How to Use Personal Learning Environments in School
In this post I would like to discuss Michael Kerres' article "Potenziale von Web 2.0 nutzen" that I found the other day. Dealing with the potentials of Web 2.0, Kerres gives advice on how to make use of e-learning and online tools and for personal learning environments (PLE) in school. The article can be downloaded here. I would like to announce in advance that I will not merely summarize the article but rather state my own opinion about PLE based on the article.
Thanks to Web 2.0 and its different approach towards interaction and publishing information online, the boundaries between users and users gradually change. It has become significantly easier to build a website and publish data on the web. Former users of Web 1.0 become authors and private content more and more finds its way to the public. With regard to schools and universities, these frontier crossings, according to Kerres, can have the following consequences:
In my opinion, making use of PLE in an educational context can be beneficial if used constructively. In other words, PLE should be involved in class if they contribute to a better learning experience. One major downside of PLE is that students have access to other profiles, i.e. it is tempting to just copy and paste from each other. Hence, it is up to the teacher to consider how PLE can be implemented securely and adequately without neglecting individual work and performance when it comes to grading the students' results. On the other hand, though, learners can benefit from each other by having insight into the information, ideas, and reflections of their fellow students ("shared knowledge"). Having access to such a variety of opinions offers a lot of learning potentials and inspiration for learners, ultimately leading to better performances and results overall. For instructors and teachers, PLE imply several opportunities as they show learning progresses, learning processes, individual efforts and engagement as well as results in a comprehensive and objective way.
Furthermore, PLE facilitate active learning and participation on the part of students. However, such high degrees of autonomy and independent organization of personal learning processes that PLE entail, cannot be applied to all age groups. That is, teachers should make sure that all students have adequate knowledge and media literacy when it comes to using such platforms productively. Another crucial point, thus, is that the initial training for PLE should not take too much time so that the actual learning content is given priority rather than technical issues. In other words, PLE should be easy to use and motivating and make class less monotonous.
In a nutshell, PLE can - if used appropriately - facilitate educational objectives and competences such as autonomy, self- and co-determination with regard to content or media literacy. Students get to customize their personal learning environments according to their preferences and work at their own pace to meet the requirements. In my opinion, though, PLE should be merely considered as tools and aids rather than a universal remedy. It remains to be seen whether schools will make more use of PLE in the future or if classes will solely take place in such a fashion in a few years. The application of e-learning in schools and universities, however, has definitely been increasing over the past years and will proceed, I guess. One example worth mentioning in this context is the Virtual Linguistics Campus (VLC) that is used in the English department of the University of Marburg.
With respect to Kerres and his article, he limits his expenses to the advantages of PLE instead of reflecting on possible disadvantages. In my mind, there are a few points that remain unclear: If the boundaries between teachers and students, respectively authors and consumers, decrease, the question arises whether every producer is automatically a good one and whether this mixture of roles has an impact on the overall quality of contents. Second, if classrooms become ubiquitous and homes turn into learning environments, will privacy and school mingle and students lose their spare time spending too much time at home working? Will PLE have negative impacts on the students' social skills and behavior if they do not meet each other in school any more but rather spend the whole day sitting in front of their computers? What about their privacy if everything they do can be traced online by others? All in all, these aspects need to be considered when contemplating PLE and online learning platforms.
Further Information
Thanks to Web 2.0 and its different approach towards interaction and publishing information online, the boundaries between users and users gradually change. It has become significantly easier to build a website and publish data on the web. Former users of Web 1.0 become authors and private content more and more finds its way to the public. With regard to schools and universities, these frontier crossings, according to Kerres, can have the following consequences:
- hierarchies between teachers and students decrease: teachers function as guides and companions, while students create "user generated content"
- students customize their own learning and working environments (PLE)
- thanks to online platforms, learning becomes ubiquitous and portable, i.e. students can work at home and at their own pace
- learning processes, activities and results make learning can be traced and seen by others online: learning as performance
In my opinion, making use of PLE in an educational context can be beneficial if used constructively. In other words, PLE should be involved in class if they contribute to a better learning experience. One major downside of PLE is that students have access to other profiles, i.e. it is tempting to just copy and paste from each other. Hence, it is up to the teacher to consider how PLE can be implemented securely and adequately without neglecting individual work and performance when it comes to grading the students' results. On the other hand, though, learners can benefit from each other by having insight into the information, ideas, and reflections of their fellow students ("shared knowledge"). Having access to such a variety of opinions offers a lot of learning potentials and inspiration for learners, ultimately leading to better performances and results overall. For instructors and teachers, PLE imply several opportunities as they show learning progresses, learning processes, individual efforts and engagement as well as results in a comprehensive and objective way.
Furthermore, PLE facilitate active learning and participation on the part of students. However, such high degrees of autonomy and independent organization of personal learning processes that PLE entail, cannot be applied to all age groups. That is, teachers should make sure that all students have adequate knowledge and media literacy when it comes to using such platforms productively. Another crucial point, thus, is that the initial training for PLE should not take too much time so that the actual learning content is given priority rather than technical issues. In other words, PLE should be easy to use and motivating and make class less monotonous.
In a nutshell, PLE can - if used appropriately - facilitate educational objectives and competences such as autonomy, self- and co-determination with regard to content or media literacy. Students get to customize their personal learning environments according to their preferences and work at their own pace to meet the requirements. In my opinion, though, PLE should be merely considered as tools and aids rather than a universal remedy. It remains to be seen whether schools will make more use of PLE in the future or if classes will solely take place in such a fashion in a few years. The application of e-learning in schools and universities, however, has definitely been increasing over the past years and will proceed, I guess. One example worth mentioning in this context is the Virtual Linguistics Campus (VLC) that is used in the English department of the University of Marburg.
With respect to Kerres and his article, he limits his expenses to the advantages of PLE instead of reflecting on possible disadvantages. In my mind, there are a few points that remain unclear: If the boundaries between teachers and students, respectively authors and consumers, decrease, the question arises whether every producer is automatically a good one and whether this mixture of roles has an impact on the overall quality of contents. Second, if classrooms become ubiquitous and homes turn into learning environments, will privacy and school mingle and students lose their spare time spending too much time at home working? Will PLE have negative impacts on the students' social skills and behavior if they do not meet each other in school any more but rather spend the whole day sitting in front of their computers? What about their privacy if everything they do can be traced online by others? All in all, these aspects need to be considered when contemplating PLE and online learning platforms.
Further Information
- Kerres, Michael (2006): Potenziale von Web 2.0 nutzen. In: Andreas Hohenstein & Karl Wilbers (Hrsg.). Handbuch E-Learning, München: DWD (http://edublog-phr.kaywa.ch/files/web20-a.pdf).
- Personal Learning Environment (Wikipedia): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_learning_environment
- The Virtual Linguistics Campus (VLC): http://linguistics.online.uni-marburg.de/