So somebody recently asked me about a presentation on "Learning 2.0" Not the first time I'd heard this term, hell, I probably used it a couple of times myself. This time however, something really hit me. I need to read a lot more neuroscience and cog sci but I'm going out on a limb and saying that there is no such thing.
I know, cause I heard him say it myself, that Tim O'Reilly, the guy who started the whole "2.0" craze (or who at least at the meeting where it was started) did not use the term to denote an iteration but a break with the prior ways things had been done. SO I really don't believe that humans are learning differently - meaning, I think we are constituting memories, adapting behavior, practicing new skills - those activities that typically make up learning from the human standpoint - in much the same way as we have for hundreds if not thousands of years. I'm talking about our internal processes.
That doesn't mean that we haven't changed the mechanisms we use but the internal processes are very similar. So there is no "Learning 2.0" from the learners' view - there could well be "Instruction 2.0" or "Teaching 2.0" but think about what is really different there - those last two (and you could throw in Government 2.0, Education 2.0) address organizations and not learners and this gets to my second bothersome point about "Learning 2.0."
The use of "Learning 2.0" in my mind, puts all the burden of change on the learner. If they are all 2.0 and changed then clearly we (The Organizations) don't need to do anything on our end. Think about it - Government 2.0 as a term - talks about how the organization of government needs to change. IMHO, the use of a term like "learning 2.0" seems to absolve us of addressing the hard questions of how we need to change as organizations. Forget for a moment, about using Twitter for whatever or blogs for something else - do you need to have HR at the design table? What is predominant characteristic of your organizational culture? Is your technology woefully out of date? Does your office furniture suck and imparts to people a concrete idea of how the org REALLY values it "most important asset"? How do you hire? What kind of people do you look for?
Those are the dynamics that our learners are already operating in. Understand that environment. Figure out how to change that environment needs to change. Then maybe, we'll actually be getting to a "2.0" place. Let's put the burden on us and not on the learner.