Responsive Open Learning Environment in a Higher Education Institution

2019 ◽  
pp. 237-255
Author(s):  
Aysegul Liman Kaban ◽  
Tufan Adiguzel ◽  
Müge Nur Özaydın
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Lifelong Learning ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Learning Management Systems ◽  
Education Institution ◽  
Open Learning ◽  
Personal Learning ◽  
Personal Learning Environments ◽  
Open Learning Environment

We have started to hear more and more about responsive open learning environments (ROLEs). They are the next generation of personal learning environments (PLEs). PLEs are based on the basic aggregation of existing content and services mainly using Web 2.0 technologies. ROLEs are mutating lifelong learning by introducing a new infrastructure to a world while dealing with existing learning management systems, institutions, and technologies, and these systems have test-beds. In this chapter, the authors describe first experiences utilizing ROLEs at Istanbul Technical University in Istanbul. The results of the study showed the readiness of the technology for large-scale trials and the benefits for the students leading to new insights in the design of ROLEs for more informal learning situations.

Applying E-Portfolio Evaluation Criteria to the Blackboard LMS E-Portfolio

2015 ◽  
pp. 157-185
Author(s):  
Gary F. McKenna ◽  
Gavin J. Baxter ◽  
Thomas Hainey
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Education Institution ◽  
Portfolio Evaluation ◽  
Personal Learning ◽  
Need To Evaluate ◽  
E Learning ◽  
Uk Higher Education ◽  
Intended Effect

An important part of educational effective practice is performing evaluations to optimise learning. Applying evaluation criteria to virtual and personal learning environments enables educators to assess whether the technologies used are producing the intended effect. As online educational technologies become more sophisticated so does the need to evaluate them. This chapter suggests that traditional educational evaluation frameworks for evaluating e-Learning are insufficient for application to LMS e-portfolios. To address this problem we have developed evaluation criteria designed to assess the usability of LMS e-portfolios used within higher education. One of the main problems with evaluating the usability of LMS e-portfolio is that there is a distinct lack of empirical evidence of evaluation criteria designed and developed for evaluating e-portfolios. This chapter describes the results of applying newly developed LMS e-portfolio evaluation criteria within one UK higher education institution.

Personal Knowledge Integrators

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 59-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. White
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Design Science ◽  
File Systems ◽  
Learning Management Systems ◽  
Personal Knowledge ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Personal Learning ◽  
Sources And Sinks ◽  
Exchange Information ◽  
Personal Learning Environments

This paper discusses, in the context of personal learning environments, the need for Personal Knowledge Integrators – PKI’s or Knowers. It first illustrates and establishes the need for Knowers with usage scenarios and people’s requirements. It then describes the elements required to make a Knower which can exchange information with other Knowers, regardless of different platforms or technologies. Knowers will provide a person with a knowledge hub synchronising with learning management systems, personal learning environments, file systems and other sources and sinks of information. A design science approach is described with iterative cycles of design and prototyping.

Trajectory of an Institutional PLE in Higher Education Based on an e-Portfolios System

2015 ◽  
pp. 132-156
Author(s):  
Jesús Salinas ◽  
Victoria I. Marín
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Virtual Learning Environment ◽  
Balearic Islands ◽  
Good Tool ◽  
Personal Learning ◽  
Personal Learning Environments ◽  
Student Questionnaire ◽  
Academic Information ◽  
The University

This paper presents a study during four academic years (from 2010/11 to 2013/14) on the potential for offering students elements to construct their own personal learning environments, by integrating an institutional virtual learning environment and an e-portfolios system. The study was conducted in the University of the Balearic Islands (Spain) and a total of 232 students enrolled to a graduate compulsory course of the fourth year of the studies of Pedagogy took part in the study. The course was performed using the project-based method, and the study was carried out by phases. The collection of data was done through observation and monitoring the e-portfolio activity, a student questionnaire and the observation of student output. These data showed that this kind of environment is used almost exclusively for academic purposes. Some conclusions are that e-portfolio is a good tool for the organization of academic information and that it is useful for collaborating and working in groups.

The Centralisation Dilemma in Educational IT

2012 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Weller
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Learning Environment ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Virtual Learning Environments ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Reliability Data ◽  
Personal Learning ◽  
Personal Learning Environments ◽  
Range Of Functions ◽  
Technical Issues

The trend with organisational adoption of virtual learning environments (VLE) seems to be cyclical. Initially, a decentralised approach was adopted, wherein each department implemented different learning environments or mixtures of technology, often developed in-house. The last five years have seen an increased centralisation of learning environment implementation, with most universities adopting a single VLE. However, in more recent times the proliferation of free, easy-to-use third party tools that fulfil a range of functions has seen a desire amongst some educators to return to a more decentralised model of technology provision, by supporting Personal Learning Environments (PLE). This paper examines the issues surrounding both a centralised and decentralised model. These include pedagogic, support, financial, reliability, data and technical issues. The conclusion is that although the fully individualised PLE may not be possible or desirable in higher education, maintaining separate, often inferior versions of commonly available software is not a sustainable position.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document