Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From Formal to Informal Learning: Scenario, Conditioning Elements and Evolutionary Steps

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Characterisation of a Personal Learning Environment as a Lifelong Learning Tool

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Education ((BRIEFSEDUCAT))

Abstract

This chapter illustrates the current shift from formal to informal learning. The first section of the chapter provides an introduction to LLL, describing definitions and main policies in Europe, as first horizon in an international vision, with the aim of grounding the development of this research on updated official reports and on the orientation of macro-measures, to focus subsequently on a possible innovative learning format for adult lifelong learners.

The following outline of lifelong learners’ characteristics, needs analysis, and expectations allow to profile the target learners of this study.

The third and final section of the chapter develops an extensive analysis of the theoretical background of personalisation of LLL: implications and challenges of the concept of PLE are discussed, as well as adaptive mechanisms and Social Semantic Web as tools for implicit and explicit personalisation of learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Guidance as referring to a continuous process that enables citizens at any age and at any point in their lives to identify their capacities, competences and interests, to make educational, training and occupational decisions and to manage their individual life paths in learning, work and other settings in which those capacities and competences are learned and/or used. Guidance covers a range of individual and collective activities relating to information-giving, counselling, competence assessment, support and the teaching of decision-making and career management skills (CEDEFOP, 2011, p. 18). The Council of the EU adopted two guidance resolutions on strengthening policies, systems and practices in guidance throughout life in Europe (Council of the European Union, 2004) and on better integrating lifelong guidance into LLL strategies (Council of the European Union, 2008). Also the FEDORA (2007) highlights the value of guidance provision and seeks the support of all stakeholders. FEDORA (http://www.fedora.eu.org) is a European Association whose members work as guidance practitioners in a variety of roles in higher education institutions.

  2. 2.

    The Bologna process (started in 1999) establishes the framework for cooperation with 46 countries to create an EHEA that ensures more comparable, compatible and coherent systems of higher education in Europe.

  3. 3.

    The Reference Framework sets out eight key competences (1) Communication in the mother tongue; (2) Communication in foreign languages; (3) Mathematical competence and basic competences in science and technology; (4) Digital competence; (5) Learning to learn; (6) Social and civic competences; (7) Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship and (8) Cultural awareness and expression. The eight key competences are defined as a combination of knowledge, skills and attitudes appropriate to the context, and they contain several themes such as critical thinking, creativity, initiative, problem solving, risk assessment, decision taking and constructive management of feelings.

  4. 4.

    Individualised learning was developed in the 1970s as an alternative approach to traditional group instructional approaches. At this time individualised learning allowed students to have more time and appropriate instruction if they needed it. The curriculum content and work undertaken by students was set and assessed by the classroom teacher.

  5. 5.

    Martin Dougiamas’s Modular Object Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment (http://www.moodle.org) is one of the most widely used LMSs in the world, by over 31 million students in over 44,000 sites in over 200 countries (Cooch, 2010).

  6. 6.

    A workaround to controlling students’ access was made available for Moodle 1.9: activity locking was a means whereby a teacher could set certain conditions on a task that a learner had to meet before the next task became visible. With Moodle 2.0 this feature is standard, by conditional activities (Cooch, 2010).

  7. 7.

    http://docs.moodle.org/en/Philosophy.

  8. 8.

    http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=140054.

  9. 9.

    See http://cordis.europa.eu/fp6/projects.htm and http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/projects_en.html.

  10. 10.

    10LTfLL (http://www.ltfll-project.org/index.php/index.html) was co-funded by the EU under the ICT theme, 7th Framework Programme for R&D (FP7-­ICT-2007-1-4.1) (2008–2011). It aimed to provide personalised formative feedback for facilitating formal collaborative learning and informal social learning, finding innovative ways to the challenges of pervasive technology-enhanced learning: gaining access to the right tools, mastering them, usability and optimised utilisation, interoperability, content overload.

  11. 11.

    11ROLE (http://www.role-project.eu/) is supported by the EC, in ICT-2007 Digital Libraries and technology-enhanced learning, 7th Framework Programme (2009–2013). It is a European collaborative project (16 research groups from 6 EU countries and China) whose main task is to deliver and test prototypes of highly responsive PLEs, offering breakthrough levels of effectiveness, flexibility, user-­control and mass-individualisation.

  12. 12.

    12See Deliverable D2.5–LTfLL Roadmap at http://www.ltfll-project.org/index.php/deliverables.html.

References

  • Alberici, A., Catarsi, C., Colapietro, V., & Loiodice, I. (2007). Adulti e Università Sfide ed innovazioni nella formazione universitaria e continua. Milano: Franco Angeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alfonseca, E., Carro, R. M., Martin, E., Ortigosa, A., & Paredes, P. (2006). The impact of learning styles on student grouping for collaborative learning: A case study. User Modelling and User-­Adapted Interaction, 16, 377–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, P. (2006). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education. JISC. Retrieved May 12, 2011 from http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/terminolgy/JISC-review2006.html

  • Attwell, G. (2007). Personal learning environments - the future of eLearning? eLearning Papers 2. Retrieved May 12, 2011 from http://www.elearningeuropa.info/out/?doc_id=9758&rsr_id=11561

  • Attwell, G. (2008). The social impact of personal learning environments. In S. Wheeler (Ed.), Connected minds, emerging cultures: Cybercultures in online learning. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change Magazine, 2, 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, T. (2005). Personalised learning in the UK: from vision to strategy? Personalised learning: high expectations symposium. Sydney (NSW): Department of Education and Training.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, T., & Miller, R. (2004). Personalised learning: Creating the ingredients for system and society-wide change. Melbourne: IARTV Incorporated Association of Registered Teachers of Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berners-Lee, T., Handler, J., & Lassila, O. (2001). The semantic Web. Scientific American. Retrieved September 23, 2008 from http://www.ryerson.ca/~dgrimsha/courses/cps720_02/resources/Scientific %20American %20The %20Semantic %20Web.htm

  • Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballentine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonaiuti, G. (2007). I learning object nella prospettiva dell”eLearning 2.0. Atti del IV congresso Sie-l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braynov, S. (2004). Personalization and customization technologies. The Internet Encyclopedia. Retrieved May 15, 2011 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ 10.1002/047148296X.tie141/full

  • Breslin, J., Passant, A., & Decker, S. (2009). The social semantic Web. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Broek, S. D., & Buiskool, B. J. (2010). Key competences for adult learning professionals. Zetermeer: Research voor Beleid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brusilovsky, P. (1996). Methods and techniques of adaptive hypermedia. Journal of User Modelling and User Adaptation Interaction, 6, 87–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brusilovsky, P. (1998). Adaptive educational systems on the World-Wide-Web. In G. Ayala (Ed.), Current trends and applications of artificial intelligence in education (pp. 9–16). Proceedings of Workshop at the 4th World Congress on Expert Systems, ITESM, Mexico City, Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A., & Nejdl, W. (2007). The adaptive Web: Methods and strategies of Web personalization. In Lecture Notes in Computer Sciences. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brusilovsky, P., & Peylo, C. (2003). Adaptive and intelligent Web-based educational systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13, 156–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, L. (2007). Emerging trends in social software for education. In Emerging technologies for learning (Vol. 2, pp. 10–18). Coventry, UK: Becta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvani, A. (2006). Reti, comunità e conoscenza Costruire e gestire dinamiche collaborative. Trento: Erikson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvani, A., Buonaiuti, G., Fini, A., & Ranieri, M. (2007). I Personal Learning Environment: una chiave di volta per il Lifelong Learning? Atti del IV congresso Sie-l

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R. J., Robinson, W., Neelands, J., Hewston, R., & Mazzoli, L. (2007). Personalised learning: Ambiguities in theory and practice. British Journal of Educational Studies, 55, 135–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. A., Howard, R. A., & Lane, W. D. (1999). Addressing different learning styles through course hypermedia. IEEE Transactions on Education, 42, 33–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cedefop. (2011). Lifelong guidance across Europe: Reviewing policy progress and future prospects. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatti, M. A., Agustiawan, M. R., Jarke, M., & Specht, M. (2010). Toward a personal learning environment framework. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1, 66–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claparède, E. (1920). L’école sur mesure. Genève: Payot.

    Google Scholar 

  • CLEX. (2009). Higher education in a Web 2.0 world: Report of an independent Committee of Inquiry into the impact on higher education of students’ widespread use of Web 2.0 technologies. Bristol: CLEX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Should we be using learning styles? What research has to say to practice. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre/University of Newcastle upon Tyne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooch, M. (2010). Moodle 2.0 First look. Birmingham: Packt Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic knowledge communities: Edtechtalk, Webcast Academy. Dave’s Educational Blog. Retrieved May 29, 2009 from http://davecormier.com/edblog/2008/02/29/rhizomatic-knowledge-communities-edtechtalk-webcast-academy/

  • Corneli, J., & Danoff, C. J. (2011). Paragogy: synergizing individual and organizational learning. Retrieved September 29, 2011 from http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Arided/ParagogyPaper

  • Council of the European Union. (2004). Resolution of the Council on strengthening policies, systems and practices in the field of guidance throughout life in Europe. Brussels: Council of the European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union. (2008). Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 21 November 2008 on better integrating lifelong guidance into lifelong learning strategies. Official Journal of the European Union, 4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union. (2010). Conclusions on the social dimension of education and training. Official Journal of the European Union, 2–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downes, S. (2006). Learning networks and connective knowledge. Retrieved May 29, 2009 from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper92/paper92.html

  • Downes, S. (2007). Learning networks in practice. Emerging technologies for learning. Retrieved May 29, 2009 from http://www.downes.ca/files/Learning_Networks_In_Practice.pdf

  • Downes, S. (2010). Personal learning environments. Retrieved May 29, 2009 from http://www.downes.ca/presentation/245

  • Drexler, W. (2010). The networked student model for construction of personal learning environments: Balancing teacher control and student autonomy. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26, 369–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • EAEA. (2006). The common European adult learning framework. Brussels: EAEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2000). E-learning – designing tomorrow’s education. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2001). Making a European area of lifelong learning a reality. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2002). European report on quality indicators of lifelong learning. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2006). Communication from the Commission Adult learning: It is never too late to learn. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2007). Communication action plan on adult learning: It is always a good time to learn. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2008a). The Lifelong Learning Programme 2007–2013 Glossary. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2008b). Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training indicators and benchmarks 2008. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2008c). ALPINE - Adult Learning Professions in Europe: A study of the current situation, trends and issues. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2009). Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training indicators and benchmarks 2009. Luxembourg: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011a). Action plan on adult learning: Achievements and results 2008–2010. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011b). Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training: Indicators and benchmarks 2010/2011. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament; Council of the European Union. (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, 10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament; Council of the European Union. (2008). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament; Council of the European Union. (2009). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European Credit System for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET). Official Journal of the European Union, 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, T. (2007). The building blocks of high school redesign. ASCD Infobrief, 49.

    Google Scholar 

  • FEDORA. (2007). Charter on guidance and counselling within the European higher education area. Brussels: FEDORA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78, 674–681.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M., & Soloman, B. A. (1997). Index of learning styles questionnaire. Retrieved August 30, 2011 from http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.html

  • Fisher, C. (2008). Networks and studios. Retrieved June 16, 2009 from http://learning2cn.ning.com/profile/ClarenceFisher

  • Fitzgerald, R., & Steele, J. (2008). Digital Learning Communities (DLC): Investigating the application of social software to support networked learning (CG6-36). Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (2009). Michael Fullan’s answer to “what is personalized learning?” Microsoft Partner Network. Retrieved August 13, 2011 from http://cs.mseducommunity.com/wikis.personal.michael-fullan-s-answer-to-quot-what-is-personalized-learning-quot/revision/3.aspx

  • Gaballo, V. (2007). Web 2.0 Educational eLearning and knowledge management in higher education. Atti del IV congresso Sie-l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia Hoz, V. (1981). Personalized education. Valladolid: Minon. S. A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giovannella, C. (2008). Learning 2.0? Atti del V congresso Sie-l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21, 82–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf, S. (2007). Adaptivity in learning management systems focusing on learning styles. Vienna: Vienna University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf, S., & Kinshuk. (2006, July). An approach for detecting learning styles in learning management systems (pp. 161–163). Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances Learning Technologies (ICALT 06), Kerkrade.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf, S., & Kinshuk. (2007). Providing adaptive courses in learning management systems with respect to learning styles. In Proceedings of the World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (e-Learn) (pp. 2576–2583). Chesapeake, VA: AACE Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf, S., Kinshuk, & Ives, C. (2010). A flexible mechanism for providing adaptivity based on learning styles in Learning Management Systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 30–34). Sousse, Tunisia: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf, S., Lin, T., Jeffrey, L., & Kinshuk. (2006). An exploratory study of the relationship between learning styles and cognitive traits. Proceedings of the European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (EC-℡ 06) (pp 470–475), Crete, Greece.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf, S., Lan, C. H., Liu, T. C., & Kinshuk. (2009). Investigations about the effects and effectiveness of adaptivity for students with different learning styles. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT 2009) (pp. 415–419). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, T. (2008). Collective knowledge intelligence: where the social Web meets the semantic Web. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 6, 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, D. (2004). Personalising learning: Next steps in working laterally. London: Specialist Schools Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. ultiBASE eJournal RMIT University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1982). The manual of learning styles. Maidenhead: Peter Honey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, D. (2007). Every school a great school: Realizing the potential of system leadership. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (2000). Theoretical foundations of learning environment. Totowa, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2000). Models of teaching (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karrer, T. (2008). Work learning - Same thing. eLearning Technology. Retrieved December 15, 2009 from http://elearningtech.blogspot.com/2008/02/pwle-not-ple-knowledge-work-not.html

  • Keller, F. S. (1968). Good-bye, teacher. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 1, 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kern, R., Ware, P., & Warschauer, M. (2004). Crossing frontiers: New directions in online pedagogy and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 243–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilpatrick, W. H. (1918). The project method. Teachers College Record, 19, 319–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of adult education: Andragogy versus pedagogy. New York: Associated Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kort, B., & Reilly, R. (2002). Theories for deep change in affect-sensitive cognitive machines: A constructivist model. Educational Technology & Society 5(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, J., Noronha, S., & Vergo, J. (2000). A user-centered design approach to personalization. Communications of the ACM, 43, 45–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuljis, J., & Liu, F. (2005). A comparison of learning style theories on the suitability for elearning. In M. H. Hamza (Ed.), Proceedings of the IASTED Conference on Web Technologies, Applications, and Services (pp. 191–197). Calgary, AB: ACTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leadbeater, C. (2004). Personalisation through participation: A new script for public services. London: Demos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leadbeater, C. (2009). We-think: Mass innovation, not mass production. London: Profile Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • LEADLAB. (2010). European model of personalisation for adult learners. European Grundtvig Project LEADLAB - Leading Elderly and Adult Development LAB (1.11.2009–31.10.2011). Retrieved September 3, 2011 from http://www.leadlab.euproject.org/go.cfm?PageId=6001

  • Leo, T., Manganello, F., & Chen, N.-S. (2010). From the learning work to the learning adventure. In Proceedings of EDEN 2010 Annual Conference (pp 9–11), Valencia, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leone, S. (2009). PLE: A brick in the construction of a lifelong learning society. Technology Supported Environment for Personalised Learning Methods and Case Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leone, S. (2010, March). F2F learning vs. eLearning: The lifelong learner’s point of view. Proceedings of INTED 2010, Valencia, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leone, S., & Guazzaroni, G. (2010). Pedagogical sustainability of interoperable formal and informal learning environments. Developing and utilizing e-learning applications. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, P. (1997). Collective intelligence: Mankind’s emerging world in cyberspace. Cambridge: Perseus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Limongelli, C., Sciarrone, F., Temperini, M., & Vaste, G. (2009). Adaptive learning with the LS-Plan system: A field evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 2, 203–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Limongelli, C., Sciarrone, F., & Vaste, G. (2011). Personalized e-learning in Moodle: The Moodle_LS system. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 7, 49–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Littky, D., & Allen, F. (1999). Whole school personalization: One school at a time. Educational Leadership, 57, 2–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litzinger, T. A., Lee, S. H., Wise, J. C., & Felder, R. M. (2007). A psychometric study of the index of learning styles. Journal of Engineering Education, 96, 309–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubesky, R. (2006). The present and future of Personal Learning Environments (PLE). Optusnet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maharey, S. (2007). Organising for personalising learning. Wellington: Ministry of Education Media Release, New Zealand Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Pons, M. (2002). A social cognitive view of parental influences on student academic self-­regulation. Theory into Practice, 41, 126–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAuliffe, M., Hargreaves, D., Winter, A., & Chadwick, G. (2009) Does pedagogy still rule? Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 15(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2010). Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26, 28–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minocha, S. (2009). A study on the effective use of social software by further and higher education in the UK to support student learning and engagement. Bristol: JISC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monachesi, P., & Markus, F. T. (2010, May). Socially driven ontology enrichment for eLearning. Proceedings of the Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, Valletta, Malta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monachesi, P., Markus, F. T., Westerhout, E. N., Osenova, P., & Simov, K. (2011). Supporting formal and informal learning through domain ontologies. e-Education, e-Business, e-­Management, and e-Learning – IEEE, 2(2), 117–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Motschnig-Pitrik, R., & Mallich, K. (2004). Effects of person-centered attitudes on professional and social competence in a blended learning paradigm. Educational Technology & Society, 7, 176–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • National College. (2011). About personalising learning. Nottingham: National College.

    Google Scholar 

  • New Media Consortium. (2009). The Horizon report: 2009 edition. Austin, TX: NMC.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0 design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved September 18, 2007 from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html?page=1

  • OCSE – Organisation for Economic Cooperation Development. (2006). Schooling for tomorrow: Personalising education. Paris: Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppermann, R. (1994). Introduction. In R. Oppermann (Ed.), Adaptive user support: Ergonomic design of manually and automatically adaptable software (pp. 1–13). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppermann, R., Rashev, R., & Kinshuk. (1997). Adaptability and adaptivity in learning systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Transfer (pp. 173–179), Pace, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppermann, R., & Simm, H. (1994). Adaptability: User-initiated individualization. In R. Oppermann (Ed.), Adaptive user support: Ergonomic design of manually and automatically adaptable software (pp. 14–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, M., Grant, L., Sayers, S., & Facer, K. (2006). Social software and learning. Bristol: Futurelab.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkhurst, H. (1922). Education on the Dalton plan. New York: E. P. Dutton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pask, G. (1976). Styles and strategies of learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 128–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettenati, M. C. (2010). Proposal of a personal knowledge environment. Retrieved August 8, 2011 from http://knowbie.wordpress.com/tag/personal-knowledge-environment/

  • Popescu, E. (2008). Dynamic adaptive hypermedia systems for e-learning. Romania: Université de Craiova.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posea, V., & Trausan-Matu, S. (2010). Bringing the social semantic Web to the personal learning environment. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT). Sousse, Tunisia: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80’s. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salaway, G., Caruso, J. B., & Nelson, M. R. (2008). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology 2008. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sangineto, E., Capuano, N., Gaeta, M., & Micarelli, A. (2008). Adaptive course generation through learning styles representation. Universal Access in the Information Society, 7, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sclater, N. (2008). Web 2.0, personal learning environments, and the future of learning management systems (Research Bulletin, Issue 13). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seely-Brown, J. (1999). Learning, working and playing in the digital age. Retrieved June 15, 2009 from http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/sci_edu/seelybrown/

  • Seely-Brown, J. (2009). Learning in the digital age. Retrieved June 15, 2009 from http://www.johnseelybrown.com/

  • Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. Retrieved August 8, 2011 from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm

  • Siemens, G. (2006). Connectivism: Learning Theory or Pastime of the Self-Amused? Retrieved June, 6, 2011 from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism_self-amused.htm

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steeples, C., & Jones, C. (2002). Networked learning: Perspectives and issues (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stubbé, H. E., & Theunissen, N. C. M. (2008). Self-directed adult learning in a ubiquitous learning environment: A meta-review. In: M. Kalz, R. Koper VH-P, & ML (ed) Proceedings of the First Workshop on Technology Support for Self-Organized Learners (pp. 5–28). Aachen: RWTH Aachen University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds. New York: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trentin, G. (2005). From “formal” to “informal” e-Learning through knowledge management and sharing. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 1, 209–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, J. C. R., Chu, H.-C., Hwang, G.-J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2008). Development of an adaptive learning system with two sources of personalization information. Computers & Education, 51, 776–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (1999). The world declaration on higher education for the twenty-first century: Vision and action. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO Institute for Education (1999) Glossary of adult learning in Europe. UNESCO, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varisco, B. M. (2002). Costruttivismo socio-culturale Genesi filosofiche, sviluppi psico-­pedagogici, applicazioni didattiche. Roma: Carocci.

    Google Scholar 

  • Via, W. (2010) Personal learning networks for educators. Retrieved May 17, 2011 from http://www.youtube.com/user/skipvia#p/a/u/1/q6WVEFE-oZA

  • Von Glasersfeld, E. (1998). Il costruttivismo radicale. Una via per conoscere ed apprendere. Roma: Società Stampa Sportiva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washburne, C. (1941). A living philosophy of education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerhout, E. N., Monachesi, P., Markus, F. T., & Posea, V. (2010). Enhancing the learning process: Qualitative validation of an informal learning support system consisting of a knowledge discovery and a social learning component. In M. Wolpers, P. A. Kirschner, M. Scheffel, et al. (Eds.), Sustaining TEL: From innovation to learning and practice (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6383, pp. 374–389). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, S. (2011a). Digital age learning. Retrieved September 30, 2011 from http://steve-­wheeler.blogspot.com/2011/07/digital-age-learning.html

  • Wheeler, S. (2011b). Personalised learning. Retrieved September 30, 2011 from http://steve-­wheeler.blogspot.com/2010/11/personalised-learning.html

  • Wild, F., Modritscher, F., & Sigurdarson, S. (2008). Designing for change: Mash-up personal learning environments. eLearning Papers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 397–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, L., Ding, L., & Finin, T. (2011). How is the semantic Web evolving? A dynamic social network perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(4), 1294–1302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25, 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41, 64–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy

    Sabrina Leone

Authors
  1. Sabrina Leone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Leone, S. (2013). From Formal to Informal Learning: Scenario, Conditioning Elements and Evolutionary Steps. In: Characterisation of a Personal Learning Environment as a Lifelong Learning Tool. SpringerBriefs in Education. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6274-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation