Personal
  Learning
Environments


Graham Attwell
Personal Learning
 Environments - a concept
based on Web 2 .0 and social
         software
We are at present undergoing a deep
and prolonged industrial revolution
   based on digital technologies
The reform and reshaping of
      social systems and
institutions has tended to lag
  behind in periods of rapid
     technological change
Profound innovations in technology
tend to be reflected in older paradigms
for example the ‘virtual classroom’ or the ‘Virtual
             Learning Environment’
The challenge
It is not the development of
technology per se which poses
 such a challenge to education
     systems and educational
            institutions
but the changing ways in which people are using
technologies to communicate and to learn and the
      accompanying social effect of such use
My Space and Bebo
Web logs
Flickr, Second Life
forming and participating in on-line social networks and communities
The reaction of education systems and institutions
 to the rise of social networking has been at best
    bewilderment, at worst downright hostility
a refusal to engage in these issues risks
   school/TAFE becoming increasingly
irrelevant to the everyday lives of many
                  people
and particularly
irrelevant to the ways
     in which they
   communicate and
   share knowledge
Web 2.0 allows
young people to
  be active co-
   creators of
   knowledge
We have to review the industrial schooling
   model including the organisation of
institutions and pedagogy and curriculum
It is not just young people who
use social software for learning
Social software is
widely used in the
  workplace for
informal learning
Most informal learning is learner driven,
problem based, or motivated by interest
Google is the most used e-learning application
most learning is unaccredited
people learn through legitimate
   peripheral participation
Knowing is .... located in
relations among practitioners,
their practice, the artefacts of
 that practice, and the social
organization…of communities
          of practice

                 Lave and Wenger, 1991
Lurking is a means of becoming
   integrated in distributed
   communities of practice
In such communities of practice formal
  learning materials are seldom used
We have ignored the vast potential of freely
available ‘objects’ of all kinds for learning purposes .
changes in the way in which we learn and develop new
 competences is a challenge to our traditional subject
                     organisation
And although most countries have adopted a
rhetoric of lifelong learning, there is little sign
   that education systems have sufficiently
   changed to facilitate such a movement.
The answers?
How can we support
lifelong competence
     development?
Personal Learning
 Environments have
the potential to meet
   such a challenge
PLEs are not another
substantiation of educational
   technology but a new
    approach to learning
A response to pedagogic approaches which require
that learner’s e-learning systems need to be under the
          control of the learners themselves.
and recognise the needs of life-long learners for a
system that provides a standard interface to different
   institutions’ e-learning systems, and that allows
    portfolio information to be maintained across
                      institutions.
Learning is now seen
  as multi episodic,
   with individuals
 spending occasional
  periods of formal
    education and
 training throughout
  their working life.
PLEs are based on the idea that
    learning will take place in
different contexts and situations
  and will not be provided by a
     single learning provider
the idea of a Personal Learning
   Environment recognises that
learning is continuing and seeks to
   provide tools to support that
              learning
Using whatever tools and devices
   which the learners choose
It also recognises the role of the individual in
         organising their own learning
PLEs can help in the
recognition of informal
       learning
PLEs can develop on the
 potential of services oriented
architectures for dispersed and
 networked forms of learning
 and knowledge development.
“the heart of the concept of the PLE
     is that it is a tool that allows a
  learner (or anyone) to engage in a
distributed environment consisting of
   a network of people, services and
 resources. It is not just Web 2.0, but
  it is certainly Web 2.0 in the sense
    that it is (in the broadest sense
  possible) a read-write application.”
                        Stephen Downes, 2006
The promise of Personal
Learning Environments could
   be to extend access to
 educational technology to
  everyone who wishes to
organise their own learning.
The ‘pedagogy’ behind the PLE – if
it could be still called that – is that
   it offers a portal to the world,
     through which learners can
  explore and create, according to
their own interests and directions,
 interacting at all times with their
       friends and community
the PLE will challenge the existing
education systems and institution
New forms of learning
 are based on trying
  things and action,
rather than on more
 abstract knowledge.
Policies to support the development
     and implementation of PLEs
encouraging and supporting
   the development of
communities of practice and
   engagement in those
      communities
decisions over funding and
support need to be taken as
close to practice as possible
a broader
understanding of digital
     literacy and its
 integration within the
       curriculums
recognise different
forms and contexts of
       learning
the development and
  adoption of new
     pedagogies
the co-shaping of
  technologies bringing
  together techies and
teachers, enterprises and
       institutions
Thanks for
     Listening




Wales Wide Web -www.knownet.com/writing/weblogs/Graham_Attwell
Personal learning-environments-hi
Personal learning-environments-hi

Personal learning-environments-hi

  • 1.
  • 2.
    Personal Learning Environments- a concept based on Web 2 .0 and social software
  • 3.
    We are atpresent undergoing a deep and prolonged industrial revolution based on digital technologies
  • 4.
    The reform andreshaping of social systems and institutions has tended to lag behind in periods of rapid technological change
  • 5.
    Profound innovations intechnology tend to be reflected in older paradigms
  • 6.
    for example the‘virtual classroom’ or the ‘Virtual Learning Environment’
  • 7.
  • 8.
    It is notthe development of technology per se which poses such a challenge to education systems and educational institutions
  • 9.
    but the changingways in which people are using technologies to communicate and to learn and the accompanying social effect of such use
  • 10.
  • 11.
  • 12.
  • 13.
    forming and participatingin on-line social networks and communities
  • 14.
    The reaction ofeducation systems and institutions to the rise of social networking has been at best bewilderment, at worst downright hostility
  • 15.
    a refusal toengage in these issues risks school/TAFE becoming increasingly irrelevant to the everyday lives of many people
  • 16.
    and particularly irrelevant tothe ways in which they communicate and share knowledge
  • 17.
    Web 2.0 allows youngpeople to be active co- creators of knowledge
  • 18.
    We have toreview the industrial schooling model including the organisation of institutions and pedagogy and curriculum
  • 19.
    It is notjust young people who use social software for learning
  • 20.
    Social software is widelyused in the workplace for informal learning
  • 21.
    Most informal learningis learner driven, problem based, or motivated by interest
  • 22.
    Google is themost used e-learning application
  • 23.
    most learning isunaccredited
  • 24.
    people learn throughlegitimate peripheral participation
  • 25.
    Knowing is ....located in relations among practitioners, their practice, the artefacts of that practice, and the social organization…of communities of practice Lave and Wenger, 1991
  • 26.
    Lurking is ameans of becoming integrated in distributed communities of practice
  • 27.
    In such communitiesof practice formal learning materials are seldom used
  • 28.
    We have ignoredthe vast potential of freely available ‘objects’ of all kinds for learning purposes .
  • 29.
    changes in theway in which we learn and develop new competences is a challenge to our traditional subject organisation
  • 30.
    And although mostcountries have adopted a rhetoric of lifelong learning, there is little sign that education systems have sufficiently changed to facilitate such a movement.
  • 31.
  • 32.
    How can wesupport lifelong competence development?
  • 33.
    Personal Learning Environmentshave the potential to meet such a challenge
  • 34.
    PLEs are notanother substantiation of educational technology but a new approach to learning
  • 35.
    A response topedagogic approaches which require that learner’s e-learning systems need to be under the control of the learners themselves.
  • 36.
    and recognise theneeds of life-long learners for a system that provides a standard interface to different institutions’ e-learning systems, and that allows portfolio information to be maintained across institutions.
  • 37.
    Learning is nowseen as multi episodic, with individuals spending occasional periods of formal education and training throughout their working life.
  • 38.
    PLEs are basedon the idea that learning will take place in different contexts and situations and will not be provided by a single learning provider
  • 39.
    the idea ofa Personal Learning Environment recognises that learning is continuing and seeks to provide tools to support that learning
  • 40.
    Using whatever toolsand devices which the learners choose
  • 41.
    It also recognisesthe role of the individual in organising their own learning
  • 42.
    PLEs can helpin the recognition of informal learning
  • 43.
    PLEs can developon the potential of services oriented architectures for dispersed and networked forms of learning and knowledge development.
  • 44.
    “the heart ofthe concept of the PLE is that it is a tool that allows a learner (or anyone) to engage in a distributed environment consisting of a network of people, services and resources. It is not just Web 2.0, but it is certainly Web 2.0 in the sense that it is (in the broadest sense possible) a read-write application.” Stephen Downes, 2006
  • 45.
    The promise ofPersonal Learning Environments could be to extend access to educational technology to everyone who wishes to organise their own learning.
  • 46.
    The ‘pedagogy’ behindthe PLE – if it could be still called that – is that it offers a portal to the world, through which learners can explore and create, according to their own interests and directions, interacting at all times with their friends and community
  • 47.
    the PLE willchallenge the existing education systems and institution
  • 48.
    New forms oflearning are based on trying things and action, rather than on more abstract knowledge.
  • 49.
    Policies to supportthe development and implementation of PLEs
  • 50.
    encouraging and supporting the development of communities of practice and engagement in those communities
  • 51.
    decisions over fundingand support need to be taken as close to practice as possible
  • 52.
    a broader understanding ofdigital literacy and its integration within the curriculums
  • 53.
    recognise different forms andcontexts of learning
  • 54.
    the development and adoption of new pedagogies
  • 55.
    the co-shaping of technologies bringing together techies and teachers, enterprises and institutions
  • 56.
    Thanks for Listening Wales Wide Web -www.knownet.com/writing/weblogs/Graham_Attwell