Search results
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- am part of a team exploring how Web 2.0 should be incorporated into our1 KB (185 words) - 04:14, 22 November 2023
- .... His major areas of research are: geoscience education, online learning, web 2.0 applications, global climate change, the scholarship of teaching and learni1 KB (185 words) - 04:35, 22 November 2023
- ...I also [http://edit.emich.edu/index.php?title=SOTL:Main have researched] Web 2.0 communities and community building, and social knowledge projects. I have2 KB (363 words) - 21:51, 3 October 2009
- ...uld be aware that no one will be assigning you work: this is a "bottom-up" Web 2.0 project, and it thrives precisely because people work on whichever encyclop1 KB (249 words) - 21:12, 26 December 2007
- ==Web 2.0== ...ites cannot yet afford the implementation overhead. But tools support for Web 2.0 design approaches continues to evolve rapidly as of 2008, and this has resu12 KB (1,802 words) - 08:48, 22 April 2024
- ...ve blog on everything about collective intelligence, wisdom of the crowds, Web 2.0 Contact: Howard Rheingold.2 KB (233 words) - 15:41, 26 January 2023
- ...s. His current research interests include asynchronous online discussions, Web 2.0, and 1:1 computer initiatives. Major current events include chairing educat2 KB (242 words) - 04:07, 22 November 2023
- ...such as AMP, GE and Westfield. She is deeply involved with open source and web 2.0 online communities. Over the past few years Kate has worked with marketing3 KB (379 words) - 04:11, 22 November 2023
- ...uld be aware that no one will be assigning you work: this is a "bottom-up" Web 2.0 project, and it thrives precisely because people work on what they want, wh2 KB (356 words) - 13:31, 8 January 2008
- ...uld be aware that no one will be assigning you work: this is a "bottom-up" Web 2.0 project, and it thrives precisely because people work on what they want, wh2 KB (387 words) - 13:43, 8 January 2008
- ...erent projects, and have become very interested in community management in Web 2.0. Since the only thing really differing CZ from WP is its pretensions toward2 KB (324 words) - 04:49, 22 November 2023
- {{rpr|Web 2.0}}3 KB (454 words) - 09:14, 28 March 2024
- ...uld be aware that no one will be assigning you work: this is a "bottom-up" Web 2.0 project, and it thrives precisely because people work on what they want, wh2 KB (364 words) - 03:15, 11 October 2007
- {{rpr|Web 2.0}}4 KB (660 words) - 10:45, 7 March 2024
- ...This is a matter of personal preferences of many individuals. Perhaps most web 2.0 participants are attracted by 'as free as possible' kind of license.4 KB (698 words) - 09:55, 4 November 2007
- ...ren't really seeing the potential that you would hope for with all of the Web 2.0 tools out there. We aren't seeing the academic community take advantage of7 KB (1,079 words) - 03:41, 22 November 2023
- {{rpr|Web 2.0}}11 KB (1,461 words) - 10:46, 7 March 2024
- ...riety of web based mashups. [[Tim O'Reilly]] lists Mashups as one of the [[Web 2.0]] technologies. <ref name="Web2.0"> title="Levels of the Game: The Hierarchy of Web 2.0 Applications"}}24 KB (3,662 words) - 09:57, 20 August 2023
- ...ice.eu/resource/1680 2007, State-of-the-art in Good Practice Exchange and Web 2.0 - Report prepared by ePractice.eu - a project funded by the European Commi6 KB (945 words) - 20:25, 22 March 2008
- ...tarted by a co-founder of Wikipedia, Dr. Larry Sanger, is quite unusual as Web 2.0 projects go. "We are focused on quality and responsibility as well as quan5 KB (685 words) - 19:30, 22 December 2007