Jon Mason, you have made a good point in your last paragraph. I think we should be careful to avoid conflating two distinctions: on the one hand, there is the distinction between formal and informal learning; the other distinction is between explicit (conscious, reflective) and implicit learning (what we “pick up”, so to speak, without deliberate attention to it; e.g. how children acquire their first language). Although we tend to associate explicit learning with formal settings (schooling), your example of speed limits shows that much explicit learning can take place in informal contexts. Similarly, schooling largely targets explicit learning, but much implicit learning also takes place in school (e.g. the whole socialization and enculturation process – “how to play the game” – that kids absorb in school). In the classroom (a formal setting), teaching/learning activities can vary along the explicit-implicit continuum: think about the difference between listening to an explanation of a grammar rule and then doing an exercise on it (learning is highly explicit), versus engaging in a role-play or simulation (learning is largely implicit).

Sandrine, there's lots of resources out there - eg., see: Victoria Marsick. Toward a unifying framework to support informal learning theory, research and practice, at http://bit.ly/12pKOdq and http://tecfa.unige.ch/staf/staf-k/borer/Memoire/incidential%20learning/incidentiallearning.pdf

And, Burns & Schaeffer at:

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v40n3/burns.html

But -- I'd also suggest looking at this topic with a critical perspective, like asking where the boundaries lie between formal & informal or even between just "learning" & "informal learning" -- as they're not always apparent,eg, when reflection is taking place. Many theories of learning are also just as valid in informal contexts.

And, what is it that is being learned? eg., if I get a speeding fine in a section of road that has a speed limit I'm not familiar with I learn that it's probably not smart to speed there again -- so, in this case it is not hard to mount arguments that the experience was both a "structured learning experience" (structured by the road traffic authorities) & was formally learned; and, it has nothing to do with formal educational institutions & is therefore informal learning. So, just because theories can sound plausible, it doesn't mean they are the last word on things either -- or there's not an alternative theory

Last year, Elisabeth Bennett talked about 'A Four-Part Model of Informal Learning: Extending Schugurensky’s Conceptual Model'. Might be a good starting point, either.

http://www.adulterc.org/Proceedings/2012/papers/bennett.pdf

Jon Mason, you have made a good point in your last paragraph. I think we should be careful to avoid conflating two distinctions: on the one hand, there is the distinction between formal and informal learning; the other distinction is between explicit (conscious, reflective) and implicit learning (what we “pick up”, so to speak, without deliberate attention to it; e.g. how children acquire their first language). Although we tend to associate explicit learning with formal settings (schooling), your example of speed limits shows that much explicit learning can take place in informal contexts. Similarly, schooling largely targets explicit learning, but much implicit learning also takes place in school (e.g. the whole socialization and enculturation process – “how to play the game” – that kids absorb in school). In the classroom (a formal setting), teaching/learning activities can vary along the explicit-implicit continuum: think about the difference between listening to an explanation of a grammar rule and then doing an exercise on it (learning is highly explicit), versus engaging in a role-play or simulation (learning is largely implicit).

@Denise, I'd like to see a model or theory for the 'stories' told. Of course, if students see that when they do not break the ranks they will not have problems, they will follow this 'rule of engagement'. Call it socialization and/or enculturation, even assimilation, for which there may be a number of models available. I am not an expert in this field.

There are a number of theories such as "Collaborative learning" "Communicative Language Learning "ZPD" and "CoP". There are many variables so many that it would be difficult for any one theory or model to successfully describe how learning is acquired. There does appear to be some evidence that both formal and informal learning requires a period of reflection and interaction between the learner and the content. This also appears to be more effective if this interaction includes others. I can't remember which theory as it was one that I read for background on a different theory.

Thanks a lot Jon. I realized it while reading and I m a bit confused I must confess. So I'll start with understanding the meaning of informal learning first. Thanks once more.

Thanks to Denise and Michael for your contributions. I really appreciate.