Simple, consistent, and structured Integration with
student information systems (SISs) so student rosters are
automagically populated in courses
Private and secure (i.e., FERPA compliant)
Tight tool integration (e.g., quiz scores populated in
gradebooks)
Supports sophisticated content structuring (e.g.,
sequencing, branching, and adaptive release)
CMS Weaknesses
As it is widely implemented, the CMS is time-bound (i.e.,
courses go away at the end of the semester)
Teacher, rather than student, centric
Courses are walled off from each other and from the wider
Web, thereby negating the potential of the network
effect
Limited opportunities for students to "own" and manage
their learning experiences within and across courses
Rigid, non-modular tools
Interoperability challenges and difficulties (significant
progress is being made on this front, but the ability to
easily move data in and out of the CMS and to plug in
alternative tools to replace or enhance native tools remains
to be seen)
PLN Strengths
Almost limitless variety and functionality of tools
Customizable and adaptable
No artificial time boundaries remains "on" before,
during, and after matriculation
Open to interaction and connection with persons without
regard to their official registration in programs or
courses
Easily sharable with others both inside and outside of
courses, programs, and institutions
Student-centric (i.e., each student selects and uses the
tools that make sense for their particular needs and
circumstances)
Compilable via simple technologies like RSS
PLN Weaknesses
Complex and difficult to create for inexperienced
students and faculty members
Potential security and data exposure problems FERPA
issues abound
Limited institutional control over data
Absent or unenforceable SLAs no ability to predict or
resolve Web application performance issues, outages, or even
disappearance
