US IN EDUCATION
By Gabriela Grossecki
Abstract
“Surfing the net, which is more and more complex, has become one of the main
obstacles in efficiently using the network. This is mostly due to the disorganized nature of the
Internet, in collections of sites and documents whose quick and exponential growth rate leads
to difficulties users have to face in order to find their way out of the online informational
maze. There are two possibilities of coping with this complexity: either the structure of the
Internet is reorganized, or every user is offered the ability of systemizing an individual
perspective of the network. Although the first option would probably bring more benefits on a
global level, the second is easier to achieve and has immediate advantages for the individual
user or for a group of users.” These lines can be found in a paper from September 1994,
published by Michigan State University.1 Almost a decade passed until the dream of the
American University teachers materialized in the emergence2 of a revolutionary way to
organize the informational content available online, according to individual needs and
interests, offered by social bookmarking applications. This paper will attempt to offer a first
structure and a first frame for using del.icio.us the one of the most used instruments of social
bookmarking in the recent history of the Internet - in education.
1
Robin Good, A Delicious Way to Personalize the Web, January 5, 2004,
http://www.masternewmedia.org/2004/01/05/a_delicious_way_to_personalize.htm.
2
It is believed that the era of the social web began with the launch of del.icio.us on September 15, 2003.
3
http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/.
I. INTRODUCTION
4
Lists of social bookmarking applications/services can be accessed at Listio, eConsultant, or 3Spot.
5
Other companies which monitor Web traffic show approximately the same number. See statistics from:
Compete (http://snapshot.compete.com/del.icio.us): 973,908 visitors per month (USA), Rank: 1,930; Quantcast
(http://quantcast.com/del.icio.us): 1,100,000 visitors per month (USA), Rank: 1,342 or Alexa
(http://www.alexa.com/browse?&CategoryID=5305). Those who are interested in real time traffic can follow the
del.icio.us statistics at http://deli.ckoma.net/stats.
6
http://blog.del.icio.us/blog/2006/09/million.html.
7
Top 25 Largest Social Bookmarking Sites, 6/09/2007, http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/social-
bookmarking.html.
But, perhaps the most interesting aspect is represented by its demographic profile.
Studies carried out in 2006 by LeeAnn Prescott8 and Trevino showed that most users were
male (59%), 30 years-old on average, having high incomes, coming from urban areas or
suburbs9, tending to have higher education and to be familiar with technology from a young
age. As the site’s inventor himself stated, the great majority of del.icio.us users are bloggers,
programmers, educational actors (teachers, librarians), persons interested in constantly
discovering interesting sites and in showing them to others too.
Fig 1 The del.icio.us interface for my account (screen capture, 20 July 2007, http://del.icio.us/ggrosseck)
A user’s collection is found at the address http://del.icio.us/username and has the RSS
http://del.icio.us/rss/username (in fact, any del.icio.us page allows an RSS subscription). At
the address http://del.icio.us/username/tag we find the resources of the username, saved under
the specified tag. At http://del.icio.us/username/tag1+tag2 we find the resources characterized
by the specified tags, tag 1 and tag 2.
We can follow certain users’ collections and sub-collections, characterized by tags, by:
subscribing to the RSS of the users’ collections, if we know they search information
about fields of interest for us too;
adding them in our own network by using the option network (at
http://del.icio.us/network/username we find resources added by all users from
username’s network);
subscribing to certain resources which we specify by using the option subscriptions (at
http://del.icio.us/subscriptions/username we find other users’ resources, characterized
by particular tags).
2. Managing marked information (saving resources from other users, deleting them
etc.). Del.icio.us can be considered an editing instrument, with the help of which every user
slices the web in his/her own manner. Del.icio.us offers several ways of managing the
resources in one’s own collection: on the resource page, from the browser’s menu, with the
help of the TAG bookmarklet etc. The latter provides more options: information about the
date of the post, most popular tags; the field Keywords offers a shortcut to the URL of the
posted resource; we can delete the resource straight from the editing window.
3. Personalizing. Social bookmarking offers all users the possibility of making their
lists of relevant websites public, or of keeping them private. Other users can access these
resources and can choose to save them. In this way, every user creates his/her own vision of
the Internet, according to the nature of the network, which isn’t an organized entity, but an
entanglement of sites (the changes performed don’t affect other users).
4. We have three search options on del.icio.us: one’s own collection, the general links
library and the Web. Thus, del.icio.us used as a search engine allows: finding other useful
tools, subscribing to the interesting ones, filtering resources for personal use (not only can we
browse through the links of any user who decided to make their resources public, but we can
choose only those which correspond to our own interests). It also allows searching files of a
certain type (for example, we can localize video files which refer to Web 2.0 by writing on the
address bar: http://del.icio.us/tag/system:media:video+web2.0). Sometimes, del.icio.us
collections prove more efficient in localizing web resources than Internet search engines.
5. Finding information/Research. Del.icio.us is, essentially, a social bookmarking
service, an excellent system for archiving favourite information on the Internet, following hot
topics and new resources from certain fields, discovering other new sites and/or exploiting
other persons’ collections. The real strength of del.icio.us resides in a certain form of
“collective intelligence”, because new information is always added, revised and filtered. Thus,
the so-called architecture of participation is set up.
6. Evaluation. Yahoo bought del.icio.us (an important marketing move for the
company, similar to the acquisition of Flickr), and this led to a massive increase in the number
of users and, implicitly, in the quality of the stored sites. A resource is considered important if
it is stored in more del.icio.us accounts, and we can notice this by looking at the number of
persons who added the respective resource (which is attached to each link). Thus, the number
of users who saved a certain site becomes an indicator of the respective resource’s
value/utility/notoriety. If we click on the counter which indicates the magnitude of the
resources, we access the respective users’ collections and the tags under which they had saved
the resource. For instance, the resource Open Source Windows, from del.icio.us/ggrosseck
collection, was also saved (at the time this article was written) by 5099 users. If we click on
this number, we get the list of the respective users’ collections, and we might find other useful
resources (a common resource may indicate a common interest field).
At del.icio.us/popular we find the resources saved by most users, and at del.icio.us/tag
we find the most used tags; these pages can be followed through RSS (the tags underlined in
red can be found in our own collection). Unlike classic search engines (Google, Yahoo), this
system has the advantage that the importance of a resource is established by a person, not by
an algorithm.
7. Collaboration/Communication. Although the facility “your network” is correlated
more to the bookmarks saved by Internet users than to the users themselves, we rely on the
experience/opinion of these people we have included in our circle of users and who have
already evaluated the respective resource (users can choose to include persons with similar
interests in their network by attributing them the quality of “member”, or mere “observer”,
called “fan”). “We are joining forces to build my vision of creating a way for people to
remember things together. It is a shared-memory site”, Joshua Schachter said. The great
advantage of this service is thus represented by the increased trust users have in the utility and
accuracy of the resources saved by users from their network. We can communicate resources
either by “links for you”, or by attributing the tag “for:username”. The Internet user to whom
we are sending the resource should be a del.icio.us user.
11
Folksonomy is a recent term, introduced by Thomas Vander Wal, http://www.vanderwal.net/.
It is believed that this collective and spontaneous way of freely indexing Internet
information offers a partial solution to the semantic Web.
Although folksonomy promises to redefine surfing/searching the Web, the most acute
problem of del.icio.us is precisely dividing the information on the Web in categories (the three
axes of del.icio.us are users, resources and tags). Schachter didn’t impose any rules as far as
tagging is concerned, but he left it up to the users’ latitude to establish the taxonomy of online
resources. Basically he did what Web 2.0 stipulates: he gave the power to the users.
Because tagging is a very personal procedure, many users don’t know how to
designate sites, which leads to different styles of bookmarking the Web. Javier Cañadas
(2006) suggests four styles of tagging for del.icio.us users:
1. The selfish style. We tag only according to our individual context. Our tags have
personal meaning (only for our own benefit), are irrelevant to other users and difficult
to place in the social context of the del.icio.us network of users (for example, Oliver,
for Tiya, etc. are tags which indicate resources saved for my husband or for my
daughter). In time, it is possible that this type of user will classify content under
generally accepted, more theme-oriented tags. This doesn’t exclude selfishness, but
attributes a certain social utility to tags. The social benefit of such a classification
consists in the user’s maturity.
2. The friendly type. We tag for the people we know: friends, colleagues, project
partners, etc. This style is typical both for large groups and for small ones. The social
benefit is great and the motivation lies in belonging to a group, in the desire to share
with others what you know, to contribute to online content.
3. The altruist type. We use tags as general as possible and as many as we can for a
resource. We try, using key words, to describe as objectively/realistically as possible
the resource that we post, so that it is of interest to the great majority of users of the
most popular social bookmarking service. The social benefit is huge because it
involves generosity. “Recovering” information is easy because we understand the
notes attached to the post and we are able to interpret the tags. Motivation is low
because it involves a lot of work and no benefit.
4. The popular style. Popular tagging is used in order to get more views. There is
absolutely no social benefit. Such tagging is considered spam (we find resources
marked with top10, sex, interesting, etc.). This tagging procedure is considered
artificial and is disapproved by the rest of the users because it reflects the tendency of
some marketers to get a better position in the lists of results posted by search engines.
12
It would mean attributing del.icio.us users an altruism they don’t have.
Obviously, del.icio.us has benefits and limitations. We shall only mention some of its
advantages:
Independence from a platform. Neither the operating system, nor the browser is
important. We have those small buttons which can be installed (the configuration of
the tool bar is done from the browser).
It is easy to use: we don’t need to save addresses or to have special knowledge.
Ubiquity: sites can be saved and accessed on any computer with an Internet
connection, anywhere in the world.
Serendipity: social browsing leads to finding useful links/collections.
Collective intelligence strengthens the synergy of del.icio.us.
Flexibility: del.icio.us allows us to create a personal library of resources which can (or
not) be tagged, classified in several categories, shared with others, taken from others,
and can be published as web links or RSS on blogs or personal sites, or exported as
HTML file, etc.
And some disadvantages:
Being a web service it requires an online connection.
The absence of tags. According to a Pew Internet report13 only 28% of American
Internet users place web resources in a category.
The impossibility to control vocabulary. Tags aren’t subjected to any hierarchy which
gives del.icio.us a chaotic and ambiguous character. There are those relational tags
which classify categories according to common URLs, but because the data base
belongs to the users there is no standardization. The popularity of del.icio.us increased
precisely because of its system’s flexibility, fluidity and lack of control imposed by a
certain taxonomy. Furthermore, because tags can create confusion (London can be a
link to the tourist map of London or to a volume by Jack London) it is advisable, from
time to time, to reorganize (rename, include in other categories or even delete) tags.
Inconsistency of terms. It is best to choose a category after exploring those which
already exist in the network. In other words, nobody is saying that the tag “educatie”
(education, engl.) isn’t good, but it limits the access to the links only to users who
speak Romanian. Moreover, as long as we don’t decide otherwise, links are public and
placing the online resource in a category which wasn’t tagged properly can cause
problems (“enemy” for our office colleague, for instance).
Merging tags and eliminating the singular-plural dichotomy: “blog”, “blogs”,
“blogging”, “blogosphere”, etc.- instead of using four tags, it’s better to use just one.
The evolution of language (synonyms, writing with or without spaces, with or without
capital letters, using or not the underscore, using a certain language, etc.). Because
there isn’t a distinction between capital and small letters we have to be extra careful
when we tag - within phrases we either use the underscore or we unite words (e.g.
social_bookmarking or socialbookmarking, and not social bookmarking, because that
results in two categories: “social” and “bookmarking”).
The lack of precision: misspelled terms, superficiality, uncertainty, incorrect placement
in several categories, etc.
Del.icio.us isn’t literally a social network, centered more on people than on the data.
For instance, the only way of creating a profile is to include a link to your own blog or
page, which makes it difficult to find persons with similar interests. Social aspects
have room for improvement and that can be achieved, specialists say, by including
comments, groups, etc., even URL clusters (something like Flickr) or recommended
links. “It is not only about helping people find each other according to the interests
13
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Tagging.pdf.
that connect them, but doing that in a certain context”, Joshua Schachter underlined.
However, the beauty of del.icio.us lies in its simplicity and efficiency, which is why
the envisioned social upgrade remains a peripheral function to most of its users.
There is no real competitor on the market, its interface still has lacks, actualization
isn’t done in real time, the clients’ service is defective (some users complain that they
receive an answer to their requests only after a few weeks14).
Information load. A big number of links and/or a large network might require more
time/attention to browse through the information flow, etc.
15
http://horizon.nmc.org/wiki/Main_Page.
16
See also http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/discussion/2.cfm.
17
http://www.twoantennas.com/projects/delicious-network-explorer/.
18
http://www.mindmymap.com/.
19
ViewFinder Heat Map, http://www.feng-gui.com/Default.aspx
o and many other applications (we can follow the interests of the user vs. link
popularity, the space of individual links, diagrams with recommended links,
etc.).
V. INSTEAD OF A CONCLUSION
Although it is such a popular service among virtual space users, in Romania too ew
educational actors use del.icio.us20. This mostly happens because of the mistrust in the new
social bookmarking technology and of the lack of interest (particularly because they lack
knowledge and aren’t’ familiarized with the Web 2.0 applications). I hope that, eventually, the
subtle, flexible, pertinent and convincing character which rendered del.icio.us unique among
social bookmarking services will determine its adoption in educational activities.
VI.REFERENCES
1. Hammond, T.; Hannay, T.; Lund, B.; Scott, J., Social Bookmarking Tools (I). A General Review,
D-Lib Magazine, aprilie 2005, vol. 11(4),
http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april05/hammond/04hammond.html.
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del.icio.us.
3. Javier Cañadas, Tipologías y estilos en el etiquetado social, http://www.terremoto.net/tipologias-y-
estlos-en-el-etiquetado-social/, 7 august 2006.
4. O’Connor, Brett, del.icio.us Mashups, Wiley Publishing Inc., 2007.
5. Richardson, Will, Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts and other powerful web tools for classroom, Corwin
Press, 2006.
6. Seldow, A., Social Tagging in K-12 Education: Folksonomies for Student Folk, 2006,
http://mrseldow.gradeweb.com/custom/Social_tagging_in_K12_Education_Seldow_4_3_06.pdf.
7. Trevino, Ericka Menchen, Social Bookmarks: Personal Organization And Collective Discovery
On The Web, teză master, Universitatea Illinois, Chicago, 2006.
8. Waters, Sue, Use del.icio.us for social bookmarking,
http://aquaculturepda.wikispaces.com/delicious.
20
Or other social bookmarking applications which are useful in education (diigo, connotea, citeULike, scuttledu,
etc.)
i *
Gabriela Grosseck, senior lecturer Ph.D., West University of Timisoara, Faculty of Sociology
and Psychology, Department of Modern Languages and Social Informatics, 4 Bd. V. Parvan, office
029, 300223 Timisoara, tel. 0040 256 59 22 66, fax 0040 256 59 23 20, e-mail:
ggrosseck@socio.uvt.ro.