Design of Personal Learning Environment Framework for Learner Autonomy

Abstract— Personal Learning Environment (PLE) takes the
advantages of the evolution of Web 2.0 technology. PLE aims to
create a learning environment where each learner is in control of his
or her own learning goal(s), activity(s) and experience. PLE promotes
self-regulation and learning autonomy in a learner, eventually
promoting lifelong learning that crosses the boundary of higher
education institution. PLE can be viewed as a complement or an
extension to the existing Learning Management System (LMS). LMS
has its limitation in supporting learners’ diverse learning needs. In
this paper, we proposed a framework for PLE to encourage learner
autonomy. The framework is then applied on “Studious Network”
which act as the platform for learners to explore the Web 2.0
applications in the learning process and to exercise learner autonomy
in an informal learning environment. The findings show that users of
Studious Network generally have positive user experience in using
the system.
Keywords—Learner Autonomy, Personal Learning Environment
(PLE), self-regulation, Informal Learning.
I. INTRODUCTION
EARNING environment plays a crucial role in creating
learning experiences which encourage students’ autonomy
and stimulate self-determined learning that prepares them for
lifelong learning. This place and space, the context in which
learning occurs, in today’s interconnected and technology-
driven world can be physical or virtually online.
Learning management system (LMS) has been widely
practiced in managing teaching and learning process in higher
educational institution. Practically, LMS is more of a
coursework focus and supports management of teaching more
than the learning itself [1], [2]. An educator controls the
content or flow of coursework in LMS and in a way hoping to
control the learner’s learning process. The effectiveness of
learning (both formal and informal) in LMS is not guaranteed
as different individual requires different set of learning needs.
LMS cannot provide an effective learning environment that
accommodates the diverse needs in different learners to
enhance their learning process [3]. Furthermore, the following
problems/limitations in learning are obvious within LMS in
higher education that hinders the individual learning process:
Salimah. Mokhtar is with the Department of Information System, Faculty
of Computer Science & Information Technology, University of Malaya,
50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (e-mail: salimah@um.edu.my).
Shen Huoy. Lim is co-researcher for this project. (e-mail:
limshenhuoy@siswa.um.edu.my).
i. Unidirectional knowledge creation – the content of
LMS is usually created by the educators and learners
have no ability to create their own knowledge in the
system [2].
ii. Limited communication - although most LMS
incorporates discussion board/forum facility for both
educators and learners to discuss relevant topics but in
reality, not many have been utilizing such facility due
to lack of motivation and participation [2],[4].
Communication normally only occurs during physical
lectures and seldom expand outside of them.
iii. Lack of collaboration - learners have no flexibility to
collaborate with each other to create knowledge in
LMS due to its closed and centralized design [1]. As
collaboration learning is one of the effective ways of
learning, the ability to collaborate within a learning
system is essential.
iv. Learning ends with semester - most learners use LMS
for the purpose to get educators’ teaching materials and
to see due date of assignments. Once the semester ends,
learning eventually ends as such system will not be
frequented anymore. Mainly due to lack of update from
the educators and learners feel there is no need to fulfill
the institutional requirement to do so [1].
In order to remedy the limitations of the LMS, a new
educational concept called Personal Learning Environment
(PLE) has been actively researched to be extended from the
institutional learning environment [5], [6], [7], [8], [4], [9].
PLE provides the essential quality for both educators and
learners to be able to communicate, collaborate, create and
search for knowledge and connect with one another where this
relationship may not end as the semester ends.
This paper presents the design and evaluation of “Studious
Network”, a prototype of PLE for learners to explore the Web
2.0 applications in the learning process and to exercise learner
autonomy in an informal learning environment.
II.LITERATURE REVIEW
A.The Evolution of Web 2.0 and e-Learning 2.0
Social computing represents a collection of web
applications or technologies which we usually refer as Web
2.0 or social software. Web 2.0 is a term made popular by Tim
O’Reilly since 2004 [10], is defined to be the platform for the
web, where people’s participation and collaboration will
harness collective intelligence through the driving force of
data. Web 2.0 promotes the wisdom of crowds through rich
user experience where dynamic websites replace static ones
Design of Personal Learning Environment
Framework for Learner Autonomy
Salimah. Mokhtar, and Lim. Shen Huoy
L
4th International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology (ICCSIT'2013) Oct. 6-7, 2013 Dubai (UAE)
10

and syndication technology keeps people together. E-learning
has evolved with Web 2.0 and has become E-learning 2.0 that
utilizes the advantages of Web 2.0 applications in education
[11]. Web 2.0 or social software can be categorized into four
conceptual groups according to their usage in this Web era
[12]. Table I shows the four categories of Web 2.0
applications with examples given for each groups chosen
particularly for their potential usage in the higher education
environment.
TABLE I
CATEGORIES OF WEB 2.0 APPLICATIONS
Category Description
Types of Application:
Examples
Collaboration
Applications that
allow collaborative
authoring content by
multiple parties
Wikis: Wikipedia
Communication
Applications that
allow synchronous or
asynchronous
interaction between
multiple parties
Email: Gmail
Instant Messaging: MSN
Live, Yahoo Messenger
Peer-to-peer: Skype
Relationship
management
Applications that
allow identity and
relationship
management via
social network
Social network:
Facebook, LinkedIn
Social citation: Mendeley
Information
Applications that
allow collection or
publishing or sharing
of information and
facilitating feedback
input
Blog: Blogger,
Wordpress
RSS Reader: Google
Reader
Microblog: Twitter, Plurk
Media Sharing: Flickr,
YouTube
Social Bookmarking:
Del.ici.ous
B.Different Types of Learning Environments in Higher
Education
Figure 1 shows the different forms of e-learning in higher
education ranging from no use of e-learning to e-learning 1.0
(i.e. use of LMS and web-based learning) to e-learning 2.0
(i.e. the use of Web 2.0 in teaching and learning).
Fig.1 Different forms of e-learning (adapted from [13] with
modification)
Face-to-face learning is categorized as no e-learning
because most physical classroom learning does not require
computer mediated technology to facilitate the learning
process. Moving forward to e-learning 1.0, blending learning
includes classroom aids such as projector to the use of
computer labs and laptops in classroom. Crossover between
blended learning and distributed learning is mixed mode
learning where there may be less face-to-face but more e-
learning use in the course. As e-learning technology becomes
more available, distance education provides more flexibilities
to learners in the learning process with the use of technology.
Distance education plays a role in personal learning where
learners generally have more control over when, where and
how to learn. Ultimately, e-learning 2.0 facilitates self-
regulated learning with the use of Web 2.0 technology in the
learning process.
C.Personal Learning Environment& Learning Theory
PLE is introduced due to the disadvantages of LMS learning
model which may not be sufficient to accommodate learners’
needs today that are more socially and connectedly
demanding. The idea for PLE was built upon the visualization
of [14]’s “The VLE of the future”, who believes that the VLE
should not be institutional but personal to support both formal
and informal learning needs of a learner today. The objective
of PLE is to give learners autonomy in learning, where
learners are free to choose the learning methods and tools
based on their preference in constructing new knowledge,
hence taking control of their own learning process, adapting
more of the learning theory of humanism [15],[16]. The theory
of humanism stress on learning is student centered and
personalized. Holistic perspective combines experience,
perception, cognition and behavior.
D.Fostering Learner Autonomy Through PLE
Autonomy is broadly defined as taking control of one’s own
learning and it is a combination of direct and indirect
observable behaviors during the learning process (Benson,
2007). Being autonomous requires the learners’ ability to
become self regulated and their attitude in taking
responsibility for their own learning, hence the more
responsible the learners in taking charge of their learning, the
higher their motivation in learning [17]. Self regulated
learning prepares learners to make educational decision with
their need and self-understanding in mind for them to take
charge of their own learning experience [18], [3].
III. METHODOLOGY
This research adopt the Design Science Research for
Information System (DSRIS) methodology. The goal of
design science research is to develop an effective learning
environment which is used as authentic setting for studying
how learning and teaching are effectively achieved and further
refined in the real-world environment [19]. Design science
research [20], follows five simple phases that are usually in
iterations. The phases are i. awareness of problem, ii.
suggestion, iii. development, iv. evaluation and v. conclusion.
IV. PLE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR LEARNER
AUTONOMY
This framework is designed in phase three of the design
No e-learning E-learning 2.0
Face-to-face
learning
Classroom
aids
Computer
labs/laptop
Mixed mode (less face-
to-face, more e-learning)
Distance
education
Self-regulated learning
Blended learning
Distributed learning
Personal learning
E-learning 1.0
11

research. In order to encourage learner autonomy through the
use of Web 2.0 technology in PLE, the relationships between
the learning environments, the learners’ learning process,
learning tools available, and the need for control of the
learning process in the higher education are discussed. Figure
2 shows how these are related in the PLE conceptual
framework that encourages learner autonomy. Those
highlighted in grey are the focus of this research.
Fig. 2 PLE Conceptual Framework to encourage learner autonomy
Learner’s role becomes both producer and consumer of
knowledge. Being autonomous empowered the learners to set
their own learning goals and be accountable to achieve them.
Better learning experience is achieved when learners are
personally motivated in the learning process where they can
choose what and how they prefer to learn. Learners generally
perform these activities in the learning process: browse,
collect, network, create, share, and communicate, regardless of
learning environments. Many researchers [21], [22], [23],
[24] believe that scaffolding is an effective teaching and
learning method to promote self-regulated learning and
ultimately to cultivate learner autonomy especially in today’s
technology mediated learning environments. Scaffolding may
come from peers and experts in the community of practice in
the forms of social support and peer support or from the
educator in the form of task support depending on the needs of
the learners in the different learning environments.
V.ADOPTION OF FRAMEWORK FOR STUDIOUS
NETWORK
Studious Network is designed to encourage learner
autonomy while providing scaffolding in term of reading
suggestion, discussion platform, and resources center, which
are maintained by a facilitator in Studious Network. Studious
Network is divided into 3 major functions: i. Reading enables
users to browse articles (or information or knowledge) and
eventually collect them for references. These aggregations of
articles serve as reading suggestion to help users to kick-start
their learning process. ii. Discussion enable users to leave
comment(s) on article(s), ask and/or reply question(s), and
making connections with other users (network). Discussion
(communication) can be done outside of Studious Network
through Twitter and these discussions can be aggregated and
presented in Studious Network for more users to see. iii.
Sharing enable users to create and share any information or
knowledge found during their learning process to more users.
Sharing of useful resources such as new articles that help in
the learning process is beneficial to many users. Reflection or
experience sharing by creating or writing articles is helpful
too. These sharing contribute new knowledge for Reading for
others to browse and collect. A snapshot of Studious Network
is shown in Figure 3.
Fig. 3 Screen shot of Studious Network
VI. EVALUATION OF STUDIOUS NETWORK
In the evaluation phase, a usability study is conducted to
evaluate the usefulness, satisfaction, and ease of use of the
implemented prototype called Studious Network, a personal
learning environment that encourages learner autonomy.
Usability study in the form of summative evaluation is
important to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the
implemented design. A self reported metric called Usefulness,
Satisfaction, and Ease of use (USE) questionnaire is used to
collect users’ feedback according to the criteria: usefulness,
ease of use, ease of learning, satisfaction, and learner
autonomy. Overall, the findings show that users of Studious
Network generally have positive user experience in using the
system.
12

VII. CONCLUSION
The success of PLE implementation is highly depended on
learners’ competency and skillfulness in using Web 2.0
technology, their preferences in the learning process, and their
ability to become autonomous. Hence, before a design of PLE
is proposed, gathering data on learners’ competency and skill
level in using Web 2.0 applications and their learning
preferences in the learning process is both essential and
informative. Analysis on what majority learners prefer in
learning ensures the design of proposed PLE is acceptable to
most learners. The findings have shown useful information
about the relationship between what the learners are capable of
and what the learners choose to use. It is found most learners
still choose the traditional way of learning instead of
embracing new technology despite their self assessment to be
competent and skillful in using Web 2.0 applications. One of
the possible reasons for such findings is that both learners and
educators are hesitant to explore new techniques in the
teaching and learning process due to lack of awareness of such
technology that can be used. Another possible reason is
learners are less confident in using technology in the learning
system where assessment using this technology is still
undefined. Scaffolding from the educator is found to be still
essential to most learners in the learning process where most
learners prefer to have clear learning instruction from the
educator to achieve the learning goals.
The proposed design incorporates tools such as email,
blogging, microblogging, social comment, and RSS based on
the findings and analysis done. The main purpose for Studious
Network is to provide reading suggestion, facilitate
communication, and a place for knowledge sharing among its
users. It is designed to allow its users to browse, network,
collect, create, communicate, and share information or
knowledge in the learning process among peers or experts in
the community of practice.
The idea of PLE and learner autonomy is still new to many
learners and it is expected to take some time before the idea is
fully adopted and practiced among learners. The implemented
prototype is the initial step to introduce the idea and benefits
for practicing PLE in the learning process. Although the
implemented PLE is practiced in the context of informal
learning, the idea of similar approach can be extended into
formal learning which is not focused in this research. More
iterations for improvement is required before the design and
development of PLE to encourage learner autonomy can yield
its ultimate purpose of improving learning experience and
promoting lifelong learning among the learners. It is of utmost
importance that the success of PLE depends highly on
learners’ adoption and willingness to actively participate
socially using various Web 2.0 applications. Educator plays an
important role as facilitator and motivator, who promotes the
use of Web 2.0 applications and provides essential scaffolding
to the learners in the learning process.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The research if funded by Flagship research project (FL013-
2012) under ICT and Computational Science Research
Cluster, University of Malaya.
REFERENCES
[1] Chatti, M. A., Agustiawan, M. R., Jarke, M., & Specht, M. (2010).
Toward a Personal Learning Environment Framework. International
Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1(4), 66-85.
[2] Martindale, T., & Dowdy, M. (2010). Personal Learning Environments.
G. Veletsianos (Ed.), Using emerging technologies in distance education
(Vol. 16, pp. 177-193).
[3] McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2010). Personalised and self regulated
learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative
pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 26(1), 28-43.
[4] Wilson, S., Liber, O., Johnson, M., Beauvoir, P., Sharples, P., &
Milligan, C. (2007). Personal Learning Environments: Challenging the
dominant design of educational systems. Journal of e-Learning and
Knowledge Society, 2(3).
[5] Drexler, W. (2010). The networked student model for construction of
personal learning environments: Balancing teacher control and student
autonomy. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(3), 369-
385.
[6] Johnson, M., & Liber, O. (2008). The Personal Learning Environment
and the human condition: from theory to teaching practice. Interactive
Learning Environments, 16(1), 3-15.
[7] Milligan, C., Beauvoir, P., Johnson, M., Sharples, P., Wilson, S., &
Liber, O. (2006). Developing a reference model to describe the personal
learning environment. Innovative Approaches for Learning and
Knowledge Sharing, 506–511. Springer.
[8] Schaffert, S., & Hilzensauer, W. (2008). On the way towards Personal
Learning Environments: Seven crucial aspects. Elearning papers,
9(July), 1–10.
[9] van Harmelen, M. (2006). Personal Learning Environments. Sixth IEEE
International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies
(ICALT’06) (pp. 815-816).
[10] O’Reilly, T. (2005). What’s Web 2.0? Retrieved from March 29, 2012,
from http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html.
[11] Downes, S. (2005). E-Learning 2.0. eLearn Magazine. Retrieved from
http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articles&article=29-1.
[12] Amberg, M., Reinhardt, M., Haushahn, M., & Hofmann, P. (2009).
Designing an Integrated Web-based Personal Learning Environment
based on the Crucial Success Factors of Social Networks. Research,
Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education, 1, 1075–
1080.
[13] Bates, T. (2011). Understanding Web 2.0 and its Implications for E-
Learning. Web 2.0-Based E-Learning: Applying Social Informatics for
Tertiary Teaching (Vol. 1, pp. 21-42).
[14] Wilson, S. (2005). Future VLE - The Visual Version. Retrieved from
http://zope.cetis.ac.uk/members/scott/blogview?entry=20050125170206.
[15] Huitt, W. (2009). Humanism and Open Education. Educational
Psychology Interactive. Retrieved from
http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/affect/humed.html
[16] Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., Mainemelis, C., (2001) 'Experiential
Learning Theory: Previous Research and New Directions', in R. J.
Sternberg and L. F. Zhang (eds) Perspectives on Thinking, Learning,
and Cognitive Styles, pp. 227-247. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[17] Lin, S., & Overbaugh, R. C. (2011). Autonomy of participation and ICT
literacy in a self-directed learning environment (SDLE). Quality &
Quantity, 1-13. Springer Netherlands. doi:10.1007/s11135-011-9505-2.
[18] Aviram, A., Ronen, Y., Somekh, S., Winer, A., & Sarid, A. (2008). Self-
regulated personalised learning (SRPL): Developing iClass’s
pedagogical model. eLearning Papers, 9. eLearning papers, (9), 1-17.
[19] Sandoval, W. A., & Bell, P. (2004). Design-based research methods for
studying learning in context: Introduction. Educational Psychologist,
39(4), 199–201. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3904_1.
[20] Vaishnavi, V., & Kuechler, W. (2007). Design science research methods
and patterns: innovating information and communication technology.
Order A Journal On The Theory Of Ordered Sets And Its Applications.
Auerbach Pub.
[21] Dabbagh, N. (2003). Scaffolding: An important teacher competency in
online learning. TechTrends, 47(2), 39-44. Springer Boston.
13

[22] Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2005). Using Web-based Pedagogical
Tools as Scaffolds for Self-regulated Learning. Instructional Science,
33(5-6), 513-540. Springer Netherlands.
[23] McLoughlin, C. (2002). Learner support in distance and networked
learning environments: Ten dimensions for successful design. Distance
Education, 23(2), 149-162.
[24] Sharma, P., & Hannafin, M. (2005). Learner perceptions of scaffolding
in supporting critical thinking. Journal of Computing in Higher
Education, 17(1), 17-42. Springer Boston.
Salimah Mokhtar is an Associate Professor in the Department of
Information System at Faculty of Computer Science & Information
Technology, University of Malaya in Malaysia. Her research interests are in
the area of Information System for education, blended learning, IS planning,
social networking and most recent interest centers on fostering spirituality in
tertiary learning.
Lim Shen Huoy obtained her Master of Computer Science degree from
University of Malaya. Her research interests include e-learning, social
networking and crowdsourcing.
14

Design of Personal Learning Environment Framework for Learner Autonomy

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (13)

Semelhante a Design of Personal Learning Environment Framework for Learner Autonomy

Semelhante a Design of Personal Learning Environment Framework for Learner Autonomy (20)

Último

Último (20)

Design of Personal Learning Environment Framework for Learner Autonomy