Emergent Learning Model

Learner-Generated Contexts Group

Emergent Learning Model

Informal/non-formal/formal Learning

Fred Garnett

London Knowledge Lab

OU Talk October 7th 2010 (revised)


Topics

Emergent Learning Model Elements

Informal, Non-formal & Formal learning

Background

Teaching as Brokering

Technology, Learning & Social Change

Technology-based Informal Learning


ELM issues and possibilities

ELM; Pros & Cons

What difference does it make?

ELM Elements

Why Emergent? Because it seems to offer a structure which can be used with Sugata Mitra's work on self-organised learning

Emergent Learning Model Elements concerned with;

Integrating Informal, Non-formal & Formal learning

To meet EU i2015 targets; which extend the Bologna Process of standardising HE across EU to all phases of learning

BUT!

Offers an opportunity to reconceptualise learning; or even to see Plato's Academy in it's original tri-partite design?

Learning as different processes with education

NOT!

“Informal Learning is what my students do in their own time to meet the requirements of their formal degree” An HE VC

ELM Informal Learning

Informal Learning traditionally seen as what we do in our free time, reading in 'Street-corner Universities' Libraries

MLA; “Informal Learning is what occurs in Libraries”

DBIS; “Watching TV especially the BBC”

Could be Incidental Learning

Learning when playing, or games, or having fun

Learning in various social contexts but not institutionalised

Increasingly seen as learning using the Internet;

BUT for this model

“Informal Learning is the social processes that support learning in any context”

ELM Non-formal Learning

Non-formal Learning, traditionally seen Post-compulsory Voluntary Education;

Adult Education or Community Education

Also organised hobbies and groups with special interests

Could have been defined as “Structured Learning opportunities without formal learning outcomes”

e.g. School of Everything

but this can be redefined around the concept of scaffolding;

“Non-formal learning is Structured Learning Resources without formal learning outcomes” (or accreditation?)

ELM Formal Learning

Formal Learning; traditionally defined as learning which occurs within the various Institutions of the education system

Primary School (as preparation for education)

Secondary School (as assessed education – or NC)

College (as Vocational Education)

University (as fully accredited education)

Characterised by the power to set assessments and validate qualifications (subject to accreditation criteria) and good for organising classes.

Can be defined as;

“Formal Education is the process of administering accreditation and qualifications”

Emergent Learning Model Concepts

“Informal Learning, the social processes that support learning in any context” is about People

“Non-formal Learning, Structured Learning Resources without formal learning outcomes” is about Resources

“Formal Learning, the process of administering accreditation and qualifications” is about Institutions

(See Table)

The issue then raised from this proposed structure is 'flow.' Do we start with institutions and impose processes that work for them, or start with the social processes of self-organisation and design systems and resources to support the learning that emerges?

ELM Background

Teaching as Brokering;

A Learning Broker;

a) writes the syllabus & develops the learning process,

b) supports & facilitates collaborative learning

c) enables learners to follow the motivation of 'interests

d) allows creative assessments

2007 LSDA Innovation in Learning Project interviewed Star Award winners to identify their qualities after 3-5 years they;

a) understand their subject for teaching (pedagogy)

b) understand learning management (andragogy)

c) turn power over to the learners. (heutagogy)

ELM Background

Technology, Learning & Social Change;

Kondratieff long-wave economic change effected by meta-technology; e.g. Steam Engine over 50-year cycles

1971/2021; the microprocessor era of long-wave change

Technology Innovation Process of Change through second-order effects (unanticipated) is resolved by user choices

Results in NSU Model; Networks, Services, Users;

So social change in learning arguably may be characterised by;

Distribution Networks (& network effects); Internet

Service “business” model of provision (of learning resources)

User-driven model of use; learner-centric approach;

ELM BackgroundTech-based Informal Learning; some factors

Metadata for Community Content; Tools & Skills not content

Social Network Model of Learning; participatory, interest

lastfridaymob; Creative, Interactive, Participative Tech Design

Ecology of Resources; More Able Partner supports learning

Learner Generated Contexts; “Coincidence of Motivations leading to Agile Configurations”

Open Context Model of Learning; PAH Continuum, 2007

An Organisational Architecture of Participation; nPV 2008

ELM Issues

So this Model of Learning requires expertise in educational professionals which can support learners as they are served across three phases of the learning process;

Informal Learning Phase; enabling models of learner self-organisation that can be recognised by institutions post-hoc

Non-Formal Phase; Learning resources have to be designed for learner appropriation. Accreditation opportunities need to embedded & quality assured (through templates?)

Formal Learning Phase; Need to support resource provision, map to accredited learning outcomes, validating learning and managing financial flows. Quality Assurance, the provision of the security and authentication of learners digital resources will enable learning strategies & policy outcomes to be provided to the government (See Policy Forest outcomes)

ELM Flows & Learning Literacy

A Learning Literacy will emerge by enabling participatory models of learner self-organisation that create agile configurations dynamically in institutions

Non-Formal; Learning resource design have to be designed for appropriation whilst provide accreditation opportunities and allow co-creation (as learning sequences nQuire)

Formal; Need to support resource provision, map to learning accreditation outcomes, quality assurance & policy outcomes

This key institutional change alters the role of the teacher who work to support the learners 'literacy' in using this model

ELM Projects

We are testing this model with a range of Ambient Learning

Projects;

1) Ambient Learning Manchester using 'learner-generated Digital Libraries' to integrate institutions in the Manchester 'Digital Corridor' using 'Google Goggles'

2) Participative Science Park – Kew Gardens. Finding ways of integrating a visitor attraction with a world class scientific centre through flora interactions

3) Local Larder & Recipe Walks in Lewisham developing “psycho-geography you can eat”

ELM Pros & Cons

PROS; Socially Responsible System of Learning

Inclusive >> Participation

Adaptive >> Voluntary Communities

Ecologically Responsible >> #Hyperlocal

Transparent >> Public Education Professionals drive Policy

Socialises for the (Knowledge) (Democracy) post industrial

Learning driven by Intrinsic values not extrinsic motivation

CONS; Not the traditional mode of Institutional behaviour

Prioritises Informal Learning over Formal Learning

Requires new skill sets, teaching, managing, learning, finance

Learner-centred system model requires post-hoc accreditation

How can institutions capture the network effect of Tech-based Informal Learning?

ELM; PAH Continuum

Pedagogy, Andragogy, Heutagogy Continuum

Knowledge Creation

Process negotiation

Subject Understanding

Knowledge Production Context

EpistemicMetacognitive Cognitive Cognition Level

doctoral research

adult education

schools Education sector

learnerteacher/learner teacher Locus of Control

HeutagogyAndragogy Pedagogy

Learner-Generated Contexts Group

Emergent Model of Learning

[email protected]

http://heutagogicarchive.wordpress.com/

The Learner Generated Context Group