In Xinyun’s previous blog post, she touched on formal and informal learning. In fact, we keep witnessing heated discussions around these topics. Understanding what is formal/ informal learning, in my opinion, serves as a good start and lends more insights to the debate.

 

The Binary/ Tripartite Model

According to Clark (2015), Malcolm Knowles (1950) is generally considered to have first coined the term informal learning. Allen Tough (1971) was one of the pioneers to formally study how adults use informal learning. The next big proponent of informal learning is probably Jay Cross (2007), who delved into it through his book Informal Learning: Rediscovering the Natural Pathways That Inspire Innovation and Performance. Yet the definitions of formal and informal learning are muddied and thereafter leads to different categorizations.

 

The most common way to contrast formal and informal learning is based on who controls the learning objectives and goals, deriving from an administrative concern. In this categorization, formal education is the “hierarchically structured, chronologically graded education system”. Educational departments set the goals and objectives. In contrary, informal education is “the truly lifelong process … from daily experience and the educative influences and resources in his or her environment”, and learners set the goals and objectives. A tripartite model is also proposed where a middle form called non-formal learning is described as “any organised educational activity outside the established formal system”. But we could often observe overlaps. For example, some school running science clubs could describe their activity as informal education, but could also fall under the formal learning category (Clark, 2015, Smith, 2002).

 

Smith (2002) suggested that this tripartite categorization actually says little about the nature of educational processes. Instead, he would turn to process and focus on conversation. Smith recommended to “look into process as a significant way into setting the boundaries of informal education”. Thus, formal education is essentially curricula-driven while informal education is conversation-driven and unpredictable. Informal educators need to go with the flow, catch the moment, and deepen people’s thinking.

 

The Continuum

In the book Apprenticeship in Critical Ethnographic Practice, Lave (2011) went one step further and explicitly questioned the comparative theory between formal education and informal education. She doubted whether we could bracket off one kind of education from the other, since the mutually cultivate relations that give shape and meaning to both sides are unneglectable.

 

During her research, apprenticeship of tailors in Liberia was employed as an example to investigate. There were no classes in the tailors’ shop. The masters didn’t have lesson plans to follow, and only responded based on their experiences. If the social relations of production, social relations among the tailors, and Liberian cultural identities and social distinctions and how to clothe them are parts of becoming a master tailor, then it is impossible to stipulate what the boundaries of tailoring knowledge should be. In addition, Lave examined the terms of “formal” and “informal” education, which made their meaning seems as a contrastive pair. She argued that the terms themselves seemed contentless to her. Another criticism she made is that analyzing a binary model under a hierarchical politics which favors formal education seemed untenable, which led Lave to reconsider the kind of the theory itself. When concluding the book, Lave said, “people making their lives together in various historically forged institutional arrangements, not exactly as they choose. If we accept that it is the basis of social learning, then social life is not reducible to knowledge or even to knowing…”

 

This stresses the inseparable nature of “formal” and “informal” learning again. Likewise, Smith (2015) stated “Learning may be thought of as a spiral with both steps of formal and informal learning episodes taking place”. Formal and informal learning should be thought of as parts of a continuum.  For example, a two-year study calculated that each hour of formal learning spills over to four-hours of informal learning or a 4:1 ratio (Cofer, 2000). Or one can imagine two students took a biology class together and chatted about learning content outside classroom. The plant they learned in the lecturing time should be formal learning, according to the binary model. If they happened to see the plant on their way back home, and chatted about what they’ve learned in class, this is informal learning. In this way, formal and informal learning complements each other. As Bell (1977) contended, formal learning often leads to informal learning. Similarly, informal learning facilitates the acceptance and development of the formal learning.

 

Do We Need to Separate Them?

If the above discussion is assumed true, i.e. formal and informal learning are closely connected to each other, then the question changes from “What is the difference between formal and informal learning?” to “Should we label formal/ informal learning and investigate them independently?” Personally, I would argue that the crucial thing is not about whether we should separate formal/ informal learning, but about exploring the connections between them: when and why does formal learning shift to informal learning in the processes, and vice versa? Moreover, how could instructors design courses in a way that captures these shifts and thus take full advantage of learning opportunities? Further, in online programs such as World Campus, where the asynchronous nature could make things harder, how could instructional designers offer help?

 

References

Bell, C. R. (1977). Informal Learning in Organizations. Personnel Journal, 56(6), 280-283, 313.

Clark, D. R. (2015). Informal and Formal Learning. Retrieved from http://www. knowledgejump.com/learning/informal.html

Cofer, D. (2000). Informal Workplace Learning. Practice Application Brief. U.S. Department of Education: Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education.

Lave, J. (2011). Apprenticeship in Critical Ethnographic Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Smith, M. K. (2002). Informal, non-formal and formal education: A brief overview of different approaches. Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/informal-non-formal-and-formal-education-a-brief-overview-of-some-different-approaches.