Groundbreaking technology is forcing a change in education --  knocking down barriers, outdated modes and definitions. The educational affordances through electronic devices has enabled ubiquitous learning --  overcoming not only spatial limitations but also socio-economic and age restraints.

As a person who grew up without computers or the internet, I have experienced the transformation brought on by technology in the workplace where I teach older students.  However, it is the personal empowerment of learning brought on by technology -- most notably, learning in an informal context that this work will focus on, as I feel this is one of the biggest factors contributing to our development as a whole -- building up on the collective intelligence of ordinary people.  

Learning informally, in the comfort of one's home or a quiet cafe, fueled solely by one's own motivation and curiosity, seems to make a bigger impact -- especially for me as I have embarked on the online course here at University of Illinois. The freedom and flexibility offered through this innovative approach to learning has allowed me to further my studies while working -- something that would not have been possible without technology. The fact that this style of learning can be done in a continuum -- in the means of lifelong learning, is what I define as the so-called transformative power in education. 

Schugerensky (2000) describes a tri-part taxonomy which distinguishes informal learning based on intentionality and consciousness. It can be divided as follows: 

Image retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/2733/2/19formsofinformal.pdf

Self-directed learning, as defined by Schugerensky (2000), is learning undertaken by an individual either by himself or with a group "without the assistance of an educator" (p.3). The learner tries to learn something intentionally and being aware of such intentions constitutes a conscious act of learning. Trying to learn how to bake a cheese cake by searching for recipes is a form of self-directed learning. 

Incidental learning is when the learner had not originally intended to learn something but ends up learning anyway such as when a person turns on the TV and watches a documentary about the origin of conflict in a certain region, ending up learning something new unintentionally while being consciously aware that he has learned something new. 

Socialization is referred to as the " internalization of values, behaviors, attitudes, skills, etc. that occur during every day life. Not only do we have no a priori intention of acquiring them, but we are not aware that we learned something" (Schugerensky, 2000, p.4). 

Building upon his model, Bennett (2012) proposed a new model for informal learning based on adult learning as the following graph shows: 

Image retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3f67/53cdf8ff75f53328ffea6ba2b24f732c1d5d.pdf 

Schugerensky's Socialization was replaced with Tacit Learning to encompass the learning of skills where its practice "builds tacit and embodied knowledge as people make minor adjustments to build expertise without full conscious knowledge of the actions" (Bennett, 2012, p.27).  

Integrative Learning is added and defined as a process where the learner integrates prior knowlege or images consciously with a "nonconscious intentional process of tacit knowledge," creating a spark in creativity, ideas or insight (Bennett, 2012, p.28). 

Boekaerts and Minnaert (1999) claim that there is no clear-cut definition of formal and informal learning. Still, researchers have tried to define how informal learning contrasts with formal learning. 

Informal learning is defined as learning acquired through work or life experiences and facilitated mostly by interest or necessity through a flexible setting (McGiveney, 1999). The learning, unlike in a formal setting, is not structured nor does it lead to certification, thus allowing the learner to be unintentionally engaged in learning (EU, 2001). The natural, relaxed setting allows the individual to be more open to new content, rather than resist unfamiliar knowledge. Lucas and Moreira (2009) defines informal learning as "self-directed, incidental, intentional, non-intentional or a social form of learning" (as cited by Song & Bonk, 2016, p.2).

Informal learning, according to Cope & Kalantzis (2014), is "organic, contextual and situational (p. 109). Informal learning can be practical skills that one learns while volunteering or studying abroad or IT skills that are acquired through work or from peer groups. Eraut (2000) and many others are proving that "the majority of human learning does not occur in formal contexts" but beyond the school walls, thus recognizing the extensiveness of informal learning (p.12). 

Informal learning is explained interestingly in the following TedTalk: 

Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn-5OFcwpkM

In contrast, the EU defines formal learning as education provided by an institution with a structured organization and leading to a certification. The objectives and time frame is predetermined and intentional with the learning outcome being measured through assessments.

The major differences between formal vs. informal learning is said to be based on the intention and goals of the learner. The approaches are said to contrast in the following areas:

Organization: Formal learning has a set structure with clear objectives whereas informal learning does not.
Motivation: Formal learning can provoke disinterest whereas informal learning can promote eagerness to learn.
Accessibility: Formal learning is formulated with clear boundaries whereas informal learning is ubiquitous.
Duration: Formal learning has set time frames based on learner objectives whereas informal learning can be continuous in nature.
Quantification: Formal learning is measurable with exams and tests whereas informal learning is said to be difficult to quantify ("Difference Between Formal and Informal," 2018).

Bonk (2010) states that learning is becoming more and more self-directed and informal. The rapid evolution of technological innovation has contributed to promoting a learning environment that is easily accessible anywhere, anytime for anyone. Burbules (2014) claims that the focus of learning has moved from "learn it now, use it later" to "the learner’s needs and purposes of the moment" (p.1).  The informal self-directed learning is driven by motivation. Self-directed learning, according to Knowles (1975), is a process in which "individuals take the initiative, with or without the help from others, in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating goals, identifying human and material resources, choosing and implementing appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating outcomes” (as cited by Song & Bonk, 2016, p.3).  Heath (2016) clamis that "self-directed learning is a guiding sense of the need to achieve something, make events happen, and to change one’s own state of being or role" (p.2). 

Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1205838?needAccess=true

The retention of subject content -- especially abstract content such as physics or math is said to be higher under a motivating environment ( Ly, Saadé & Morin, 2017). Thus the effectiveness of self-directed informal learning can be substantiated. 

Retrieved from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/INFORMATION-%26-COMMUNICATIONS-TECHNOLOGY-IN-%7C-in-Song-Bonk/f9772d98b5ac3aad671ffc64bbdbedbdbf280484

Through the development of technology and immense exposure to data and multimedia, learning becomes more unintentional. The internet floods us with massive amount of information; knowledge is gained through multiple channels outside the conventional school environment. Technology provides us with tools and opportunities to understand our world better through multi-modalities of learning. People learn how to create, use, build knowledge and skills by watching YouTube or Googling online. But now it is going beyond that. Students need not be passive receptors of knowledge nor does pedagogy have to take on a unified approach. An institutionalized-driven academia is making way for the self-directed learner who no longer rely solely on physical interaction nor limited context and setting. Learning is taking all forms at an unprecedented scale, especially through informal learning. Online learning resources provide us with opportunities for lifelong learning -- enabling both the young and old to seek out new skills and knowledge outside of their professional space. 

The following graph shows the self-regulatory skills a learner uses in an informal learning context:

Image retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Hypothetical-model-of-the-dynamics-of-informal-learning-processes_fig1_222933832

To support ongoing studies, the self-directed informal mode of learning equips the learner to take on alternative learning formats through a cloud-based education or through innovative learning tools such as virtual reality. We can strengthen our weak areas of knowledge through our own personalized learning method by selecting from a plethora of learning platforms made available by technology.  

The following video shows how young learners can acquire knowledge through the collaborative network of informal settings: 

Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBN4j4rZgrc 

More and more, formal and informal learning is at a crossroads with e-learning and blended learning joining education by design. Non-formal or informal learning is beginning to resemble formal schooling by including specific course outlines and goals in addition to assessments that eventually lead to certification. Formal learning is also perceived as bearing informal elements; values and belief systems are also acquired through what we think of as academic neutrality (Rogers, 2014). Smith (1988) claims that there is a "striking mix of educational and learning processes in each" (p.125-126). 

The following graph shows how technology is enabling an integration of formal and informal learning: 

Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Conceptual-framework-for-designing-the-hybrid-learning-space-with-web20-technologies_fig1_277985537

A more project-based curriculum allows a ubiquitous-driven learning environment.A technology-enabled learning environment taps into both worlds; an informal setting adopts a more focused objective with features such as e-content or e-assessments gauging performance, much like a formal setting. The adaptation of differentiated learning modules in formal learning with biometric analysis that identify and adapt to varied user response provide flexibility and empathetic support, similar to an informal setting. Peer-to-peer or institution-to-institution digital collaboration or work projects assimilates both formal and informal learning into one.

Learning can be done at the conveniency of one's home with a curriculum that has been personalized to tailor to each student's interest, strength, or style of learning. Leadbeater (2010) also recommends a "third space" where learning between school and home is "bridged" (p.63). 

Informal learning is not exempt from criticism. Boekaerts and Minnaert (1999) state that not much educational literature exists on the benefits of informal learning. According to Colley, Hodkinson and Malcom (2003):

"Learning is often thought of as ‘formal' or 'informal'. These are not discrete categories, and to think that they are is to misunderstand the nature of learning. It is more accurate to conceive ‘formality' and `informality' as attributes present in all circumstances of learning. The priority is then to identify these attributes, explore their relationships, and identify their effects on learners, teachers and the learning environment" (p.1).

Billet (2001) argues that most learning occurs outside a formal setting. He claims that "there is no such thing as informal learning" as all types of learning happens in a structured form even if its at a local community (as cited by Maunonen-Eskelinen, 2007).

In addition, the biggest criticism of informal learning is that the learner, without the guidance of a "teacher or expert," may be exposed to unintentional or intentional misinformation. Tavares and Melo (2019) claim that respondents to their study indicated the lack of direction or "teacher support" to guide the information was said to be one of the drawbacks of this type of learning. It did not come easily for everybody as the constant distraction from the hyperlinks required discipline to achieve an effective learning experience. 

Hodkinson (2010) claims that as informal learning becomes popular and adopts more elements of formalization, then its unique benefits will be lost. He claims that the importance lies in what is being learned and to whom, rather than whether people have learned or how much they have learned. 

A learning experience set in an informal setting and powered by one's own pursuit for knowledge and information enabled by technology will only get better as time progresses. The appeal of its flexibility and accessibility will eventually, in my opinion, have formal learning and informal learning amalgamated into a new mode of learning.  

Online learning resources such as virtual online classes or other educational tools will provide greater opportunities to support learning outside the traditional classrooms not because they have to but because they want to.  To be able to continue to do this when I want to, as long as I want to, and wherever I am, is the greatest personal benefit technology has brought to my self-directed informal education.   

Bennett, E.E.(2012). A four part model of informal learning: Extending Schugurensky's conceptual model. Adult Education Research Conference. Retrieved from https://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2012/papers/3

Boekaerts, M. & Minnaert, A.(1999). Self-regulation with respect to informal learning. International Journal of Educational Research. 31. 533-544. 10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00020-8.

Bonk, C. (2010). For openers: How technology is changing school. Educational Leadership, 67, 60–65.Burbules, N. (2014). Ubiquitous Learning and the Future of Teaching. Teacher Education in a Transnational World, eds. Rosa Bruno-Jofre and Scott Johnston (University of Toronto Press, 2014): pp. 177-187.

Burbules, N. (2014). Ubiquitous Learning and the Future of Teaching. Teacher Education in a Transnational World, eds. Rosa Bruno-Jofre and Scott Johnston (University of Toronto Press, 2014): pp. 177-187.

Colley, H., Hodkinson, P. & Malcom, J. (2003). Informality and formality in learning, a report for the Learning and Skills Research Centre, Leeds: University of Leeds

Cope, W. & Kalantzis, M. (2014). ‘Education Is the New Philosophy’, to Make a Metadisciplinary Claim for the Learning Sciences. Retrieved from http://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-1-new-learning

Difference Between Formal and Informal Education. (2018). Retrieved from https://raccoongang.com/blog/difference-between-formal-and-informal-learning/

Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning, implicit learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. Coffield 2000: 12-31 

Heath, S.B. (2016). Informal learning. Standford University.  Retrieved fromhttp://shirleybriceheath.net/pdfs2016/informal-learning.pdf 

Hodkinson, P. (2010). Informal learning: A contested concept. International Encyclopedia of Education, 3rd Ed. 

Ly, S. L. S., Saadé, R. & Morin, D. (2017). Immersive learning: Using a web-based learning tool in a phd course to enhance the learning experience. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 227-246. Retrieved from http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/3732

Maunonen-Eskelinen, I. (2007). Formal, Non-Formal, Informal Learning. Retrieved from https://salpro.salpaus.fi/tes/CD-rom/pdf/A1_Salpaus_formal_informal_nonformal_learning.docx.pdf

McGiveney, V. (1999) Informal Learning in the Community. A trigger for change and development. Leicester: NIACE. 99

Schugurensky, D. (2000). The forms of informal learning: Towards a conceptualization of the field. University of Toronto. Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/2733/2/19formsofinformal.pdf

Scott, C. L. (2015). The future of learning 3: What kind of pedagogies for the 21st century? UNESCO Education Research and Foresight, Paris. [ERF Working Papers Series, No. 15].

Song, D. & Bonk, C.J. (2016). Motivational factors in self-directed informal learning from online learning resources, Cogent Education, 3:1, DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2016.1205838

Tavares, V.D, & Melo, R.B. (2019). Possibilities for formal and informal learning in the digital era: what does the digital native youth think?  Psicologia Escolar e Educacional, 23, e183039. Epub August 05, 2019.https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2175-35392019013039