Downes, S. (2007) Web 2.0 and Your Own Learning Development [Online video presentation] Available at: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5431152345344515009 (accessed November 21 2007)

Downes, S. (2007) Web 2.0 and Your Own Learning Development [Online video presentation] Available at: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5431152345344515009 (accessed November 21 2007)

This online presentation characterises the principles upon which the author considers web 2.0 technologies to be based. These three underlying principles have connections with the social learning theories of other entries in this annotated bibliography (Lave & Wenger, 1991), (Mendoza et al., 2007). The three principles are:- Interaction: participation in communities of practice; Usability: the software must be easy to use and accessible; and Relevance: or salience. Most significantly, Downes describes the need for the user to own and personalise the spaces that they use, encouraging the bespoke selection of resources from the vast collective knowledge available through the World Wide Web. It is the skills associated with this selective process that are of particular interest when considering the links with user-driven e-portfolio software, whether it be for representational or reflective use.

Mendoza, H.R., Bernasconi, C. & MacDonald N.M. (2007) ‘Creating New Identities in Design Education’ International Journal of Art and Design Education, 26 (3), pp308-313

Mendoza, H.R., Bernasconi, C. & MacDonald N.M. (2007) ‘Creating New Identities in Design Education’ International Journal of Art and Design Education, 26 (3), pp308-313

Mendoza et al explore a community theory of shared knowledge in interdisciplinary design fields. The ideas are not dissimilar to Lave & Wenger’s legitimate peripheral participation in that the authors state that they “do not subscribe to the idea of restrictive fields of knowledge which thereby prevent access to others. We argue that a collective mapping of interrelated knowledge territories creates a stronger framework…”

“The ability to interrelate with others using the ap, to add and to edit it creates a powerful participatory learning tool.” There are also links with well-founded web 2.0 technologies such as wikis and weblogs in the underlying ethos expressed in the article. The authors go on to affirm the belief that restricting knowledge through boundaries is counterintuitive to its mercurial nature.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

The authors describe the concept of legitimate peripheral participation as being central to their theory of Situated Learning. In broad terms, legitimate peripheral paticipation describes the way in which members of communities of practice are valued by their willingness to learn and contribute to the knowledge of a sociocultural community based on a predicated mastery of existing knowledge and skills.

There is a relationship with this theory and the recurrent capacity of Web 2.0 technologies as described by Downes (2007); Interaction: participation in a community of practice; Usability and Relevance. So there are significant parallels to the theme of ownership (user, organisational) of portfolios for learning and employment.