Abstract:

Personal Learning Environment (PLE) is the "set of tools, information sources, connections and activities that each person uses assiduously to learn” (Adell & Castañeda, 2010, p. 7). There are some elements to be considered in order to make a better explanation about what a PLE is, although they are not the same elements in every definition, here we’re presenting those elements common to all definitions reviewed in the literature. Learning mediated by interaction; Active role of learner; Multiplicity of content; Diversity activities; Accessibility and ubiquity of web tools; and Ownership of web tools.

In order to design a rubric for evaluating a Personal Learning Environment, 5 interviews with experts PLE users were made it, the elements mentioned before were considered in the interviews. Participants were selected because of their use of Internet tools, frequency of use and related to everyday work activities through internet, which in every case was at high level of use and expertise. Semi-structured protocol of interview was used and supported by audio recording.

We interviewed each expert in their workplace following the format of semi-structured interviews in which they were asked to show how they used Internet tools for learning purpose. Each of them was detailing the tools and their use. Interviews were transcripted. From the content analysis categories and evaluation criteria were created, and the rubrica items were designed.

Content Validity Ratio (CVR) was obtained, four judges has been participated evaluating each of the items in the rubric, considering if the item in their opinion was:
1) Useful
2) Useful but not essential
3) it is not necessary.

The Content Validity Index (CVI) was calculated by averaging the scores resulting from all criteria in the section. 12 criteria were considered to be part of the rubric; those who meet the criteria and 1 criteria was considered for theoretical reasons. The following list shown the items who were included in the rubric.
1. Objective of the project to create and develop their PLE.
2. Functionality of the PLE (add, connect, create, share and organize)
3. Ubiquity of PLE (using different devices)
4. Learning related to the project by the PLE mediated.
5. Perception of efficiency in the use of PLE
6. Systematic use of PLE
7. Transformation tools PLE to perform functions (add, connect, create, share and organize)
8. Finding Information
9. Criteria for the choice of tools
10. Connectivity between tools
11. Collaboration with other users
12. Transfer to another context

The procedure proved to be robust to build and validate the signing will help evaluate a PLE and then to determine a level of development objective for these environments, which can give rise to other quantitative analysis, as correlations and linear regressions. Even though the previous element are common in every definition, in order to create the rubric, it was important to consider that studies show differences in the design of the learning situation, which can vary in relation to the way of using the PLE and, therefore, how to evaluate their use. Another aspect in the design of the rubric was trying to find out how each student create their own PLE, because this creation is unique for each student, thus each PLE is different and its evaluation should be personalized.

Keywords:

Personal learning environments, rubric, assessment, evaluation, internet, web, learning.