This article is focusing on comparing the efficiency of “traditional learning” vs “non-traditional learning” on the example of a project called CoCreat. The project results in new solutions for promoting creative collaboration in terms of new and innovative learning models based on social media and mobile technology. Creative collaboration is a multidisciplinary process where various problems are explored from novel perspectives and the result of collaboration is not defined beforehand (Sternberg,2006). The main idea is to develop and evaluate collaborative spaces for learners of different ages in order to promote creative collaboration.The main source of data will be gathered from one of the author’s master thesis which tries to find answer to her research question “Do students consciously make their selection of courses and therefore plan their studies  based on how does the administrative side is built up or and because of their need to get their credits and EAP-s or are they mainly taking into consideration the content of the course? The question rose from the current situation in online learning where using different social media tools are being promoted more and more, but still are not that well adapted in a lot of different countries. Why is it so? Is it only the traditions or maybe different school systems do not believe in the efficiency of learning somewhere else than classroom. What about students themselves? Would they adapt more Internet based study activity if it were an option?   

In the article “traditional learning” needs to been defined whereas “non-traditional learning” is seen as conducting studies using different social media tools and other devices which make the importance of distance and time disappear (ability to do school work online when ever necessary). Non-traditional learning is already practiced in Tallinn University in a considerable amount as one master level curriculum IMKE  - Interactive Media and Knowledge Environments – which is a five years old international master program, has open and very flexible and constantly evolving curriculum. It has its main characteristics of a dynamic morphology manifesting mainly in fostered flexible university regulations and all the external contributions, and a very heterogeneous learning environments encouraging our vision that every lecturer should used the approach she or he sees as the fittest in each course. As a result, IMKE course modalities range from strictly face-to-face to fully online without any face-to-face contact; from simple (paper) file sharing to intensive use of a specific learning management system; some open learning environment agreed upon buy students and lecturers; or even Second Life. This heterogeneity is welcomed by IMKE's community as it allows for an hands-on experimental approach to many of the topics addressed in the curriculum, but also raises questions and problems. One example being the difficulty students feel in keeping up with everything related to their master program and their colleagues, as all are encouraged to keep personal blogs on top of every system account they must get hold of to participate in the program's.

1. Mikhail Fominykh, Ekaterina Prasolova-Førland and Monica Divitini: "Constructing a 3D Collaborative Virtual Environment for Creativity Support," 2. Eero Palomäki, Pekka Qvist, Olli Natri2 onatri@cc.hut.fi Pekka Joensuu, Marko Närhi, Elina Kähkönen, Reija Jokela, Marianne Hemminki, Päivi Korpelainen, Jari Vepsäläinen, Katrina Nordström "LabLife3D: Teaching Biotechnology and Chemistry to Engineering Students by Using Second Life"