Skip to main content

Comparing Formal, Non-formal, and Informal Online Learning Environments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Next Generation of Distance Education

Abstract

Everything our research team learned about virtual learning communities (VLCs) from formal learning environments was called into question when we recently shifted our attention to non-formal and informal learning environments. In almost all of the literature we reviewed, what we understood about online learning communities and how they develop, grow, and die away was based on examinations of formal online learning environments—primarily on postsecondary courses managed by institutions of higher learning. Formal environments typically require learners to engage each other online in prescribed, externally defined ways. As effective as formal environments may be, paying exclusive attention to them limits our understanding of the nature of learning in online settings. Non-formal and informal learning environments, by contrast, impose fewer controls on learner activities, and collaboration among participants is not required. This chapter considers what we are beginning to learn about learning communities in formal, non-formal, and informal online environments and speculates about how learners make use of social interaction to enhance learning. We wonder out loud whether “community” is an overused, tired metaphor for understanding dynamic learning phenomena and social interaction evident in non-formal and informal learning environments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allen, C. (2004). The Dunbar number as a limit to group sizes. Retrieved from http://www.­lifewithalacrity.com/2004/03/the_dunbar_numb.html December 9, 2011.

  • Anderson, T. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M. Moore & G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 129–144). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, R. M., Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Wozney, L., Borokhovski, E., Wallet, P. A., Wade, A., & Fiset, M. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74, 379–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brook, C., & Oliver, R. (2006). Exploring the influence of instructor actions on community development in online settings. In N. Lambropoulos & P. Zaphiris (Eds.), User-centred design of online learning communities (pp. 342–364). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, P. H. (1985). The world crisis in education: The view from the eighties. New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couros, A. V. (2009). Open, connected, social: Implications for educational design. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 26(3), 232–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, S., & Osguthorpe, R. (2003). Building an online instructional design community: Origin, development, and the future. Educational Technology, 43(5), 44–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, B. K., Schwier, R. A., & Ross, H. M. (2007). Synthesis of the process of learning through discourse in a formal learning community. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 18(4), 461–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downes, S. (2009). MOOC and mookies: The connectivism & connective knowledge online course. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/Downes/mooc-and-mookiesthe-connectivism-connective-knowledge-online-course-presentation December 9, 2011.

  • Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(1), 113–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahy, P. J., Crawford, G., & Ally, M. (2001). Patterns of interaction in a computer conference transcript. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/36/74 December 9, 2011.

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2003). A theory of critical inquiry in online distance education. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 113–127). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckscher, C., & Donnellon, A. M. (1994). The post-bureaucratic organization. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, J. M., & Bruckman, A. S. (2004). The bystander effect: A lens for understanding patterns of participation. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(2), 165–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J. W., Kreijns, K., & Beers, P. J. (2004). Designing electronic collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 47–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klamma, R., Chatti, M. A., Duval, E., Hummel, H., Hvannberg, E. H., Kravcik, M., Law, E., Naeve, A., & Scott, P. (2007). Social software for life-long learning. Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 72–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Exploring the icebergs of adult learning: Findings of the first Canadian survey of informal learning practices. Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 13(2), 49–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, D. W. (2001). Adults’ informal learning: Definitions, findings, gaps and future research. NALL Working Paper No. 21, OISE/UT, Toronto. Retrieved from http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/depts/sese/csew/nall/res/21adultsifnormallearning.htm December 9, 2011.

  • Luppicini, R. (2007). Trends in distance education: A focus on communities of learning. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacGillivray, A. (2010). Respected leaders’ work with boundaries. Retrieved from http://boundaryspanner.wordpress.com/2010/04/21/respected-leaders-work-with-boundaries/December 9, 2011.

  • Milheim, W. D. (2006). Strategies for the design and delivery of blended learning courses. Educational Technology, 46(6), 44–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, E., & Coleman, E. (2004). Graduate students’ experiences of challenges in online asynchronous discussions. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 30(2), 29–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piezon, S. L., & Donaldson, R. L. (2005). Online groups and social loafing: Understanding student-group interactions. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8(4). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/∼distance/ojdla/winter84/piezon84.htm December 9, 2011.

  • Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2004). A development research agenda for online collaborative learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 53–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. P., & Jordan, H. M. (2004). Blended learning and sense of community: A comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/192/274 December 9, 2011.

  • Schwier, R. A. (2007). A typology of catalysts, emphases and elements of virtual learning communities. In R. Luppicini (Ed.), Trends in distance education: A focus on communities of learning (pp. 17–40). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwier, R. A. (2009). The elusive metaphor of community in virtual learning environments. In Proceedings of ED-media 09. Honolulu, Hawaii: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwier, R. A., & Daniel, B. K. (2007). Did we become a community? Multiple methods for ­identifying community and its constituent elements in formal online learning environments. In N. Lambropoulos & P. Zaphiris (Eds.), User- evaluation and online communities (pp. 29–53). Hershey: Idea Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwier, R. A., & Dykes, M. E. (2004). The struggle for community and content in virtual learning communities. In Proceedings of Ed-Media 2004 (pp. 2976–2982). Lugano, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwier, R. A., & Dykes, M. E. (2007). The continuing struggle for community and content in blended technology courses in higher education. In M. Bullen & D. Janes (Eds.), Making the transition to e-learning: Issues and strategies (pp. 157–172). Hershey: Information Science Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selman, G., Cooke, M., Selman, M., & Dampier, P. (1998). The foundations of adult education in Canada (2nd ed.). Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1996). In search of community. In W. Vitek & W. Jackson (Eds.), Rooted in the land (pp. 195–203). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Elearnspace. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm December 9, 2011.

  • Siemens, G. (2008). What is connectivism (and theory comparison table). Retrieved from http://docs.google.com/View?docid=anw8wkk6fjc_14gpbqc2dt

  • Siemens, G. (2010). What is the unique idea in connectivism? Retrieved from http://www.connectivism.ca/?p=116 December 9, 2011.

  • Tough, A. (1971). The adult’s learning projects: A fresh approach to theory and practice in adult learning. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virtual Learning Communities Research Laboratory. (2009). Virtual learning communities research laboratory. Retrieved March 18, 2009, from http://www.vlcresearch.ca December 9, 2011.

  • Wiley, D. (2010). Thinking out loud about connectivism. Retrieved from http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/1408#axzz0lgUZpK3N December 9, 2011.

  • Zengeström, J. (2005). Why some social network services work and others don’t—or: The case for object-centered sociality. Retrieved from http://www.zengestrom.com/blog/2005/04/why-some-social-network-services-work-and-others-dont-or-the-case-for-object-centered-sociality.htmlDecember 9, 2011.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions of research team members in the Virtual Learning Communities Research Laboratory at the College of Education, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon to the research and ideas expressed in this chapter, including Ben Kei Daniel, Kirk Kezema, Jaymie Koroluk, Dirk Morrison, Heather Ross, Greg Soden, Craig Wall, and Xing Xu. This research is supported by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard A. Schwier Ed.D .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schwier, R.A. (2012). Comparing Formal, Non-formal, and Informal Online Learning Environments. In: Moller, L., Huett, J. (eds) The Next Generation of Distance Education. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1785-9_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics