PLE

Backcasting and PLE building

At UBC’s annual Educamp session yesterday, I listened to keynote, Duane Elverum talk about sustainability education, and was particularly intrigued by the concept of backcasting – a term I hadn’t heard before but an approach I use often in my own life.

Where forecasting imagines a future based on the way we are currently operating and are likely to operate in the future based on the technologies available to us, backcasting works from the ground up. It recognizes that tools and solutions to problems are never pre-determined, and so starts with a stated vision and then invents/adapts/leverages technology to achieve that goal.

Although the strategy is used often in design, urban planning and resource management, I think it can be highly effective for personal development and learning as well. In the context of thinking about and developing a PLE, here’s how it might work.

  • imagine/envision a future picture of yourself that you like.  What kind of work are you involved in? What are your interests? What qualities/attributes/skills do you have? How are you contributing to a world you want to live in?
  • consider your current situation.  Where are the gaps?  What do you need to do to develop into the person you imagine yourself to be?
  • employ or invent the approaches/technologies/learning resources to support the path to that vision.

For me, the process of decision making, thoughtful planning and conscious reflection are central components in the making of my own personal learning environment.

As Duane points out, students “see the things they are learning as disconnected from the increasingly urgent and dire warnings they hear and talk about everyday.”  At some point, those of us who have the potential to help learners grow into their responsibilities as citizens in an increasingly complex world, need to be stepping up as guides and facilitators in this process.

Learners and PLE’s

I’ve been reflecting on a panel I facilitated last week at the 2009 Canadian eLearning Conference.  Three UBC learners (Andre, Angeli and Zack) talked about their concepts of PLE – what they think is important and what they think about the relationship between learning, university and their own personal goals and explorations.

Here are some of the themes that they touched on:

  • students are inherently practical and grades are key motivators for action.  We’ve structured the education system this way, it’s not their fault.
  • PLEs will primarily include tools and approaches that support getting better grades. Tools like Quizlet, Facebook for study groups, google docs and wikis for shared work, blogs for personal reflection, IM and (sometimes) Twitter for networking with peers, etc. Not much room/time  for creative explorations with online tools, resources and social spaces unless it is part of a degree requirement.
  • disconnect between personal learning goals, choice of tools and selection of approaches. Learning goals are set by the instructor and those are the ones that students pay attention to. Connection with the personal and reflection on learning process happens with support – usually in the context of a “work” project or an instructor’s approach to teaching.
  • personal learning environments are not synonymous with technology – books, creative materials, etc. are just as important as part of a person’s personal learning environment.

So, how do we meaningfully support the learners in the activities that surround the  development of their personal learning environments:  reflection, identification of their own learning goals, consideration of the “fit” between their goals and twhat is required for their chosen field of study?  Educational reform, one interaction at a time? Lots to consider here…

Here are the slides (on Slideshare) that provided some context to our panel discussion: