PLE/Ns and Managing Personal Knowledge (PKM)

 What does anyone know about Knowledge ?

The task is to detail how I define information and knowledge and determine how I manage information. Do I follow a  structured PKM model or rely on a less formal system? I am meant to consider diagramming how my PKM relates to my PLE/N and share in the discussion forum. 

Once again, I'm questioning the relevance of the acronym. I'm becoming frustrated with the process of comparing apples to oranges and talking at cross purposes.  There appears to be no universal definition of KM, just as there's no agreement as to what constitutes knowledge in the first place so I question the relevance of discussing an acronym which has knowledge at the core ? My preference would be to replace it with P.I.M (personal information management)

There seems to be a dwindling of forum contributors. Some of the regulars have dropped off and some newbies have appeared. I anticipate a proportion would be working on a final artefact due in the final week, however I'm realistic enough to accept that it is best for me to forgo the artefact, and concentrate on refining my ideas and determining how they link together because I can definitely sense both a pattern and connection. The most effective method of demonstrating this currently eludes me.   

Interestingly enough there were no artifacts ! Guess I have to keep reminding myself that MOOCING equates with flying free, ignoring deadlines and pretty much doing whatever suits. Liberating ..............

The Waiting Game

Well it appears the signposts have distracted me to the extent that I'm maintaining a presence on the forum and the Groups Network but am sadly falling behind in the blogging - I'm not complaining, just documenting. I accept that my artefact will not be ready in time for the completion of the course-too much reflection, too many distractions, not enough time. BUT - it doesn't matter, because my learning will continue apace once the course is completed. I have a kaleidoscope of ideas to follow up. 

For the moment, I fear infoglut has me in its mire, but I will surface and will be a lot dirtier but a lot wiser. And I can always wash can't I, then the mire should be a dim memory with cleanliness an almost permanent state (fingers crossed)

And as I wait and linger I had time to watch and enjoy the 'Doodle Revolution'

The Doodle Revolution

And this one

Visual Creative Thinking

View more presentations from homehelper.

for future pondering and elaboration:

1.The Musketeer principle

2.The Jackhammer - network saboteur

3.The Informed Silence
4. The default versus the personal network

PLE/Ns Tools - What Exists,...... How are they used ?

 Am I at risk of becoming a real tool if I dismisses new tools arbitrarily ?

The task is to explore tool functionality missing from PLEs, determine what I need to create new tools and identify strategies for improving end user experience- perhaps new tools, new interfaces and imroving functionality

The term 'tool' exudes the typical ambiguity. 

When is a tool a resource ? 

Is an LMS a tool or resource ?

Creating new tools e.g GRSShopper presupposes a high degree of Perl scripting experience which I don't believe would be possessed by most teachers. And it is the discipline of teaching which is relevant to me. I don't believe the person who has the largest toolbox or the shiniest newest tool is necessarily the best craftsperson. For me the relevance lies in the tools functionality and ease of use. 
That old song -" If I had a hammer" comes unbidden into my head, and therefore hot on its heel's a favourite quote :  

If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.  Alexander Maslow

Using PLE/Ns effectively: skills, mindsets, and critical literacies

Apple, Orange Or A Real 'Lemon' ? 

The focus has shifted to the skills needed to ensure success within PLE/Ns. What impact does literacy have on a learner's ability to not only function, but flourish in a digital world ? George Siemens believes that being literate requires technical skills, conceptual mindsets, as well as an attitude of tolerance of complexity and ambiguity.

  
A bit of fun - an online tolerance of ambiguity test. Additionally, an interesting study which explains that 'personality and tolerance of ambiguity' are also referred to as language ego, ego boundaries, or cognitive flexibility (Guiora,1981; Ehrman, 1993)It seems that various studies have shown that learners who can tolerate moderate levels of ambiguity are more likely to persist in language learning.

As I see it, the greatest hindrance to comparing theories is that there is no universally accepted definition of any of them. As with the PLN/PLE debate, it appears to boil down to 'scholarly' opinion. And what is quite unnerving to the student, if 'academics' disagree after studying a theory in great depth, what sense of clarity are the 'others' expected to achieve.
 

Firstly why do so many theories begin with "C" ? If I was going to submit a theory at some stage, I certainly wouldn't give it a title which began with "C". Connectivism, Constructivism, Constructionism, Cognitivism. Perhaps something with "Z" or "X" would make it easier to remember. However I can't think of one which suits so I'll go with the 'C' bandwagon and suggest 'Complexitism'. Humans are too complex to be pigeonholed according to any criteria which has a cognitive functioning component. If its so clear, why so varied ? 

Theories have their place - I enjoy reading about them, however I act according to my intuitive barometer. Their value lies in facilitating discussion and refinement of strategies which is the toolbox of the educator.I don't rally behind the banner of any one exclusively. Our ability as educators to critically evaluate learning theories is limited to a great extent by the degree of 'at the chalkface' experience. I look to my experience over 35 years of teaching and modify my approach according to my analysis of learner needs. I believe there are disadvantages in attaching pedagogical practice to the bandwagon of any one theory. Experience is the most humbling of teachers. If one accepts the concept of 'individual differences' there can be no justification in placing 'all the eggs in one basket'.

The Executive Summary of the 1990 Delphi Report from the American Philosophical Association (Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction) states:

The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, fair- minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit. Thus, educating good critical thinkers means working toward this ideal.

Daunting task for both educators and students ! I expect a highly evolved, well balanced personality would be a good place to start. Hands up all those who have evolved thus far ? My hands shall stay by my side for now !

Evaluating Learning in PLE/Ns

 WHO DOES IT, HOW DO THEY DO IT, AND IS IT WORTH DOING ?

Assessment and learner evaluation presents a probem similar to that which exists between hard and soft systems:
Apparently, hard processes = learning management systems and standardized testing  ans soft systems = no clear way to ascertain the quality or depth of learning. Therefore it doesn't require an extraordinary leap of faith to assume that an effective system of learning would maintain a balance between hard processes, soft processes and technologies which would reflect the needs within a particular context.

My focus therefore is to explore "how do we measure what matters, and, to whom does what we measure matter? 

There's been much discussion about the differences between testing, evaluating and assessing. The terms appear to frequently be used interchangeably. As I understand it, testing applies to assessments which have definitive yes/no answers e.g yes/no and multiple choice tests. Evaluation enters into a greyer area where judgements are made by the evaluator. For example, a teacher may use testing to identify  a students understanding of mathematical processes, however taken into account would be their daily interactions, conditions at the time ongoing assessments

Reading Keith Hamons post generated a new perspective for me.

All statements about any student are provisional. "This is John, an exemplary A student, and this is Mary, a problematic F student" are both provisional, and do not say all that can be said or measured about either John or Mary or about ourselves for measuring and saying such things. That to teach any thing, we must define that thing, but our definitions are always provisional, always subject to change, usually sooner rather than later.

I'd not really thought about it in this way before. I had of course considered the element of subjectivity with respect to many forms of assessment. However, the pigeonholing of a student can have great impact on not only future learning but on life. Many students are hamstrung by low expectations formulated by uninformed educators. While tests can generate a peer comparative 'score' and are situational, the evaluation of attitude and values is completely subjective and can be more reflective of the personality dynamics existing between teacher and student. There  is a real danger of students only living up to what appears to be expected of them.


Additionally:

"Our educational systems are overwhelmingly informed with the myth of the individual. Our testing regimes, grading regimes, pedagogies, epistemologies, and learning theories are all based on the individual, ignoring the role of the network or rhizome, in the creation and management of knowledge"

I have observed that the vocal MOOC contibutors are comfortable pursuing their own leads which supplement the course readings and generate discussion. Consulting the course agenda in order to guide thinking processes has been helpful and to see how the topics relate to one another - a learning destination.

In my field of primary education, diagnostic testing prior to the commencement of a unit represents a gauge of sorts. The comparison of diagnostic and summative assessment results represents a yardstick. Formative assessment is also often included which allows for an ongoing evaluation of both student progress and pedagogical effectiveness. The program is 'supposedly' dynamic, continually revised for maximum productivity.Hmmmm......

With a MOOC, the strengths and weaknesses of the guinea pigs are unknown, and the facilitators are unfamiliar with the learners' normal learning paradigm, so perhaps the best assessor of learning in this case would be the learners themselves. If the MOOC were to re-create a 'traditional' pedagogical stance with facilitator as imparter of knowledge, I would doubt its effectiveness, however this has not been the case and I would suggest that the only form of attempted manipulation appears to have come from a small minority of participants with a personal agenda.

http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/online-teaching-challenge-creating-an-emotional-connection-to-learning-part-1/

September 28, 2010

Rob Kelly offers an interesting perspective in  Online Teaching Challenge: Creating an Emotional Connection to Learning, part 1  He states that learning research indicates that people learn better in the presence of some emotional connection — to either the content or to other people, however he agrees that the creation of this emotional connection is particularly challenging in the online classroom, where most communication is asynchronous and lacks many of the emotional cues of the face-to-face environment.

Rick Van Sant, associate professor of education at Ferris State University agrees that :

“One of the things we know about learning is that learning with emotion is a far deeper experience than learning without emotion,” 

Van Sant uses the site www.ted.org/ in his courses (Technology, Entertainment, Design) This features top presenters talking about a diverse offering of topics. Van Sant believes that technology provides access to a vast array of content which possesses the potential to resonate emotionally with students in this way, however he sees barriers in the delayed response time, not being able to respond in the moment to engaging content. 

He regrets the loss of many teahcable moments
In a typical online learning environment, students react and post to a discussion board or blog and wait for a response. “I think it’s one of the downsides of asynchronous learning. You lose that opportunity for the teachable moment,” Van Sant says. “There are many positive aspects to online learning, such as thoughtful reflection. One of the things I see, the students who do not often volunteer or engage in on-the-fly discussion in a face-to-face classroom will turn around in an online environment and become significant discussants. Not that they’re lazy in the classroom; they just don’t process information on the fly quite like somebody else.”

“The goal isn’t to cater to all eight individual multiple intelligences. It’s about providing, over the range of a course, the opportunity for people to learn and express their learning within their strengths and not always have to operate within their deficits. To do that, you need variety. You need redundancy. You need multiplicity. You need different ways of sharing and knowing. … What happens here is working in a much richer environment. It is a challenge for us to understand that in this rich environment we’ve got to become masters of that domain.” 

Rob Kelly, Online Education, Online Teaching Challenge: Creating an Emotional Connection to Learning, part 2,September 30, 2010

 With online learning being a relatively new medium the jury will be out for some time yet as to the effectiveness of this type of study, particularly in a largely unstructured course such as a MOOC. From what I have read and heard, the main features essential to good practice seem to be: dialogue(both sunchronous and asynchronous); learner commitment; facilitator support and a strong degree of learner autonomy.This autonomy impacts on, and is impacted by, time management, content choices, pace, interface navigation and assessment.
Perhaps all indications lead to rethinking our notion of 'individual' as a discreet individual to the notion of a Janus like personality, two pronged, a mashup of a unique humaneness and a network rhizome !

PLE, PLN and Learning Theories

Apple, Orange Or A Real 'Lemon' ?

source: http://www.dilbert.com/
As I see it, the greatest hindrance to comparing theories is that there is no universally accepted definition of any of them. As with the PLN/PLE debate, it appears to boil down to 'scholarly' opinion. And what is quite unnerving to the student, if 'academics' disagree after studying a theory in great depth, what sense of clarity are the 'others' expected to achieve.

Firstly why do so many theories begin with "C" ? If I was going to submit evidence to test and support an hypothesis hoping it would become a theory at some stage, I certainly wouldn't give it a title which began with "C". Connectivism, Constructivism, Constructionism, Cognitivism. Perhaps something with "Z" or "X" would make it easier to remember. However I can't think of one which suits so I'll go with the 'C' bandwagon and suggest 'Complexitism'. Humans are too complex to be pigeonholed according to any criteria which has a cognitive functioning component. If its so clear, why so varied ?

Theories have their place - I enjoy reading about them, however I act according to my intuitive barometer. As simply a plausible explanation for a certain phenomenon, theories are great for contemplating, critically appraising or tasting. Their value lies in facilitating discussion and refinement of strategies which is the toolbox of the educator. I don't rally behind the banner of any one exclusively. Our ability as educators to critically evaluate learning theories is limited to a great extent by the degree of 'at the chalkface' experience. I look to my experience over 35 years of teaching and modify my approach according to my analysis of learner needs. I believe there are disadvantages in attaching pedagogical practice to the bandwagon of any one theory. Experience is the most humbling of teachers. If one accepts the concept of 'individual differences' there can be no justification in placing 'all the eggs in one basket'.

An interesting comparison of some of the main theories from Ailsa's blog - CCK11 meets ANT

"....Adapted from a table George Siemens has on learning theories in week 1 readings, but with an additional column expanding on connectivism to consider actor-network theory...."

Still refining my thoughts on this one !

The neXt/eXtended Web

 THE 'X" FACTOR

Once again the jargon (who calls it what) is taking control of the debate, but the general consensus seems to be that the Web has developed from the 'Reading' Web, to the 'Contributing' web and is now moving towards the 'Linked Data' web. Apparently data will increasingly be created, linked and managed by 'services' rather than the individual. 'Intelligent Search' and 'Behavioural Advertising' will be the new buzz words. Caterina Fake, founder of Flickr and Yahoo Answers is now turning her hand to the 'product design' of a Web service named "Hunch" . The site explains:

“……..It starts by Hunch getting to know you: what do you like; how do you think; who are you? Then, Hunch builds a taste profile mapping your unique tastes and preferences to the people, places and things all around you which you might like. The result is great recommendations that are customized just for you….”

Of course it conveniently plays down the benefits for Hunch .Whatever its nomenclature, the scariest part about this 'X' web is the loss of privacy it heralds. Currently we have the choice of privacy settings on most of the social media websites to block 'stranger' access to our private data,(that's if we can locate them amongst all the mumbo jumbo and associated hype). Of equal concern is the absence of sophisticated critical literacy in many of the future users.

"......With information dissemination, esp via the Web comes interpretation, bias and decontextualisation …… Allied with the electronic dissemination of information comes responsibility as well, and a huge one at that - appropriate use, duty of care, ethics, all these go way beyond the school.  In a world where being able to access, interpret and use information at the point of need for Joe citizen is the single most important skill set we can give our children alongside traditional literacy and numeracy.  We have music specialists, art specialists, sports specialists etc. but there are no information specialists...."

Barbara Combes, Lecturer, School of Computer and Security Science Edith Cowan University, Perth Western Australia,

OZTL_NET listserv 2010

With Google and other major players spending billions on software and apps for the cell phone user, the 'mobile' phone (as we refer to it in Australia) is set to become the 'new age' laptop or mobile computer, the portable web, the portable PLE. So in answer to the question "Which technology will become obsolete?", I guess it won't be that of the cell phone. Google's no fool and they've twigged to the fact that cell phone ownership eclipses computer ownership, so it makes financial sense for more 'toys' to be accessible via the phone portal. The advertising promotes this development as providing greater equity through wider access. The data on the apps can all be linked via the Google databases of course and its all hidden behind the altruistic mask Google unconvincingly tries to wear.

"Mr. Google" Eric Schmidt explains what Web X is and incidentally brushes off Web 2.0 as simply a marketing term.

 

The Google CEO summarises Web X thus:

1. a different way of building applications

2. defined as relatively small applications pieced together

3. available in the cloud

4. run on any device (inference=mobile phones)

5. customisable

6. distributed virally through social networks

7. solves problems easily

8. faster download

Another Google Supremo Dr.V.G.Cerf who is otherwise titled 'the Google evangelist' does his best to reassure us that Google has only the interests of the consumer at heart. After all, we consumers want to be 'in control' of advertising data to which we're exposed don't we ? Google is simply providing the context whereby we can access that data. (Hmmmm) One  example he provides is 'smart television sets' where a consumer can simply 'mouse around' and be offered intuitive suggestions for spending even more money. Perhaps I'd like to purchase a book about Brad Pitt - this is surely what I had in mind when I downloaded "Troy" ? My purpose couldn't simply have been to watch the movie could it ?

 

The newly coined term "Googleware" which is a marriage of software and hardware really provides a more accurate description of Web X for me as the 'business web' insidiously hidden beheath the mantle of the term 'customisable' which serves to reassure us that control rests in the consumer's hands.

....to be continued....

#PLENK2010

The Way Forward - PLE or LMS

Is This A Dagger I See Before Me?

I question whether the battle of the acronyms need really be as fierce as it's made out to be. Perhaps a productive method of contrasting the two systems is to look at the deficiencies of each and then offer some possible strategies for circumventing any threats to the learner's acquisition of knowledge. I stumbled upon Graham Attwell's presentation which questions the 'ostrich' reaction of educational institutions to the whole concept of social networking.

Personal Learning Environments

Buzan's comparison of the brain to a Swiss army knife had me thinking "what a wonderful analogy to use for a PLE", however, having read Mohamed Amine Chatti's post I agree that his perception of the PLE as Toolbox and the LMS as Swiss knife is much closer to the truth as I now see it.

Similar to the knife the LMS may be limited and constrained by its structure while the PLE functions unrestrained. The reference to tools and resources is so frequently uttered when referring to PLEs however I'd never linked the image with the concept before.

It has become abundantly clear to me that the crux of the matter is teacher education beginning at the very core - pre service. There is limited value in parrotting back the readings or taking sides in the battle of the acronyms if the horse has already bolted. This happens to be my personal Soapbox. It has been mentioned in many arenas that there exists a certain academic snobbishness displayed towards the PLE. This is most likely generated by a sense of self preservation due to a lack of academic proficiency with many technological tools, and I would further suggest a disinclination for changing the status quo. It wouldn't serve for the masters to appear lacking !

Sarah Cunnane's 'Times Higher Education' article- "Students Let Down By The Academic Luddites" declares that the use of technology in higher education is becoming both political and academic, while the Office of Educational Technology,is calling for "revolutionary transformation rather than evolutionary tinkering" in the field. What concerns me most in the pie charts is the percentage of faculty who had never heard of blogs, LMSs, virtual worlds or plagiarism detection tools.

The article reinforces my belief that the complacency in the education sector stains all levels.

In Jonathan Mott's article Envisioning the Post-LMS Era: The Open Learning Network he suggests that the very diversity of PLEs and PLNs has limited their implementation on an institutional level, however showcases Brigham Young University's development and deployment of an Open Learning Network (yet another acronym I fear) compromise which Mott believes would embrace:

".....both the efficiencies of the LMS and the affordances of the PLN, rejecting the "tyranny of OR" in favor of the "genius of AND....." 

I came across Jane Hart's post - The Future Of The LMS late in the course and although thought provoking as usual, there seems to be continuing debate and diverse opinions about the validity and future of the LMS. The main bone of contention appears to be the increasing role of social media in learning and the opinion of some 'academics' that informal learning will never compete with formal learning. Intellectual snobbery I would say, and an example of ostrich mentality.

An update on the LMS scenario with Jane Hart's post "Where are you on the LMS adoption curve?" dated November 27, 2010. What I really find absorbing is the comments associated with high value blogs. RSS feeds don't really work for me-the data flows in. I prefer to trowel the few blogs I've shortlisted due to the amount of interaction they engender and rely on serendipity. If I miss out on anything of vital importance I'm sure it will findme via another medium.


#PLENK2010

PLEs - What A Mashup !

'PLE' As I Understand It ( for now)

The squirrel has decided to store the nuts she has gathered, go with her instincts and listen to the inner voice, constructing some illuminations of her own. The urge to blow raspberries at dogs is already waning.

Julie Collareda's Personalised Learning Environments (PLEs) Wiki  documents that there is no 

 "....one size fits all' PLE solution for either student or teacher, if personalised learning is to be enabled. Individuals are now clamouring to design their own personalised space where they can access favourite sites, feeds, bookmarks and other generative tools......"  

The learner develops their own arsenal of tools as their needs are identified and refined and technical proficiency with each tool develops.The degree of learner autonomy within an environment is dependent on whether the personalisation has been engineered by the learner or by an external agent, as in an MLE. 

As learners, we use tools to facilitate the learning process. As far as I can ascertain, the PLE is a real Mashup a mix of people, services, artefacts, digital and non digital resources which foster the construction of knowledge in a learner. A positive PLE, its construction and maintenance is a crucial component of the learning process. Therefore PLEs are environments in which individual learners, or groups of learners represent a trend towards personalised social learning, an alternative to MLEs. 

I loved Jennifer Chesney's creative 'intuitive' interpretation as a PIM (personal intuitive map).It strongly reinforces my belief that we will achieve no ' one size fits all ' solution to the PLE/PLN debate or format, even with respect to the terminology used, because of basic learning preferences or styles. 

 image credit: Bill Browning: http://www.mnispi.org/cartoon/2001/index.htm

Richard Felder’s advice on how to address the spectrum of learning styles should provide food for thought to any educator, any learner for that matter.

At last-found a post today which makes complete sense to me. When reading Steve Wheeler's blog today I experienced so many 'Eureka' moments I thought I maybe able to take out a loan.

".....We propose a hybrid approach. Essentially, we argue that students require structure and scaffolding when they first venture into digital learning environments. No-one is a digital native (yay, the voice of reality), no matter how much the Prensky theory is talked up. Yet the average institutional Managed Learning Environment is by nature dull, uninspiring and difficult to navigate(Amen to that). Web 2.0 tools (Cloud Learning Environment) are more attractive, easier to use and free, but are unprotected and vulnerable (particularly for the K-6 age group who are my students). Further, the content sent to the application ends up becoming the 'property' of the Internet company and is difficult to delete, a target for data mining. Whilst CLEs will not fully address all of the tensions between iMLEs and PLEs, we argue that they provide a tentative bridge to provide the best of both worlds in terms of affordances and interoperability....."

Associate Professor Steve Wheeler, Faculty of Education at the University of Plymouth

 

 The diagrams were clear simple and exactly what I'd been envisaging after hours and hours of contemplation. The 'something not quite right' feeling I'd had at the outset of all this PLE/PLN debate was quieted.

Two great graphic organisers as well - this was almost too much !!!! 

 

 

 Clear, succinct, minimal jargon (no headaches) However I'm not sure Tony Buzan would approve of the straight lines !

Thank you Steve

The PLN/PLE differences debate loses impact for me once the PLN is viewed as a component of a healthy professional PLE. Now some prefer to view the PLE as a component of the PLN, however either view just as clearly reinforces the symbiotic connection. 

 

'One size does not fit all' in either approach or medium as far as I'm concerned. None of us learns inside a vaccuum, and the opportunity to function according to a preferred learning style can be a powerful aphrodisiac for the self directed learner. With this 'combination' PLN/PLE model the focus is not moved away from the collective social learners, but provides a balance between individual and collective needs, thereby satisfying both camps.

#PLENK2010

Personal Learning Networks - What's in a name ?

Has the PLN become the PLE or has the PLE become the PLN

Corinne Weisburger's slideshare presentation "How To Create Your Personal Learning Network For Professional Development And Research" helped to clarify somewhat my understanding of the nature of PLNs and demonstrated strategies which could be used for customising that network. 

"....PLNs are deliberately formed networks of people and resources capable of guiding our independent learning goals and professional development needs.... "

Learning via a PLN may be connectivist or constructivist in nature(depends on which hat one wears and I'm not sure which suits me yet, then again perhaps I'll tend towards the constructionist by the end of the journey), multiple rather than single user generated. Then again, will a PLN by any other name smell as sweet? An interesting take on "What's new in the world?" raises the point that:

.......Personal Learning Networks are all the rage at the moment. As with a lot of “modern” things, they’re existed for a long time but have now got a snappy new name. It used to be called “advice from friends and colleagues”. But in the era of social media the word friend has taken on a new meaning. Social media has provided me with a lot of friends who I’ve never met and never spoken to. I’ve exchanged a few tweets with them, commented on or received comments on a blog article, or maybe read a few forum posts, and as a result these people are, in Web 2.0-speak, friends........     

It may simply be a case of 'everything old is new again'. Having been an educator for over 35 years now, I've been witness to the rebirth of many techniques and philosophies, each with a new glossy jargonistic name. The process, not the name, is what has ramifications for the learner, who becomes part of an increasingly global learning community.  This concept is not new, the global perspective is. With the advent of the Web 2.0 paradigm, and the accompanying digital explosion, the learning network has taken on a far greater significance, its value lying in its future potential rather than its current reality in many closed MLEs which fulfil institutional rather than individual needs. 

 

I enjoyed John Spencer's perception of a PLN as being a mindset not a 'thing' or a 'process'. Interestingly the author stated that he created it while doodling and feeling bored to death at a professional development meeting. I speak from personal experience when I state that professional development meetings are out of bounds for me. It's been many many years since I actually learnt anything of professional significance in one of those environments. They follow the same format: gratuitous long winded introductions; minimal input from the 'experts' who have been provided at great expense; the compulsory brainstorming sessions, followed by workshops and group presentations. Once the general consensus is reached with the lowest common denominator prevailing, gratuitous thanks are delivered and the obligatory, (again gratuitous), evaluation sheet distributed. Call me jaded, but I'd rather play polo with Genghis Khan than 'network' at one of these meetings. I believe we all should resist the sabotaging of our learning environments in such fashion, personal or otherwise.

I view the network as being ‘Janus like’, with one face representing the individual and the other, the group which provides the stimulus for looking at another perspective. This is of benefit to both the individual and the group. 

Discovered a most amazing widget "Garys Social Media Count" created by Gary Hayes (an Aussie resident) Just had to share !

.

 

Mindmapping -organise it !

MINDMAPPING

Following a suggestion on the forum about using CMAP software to map out our PLE and after watching the video of Mr. Mindmap (Tony Buzan) what became clearer was the link between how our minds function and the structure of a mindmap which I'd never linked before.  Sure, mindmaps organise our thoughts but why are specific shapes and lines used ?

  

1. Mindmaps reflect the processes of the mind.
2. They should be curvilinear. The brain thinks centrally and explodes out by association. Association = connections = memory = thinking
3. Start in the centre and connect the branches using curved tapered lines as the brain is organic and free flowing . Straight lines = rigidity
4. Use one word per branch, so the ideas have the freedom to radiate out
5. The length of the branch should be the length of the word to ensure the meeting points are very close and therefore connected 
6. Incorporation of colour aids the memory
7. Use images and keywords- Buzan claims "all the great geniuses did that" which is highly subjective and a gross generalisation, however if it was good enough for Leonardo, Darwin and Beethoven why shouldn't it be good enough for Mr. or Ms. Average. Buzan calls mindmaps a'genius tool' and why wouldn't he ? Should we understand by inference that as he is the inventor, it follows that .............

 Interestingly, I'm still looking for 'free' mapping software which ticks all Buzan's boxes. Buzan's choice (iMind) costs $99 for the basic version.

PLEs and PLNs - Watch your Ps and Ps

Confusion and Ambiguity Reigns Supreme

I'm meant to look at 'A Personal Learning Environment' as more of a concept than a particular toolset, and often presented in contrast to organizational learning management systems. For this course the term 'Personal Learning Network' has been defined as a structure that reflects relatedness to other people and grows when new people or connections are made. Information sources are seen as part of a PLN.

First understatement -A degree of overlap exists between these two terms !

I have been attempting to navigate the MOOC playing field and avoid the ambiguities engendered by acronym overdose. The readings have only generated more questions, but I'm somewhat comforted by the knowledge that I'm not alone in my confusion. 

 Wendy McGrath's blog comment resonated with me: 

....My take is that striving to draw lines of distinction between ple’s and pln’s isn’t useful to me. There are basic interdependencies here, and if there are boundaries, they are soft ones....http://wmcgrath.edublogs.org/

For me it would appear simple enough to define a PLN as a network of people who facilitate the individual’s learning and a PLE as the environment within which this growth occurs(although environment doesn't really hit the mark with me either, the term is too closely aligned to a specific area. I would prefer something like Personal Learning Resources). However simple doesn't ever appear to be the 'scholarly way', otherwise it would be unambiguous and accessible to all wouldn't it ? (I feel the cynic is starting to take a hold, so as it's early days yet, I'll exert restraint) 

Having pondered on the readings and following the discussions on the forum I too am less inclined to persist with attempting to differentiate between PLEs and PLNs. I see them as intertwined, with the network existing as a component of the environment. However, for the learning experience I'll consider them as distinct, and see where that takes me. If I start to look at it from the squirrel's perspective, at least I can say I've given it my best attempt.

#PLENK2010