1 / 14

Report out from Personal Learning and Research Environments

Report out from Personal Learning and Research Environments.

maite-haney
Download Presentation

Report out from Personal Learning and Research Environments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Report out from Personal Learning and Research Environments Oleg Liber, Sharon Perry, Phil Beauvoir, John Swannie, Tom Franklin, Sarah Davies, Dan Corlett, Hugh Davies, Sandy Patrick Carmichael, Sandy Leaton-Gray, Michael Sellway, Rob Crouchley, Rob Allan, Adrian Fish, Christina Smart, Maia Dimitrova, Marcello Allegri, Charles Severance, Wilbert Kraan

  2. Presentations VRE/VLE/IE • Colloquia • Interactive Log • Teaching and Learning Portal • TLRP - Teaching and Learning Research Program • AERS • ReDRESS - Resource Discover for Researchers in e-Social Science • VRE Sakai Demonstrator • GROWL - Grid Resources of Workstation Library • VRE: Integrated Biology Demonstration • CQeSS - Collaboratory for Quanatative e-Social Science

  3. VRE Customers VRE “Experts” Problem: Many “personal” environments IE Customers IE “Experts” Collaborative VLE/VRE/IE Requirements Each expert group is often influenced by a different field of research: VLE’s are influenced by Educational Technology experts, VRE’s are often influenced by Computer Scientists, while IE’s are influenced by Library Sciences. When we treat Virtual Learning, Virtual Research, and Information Environments as different, we end up developing divergent environments which satisfy similar requirements in very different ways based on the experts who are funded to produce the VRE, VLE, or IE solutions. VLE “Experts” VLE Customers

  4. End users are people too… Customers Customers VRE “Experts” IE “Experts” Collaborative VLE/VRE Requirements As painful as it may be, the VRE, VLE, and IE experts must begin to coordinate so that some point in the future, users don’t have environments with completely different approaches to the same problem. VLE “Experts” Customers

  5. Why have a “Personal” in personal Learning/Research Environment • Move from a provider or institution focused set of capabilities to an environment where users “assemble” their environment to suit their needs. • System that maps to how I think and operate so that things are made easier for me. How do I bend this tool to suit the way that I work? Especially as my skills as a user improve. • Move bits around arrange the way you like. This is both things like my own folder arrangements and things like accessibility (i.e. how I want to “see” these things)

  6. Requirements appear to be different…

  7. Similarity and Differences • Traditionally, there are some differences • Locus of control • Existing versus emerging information • Fixed versus fluid agenda • Different tools in use VRE Physics Visualization Grid Computing Teaching Learning VRE Chemistry Repository IE Social Science QTI Scorm Attendance Annotation Chat Discussion Resources Shared Data

  8. Personal Learning/Research Environment VRE Visualization Computing VLE VRE Chat Annotation QTI Scorm IE Shared Data Why not apply it all to learning and integrate it together? The Personal Learning/Research Environment (PLRE) effectively adds a “productivity” layer to the VLE/VRE/IE space which unifies the look/feel/usability across the multiple sources of information

  9. Today’s PLRE is a Compromise • Web browser with lots of bookmarks to many sites - each quite different • Computer desktop with files, folders • E-Mail client • Calendar client • … All quite different - user figures tools out as best they can and to the extent they can

  10. Someday the PLRE will not be a browser Better user experience Increased productivity More complex to build Difficult to keep up with changing technology a. pure html web page b. web page based, but with browser enhancements c. browser extension d. dedicated desktop network client e. extensible desktop application platform f. common desktop application

  11. Promising Trends • Standards based portals - JSR-168, etc. • API standardisation • Basic look and feel standardisation - CSS • Federating portals - WSRP • User control over assembly of many sources • Ability to write portable full-featured tools • Java • Eclipse • Flash MX

  12. High Level Recommendations • Continue to invest in VLE/VRE/IE efforts, accepting the fact that for the moment they will not converge immediately • Continue to invest in portals and WSRP activities to explore federation within current presentation technologies • Invest in research into new technologies to federate information sources beyond the browser. • Act to maintain communication between the VLE/VRE/IE and PLRE efforts so that common solutions can be shared and evolved over time.

  13. More Recommendations • Investigate techniques for the learner/researcher to “own” their information over their lifetime and “share” it with institutions and groups at the appropriate time. • Encourage projects which support flexible roles and structures (i.e. not just instructor can write and students can read or anyone can create groups) • Investigate techniques where PLRE’s can operate in both connected and disconnected modes

  14. Thank you for your time…

More Related