Observed Technological Development and Sustainability in PLE Diagrams
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Observed Technological Development and Sustainability in PLE Diagrams Mehmet Emin Mutlu Anadolu University, Open Education Faculty, Eskisehir, Turkey [email protected] Abstract In this study, constraints of start page services used by learners to create PLE are discussed and in order to get over these constraints a mobile application based PLE creation approach is suggested. In order to see the applicability of the suggested approach, an prototype software has been developed and user friendly specifications are added onto it. It is observed that, with the help of the newly developed mobile application, learners had a sustainable mobile learning environment. Key Words: Personal learning environments, start pages, sustainability, mobile application based PLE Introduction As developments related to web 2.0 tools put into effect at e-learning area, the level, which is called as e-Learning 2.0, is reached. Despite of the fact that environments such as LMS/VLE which are based on e- learning technologies, have showed great success in supporting formal learning environments, the personal learning environments based on e-learning 2.0 technologies have great potential of supporting lifelong and informal learning (Downes, 2006; Ebner 2007). The level of utilization of learning environments of individuals varies by their ability of using Web 2.0 technologies (Ivanova and Chatti 2011). Individuals skilled at technology can adopt technological developments more than others, the others, who are not skilled at technology, are more dependent on services of firms in order to create their learning environments and when firms stop providing these services those individuals have problems with sustaining their learning environments. In the second part of the study, rise, development, derivatives of personal learning environments and technologies related to it are discussed, in the third part of the study basic approaches about creating PLE are introduced and start page approach, which is used extensively, is examined. In the fourth part a mobile application based PLE building approach which will repair restrictions and deficiencies of “start page” approach is introduced and applicability of the suggestions has been tested. In the last part, results are discussed and suggestions about development of the application are made. Personal Learning Environments It is observed that Learning Management Systems (LMS) and Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs), which are used for application of e-learning processes, are inefficient especially in the areas such as lifelong learning, self-regulated learning; because of the fact that students may lose their adopted learning environments due to being disconnected to the either course or the institution (Mott and Wiley 2009). In order to solve this problem, for students an infrastructure to set their own learning goals, design and manage their learning environments and processes, reach these goals and enable them to communicate with the others is developed and as a result of these studies, the concept of personal learning environment is appeared (Milligan et al. 2006). PLEs can be formed by putting together Web 2.0 tools such as search engine, blog, wiki, rss, social networks, and file sharing websites, social bookmarks with a mash up or start page loosely (Lubensky 2006). Mainly open educational resources (OER) are used in PLE, their ability of learning from others and reflecting the information, which students have, gained importance. Students attending former education classes can continue using their personal learning environments cumulatively from term to term and institution to institution without resetting their experience, content, connection and tools at the end of the each term (Mott and Wiley 2009). Students can use their PLEs effectively with the aim of informal learning and self-regulated learning after they are discharged from formal learning institutions. On the other hand individuals can create their PLEs to support informal and self-regulated learning directly. Until 2004, when this term is used for the first time, PLEs have been developed as technical projects, between 2005 and 2006 they have developed in academic field as well and at this time the concept of PLE, pedagogy under PLEs and PLE applications were discussed by many bloggers. Learning from others and social learning experiences caused rise of personal learning networks (PLNs) and social learning networks (SLNs) (Buchem et al., 2011). Detailed examination of large European Union (EU) projects such as Mupple, Aposdle, Tencompetence, Palette, Role, Grapple and Mature-IP enabled us to examine PLEs in detail and develop new technologies related to PLEs (Ferdinand and Kiefel, 2010). Due to current developments in OER and open access, individuals started reaching educational content more and this caused more implementation of PLEs. At the same time PLEs can be used as an open learning environment as well and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have become more widespread (Siemens and Downes, 2011). It is estimated that PLEs will be at the center of learning in future (Attwell, 2007). PLE Diagrams In 2005, pioneer PLE architecture diagrams, created by Scott Wilson, provided inspiration for many authors and until today PLE diagrams have been suggested by a lot of authors (Wilson 2005). Today, many of the Web 2.0 technology used in first diagrams in 2005, when Web 2.0 technologies are at infancy, have been abolished and replaced with new Web 2.0 technologies. Technological changes of Web 2.0 world have been reflected to PLE architecture diagrams day by day and some tools are preferred more than the others year by year. On the other hand, derivatives such as institutional PLE (iPLE), personal information management (PKM), personal research environments (PRE), PLNs and SLNs create important differences in diagrams (Leslie 2012). PLE architecture diagrams have become more complicated as years passed. In order to keep separated different places of lives of people such as private, social, work and education, different Web 2.0 tools with the same function are usually preferred. For example, individuals can use different social networks at the same time such as Facebook for family and close friends, LinkEdin for people they know from professional environments, ResearchGate for academic environment connections. Fast changing nature of PLE infrastructure tools and unexpected disappearance of some of the tools affect sustainability and future of PLEs. Increased variety of tools puts pressure on personal design, development and management of PLEs. Also, generation gap causes important differentiations at individuals’ abilities of use of sophisticated PLE tools (Ivanova and Chatti, 2011). Approaches of PLE Building According to Kompen and Edirisingha, approaches used for creating PLE can be collected under two groups: “(a) PLE as an object (environment or hub that contains all the applications and tools), (b) PLE as a framework for integrating a variety of Web 2.0 tools chosen by the learner to support learning” (Kompen and Edirisingha, 2008). In all PLEs of the first group, a common technological infrastructure and interface are provided to all of the users. In this approach, PLE servers based on Widget Engines/Services are created and individuals can both create and use their personal learning environments by signing into the these servers (Wilson et al. 2008). To develop, publish and manage the software of the server, extensive use of corporate/institutional support is required. Most of software used in this approach is developed in the scope of projects supported by EU. Some of the projects in this area are designed as LMS/VLE+PLE integration. In these projects, Web 2.0 and social media tools are added to the LMS/VLEs of the institutions and individuals are enabled to create their personal learning environments (Alorio-Hoyos and Wilson 2010). Second group of PLEs are created and managed by the users. This can be named as do-it-yourself (DIY) approach as well. In this approach various frameworks are suggested. For example, Kompen and Edirisingha (2008) suggested Wiki-based PLE (Google sites), Social network-based PLE (Facebook), Social aggregator- based PLE (Netvibes) and Browser-based PLE (Flock) frameworks. Also, Downes used a blog site and a blog reader as a starting area to create him PLE (Downes 2010). In this approach, most of the Web 2.0 tools, in which the required connections of the most common and other Web 2.0 tools can be embedded, are used as a starting point. Today, creating personal profiles in social media tools became a fundamental specification. Individuals can transform that particular software into PLEs by adding or defining other Web 2.0 tools on their personal profiles. For example Diigo which is both a social bookmark and personal information management application or WikiSpaces which is wiki page preparing software, can be used for this aim. Today, gradually developing specifications of internet browsers such as Chrome, Internet Explorer, Firefox and Safari, can enable us to develop browser based PLEs. It can be seen that in Scott Leslie’s “A Collection of PLE Diagrams” wiki page, so many different tools are used at the center of PLEs (Leslie, 2012). Start Page Approach The Web 2.0 service which enables us to reach other Web 2.0 tools via a webpage by prepaid widgets is named as “start page”. Start pages approach is created by putting together PLEs via selected Web 2.0 tools by user on a page which is chosen by user as well. According to Ivanova; “The start pages such as iGoogle, Netvibes, Pageflakes and Protopage show the rich possibilities for building personalized learning environments with characteristics for planning learning activities: create a list of activities, use a simple text editor, access blogs and wikis; RSS syndicating information of rich media sources; exploring and researching via search engines and using additional widgets, for example polls and analytical tools; collaboration and networking: sharing of information and knowledge, connecting to social networks; personalization of feel and look as well as using widgets, for example for quizzes and surveys.