• Today’s students are considered ‘IT or digital natives’, as they have not known a time without digital technology and the internet. Consequently they are less likely to be frightened of / or put off by new technology.   
• Access to digital technologies in the home has increased to the point where many students coming to school use technology on a daily basis to; socialize, download music, videos and films, play games, enter virtual world simulations and purchase their requirements.   
• The capacity of schools to utilise technology, for educational and school business purposes, has grown exponentially in the past 10 years with most Australian schools possessing the necessary infrastructure, hardware and software that enables students to access the Internet and to use computers readily.  

It will examine some of the major issues facing educators, at all levels, as they begin to implement the transformational change in education purpose and delivery necessary to achieve a movement away from the original lineal education model; 

• a model that focused on the gathering and regurgitation of pre-determined information
• to a model that through increasing use of emerging technological opportunities and tools, enables students to ask real-time questions about real world issues; work collaboratively with others around the world to create and share ideas and information; learn through virtual world simulations and to draw their own conclusions and solutions.

 Finally it will comment on the current accepted methodologies used by schools to plan for the introduction of Web 2.0 technologies and whether these need to be reviewed and rethought.  

Discussion The question ‘As a school leader how would you plan for Web 2.0 technologies to contribute to school learning?’ is complex and calls for a number of understandings to be made clear. To begin with an understanding of what this paper has identified as Web 2.0.  

What is Web2.0? According to Wikipedia, “Web 2.0, a phrase coined by O'Reilly Media in 2004, that refers to a perceived second-generation of Web-based services—such as social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies—that emphasize online collaboration and sharing among users. ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web 2.0 Below are a number of other commonly accepted definitions and interpretations of Web 2.0;

• A term often applied to a perceived ongoing transition of the World Wide Web from a collection of websites to a full-fledged computing platform ...
  www.2020systems.com/internet-ad-glossary-r-z.html
• Refers to a supposed second-generation of Internet-based services - such as social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies - that let people collaborate and share information online in ways previously unavailable. (source Wikipedia)
  www.thewebworks.bc.ca/netpedagogy/glossary.html
• A term introduced in 2004 to characterize design patterns in a constellation of new generation Web applications which may provide an infrastructure for more dynamic user participation, social interaction and collaboration.
  www.csa.com/discoveryguides/scholarship/gloss.php
• Web 2.0 is an expression which was used for the first time in 2004 and referred to the second generation of Internet. The main characteristics of new era in Internet is connected with its constant development and delivering services tailored to the needs of each user. ...
  www.share.uni-koeln.de/

 To summarize Web 2.0 allows people to collaborate, share, argue, disagree, buy, sell, create, learn and communicate information online in many different ways.This differs from the first iteration of the internet that really was a one-dimensional storehouse of information where information was sought and accessed through use of search engines alongside web sites that were created for advertising products. Web 2.0 allows users to no longer be just consumers but significant contributors. 

What are the technologies that make up Web 2.0? There are a number of tools and services that have become synonymous with Web 2.0. These include; P2P; MP3; Folksonomy; RSS feeds; wiki's; Webquest; blogs; Vblogs; podcasts; widgets; screencasts and vcasts. Names such as You Tube, My Space, Second Life, eBay, Amazon and Flickr are almost household names among Y and Net Gen Students. According to Morgan Stanley (State of the Internet -- Web 2.0 San Francisco, November 2006 http://www.morganstanley.com/institutional/techresearch/webtwopto2006.html ) the growth of user-generated content has overtaken all major contributors to the web as of September 2006.

Figure 1 below shows a summary of this in table form. Amazing to see Wikipedia has shown a 110% growth in user activity and You Tube an astounding 2662% increase in user activity.  

Figure 1: Results from the Morgan Stanly State of the Internet research Nov 2006

Figure 2: According to the research social networking and personal spaces are what is attracting young people to the web.

Figure 3: This screen capture shows some of the popular web 2.0 tools young people are choosing to spend time exploring according to the Morgan Stanly research.

 There is no doubt that Web 2.0 technologies are growing and developing at an ever-increasing rate and that more and more students, parents and teachers are accessing and using a variety of web 2.0 tools as part of their daily lives How to engage with these in our schools as part of everyday teaching and learning programs and routines is the key question and is one we must address now if we are to engage the 21^st Century learner. Systemically there are a number of issues to resolve before we can begin to achieve this outcome. 

The first issue I would like to highlight is the need for an agreed identification of appropriate e-learning strategies and implementation of these in schools (including Web 2.0 tools). 

We currently use tools such as the STaR chart to help plan the pathway and progress of IT in schools. The STaR Chart, (School Technology and Readiness) can be used in a number of ways in schools in the NT. Firstly, through a set of well designed questions teachers can reflect on and evaluate their own use of ICT in their teaching repertoire and classroom pedagogy. Secondly school leaders can use the STaR Chart rubrics that consist of a continuum of descriptors, to evaluate the state of ICT within their school. The elements of ICT included in the evaluation process are;

1. Leadership and Management;
2. ICT Infrastructure;
3. ICT Professional Learning;
4. Classroom Practice;
5. Student Access and Assessment; and
6. Administration and Community Access.

 These elements are broken into 19 aspects or indicators. Only one of these, number 13, (Classroom Practice) talks about ‘Online interaction” Let us take a look at what schools have as a guideline to the developmental pathway of this element: 

Phase 1: Use websites to retrieve information,
Phase 2: Opportunities for participation in online activities, limited use of email, develop search strategies for online content,
Phase 3: Develop critical practices for selecting and using online content, use of online projects for learning and collaborating e.g. Web Quests, emails beyond the school,
Phase 4: Engage in a range of online communities and activities to learn, share and collaborate, Become effective and critical users of online content’ 
The star chart was constructed in 2005 before web 2.0 technologies had really become an entity and an issue for educators to deal with and whilst the indicators probably enabled some planning and decision making at a school level without too much controversy, the advent of web 2.0 tools are set to upset this. The key point to think about here is that it was probably safely within a school’s duty of care to take responsibility for developing school-based policies around; what websites were appropriate for students to access to gather information from; the development of strategies that guided students to make informed and critical decisions about the validity of information found on websites; what collaborative tasks would give students access to and interactivity with a wider education community e.g. travel buddies, Think Quests, Murder under the Microscope etc.; and what email facilities students should have access to (these were usually non-synchronous activities). With the advent of Web 2.0 these decisions are not so straight forward or clear-cut today. One school may decide to embrace web 2.0 and encourage the use of Wikis, Blogs, Flickr and Podcasts for example, while another school may be actively discouraging teachers and students to use these tools. 

I believe many education systems adopt the use of products such as STaR charts as this, absolves them from the hard task of determining which web applications schools should be including in the learning program. Such a decision places the burden on schools themselves to determine the appropriateness of what is available and how it should be used by teachers and students. Given the presence of internet predators and unsuitable content, adoption is always going to be on the conservative side with a ‘ban mentality’ as the predominant and preferred method of dealing with issues. We just have to look back at some recent examples of this that include mobile phone use and mobile phone cameras. At many of our schools it’s as simple as students not being allowed to bring their own laptops or portable devices (iPods) to school for use. If we struggle with this aspect of technology, then the use of Web 2.0 tools, which could expose schools or systems to community or public discontent and possible legal action, will be put into ‘the too’ hard basket.  

As long as schools and systems remain ill prepared and unwilling to face changing times preferring to develop ‘policy on the run’ access to YouTube, My Space, Face Book, and a myriad of other Web 2.0 technologies will be disjointed and adhoc.

 The second issue I would like to address is the difference of opinion as to the purpose of schooling. Currently we continue to have significant differences among parents, educators and systems as to the purpose of education. A linear education model continues to represent how most systems deliver and support education. This model requires age progression through primary, secondary and tertiary pathways; continues to disseminate information in ‘sequential chunks’ and requires students to pass exams to enter higher education. Isolated examples do exist of schools (i.e. Steiner Schools - http://www.steiner-australia.org/other/index) that endeavour to look at education in a new light. Also, whilst Ministerial publications and policies developed by taskforces such as MCEETYA are beginning to acknowledge the complexities of 21^st Century schooling, to date most of this has been largely rhetoric. In general, and for the majority of the population, the idea that schools have a new function and purpose as a result of innovative Web 2.0 technology is hard to get across to parents and the wider community.

According to Longstreet and Shane (1993.p.15),  After all, parents and teachers can prepare children only for an environment they themselves understand. It is all well and good to teach a reasonable measure of flexibility to children. However to teach flexibility when confronting unknown futures, including some that may be abhorrent to adults is beyond the realm of reason. Furthermore, the accumulated traditions and embedded cultural heritage of one’s earliest childhood cannot be simply dismissed at will. 
To this desire to cling to traditional methods of teaching, Longstreet and Shane, give the term ‘intergenerational disjuncture’. I believe the gap that exists between our aging teaching workforce, many of whom retain images, purposes and didactic practices from their own experiences of schooling, and the students they teach is huge. Bridging this expanding divide is a daunting challenge and may not be fully achieved in the immediate future. Maybe it won’t be this current crop of educators who transform schools but the children of the next generation.  

Finally how will school leaders successfully and safely incorporate Web 2.0 technologies into schools?  
School leaders have, in reality, been placed in the unenviable position of providing educational programs to more effectively meet the needs of today’s ‘visually orientated students who have grown up in a world that has always had the internet’ (Becta Leading next generation learning, Emerging Technologies for Learning, Vol 3, 2008), while at the same time supporting teachers and parents who haven’t. The common denominator is that as a group they are all heading into the same unpredictable future.
What should school leaders and leaders of school systems do? I believe strongly that it is the concepts that underpin Web 2.0 applications and tools that school and system leaders need to capture and implement into the learning programs of students. It is the power behind the Web 2.0 tools that students, teachers and parents need to understand not the tool. Once the power of the tools are understood schools should have access to private virtual networks and virtual environments that are safe from the predators and inappropriate content that exist on the ‘open internet’. Provision of such environments should successfully empower students by allowing them to practice, in safe and secure environments, all the ideas that underpin Web 2.0 thinking. Students will be able to create and share content, collaborate, interact, participate, share, access and contribute through the various Web 2.0 tools such as Wikis, Blogs and Podcasts.  
However given all of the issues described above there is a clear need to involve not only the students in understanding the new paradigm of learning but also simultaneously up skill teachers and parents into understanding the balance required between information retention and the skills they will require to enable them to participate effectively in a new technological society. Parents and teachers must agree that the need for students to be able to decipher, infer, critique, and draw meaningful conclusions from the array of written and visual data provided to them is as important as information retention. Once an understanding of this balance is achieved schools and systems may be in a position to move on.  
From a system perspective leaders need to up-skill existing teachers and recruit younger teachers into the profession. There is a real need to deal with the widening age gap between students and their teachers. 
Finally as these new technologies permeate the education processes there is a critical need for schools and systems to have proactively developed transparent and concise technology policies that provide schools with a clear understanding of what tools and technologies are appropriate, and how they are intended for use in a schooling environment. This will enable schools to implement and work with the technology safely without fear of litigation   

Conclusion This is the first generation of students who are much more technologically proficient than the majority of their teachers and who in reality have a global perspective more than a national perspective of the world. Never before have students been significantly more adept than their teachers. Never before have teachers been questioned about their ability to teach by a growing discontented generation of students. The reality that education can longer follow linear pathways is starting to be understood by educationalists. The rub is that they struggle themselves to determine what education should look like for today's students. Educators of today are mainly baby boomers who were born in the 1950s and due to intergenerational disjuncture largely try to maintain an educational system that they themselves grew up in and were part of. This needs to be addressed urgently through the training and appointment of younger teachers and the compulsory up-skilling of existing teachers.   
Students are now able to access information through means dreamed about in centuries past. There is no longer the need to regurgitate this information instantly at any time Therefore the challenge facing teachers, parents and governments is to accept, as a group that if schools continue to just impart information they will not engage with, or meet the needs of, today's students and as a result many students will choose to leave to find other educational pathways that will satisfy their learning styles and needs.
In support of this statement one can look at the recent growth of virtual or online learning. Virtual schooling in the USA now approaches one million students after commencing in 1995 with fewer than one hundred. Another factor to consider when proposing that education needs to move beyond information delivery is to consider that students starting school today will be retiring in 2065 and beyond.  Given the changes that have occurred in technology during the last 10 years no one has any idea of the reality of 2065. 
A presenter from ‘Education is Linear’ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73CQIM7ogs8&NR=1) summarized ‘that in a four day conference no-one was really able to describe the future needs of students’ and therefore how would educators be able to provide a skilled workforce for a future no one is certain about.  
If schools and system leaders are to continue to use tools such as the StAR Chart it may be time to promote ‘Aspect 13’ to prominence in their thinking. It is time to look at providing safe virtual environments that students can operate in successfully to develop the new skills, knowledge, understandings attitudes and perceptions they require in the wider world.  Only by involving and gaining agreement by all parties, as to the function of schools, can we hope to provide an engaging educational journey for students of the 21^st Century. Failure to do so will result in schools continuing to maintain traditional educational platforms and paradigms of the past.
The following video clip borrowed from You Tube sends the message to all that the needs of students today are being overlooked. (A Vision of K-12 Students Today; Nov 2007)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A-ZVCjfWf8&feature=related    

References:

·         MCEETYA; Learning in an Online World, Digital Education – making change happen, Curriculum Corporation, 2008
·         The River City Project; A Multi-User Virtual Environment for Learning Scientific Inquiry and 21^st Century Skills, http://muve.gse.harvard.edu/muvees2003/index.html, accessed April, 2008
·         Simulation Nation: The Promise of Virtual Learning Activities; http://www.edutopia.org/simulation-nation accessed April 2008
·         Becta; Leading next generation learning, Emerging Technologies for Learning, Volume 3, March 2008
·         Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0  (accessed April 2008)·         2020 Systems “Online Marketing Made Easy”; http://www.2020systems.com/internet-ad-glossary-r-z.html , accessed April 2008-05-04
·         Net Pedagogy Portal; http://www.thewebworks.bc.ca/netpedagogy/glossary.html , accessed April 2008-05-04
·         CSA Glossary; http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/scholarship/gloss.php , accessed May 2008-05-04
·         Share – Sharing Resources in Education; http://www.share.uni-koeln.de/?q=en/glossary/29 , accessed May 2008-05-04
·         School Technology and Readiness (STaR) Chart, http://elearn2.latis.net.au/ilt (accessed April, 2008)·         MCEETYA, Learning Spaces Framework; Learning in an Online World; Curriculum Corporation, 2008
·         simSchool, Challenge? Practice. Performance? Evidence. https://simschool.org/my/login , accessed May 2008-05-04
·         Edutopia; Wiki Don’t Lose that Number, http://www.edutopia.org/node/4003 , accessed April 2008 ·         Morgan Stanley; State of the Internet - Web 2.0 San Francisco, http://www.morganstanley.com/institutional/techresearch/webtwopto2006.html , November 2006
·         Longstreet, W.S., & Shane, H.G.; Curriculum for a New Millennium, Massachusetts, Allyn & Bacon 1992 

YouTube:
·         21^st Century Pedagogy; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l72UFXqa8ZU&feature=related , accessed May 2008
·         A Vision of K-12 Students Today; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A-ZVCjfWf8&feature=related , accessed May 2008
·         ‘Education is Linear’ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73CQIM7ogs8&NR=1) , accessed May 2008     Podcast:Would Students Use It? http://staffweb.peoriaud.k12.az.us/Shawn_Wheeler/AdventuresNPodCastingpresentation/Pages/Slide_6.htm , accessed

I am a teacher and have taught in WA and the UK before coming to the Northern Territory.

At the moment I am not in the classroom.

I'm a mad sudoku fan. I try to do a sudoku when I get home from work. I find it helps me unwind from the days little stresses. I'm onto killer sudokus at the mo.