This is not to say technology can not be used to teach. I am very wedded to my own interest in Racing Academy (www.lateralvisions.co.uk/racingacademy/index.htm)- which does offer teaching in physics in that it does offer guidance, progression in a way determined by a teacher. However I would not begin to assume that the model we developed in RA can be transposed to the study of literary criticism ( I am quite keen on building Joyce’s Ulysses mlearning game in Dublin).

Also, this is not to say that we can not be scientific in what we do. Over the years I have run courses on using technology in learning, Jim Hartley’s Designing Instructional Text has been my consistent recommended read. A clear account of how to be mindful when writing and laying out words for learners based on empirical findings. If we must have learning design than this is the kind of guidance we need. In the past week I have received a series of power point slides from people who are pronouncing upon efficacy in learning technology who do not understand the first thing about legibility, readability and conveying meaning to others. It matters little that you do this embedded in some system that counts the number of times I open the file etc and makes sure that that info is transposed to my personal and assessment portfolios. Learning design first and foremost should be about communication and not systemization.

I hope you don’t take this as a criticism, because it sure isn’t. I can understand the kind of circumstances that can lead to these typos, but won’t it increase resistance to already hard to accept concepts and perspectives in many contexts?

Well, I’ll use it anyway, because it has some very insightful ideas and I’ve never been a fan of too much instructional design .

anyway… Language sometimes gets in the way. You see, where I physically come from (Portugal) people don’t refer to blackboard or any other of these course management systems as learning environments – they called them platforms… for learning (‘you-shall-learn-if you-go-there kind of a thing’). We never consider it as an environment – not in the way it’s been designated, maybe because a tool per se cannot grant the environment. It’s the interactions amongst people that enhance a given space and give it an atmosphere that will set the right mood (environment) for them (be it online or f2f)

Curiously enough …today I was looking at a picture I took to a classroom blackboard (yes, they still exist!!) and how it resembles the blackboard we have online…
In my school years the Blackboard belonged to the teacher. It was where he/she wrote things for us to copy down, and which we were demanded to stare at (they called it: to pay attention to). Sometimes we had the “privilege” to use it, but only when the teacher said so. These Contrived Management Systems (CMS ) are quite similar, n’est pas? Just one more replication of school days reality.

Now, I have never really considered these CMS as VLEs. They are now called this because someone has realized everyone is trying to have a social-constructivist approach and they thought that by giving it a posh name it would make the trick. Well, they guessed it wrongly. Nothing changed …really – you still get a blackboard, with a lot teacher structure. Sometimes one more generous soul remembers to activate the discussion board so students can have a saying, but they are secure because they know they can control that too. {i find it so funny when people say it’s a secure/safe environment ….but that’s another story)

So the way I see it – a (V)LE is a space where people come together with the purpose of congregating, communicating, sharing, collaborating…. and where learning happens as one of the results of that inter-exchange. While they do so, they set the scene, develop the atmosphere which will transform the space into an environment where they feel compelled to learn, and most frequently come back to not because they have to but because they want to. The V just means it’s online. It’s not that a big deal anymore…or at least it shouldn’t.
The PLE is directly related with the individual. It’s a bit more ego-centric if you like. It combines the environments where we learn with others with the space where we reflect and create artifacts that represent our learning enterprise. It doesn’t have to be necessarily or exclusively online.

As for personal empowerment, I do think the web has been making a huge difference…for those who have embraced it. For all the others, it’s a world apart. What we need is more real plug and play tools – they still offer a lot of glitches – and more collaboration between the end users and the techies (those who actually listen to).
I could go on and on, but my comment is already longer than your post… :-S