Before responding to the (apparently provocative) question posed by Chris Lott this week, “What does your PLE look like?”, I have one genuine question that precludes defining one’s PLE (playing into the indictment of the concept in what D’Arcy Norman initially showed as his PLE) is what is the utilitarian scope of a PLE? Presumptively we are primarily talking about networked utilities (e-mail, Web) but clearly also just plain digital utilities (computer, files [I think Ray mentioned desktop searching]), now how about the physical realm? My office? My phone? Pens and papers? My bookshelf? My colleague’s office? The library?
I ask this question without facetiousness, because if we’re talking about a holistic look at individuals learning environment, we certainly don’t want to restrict it to Web, and I even think just brainstorming the variety and interconnectedness of utilities and tools in our non-digital learning environment(s) may validly inform our digital ones, and can provide anecdotes through which we can better adapt (ourselves and others) to the online tools.
As far as my PLE, though I outlined a laundry list in your wiki, I’m now trying to think about it more organically. I’m currently toying with conceptualizing my digital PLE through a metaphor of physical space, with interconnected rooms and even “wormholes” that take me in and out of the “real” world. While at first I imagined this as a house with multi-doored, hexagonal rooms and intermediary halls (plus windows one can jump out of and back into the “real world”),
Walter R. Tschinkel’s cast of an ant colony, The nest architecture of the Florida harvester antit might end up being more simply sketched as the architecture of an ant colony. This latter metaphor is probably seems particularly apt to anyone who knows me, as my “train of thought” is more akin to a state of ants scurrying from one point to another as they forage with semi-obscured motivations and objectives, constantly adjusting based on new and immediate information.
My drive-by answer is: why not include everything? As long as we stick to real examples and don’t get too far down the philosophical path (as I tend to do), then it shouldn’t be a problem.
I say this because I’m a big proponent of various physical practices (paper notes and lists, creating marginalia, etc) and real-world activities that feed into the digital realm, such as pieces of the Getting Things Done and Do it Tomorrow productivity systems… time management, organization, etc. all seem like important factors here.
Yes, yes, and I’m finding myself moving forward, pulling back, going more digital, going less digital. It’s all about finding the most valuable resources and most efficient tools and using them.
I agree that it should include everything. Even when Jane Knight asked for my Top 10 tools for learning, I included my trusty artist’s sketch pad, which I use for notes and mindmapping. I don’t think that our learning is confined to being online, although I definitely believe that it adds a dimension that isn’t available to us offline.