Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Authenticity in learning for the twenty-first century: bridging the formal and the informal

  • Development Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper attempts to bridge informal and formal learning by leveraging on affordance structures associated with informal environments to help learners develop social, cognitive, and metacognitive dispositions that can be applied to learning in classrooms. Most studies focus on either learning in formal or informal contexts, but this study seeks to link the two. The paper proposes three tenets to augment de-contextualized learning in schools by putting back the: (a) tacit, (b) social-collective, and (c) informal. This paper seeks to advance the argument for a consideration of how formal learning might be made more authentic by leveraging the affordances of informal learning. Two case examples are illustrated. The first case shows learners operating in a virtual environment in which—through the collaborative manipulation of terrain—adopt the epistemic frame of geomorphologists. The case seeks to illustrate how the tacit and social-collective dimensions from the virtual environment might be incorporated as part of the formal geography curriculum. In the second case, interactions between members of a school bowling team highlight the contextualized and authentic metacognitive demands placed on learners/bowlers, and how these demands are re-contextualized—through metacognitive brokering—to the formal curriculum. Productive linkages are made between informal and formal learnings and anchored through learners’ authentic experiences.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldrich, C. (2005). Learning by doing: A comprehensive guide to simulations, computer games, and pedagogy in e-learning and other educational experiences. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azzarito, L., & Ennis, C. D. (2003). A sense of connection: Toward social constructivist physical education. Sport, Education, and Society, 8, 179–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Carteaux, R., & Tuzun, H. (2005). Making learning fun: Quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 86–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49, 193–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boersma, A., Dam, G. T., Volman, M., & Wardekker, W. (2010). ‘This baby… it isn’t alive’. Towards a community of learners for vocational orientation. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S. (2002). Learning in the digital age. In M. Devlin, R. Larson, & J. Meyerson (Eds.), The internet and the university: 2001 forum (pp. 65–91). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S. (2005). New learning environments for the 21st century. Retrieved from http://www.johnseelybrown.com/newlearning.pdf/.

  • Brown, J. S. (2010). John Seely Brown: The business school of extreme aerial surfing [Video file]. Retrieved December 9, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJUO1GtiCfQ.

  • Brown, J. S. & Alder, R. P. (2008). Minds on fire: Open education, the long tail, and learning 2.0. EDUCAUSE Review, pp. 17–32.

  • Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1999). Organizing knowledge. Reflections, 7(2), 28–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (2000). The social life of information. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

  • Chee, Y. S. (2001). Networked virtual environments for collaborative learning. In Proceedings of ICCE/SchoolNet 2001, Ninth International Conference on Computers in Education, Seoul (pp. 3–11).

  • Chee, Y. S. (2010). Game-based learning as performance: The case of Legends of Alkhimia. In B. Meyer (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4 th European Conference on Games Based Learning (pp. 47–54). Reading, UK: Academic Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W., & Looi, C. K. (2011). Active classroom participation in a Group Scribbles primary science classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 676–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clinton, H. R. (1996). It takes a village: And other lessons children teach us. New York: Touchstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A. (2006). Cognitive apprenticeship. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 47–60). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cope, N. (2005). Apprenticeship reinvented: Cognition, discourse and implications for academic literacy. Prospect, 20(3), 42–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Hung, D., & Chen, D.-T. (2007). Context-process authenticity in learning: implications for identity enculturation and boundary crossing. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 147–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamaludin, A., Kim, M. S., & Hung, D. (2012). Unpacking self and socio dialectics in learners’ interactive spaces. Computers & Education, 59(3), 1009–1020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jan, M., Chee, Y. S., & Tan, E. M. (2010). Changing science classroom discourse toward doing science: The design of a game-based learning curriculum. In S. L. Wong et al. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 543–547). Putrajaya: Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.

  • Latham, G., & Story, K. (2006). Reading companions: Building communities of shared experiences. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 14(3), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 63–82). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3, 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, K. Y. T. (2009). The six learnings of second life: A framework for designing curricular interventions in-world. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, 2(1), 3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, K. Y. T. (2011). What are avatars made of? Fictive worlds and the zone of regulatory development. In A., Cheney, & R. L., Sanders (Eds.), Teaching and learning in 3D immersive worlds: Pedagogical models and constructivist approaches (pp. 271–287). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

  • Lim, K. Y. T., Hung, D., & Huang, D. (2011). Towards a situative view of extending and scaling innovation in education: A case study of the six learnings framework. Educational Review for Policy and Practice, 10(2), 77–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nasir, N. S., & Hand, V. (2008). From court to the classroom: Opportunities for engagement, learning, and identity in basketball and classroom mathematics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 143–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Nonno, N. (1998). The concept of “ba”: Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Toyama, R. (2003). The knowledge-creating theory revisited: Knowledge creation as a synthesizing process. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1(2), 2–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2010). Presentation of the PISA 2010 results. Retrieved December 7, 2010, from http://www.oecd.org/document/7/0,3746,en_21571361_44315115_46635719_1_1_1_1,00.html/.

  • Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, A. (2010). Community engagement as authentic learning with reflection. Issues in Educational Research, 20(1), 57–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S., Gentry, M., & Reis, S. M. (2004). A time and a place for authentic learning. Educational Leadership, 62(1), 73–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B., Matusov, E., & White, C. (1996). Models of teaching and learning: Participation in a community of learners. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), Handbook of education and human development (pp. 388–414). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. C. (1995). What we learn when we learn by doing. (Technical Report No. 60). Northwestern University, Institute for Learning Sciences.

  • Schank, R. C., Berman, T. R., & Macpherson, K. A. (1999). Learning by doing. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (vol. II) (pp. 161–182). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

  • Shaffer, D. W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers & Education, 46, 223–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2009). Why virtual worlds can matter. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(1), 37–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, D. & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. CreateSpace.

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G., & Wells, J. (1984). Learning to talk and talking to learn. Theory into Practice, 23(3), 190–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). A guide to managing knowledge: Cultivating communities of practice. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, V. (2008). Small by design—not by default: The big picture schools in Australia. Professional Voice, 5(3), 35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2002). Contextualised meaning making: One way of rethinking experiential learning and self-directed learning? Studies in Continuing Education, 24(2), 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office of Education Research, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore, 637616, Singapore

    David Hung, Shu-Shing Lee & Kenneth Y. T. Lim

Authors
  1. David Hung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shu-Shing Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kenneth Y. T. Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shu-Shing Lee.

Appendix 1: Typical interview questions from the reported intervention

Appendix 1: Typical interview questions from the reported intervention

Case study 1

  1. 1.

    During our lessons in the virtual world, one of the activities that you took part in was to work with your team-mates to form your own drainage basin. Now, let’s look at this topographical map. Where is the drainage basin on this map?

  2. 2.

    What clues in the map did you use to help you determine the watershed?

  3. 3.

    Here’s another map, this time of a different part of the world. Your task—for the next 5 min—is to predict how the form and shape of the drainage basin will evolve over time.

  4. 4.

    What are some of the criteria that you applied when formulating your prediction?

Case study 2

  1. 1.

    Do you set challenging goals for bowling?

  2. 2.

    If you make a mistake, how do you avoid repeating it?

  3. 3.

    How well do you know your strengths and weaknesses?

  4. 4.

    Do you think that your peers, coaches, or parents could affect your performance?

    • If yes, by whom? Please elaborate on it.

    • If no, what could influence your performance?

  5. 5.

    Do you find in-class learning can be useful for your bowling practices or vice versa?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hung, D., Lee, SS. & Lim, K.Y.T. Authenticity in learning for the twenty-first century: bridging the formal and the informal. Education Tech Research Dev 60, 1071–1091 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9272-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9272-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation