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. Other start pages can be used for different learning purposes, for example: 24eyes—working with RSS feeds or lists of RSS feeds; Jimdo for site creation and arrangement; SurfNinja for visual arranging of icons and access to favorite websites. Start pages give possibilities for self-organization and management of learning and research combining many of the learning technologies and data sources for producing a rich learning experience according to learning needs and goals.” (Ivanova, 2009)

Various authors also examined and evaluated start pages as a whole:

M. Ivanova review eight start page services: 24eyes (www.24eyes.com), Personalized Google Homepage (www.google.com/ig), Jimdo (www.jimdo.com), Netvibes (www.netvibes.com), PageFlakes (www.pageflakes. com), Protopage (protopage.com), Microsoft Personal Start Page (start.com), SurfNinja (www.surfninja.com) (Ivanova, 2009).

M. Palmér et al. examined six different platforms in which contain start pages in 2009: iGoogle (www.igoogle.com) (start page), Netvibes (www.netvibes.com) (start page), Moodle+ Wookie (getwookie.org/moodle/) (LMS), Google Wave (wave.google.com/help/ wave/about.html) (communication and collaboration), Afrous (www.afrous.com) (mashup) and G.ho.st (g.ho.st) (Web desktop) (Palmer et al., 2009).

M. Ivanova review 14 start page services in other paper: 24eyes (www.24eyes.com), Eskobo (www.eskobo.com/default.aspx), ItsAstart (www.itsastart.com), Favoor (http://www.favoor.com), MyGetgo (http://mygetgo.com/index.html), Personalized Google homepage (www.google.com/ig), Goovy (www.goowy. com), Jimdo (www.jimdo.com), Netvibes (www.netvibes.com), PageFlakes (www.pageflakes.com), Protopage (protopage.com), Microsoft Personal Start Page (www.start.com), SuprGlu (www.suprglu.com), SurfNinja (www.surfninja.com ) (Ivanova, 2008).

In addition to these examinations, SymbalooEdu (Harwood 2011), My Yahoo (Goodwin-jones, 2009) and stHrt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sthrt) start page services are also included in literature.

Firms, which provide start page service, offer prepared widgets to their users. For example users can add Web 2.0 sites such as Facebook or SlideShare onto their own web pages by using these widgets. Preparing a widget requires programming skills. Big companies offer development environments which are called as “mashup editor” to the user in order to enable them developing the widgets they need without programming skills (Chatti et al., 2011).

Chatti et al. reviewed three mashup editors: Microsoft Popfly (www.popfly.com), Google Mashup Editor (code.google.com/gme/) and Yahoo Pipes (pipes.yahoo.com/) (Chatti et al., 2011). Luong et al. (2010) reviewed Yahoo! Pipes (pipes.yahoo.com/pipes/), Microsoft Popfly (authors and site are not mentioned), Google Mashup Editor (authors and site are not mentioned), MashMaker (software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-mash- maker-mashups-for-the-masses/) and Marmite (www.cs.cmu.edu/~jasonh/publications/chi2007-marmite- final.pdf) mashup building environments.

Superiorities of Start Pages approach can be listed as given below:

 Ease of Use  PLE development with personal skills, no requirement of support personnel  Ease of Access  Online use, contents are saved on server or cloud  Dashboard Architecture  Use of tools related to each other on one screen

Main restrictions of start page approach are listed below:

 Widgets: Users need to use simple links when they cannot find prepared widgets for Web 2.0 tools.  Ownership: The owner of the content uploaded to start pages is controversial because of the fact that a web service is used.  Cost: Start page services are usually free but this may cause extensive advertisement display.  Security and Privacy: Firms that gives start page service can share your personal information with other institutions and use for purposes of which you may want to avoid.  Sustainability: The firm which provides start page service may terminate these services whenever it would like to.

Sustainability of Start Pages

Sustainability of Start Pages is dependent on the attitude of the firms/institutions which provide these services. Many of the firms/institutions which offer start page services but unable to create an income model had to terminate their services. The status of the firms that offer start pages service are defined with a scan made on 22th of July 2012. The results are listed below:

 PageFlakes (Ended in January 2012)  iGoogle (Will end on November 1, 2013)  Windows Live Personalized Experience (Began as start.com, continued as my.Live.com, then redirected to my.msn.com) (Ended on 30 March 2010)  SurfNinja (Cannot be accessed on 22/07/2012)  G.ho.st (Ended in April 2010)  Google Wave (Ended in April 2010)  Eskobo (Cannot be accessed on 22/07/2012)  ItsAstart (Cannot be accessed on 22/07/2012)  MyGetGo (Cannot be accessed on 22/07/2012)  Goovy (Cannot be accessed on 22/07/2012)  SuprGlu (Cannot be accessed on 22/07/2012)  SurfNinja (Cannot be accessed on 22/07/2012)  Flock (it is not a Start page, a browser plug-in to build PLEs) (Kompen and Edirisingha, 2008) (Ended in April 2010)  Microsoft PopFly - Mashup Creator (Ended on August 24, 2009)  Google Mashup Editor (Merged with Google Apps on January 15, 2009)  An Intel research project MashMaker‘s website last updated on January 20, 2010. Product is not accessible.  A Carnegie Mellon University research project Marmite‘s website last updated in 2007. Product is not accessible.

Start Pages and Mash up Editors sites of which are on service on 22 July 2012 are listed below.

 ProtoPage  NetVibes  Afrous (Mashup)  24eyes  Jimdo  SymbalooEdu  My Yahoo  stHrt  Favoor  Yahoo Pipes (Mashup Editor)  Moodle + Wookie (LMS)

28 web sites are examined and 17 of them have terminated their services, 11 of them are still on service.

Proposal a New Approach for PLE Building – Mobile Application Based PLE

Sustainability of the start pages which provide service as a web site usually cannot be ensured. It is estimated that personal learning environments will support learners’ learning in scope of lifelong learning. Weak sustainability prevents achieving this goal. A more permanent tool is needed to create PLE.

In this study, creating a mobile application based PLE approach is suggested to support lifelong learning of the learners. To test this approach, an application software can be used by the users to create PLE is developed. The software has the specifications listed below:

 The application will be developed for at least one of the iOS, Android or Windows operating systems. In this study, it is decided to develop an application which can work under Windows 8 operating system. If application gives the expected results, it is possible to get other versions of it that can work under different operating systems via converter software.  Applications can be downloaded from virtual stores such as App Store, Google Play and Windows Store for free by the users. In this study, developed application will be distributed via Windows Store for free.  Making an experimental research on users is not targeted in this study. The possibility of getting PLE creation opportunities that users have with “start page” approach is searched. With the application software developed specifically for this purpose answers to the “(a) Can a PLE be formed with this application?” and “(b) Can this PLE be used for lifelong learning?” are being searched.

At first, a prototype is developed as a method, in this application, tests of PLE are made and then this function is transferred to another software which has same infrastructure but more sophisticated then strengths and weaknesses of the new application are discussed.

Initial Design of Application - MyPLE

Using the “Split App” template in Windows Store App Development Environment, a simple PLE Start Pages container created. This prototype includes only a data model and a view model, it doesn’t have data input and data modification features. For this reason, the web addresses entered in the lists on the source code level by manually. An embedded internet browser is used to display content of web sites.

At first stage, a design in which PLE tools are installed on main page in sequence is being tried (Figure 1).

Figure 1. First design for MyPLE

In this usage, cropped images of web pages belong to PLE tools are put together in a manner that will be expanded to the right. User can reach the PLE tool he/she needs by scrolling display left to right and use it by displaying full screen.

Even though this usage type is so simple, it has a data structure which is not very suitable to expand. Because of this reason, it is observed that putting PLE tools into data model of the application with a hierarchy which has two levels. In this new usage method, user can create the lists he/she needs on main page and add web sites belong to PLE tools as an item of these lists. So, PLE can be designed in a more rationally and useful way and it has a structure which is suitable to expand

In a PLE, various Web 2.0 tools can be used according to competences and required learning activities of the learner (Castañeda & Soto 2010). For example, the following lists can be created in MyPLE:

● Blog and Wiki lists ● E- portfolio and VLE lists ● File share lists (SlideShare, Scribd, Youtube, Flickr, etc.) ● Open Educational Resources (MIT Courseware, OpenLearn, TÜBA Open Course, Yunus Emre, etc.) ● Social Networks (Twitter, Facebook, Linkedin, Google+, etc.) ● Social Bookmarking Websites (Diigo, Delicious, etc.)

New items related to headlines of the each of the lists created can be added. For example addresses such as http://www.slideshare.net/downes, http://www.slideshare.net/gsiemens can be added to the “SlideShare list” (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Screenshots of MyPLE prototype

Another approach applied is creating lists according to different research subjects. So, for example, a list belongs to “Connectivism” research field is created and blogs, file share links, social network addresses belong to that field can be added to this list.

Development of the Application – AllMyListsMetro

The developed MyPLE prototype software can list and display web sites which are manually added in its computer codes. The activities below are made to enable users use this software interdependently:

 Analyzed the structure of the MyPLE application.  Recently, using the same template “Split App”, AllMyListsMetro software has been developed including filing, list management, item management, printing, searching and sharing capabilities and features (Mutlu, 2012).  AllMyListsMetro application contains 15 different templates like “Note List”, “To Do List”, “Event List” etc. With AllMyListsMetro application can be created useful lists in these templates and can be input items to the lists (Mutlu, 2012)  By adding a special “Link List” template, MyPLE‘s PLE building function was transferred to the AllMyListsMetro software.  Thus, gained the ability to create PLE for AllMyListsMetro

AllMyListsMetro application we get after stages listed above has features listed below:

 Personal “start pages” can be created. So users can put together all the Web 2.0 tools they need to create PLE and reach them from one place.  The installation of a start page application in the user's computer, eliminate dependence on outside.  Internet connection is not required when user creating a PLE on the application. Internet connection needed when start using PLE tools are accessing the content (offline design).  Mobility (tablet, phone and laptop - with Windows 8). User can carry his/her PLE in a mobile platform with him/her. Users can reach their PLEs device independently if data is stored in a cloud environment. (Cloud storage feature has not been added yet.)  Data organization (such as files, lists, items, fields). User can save all of his/her PLE in one file and create more than one PLE file. He/she can create the lists he/she needs by using different templates defined in software, add items he/she needs each of the lists (Figure 3) (Mutlu, 2012).  Transferability and shareability on file level. He/she can transfer PLE files to other environments and share them with the other users using the same software.  Sustainability of applications. Mobile applications have become more widespread for five years. It is anticipated that they will be in use for long time. (iOS since 2007, Android since 2008, Windows from 2012).  If AllMyListsMetro software is pulled from market, this cannot stop users, who downloaded it into their computers before, using it. This situation is a more sustainable approach compare to start page approach of lifelong learning.  If a start page service is stopped suddenly, users cannot save information belong to PLE they create and they have to trust their memory to create a new PLE and start over. A PLE file created by using AllMyListsMetro is a XML file as well so its content can be display via other XML software very easily.  AllMyListsMetro can be used not only for PLE but also for personal information management with the help of list management features it has. So users can plan their lifelong learning activities, save information and documents related to persons, events, objects, places and search them (Mutlu, 2012).

Figure 3. Screenshots of AllMyListsMetro application (with PLE start pages building function)

Main weaknesses of the first tests of the mobile application based PLE are listed below:

 Due to the lack of real multitasking, more than one tool cannot be activated at the same time.  Due to the nature of embedded browser, previously entered pages cannot be saved in cache.  Because of the structure of the operating system, copy/paste transactions are not as flexible as desktop applications.

Conclusion

In this study, a mobile application based approach is proposed to create PLE start pages. To test the applicability of the suggested approach, a feature which enables users to add Web 2.0 tools to AllMyListsMetro software, general purpose list management software, and reach them via this software is added. The new version we created, shows that users can create PLEs as easy as start page use and use them to support lifelong learning.

The proposed approach is not included the limitations of the traditional Start Pages and Mash up Editors to create PLE. But empirical studies on real users needed to be made for determining strengths and weaknesses of application based PLE approach.

In the future versions of the application based PLE:

 Saving files on the cloud capability can be added  Dashboard structure can be created using the Live Tiles and Notification properties of the Windows 8 Metro Style  More flexible pages can be prepared by applying W3C Widget Specs.

References

Alario-Hoyos, C., & Scott Wilson. (2010), Comparison of the main Alternatives to the Integration of External Tools in different Platforms. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, ICER2010, p:3466-3476, 15-17 November, 2010, Madrid, Spain.

Attwell, G. (2007), Personal Learning Environments - Future of eLearning? eLearning Papers, 2, 1, January. Retrieved from http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=8553&doclng=6

Buchem, I., Attwell, G., & Kompen, R. T. (2011), Understanding Personal Learning Environments: Literature review and synthesis through the Activity Theory lens. In: Proceedings of the The PLE Conference 2011, 10th - 12th July 2011, Southampton, UK.

Castañeda, L., & Soto, J. (2010), Building Personal Learning Environments by using and mixing ICT tools in a professional way. Digital Education Review, 18 (18), 9–25. Retrieved from http://greav.ub.edu/Der/index.php/der/article/viewArticle/163

Chatti, M. A., Jarke, M., Specht, M., & Schroeder, U. (2011), Model-Driven mashup personal learning environments. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(1), 21-39.

Downes, S. (2006), e-Learning 2.0, eLearn Magazine, October 2005, http://www.elearnmag.org /subpage.cfm?section=articles&article=29-1

Downes, S. (2010), Personal Learning Environments, April 22, 2010 Keynote presentation delivered to Interactive Technology in Education Conference, Hämeenlinna, Finland, by Video. Retrieved from http://www.downes.ca/files/Personal%20Learning%20 Environments.pdf

Ebner, M. (2007), E-Learning 2.0 = e-Learning 1.0 + Web 2.0? In: Proceedings of Second International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES’07), 1235-1239.

Ferdinand, P. & Kiefel, A. (eds) (2010), D2.1 Survey of existing models (M09), ROLE Project Deliverables, Retrieved from: http://www.role-project.eu/wp-content/uploads-role/2010/11/role-deliverable-2.1-updated- version-final.pdf Goodwin-jones, R. (2009), Emerging Technologies Personal Learning Environments. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 3-9. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol13num2/emerging.pdf

Harwood, B. C. (2011), Using Personal Learning Environments ( PLEs ) to encourage peer learning and learner autonomy. Technology in Pedagogy, (6), 1-6.

Ivanova, M. (2008), Multichannel Self-Organized Learning and Research in Web 2.0 Environment, In: Kalz, M., Koper, R., Hornung-, V., & Luckmann, M. (eds.), 1st Workshop on Technology Support for Self- Organized Learners (TSSOL08), TEN Competence STT, Salzburg, Austria.

Ivanova, M. (2009), Use of Start Pages For Building A Mashup Personal Learning Environment to Support Self- Organized Learners. Serdica J. Computing, 3, 227-238.

Ivanova, M., & Chatti, M. A. (2011), Competences Mapping for Personal Learning Environment Management. Proceedings of the The PLE Conference 2011. 10th - 12th July 2011, Southampton, UK. Retrieved from http://journal.webscience.org/569/

Kompen, R. T., & Edirisingha, P. (2008), Building Web 2.0 Based Personal Learning Environments – A conceptual framework. EDEN Research Workshop 2008.

Leslie, S. (2012), A Collection of PLE Diagrams, Deliberation Blog, Blog post. Retrieved from http://edtechpost.wikispaces.com/PLE+Diagrams

Lubensky, R. (2006), The present and future of Personal Learning Environments (PLE), Ron Lubensky's Blog, Retrieved from http://www.deliberations.com.au/2006/12/present-and-future-of-personal-learning.html

Luong, T. N., Etcheverry, P., Nodenot, T., Marquesuzaà, C., Lopistéguy, P. (2010), WINDMash : A Visual Mashup Environment Dedicated to the Design of Web Interactive Applications. In: Third Workshop on MashUp Personal Learning Environments MUPPLE10, September 2010, Barcelona, Spain

Milligan, C., Beauvoir, P., Johnson, M., Sharples, P., Wilson, S., & Liber, O. (2006), Developing a Reference Model to Describe the Personal Learning Environment. (W. Nejdl & K. Tochtermann, Eds.) EC-TEL 2006, 4227, 506 – 511.

Mott, J., & Wiley, D. (2009), Open for Learning: The CMS and the Open Learning Network. In Education, 15(2). Retrieved from http://ineducation.ca/article/open-learning-cms-and-open-learning-network

Mutlu, M. E. (2012), Yaşam Günlüğü (CARPE) Uygulamaları ve Yaşam Deneyimleri Yönetimi İçin Bir Bilgi Mimarisi, XVII. Türkiye’de İnternet Konferansı, 7-9 November 2012, Eskisehir, Turkey. (In Turkish) (Accepted)

Palmér, M., Sire, S., Bogdanov, E., Gillet, D., and Wild, F., (2009), Mapping Web Personal Learning Environments. In 4th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (ECTEL) - Workshop on Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments (MUPPLE'09), 2009.

Wilson, S. (2005), A diagram illustrating a future vision for a VLE. Retrieved from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ elifishtacos/90944650/

Wilson, S., Sharples, P., Griffith, D. (2008), Distributing education services to personal and institutional systems using Widgets. In: Wild, F., Kalz, M., Palmer, M. (eds.) Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments, Proceedings of the 1st MUPPLE Workshop. CEUR-Proceedings, Maastricht, The Netherlands,vol. 388 (2008)

Siemens, G. and Downes, S. (2011), Connectivism and Connective Knowledge, Massive Open Online Course, Retrieved from http://cck11.mooc.ca/index.html