In contrast, the Web 2.0 definition of “knowledge” is collective agreement about a description that may combine facts with other dimensions of human experience, such as opinions, values, and spiritual beliefs. As an illustration, the Wikipedia entry on “social effect of evolutionary theory” wrestles with constructing a point of view that most readers would consider reasonable, accurate, and unbiased without derogating religious precepts some might hold. In contrast to articles in the Encyclopedia Britannica, Wikipedia articles are either undisputed (tacitly considered accurate) or disputed (still resolving through collective argumentation), and Wikipedia articles cover topics that are not central to academic disciplines or to a wide audience (e.g., the cartoon dog Scooby-Doo).
Paul McKenzie on 24 Nov 09A great post by Ian Jukes. The writing is certainly on the wall for the "bring in the expert and sit up straight" style of professional development. I've been wondering for years why schools don't pool their collective expertise to create a culture of learning in their schools. Some of the "experts" that are brought in don't even have the practical or even theoretical expertise of residing staff members. This year a visiting professional told me, "When it comes to schools, there are never any prophets in your own backyard." The zeitgeist is certainly suggesting we need a change.
