Phil Hodkinson

The Final Keynote seems to have come around quickly! Rethinking the relationships between on and off the job learning

If we take the view that workplace learning is participatory and informal, then:
- work related learning can become invisible
- differences between on and off job learning are exaggerated
- focus on the workplace marginalises individual learning & individual movement.

Transfer of learning implies to Phil an acquisiton mode of learning.
Learning culture is the social practices through which people learn - a learning site might be clearly bounded, the learning culture never is. The disposition of a person has as much influence on learning as the learning culture hass.

[Phil is a lively talker who is able to take the abstract and illustrate with examples well without 'dumbing it down']

Moving from learning to work can be frought with dangerous difficulties dependant largely on the social and cultural capital of the individual learner.

'Learning is Becoming'
seeing movement as a learning opportunity. Learning is not transferred, people move and learn. Movement is not always physical between fields (ie work, study, family etc).

One of the other great things Phil has been doing through his talk is referring to and drawing on the sessions he has participated in during the conference.

Better Questions?
- what learning is practically and morally achievable and desirable in any particular circumstance and for whom?
what learning can be best done off the job?
what are the relationships between on and off the job learning cultures?
how can the on and off learning cultures be better interrelated, and if/when that is desirable?
how can on/off job learning help people become who they want to be?