Education Journey

Education 1.0 was characterized by a teacher lecturing from the front of the classroom and scribbling on a chalkboard while students were primarily observers and listeners.

Education 2.0 took those traditional teaching methods and replaced chalkboards and filing cabinets with personal computers, digital projectors, educational software, and data systems— allowing for massive data collection, as well as some curricular changes and economies of scale. In other words, schools added computer labs and other technologies to their instruction, but they didn’t make those tools a vital, transformational part of the curriculum; for the most part, teachers still imparted knowledge from the front of the class, and students still listened and took notes.

Education 2.0 begins the transition to a new educational paradigm based on knowledge production and innovation production, the appropriate engines for viable 21st Century economies.

Education 3.0, which empowers students to produce, not merely to consume, knowledge. Education 3.0 is made possible by Education 2.0 (Internet-enabled learning), and by centuries of experience with memorization (Education 1.0). Ed­u­ca­tion 3.0 sub­sti­tutes this “just in case” mem­o­riza­tion with skills for de­sign­ing their fu­tures in a so­ci­ety that is in­creas­ingly de­pen­dent on imag­i­na­tion, cre­ativ­ity and in­no­va­tion. Education 2.0 is a necessary foundation for Education 3.0. World-wide, productivity through 2.0 “open sourcing” creates “pushes” toward involvement in innovation.

Education 3.0 is to take a holistic approach in which technology is as important a part of instruction as the teachers and the lesson plans, and where all three pieces work together seamlessly. Education 3.0, its evangelists say, creates a transformational, hands-on learning environment that help motivate students to develop the skills and knowledge they’ll need in the modern world: problem solving, critical thinking, innovation, business literacy, and collaboration.

Education 3.0 is qualitatively different incarnations that build upon Education 2.0 information sourcing capabilities and, to a lesser extent, the memorization habits of Education 1.0. We realize that most of the world’s education is at the l.0 level, and that only a fraction of world education is “officially” moving toward Education 2.0 despite the fact that students often attempt to Leapfrog beyond 1.0, if only – and often by necessity - outside the classroom.

Education 1.0 and 2.0 did not focus as much on the real-world skills that students need. You clearly need to design curriculum and teaching and learning practices and use technology to develop those skills in your students. Education 3.0, it’s more about holistic transformation. This transformation must start with student instruction in mind: Curriculum teams need to develop lesson plans that incorporate technology as an essential component, and one that enables a hands-on, project-based approach to instruction—making whatever adjustments to the classroom environment are necessary. School districts must set up technology-planning teams to assess their current technology, staffing, and workflow, then build a forward-looking technology plan and maintain it. Students must have access to basic technology tools, such as word processing and spreadsheets, as well as always-on connectivity. Teachers—trained properly in the use of new tools and technology to help guide instruction—must select up-to-date content from online resources and edit digital content to personalize the curriculum for each student. And all of this should be standardized across the district to maintain a consistent vision and minimize costs and complexity.

Figure   1          Transformation of Education

Table 1 Comparison between Education 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0

	“Download” Education 1.0	“Open Access” Education 2.0	Knowledge Producing Education 3.0
Meaning is…	Dictated	Socially constructed, with aid of (usually limited) Internet access	Socially constructed and contextually reinvented knowledge
Technology is…	Confiscated at the classroom door (digital refugees)	Cautiously adopted open access (digital immigrants)	Everywhere (digital natives in a digital universe) for ubiquitous knowledge construction and transmission
Teaching is done …	Teacher to student	Teacher to student and student to student (progressivism); Internet resources are a normal part of learning activities	Teacher to student, student to student, student to teacher, people-technology-people (co-construction of knowledge)
Schools are located…	In a building (brick)	In a building or online (brick and click), but increasingly on the Web throughhybrid and full internet courses	Everywhere in the “creative society” (thoroughly infused into society: cafes, bowling alleys, bars, workplaces, etc.)
Parents view schools as…	Daycare	Daycare with an laboratory edge, provided by open access and gradual movement toward project-based learning	Places for students to create knowledge, and for which parents may provide domestic, volunteer, civic, and fiscal forms of support
Teachers are…	Licensed Professionals	Licensed Professionals who team with students, parents and others to (gradually) create more interesting class experiences	Everybody, Everywhere, backed up by wireless devices designed to provide information raw material for knowledge production
Hardware and software in schools…	Are purchased at great cost and ignored	Are open source and available at lower cost, permitting open access “on the cheap” and beyond school premises and time frames	Are available at low cost and are used purposively, for the selective production of knowledge
Industry views graduates as…	Line workers who must be trained and from whom little created is expected	A workers marginally or ill-prepared for the knowledge-producing economy	As knowledge-producing co-workers and entrepreneurs who can support the development of focused knowledge construction

Educating the best and the brightest in this brave new world will take a new and improved educational paradigm. Ed­u­ca­tion 1.0 schools can­not teach 3.0 stu­dents. The move to the 3.0 par­a­digm re­quires gen­uine and mas­sive struc­tural trans­for­ma­tions. If schools con­tinue to em­brace the 1.0 par­a­digm and are out­moded by stu­dents that thrive in a 3.0 so­ci­ety, we can only ex­pect con­tin­u­ous fail­ure.

	Par­a­digm
Do­main	1.0	2.0	3.0
Fun­da­men­tal re­la­tion­ships	Sim­ple	Com­plex	Com­plex cre­ative (tele­o­log­i­cal)
Con­cep­tu­al­iza­tion of or­der	Hi­er­ar­chic	Het­er­ar­chic	In­ten­tional, self-or­ga­niz­ing
Re­la­tion­ships of parts	Me­chan­i­cal	Holo­graphic	Syn­er­getic
World­view	De­ter­min­is­tic	In­de­ter­mi­nate	De­sign
Causal­ity	Lin­ear	Mu­tual	An­ti­causal
Change process	As­sem­bly	Mor­phogenic	Cre­ative de­struc­tion
Re­al­ity	Ob­jec­tive	Per­spec­ti­val	Con­tex­tual
Place	Lo­cal	Glob­al­iz­ing	Glob­al­ized

Three generations of education

Education 1.0 is, like the first generation of the Web, a largely one-way process. Students go to universities to get education from professors, who supply them with information in the form of a stand up routine that may include the use of class notes, handouts, textbooks, videos, and in recent times the World Wide Web. Students are largely consumers of information resources that are delivered to them, and although they may engage in activities based around those resources, those activities are for the most part undertaken in isolation or in isolated local groups. Rarely do the results of those activities contribute back to the information resources that students consume in carrying them out.

Education 2.0 happens when the technologies of Web 2.0 are used to enhance traditional approaches to education. Education 2.0 involves the use of blogs, podcasts, social bookmarking and related participation technologies but the circumstances under which the technologies are used are still largely embedded within the framework of Education 1.0. The process of education itself is not transformed significantly although the groundwork for broader transformation is being laid down.

Education 3.0 is characterized by rich, cross-institutional, cross-cultural educational opportunities within which the learners themselves play a key role as creators of knowledge artifacts that are shared, and where social networking and social benefits outside the immediate scope of activity play a strong role. The distinction between artifacts, people and process becomes blurred, as do distinctions of space and time. Institutional arrangements, including policies and strategies, change to meet the challenges of opportunities presented. Education 3.0 as used here is embraces many of the concepts referred to by Downes (2005) in his concept of e-learning 2.0, but complements them with an emphasis on learning and teaching processes with a focus on institutional changes that accompany the breakdown of boundaries (between teachers and students, higher education institutions, and disciplines).

Table 2: Educational generations in higher education
Characteristics	Education 1.0	Education 2.0	Education 3.0
Primary role of professor	Source of knowledge	Guide and source of knowledge	Orchestrator of collaborative knowledge creation
Content arrangements	Traditional copyright materials	Copyright and free/open educational resources for students within discipline, sometimes across institutions	Free/open educational resources created and reused by students across multiple institutions, disciplines, nations, supplemented by original materials created for them
Learning activities	Traditional, essays, assignments, tests, some groupwork within classroom	Traditional assignment approaches transferred to more open technologies; increasing collaboration in learning activities; still largely confined to institutional and classroom boundaries	Open, flexible learning activities that focus on creating room for student creativity; social networking outside traditional boundaries of discipline, institution, nation
Institutional arrangements	Campus-based with fixed boundaries between institutions; teaching, assessment, and accreditation provided by one institution	Increasing (also international) collaboration between universities; still one-to-one affiliation between students and universities	Loose institutional affiliations and relations; entry of new institutions that provide higher education services; regional and institutional boundaries breakdown
Student behaviour	Largely passive absorptive	Passive to active, emerging sense of ownership of the education process	Active, strong sense of ownership of own education, co-creation of resources and opportunities, active choice
Technology	E-learning enabled through an electronic learning management system and limited to participation within one institution	E-learning collaborations involving other universities, largely within the confines of learning management systems but integrating other applications	E-learning driven from the perspective of personal distributed learning environments; consisting of a portfolio of applications

In an Education 3.0 world, institutions will be called on to accredit not programs of study or courses, but rather to accredit learning achieved.

Education in the 20th and early 21st Centuries (Education 1.0) has been based on scarcity. Professors and learning resources are scarce. Learning materials are difficult and costly to produce, and being physical objects, they are hard to move around. Being physical objects, they are also rivalrous, so a single copy of a book in a library cannot be signed out to two people at once. Professors are also costly to move around. This results in professors and learning resources being aggregated into institutions within which most of the key processes are contained.

The concept looks at the holistic approach to the transformation of the education system. Education exists in a digital universe and is infused in every aspect of society with every individual looking to innovate and grow intellectually.

Schools need to be equipped with a network and good bandwidth with access to mobile devices and laptops. It should focus on the integration of ICT tools and the internet in the classroom and into the learning process.

Teach­ing in Ed­u­ca­tion 3.0 re­quires a new form of co-con­struc­tivism that pro­vides mean­ing­ful ex­ten­sions to Dewey, Vy­got­sky and Freire, while build­ing the fu­ture. Specif­i­cally, teach­ing in Ed­u­ca­tion 3.0 ne­ces­si­tates a Leapfrog ap­proach with:

• Adults who are ea­ger to imag­ine, cre­ate and in­no­vate with kids
• Kids and adults who want to learn more about each other
• Kids and adults who part­ner to col­lab­o­rate in teach­ing to and learn­ing from each other
• Kids who work at cre­ative tasks that mir­ror the in­no­va­tion work­force
• An un­der­stand­ing that kids need to con­tribute to all eco­nomic lev­els, and with bet­ter dis­tri­b­u­tion of ef­fort than in the past

Education 3.0 is a term that has been used to describe a level of transformative capabilities and practices for education in the 21st century. Education 3.0 is an interesting approach that views Web 2.0 as an enabling technology for change in HE.

Characterising three stages of education they describe:

·         Education 1.0 as being in a didactic style,

·         Education 2.0 as Education 1.0 enhanced by use of Web 2.0 technologies.

·         Education 3.0 as "characterized by rich, cross-institutional, cross-cultural educational opportunities within which the learners themselves play a key role as creators of knowledge artefacts that are shared, and where social networking and social benefits outside the immediate scope of activity play a strong role. The distinction between artefacts, people and process becomes blurred, as do distinctions of space and time. Institutional arrangements, including policies and strategies, change to meet the challenges of opportunities presented. Education 3.0 as used here embraces many of the concepts referred to by Downes (2005)119 in his concept of e-learning 2.0, but complements them with an emphasis on learning and teaching processes with a focus on institutional changes that accompany the breakdown of boundaries (between teachers and students, higher education institutions, and disciplines)."

These concepts are widespread. In Europe there is a groundswell of interest in whether Web 2.0 will act as either a transformative or an enabling force in changing universities by blurring the boundaries between individual universities, by blurring the boundaries between higher education and open education, by giving rise to the need for other qualification awarding bodies at HE levels, and by changing learning and teaching practice.

cost

Education 3.0 provides an alternative scenario in which an open higher education environment can bring the mechanisms of open peer review and critical rationality (Popper, 1972) to teaching and learning, reduce cost through resource sharing, and increase collaboration across national and institutional borders.

Table 1.0 highlights three key distinctions between HE 1.0 and HE 2.0. As the previous sections have discussed, these may firstly involve the primary role of a lecturer changing from broadcasting to a lecture theatre full of students to facilitating an integrated online and off-line learning environment. Secondly, there may be a move away from a reliance on linear teaching delivery, via traditional lectures, and towards the use of media such as podcasts and videos which students can control as they please. Thirdly and perhaps most

significantly, as mashups and resource piggybacking become the norm there is likely to be a far looser coupling of teaching content to an academic’s parent institution.

Table 1: HE 1.0 and HE 2.0

Education 1.0	Education 2.0	Education 3.0
characterized current systems used in education as a design pattern that is not supportive of lifelong learning or personalization, is asymmetric in terms of user capability (e.g. between learners and teachers), and disconnected from the global ecology of Internet services.		Characterized the disruptive nature of decentralized educational technologies and documented some of the technological, social and behavioral changes that are leading to Education 3.0 under the heading E-Learning 2.0
Produced a convergence of institutions, and limited the range of potential areas of knowledge that could be the subject of programs of study. Aggregation within a paradigm of scarcity also means that educational processes and educational pathways are limited.		An increasing abundance of free and open resources for use in education means that learning resources are no longer scarce. Being digital, such resources are non rivalrous, there is no limitation on the number of people that can access the same resource simultaneously. Digital resources do not need to be aggregated into physical facilities, and many are 'out there on the Internet'.
The key features of this version 1.0 were 1.      Unstructured learning experiences - nobody would "instruct", kids would just learn 2.      Holistic learning experiences - the processes were totally 360 degrees (naturally!) 3.      Practical orientation of learning experiences - there were no artificial classrooms	The key features of this version 2.0 were - 1.      Structured learning experiences - teachers would formally instruct kids 2.      Fragmented learning experiences - learning was broken up into separate pieces 3.      Theoretical orientation of learning experiences - artificial classrooms created artificial, theoretical experiences
Learning was gained through observation, repeat, inculcate and imitation.	Transitioned from apprenticeship to formal education and training. Despite our movements toward universal education, access to knowledge and opportunity continues to be inequitable throughout the world. Even with the arrival of the computer revolution, access to the tools of learning continues to define the learner.	Education 3.0 will only be gained through investment and universal standardization. Platforms for education and learning will slowly standardize and become globally accessible and affordable.
First generation of the web, mainly a one way process	uses the technologies of Web 2.0 to create more interactive education but largely within the constraints of Education 1.0	Breakdown of most of the boundaries, imposed or otherwise within education, to create a much more free and open system focused on learning.
The chalk and talk era	Assistive aides like multimedia	Large focus on communication and collaboration
	Key points 1) Social networking (and social computing in general) transforms the learning framework by providing huge potentials for self-guided learning, cooperative learning and life-long learning. 2) The use of social networks in education, even if it’s starting within the educational providers, has a huge influence in the typical (classical) education. Thus it will assist its modernization which is necessary so the later can easily adapt to the new requirements. 3) The “education 2.0” phenomenon, “questions” the current educational models through: a) the transformation of the teaching process (pedagogical aspect), b) by placing new requirements in the administration of the teaching process (administrative aspect), c) by involving new educational tools (technological aspect) that contribute to a more complete and without discrimination education for the European citizens. 4) The boundaries between school and home, between formal and informal education, between teacher and learner, between education and entertainment, between content management systems and learning content management systems tend to become more and more blurred, more and more thin. 5) Although the current trend indicates that we are about to face a major change to the education as we know it, the deeper understanding of the “learning 2.0” phenomenon and its consequences to the learning process, to students, teachers, and to the educational system altogether, is still quite poor. Farther research and analysis is needed to a series of critical factors so that all aspects and angles canbe fully understood.	Key components of Education 3.0 1. Curriculum, Pedagogy, and Assessment This involves… • A student-centered, personalized approach to instruction; • Interdisciplinary and project-based work; • A 21st-century curriculum that integrates skills such as problem solving, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration into the core curriculum areas; and • Authentic assessments that measure these key 21st-century skills. 2. Infrastructure and Technology This requires… • A forward-thinking technology vision, led from the top; • The creation of flexible learning spaces for students; • A robust IP network that can support several interconnected learning and administrative systems simultaneously; • Ubiquitous access to technology for all staff and students; and • Sustained, targeted, and integrated staff development in both technology and pedagogy. 3. Policies, Procedures, and Management This includes… • A well-governed and managed system, with clear policies and procedures for using technology to transform education; • A “change management” plan to guide this educational transformation and ease the transition; • Data-driven accountability and decision-making; and • An integrated ecosystem of partners. 4. Leadership, People, and Culture This requires… • Visionary leadership; • Excellent teachers, principals, and system leaders; and • An ambitious, collaborative, and innovative school culture.
		Factors are cited as catalyst for Education 3.0 Education Wide diffusion of of e-learning Growing interest in alternatives to teacher-centred approaches such as constructivism Local, regional, and international collaboration to create repositories of educational content Awareness for the need of recognition of prior learning Increasing use of the Internet to find information and just in time learning Social Increasing use of information technologies in daily life and for social purposes Increasing social use of online virtual spaces A new definition of self and society that includes computer mediated social structures, and people outside of one's immediate physical environment Technology The widespread adoption of personal computers and the Internet The emergence of Web 2.0, including blogs, podcasts, social interaction tools, etc. E-Learning platforms or learning management systems that incorporate features of Web 2.0 Free and open source software Legal The development of alternative licensing mechanisms to traditional copyright, which promote the use and reuse of (educational) content without requiring further explicit permission by the author or copyright holder or payment of royalties Economic Internet mediated peer-production has emerged as an efficient organizational model for development of information goods and complements the traditional understanding of firm- and market-organized production processes