πŸ“‘ How Informal Learning Gets Misunderstood (And Misinterpreted)

Bookmarked How Informal Learning Gets Misunderstood (And Misinterpreted) by David Price (Noteworthy – The Journal Blog)

The inconvenient truth is that students don’t need β€˜experts’ the way they used to. Knowledge is ubiquitous. Any teacher that thinks that they don’t need to change as a result of this truth is doing their students a disservice. Make no mistake: the real learning revolution has already happened, it just doesn’t involve those of us who teach. Because they real revolution is in the phenomenal growth in informal and social learningβ€Šβ€”β€Šas practised by the Beatles and, now, all of us.

David Price responds to criticism that creativity is dependant on a cache of knowledge. Referring to his experiences with Musical Futures, Price explains that it is creativity and passion which lead to an interest in knowledge and theory, not vice versa. Something he also discusses in his book Open. This reminds me of a post from Amy Burvall who also discusses the importance of having dots to construct ideas. Interestingly, Brian Eno suggests that such ‘dots’ can grow out of shit. Reflecting on the growing trend to ban devices, Mal Lee and Roger Broadie suggest that banning will have no impact on students digital learning and will instead have a detrimental effect on agency within schools.

3 responses on “πŸ“‘ How Informal Learning Gets Misunderstood (And Misinterpreted)”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *