Web 2.1 : Toward a large and qualitative participation on the Web
Keywords:
Web 2.0, questionnaire, information science, production of information, quality of information, broad participation.Abstract
This article presents the results of research done on Web 2.0 within the School of Information Sciences ESI. It aims to study the behavior of different academic actors who deal with information, among whom we cite teachers, students of masters and students of information sciences in Morocco, face to Web 2.0’s services.
Firstly, it aims to evaluate the use and production of information in the context of Web 2.0. Then, it attempts to assess those rates, to identify and analyze the causes of eventual problems and obstacles that academic actors face. In fact, we intend to understand why information actors in the academic world use often Web 2.0’s services but do rarely produce qualitative content.
To achieve the objectives set, we used the on-site survey method, which was based on an electronic questionnaire administered directly to our people via the Internet. We chose the electronic version of questionnaire in order to make an optimal use in terms of new technologies, to gain time and to reduce cost. Then, in order to deepen the understanding of the data collected, we complete the data collected by the questionnaire by an ongoing discussions with actors.
Finally, to overcome the problems already identified, we intend to propose the elements of a new version of the Web called Web 2.1 offering new concepts in order to encourage users to produce information of quality and make the Web more open to a larger community.
This version maintains the current contents of Web 2.0 and adds more value to it. Indeed, the content will be monitored, evaluated and validated before being published.
In order to target valuable information, the new version of Web 2.1 proposes to categorize users into three groups: users who just use the contents, producers who use and produce content, and validators who validate the content in order to target information that is validated and of good quality. Once the information is published, it must be well organized, well stored and archived or removed to avoid over-information.
