Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education

Via posts on the DigitalKoans and Record Management Futurewatch I came across references to a new JISC-funded report on “Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education” by Tom Franklin and Mark van Harmelen.

This 27-page long document provides a series of recommendations to JISC on how it should respond to the challenges posed by Web 2.0.  The recommendations include:

Recommendation 1: Guidelines should not be so prescriptive as to stifle the experimentation that is needed with Web 2.0 and learning and teaching that is necessary to take full advantage of the possibilities offered by this new technology.

Recommendation 4: JISC should consider funding work looking at long-term access to student created content once they have left the university with the aim of developing good practice guides.

Recommendation 8: JISC should consider funding studies looking at the risks to the institution associated with internally and externally hosted Web 2.0 services, and ways in which the risks can be controlled and mitigated. This could be done within the wider context of examining risks associated with Web 2.0, web services and Service Oriented Architectures.

Recommendation 17: JISC should consider commissioning studies to explore i) the accessibility issues of various commonly used Web 2.0 technologies, and how any limits can be overcome, and ii) case studies on how Web 2.0 technologies can enhance accessibility.

Recommendation 9: JISC should consider funding projects or case studies that look at different methods for integrating Web 2.0 into the overall university information and information technology environment while retaining flexibility of use across teaching, learning, administrative and other areas of university activity.

All sensible stuff, I feel, which reflect some of the discussions we’ve been having on this blog (e.g. the current discussions about use of Facebook within our institutions address the issues raised in Recommendation 9).

I should point out that Tom and Mark made use of Web 2.0 technologies in the production of their report. In particular they hosted a virtual conference which discussed a range of Web 2.0 issues, based on briefing papers produced by Tom and Mark. I spoke on Content Creation: Web 2.0 Is Providing The Solution at the virtual conference – and I must admit that I was somewhat surprised that the consulation process was not described in the report.


  1. Whoops! Some things fell between the cracks in a rush to complete by our deadline.

    While we mentioned the webinars in the report, we didn’t name the speakers (Stan Stanier, Terry Wassell, Brian Kelly, Graham Attwell, David White, Chris Adie, Tom Franklin and myself) or mention their specific topics in the report, and we should have. At least we ensured that thanks for speakers’ and other participants’ participation went out privately in email and more publicly in an emerge blog post by me.

    We should also have noted where speakers’ slides are stored. For the record the slides are as Brian’s URL above, and for Brian also here on slideshare, with the remainder collated in my account at slideshare.


  2. Hi Mark – I’m very much aware of the pressures of getting reports finalised in time for funders’ deadlines and that sometimes things do get overlooked. So thanks for this response.


  3. Hmm – looks like the link was chanhged. I’ve updated it, so it should now work. Thanks for the report.



  1. Web 2.0 for higher education « putting down a marker - [...] Other blog coverage: see Brian Kelly (UKOLN) on UK Web Focus. [...]

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>