References

References

American College of Education. (2018). The Digital Learner Module 4. Retrieved from 

          https://ace.instructure.com/courses/1543035/assignments/9416277

MTT Info Network. (n.d.).  Excellent Centers. Retrieved from http://www.mttsonline.org/

Maryland State Department of Education. (n.d.).

           Maryland Teacher Technology Standards. Retrieved from  

           http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/techlit/docs/TeacherTechnologyStandards

           MSDEVersion.pdf 

Google Image. (n.d.a). Diversity. Retrieved from 

            https://www.asc.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/field/image/diversityupdated.jpg

Google Image. (n.d.d). Student Diversity. Retrieved from 

http://www.ocde.us/CulturalDiversity/PublishingImages/CDLogo%20DropS%20

Transparent%20BG.png

Sharma, R. (2018). Unit 17 Web 2.0. retrieved from

            http://14.139.40.199/bitstream/123456789/41872/1/Unit-17.pdf         

U.S. Department of Education. (2011). No Child Left Behind Act. Retrieved from

             https://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml

Voice Thread LLC. (2018). Amazing Conversations About Media. Retrieved from 

             https://voicethread.com/

Findings on Web 2.0 Tool Versus Web Page

According to Sharma (2018), the web-user considered the web-king and the web-user can create content information on the web very conveniently. Unlike the web page, the Web 2.0 tool allows the web-user to rate or tag the web content information. Also, Web 2.0 has transported a merging of a broader range of diverse systems at one place. For example, an occurrence of a multiple of systems editing, collaboration, image sharing, and participating in other Web 2.0 tool service in one place or space at the same time. Likewise, Web 2.0 social milieu of the content-information is different from the web page because people and communities are now producing content-information and services to meet their needs and goals. People with similar interests have come closer now (Sharma, 2018).

As a Web 2.0 advocate and web-user, Ms. Da Silva Beharry's desire to a creative thinker, reflective learner, team worker, self-manager, effective participator, and independent enquirer align with American College of Education (2018) Module 2 Learning Objectives. Unlike the web page, the Web 2.0 tool allows the web-users, including teachers, students, and communities to read, write, and share information simultaneously. In this regard, unlike the web page, the Web 2.0 has taken the educational delivery to the next level of advancement where the content-information created by online-collaboration. Thus the Web 2.0-Innovative-Platform fundamental toward allowing users to become creative-thinkers that collaborate, converse or share concepts (Deepak Kumar & Shiva Kanaujia, 2013).

The Difference between Web 2.0 Tool and Webpage

According to Deepak Kumar & Shiva Kanaujia (2013), Web 2.0 is a platform connected to devices of Web 2.0 applications that benefit primarily from the platform by using disseminated and communication web services; and contributes or describes the communication of the web into a platform for services. In this regard, Web 2.0 is also a platform where web-user sharing data and participating in software applications and services. Unlike the web page which does not provide the tool that will allow the user to read, write, and share information simultaneously.

According to Sharma (2018), Web 2.0 is the second generation of World Wide Web which provides the facility of online collaboration and data distribution amongst people in an efficient manner. While the web projected to be two-way, initially the majority of websites were transmitting one-way data to any reader in a passive style of communication that confirmed the first web as an inactive web. Based on this scenario, web users were unable to contribute, interact, or comment on the services.

The fundamental difference regarding the Web 2.0 tool versus the Web page is similar to Reading versus Reading and Writing. According to Sharma (2018), “In Web 2.0 the ‘Top-Down’ approach has been replaced with ‘Bottom-Up’ approach where the user decides the kind of content.” Based on this scenario, the web-user uses the web as a platform to accomplish a broad range of diverse tasks relating to image and video sharing, YouTube, electronic mail and message, editing data online, including other tasks using the support of various software packages or services. In regards to this information, the web-user can interact and contribute to the web pages of other people or organizations instead of merely reading them (Sharma, 2018).

Definition of Web Page by Julia Da Silva Beharry

According to the researcher Julia Da Silva Beharry, a webpage is a hypertext article, file, essay or any other document connected to the Worldwide Web and displayed in a web browser such as Firefox, Google Chrome, Opera, Microsoft Internet Explorer, Microsoft Edge, or Apple Safari. These web pages are usually called pages or website.

Definition of Web 2.0 Tool by Julia Da Silva Beharry

Ms. Da Silva Beharry explains that Web 2.0 tool is a universal language about specific software-applications of the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW), including blogs, wikis, video sharing services, and social media websites. Some of these websites consist of LinkedIn and Facebook, which focus on interactive sharing and participatory collaboration and instead of pure content delivery.

Julia's Brief Account of Web 2.0 Tool Versus Web Page

How will Julia Da Silva Beharry develop and classify her visual explanation of Web 2.0 tool?  Ms. Da Silva Beharry will develop and classify her visual explanation of Web 2.0 tool by sharing the link with the Blog she created. Here is the link: http://juliasvisualexplanationofweb2-0tool.blogspot.com/ to her Blog. Copy and paste web link into the browser or click on the link to view her presentation. Julia’s Blog will discuss the definition of Web 2.0 tool by Julia Da Silva Beharry, the definition of a Webpage by Julia Da Silva Beharry, and the differences between Web 2.0 tool and a webpage.