Dolors Reig 2010:
Así, pefiero las definiciones amplias, como la de David Jones, que describe los PLE como entornos “Sin propósito concreto, colaborativos y negociados alrededor de necesidades e intereses particulares (Jones & Muldoon, 2007)
Recomiendo a los interesados/as las definiciones de Graham Attwell (2007), uno de los autores que se ha dedicado al tema con más intensidad.

Backall 2005:
Why do we need a PLE when we already have the Internet? The Internet is my PLE, ePortfolio, VLE what ever. Thanks to blogger, bloglines, flickr, delicious, wikispaces, ourmedia, creative commons, and what ever comes next in this new Internet age, I have a strong online ID and very extensive and personalised learning environment.

Downes 2007:
The e-learning application (…) begins to look very much like a blogging tool. It represents one node in a web of content, connected to other nodes and content creation services used by other students. It becomes, not an institutional or corporate application, but a personal learning center , where content is reused and remixed according to the student's own needs and interests. It becomes, indeed, not a single application, but a collection of interoperating applications — an environment rather than a system.” no utiliza el termino PLE

Attwell 2010:
PLEs can be seen as the spaces in which people interact and communicate and whose ultimate result is learning and the development of collective know-how. In terms of technology, PLEs are made-up of a collection of loosely coupled tools, including Web 2.0 technologies, used for working, learning, reflection and collaboration with others.

Anderson 2006:
The PLE is a unique interface into the owners digital environment. It integrates their personal and professional interests (including their formal and informal learning), connecting these via a series of syndicated and distributed feeds.

Harmelen: Personal Learning Environments are systems that help learners take control of and manage their own learning. This includes providing support for learners to set their own learning goals, manage their learning; managing both content and process, communicate with others in the process of learning and thereby achieve learning goals. A PLE may be composed of one or more sub-systems: As such it may be a desktop application, or composed of one or more web-based services.” Mark van Harmelen, http://octette.cs.man.ac.uk/jitt/index.php/Personal_Learning_Environments

Mott 2010:
Where the LMS is vertically integrated and institutionally centralized, the PLE is the educational manifestation of the web’s "small pieces loosely joined".

Chatti 2010: http://mohamedaminechatti.blogspot.com/2010/03/lms-vs-ple.html
A PLE is not only a personal space, which belongs to and is controlled by the learner, but is also a social landscape that offers means to connect with other personal spaces in order to leverage knowledge within open and emergent knowledge ecologies. (…)The distributed PLEs can be loosely connected to build a knowledge ecology (which) is open, distributed, diverse, emergent, self-organized, and learner-controlled.

Lee Kraus http://www.leekrausonline.com/2007/06/ple-not-personal-and-not-learning.html
An ecosystem of connected educational resources facilitated by a (large) set of tools and fueled by collaboration opportunities facilitating the consumption of content that enables an increased understanding of specific knowledge domains.

Siemens 2007 http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2007/04/15/ples-i-acronym-therefore-i-exist/
PLEs aren’t an entity, structural object or software program in the sense of a learning management system. Essentially, they are a collection of tools, brought together under the conceptual notion of openness, interoperability, and learner control. As such, they are comprised of two elements – the tools and the conceptual notions that drive how and why we select individual parts. PLEs are a concept-entity.

Clive Shepherd http://clive-shepherd.blogspot.com/2007/04/ples-what-are-we-talking-about-here.html
My personalized learning environment is a knowledge network that includes my browser favorites, my RSS feeds, my electronic documents and so on. But it's also non-digital and not easily captured in my browser. It includes my wife, friends and work colleagues, my tennis coach, my books, magazines and newspapers, the TV I watch, the films I see, the radio programmes that I listen to.

Attwell 2007:
The Association of Learning Technology’s 2006 conference was dominated by discussions on how blogs and wikis could be used for learning. And there was a buzz around the idea of Personal Learning Environments (PLEs). Someone even suggested that in a few years time we would no longer need the Virtual Learning Environment. Yet for all the talk there was no consensus on what a Personal Learning Environment (PLE) might be. The only thing most people seemed to agree on was that it was not a software application. Instead it was more of a new approach to using technologies for learning.
Pero la revisión de la literatura nos enseña que ni siquiera este consenso es general (Fiedler 2010).

Chatti 2011 http://mohamedaminechatti.blogspot.com/2011/02/cfps-ple-conference-2011.html
A Personal Learning Environment (PLE) includes the tools, communities, and services that constitute individual educational platforms learners use to direct their own learning and pursue educational goals. This represents a shift away from the traditional model of learning, and towards a model where students draw connections from a growing matrix of online and offline resources that they select and organise.

Scatler 2008
Much of the debate regarding the shortcomings of LMSs is taking place in the blogosphere, and a good deal of it centers around the concept of a personal learning environment (PLE).5 Proponents of PLEs agree that there is a need to harness the power of a range of tools, services, and content outside of the institution that learners can use during their studies. The movement diverges in three distinct directions, however, when it comes to the implementation of a PLE. The first group6 argues that client software can be developed to mediate between the learner and the many resources and facilities on the Internet. A second group, which includes initiatives such as Elgg (http://www.elgg.org/), is attempting to achieve this by providing sophisticated web servers and enabling participation by learners via their web browsers without additional software. Finally, some people argue that PLEs are essentially here already and that many online learners already make effective and customized use of a range of online facilities.

Ricoy 2010
Se entiende el PLE como la selección que cada sujeto hace libremente de forma que puede recoger información, difundir ideas, ampliar conocimientos y, al mismo tiempo, promueve el desarrollo de comunidades virtuales que (in)conscientemente generan aprendizaje y reflexionan sobre el mismo.
Cada vez, en mayor medida, los ciudadanos disponen en la red de un mayor número de oportunidades de aprendizaje formales e informales y se pueden mover por intereses propios y sentirse más autónomos. Detrás de estas oportunidades, no siempre existe editores para organizar los contenidos o profesores para seleccionar y ofrecer recursos de aprendizaje. Cada usuario puede ser autónomo, gestionar su tiempo, consultas que realiza y dedicación al aprendizaje a través de Internet. Esta selección y dinámicas de desarrollo personal e intelectual se conoce como Personal Learning Environment (PLE) o ambiente personal de aprendizaje en Internet. Estos entornos de aprendizaje deben su existencia fundamentalmente al desarrollo de las tecnologías de la Web 2.0, basadas prioritariamente en la interacción, intercambio y colaboración social. Por tratarse de un término de uso muy reciente y continuar en desarrollo y debate, no existe todavía una definición unívoca. Con todo, hay consenso en que en el PLE tiene especial relevancia la conexión y la comunicación que se establece virtualmente, así como las herramientas de creación y publicación de contenidos Web. Los PLEs son especialmente interesantes en la sociedad del conocimiento que exige una formación a lo largo de la vida.
Para Van Harmelen (2008), el PLE es el sistema de e-learning de un utilizador individual, que propicia el acceso a una gran variedad de recursos de aprendizaje de carácter divulgativo o selectivo/especializado, permitiendo su uso a discentes y docentes, de forma compartida, individual y autónoma.

Couros 2010
In seeking a distinction between the PLE and PLN, I performed a recursive exercise I asked individuals within what I perceive to be my own PLN about their perceptions of the differences between the two terms. This interrogation was facilitated via Twitter, as this microblogging platform has proven for me to be the most responsive method for surveying the connective knowledge of those within my PLN. The result was a steady outpouring of educators who offered definitions, print and multimedia resources, and diagrams, many of these developed personally or by those to whom they were connected. I have attempted to capture this conversation in a blog post at: http://educationaltechnology.ca/couros/1156.

The general consensus of this conversation maintains that PLEs are the tools, artefacts, processes, and physical connections that allow learners to control and manage their learning. This definition supports Martindale's and Dowdy's observation that “A PLE can be seen as a manifestation of a learner's informal learning processes via the Web” (chapter 9). Definitions of PLNs, however, seem to extend this framework to more explicitly include the human connections that are mediated through the PLE. In this framework, PLEs become a subset of the substantially humanized PLN. For reference in the remainder of this section, my PLN definition is simple: personal learning networks are the sum of all social capital and connections that result in the development and facilitation of a personal learning environment.

Põldoja 2010
There are various interpretations of the PLE concept (e.g. Arenas 2008; Harmelen 2006; Kolas and Staupe 2007; Wilson et al. 2007; Atwell 2007). Most of the educators and researches tend to talk about PLEs as instruments typically associated with social media (Johnson and Liber 2008) an individual can choose and control. A mainstream understanding is that a PLE is either a single technological application (e.g. Netvibes, Weblog, Flock) hosted and partially controlled by institutions or a collection of them chosen by each individual, rather than the institution (Jones 2008).
Fiedler and Pata (2009) define a PLE as a collection of instruments, materials and human resources that an individual is aware of and has access to in the context of an educational project at a given point in time. Thus, they stress the importance of a relationship between an environment and an educational project. While an environment is understood generally as (constructed) conditions that surround an individual and provide a setting in which the individual operates, it becomes a learning environment when one wants to carry out a learning project (Väljataga and Laanpere, forthcoming). In this case the individual starts to perceive potential activities and (lack of) resources (natural objects; people; mental, physical and digital artefacts) of his/her environment in relation to a particular learning project at a given point in time. The particular learning project gives a meaning and awareness to the perceived resources that are located in the individual's learning environment. Although the dominant thinking of PLEs is related to web-based technology, the authors of this paper want to point out that a PLE does not necessarily have to make use of technological applications. However, as much of our activities and life are gradually moving to Web, technological means in one's PLE start to be more and more a variety of social media applications, providing possibilities to extend one's perceived environment.

Lubensky 2006:
The following definition is intended to introduce the general nature of PLEs:

a Personal Learning Environment is a facility for an individual to access, aggregate, configure and manipulate digital artefacts of their ongoing learning experiences.

This definition captures the following salient aspects, which seem to be common across all current viewpoints:
  1. PLEs are effectively controlled by the individual, thus decoupled from institutional portals like university Virtual Learning Environments (VLE) or workplace Learning Management Systems (LMS) for which the design goals are in response to institutional requirements.
  2. The artefacts operated upon through PLEs include the digital resources and references with which individuals wish to engage presently and perhaps recall in the future. Resources include not only static text and media but also dynamic services and their artefacts, such as instant messaging, online forum and weblog conversations. Whereas an ePortfolio contains actual assets for the purpose of reflection, assessment or self-promotion, the PLE includes a broader repository that also includes links and commentary for all three purposes.
  3. The primary goal of a PLE for an individual is to bring all the disparate artefacts of interest for learning under a single operating roof. The presumption is that there are many artefacts, organising them is time-consuming and it's easy to forget about or lose them. PLEs are meant to simplify managing these artefacts, creating meaning through aggregation, linking and metadata tagging (eg comments, keywords).
  4. A PLE integrates with the digital services to which the individual currently subscribes. These could be the university VLE, the workplace LMS or a collection of so-called Web 2.0 services like social bookmarking or photo sharing.
  5. A PLE spans the various learning experiences to which an individual subscribes throughout life. High school students may begin to operate their own PLE, hooking it into their school's VLE. Upon university entrance, it could be connected to the university VLE. If entering professional practice, the individual could then link the PLE to workplace learning and professional development facilities. All the while, the individual may wish to link selectively to an evolving parade of Web 2.0 services which are found to be useful for enabling personal growth and learning.


Martindale 2010:
No existe actualmente una única aplicación o entorno arquetípico para el PLE. Para algunos, un PLE es una herramienta específica o una serie de herramientas utilizadas por un estudiante para organizar su proceso de aprendizaje. Para otros, es una metáfora que describe ls actividades de un estudiante moderno. No hay una única definiciún de PLE. Sin embargo, un rasgo comun de todas las definiciones es el control del estudiante sobre su propio proceso de aprendizaje. Ya que la idea de PLE se ha desarrollado como una reacción contra los LMS, no sorprende la énfasis en el control "personal" en sus descripciones.
El termino "personal learning environment" fue utilizado por primera vez en 2004 en la conferencia de JISC-CETIS (Joint Information Systems Committee — Centre for Educational Technology Interoperability Standards). La historia del desarrollo del concepto está documentada en Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Learning_Environment) y en van Harmelen, 2008 (http://octette.cs.man.ac.uk/jitt/index.php/Personal_Learning_Environments). Un acontecimiento clave fue la presentacion de Scott Wilson sobre el "futuro VLE" (2005). Poco después, PLE fue el tema de la conferencia annual de JISC-CETIS en 2005.

PLE could be described as basically a mechanism, process or interface through which a wide spread of data, conversations, ideas etc are able to be constructed, organised, accessed and presented. (Fraser 2006)

Fiedler (2010) dice que la noción de PLE ha aparecido como una especie de antonimo de las herramientas centralizadas de la educación formal.
Downes (2005), for example wrote: “The e-learning application, therefore, begins to look very much like a blogging tool. It represents one node in a web of content, connected to other nodes and content creation services used by other students. It becomes… a personal learning center, where content is reused and remixed according to the student's own needs and interests. It becomes, indeed, not a single application, but a collection of interoperating applications - an environment rather than a system”

Johnson et al. (2006) suggested that over the years the discourse gradually developed around a number of foci that can be interpreted as an expression of a...
• desire for greater personal ownership of technology and data
• desire for more effective ways of managing technological tools and services
• desire for the integration of technologically mediated activities across all aspects of life
• desire for a removal of barriers to the use and combination of tools and services
• desire for mediated collaboration and co-creation

PLE como concepto

Attwell (2007c)
... it is critical that PLEs are being seen as not just a new application of educational technology, but rather as a concept. The development of Personal Learning Environments represents a significant shift in pedagogic approaches to how we support learning processe (p. 59).

Downes (2007b)
The PLE is a recognition that the ‘one size fits all' approach characteristic of the LMS (Learning Management System) will not be sufficient to meet the varied needs of students. It is, indeed not a software application per se, but is rather a characterisation of an approach to e-learning (...) the key to understanding the PLE consists not in understanding a particular type of technology so much as in understanding the thinking that underlies the concept… (p. 20).

Johnson et al. (2006)
When examining current technologies, the PLE ‘lens' affords us two key actions, (...) it allows us to critique current technologies, situating them in terms of what might be characterised as their ‘PLE compliance'. Secondly, it generates a ‘migration path' to move a current technology from a position of partial PLE-ness to full compliance (p. 187).

Kerres (2007)
“for the user, this “personal learning environment” is not a separate space on the internet, it is an essential part of the users' workspace. It should be highly integrated with the user's framework of tools for his/her personal use of the internet (p. 11).

Willson et al. (2006) talked about a design pattern: “The critical design flaws inherent in today's learning systems can be addressed through adopting a new design pattern that shifts emphasis away from the isolated experience of the modular VLE. We characterize this new pattern a Personal Learning Environment, although unlike the VLE this is primarily a pattern concerned with the practices of users in learning with diverse technologies, rather than a category of software” (p. 4). Their vision leaves room for a broader (re-)instrumentation as it is evident in the following quote: “While we have discussed the PLE design as if it were a category of technology…, in fact we envisage situations where the PLE is not a single piece of software, but instead the collection of tools used by a user to meet their needs as part of their personal working and learning routine. So, the characteristics of the PLE design may be achieved using a combination of existing devices (laptops, mobile phones, portable media devices), applications (newsreaders, instant messaging clients, browsers, calendars) and services (social bookmarkservices, weblogs, wikis)…” (p. 9).

PLE como colección de herramientas

Harmelen (2006): a PLE is a single user's e-learning system that provides access to a variety of learning resources, and that may provide access to learners and teachers who use other PLEs and/or VLEs… (p. 815).

Citados en Fiedler 2010:
Kolas and Staupe (2007): "in order to meet the requirements of a PLE, a powerful computer architecture is needed, where it is easy to locate resources based on context and needs. There should also be a powerful search- and navigation system connected to the architecture. The architecture must ensure relevant, complete and consistent information” (p. 751).
Dron and Bhattacharya (2007) offered a rather tautological definition: “PLEs are a collection of interoperating applications that together form an individual's learning environment”, while Milligan et al. (2006) seemed to envision a particular set of tools: “In a Personal Learning Environment (PLE), the learner would utilise a single set of tools, customised to their needs and preferences inside a single learning environment” (p. 507). They also suggest “a key technological component …is the use of Web Services” (p. 508). They also emphasise a Service Oriented Approach (SOA) and the importance of the issue of interoperability. However, Milligan et al. (2006) also acknowledge that “…what differentiates a Personal Learning Toolkit from any other type of tool is difficult to pin down in terms of features alone; the critical factors are primarily in how the system is used, by whom, and in the context of use” (p. 509). Nevertheless, these authors also suggested that one should have a look at a “wide range of tools and sites that exhibit what we felt were characteristics useful in a PLE context…” (p. 509). In fact, they surveyed a number of ICT tools and identified 77 recurring patterns of use that they further categorised into nine distinct groups. They further identified a number of key services that recur in the patterns. Together, these use patterns and services make up their PLE Reference model. This reference model was used to create two PLE toolsets (a standalone desktop application and a portal based solution).

PLE como consecuencia de Web 2.0

Severance et al. (Severance et al., 2008), for example, see personal learning environments married to the tools and services that are commonly labelled Web 2.0: “PLEs start with the current and expanding capabilities of the World Wide Web, especially those referred to often as ‘Web 2.0' capabilities, those involving individual site customization of appearance, resource feeds, tools and tool placement, and increasingly group or social interactions, and add organizing mechanisms and tools focused on educational efforts to produce an environment that can be optimized for learning” (p. 48) Citado en Fiedler 2010

Fiedler dice que la tendencia es de discutir los PLEs en relación con las tecnologías emergentes o reducirlos a un sistema tecnológico o una serie de herramientas. Si algunos hablan de "concepto" o idea, .............

Otras en Martindale 2010
Scott Leslie (http://edtechpost.wikispaces.com/PLE+Diagrams) publicó una serie de modelos de PLE que han recibido mucha atención. Ray Sims ha incluido un diagrama interesante que pone énfasis en relaciones personales. Sims ha incluido meditación, libros y espacios físicos donde aprende. Esta versión altamente personalizada extiende las dimensiones de PLE fuera del ámbito de las tecnologias web 2.0. El diagrama de PLE de David Warlick incorpora "esfuerzos reflectivos" que incluyen leer, escribir, presentar, y conversar con otros. Estos esfuerzos no fueron orientados ni dependientes de una tecnologia especifica que facilite la interaccion.
Cuando el PLE era concebido una tecnologia o herramienta, muchas veces era definido como una colección de tecnologías en forma de una aplicación de escritorio o servicio web (van Harmelen, 2008). Schaffert & Hilzensauer (2008) lo definen como colección de aplicaciones de software social que el estudiante ha elegido como util para sus necesidades particulares. Lubensky (2006) ve en PLE un sistema que el estudiante utiliza para organizar e investigar el contenido de acuerdo con sus necesidades de aprendizaje. Downes (2006) subraya el acceso a una larga colección de aplicaciones y redes de aprendizaje. Scott Wilson define PLE como coleccion de herramientas que uno utiliza en su trabajo y aprendizaje. El PLE incluye el uso de la combinación de dispositivos, aplicaciones, y servicios dentro de la práctica del aprendizaje personal mediante tecnología.

Niall Sclater (2008) ha identificado tres perspectivas sobre de que debería consistir un PLE y como debería funcionar. La primera perspectiva es que PLE debe ser un software cliente que actua de mediador entre el estudiante y los recursos que el estudiante necesita. La segunda perspectiva es que un portal web puede ser un PLE sin necesidad de software cliente. La tercera perspectiva es que PLEs ya están aquí en forma de recursos físicos y electrónicos que los estudiantes pueden manipular y customizar para aprender efectivamente.

PLEs can be seen as the spaces in which people interact and communicate and whose ultimate result is learning and the development of collective know-how. In terms of technology, PLEs are made-up of a collection of loosely coupled tools, including Web 2.0 technologies, used for working, learning, reflection and collaboration with others.
(Attwell 2010)

Personal Learning Environments are by definition individual. However it is possible to provide tools and services to support individuals in developing their own environment. In looking at the needs of careers guidance advisors for learning Attwell, Barnes, Bimrose and Brown, (2008) say a PLE should be based on a set of tools to allow personal access to resources from multiple sources, and to support knowledge creation and communication. Based on an scoping of knowledge development needs, an initial list of possible functions for a PLE have been suggested, including: access/search for information and knowledge; aggregate and scaffold by combining information and knowledge; manipulate, rearrange and repurpose knowledge artefacts; analyse information to develop knowledge; reflect, question, challenge, seek clarification, form and defend opinions; present ideas, learning and knowledge in different ways and for different purposes; represent the underpinning knowledge structures of different artefacts and support the dynamic re-rendering of such structures; share by supporting individuals in their learning and knowledge; networking by creating a collaborative learning environment.
(Attwell 2010)

However, a PLE is not a piece of software. It's an environment where people and tools and communities and resources interact in a very loose kind of way.
(Wilson 2008)

The general consensus of this conversation maintains that PLEs are the tools, artefacts, processes, and physical connections that allow learners to control and manage their learning. This definition supports Martindale's and Dowdy's observation that “A PLE can be seen as a manifestation of a learner's informal learning processes via the Web” (chapter 9). Definitions of PLNs, however, seem to extend this framework to more explicitly include the human connections that are mediated through the PLE. In this framework, PLEs become a subset of the substantially humanized PLN. For reference in the remainder of this section, my PLN definition is simple: personal learning networks are the sum of all social capital and connections that result in the development and facilitation of a personal learning environment.
(Cormier 2010)

The PLE is a unique interface into the owners digital environment. It integrates their personal and professional interests (including their formal and informal learning), connecting these via a series of syndicated and distributed feeds. The PLE is also a portfolio system allowing the user to maintain their repository of content and selectively share that content as needed. It is also a profile system, exposing the users interests in a variety of ways allowing automated, but selective search of the individual and their digital contributions. Of course, the PLE is a social as well as an information environment, connecting the user to individuals and cooperative events and activities throughout the Net. (Anderson 2006a)

Los entornos personales de aprendizaje son herramientas, comunidades y servicios que forman plataformas educativas individuales utilizadas por los alumnos para dirigir su propio aprendizaje y perseguir sus objetivos educacionales. (7Things, 2009)

PLEs aren’t an entity, structural object or software program in the sense of a learning management system. Essentially, they are a collection of tools, brought together under the conceptual notion of openness, interoperability, and learner control. As such, they are comprised of two elements – the tools and the conceptual notions that drive how and why we select individual parts. PLEs are a concept-entity. Problem is, however, that we are discussing PLEs as if they were solely an entity – so we compare PLEs with an LMS and other entity-based learning tools…but if PLEs exist at all, they are very personalized and individual (hey, maybe that’s why they are called personal learning environments!). My PLE may consist of an entirely different combination and set of tools than a colleague’s.
(G. Siemens, http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2007/04/15/ples-i-acronym-therefore-i-exist/)

Bastante interesantes discusiones sobre la naturaleza de PLE:
http://elearningtech.blogspot.com/2007/06/ple-pwle-discussion-contiunes-corporate.html
http://elearningtech.blogspot.com/2007/06/more-discussion-on-personal-work.html
http://blogoehlert.typepad.com/eclippings/2007/06/and_later_mark_.html