So far in EDCI339, we have explored a few concepts related to open and distributed learning. These concepts include instructor-centred versus student-centred learning, synchronous and asynchronous learning, and connectivism. To start, instructor-centred learning occurs when the binary between teacher and student is strictly defined; the prior is the sole “donor of knowledge” and the latter is the “receiver”. In student-centered learning, the student is encouraged to take the lead on their own learning and problem solving. The article suggests that “self-directed learning” should be emphasized as much as possible. This article is written specifically about the use of open learning in massive online, open courses (MOOCs), which presumably have a student body composed of late adolescents or adults. From a developmental perspective, I wonder if the preferred or emphasized learning model would shift for a younger audience. In certain contexts, when young students may not have the personal skills or experiences to direct their own learning, I wonder if instructor-centred is more effective. In either case, there are likely many factors to consider including the environment, class size, method of delivery (i.e., online or not) and subject being taught. As the article suggests, I agree that emphasizing independent learning is beneficial since it helps students develop their own problem-solving skills while giving them a chance to show initiative and growth.
Another dichotomy presented in the readings is that between synchronous and asynchronous learning. Synchronous learning occurs when students interact face to face. This can happen in person or by sharing online video chats. Asynchronous learning is more independent, where no physical or online space is shared in real time. I believe that both have advantages and disadvantages. As a fourth-year student who also works and volunteers, I appreciate the asynchronous approach taken by this course. It allows me to work more at my own pace (I say, as I write this reflection past the due date. I guess I’m a laggard today, unfortunately!). At this stage in my degree, I have had many experiences learning in synchronous classes where students gather regularly. In my experience, the synchronicity does not enhance my learning. In fact, almost all my learning occurs either before or after the class when I can work on my own. Also, synchronous learning experiences can be frustrating when group work is used and composes a major part of the overall course grade. As an extrovert and “people person,” I am not undermining the importance of working with others. However, when it comes to academic accomplishments and numerical grading schemes, I would rather rely on myself only.
Lastly, connectivism is defined in the first article as “networking with connections to gain knowledge or skills.” The second article emphasizes the role of chaos and entropy in learning; forming connections is a critical step for learning in “nebulous environments of shifting core elements.” I agree most strongly with the aspect of connectivism that emphasizes maintaining connections through which one can acquire unknown knowledge, instead of focusing on the knowledge itself. In this era, concrete, internalized knowledge is becoming obsolete as we continue to turn to Google to answer simple questions. Remembering factoids is less useful and impressive than it used to be. Now, the most valuable player is the player who can use connections to efficiently use and optimize the tools that are already available.