Christie Mason

No Nancy I don't think you're the dreamer, I think anyone that thinks they control another person's learning process is a dreamer. I don't know when/why trainers/teachers decided that learners shouldn't have any control over their own learning, but somehow that concept became embedded to the point that to suggest otherwise is heresay.

Control is an intangible perception and the oddest thing of all is that the more you appear to give up control, the more control you have.

I came to that odd realization through decades of experiences and through fractals.  Fractals are patterns that are replicated to/from infinitely small and infinitely large that create images that appear nothing like the underlying pattern at different viewing points and from different angles (for a fun exploration try Aros Fractals).  The pattern of interconnectedness of neurons is the same as organization/individual relationships, which are the same as the web. 

To me that pattern is also the same as the spirals of connections and content that people create during their individual learning processes.  Attempting to impose a hierarhical command/control process upon dynamic learning connections as never made sense to me. (See my poor graphical attempt to present this by clicking on the questions marks at the top of this page)

One person can control the underlying pattern but one person cannot control how and when a different person will perceive the replications of that pattern.  Each person's perception of that image is correct, but each perception will differ because there are infinite viewing points.

Another related concept from fractals is that random events create order.  That means that most people's perception of chaos is incorrect.  What they are misunderstanding is the underlying pattern. (Google for Sierpinski triangle or try this link).

That probably got a little "out there" but these concepts have provided me with a practical touch point in many different environments.

Christie Mason

I don't know the protocol for creating a new thread from existing threads within this forum.  This is a reply to Minh McCoy originally under "Welcome Informal Learners".

Minh's example of the edge of a forest as an example of the Edge of Chaos struck home.  The transitional margin between 2 existing systems is the area of optimum opportunity for new growth.  Within the context of this discussion, it is the area of opportunity for learning moments, not teachable moments.  It is the edge between controlled, traditional training and the perceived chaos of the web. 

Is eLearning the "structure" to support informal learning?  It depends on how you define eLearning.  eLearning is NOT putting PPT on the web and it is NOT synchronous web conferences that poorly replicate a constricted classroom event. 

4 years ago I created a page called "What is eLearning?" .    I was frustrated then, and still, about how eLearning had been used to replicate formal, controlled, ineffective, traditional training/teaching processes instead of expanding, extending, enhancing and evolving web supported processes that are already widely used to support informal learning.

My 3 best reference sites for what eLearning could be are Google.com (non-linear search), Amazon.com (faceted classification and collaborative knowledge sharing) and Dell.com (build to order learning components).  There is a structure and control underlying each site's functions and display but each site does not enforce a linear navigation of its content.

Contrast the structure of those sites to what passes for what trainers use to create eLearning.  Learning/Learner management systems that restrict access by static organizational hierarchies, content authoring programs that are usually nothing more than PPT to static HTML convertors or PPT to Flash (the garlic of the Web) convertors.

It's been my general experience that IT "gets" how to capitalize on the opportunities of the web at the edge between control and chaos - trainers don't.  Both tend to have a control orientation so this has always confused me.  My current theory is that it may be that IT has learned to think in terms of controlling the interaction of intangible "services" while trainers still think in terms of controlling tangible, paper based presentations.

Christie Mason

To encourage IT's involvement and support I would suggest focusing your first forays towards topics that IT would find useful and usable.

I suspect that many trainers who complain that IT won't support them haven't taken the time to learn about the processes they are promoting. If you know, or at least attempt to learn, the impact that implementing LMS/LCMS, blogs, RSS, eConferencing etc will have on their security, framework, pipes and current applications then you'll have a much easier time understanding their concerns and gaining their agreement.

Now that the training industry is co-opting and redefining IT terminology it seems that these 2 areas of expertise are becoming "separated by a common language."  The words may be the same but the concepts they represent are radically different.

Another concept that I've found useful is to be in "guest" mode.  A trainer who's requesting access to organizational IT systems is a guest within that system.  If you can't get "invited" as a guest then consider renting your own space and running a "proof of concept" process remotely.  That's also a good way to develop grassroots support and identify barriers and bumps to integrating your process with existing systems.

Christie Mason

Jay, you have supplied the starting point for many of my explorations into informal learning, I still refer many people to your "Informal Learning - The Other 80%"

Other areas of exploration that I've used are SNA - Social Network Analysis,  KM - Knowledge Management (esp faceted classification), Constructionist learning theories,  and anything dealing with web interactions and content management.

My working definition of informal learning is that it is learner controlled as to time and place.  It occurs when a learner determines that they don't know what they need to know, which leads that learner to initiate a quest for content resources that they respect and trust.

There can be a structure supplied to support informal learning but that structure is as different from traditional training structures as the web is different than a printed book.

Christie Mason

Applying chaos and complexity theories to learning and organizational systems has fascinated me for a very long time.  (http://tinyurl.com/qhnu6)  I don't remember when I encountered "The Edge of Chaos is Where Systems are at Their Optimum Performance" but it's held true during hundreds of reviews of learning and organizational systems. 

Each individual, each system, defines their "edge" differently, plus the definition of that "edge" will change in reaction to situational/environmental changes.  eLearning can support informal learning processes that meet the dynamic edge of chaos as it evolves and changes in ways that traditional training never could.

Christie Mason