Personal Learning Environments (PLE) – Innovation in education and training or just ‘old wine in new bottles’?
Author(s):
Simone Haasler (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2013
Format:
Paper

Session Information

02 SES 02 B, Personal Learning Environments, Learning Territorities and Learning Sites

Paper Session

Time:
2013-09-10
15:15-16:45
Room:
A-103
Chair:
Marja-Leena Stenström

Contribution

During the last two decades, considerable effort and funding have been expended on developing and implementing ICT in education and training. Despite these efforts, there remains an issue as to the effectiveness and attractiveness of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) or e-learning in practice. In fact, a number of critical voices underline that despite the far reaching changes in the economy, in production and in social life through the widespread adoption of digital technologies, educational institutions and curricula remain remarkably unaffected.

Based on the ideas of collaborative learning and social networks within communities of practice, Personal Learning Environments (PLE) are being put forward as a new approach to the development of e-learning tools (Wilson et al, 2006). PLEs can be described as a collection of loosely coupled tools, including Web 2.0 technologies, used for working, learning, reflection and collaboration with others. PLEs can be seen as the spaces in which people interact and communicate and whose ultimate result is learning and the development of collective know-how. Thereby, social software can be used for informal learning which is learner driven, problem-based and motivated by interest – not as a process triggered by a single learning provider, but as a continuing activity corresponding with the paradigm of self-directed learning. By definition, PLEs are individual while at the same time it is possible to provide tools and services to support learners in developing their own environment, thereby supporting knowledge creation and communication. Whilst PLEs revert to a specific set of technology, including applications and services, more important is the idea of supporting individual and group-based learning in multiple contexts and of promoting learner autonomy and control (Connole, 2008).

The paper will present results from a European project that developed and introduced PLEs for trainees and mostly low skilled workers in the domain of forestry and tree care. It was implemented in four European countries (Belgium, France, Germany and the Netherlands) in cooperation with larger vocational education and training centres and small and medium size companies. The project was completed in 2011 and had the objective to pilot a PLE for the target group of mainly low skilled users, vocational teachers and company instructors to enhance formal and informal learning processes, competence development and knowledge exchange. The presented results are based on an evaluation implemented alongside the project to assess the effectiveness and impact of the introduced PLE. The evaluation considered (1) the didactical quality of the teaching and learning environment, (2) how PLE facilitates competence development (considering technical competence, methodological competence, social competence and communicative competence), (3) the user-friendliness and accessibility considering the educational background of the users, and (4) the extent to which the PLE supported the cooperation between the vocational school and the company.

Method

The evaluation was based on a survey distributed among the project participants and PLE users. The survey was pretested and translated into Dutch, English, French and German and was completed online. Considering the project duration of 24 months the survey was implemented at the interim stage (after 12 months) and at the end of the project. The approach of conducting a formative evaluation was chosen in order to allow for reflection to making adjustments of the PLE tools during the second phase of the project period. This means that the results of the first evaluation round were directly discussed and used to improve the learning environment. At the interim stage the survey was completed by 34 users; the second survey by 45 users. In both evaluation rounds all kinds of users across the four European countries (learner, trainer in the company, vocational teacher, IT technician and others) were sufficiently represented.

Expected Outcomes

Considering the users’ experience with PLE some findings from the overall evaluation can be highlighted: - The introduction and use of the PLE did not reveal or generate better learning outcomes than conventional teaching and learning methods. - The development of the PLE arrangements was predominantly guided by technological concerns rather than considering the didactical needs and interests of the users. - PLE arrangements were mainly considered to reproduce conventional teaching and learning methods, but were not really seen as an innovation to learning. - Of the applied tools Blogs, Wiki and video sharing seemed to be particularly useful to support the different facets of competence development. - In particular, PLE was found to support the development of technical competence. - PLEs are more suitable for learning in vocational schools than for learning in the company or company-based training. - The application and usage of PLE to large degree relies on the support provided by technical experts. Without technical advice and guidance PLE are difficult to use. - PLE can facilitate the vocational learning of crafts-oriented users and learners who are more inclined to work with their hands. Thus, they are appropriate to attract this group of trainees.

References

Abs, H. J., Maag Merki, K., & Klieme, E. (2006). Grundlegende Gütekriterien für Schulevaluation. In: W. Böttcher, H. G. Holtappels & M. Brohm (Eds.): Evaluation im Bildungswesen. Eine Einführung in Grundlagen und Praxisbeispiele. Weinheim: Beltz Verlag, pp. 97-108. Attwell G. (2007). Searching, Lurking and the Zone of Proximal Development, e-learning in Small and Medium enterprises in Europe. Vienna: Navreme. Bortz, J. & Döring, N. (2006). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler. Berlin: Springer. Conole, G. (2008). New Schemas for Mapping Pedagogies and Technologies. July 2008, Ariadne, 56, Accessed January 15, 2013 from: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue56/conole/ Herrington, J., Reeves, T., & Oliver, R. (2005). Online learning as information delivery: Digital myopia. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16(4), pp. 353-367. Jenkins, H., Purushotoma, R., Clinton, K.A., Weigel, M., & Robison, A. J. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. White paper co-written for the MacArthur Foundation. Accessed July 14, 2008 from: http://www.projectnml.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf Kallus, K. W. (2010). Erstellung von Fragebogen. Stuttgart: UTB-Verlag. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Martin, M. (2009). Selbstgesteuertes Lernen mit Neuen Medien in der Fachschulausbildung. In: C. Fenzl, G. Spöttl, F. Howe & M. Becker (Eds.): Berufsarbeit von morgen in gewerblich-technischen Domänen. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann Verlag, pp. 120-126. Wilson, S., Liber, O., Johnson, M., Beauvoir, P., Sharples, P., & Milligan, C. (2006). Personal learning environments challenging the dominant design of educational systems. Paper presented at the ECTEL Workshops, Heraklion, Crete. Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Author Information

Simone Haasler (presenting / submitting)
University of Bremen
Centre for Social Policy Research
Bremen

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.