There have been articles and references made in the e-learning and usability community centered around the concept of folksonomy.
A folksonomy is a
user-generated classification, emerging through bottom-up consensus
A fusion of the words folks and taxonomy, the first use of
the term folksonomy has been attributed to Thomas Vander Wal. Taxonomy
comes from taxis and nomos (from Greek). Taxis means
classification. Nomos (or nomia) means management. Folk
is people.
The jist of the idea
is that the classification/organization of content comes from the folks or
community of users themselves. In
essessence, the students or users themselves should organize the content as
they use it or take part in creating it, i.e. in a blog, web chat, and or any
other web-based communication channel.
‘Kirpatrick’s
Level One’ is all about the learner’s reaction/satisfaction, but will
implementing the concept of “folksonomies” in e-learning really help to
increase satisfaction with their learning experience. One can organize, rearrange, reconfigure things to the way that
makes sense to them, but should they?
Will that help
someone pass the test for OSHA certification on the job, if the parts and
components can be changed at will, with no heiarchy to provide boundaries and
the finite information components necessary to succeed in the correct
context? I can make a case on either
side of the argument, I just wanted to let you know about some of the ideas
swirling around amoungst the e-learning and user-interface-engineering pundits.
Articles about
“Folksonomy” and or “Folksonomies”
Folksonomies: Power to the
People
Folksonomies:
A User-Driven Approach to Organizing Content
The Kirpatrick
Model
Evaluating e-Learning: Introduction to the Kirkpatrick
Model
Godfrey
Parkin’s Post on Kirpatrick’s Level One
Dave Boggs, SyberWorks
Comments