George Siemens  reflects in Effort in the right place?:

...is learning best achieved through structure (created by those who define what a learner needs to learn) or through environment (fostered by an organization, but created by the learner)?

I know much learning needs to happen via structured processes (I don't want a pilot or surgeon who taught themselves...), so perhaps it's worth describing foundation learning (skills/competencies) as requiring structure...and maintenance learning (the skills/knowledge needed to stay current and grow in our work) as requiring environment. Structured learning happens for 4 - 8 years...maintenance learning happens throughout life...yet it seems most learning related activities are still geared towards structured learning. Sort of like trying to leverage the point that will produce minimal results (but is controllable), while leaving the point that will produce rapid results (but is more serendipitous...and hence less receptive to structure) untouched. Thoughts?

I would rather use formal and informal learning as those terms are better to catch the core difference between structure and environment: the issue of primary control over learning process. [Context: definitions+references, comparison between two forms, supporting informal learning]

Based on adult learning theories I assume that we may need both types at the same time:

Adults have a need to be treated as being capable of self-direction, but they can be or choose to be relatively dependent. Adults learn better if they are provided with sufficient support and guidance to complement their own level of dependency (Knowles, et al, pp.65, 135-139).

E.g. you would most likely want a pilot or surgeon who combined structured training with years of informal learning experiences.

As I already wrote I believe in interplay between those two forms: any structured intervention should be focused on releasing energy of learner and providing just enough focus and support to get though a learning experience. I also believe that people are smart enough to learn themselves :)))

This is a real scenario in our elementary school. Does one teach by following the dots or does one integrate the basic skills into a more open inquiry where there is opportunity for student self direction. There is tension here. This is a not a free for all. This is children inquiring about their world and teachers giving them tools and models to help them grow into life long learners, confident learners.
9:08:46 AM  #  comment []

George Siemens in Knowledge sharing Environment:

Some components needed in a well-crafted environment suitable for knowledge sharing:

• Informal, not structured
  
• Self-forming connections - let members of the environment decide how to interact
  
• Tool-rich - members should have many options for connecting and dialoguing.
  
• Simple/single starting point...but multiple branches/exits
  
• Diversity of participants - very critical...people tend to form into groups of similar people. Knowledge sharing and innovation require smashing together ideas of contradictory or unrelated nature
  
• Time - facilitation is best viewed as a small spark that grows into a roaring flame over time. Most managers seem to prefer explosions that die out quickly...
  
• Trust - knowledge sharing is about people. Safety and security (face to face or online) lead to trust. General community rules should value individual contributions and personalities.
  
• User-shaped - most KM initiatives begin with the mindset of building a house and then telling employees to move in an basically only hang up pictures. Instead, they should be given tools and supplies...and then allowed to create what they really need.
  
• Community feel - communities of practice have gained a reputation as being effective means of sharing knowledge...because we are most likely to share what we know with people we know.
  
• Capturing and searching - these staples of KM are still important. Newcomers should be able to observe the trials others have walked...and if done right, a KM system could link into persformance support systems...resulting in up to date resources for people...when they are needed.

Commenting Denham Grey suggests to "inquire what sharing knowledge really means" and points to wiki about knowledge sharing.

School administrators need to respect teachers. This is not done by dumbing down the curriculum with 'teach to the test" and scripted learning. What we are talking about is peer centered ways of collaborating. For teachers it is collaborating about the PRACTICE. If we are working with students we are talking about student centered collaborations where they construct new understandings by giving them choices on how to creatively exhibit their new knowledge. If teachers are not respected and are given top down crap, does this affect the way we teach our students? I think so. Political hacks who do not know a damn thing about teaching are mandating tests and curricului that are not efficacious nor sound. So both teachers and students find themselves in institutions that are betraying their mission. Why share knowledge in a school or classroom if the each days lesson is scripted. Talk about going against the human spirit. Then politicians wonder why good teachers leave the profession!
8:30:47 AM  #  comment []