Research Agenda
My research is focused on the intersection of informal learning, workplace performance, and evaluation. Below describes my current research, with references.
Nothing is created in a vacuum. Please view my acknowledgments and my AI Disclaimer using the button below.
Domain of Knowledge
Richey, Klein, and Tracey (2011) define instructional design as “the science and art of creating detailed specifications for the development, evaluation, and maintenance of situations which facilitate learning and performance” (p. 3) and when most instructional designers think of this definition, they think about formal learning instances. Those can be eLearnings or workshops or blended learning environments from K-12 teachers to higher education to adults in the workplace. I would encourage instructional designers to think outside of this formal context and begin to consider instructional design in the context of informal learning, especially as it occurs in the workplace.
Typically, informal learning is defined in contrast to formal learning. Formal learning in the workplace is structured learning that takes place outside of the work environment (Marsick & Watkins, 1990, 2001). Formal workplace learning can take the form of workshops, certification programs, or virtual reality training. Informal learning, on the other hand, is not highly structured and is driven by the learner’s discretion (Marsick & Watkins, 1990). Informal workplace learning can take the form of communities of practice, listening to podcasts, and real time problem solving.
Within informal learning, Michael Eraut (2000) outlined a typology of informal learning: implicit, reactive, and deliberative learning. Implicit learning is knowledge acquisition through unconscious attempts to learn and recognition that knowledge was gained (Reber, 1993). Reactive learning occurs in the middle of attempting to solve a problem that while the learning may be intentional it is in reaction to solving a problem (Eraut, 2004). While both of these contexts of informal learning are valuable, for my research, I am interested in deliberative informal learning or “where there is a definite learning goal and time is set aside for acquiring new knowledge, and engagement in deliberative activities such as planning and problem solving, for which there is a clear work-based goal with learning as a probable by-product.” (Eraut, 2004).
What drives my interest in deliberative informal learning is its self-directed nature and how it can be designed, developed, implemented, and potentially evaluated from a workplace instructional designer perspective. There is a great opportunity here for instructional designers to meet the need of their audience through creating and deploying effective deliberative learning experiences.
Research Agenda
Dr. Robert Branch spoke to our 8990 class and reflected on how his doctoral research question grew out of the phrase “A picture is worth a thousand words.” It made me consider, what is the foundation of my research? I kept coming back to the saying, “Nature is the best teacher; she gives the test first and the lesson later.” From my experience in the field, I have found this to be true.
You could connect this to what Dr. Kopcha called our ‘humble theory’ in the design-based research class. From an intuitive sense, I have found that the lessons that stick most are the ones I learn while trying to solve a problem, and then I can reflect on and apply them to later experiences. It is a natural process that happens outside of a formalized learning environment. Through this reflection, I have come to the research question of:
“If nature is the best teacher, how can we as instructional designers leverage the natural way of learning to influence workplace performance?”
Through my research, I hope to be able to address:
- What are current informal learning opportunities that are being intentionally designed by instructional designers?
- What methods are being employed to evaluate the effectiveness of these informal learning interventions?
- How can instructional designers elevate the workplace performance of employees through informal learning interventions?
Statement of importance
In 2024, the Association for Talent Development (ATD) released research that found 33% of organizations surveyed stated that more than half of their offered learning opportunities are informal and only 35% of organizations measure the effectiveness of informal learning. The study went on to state that 51% of organizations believe that informal learning will continue to increase over the next two years. These findings are not surprising when considering the literature around the perceptions of informal learning.
Research of teachers has found that they believe the effectiveness, relevancy, and flexibility of informal learning to be greater than that of formalized learning interventions (Lohman, 2006; Wermke, 2010). In a 2007 paper, Merriam et al. found:
“…upwards of 90% of adults are engaged in hundreds of hours of informal learning” and “it has also been estimated that the great majority (upwards of 70%) of learning in the workplace is informal”
Merriam et al. (2007), pp. 35-36
In addition to organizations recognizing the growth of informal learning within the workplace and the learner perception of the relevancy and effectiveness of informal learning, research has found that this approach to learning is foundational to a range of professions (Cheetham & Chivers, 2001, 2005).
With organizations beginning to understand the demand for informal learning practices and learners themselves expressing interest in pursuing informal learning, my research into this area is particularly relevant and important to help enable instructional designers to be able to intentionally develop effective informal learning interventions to help improve workplace performance.
Proposed Direction
In collaboration with my advisor, Dr. Jill E. Stefaniak, I have begun an IRB-approved pilot study survey of instructional design practitioners in the field to begin to address my first two research questions. This pilot study will help lay the foundation for understanding which forms of informal and formal learning instructional designers themselves use, as well as which types of informal and formal learning they intentionally design for these audiences.
As a next step to build on this research, I will conduct focus groups and interviews with instructional designers to further explore what was found in the survey. The intention here is to gather more qualitative data to inform the status of informal learning design in the field. From here, I will partner with Dr. Stefaniak to guide the next steps in determining how to address my final research question.
Outside of the pilot study, I am also conducting a systematic review of the current literature, which will be finished by the end of the summer as part of my 9600 Readings course with Dr. Stefaniak. I have been working on an annotated bibliography in 8900 that includes self-directed learning, which is helping to broaden my considerations around informal learning.
Additionally, I am considering further theoretical constructs in systems thinking, exploring how informal learning can operate across the organization to improve workplace performance and the decision-making processes of instructional designers as they develop informal learning interventions.
The work I have done so far with this has given me a great deal of background, context, and theory to help guide my foundational ideas about informal learning and to determine how I can bring a novel and needed perspective to the field.
References
Association for Talent Development (ATD). (2024) Informal Learning: Measuring Success Outside the Classroom [White Paper].
Cheetham, G., & Chivers, G. (2001). How professionals learn in practice: An investigation of informal learning amongst people who work in professions. Journal of European Industrial Training, 25(5), 247-292. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590110395870
Cheetham, G., & Chivers, G. (2005). Professions, competence, and informal learning. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/13660750610665017
Eraut, M. (2000) Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 113-136. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709900158001
Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 173-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/158037042000225245
Lohman, M. C. (2006). Factors influencing teachers’ engagement in informal learning activities. Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(3), 141–156.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13665620610654577
Marsick, V.J. & Watkins, K. (1990). Informal and incidental learning in the workplace. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315715926
Marsick, V. J. and Watkins, K. E. (2001). Informal and incidental learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.5
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: an essay on the cognitive unconscious (Oxford, Oxford University Press) https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.118.3.219
Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., & Tracey, M. W. (2011). The instructional design knowledge base: Theory, research, and practice. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9213-6
Wermke, W. (2010). Continuing professional development in context: teachers’ continuing professional development culture in Germany and Sweden. Professional Development in Education, 37(5), 665–683.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2010.533573