PLE/VLE/Learning Cloud/That Which Shall Not be Named Update
Having alienated half of my blog and Twitter network in pursuit of learning how the more advanced among us do things, I wanted to share a few updates.
- D’Arcy updated his PLE post with a TouchGraph diagram showing how his blog serves as the hub of his learning network. Feel free to ignore the part where he puts the Canadian style smackdown on me and I do a lot of apologizing. I want my friend back!
- Alan chose two interesting metaphors to talk about his PLE (or whatever)… his tools and connections as a kind of learning network cloud with Heisenbergian effects and an anatomical model of core, heartbeat, nervous system, etc. I like them both– the first because I agree about the indeterminacy and approximation, the second because it connects on a more visceral (no pun intended) level.
- Martin Weller has a couple of good posts: one looking at where we stand now with the idea of the PLE and another that proposes a continuum model for making sense of the VLE/PLE ideas that are out there.
- Nancy White shares her ‘configuration’ tag in del.icio.us with which communities of practice have tagged their ‘individual technology configuration’– maybe that’s a neutral term that would work better than PLE?
- Michele Martin shares juicy details of her PLE, including paper based components. Fascinating. I like her model of Gather/Process/Act.
- Jared Stein asks a question that Michele partly answers, namely: “should definitions of one’s PLE to be limited to the digital space, or are physical tools and utilities fair game?”
- George Siemens has discussed the concept before and does so again.
- Tony Karrer links to many other places where this conversation has been happening…
If nothing else, names and such aside, it is clear that there is something being addressed– at least in part– by these conversations that is important. An itch is being scratched! I’m not hung up on the definitions for two reasons:
- I can’t point to “the PLE” but I can point to many examples of “a PLE” just as I can point to many examples of blogs despite the term ‘blog’ being arguably meaningless.
- I’ve never really understood the idea of the PLE as being directly in opposition to– much less aligned structurally with– the LMS. I think this greatly influences how different people view the term (i.e. the idea of the PLE as one monolithic entity replacing the other).
March 10th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
you never lost your friend, buddy. I’ll amend my comments to be a little less filter-worthy.
March 11th, 2008 at 3:25 am
Maybe we need to just call them personal learning tools (PLT) or a Personal Learning Toolkit and leave it at that. PLE and “Personal Learning Network” (PLN) imply a sort of monolithic something that seems to make people uncomfortable, as though there’s a “right” and “wrong” kind of environment or network to build. But if we just talk about personal learning tools and not try to call it a system, then it’s something that fits in anywhere. You can pick and choose as it suits you, depending on the kinds of tasks that you tend to perform. I need tools to help me gather information, to make sense of it, to connect to other people, etc. Then we can talk about which tools I use and how I use them without getting bogged down in all this stuff about “what’s a PLE.”
March 11th, 2008 at 8:06 am
I just call it “the stuff that I use to connect me to the people I care about.” Doesn’t need an acronym for my usage
March 11th, 2008 at 9:22 am
I guess where others see the term as monolithic, etc. I see the alternatives as being too limiting. It isn’t a toolkit because that doesn’t capture the equal importance of connections and people. It isn’t just stuff one uses to connect because that is only one of at least three major activities that happen– it really *is* an environment, because its existence is only partially dependent on ourselves as individuals, non-human things are a part of it, and we can do valuable things there without making any connections at all.
I wonder how terms like environmental and network suddenly became monolithic in connotation? It hasn’t reached this far north yet, I guess!
The choice so far seems to be either a paragraph of explanation, a term that people react unhappily toward, or a reductive reference that hits on one part of the activity…
I don’t like any of the possibilities, honestly. But then my background is lit theory, philosophy, and writing– holding long conversations about things no one actually understands using terms that everyone disagrees about is pretty much the norm
March 11th, 2008 at 11:53 am
I don’t object to the term, I just don’t understand it well enough yet to help you out. My understanding is that you are seeking a way to replicate “what we do” that makes us “who we are” professionally. I do want to help, but I think this conversation is way above my head. However, I will be hiring a new team member in the next few months and will likely show them “what I do.” I would love to test any ideas you or your network can pull together to bring a new person up to speed, with the understanding that my network, connections and tools are unique. I can provide the new person with an overview of the concept and I can model my networking, but he or she will need to forge an independent path. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help bring this to life for you.