E.mitrousi Informal Learning in the Workplace

7/31/2019 E.mitrousi Informal Learning in the Workplace

1/28

1

Informal learning in the workplace: the example of a dictionary

compilation team

1. AbstractThis small-scale qualitative research project explores the notion of informal

learning in the workplace, its breadth and the factors that affect the learning

process. The participants in the investigation are researchers, namely the

members of a dictionary compilation team, who work in a Research Centre in

North Greece. The study is an exploratory one and generates data gathered

from interviews. The conclusions drawn are that all the respondents highlight

the importance of workplace learning, recognizing as factors that affect

learning: the formal training, the everyday practice, and the support they have

from the others. Yet, regarding the notion of informal learning, there is scope

for make it more distinguishable, as it is largely invisible and not recognized as

learning.

2. IntroductionInformal learning in the workplace: the example of a dictionary

compilation team is the title of the project I am undertaking, and, as it is

obvious from its title, it focuses on informal learning in the workplace, i.e. in


2/28

2

the Research Centre where I work. The participants in this project are five

colleagues, the researchers-members of the compilation team of a Greek-

English dictionary to which I also belong. My colleagues are both researchers,

who work permanently in the Centre, as well as teachers of Greek and English

Language, who are selected by the Greek Ministry of Education to work as

researchers in the Research Centre, which strives to promote and disseminate

the Greek language worldwide through the teaching materials it produces.

Teachers selection is renewed every year, as some of them go back to their

school and are replaced by new ones. When I carried out the investigation, the

team consisted of eight members, two experienced researchers, i.e. me and the

coordinator of this working group, and six researchers (the teachers mentioned

above); five of them agreed to participate in the study, but the sixth one denied,

as she doubted the purpose of the research, assuming that it was guided by the

Research Centre we work in.

Although all the teachers have professional knowledge on the Greek and /

or English literature, they have no previous experience of the work required in

order to compile a dictionary. The learning that occurs on this work is both

formal and informal. Yet, although formal learning can be easily recognized,

informal learning may not be distinguishable and may take place

unconsciously; for this reason I decided to explore its notion, its breadth and the

factors that affect the learning process.

The research questions addressed in this framework are the following: 1)

How much learning occurs on the job?; 2) What counts as informal learning


3/28

3

in the workplace?; 3) What factors affect both formal and informal learning at

work?; and 4) How these factors affect the learning process?. The initial form

of the third question was: What factors affect informal learning at work?. Yet,

after my tutors feedback-question (regarding TMA03): Is all learning on the

job informal learning?, I modified it, in order to examine the factors that affect

both formal and informal learning at work.

Undertaking the project presented above, I decided to draw on the following

ideas in the literature of lifelong learning: a) situated learning; b) learning in the

workplace, both formal as well as informal learning; c) human capital; and d)

social capital.

The teachers-researchers, qualified with a Master Degree in Greek and / or

English literature and being competent on ICT technology, constitute the

human capital of the Centre who work in a system themselves with all of their

knowledge, experience and capacity to grow and innovate (Marsick and

Watkins, 2002). But, as soon as they are integrated into the compilation team of

our Research Centre, they have to couple this knowledge and experience, with

new learning, as they will be engaged in a new work project. Since this learning

is acquired in a social context from the relations with their colleagues, the

researchers become part of the social capital (Schuller and Field, 2002).

As factors that facilitate this learning process could be mentioned not only

the formal training of the researchers, but also their engagement in the everyday

practice and their relationships with the other researchers: the more skilled and


4/28

4

knowledgeable ones, who act as experts in the whole procedure, as well as the

fellow-researchers who do the same job.

In the case of learning from the more knowledgeable researchers, critical is

a form of organized learning support, as Eraut et al. (2002) point out, with the

skilled researchers being the experts. Yet, simultaneously, all the researchers

in the certain working group, according to Eraut et al. (ibid.) term, learn

through mutual consultation and support, when they ask each other for an

advice or when they try to solve a problem (ibid.).

What is obvious from the above is that learning that occurs in the Research

Centre is largely situated and dependent on social relationships within the

workplace (Study Guide, p. 40).

3. Literature reviewReflecting on the literature, which could be relevant to my own

investigation, I found out that, above all, Eraut et al. (2002) shaped my thinking

on the theoretical background to my project. Firstly, the conclusion they

reached from their findings that while people learn at work from formal

sources, learning from people is considered to be more important (ibid.)

influenced me to investigate the blurred to me issue of informal learning in the

workplace.

Furthermore, the questions: a) What is being learned?, b) How it is being

learned?, and c) What factors affect the level and directions of learning

effort?, they had constructed as their research program was progressing, helped


5/28

5

me shaping my research questions: a) How much learning occurs on the job?;

b) What counts as informal learning in the workplace?; c) What factors affect

both formal and informal learning at work?; and d) How these factors affect

the learning process?.

Eraut et al. (ibid.) view learning as situated and dependent on social

relationships within the workplace. The evidence they present, drawn from a

range of workplaces, is consistent with their sound argument for the importance

of the informal learning gained through social relations with their colleagues in

every level within the workplace.

The findings of Eraut et al.s (ibid.) interviews are that learning from formal

education and training is considered to be of secondary importance, whereas

learning from other people - in the form of organized learning support and

mutual consultation and support - and the challenge of work seem to be

prevalent dimensions of learning. These findings lead them to suggest that the

dominant assumption that learning in The Learning Society is a harvest of

formal provision needs to be balanced by a more thorough understanding of the

importance of informal learning on-the-job and of the factors that affect it

(ibid.). Regarding my own investigation, I found crucial their above mentioned

argument for elaborating the factors that facilitate learning in my own

workplace.

But, learning in the workplace still remained a complex issue for me. So, a

problem I had to overcome, which I realized after my tutors remark regarding

the TMA03, was to distinguish in my mind informal learning from not-


6/28

6

structured formal learning and then to make these notions discernible to my

colleagues. Thus, I decided to explore the notion of informal learning as this is

presented in the researchers: Livingstone (2002), Eraut (2004), and Marsick and

Watkins (1990), whose articles I had access to.

After reviewing these articles, I found that their definitions of informal

learning are not only critical for shaping my thinking on the theoretical

framework of this sort of learning, but also useful for the analysis for my

project. In particular, helpful are: a) Livingstones (2002) definition that

informal learning is all these individual and collective learning activities that

we do beyond the authority and requirements of any educational institution; b)

Erauts (2004) conclusions that implicit informal learning occurs unconsciously

and new knowledge and skills are acquired without being recognized explicitly

and that deliberative informal learning refers to the engagement in deliberative

activities for which there is a clear work-based goal with learning as a probable

by-product (ibid.); and c) Marsick and Watkins (1990) remark that incidental

learning, a subcategory of informal learning, is an unconsciously occurring by-

product of some other activity, such as task accomplishment or formal learning.

According to Marsick and Watkins (ibid.), when people learn incidentally,

their learning may be taken for granted, tacit, or unconscious.

The definitions of informal and incidental learning provided both by

Marsick and Watkins (1990) as well as by Eraut (2004) have some common

elements, because they present these types of learning as being by-products of

work activities, which may occur in an unconscious way (in the case of Erauts


7/28

7

implicit learning and Marsick and Watkins incidental learning) or deliberately

encouraged (in the case of Erauts deliberative learning and Marsick and

Watkins informal learning).

Livingstones (2002) definition of informal learning as individual and

collective learning activities coincides with Erauts (2004) assertion that

informal learning recognizes the social significance of learning from other

people, but implies greater scope for individual agency than socialization.

Furthermore, Erauts deliberative learning, reminds us of Livingstones

statement about the deliberate efforts to acquire new understanding, knowledge

or skill in a discernible amount of time in the framework of an informal

learning project.

Human capital and social capital are two other crucial ideas, which I draw

on in undertaking my project. To be more specific, when the qualified teachers-

researchers come to work in the Research Centre, exploiting their already

acquired knowledge, experience and capacity to grow and innovate (Marsick

and Watkins, 2002), constitute the human capital of the Centre. But, when they

are integrated into the dictionary compilation team, they have to combine their

previous knowledge and experience with the new learning, which will be

acquired in a social context through the relationships with the other researchers.

By this time, they become part of the social capital (Schuller and Field, 2002).

Coleman, as cited by Schuller and Field (2002), observes that human capital

is created by changes in persons that acquire skills and capabilities, which make

them able to act in new ways. Thus, human capital theory provides a rationale


8/28

8

for investing in peoples skills, in order for them to increase their productivity

and their earnings, and in so doing to increase the productivity and wealth of

the societies they live in (Schuller, 2000). So, the notion of human capital

considers society as a collection of autonomous individuals.

But, Schuller and Field (2002) critique notions of this theory, with its

economic emphasis on the development of lifelong learning policy, and use the

idea of social capital to refer to the powerful role played by social context in

influencing what and how people learn. Based on their argument that social

capital can explain patterns of participation in Northern Ireland and on the

evidence they present, they assume that high levels of social capital lead, in

general, to higher-than-average levels of informal and non-formal learning.

Indeed, the evidence available from the example of Northern Ireland is

consistent with their view, but more empirical research projects are needed to

identify examples of communities that have comparatively low social capital in

relation to lifelong learning, in order to be possible to generalize and extend

their approach to larger, than Northern Ireland, social systems.

What could be summarized from the arguments mentioned above about

human capital and social capital theories, which is crucial for my analysis, is

Schullers (2000) assertion about the relationship between human capital and

social capital in terms of input / measure: while human capital is measured

primarily by levels of qualification achieved, social capital gives prominence to

informal modes of learning, and the skills acquired through learning-by-doing.

Moreover, Coleman (in Schuller and Field, 2002) claims that, in the context of


9/28

9

work, social capital is maintained by colleagues supplying each other with ideas

and information.

4. MethodologyBeing one of the two experienced researchers in a dictionary compilation

team within the Research Centre I work, I decided to explore learning, both

formal and informal, that occurs on the work activity of compiling a dictionary.

Yet, due to the fact that formal learning can be easily recognized in the

workplace, I preferred to focus on the more blurred notion of informal learning,

its extent and the factors that affect informal as well as formal learning. Another

reason for choosing to explore informal learning at work is that the research

literature on this theme is very thin, so, as Eraut et al. (2002) stress, it must be

given more attention. Hence, in order to balance the dominant assumption that

learning in The Learning Society comes only from recognized formal provision,

there is a need to present more empirical evidence about informal learning at

work and to contribute, in this way, to the body of relevant literature.

A small-scale qualitative exploratory approach was employed, since its aim

was to investigate a little understood phenomenon, i.e. the informal learning in

the workplace, and discover the important factors that affect the learning

process (Research Methods in Education handbook, p. 145). Research

involved the collection of primary data using information from others

(Research Methods in Education handbook, p. 116), i.e. the method of face-


10/28

10

to-face individual interviewing of the five participants, namely the researchers

who are the members of the dictionary compilation team.

Initially, I was intending to use one more method to collect data, this of the

participant observation, and more specifically of the observation of one meeting

of our working group. Moreover, I was planning to couple this method with

additional interviews of the participants, in order to validate the findings of my

observation and to avoid bias, as I would observe people known to me, my

colleagues. Yet, undertaking the investigation, I realized that the initial

schedule of my project work was too ambitious, a fact that my tutor also

underpinned in his feedback in respect of TMA03. Thus, after having read

Bells (2005) advise that it might be unwise to undertake participant

observation unless you are already experienced, have the time and are very

familiar with the techniques involved, I decided to conduct only the main

interviews and to set aside the observation and the additional interviews.

I thought of using the method of interviews instead of this of questionnaires,

because the former is characterized by adaptability, a feature that the latter does

not have. Thus, the interviewer can investigate motives and feelings from the

tone of voice or the facial expression, and ask the interviewee to develop and

clarify his response (Bell, 2005). Before conducting the interviews, I prepared

the topics and I wrote questions on cards, for being easier to decide the order of

questioning during each interview. To establish the validity and the reliability

of the data I was intending to collect, I told to the coordinator of our team what


11/28

11

I was trying to find out and I asked her whether the questions I had devised

were appropriate to do the job (Bell, 2005).

What is obvious from the above is that the method of interview has several

disadvantages, which I had to bear in mind. The following are representative of

the pitfalls associated with this approach: a) it is a time-consuming method,

both in terms of conducting the interviews as well as of analyzing the

responses; and b) it is a subjective technique and there is always the danger to

fall into the bias trap (Bell, 2005). Since I had to interview only five

colleagues, I could manage the time required for the interviews. But, I had to be

aware of the time needed for the transcription and analysis of the data, so I

scheduled a three-week period for these procedures. Regarding the problem of

bias I tried for being vigilant and critical of my interpretation of the data.

Being an inside researcher, I tried to exploit the advantages of this status,

like the intimate knowledge of the context of the research and of the

micropolitics of the institution, and the best method for approaching my

colleagues (Bell, 2005). Yet, at the same time, I took care of any problems that

may arise from acting as an insider, such as the lack of objectivity due to the

close contact with the institution and colleagues (ibid.), or the difficulty of

guaranteeing anonymity and confidentiality (Research Methods in

Education handbook, p. 167), by discussing my interpretation of the data with

them, in order to cross-check my understanding of the situation with theirs

(ibid.).


12/28

12

Before starting to collect data, I obtained the consent (Appendix 1) of those

I was going to interview, i.e. my colleagues consent (Bell, 2005), making a

very general statement about the focus of the research (Research Methods in

Education handbook, p. 167)

For addressing the research questions of my project, tape-recorded, semi-

structured interviews, based on s schedule of eight open-ended questions

(Appendix 2) were used to collect data. I selected to use open-ended questions

for the several advantages they have: people respond as they wish, they give as

much detail as they feel is appropriate, they ask for clarification of the questions

(Research Methods in Education handbook, p. 171). Furthermore, I preferred

tape recording, because it allows the interviewer to keep eye contact with the

interviewee and it guarantees the accuracy of what he writes (Bell, 2005). Yet,

as one participant did not agree for the interview to be recorded, the method of

shorthand was used, but when the interview was over, I wrote up as much as I

remembered.

All interviews were conducted over a two-week period and lasted between

fifteen and twenty-five minutes. They were carried out privately in an office of

the Research Centre at a time when the respondent and the interviewer had

mutually agreed to. Each respondent was reminded of the focus of the study at

the outset of the interview. Where was a need for clarification, the scheduled

eight questions (Appendix 2) were elucidated from the interviewer by means of

additional questions. Besides, respondents were free to talk about each topic

and give their views, which would ensure the validity of the data collected


13/28

13

(Research Methods in Education handbook, p. 171). Interview recordings

were transcribed and, after being refined, extracts of them were used to develop

specific themes, which were closely related to the aims of the project. Tapes

containing the interviews were stored securely on Research Centre premises,

where they will be kept until after the report has been examined. All other

researchers of the Centre were denied access to this data.

5. Data presentation and analysisAnalysis of the findings of the research leads to the development of the

following themes: a) workplace learning; b) support from the experts; c)

working group; d) formal learning; e) assumptions about informal learning. The

data reflecting these themes are provided below, but all the names of the

participants have been substituted to ensure confidentiality. For ease of

comprehension of what follows clarifying terms are included in brackets. Yet,

due to the fact that the data presented here have been translated from Greek to

English, they may not convey well the responses of the participants.

Workplace learning

This theme relates to what participants believe they learn at work drawing

on their personal experience. All of them stress that the context of work gives

them opportunities to learn, to acquire new skills and knowledge, to have new

learning experiences:


14/28

14

I learn enough, in terms of acquiring new skills I have not ever

expected. I learn to work more efficiently, more fast.

(George)

I am informed about dictionaries I had no idea they existed. I learn to

use quite different software I am forced to widen my knowledge.

(Catherine)

I was considered competent when I came to work in the Centre, but

what I learn here, the experiences I could not imagine I would acquire

these experiences.

(Julie)

Support from the experts

This theme addresses the form of support being provided to the new

researchers (participants in the investigation) from the more knowledgeable and

experienced researchers. They argue for the favorable response, for the

expertise and the intimate knowledge of the experienced researchers:

They give us direct and valid answers. Thus, we can compare what we

have learned in the particular stage of work. We are sure that we have

done a good job.

(Joanna)


15/28

15

Most times the answers are direct and they show us that they are aware

of the problem and that they dont conceive it at that moment. And I

consider that always I take the best possible answer.

(George)

Some of them are moderate in their responses:

Necessarily, the experienced is the one who helps you more.

(Catherine)

If they could answer at that time, they answered. If no, they answered

later.

(Julie)

Beyond the support they have from the experts who belong to the dictionary

compilation team, one of them refers also to the support she has, to what she

learns from an experienced researcher outside the specific working group:

They answer (the experienced researchers) any query I have. They

clear up the problems. Yet, I learn from A.L. (experienced researcher)

many things that have no direct relevance to our work project.

(Helen)

Working group

This theme outlines the types of learning situation which would be

discerned during the work activity in the dictionary compilation team. All the


16/28

16

participants speak about mutual consultation and support as well as about

collaborative teamwork:

One of the factors that influence learning is the collaboration.

However, there is also the interaction, namely, beyond the collaboration

with the experienced researchers, it should exist the collaboration

within the team.

(Catherine)

Whatever you (the experienced researcher) explain and I dont

understand, I consult the researchers of the working group, these ones

who do the same job with me.

(Helen)

When I am puzzled over something... at the same time I can ask another

researcher, I discuss with him and we find a solution in common.

(George)

Furthermore, it is quoted that learning occurs as a by-product of the

everyday task accomplishment within the working group:

The everyday discussion of the problems which each of us encounters,

the mutual support to continue our efforts, the development of new

approaches, which have already been adopted by another fellow-

researcher, to use the software.

(Joanna)


17/28

17

Formal learning

This theme refers to the nature and the extent of learning that occurs as the

researchers are involved in formal education and trainings, which take place at

the outset of each stage of work. All of them, while they argue for the formal

trainings, they also mention everyday practice and / or collaboration. But, their

opinions differ in what they consider of major importance. So, two of them

underpin the prevalence of formal training:

The most important is the formal training and then the collaboration.

(Julie)

Trainings, manuals, references help you reflect. They give you a good

grounding. So, I think that they help you more than 50%. Yet, to reach

the desired aim, collaboration and the everyday practice are also

needed.

(Catherine)

One of them considers formal training and everyday practice of equal

significance:

First of all, the experienced researchers help me during the trainings,

because they teach me. And then, there is the everyday practice.

(George)


18/28

18

The other two participants seem to value formal learning as subordinate to

the everyday practice and to the collaboration:

I think that, what I learn through the collaboration I have with the

others is what outweighs. I am not sure. I give 60% to the collaboration

and 40% to the formal training. But, I realized it after the formal

training. The training must precede to be able to compare them.

(Helen)

Formal training is of a fixed length, while all the time we learn by

experience. The trainings give me a great help, but there is a need of

everyday practice, of responses in everyday queries, in order to face and

overcome certain problems.

(Joanna)

Assumptions about informal learning

This theme incorporates what participants assume that informal leaning is,

as its notion is an issue blurred to them. Several respondents are not able to

distinguish informal learning and confuse it with structured or not-structured

formal learning:

(Informal learning is), I guess, the experiences you acquire while you

engage in formal learning; to enter, to check, to alter data in the

database.

(Julie)


19/28

19

Informal (learning), I would say, that I practice to manipulate data in

the database, and, maybe, what I learn from my colleagues, the queries I

pose.

(Helen)

One of them equates informal learning with formal learning:

that in your workplace you are obliged to be trained for this work

activity, in order to cope with your job.

(George)

One of them manages to describe it more explicitly:

I would consider as informal learning the personal practice in all this

stuff that probably nobody has explained to you and that you discover

while working. Difficulties that you may encounter and you have to find

a solution by yourself or through collaboration with the fellow-

researchers.

(Catherine)

Regarding the future exploitation of what they learn informally in the

workplace, once again they are confused except the last participant mentioned

below:

I dont know if there will be a need to exploit them (the skills

acquired).

(Julie)


20/28

20

We will see. It is obvious that (what I learn informally) it is necessary

for my work in the Centre.

(Helen)

Whatever I learn may be useful in the future, and the way I learn, to

learn informally is needed in whatever I do.

(Catherine)

The findings support my assumption that learning that occurs in the

Research Centre is largely situated and dependent on social relationships within

the context of work. Participants view the support they have from the experts

and the relationships with the other members of their team as factors that affect

learning at work. To be more specific, they stress the significance of learning

from other people within their group, as Eraut (2004) describes it, in the form

of: a) organized learning support, with the skilled researchers being the

experts, who could know everything and so could answer any query that a

learner might have, and b) mutual consultation and support, when they learn

mutually through the collaboration they have. A form of learning from others,

which a participant refers to, to my great surprise, was learning from people

outside the working group.

Besides, although they recognize that they constitute the human capital of

the Centre, as they insist on mentioning their already acquired knowledge and

experience, they stress that they became part of the social capital (Schuller and


21/28

21

Field, 2002), as soon as they started to learn socially through the relations with

the other researchers in the context of their working group.

Regarding the issue of informal learning, although all of them refer

unconsciously to the types of implicit and deliberative informal learning, its

notion still remains difficult for them to understand, as they are not able to

make a distinction between formal and informal learning. Indeed, Eraut (2004)

arguing for the main problems that research projects, which focus on the

workplace learning, might have, assumes that: a) informal learning is largely

invisible and respondents are not aware of it, because much of it is either taken

for granted or not recognized as learning; b) the acquired knowledge is either

tacit or regarded as part of a persons general capability, but not at all as

something that has been learned; c) discourse about learning is dominated by

codified knowledge, so respondents cannot easily describe more complex

aspects of their work.

Although the approach I made use of to generate data helped me to address

the research questions, it is not without its difficulties. First of all, I studied only

five researchers, too small a sample to allow me to make generalizations to all

the researchers. Furthermore, this is a single workplace study and results may

not be applicable to other contexts. In terms of reliability, an important step I

omitted, when I designed the interview schedule, was a pilot study before

undertaking the interviews to test the interview schedule (Bell, 2005).


22/28

22

Regarding the validity of the data, what I observed as I was conducting the

interviews, was that in the beginning of the interview many interviewees tried

to please me by giving acceptable rather than honest answers (Research

Methods in Education handbook, p. 145). I was able to realize this, because

being an inside researcher I have an intimate knowledge of the respondents.

Yet, by ensuring them anonymity and confidentiality (Bell, 2005) I managed to

overcome this problem and obtain valid information. Notwithstanding, if I were

to repeat the investigation, being then a more experienced researcher, I would

use one more method, beyond the interviews, to collect data, this of participant

observation, for having more valid reflections of peoples behaviour in

everyday contexts (Research Methods in Education handbook, p. 145).

6. ConclusionsThis small-scale qualitative study explores informal learning in the

workplace. One of the reasons of my initial selection of this theme was for

contributing to the relevant thin literature by presenting more empirical

evidence. But, the small sample of five researchers I studied in combination

with the fact that the context of a single workplace was used renders the

findings of the study insufficient for generalization. Nevertheless, the

conclusions I derive might have some implications for the Research Centre I

work, which supports lifelong learning by promoting and disseminating the

Greek language worldwide through the teaching materials it produces.


23/28

23

To be more specific, this exploratory study leads me to draw the following

conclusions. First of all, learning that occurs in the working context, is

considered to be of great importance. The data shows that three factors affect

learning at work: a) the formal training; b) the everyday practice; and c) the

support from other people at work, either this support is of the form of

organized learning support from the experts, either of the form of mutual

consultation and support from colleagues who do the same job (Eraut et al.,

2002). So, it is acknowledged that in the context of work social capital is

maintained by colleagues who supply each other with ideas and information

(Coleman, as cited in Schuller and Field, 2002).

Besides, it is recognized that learning from formal training is of secondary

importance, a finding which is similar with that of Eraut et al.s (2002) project.

However, it is evident from the documentary evidence in this research that the

nature of informal learning remains blurred, because it is integrated with daily

routines, it is not highly conscious, it haphazard and influenced by chance

(Marsick and Volpe, as cited in Marsick and Watkins, 1990).

Thus, there is a need for the clarification of the notion of informal learning.

What has to be clear to the participants of the study as well as to all the

researchers of the Centre is that informal learning takes place wherever people

have the need, motivation, and opportunity for learning (Marsick and Watkins,

1990). This recognition might result in the increase of amount of learning at

work, in order for the Research Centre to become a Learning Organization, by

moving from systems and cultures that support individual learning towards high


24/28

24

levels of collective learning, through a range of measures it will propose (Keep

and Rainbird, 2002).

Indeed, if the Research Centre, I work in, gives emphasis to a systemic

approach to learning within itself (ibid.), it might become efficient, flexible and

entrepreneurial in the current competitive and globalized world and make

available worldwide its products, i.e. the dictionary we compile, the other books

it publishes, and its website - a portal for the Greek language.

Word count: 5278


25/28

25

Appendices

Appendix 1

Consent Form

(The original version of the following Consent Form is in Greek. Yet, for ease

of comprehension it is cited here in English.)

You are being asked to participate in the research study titled Informal

learning in the workplace: the example of a dictionary compilation team. The

purpose of this research study is to explore the notion of informal learning, its

breadth and the factors that affect the learning process at work. Six people are

expected to participate in this research study by their involvement in privately

conducted interviews.

The nature and the purpose of the above research study have been

explained to me; I have agreed to participate in the research study. I will

receive a signed copy of this Consent Form.

Signature of Person obtaining Consent Date

Signature of Participant Date


26/28

26

Appendix 2Interviews scheduled questions

1. Could you describe your work giving some details about your everydaypractice?

2. What types of knowledge and / or skills are they needed to do your work?3. In what way and how much do formal trainings that take place at the outset

of each stage of work help you to learn your work activity?

4. In what way and how much are you helped learning your work activity fromyour engagement in the everyday practice?

5. Do the other members of the team, both experts and fellow-researchers, helpyou learn while you are doing your work activity? If yes, how does this

happen?

6. Can you conceive the difference between formal and informal learning inthe workplace? From your point of view, what counts as informal learning

in your workplace?

7. How much learning, both formal and informal, do you believe that occurs asyou engage in this work project?

8. Do you realize that, while you engage in this work project, you acquire newskills, which would help you during this work activity as well as in other

contexts?


27/28

27

References

Bell, J. (2005, 4th edition) Doing your Research Project: a guide for first-time

researchers in education, health and social science, Glasgow, The Open

University Press

Eraut, M. (2004) Informal learning in the workplace, Studies in Continuing

Education, 26:2, 247-273 [online]. Available from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/158037042000225245(accessed 10 July 2008)

Eraut, M., Alderton, J., Cole, G. and Senker, P. (2002) Learning from other

people at work in Harrison, R., Reeve, F., Hanson, A. and Clarke, J. (eds)

Supporting Lifelong Learning: Volume 1 Perspectives on learning, London,

Routledge Falmer in association with The Open University

Keep, E. and Rainbird, H. (2002) Towards the learning organization? in

Reeve, F., Cartwright, M. and Edwards, R. (eds) Supporting Lifelong

Learning: Volume 2 Organizing learning, London, Routledge Falmer in

association with The Open University

Livingstone, D. W. (2002) Lifelong learning and underemployment in the

knowledge society: a North American perspective in Edwards, R., Miller,

N., Small, N. and Tait, A. (eds) Supporting Lifelong Learning: Volume 3

Making Policy Work, London, Routledge Falmer in association with The

Open University

Marsick, V. and Watkins, K. (1990) Informal and Incidental Learning in the

Workplace,London and New York, Routledge


28/28

Marsick, V. and Watkins, K. (2002) Envisioning new organisations for

learning in Reeve, F., Cartwright, M. and Edwards, R. (eds) Supporting

Lifelong Learning: Volume 2 Organizing learning, London, Routledge

Falmer in association with The Open University

Schuller, T. (July 2000) 'Thinking about Social Capital', Working Papers of the

Global Colloquium on Supporting Lifelong Learning [online], Milton

Keynes, UK: Open University. Available from

http://www.open.ac.uk/lifelong-learning (accessed 15 June 2008)

Schuller, T. and Field, J. (2002) Social Capital, Human Capital and the

Learning Society in Edwards, R., Miller, N., Small, N. and Tait, A. (eds)

Supporting Lifelong Learning, Volume 3: Making Policy Work, London,

Routledge

Documents

E.mitrousi Informal Learning in the Workplace