What’s the role for institutions in PLEs? The case of SAPO Campus

29 Junho 2010
Sem comentários

Have a look at our proposal for the PLE Conference! It will be Session 10 and we hope to get a nice discussion about the Personal and/or Institutional dilema…

SESSION TYPE: Debate (This house believes)

DURATION: 45/60 minutes

TITLE: "What’s the role for institutions in PLEs? The case of SAPO Campus"

INTRODUCTION: SAPO Campus is an integrated Web 2.0 services platform based on user-generated content production and aggregation for use in Higher Education. Upon an independent and open set of social core services (photo and video sharing, blogs, wiki, social bookmarking) lies a set of aggregation services (rss reader, portfolio, assessment, presence manager) integrated in a widget-based platform that provides a technological framework to build an institutionally supported Personal Learning Environment (PLE).

Within the edTech community some questions have been posed about the underlying concepts of SAPO Campus. From our experience it seems that some people do not accept the possibility of having a Personal space that, at some extent, is built on top of technology provided at an institutional level. We strongly believe that this is possible and, in most scenarios, can be an advantage to both users and the institution.

With SAPO Campus we tried to achieve a compromise and provide a platform with a main core supported by the institution but, at the same time, allow users a very high level of control of their own personal spaces.

With this debate we would like to get into a deeper discussion about the PLE concept and the way HEIs could play an important role in the dissemination of its effective use by providing a set of technologies that, in most ways, must follow different guidelines from common institutional practices.


PHASE 1: To support the motion we would like to start by delivering a 10/15 minute presentation of the core concepts of SAPO Campus:

  • Openness
  • No hierarchies
  • CC by default
  • Institutional integration (Open and Social University)
  • PLE supported by institutional technology
  • Digital id support/concerns
  • Shared PLE (Recommendations,…)
  • Sexiness! (User Experience and Interaction Design)

PHASE 2: People from the audience would be organized in 2 groups to support/oppose the motion. They should align themselves according to their opinion of whether the PLE concept is compatible with technology supported by an institution.

Groups should have a 20 minute time break to organize their arguments according to their position. (Note: During the group discussion we would like to be part of each group discussion in order to be aware and learn from others’ arguments)

PHASE 3: The final debate (15/20 minutes) could/should be conducted by a moderator/judge that could be designated at a more advanced moment in time. At the end it should be possible to draw a diagram where the main arguments from both sides could be clear, understandable and able to be shared with the edTech community.

Are you ready for the discussion? Do you have any suggestion?

Sem comentários