THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNET WEB 1.0 TO WEB 3.0 AND ITS EFFECTS ON ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION

Year 2022, , 144 - 155, 23.12.2022

Özlem Gök Tokgöz , Mehmet Ali Altin

https://doi.org/10.18038/estubtda.1171044

Abstract

The World Wide Web has quickly become one of the primary resource of information that comes to mind for many people in many fields. The development of the internet, which has more and more application, is grouped as Web1.0, Web2.0 and Web 3.0. Today, the web, which started with Web 1.0, has become a virtual world where people can actively participate. With this development of technology and its effect on every aspect of our lives, educational practices have also begun to change. Especially with the pandemic, the tools of Web 2.0, online learning opportunities, internet resources and communication platforms have been better understood and started to be used more actively in education. Architectural education, like many other fields, has been affected by the spread of the internet and its being a source of information. In the light of these data, the study focuses on the reflections of the learning opportunities and resources that have developed with the internet on today's university students. For this purpose, formal and informal online internet-based learning environments examined in this study. In order to collect data in the research, an online internet survey prepared and applied to a group of architecture and interior design students within the limitation of Eskişehir Technical University. Questions were asked about expanding resources, tools, deficiencies in education and what their dream education is like. In the study, the evolution of the internet, the changing needs of architectural education, the offers and demands of teachers and students in different generations, students and the evolution of the internet were investigated by considering generational differences. As a result of the study in which 47 students participated, the current state of architectural education was determined from the eyes of the students in the light of the answers given.

Keywords

Web1.0, Web2.0, Web 3.0, Architectural Education

References

• [1] Patil K, A Study of Web 1.0 to 3.0. AGPE R. Gondwana Res. J. Hist. Sci. Econ. Polit. Soc. Sci., 2021; 02(02), 40–45.
• [2] Downes S. E-Learning in Development. https://www.downes.ca/files/slides/2007_12_05_-_educamp.pdf, 2007.
• [3] Dominic M, Francis S, Pilomenraj A. E-Learning in Web 3.0, Int. J. Mod. Educ. Comput. Sci., 2014; 6, 8–14.
• [4] Kutlák J. Individualism and self-reliance of Generations Y and Z and their impact on working environment: An empirical study across 5 European countries. Probl. Perspect. Manag., 2021;19(1), 39–52.doi: 10.21511/ppm.19(1).2021.04.
• [5] Wiedmer TL. Generations Do Differ: Best Practices in Leading Traditionalists, Boomers, and Generations X, Y, and Z. Delta Kappa Gamma Bull.,2015; 82, p. 51.
• [6] Choudhury N. World Wide Web and Its Journey from Web 1.0 to Web 4.0. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol., 2014; 5(6), 8096–8099.
• [7] Umesha N, Shivalingaiah N. Comparative study of web 1.0, web 2.0 and web 3.0. In 6th International CALIBER, 2008; 499–507.
• [8] Ehlers UD. Web 2.0 – e‐learning 2.0 – quality 2.0? Quality for new learning cultures. Qual. Assur. Educ., 2009;17 (3), 296–314. doi: 10.1108/09684880910970687.
• [9] Bower M, Hedberg JG, Kuswara A. A framework for Web 2.0 learning design. EMI. Educ. Media Int., 2010;47(3), 177–198. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2010.518811.
• [10] Davies J, Merchant G. Web 2.0 for Schools. New York, United States of America: Peter Lang Verlag, 2021.
• [11] Feischman J. The Web: New Venue for Adult Education. Adult Learn., 1996; 8(1), 17–18. doi: 10.1177/104515959600800109.
• [12] Morkel J. Facebook-Enhanced Face to Face Learnıng: The Archıtecture Studıo. In 5th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium, 2011; 1–7.
• [13] Pektas Ş. T. The Blended Design Studio: An Appraisal of New Delivery Modes in Design Education. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., 2012; 51, 692–697. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.226.
• [14] Baran B, Ata F. Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Web 2.0 Teknolojileri Kullanma Durumları, Beceri Düzeyleri ve Eğitsel Olarak Faydalanma Durumları. Egitim ve Bilim, 2013;38, Sayı 169, [Online]. Available: http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/1937.
• [15] Schnabel MA, HamJJ. The Social Network Learning Cloud: Architectural Education for the 21st Century. Int. J. Archit. Comput., 2014;12(3), pp. 225–241. doi: 10.1260/1478-0771.12.3.225.
• [16] Pektaş Ş. Architectural Science Review The virtual design studio on the cloud: a blended and distributed approach for technology-mediated design education. Archit. Sci. Rev.,2015;58(3), 255–265. doi: 10.1080/00038628.2015.1034085.
• [17] Güler K. Social media-based learning in the design studio: A comparative study. Comput. Educ., 2015; 87, 192–203. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.06.004.
• [18] Karakaya AF, Pektaş ŞT. A Framework for Web-based Education Systems Supporting Interdisciplinary Design Collaboration., ODTÜ Mimar. Fakültesi Derg., 2007; 24(2), 137–148.
• [19] Wang X, Love PE. D, Klinc R., Kim MJ, Davis PR. Integration of E - learning 2.0 with Web 2.0. J. Inf. Technol. Constr., 2012;17, 387–396.
• [20] Valls F, Redondo E, Fonseca D, Garcia-Almirall P, Subirós J. Videogame Technology in Architecture Education. In Human-Computer Interaction. Novel User Experiences, 2016; 436–447.
• [21] Sorguç AG, Yemişcioğlu MK, Özgenel ÇF, Katipoğlu MO, Rasulzade R. The role of VR as a new game changer in computational design education. Fioravanti A, Cursi S, Elahmar S., Gargaro S, Loffreda G, Novembri G, Trento A, (eds.), Eds. eCAADe 35: ShoCK! - Sharing Computational Knowledge!, 2017; 401–408.
• [22] Moleta TJ. Game on: Exploring constructive design behaviors through the use of real-time virtual engines in architectural education. Int. J. Archit. Comput., 2016; 14(3), 212–218. doi: 10.1177/1478077116663341.
• [23] Albudaiwi D. Survey: Open-Ended Questions. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, M. Allen, Ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2017;1716–1717.
• [24] Groat LN, Wang D. Architectural research methods. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.