The concept of “connected learning” according to the report entitled Connected Learning: An Agenda for RESEARCH AND DESIGN by Ito et al. (2011) is based on this notion that learning environments are not mutually exclusive. People learn in their home environments, social environments, official academic environments, and so on. This idea basically approaches the way we as a society view learning as a whole, that each environment is connected and contributes to the next. By blending peer interactions, student interests and passions, and objective-focused academic settings, educators are working with and appealing to students’ motivation, not in spite of it. This leads to a more cooperative relationship between the student and the teacher—which in turn leads the student to be more receptive to learning.

The learner role is now considered an active participant. No longer are learners sitting in lectures and simply memorizing information being passed down from a SME (teacher), but now have a platform to test the waters and see what they can do. They learn from likeminded peers, and, in turn, teach their peers through a continued process of collaboration and feedback. This is quite different than before when students would compete with each other. In the past, students seemed to either ‘go it alone’ or be placed in an unofficial competition with their classmates. The problem with this was there no real ability to hone what the student knew—they only knew what they could derive from the textbook (which may or may not have been up-to-date) and from what the teacher lectured. The mention of “skill and drill” in the video Games and Education Scholar James Gee actually crystalized the notion of a need for academic change. I personally have always been a proponent of how people need to learn the basics—reading, writing, arithmetic—before venturing out into other areas of knowledge. But what this video helped me to realize is how much more effective and comprehensive learning could be if each element to be learned wasn’t hand-fed little bits at a time. Similar to scientific experiments where you isolate a variable to test it without interference, learning is more of an inclusive process with all of the variables building and contributing to an end goal. I especially appreciated how in the video James Gee mentions in past centuries learning wasn’t a standardized process, and therefore what is being suggested is actually not new, but rather a rediscovery of how humans have learned for centuries before learning was confined to only ‘official’ channels.

Teachers should be evolving right along with the subject matter they teach. From experience I can say how valuable the ‘group think’ aspect of class settings can be. There were times when I presented new information in a training session, and if someone didn’t understand due to how I said it, there was another trainee who did understand and could translate it in a more effective way because they had the same experience level. From this I gained insight into how my trainees viewed the content I was teaching—this helped me to refine my approach over time. While this may seem like everyone is the teacher, it is pivotal to ensuring the content is reaching everyone. The contribution of all learners under the guidance of the official teacher is essential as then all participants can gain something from someone else. Because people can have different perspectives and understandings, there is something to be gained by being open to new information, new technology, and new pathways. The challenge is keeping on course—its very easy to lose sight of the instructional goal and get off topic. This can negatively impact the learning that should be happening.

I think the role of the learner in informal environments is pretty natural. Provided the learner is passionate about something, they are likely to engage in the subject matter one way or another. I tend to think back to high school when the majority of young guys would spend their free time playing sports or making music—it was something they enjoyed so they willing devoted their time to learning new techniques and practicing to improve their execution. I think revolutionizing the academic environment to promote the new role of the learner will be the challenge. Many institutions are very traditional, believing that the current status quo is sufficient. Additionally, I can see where there would be a question of assessment—this would likely require years of research to convince the larger academic community that a ‘newer’ approach is not only as effective but actually more so than the accepted standardized approach that we see today.

This acknowledgement that academic institutions can and should be more malleable in how critical subject matter is conveyed is an essential first step in the evolution of education. It makes the bold statement that education doesn’t just occur between 8am-3pm, but rather it is a continual process that is without limitation. So the question remains: why are institutions putting limitations on it?