Just read through Graham Attwells position paper on Personal Learning Environments (PLEs).  It’s a quite extensive examination of what a PLE is or might be and why it might be useful to a learner.  His describes many things that have recently been introduced or changed or are on the cusp of change, such as Web 2.0 concepts; social software; ubiquitous computing; Google-isation; changes in formal assessment methodologies as well as greater recognition of informal learning.  From that, a listing of tool instances that could collectively form a PLE is given.  Whilst recognising (and emphasising) that there can be no ‘one size fits all’ solution, Graham argues that there could well be value in delivering many of these tools within a wrapper application.  (Graham lists several office type applications and although it is valid that these are deemed possible components of a PLE, I am going to ignore them on the basis that for the vast majority, they are core components of their computing environment, whether they are using them for learning or not.)

The computing powerbase is devolving and becoming more widespread through the increasingly rapid development of technologies and applications that have minimal technical knowledge requirements to use and run.  Access to computing and the internet is widespread through all / most sectors of populations (I’ll conveniently ignore those areas of the world with no or very limited hardware).  It appears to me that that there is now a greater development of applications by user-developers rather than by technical-developers.  The power of development is no longer in the hands of a knowledgeable few but with a knowledgeable many.  This has benefits in the reach of user centred design – applications are now more widespread; easier to use; less monolithic.  The downside is that there are just so many potential programs / websites that a person might engage with.  How do they know what’s out there?  How do they choose what to use?  Which type of tool should they use and then which specific instance?  When dealing with these issues, I see a benefit in delivering access within some form of wrapper.  The choice of what to include, however, is not trivial.

I have a practical interest in this, working out how access to this new paradigm in online learning can be provided or supported within the formal confines of a HE institution.  Does the act of providing access to some social software even negate the impact of that software?  Using space on our VLE, I could provide a page with links to many instances of social software but should I be comprehensive or selective?  The comprehensive route is likely to overwhelm with choice whereas students may prefer guidance to maximise their learning opportunities.  Being selective means making judgements but can I choose the correct solution for everyone?  (Clearly that will be a no!)

There are other configurations to consider too.  Using Elgg as an example since it has the features that I want to describe.  Firstly, I could just point a link at Elgg and tell students it’s worth signing up to.  This gives them the benefit of being able to converse or ruminate with a wide population of users.  Downsides can include feeling lost within this large community (can’t we have some better signposting of open communities in Elgg rather than having to search on specific keyword?); and the institution has no control.  The latter is no bad thing many of you will say, but it is a practical reality that needs to be dealt with.

A second option with Elgg is to install it on a University server and only allow enrolment from the student / staff body.  The institution then has more control but the participant universe has now shrunk and significantly we’ve reduced users to all being of one type i.e. members of the university.  A final option is to look for integration of Elgg with the VLE.  I know this has been done with Moodle although I’m not sure how it works in practice.  I would be expecting the ability to map communities / groups to teaching modules.  If I sign up to do GEO101 and Elgg is exposed in the VLE module for that course then posts would be shared only with other members of that course.  This again reduces the synergy of interacting with different users although it may increase the focus for the students.

Before I ramble on much longer, I should sum up what is a longer post than intended.   I believe that many elements of web 2.0 / eLearning 2.0 / social software extend learning opportunities; that those in the business of education should aim to maximise the learning opportunities for their learners; this includes supporting access to these softwares at some level or other.  A >Personal< Learning environment is conflicted by institutional choice as to what it recommends or makes available to construct a PLE.  This tension could do with being resolved sooner rather than later.  If we (institutions) wait 3 years or so to decide it is safe, cool and useful to link to social softwares, we will discover that everyone has moved on elsewhere!

Comments welcome, especially on the realities of supporting access / use now.