II was coming at similar thinking in the early stages of this Change11 in my blog post on MOOCSs and wicked problems .

I prefer the Cynefin five domain framework to the wicked problem framework which in various guises uses 2, 3 or 4 domains.

Give the difficulty inherent blurry & shifting nature of wicked problems that arise out of their complexity, MOOCS seem to have something several process elements that ideally suites them as problem solving methods that can bringing together the insights from many diverse participants and stakeholders.

To solve wicked problems, good practice, best practice and the evidence base will be of limited use- a guide to strategy generation and selection perhaps. Perhaps they can help come with answer what is going one here.

This so because each wicked problems is be definition unique. In system characterized by complexity, small difference can produce very different outcomes. What has helped in some places my be harmful in other places. To solve wicked problems, we need to mobilize learning in a network. MOOCS are good method to mobilize learning in diverse network with out trying to impose a one way of seeing the problem.

Coherent solutions and strategies are more likely to emerge out of the complex adaptive processes of a good MOOC than many other forms of learning.

You may like to read my earlier #change11 blog post on in Can Collective Learning be mobilized to solve Wicked Problems

The questions that still drive are:

* What are the relative strengths & weaknesses of the wicked problem literature and the Cynefin framework?
* How does this fit with rhizomic learning?