Were you convinced by rhizomatic learning as an approach?
The video was inspiring in many ways and I was convinced - partly! I think the idea of abandoning the traditional 'talk, test, certificate' model of my entire formal education is disconcerting enough for me to resist any suggestion that another better way may be available. I can certainly see that rhizomatic learning is something which happens organically in informal learning (and informal learning must make up at least 90% of our learning over the span of our lives). The learning through experimentation could be rephrased for young children as 'learning through play' which is commonplace as an ideal. I also could really see the value of the approach in areas of learning where new ground is being broken rather than old ideas and facts being internalized and understood. I can see how this approach could, for example, be invaluable in cutting edge research - though I guess I would call it research rather than learning. Somehow the word 'learning' to me involves gaining information (or insight, understanding etc.) which is already known (or seen, understood) by others.
Could you imagine implementing rhizomatic learning?
No. I can see that I have been engaged in it but I cannot understand a way in which you could 'implement it' which sounds very top down and inorganic. I suppose you could plant 'seeds' (ideas? problems?) and see if and how they grow or are approached.
How might rhizomatic learning differ from current approaches?
It's hugely different from formal education and learning as I have experienced or witnessed it. I think it is commonplace in other contexts where 'learning' may happen but the language used is more 'development', 'problem-solving', 'brain-storming'.
What issues would arise in implementing rhizomatic learning?
It would require learners who were prepared for a vastly new experience! The absence of a start or end point, the absence of markers along the way would be disorienting to people who had always 'learned' differently.