Mike wrote,
> Eugene--
>
> I think its useful to challenge dichotomies, but without
> distinctions, what's
> to talk/think about. Calling all learning "informal" doesn't
> solve a lot of
> real issues. That's what I think, along with my thoughts that the
> distinctions
> are muddy, misused, normal, human, and xmca-ish!
> mike
I do agree that distinction between "informal" and "formal" learning is
important but I think that they come from different categories. Let me give
a metaphorical example. Sail on a sailboat (i.e., "formal education") does
not create a movement of the boat (i.e., learning) -- wind does (i.e., the
flow of "informal learning" or transformation of participation). However,
skillful navigator manage to swim against the wind by using it. The
limitation of the metaphor is both teaching and learning is a mutual,
social, and collaborative process. I think that it is useful to talk about
"formal education" as an activity design (or as a provocation) for emergent
learning processes.
What do you think?
Eugene