Nowadays English language recognized as a global language and it is used for intercultural purposes. The Incheon Declaration (2015, p.7) defines the vision of 2030 education - to ensure quality inclusive and equitable education and promotes lifelong learning opportunities for all. The Lifelong Learning strategy enhances the functioning of multilingual competence. The Council of Europe Recommendations (2018, p.8) on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning consolidates the functioning of multilingual competence. At the heart of this competence is the ability to use various languages ​​properly and effectively in communication. It is based on the ability to understand, express, and interpret concepts, thoughts, feelings, facts and opinions, both verbally and in writing (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) on ​​an appropriate scale of societal and cultural contexts according to each person's wishes or needs. Reading, listening, writing, and speaking skills are also embodied in the Secondary school language curriculum (2013). The Good School Conception (2015, p.2) emphasizes the future transition from education for all to education for everyone, personalized education and training, recognising that people's experiences, needs, and aspirations are different, and learning at different rates and ways.

The research philosophy. Postmodernism emerged in the second half of the twentieth century, when the terms “postmodernism”, “postmodernity”, “postmodernist” used to spread to various cultures and humanities, and their inflation, and uncertainty began to appear.  The situation of contemporary postmodernism in education can be defined as uncertainty, world recognition and confinement (Rubavičius, 2010), transformations of becomings (Mažeikis, 2013), seeking the meaning and perspectives of learning. The branch of postmodernism is poststructuralism - in fact, it was called French poststructuralism, with the dominant philosophy being “68 philosophy” (Marshall, 2004). It is like new freedom, an action (Peters, & Burbules, 2004), a movement for resistance to generalization, it is like a challenge to the established structures and hierarchies (Usher, & Edwards, 1994) it is a change of structuralism. The dominant philosophy is “1968 philosophy” (Marshall, 2004).

Language learning is one of the key aspects of the current postmodern situation.  Students at “cosmic speed” must adapt to newly created programmes, be fluent in one or two foreign languages, and be creative, innovative, and critically minded.  According to the Eurydice (2017, p.72) study, 9 out of 10 students in the European Union study English. Students can learn English not only in formal but also in non-formal and informal ways. It can be assumed that this enables the development of rhizomatic learning, originating from the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari (2004) and their ,,moving" concepts, as rhizome, assemblage, nomads, reterritorization, deterritorization. This idea is supported by research carried out by a number of researchers (Waterhouse, 2011;  Lian, Pineda, 2014; Masny, 2014). Rhizomatic learning is the learning based on Deleuze Guattari's (2004) term of rhizome, which has neither beginning nor end, only middle (Cormier, 2008), providing a dynamic, open, personal learning network that is constructed by learners themselves and meets their real needs (Lian, Pineda, 2014). Thus, the following problem-related question arises: 1) how do school students learn English in non-formal and informal way?

The research object- the learning of English of secondary school students in the contexts of non-formal and informal learning.

The aim of the research - to reveal the English language learning of secondary school students based on the theoretical insights of Deleuze, Guattari.

The questions of the research – 1) how do secondary school students learn English in non-formal and informal ways? 2) what are the  rhizomatic features, which  manifest in English learning of secondary school students?

Research methodology Research participants – secondary school students from Lithuanian school, 12 th grade, age average -18 year. The average length of the interview – 45 min.-1h. Narrative method. A narrative is an oral or written text that presents an individual’s (based on their own experience) narrative, story about chronologically related events (or events) (Creswell, 2007, p.53-54). The data collection method is a narrative semi-structured narrative interview. Narrative data are collected in order to answer into the research question 1) how do secondary school students learn English in non-formal and informal ways? Data were collected according to Barkhuizen (2020) a five-dimensional narrative. The first dimension is - narrative as a research object. Here, researchers focus on narrative features (Barkhuizen, 2020, p.190). The second dimension concerns the conversation of the stories that are created during this process, the interaction taking place when the stories are as interaction (stories as interaction). The third dimension is less research engagement. The fourth dimension is short narrative stories. Short stories are analysed in detail in terms of both content and context. The fifth dimension - narrative analysis - thematic analysis. Short stories are analysed thematically, depending on their content as well as the context. (Barkhuizen, 2020, p. 5). The data analysis method. Thematic analysis. After collecting the students' narratives, a thematic analysis of Braun, Clarke (2006) was performed in the following order: 1) the researcher's access to the research data, which are already transcribed; 2) data coding; 3) search of themes and subthemes; 4) review of themes and subthemes; 5) description of themes and subthemes, at this stage the themes are reviewed again, formulated descriptions of themes; 6) preparation of a report. This analysis helps to answer into the second research question - what are the rhizomatic features, which manifest in the English learning of secondary school students. Cartographic method. Cartography - the art of mapping (Okada, Buckingham, Sherborne, 2014). Rhizomatic cartography is the process of mapping rhizomatic assemblages (Masny, 2013, Waterhouse, 2011). 15 individual rhizomatic maps were created. The maps are analysed through principles developed by Deleuze, Guattari (2004) (connection and heterogeneity, multiplicity, rupture, decalcomania, and cartography).

Conclusions 1. The analysis disclosed that students learn rhizomatically in non-formal and informal ways and English learning of secondary school students is having rhizomatic features such as assemblages, becomings, deterritorization, and so on. 2. The thematic analysis revealed that the dominated assemblages are: reading-listening, reading-writing, speaking-listening, reading-speaking, and listening-writing. 3. The analysis of reading-listening assemblages disclosed that students develop English through watching movies, music videos, or educational material with subtitles. Learning English through music allows the learner to learn new words, tenses and learning English from movies and their subtitles develops the phonetic subtleties of pronunciation. 4. The analysis of reading and writing assemblages disclosed that students correspond with their peers both from Lithuania and other countries. This develops networking by being "in between". Students take advantage of the benefits provided by information networks, such as Instagram, Facebook, use mobile apps to learn the language. 5. The analysis of speaking-listening assemblages disclosed that students develop English language skills on trips, talking with peers, broadcasting their programs, playing computer games. 6. The analysis of reading-speaking assemblages disclosed that students develop English language skills by reading fiction and playing computer games. Students read only one or two books in a few years, but they try to learn English through playing games. 7. The analysis of listening-writing assemblages disclosed that students develop English language skills by communicating with peers through social networks, playing computer games, learning through video platforms as Youtube, for example IELTS. 8. In order to produce the functioning of the English language learning machine, favourable micropolitics that initiates molecular change through a free learning paradigm is needed. 9. The English learning is having rhizomatic features, so rhizomatic maps were created. In addition, the work is combined of education science (non-formal and informal learning), philosophy (rhizome), and philology (English language) elements.

References 1.Braidotti, R. (2011). Nomadic theory: The portable Rosi Braidotti. New York: Columbia University Press. 2.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. 3.Barkhuizen, G. (2020).Core dimensions of narrative inquiry. In J. McKinley, H. Rose (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 188–198). London: Routledge 4.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. 5.Cronje J. (2018). Towards a model for assessment in an information and technology-rich 21st century learning environment. Ocational Paper, 37, 1-19. Urbana, IL: National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA). 6.Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic education: community as curriculum innovate. Journal of Online Education, 4(5), 1-8. Retrieved from: http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=innovate. 7.Cook, D. (2020). The freedom trap: digital nomads and the use of disciplining practices to manage work/leisure boundaries. Information Technology & Tourism, 22, 355–390. doi:10.1007/s40558-020-00172-4. 8.Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2004). A thousand plateaus: capitalism and schizophrenia. London: University of Minnesota Press. 9.DeLanda, M. (2006). Deleuzian social ontology and assemblage theory. In book: Deleuze and the social (pp. 250-266).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748620920.003.0013. 10.Eurydice report .(2017). Retrieved from: Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/key-data-teaching-languages-school-europe-–-2017-edition_en 11.Lian, A., &Pineda,V. M. (2014). Rhizomatic Learning: “As… when… and if…” A strategy for the ASEAN community in the 21st century. Beyond Words: a Journal on Language Education, Applied Linguistics and Curriculum & Instruction, 2, 1-27. 12.Masny D. (2015) Rhizoanalysis as educational research. In: Peters M. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational philosophy and theory. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_63-1 13.Mackness, J., Usher, E. (1994). Postmodernism and education. London: Routledge. 14.Mažeikis, G. (2013). Įsikitinimai. Sąmoningumo metamorfozės. [Convictions. Metamorphoses of consciousness]. Kaunas: Kitos knygos. 15.Okada A., Buckingham S.S., Sherborne, T. (Eds.). (2014). Knowledge cartography: Software tools and mapping techniques (Advanced information and knowledge processing). London, UK: Springer. 16.Peters, A.,& Burbules, M.C. (2003). Poststructuralism in Educational Research. United States: Lanham, MD. 17.Rubavičius V. (2010). Postmodernus kapitalizmas [Postmodern capitalism] Kaunas: Kitos knygos. 18.Usher, R., & Edwards, R. (1994). Postmodernism and education. London: Routledge. 19.Vidurinio ugdymo programa, Kalbos [Language program of secondary education] https://www.smm.lt/uploads/documents/svietimas/ugdymo-programos/vidurinis-ugdymas/Kalbos_2_priedas.pdf 20.Waterhouse, M. (2011). Experiences of multiple literacies and peace: A rhizoanalysis of becoming in immigrant language classrooms [Doctoral Thesis]. https://ruor.uottawa.ca/ handle/10393/19942