Conférence finale Wikim Bruxelles 01/10/09 - Keynote speaker "The Do It Yourself revolution in online migrant education" - David Casacuberta, Philosophe des sciences (Univ. Autonome de Barcelone) (
3. Aim of this talk
To analyse the current web 2.0 paradigm, its strengths
and limitations within the context of migrant users
To present a future scenario which may help to bypass
current limitations
8. Web 1.0 versus Web 2.0
Web 1.0 Web 2.0
- The portal - Social Networks
- Interactivity - Friend of a Friend
- Artificial intelligence - Wisdom of crowds
9. Punk/Funk elements
in Web 1.0
Everybody can become a generator of content
Intermediaries are no longer needed
Total control of a project, from beginning to end
Interactivity transforms the experience of accessing
information
10. Limitations of the web 1.0
paradigm
Ability to post content was limited. Portals were
designed for consumers, not for creators
Interactivity didnt meet the user’s expectations
Technology wasn’t ready to deliver expected content at
the speed and reliability desired
11. Punk/Funk elements
in Web 2.0
Collective construction of data (the user as a co-
developer)
Collective Intelligence
Data Remix
Simplicity in design
The virtuous circle
12. Limitations of the web 2.0
paradigm
Are social networks really social?
Is it really open to everybody?
What happened to interactivity?
14. A bunch of links to “friends”
is not equivalent to a culture
15. Social Networks and
migrants
Formal access is granted but access to the culture
lifeform behind it is not.
Much content delivered by social networks doesn’t
make sense to people coming from developing
countries, with a whole other set of needs and wants.
Common social networks tend to be exclusive
They might become too formal and therefore too
abstract to understand
16. Individual versus community
Enlightment: individual quest for liberty
Romanticism: artistic genius
Science: methodological individualism
Ethics: Negative concept of freedom
18. Hobbes’ Leviathan
All citizens united in the body of the king
Nation is now inmune to violence, and the state is the
only one allowed to use it
19. Immunological paradigm
Communitas versus immunitas. Common root -->
munus
munus= the gift that has to be returned to the
community
The immune= The one that doesn’t need to return the
munus
20. Immunological paradigm II
Modernity requires subjectivity
Subjectivity requires immunology
Every state, every community is build around a munus
and ways to get immune to it. Even virtual ones.
22. Immunologic alternatives
Establishing inclusive immunologic processess: How
mothers passes their immunity to their sons.
(re)construction of individuals in different immunisation
processes
23. Building communities that
Are inclusive and systemic
Have a proper lifeform, content, not just formal
Allow multiple identity roles
There is no tension between being an individual and a
member of the community
Facilitate intercultural dialogue
28. An Example: World of
Warcraft
World of Warcraft (WOW) can be used
To teach how to work in group
To develop a sense of responsibility
To create empathy
29. Flow
A mental state in which times freezes, and only present
matters
Subjects under flow are deeply focused and remenber
things better
Flow facilitates empathy
Flow is easily achieved with video-games
30. Embodiment
Any community, to make sense is grounded in specific
time and space. Formal communities lack that type of
embodiment and therefore are quite limited
By means of simulations, videogames can give the
impression of full embodiment, therefore facilitating the
construction of full-fledged communities.
31. Multiple identities
Videogames facilitate the construction of multiple
identities. Which helps
To promote more than one role
To make communities more inclusive
To create empathy by means of role changing
32. Empathy
What happens in movie or a book, happens to
someone else
What happens in a videogame, happens to me
33. The future of education is a
game
Thank you for your attention
QUESTIONS?