Informal learning does not exist!
… at least not as an supplement to the institutional sphere
inhibitors of “informal learning” (from Anne Bartlett-Bragg):
– ideology naturalizes the socially constructed patterns of behavior and ideas making them taken for granted and self-evident. The question is, who nowadays constructs ideologies and which are the ruling ideologies? — Formal education as an ideological state apparatus…
Foucault (The Masked Philosopher): ”I dream of a new age of curiosity. We have the technical means for it; the desire is there; the things to be known are infinite; the people who can employ themselves at this task exist. Why do we suffer? From too little: from channels that are too narrow, skimpy, quasi-monopolistic, insufficient. There is no point in adopting a protectionist attitude, to prevent “bad” information from invading and suffocating the “good.” Rather, we must multiply the paths and the possibilities of coming and goings.” — identity politics
Zizek (A cyberspace Lenin: why not): ”Today one is thus tempted to paraphrase Lenin’s well-known motto, ‘Socialism = electrification + the power of the soviets’: ‘Socialism = free access to internet + the power of the soviets.’” — transformative politics
– informal learning – is it a concept used in an ideological vacuum?
- the contexts of learning… It’s all ideological…
- ”formal learning with a human face” (the supplement argument)
– institutions of formal learning: are they public spaces?!?
- ex. can you use a lecture hall for spontaneous teach-in?
- can you have a wiki on the uni server and if you do, what ‘s the big deal?
– ”social software” — open collaborative content
- where’s the social? How about collaboration, or co-operation?
– formal learning in an organisation – informal learning with an disorganisation
- practical problems with gated and open parts of communication (financial vs educational contents)
- who is responsible for GNU/Linux, Apache, Wiki?
- teacher vs students (Freire: Pedagogy of the Oppressed, student-teachers & teacher-students in a dialogue changing the world)
— planning phase vs teaching phase
- who is actually learning? And for what?
- self-directed vs group directed
- disorganisation: direct
- organisation: representative (at best)
— recognising learning where and when it happens
- disorganisation: must (‘you have to give what you got’)
- organisation: measured, ”as if”-learning
- A related question concers the relationship between certainty and uncertainty (see Jussi Silvonen’s blog entry–only in Finnish, sorry)
– unintended uses/contents
- literacy: when you teach one, you get two! (Williams: On Television, bible – radical press)
- reading the word/reading the world, changing the word/the world — supplementary or parallax views?
Comments after the presentation:
– how do you deal with the practical problems of social software platforms?
– it’s all ideological… so welcome to the desert of the real…
– the same problems in companies etc.
– in some professions like educating physicians, it’s necessary to have institutional frame for learning the right things vs voluntary fields of interests (like philosophy, or human and social sciences)