First Steps Towards a University Social Network on Personal Learning Environments

The evolution of the media and the Internet in education today is an unquestionable reality. At the university level, the use of Web 2.0 tools has become increasingly visible in the new resources that professors have been incorporating both into the classroom and into their research, reinforcing the methodological renewal that the implementation of the EHEA has demanded. The aim of this article is to introduce DIPRO 2.0, an educational social network for university professors to develop their training in the area of personal learning environments through collaborative learning and production of knowledge.


Résumé de l'article
The evolution of the media and the Internet in education today is an unquestionable reality. At the university level, the use of Web 2.0 tools has become increasingly visible in the new resources that professors have been incorporating both into the classroom and into their research, reinforcing the methodological renewal that the implementation of the EHEA has demanded. The aim of this article is to introduce DIPRO 2.0, an educational social network for university professors to develop their training in the area of personal learning environments through collaborative learning and production of knowledge.

Introduction
Human beings are communicative by nature. From the time we become aware of our own existence we wish to communicate, to interact with our fellow humans, as we are social beings who seek contact, connection, and closeness. This search for communicative relationships also implies a desire to be informed. The need for knowledge as well as an awareness of what occurs both in our immediate surroundings and in the world is an inherent quality of humanity that has become increasingly prevalent as information and communication become more globalized.
The mass media have played an important role in this development to the point where they have become, as pointed out by Prado (2001), one of the features that characterize modern society; it is important to be aware that the reality that characterizes our lives at this time is one in which the mass media have seized control of our lives. As Marin (2006, p. 193) indicates, Information has been, is and will be one of the biggest tools in the world of communication. The reason for this reality is simple and straightforward: it helps us to change and/or improve our knowledge of our environment, in addition to the location and perception of the world of communication.
We share with Rodríguez Izquierdo (2005) and Malita (2011) the idea that today we live a technological reality that, on the one hand, has multiplied the channels by which individuals establish and maintain communicative relationships and, on the other hand, has modified the way in which we communicate. Information and communication technology (ICT) has become the basic pillar in the construction of new learning processes, overcoming teachers' and researchers' past worries of its slow incorporation into education (Lei & Morrow, 2010).
Today we find authors like Smeets (2004) who describe ICT as "powerful" given that it provides the individual and the community with a large number of opportunities to access information and, as a consequence, learning, making this process more effective (Chitiyo, 2011). More specifically, Tu et al. (2012, p. 13) speak of Web 2.0 technology as empowering learners to "create, share, and organize their personal learning environments in open network environments".
Today, it is inconceivable to speak of ICT as separate from the social, political, economic and educational dynamic, due to the rapid development of information technology and telematics. This article focuses on the area of education and the importance of ICT in the teaching-learning process. In this sense, a study by Cheung, Chiu, and Lee (2011) on student use of online social networking sites points out the importance of this phenomenon for the academic community since the use of these sites tends to increase motivation as well as a more active and collaborative approach to learning. The incorporation of ICT to the university educational platform in general and to university classrooms in particular demands a new way of designing the teachinglearning process. The methodology presented from this new perspective should favor the continuous exchange of ideas, as well as collaborative work strategies. In this process, group interaction and exchange of experiences (Ortíz, 2006;Davoli, Monari, & Eklund, 2009) as well as the content shared among members of the university institution is a constant variable. With the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) now in place, the challenge that university communities have to face in this new panorama, which is by no means limited to the European educational community, is the presence of the Internet in all areas of its members' lives. Salinas (2004) pointed out that ICT based learning had and has two approaches: one technological and the other methodological. The first is based on the idea of the sophistication of technological environments, oriented towards the building of knowledge, and the second combines the perspective of the student body, the technology used and the organization of the teaching-learning process. At present, one of the identity descriptors of higher education institutions is the search for quality in all its processes. In light of this, we consider that both approaches should be combined into one, given that the development of technology determines the growth and production of quality teaching and learning. it should be like, and its role in education (and in learning)" (Gutiérrez, 2007, p. 152).

Web 2.0 Tools: Social Networks
Working with the Internet is a great adventure because of its rapid growth and the many tools incorporated into it. As indicated by Cabero (2006, p. 8), "the Internet has progressively changed from being a depositary of information to converting into a social instrument for the elaboration of knowledge". The Internet provides us with free, global communication, thus its flexibility will benefit an adaptable training that adjusts to the educational processes that occur, in this case, in university teaching. The growth of the Internet comes hand in hand with the design and redefinition of its tools which give it meaning as a communicative instrument. All these tools provide, in different measure, the possibility of communicating with others and/or keeping informed about events in the world. From the point of view of the communication of information, the use of the Internet for education has as its main advantages the speed with which the information is transmitted, the diversity of sources, and the overcoming of time and space barriers, among others. However, one must also consider the possible disadvantages, which must be kept in mind when including it in the teaching and research routine of university teachers and students. These include the difficulty some people have of accessing the At present, there are more than 3,000 digital tools at society's service (Marín & Reche, 2011a (Tu et al, 2012, 13) which reflects a different way of seeing and understanding what happens around us. The role of this technology, as much in the area of education as in the social realm, is according to Tinmaz (2012, p. 235) "to provide a network of people who connect to each other wherever and whenever they need information." The study carried out by Holcomb and Beal (2010) points out that Web 2.0 tools are a vehicle for the students to develop their learning, basing this learning on the development of curiosity and creativity. Along these lines, teachers must integrate those Web 2.0 tools that they consider most useful into their daily class routine, but in order to do this, teachers need not only to be digitally prepared but also to attempt to incorporate them, given that they allow for 1. a reduction of costs and movement; 2. enabling and promotion of collaborative work through cooperative groups; 3. the expansion of information available to the student as well as its continual updating; 4. the facilitation of autonomy; 5. better control of the educational progress of students; 6. the promotion of a multi-channeled, multi-media education; 7. the encouragement of interaction with group members; 10. the increase of students' self-esteem as they advance; 11. flexibility (Ródriguez, Borges, González, Hernández, & Acosta, 2003;Cebrián, 2003;Cabero, 2006;Gallego & Alonso, 2007).
Using Web 2.0 tools in education today is not a new proposal, but rather a reality to the point where expressions such as Education 2.0 (Cabero, 2009) and University 2.0 (Hartman, Dziuben, & Broph-Ellison, 2007) are becoming increasingly more common.
Of all the tools available, social networks are gaining great importance at a personal as well as a professional level. Speaking today of social networks implies a new way of understanding, seeing, and perceiving communication between individuals, which has and will have as many critics as supporters.
Before going into more depth in pinpointing the reasons that justify the use of social networks for education, we believe it necessary to offer a conceptual approximation of what we understand about social networks at a general level in order to delimit the term within the field of education. According to Boyd and Ellison (2007, p. 211) these sites are web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system.
The nature and nomenclature of these connections may vary from site to site.
The connections formed on social networks "provide a context for the implementation of Connectivism" which "explains learning in terms of interactions on a network where the learners exchange their knowledge" (Tinmaz, 2012, p. 234 This idea is in line with that of Campos (2008) who maintains that social networks are built on collaboration structures which, together with the desire or need to share information, are reasons why, in our opinion, they can and should be brought to the educational field as a methodological resource that makes the teaching-learning process dynamic. In addition, there is the philosophy of the six degrees of separation created in 1929 by Frigyes Kstinthy, which maintains that people establish active relationships in a chain of up to six people, which increases in multiples of six, thus supporting the creation of social networks.
The objective of educational social networks is to facilitate teacher-student-institution communication, independently of the direction in which it occurs. Within the classroom, their aim is to encourage collaborative work among equals. Santamaría (2008) specifies the advantages of educational social networks as the following: -"Creating a new dimension of socialization, making possible the visualization of the contents in a plural manner and, with the appropriate tool, being able to create community.
-Providing a base for thinking about an impressive tool for inclusive education.
-In primary and secondary centers, social networks are being used as a meeting place for the different participants in the teaching-learning process. They allow for the creation of work groups and social activity groups through parents, teachers and students, although their use is usually of a communicative nature, for which in many cases we would refer to them as social software rather than social networks.
-They serve as links to companies offering work. This is where professional networking comes into play (sites like Xing or LinkedIn) to make contact with professionals in a specific area or branch of knowledge.
-As an identity and personality on campus they offer students a safe and practical space to create bonds with other members of the community.
-They facilitate the task of immersion in a foreign language environment by means of networks or communities. Within these, students are obliged by necessity to read and write texts, with the resulting learning built into this practice.
-Sound Retrieval Systems (SRS) are being used to open up the organization of conferences, seminaries, workshops etc. so that participants can get to know each other and ask questions of interest to organizers, speakers and lecturers. In First Steps Towards a University Social Network on Personal Learning Environments

Marín-Díaz,Vázquez, and McMullin
Vol 15 | No 3 July/14 99 this way, very useful feedback is generated prior to the event. In addition, links related to the subject matter can be gathered and shared to expand the event.
-They can be useful in educational organizations as a tool to reduce gaps in knowledge and technology.
-We are inclined to advocate the creation of practical communities and learning networks as a means of dynamization and construction of a digital identity." It is important to note that there are also disadvantages, such as the over-exposure of our privacy, the loss of control and ownership of the information that we upload to the network. But, over and above the advantages and disadvantages stated, why involve teachers in the creation of an educational social network for their classroom dynamic?
Although it is a form of innovation, the reason goes beyond mere teaching innovation. It is the responsibility of the teacher to know the educational and social reality of the student body and it is evident that social networks are an important part of this reality.
Therefore, we consider that the main reason for incorporating them into our teaching methodologies lies in the fact that students are dependent on them, they have incorporated them into their routines and, as a consequence, they have become normalized.
In studies carried out by Marín andReche (2011b, 2012) and Marín and Maldonado (2011) it was found that the university students consulted had reduced their knowledge of Web 2.0 tools mainly to Tuenti, Facebook, Messenger, and YouTube, as well as virtual platforms for online learning in the case studied concerning Moodle. However, we should indicate that although the results showed that the students were familiar with this platform, their knowledge of it was scarce or limited, as they only used it at specific times when the teacher asked. These studies show that the knowledge today's university students have of social networks is fundamental. Faced with this outlook, teachers must not stay on the sidelines. In consequence, we consider it necessary to incorporate the use of social networks into the teaching methodologies used in higher education classrooms in order to improve the teaching-learning process.
The role of the university professor today, after the introduction of the EHEA, has shifted to that of guide and adviser to the students, and, for this reason, it is necessary to be in touch with the reality that students live and work in to make the course content more accessible. This reality implies searching the Web 2.0 tools that students do and do not know and developing a methodology that is not only original, creative, and innovative but also close to their world, in pursuit of the search, construction, and development of a collective intelligence. teenagers, Callaghan and Bower (2012, p. 3) saw an opportunity to "transfer motivation and associated information and communication literacies into an educational context." Their study found that the use of social networking sites in the classroom encouraged self-directed learning and increased motivation and engagement. In addition, students had no difficulty transferring their personal use of social media to the context of the classroom. The study also highlighted the importance of the role of the teacher in implementing the use of SNS into the classroom. This is in line with the shift in the role of the university professor to that of guide to complement the more autonomous role of the student. This shift is also highlighted in an article by Fonseca (2011)  help not only students but also teachers, who find themselves facing a great software repository of work that will help them to begin incorporating innovations into the dynamic of the subject material.
Teachers are aware of the value of social networks, which includes autonomy, diversity, openness, and connectedness. However, many hesitate to incorporate this element of online learning into their teaching methodologies due to lack of knowledge (Tu et al., 2012), which is why it is important to create sites where teachers can find and share information, increasing their knowledge and confidence in the use of social media for educational purposes.
First Steps towards a University Social Network. To this end, the following steps were followed: For the overall design, a constructivist approach was used as a starting point, in which students can build their own knowledge based on their needs and interests and according to their own learning rhythm and interaction with the environment.

DIPRO Social Network
The main idea around the social network is, as previously stated, the collaborative production of knowledge, the motivation of teachers towards the search for active information, the stimulation of the learning process itself and, in consequence, selfeducation, overcoming the fear of openly asking other participants questions, given that some teachers are reluctant to show the possible learning gaps they may have about a specific subject (in this case PLEs), the stimulation of divergent, analytical, and critical thinking, and the attractive presentation of information. In short, the DIPRO 2.0 network was conceived as a repository of information about personal learning environments which would allow its users to overcome the obstacles pointed out by Meyer (2011), namely lack of time and training.
We consider that implementing a social network implies an act of achievement on the part of the professors given that it grows out of their particular will and initiative to create content and spaces to meet with students and with other colleagues. It implies making known the innovative actions that as educational practitioners they are carrying out in their classrooms, which means overexposure to the critical masses; nevertheless we believe that this is the strong point of incorporating social networks into education, it implies a continuous act of knowledge building in so far as it is a social construct. Aliaga takes this point further by stating that (2011, p. 54) in a social network each student is the owner of his/her own image, that is, s/he does not work on a prototype, model or platform designed by the professor, but rather can create, upload his/her own images, put a personal style on the account or personal web page.
However, we did encounter the disadvantage that a large number of professors are not aware of the educational potential of social networks and therefore, creative learning situations cannot be developed using this resource (Camacho, 2010); and, furthermore, belonging to a group that watches out for the individual, so that the individual learning process achieves its maximum expression.
Another aspect to consider is the centralization of the themes of the social network. Why use PLE in this case? The answer, in our view, is simple and, as previously mentioned, the students that fill the university classrooms are digital, they are multitaskers, and as a result their workspace is the digital universe with all the tools found in it. They use several tools (blogs, wikis, repositories, etc.) at the same time to produce an assignment, all of them combining to make up a particular PLE. For these reasons, professors should be familiar with this element and capable, after adequate training, of creating their own and encouraging their students to use it.
The use of PLE in higher education depends on the overcoming of certain disadvantages or weaknesses and the acceptance of the advantages or strengths that their use entails. Barroso, Cabero, and Vázquez (2012) point out as strengths that they are inexpensive, student-centred, and open to interaction, exchange, and connection as well as the almost unlimited variety and functionality of the tools, among others. These same authors cite as weaknesses their complexity, possible problems with security of information, and lack of a centralized management system. The origins of DIPRO can be found in the now extinct network Grouply. This medium was chosen because it is versatile, free, and has an interface that is pleasing to users. In this first attempt the network had 162 members. Nevertheless, the disappearance of the network from the market forced a reconsideration of the creation space of the network, which was one of the aims of the project. The second network used, also free, was Elgg and with it the number of participants increased slightly to 176.
The final DIPRO 2.0 social network was created with the Web 2.0 tool called Ning. This educational network is characterized, as the previous ones, by its versatility and pleasing interface, as well as by its highly intuitive functioning, and the possibility to invite others to participate. The methodology presented from this new perspective aims to promote the continuous exchange of ideas as well as collaborative work strategies (Ortiz, 2006), where group interaction and sharing of experiences form the basis of where Web 2.0 tools have a strong presence. We propose, therefore, a new scenario of mediated learning that is interactive, cooperative, and collaborative, although the collaborative should take precedence over the cooperative. In this sense Cabero (2003) indicates that they should be expressed symmetrically and reciprocally, should be based on the responsibility of the individual and the group that constitutes the network, to produce knowledge, and not be a mere transmitter of information. Along these lines, Wolton (2000, p. 37) considers that «equality of access to knowledge is not equality in the presence of knowledge». Therefore, the network should be equipped with rich and valuable resources, so that from a pedagogical point of view we may speak not only of social networks, albeit educational, but of virtual learning communities, and this is what DIPRO 2.0 is.
The educational social network DIPRO 2.0 was created with the Web 2.0 tool Ning and is characterized by its versatility, being free to use, and having a pleasant interface for users, a highly intuitive function, and the possibility to invite others to participate.   With respect to men, again it is Spain that has the greatest presence (88) as compared to Brazil, Belize, Italy, and Uruguay where there was no participation.
The main objective of DIPRO 2.0 is to be a place of reflection and help for PLEs. It aims to be a space where university teachers can find information, help or advice on this subject matter in order to incorporate it into their work as researchers or teachers. The way this works can be seen at http://tecnologiaedu.us.es/diproinfor/difusion/videos.
With regard to the network, the structure of the collaborative area is distributed into discussion forum, events, photos, videos, archives, chat, and blog, with clearly differentiated functions that we can organize into two main focus points: the area in which information is shared directly (events, photos, videos, archives, blog) and the development of common knowledge through the presentation, confrontation and discussion of ideas (discussion forums, chat rooms), all of these focused on the topic of PLE.
Additional possibilities include creating alerts and marking and creating tags. In Figure   2, an example of an event is shown in which a participant communicates to the rest of the community the holding of a conference, one of the objectives of this option. Each recipient can grade the information supplied and communicate to other members if they will attend, may attend, or will not attend. A total of 10 events have been posted which    students (in our case between the teachers themselves). Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) define social presence as the capacity of individuals to cast themselves socially and emotionally into a research community, and by Arbaugh's (2004)   We should also indicate that this tool provides information about recent messages and those most commented on. This allows us to center our attention on those elements that Initial Conclusions Valverde (2007, p. 53) indicates that, "just as ICT satisfies real educational needs, its curricular integration and good practice are generalized." In this way, the use of Web 2.0 promotes an education and training that responds to the demands manifested by society. As mentioned, the Internet is one of the tools that are currently contributing the most to helping individuals in the construction of their teaching-learning processes, in establishing relationships with other individuals, in discovering other realities, and so on.
In the educational field we agree with Holcomb and Beal (2010), that the rapid growth of the Internet in general and of Web 2.0 tools in particular implies that teachers should be conscious of their limitations with them. The creation of educational social networks has been growing over the last few years, although at a university level these have been linked to another type of tool such as blogs and wikis. At present, we have passed from an education that based the teachinglearning process on 'teaching by telling' to one that currently focuses on 'learning by doing'. According to the comment of Castañeda and Gutiérrez (2010)  in this particular area, either due to fear, or lack of self-confidence, or because they think it is a sign of weakness to have gaps in their knowledge of the subject.
On the other hand, the main handicap that we were able to detect is maintaining the active participation of the participants. If we examine the data, at the time of writing this manuscript there were 387 members; however, the active participation of the members was only 28.94%. Therefore, we believe that it should be more dynamic and encourage greater participation. Although we also believe that active participation in a social network, whatever the content, can be exhausting for professors, especially if they are fully involved in the various forums that are created within them and develop a continuous feedback that could occupy all of their time. Nevertheless, we consider this to be an initiative that with the willingness of the professors to participate could broaden the methodological horizons that we are developing today, since the presentation of classroom innovation through PLE is a way for the educational community to gradually introduce them in their classroom dynamics, so that both parties-professors and students-will benefit.
University education, which ultimately seeks to encourage Internet teaching, lies in the promotion of creativity and flexibility of training environments by higher education professionals to bring this social reality closer to the university, always remembering that ICT is in continual evolution and growth. However, as Flores (2009) indicates, the changes affect not only the way in which things are done but also the content that is given. Therefore, we put forward the suggestion that a social network can be transformed into a learning community, into a rich environment of not only technological elements but also training elements, which, through the participation and interaction of its members, grows and helps its members to grow.
To conclude, it should be indicated that both the training environment and the PLE were evaluated by experts in ICT on four dimensions: 1. Technical and aesthetic aspects, 2. Ease of navigation and movement around the environment, 3. Guide/tutorial of the program, 4. Quality of environment to create a "Personal learning environment". The instrument used was a Likert-type scale with six possible answers (from 1 = very negative/strongly disagree, to 6 = very positive/strongly agree). The response can be considered highly favourable since all of the dimensions received a score of 5 (agree/positive) or 6 (strongly agree/very positive). This leads us to believe that the environments created may be of interest and be beneficial for training university professors in ICT. As a limitation of the study we should explain that we have not yet carried out a study of the degree of satisfaction of the users of the DIPRO network, although we are in the process of developing a questionnaire for this purpose. We understand that the analysis of the results obtained will allow us to develop and strengthen both the strong points indicated by the users, and those that are susceptible to improvement. An analysis of the results of the participation of the users will also foster a greater sense of belonging and responsibility as well as a more active use of the network and participation in the activities.