[quoting Hannafin , 20 May 99] But, to reinforce Simon's question and the previous comments, make no mistake about it: scaffolding of necessity becomes progressively less explicit and domain referenced as the enabling context becomes increasingly open and learner-defined. Whereas in externally imposed/induced, we can support cognitive processes and tactics linked to known domains/problems under study, in internally defined enabling contexts we can only support cognitive cognitive processes and tactics. The dilemma, of course, is that it is precisely this type of learning (informal education, informal learning) that most needs improved tools and scaffolds to support individually defined, often spontaneous learning needs. This is where the risks are greatest, but so too are the payoffs.
In the future our technology will be able to anticipate our thoughts or at least direct them and provide the structures needed for us to learn them regardless of the subtlety of our thinking or learning intent.
Until then for individually-generated contexts, programs that act as diagnoticians in the manner of expert systems would be helpful. Sophisticated ones would be conversational in the way that a competent tutor would be able to discern the nuances of the direction of a person's learning.