Category: edci335

Categories: edci335, Post 1

One technology-mediated learning experience that I struggled with was PHIL 201, which was a required university course delivered completely online and asynchronously. When I first started the course, I was actually excited because I thought the topics sounded interesting and different from the types of courses I normally take. I liked the idea of being able to work independently and manage my own schedule. Since the course was asynchronous, I expected it to feel flexible and less stressful.

At the beginning, I was motivated and kept up with the readings and lectures pretty consistently. However, after a few weeks, my motivation slowly started to shift. Because there were no live classes or regular interaction with other students, it became easy to fall behind without realizing it. Once I missed a few readings, catching up started to feel overwhelming, especially because many of the philosophical concepts built on each other.

One of the biggest challenges for me was that some of the concepts were difficult to fully understand on my own. Even though the course materials explained the theories, I often felt like I needed discussion or conversation to process the ideas properly. Reading complex philosophical arguments independently sometimes made the learning feel isolating rather than engaging. Looking back now, I can connect this to ideas from constructivism and connectivism, where learning becomes more meaningful through interaction, discussion, and shared understanding with others.

I also think the course struggled to support competence and relatedness. Since everything was self-paced, there was a lot of autonomy, but sometimes too much freedom made it harder to stay motivated and organized. Without regular check-ins, class discussions, or collaborative activities, I didn’t feel very connected to the course or to other learners. It often felt like I was trying to figure everything out completely alone.

This experience made me realize that motivation is influenced a lot by course design, not just personal effort. If the course had included more opportunities for interaction, smaller discussion groups, or optional live sessions to talk through difficult concepts, I think I would have stayed more engaged and confident throughout the semester. Even simple ways to build connection and accountability could have made a big difference in my learning experience.

References

Ertmer, P. A. & Newby, T. (2018). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective. In West, R. E. (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology (1st Edition): Historical Roots and Current Trends (pp. 133-151). EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/behaviorism_cognitivism_constructivism

This post  will appear in a few places:

1. in the blog feed on the front of your website
2. in the Learning Design menu on your website. This is because we have applied the “edci335” category to this post and the menu item “Learning Design” has been created from the category “edci335.” For every post you make for this course, please assign the “edci335” category to it. You are welcome to use this blog for your personal hobbies or for other courses, in which case, you could create additional menu items and categories for them.
3. if you give permission, your posts categorized “edci335” will be aggregated onto the Blog Feed on the EDCI 335 Course Website.

Feel free to delete this post once you understand this. If you have any questions, please reach out to your instructor.