Some comments on my post from yesterday talking about PLEs and corporate learning. Jay Cross says it was nonsense. He writes, "He knows full well that the reason I question 'Personal' is that I don't want us to forget that learning is co-creation, not solo." So, what, we replace 'personal' with 'work'? How does that follow? Tony Karrer writes, "Stephen's very much correct about a PLE being for the person. It is going to be a challenge for corporations to come to grips with the ownership of the learning if it is captured in a system." Donald Taylor focuses on the appeasment question, asking "Do those involved in corporate learning sometimes simply deliver what they think their pay masters want?"
Andy Roberts captures my intent: "the reason why some people are passionate about genuinely personal PLEs is because of the potential to shift the locus of power and control in favour of the individual, and it's no wonder they get twitchy when it seems like there's a danger of the whole thing getting subsumed back under the wing of the corporate interests and educational institutions." Exactly.
Andy Roberts captures my intent: "the reason why some people are passionate about genuinely personal PLEs is because of the potential to shift the locus of power and control in favour of the individual, and it's no wonder they get twitchy when it seems like there's a danger of the whole thing getting subsumed back under the wing of the corporate interests and educational institutions." Exactly.
Today: 1 Total: 97 [Direct link] [Share]
