PLNs and PLEs
Ok, I'm going to bite the bullet and dive into a topic that I have been wrestling with since the beginning of this course. I would like to propose that we abandon the idea of Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) and Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) as things worth talking about and here is why:
My first reason is that the world already has enough ambiguous acronyms that mean different things to different people.
According to Google, a PLN can refer to a Personal Learning Network (usually for educators), Phospholamban (protein found in humans), the currency code for Polish Zloty, and Perusahaan Listrik Negara (an Indonesian government-owned corporation).
Wikipedia notes that PLE can refer to Personal Learning Environment, photoluminescence excitation, Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad, polymorphous light eruption (a skin condition caused by sunlight), Public legal education, Product Line Engineering (also known as product family engineering), International Air Transport Association airport code for Paiela, Papua New Guinea, International Olympic Committee country code for the State of Palestine or the International Federation of Association Football country code for the State of Palestine.
The second reason that I would like us to abandon this as a topic is because of my interpretation of connectivism. I think that we (as a society in general) have gone so far into the connectivism model that to have someone list or outline where they seek outside information from, or where they contribute to collective knowledge is rather an excercise in futility.
I believe this to be so because reliability, knowledge, sources, conversations, platforms, services, options etc... change rapidly. The purpose of Facebook has changed dramatically in just the past 10 years. How businesses advertise their products has been revolutionized since social media campaigns began. All of these changes, happening so rapidly, have made it so that the places I have conversations about teaching and learning are not important. When someone talks to me about a PLN or PLE, I envision that they are looking for "my list". Listing or creating a visual of all the different tools, software, sites and apps that I use might be meaningful right now (though I'm not sure it would be) but will it be meaningful next week, or next month, or five years from now? Being on Twitter doesn't mean that I am a more connected teacher than a colleague who isn't.
Here is where I believe the value lies: connecting with other educators.
It is important is that conversations about instruction, pedagogy, curriculum, etc... are happening. They may happen in a digital space like Twitter or face-to-face but what is important is that the conversations are happening.
It is important that teachers collaborate by co-creating criteria, building rich learning experiences together, assessing student work, and creatively solving school issues. Collaboration may happen in a digital space like Padlet or face-to-face but what is important is that collaboration is happening.
So I guess that what I am trying to say here (and let's be honest, it hasn't been very eloquent) is that discussing PLNs and PLEs like they are a list or a web of things that teachers need to do to be connected to teaching is limiting the potential for conversations to occur about real shifts to the fabric of education as we know it. Teaching has often been a very isolating profession - closed doors, secrecy, do-it-yourself attitutes have been prevalent. Sitting at your desk checking Twitter is not going to change that, however going next door and talking to a colleague about the art of teaching just might.
I believe that technology and the ways in which we use technology to gain and contribute knowledge are important, personal and depend very heavily on what kind of knowledge is being sought out. However, I believe that encouraging conversations and collaboration between teachers who work together is more powerful, more positive and quite frankly, more important.