One of the first presentations I sat in on at ASTD-ICE 2014 was on Maximizing Informal Learning’s Impact: A New Approach to Instruction Design, given by Michael Leimbach. I attended the presentation because informal learning is a tremendous interest of mine.
The purpose of the presentation was to provide insight into how to leverage the value of formal and informal learning. Leimbach discussed his research regarding informal and formal learning. Basically, the value of learning is what you actually use after you learn it. Leimbach added that we learn best from experience, but we are not very good at it.
Rethinking Informal Learning and 70-20-10
Leimbach then dove into the myths about informal learning. The first focused on the 70-20-10 rule. He mentioned studies do not show that the 70-20-10 method is the most effective approach. As he added, the 70-20-10 rule is a prescriptive model.
Engaging in Informal Learning is a common practice, not a best practice. ~ Michael Leimbach
Leimbach emphasized that there is no value in focusing on formal vs. informal learning. It is all just learning. It is not about how much individuals learn, but it is about how much they use it .
Four Types of Learning Experiences
Next, Leimbach organized learning activities along two dimensions: their level of structure and the specificity of their objectives. The resulting matrix identified four areas: guided experience, designed experience, incidental learning, and search learning.
He considered all four essential. To incorporate them into instruction, he recommended three approaches:
- Taking a learner-centric approach to instructional design.
- Thinking about the flow of learning methods.
- Creating conditions by which people value and engage in learning.
Leimbach advocates for informal and incidental learning, and encourages leaders to create the conditions for continuous learning.
I thought this was a good session, but it was more theoretical than I desired. Still, the presentation offered several important lessons.
