Measuring the Learning Effect of Non-Formal Learning
I have asserted that non-formal learning (NFL) is located on a continuum between so-called informal and formal learning (see Figure 1)
Figure 1 the Learning Continuum
…and that learning is situated in a larger socio-cultural context – a cognitive web – that provides the knowledge-centric framework within which learners operate (see Figure 1.2).
Figure 1.2 Knowledge-centric View of Knowledge (after Marc J. Rosenberg)
Similarly, NFL shares characteristics with both informal and formal learning, but is differentiated enough from both of these approaches to merit it’s own category (see Table 1)
Table 1 Definition of learning types
|
Learning Type |
Description |
|
Formal Learning |
Learning typically provided by an education or training institution, structured (in terms of learning objectives, learning time or learning support) and leading to certification. Formal learning is intentional from the learner’s perspective [my italics]. |
|
Non-formal Learning |
Learning that is not provided by an education or training institution and typically does not lead to formalized certification. It is, however, structured (in terms of learning objectives, learning time or learning support). Non-formal learning is intentional from the learner’s perspective [my italics]. |
|
Informal Learning |
Learning resulting from daily life activities related to work, family or leisure. It is not structured (in terms of learning objectives, learning time or learning support) and typically does not lead to certification. Informal learning may be intentional but in most cases it is non-intentional (or “incidental”/ random) [my italics]. |
Given the non-formal nature of the learning (and by extension a paucity of the type of assessment metrics available when evaluating the efficacy of formal training programs) I am going to explore the challenge of assessing non-formal learning in the context of Kirkpatrick’s 4-level model, particularly between Level 1 (Reaction) and Level 3 (Behavior); as Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick (2006, p.22) assert
learning has taken place …when one or more of the following occurs: Attitudes (sic) are changed. Knowledge is increased. Skill is improved. One or more of these changes must take place if a change in behavior is to occur.
More…
__________
References:
Kirkpatrick, D. & Kirkpatrick, P. (2006) Evaluating Training Programs. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Rogers, A. (2004) Looking again at non-formal and informal education – towards a new paradigm [Internet] Available from: http://www.infed.org/biblio/non_formal_paradigm.htm [Accessed 30th May 2008]
Rosenberg, M. J. (2001) e-Learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age London: McGraw-Hill.
See Also: Holford, J. Patulny, R. & Sturgis, P. (2006) Indicators of Non-formal & Informal Educational Contributions to Active Citizenship [Internet] Available from: http://crell.jrc.ec.europa.eu/active_citizenship.htm [Accessed 24th May 2010]
–
June 03 2010 03:30 pm | e-learning
One Response to “Measuring the Learning Effect of Non-Formal Learning”
Nee on 25 Jun 2010 at 4:39 pm #
Very interesting blog! Have you considered any other definitions of formal, non-formal and informal learning? As there is such a vast amount of research in the area coupled with numerous misinterpretations of nonformal learning – what have you based your definitions on? Do you not think there is intent on the side of the practitioner/educator?
Also, have you considered the national framework of qualifications (FETAC/HETAC) for assessing the outcomes of nonformal learning? There is scope within it to do so. This has also been noted in the recent OECD report: http://www.oecd.org/document/29/0,3343,en_2649_39263294_44870941_1_1_1_1,00.html
All the best
N