"The Semantic Web is an evolving extension of the World Wide Web in which the semantics of information and services on the web is defined, making it possible for the web to understand and satisfy the requests of people and machines to use the web content."

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

Created by Tim Berners-Lee, the Semantic Web is about having data as well as documents on the Web so that machines can process, transform, assemble, and even act on the data in useful ways.

When comparing it to Web 3.0 it's slightly confusing as i think they are similar. Web 3.0 is the term that is used to describe the future of the World Wide Web, what it will be like when web 2.0 is further developed basically. We currently use 2.0.

The Semantic web it seem will play the role of transforming the web, increasing Internet connection speeds and the role that further developments in computer graphics may have in the development of the World Wide Web. (As stated above )

I think the Web 3.0 and the semantic don't differ dramatically but rather the role of these two against that of web 2.0.

Is there a potential problem being stored up for people if 'education' is tailored to fit into their cultural and personal preferences?

Without a doubt Yes.

How would people have a balanced and thorough education if they simply learned about the things they wanted to?

It's important for people to learn about their own cultural background or issues, however if they were the only ones to learn it how would the rest of the world learn to understand they ways and beliefs. I think its important for everyone to learn about a variety of cultural issues and beliefs in order to be well educated and also a fairly rounded person. The more you know about and learn about the easier it will be, to make new friends, introduce yourself into new surroundings, live an everyday life.

The opportunities to learn about a specific personal preference are endless, therefore if you have a personal interest in something you can pursue it. However this should be aside from formal education.
We live in a multi-enthic society in which it is important to have some understanding into their cultural ways in order for us to progress and avoid conflicts.
The result of a 'education' is tailored to fit into their cultural and personal preferences.................

a society of very ignorant people!!

What difference to all this might the 'digital divide' make?

To socioeconomically related access issues within a society?
The obvious argument to this is that the more and more we make this digital divide, the bigger the gap we are creating between that of the young generations and the older generations. Older generations are considered digital immigrants, looking at it pessimistically their behind the times, digital challenged and slow to learn. And when making the comparsion to the youth of today world, who are digitally enhanced, fast learners and at a constant competing level, they have no chance.

"Henry Jenkins suggested that talking about digital natives and digital immigrants will widen the gap between adults (Digital Immigrants) and the youths (Digital Natives) as the adults will be seen as out of touch and the youth will be seen as masterful therefore connoting that they are more powerful. And that this it will result in the contemporary youth been seen as feral, cut off from all adult influences."

This will have a powerful impact on education systems in schools, currently schools use the basic equipment allowing all students to participate and experience wengers communities of practice. Alot of Schools currently have IT rooms in which children and students work together sharing online learning experiences. However if we are to become completely digitally enhanced surely some students who do not have the added advantages of outside the classroom help, people will get left behind.


b) To global access issues across countries and regions?
This is a matter of addressing the already increasing divide between the western world and 3rd world countries. More and more each day countries such as America are furthering their digital technologies leaving countries such as Africa and India still struggling to find the basics, such as continual source of water.
The digital divide is already huge and if it is to further, it may cause communication issues. If countries move on to a new source of communication its quite likely they may leave another behind, this may lose or hinder countries relationships.

Prensky ideas on distance learning at first sound like a great idea, but it will ultimate alienate some potential audience. Taking into account comparing some people ability to access information over others.

How might Wenger's notions on practice communities relate to Prensky's on education?

"Communities of practice are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour"
OR
"Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly" (Wenger circa 2007)
http://www.infed.org/biblio/communities_of_practice.htm


Wenger suggests that Communities of practise (COP's) are bound together by their shared interests and their shared learning. They are also tied together in their need of development and progression.

Prensky thought heavily on education and it was his thoughts and beliefs on how we should be looking at a way of making education so it suits Digital Natives. He spoke about how we as individuals interact with technologies & how these may aid or hinder our education. To a native (quite likely a young student) anything is possible on the inet, to an immigrant (a teacher in schools) getting to grips & the pace of looking up information for our on means maybe a little more difficult.

Both Wenger and Prensky's theories relate in such a way that perhaps by using Wenger's COP's people of simular interests can come together and those that are digital natives (In prenskys theory) could learn and extend their own capabilites but at the same time teach that of the digital immgrants. Tieing together, as Wenger once said development and progression in a shared learning enviroment.

It is important ot realise that there may be issues concerning hierarcy. Using Prenskys idea of education it is possible a system like this may work in a school. Therefore in this COP's the usual hierarchy is reversed. Where normally we see the teacher sharing their knowledge with a student, the student will now be teaching the teacher. This may have a negative effect as the students will feel they are more powerful than the teachers in terms of technology and its usage.

This brings in the notion of 'If young people are more able to digitally 'connect' how can co-operation be included into 'education'?' Unfortuanly i think it will be a matter of teachers accepting and working alongside students in order to both further themselves and of course the student. There needs to be a level of co-operation.
It also suggests that perhaps there needs to be a balance for both the students and the teachers. Bringing digital aspects into their course but also using traditional methods such as books.

Is your Dad, Mum, elder sibling, boy/girlfriend part of your CofP?
I suppose nearly everyone is part of a COP. My brother is quite simular to myself. He attends Manchester University, and does a joint honours course. Therefore he moves between to sets of COP's in order to help him learn. In return he helps me when it comes to University subjects, he's either been there done that or getting ready to do it. Therefore its helpful, that on this particular area of our lives we are able to work together are learn new things.