Anderson lists some Advantages of an LMS which to me actually seem like disadvantages or at the very least, have no advantage at all.
My thoughts regarding the essential questions for this week follow.
Can PLEs be seen as institutional level software?
In part, yes. If a course is offered in Moodle to degree-seeking students within an institution, that course more-than-likely will make up part of the learner's PLN (you say PLE, I say PLN). I say more-than-likely because it depends on whether the student is getting anything out of the course, specifically what the student gets from the interaction of content and individuals that originate from the course offered in Moodle. What the learner learns outside of the Moodle course constitutes the rest of the learner's PLE.
Do PLEs require dramatic reform of the education system?
Not in Mexico. Even though we have courses in Moodle (blended and distance) and have restrictions to some websites when accessing the web at the university, the learners still have access to the web outside of the university which still contributes to their PLN in productive ways. And although training teachers, admins. etc. to think in terms of a PLN is an ongoing process, I don't consider this as being a "dramatic reform of the education system".
Must PLEs and LMS be seen as antagonistic to each other? Why can't they just get along?
In my world, an "LMS" is just a part of a PLN (i.e., PLE) ; they are extensions of each other. It's like those who just know me at school may or may not have the same understanding of who I am outside of school. Even though I'm the same person, each network influences each other while maintaining some level of overlap between the two as well.
This is why I don't like the term LMS and I avoid discussing whether an "LMS" is a good or bad thing. It has little to do with the tool itself (or collection of tools) and more to do with how the tool is being used at any given moment.