Learning About Personal Learning Environments

Welcome to the Wales Wide Web!!! Where we discuss the advantages, disadvantages, and other various aspects of PLEs (Personal Learning Environments). Though I must warn you that this article can be very mind numbing unless you’re taking a course on teaching. I had to read the bullet points multiple times to even begin to understand what Mr. Graham Attwell was talking about. That’s pretty bad considering that I already had a general idea what PLEs are all about. You see, a PLE is an environment where you can learn and apply what you want at your own pace. Do you remember having a friend in a free study course, or being in one yourself? If so, you would think it was a free hour unless the student in question was extremely disciplined or there was a really tough instructor breathing down everyone’s neck. Free study courses are the formal school systems’ way of trying to create a personal learning envrironment. It’s tough to get into when a school just goes “Here’s the internet!! Go learn!!” Not because you’re an idiot or something, but because you’re so use to a structured learning environment that the only way that you can smoothly transition into a PLE, is if you have a hobby that makes you want to research things yourself; very often I might add. These hobbies are what lead to “informal learning.” Informal learning is probably what leads to the full use of a PLE. It takes a great interest, or great discipline, or a combination of the two unlock the full potential of a PLE.

That’s the meat of the article up there (or at least what I could translate from it). Like web 2.0, the PLE is somewhat of an undefined concept. It tends to carry the same general connotations when used by various people, but it has no exact definition. While formal institutions may be interested in PLEs, they are hard pressed to create them due to the lack of a standard to go by. A PLE is basically a free learning environment to me. I can use what I want, how I want it, to learn what I need to know. That sounds good and simple, right? The problem with that being recreated by schools and companies is that it needs to be efficient. That means it has to be relatively quick and easy to use to its full potential. That leads to the question “How do I create a useful PLE?” Libraries take too long for their intended purposes (but that doesn’t completely rule them out when one has an excessive amount of time). That leaves *gasp* computer applications and the all knowing internet!!! But what would be the standard? There is no standard. That would take the personal out of the PLE. What people would need is an internet browser and a good idea of how to use it. After that, it’s completely up them on what to implement into their personal learning environment. Of course blogs, wikis, forums, various search engines, and a personal touch is recommended…strongly I might add.

Now that there’s a general idea on how to use a PLE (or better yet, what it is) I’d like to comment on the article. This article speaks of introducing people to certain matters at their own level. This was obviously high level teaching theory (well I can’t say for sure since I’ve never really dabbled in it) so I would recommend looking up some terminology. Not just for the article, but for all things encountered when looking at something in a personal learning environment. This way you will find a broader range of information and won’t have to pass up really good sources because you don’t own a dictionary for that specific field. A PLE isn’t presented to somebody, it’s created by that somebody. This article is too high of a level for somebody to just pick up and read, but it left me some hints on what to do for my personal learning environment by being at such a level. It let me know that I need to implement terminology as a specific part of my PLE. It’s a good start for when you first wander off into something. This is mine so I have to go get it and I have to go get it my way. PLE and Web 2.0 go hand in hand. They aren’t information just forced on you, they’re information that you go digging for. That’s what I happen to think for this. Good night.

A Recipe for Learning Web Design

First off, I must apologize for being so late. I’m disorganized and I gotta work on that. (Note to self, IMD first, football later).

   Well, with that little rambling out of the way, I am responding to an article by D. Keith Robinson on well, making it in the web design industry. It was relatively short and didn’t go into depth because it has a really simple message: Don’t stop trying to learn when you leave school. That’s all there is to the article and that’s all there is to making it in the web design industry (or any new technological industry for that matter). If I went any further in depth, I’d have to just copy the article and try to paraphrase. I’ve been told this for years so it’s nothing really new. I’ve also been told this ever since I stated my work at the Art Institute of Dallas, so it came off as stale and boring. But I can’t really complain, somebody might stumble across this article and find the information new and exciting. Basically the article is stating an industry standard.

Web 2.0 how I see it

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html?page=1

The above site, O’Reilly gave a comparison of two internet eras. The current one being called web 2.0, our internet era, the internet of today.

Web 1.0 Web 2.0
DoubleClick –> Google AdSense
Ofoto –> Flickr
Akamai –> BitTorrent
mp3.com –> Napster
Britannica Online –> Wikipedia
personal websites –> blogging
evite –> upcoming.org and EVDB
domain name speculation –> search engine optimization
page views –> cost per click
screen scraping –> web services
publishing –> participation
content management systems –> wikis
directories (taxonomy) –> tagging (”folksonomy”)
stickiness –> syndication

There is no specific definition to web 2.0. Many people have many different views on it. Some beliefs are very similar while others are extremely different. Having never heard the term “web 2.0″ before, I truly don’t know what my view is, so I’m going to try to break down this article very briefly to get a general idea.

  • Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability
  • Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them
  • Trusting users as co-developers
  • Harnessing collective intelligence
  • Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
  • Software above the level of a single device
  • Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models

According to O’Reilly net, these are some of, if not THE, main components of web 2.0. So what does it mean? It means that web 2.0 is based almost entirely around the users. The users are what basically make up the internet, or internet based services. The internet is the community as opposed to being a series of pages. Blogs, file sharing, forums, and wikis are the essence of web 2.0. It’s as simple as that. The source is not entirely dependent on itself to grow. Less servers are needed for growing sources. That’s because each of the computers in a network can serve as a server now.  Look at limewire and bittorrent, every time a new user joins, the network grows. The internet is no longer restricted to web browsers.

What about web browsers though? Where do they fit in all of this?  Web browsers are still the central point of the internet, but websites have changed in nature. If that weren’t the case, then there would be no point in coining the term “web 2.0″. Notice how any popular site nowadays has some type of upload feature. Those sites also require you to register to be able to access all of their content. Why? So you can be apart of their database. It’s a type of security to make sure that anything doesn’t just pop up at the users of the site. If you upload offensive material, it can be gotten rid of, and if you become a problem, you can be gotten rid of.  Web 2.0 grants the users power in ways that the internet didn’t a few years back and that’s one of the reasons that it’s called web 2.0. Websites have a more personal touch now than they use to.

So in conclusion, web 2.0 is user based, not developer based. It is interactive, not informative. It is service based, not product based. It’s a network that is constantly growing with the more people that access it. It’s comparable to a living breathing thing now, for it will never stop changing. It will always have too many components to be labeled as one thing and one thing only.