Chapter 3 of the Learning Revolution white paper on Informal Adult Learning aspires to transform ‘the way people learn through technology and broadcasting’.
During the consultation over informal adult learning we argued hard that technology not only delivers the ‘stuff’ of learning but can also provide the excitement of the ‘stir’ of learning where people actually explore their ideas and test their understanding. The digital environment is now no longer a place only for viewers and passive consumers of information but can be a great place for people to learn through creating their own products and then sharing them with others. Our colleagues in NIACE Dysgu Cymru has just produced a very witty video which illustrates this point very well.
It is the turning of the tables from digital consumers to digital producers which really characterises the ‘digital revolutionaries’ who are emerging with Informal Adult Learning.
The recent publication of the Harnessing Technology surveys this year has shown just how far local authorities have now come in their use of technology for learning – 95% of those surveyed now have a written strategy for using technology and 68% actually review these strategies at least once every year.
We now have over 3,000 eGuides trained to use technology for adult learners and then to cascade their skills to colleagues. There has also been a significant investment in connectivity and hardware for local authorities in the last seven years so they really must be well placed to capitalise on the strategic potential of their digital learning capacity in the new strategic role of Lead Accountable Body for informal learning.
I came across a couple of reports that may be downloaded from ascilite (Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education) thanks to a colleague of mine, that readers of this blog may also find of interest in their work or studies:
The Net Generation are not big users of Web 2.0 technologies (Gregor Kennedy et al 2007)
What do you think? Do your experiences bear out these findings or do they differ?
Have we moved on with the current media fascination for Twitter, Facebook and all things ‘social’?