An experiment: Connectivism (Part 5)

I honestly feel that the whole process has taught both the students and I many valuable things. Although it is far from perfect, connectivism really offers a lot! Through answering the next 7 questions I will reflect on the last 9 months.

Would you do it again? Yes, but not without changes. I would for example release autonomy a little more gradually, offer more scaffolding at the beginning of the course, give students more choice over project pathways, and try to find more effective ways to develop pronunciation.

What was the most interesting thing you learned? Just how many great resources exist outside of the 'classroom' in its traditional sense. In our times information is everywhere and things like field trips, the internet, books, apps, Skype, and peers can offer so much. To not use these is unnecessarily limiting.

What was the most interesting thing students learned? That learning isn't just a boring necessity, with the same routines day in day out. There is so much opportunity both inside and outside of the classroom, that can make learning inspiring, or fun, or affirming.

How does it compare in practice with constructivism, and instructivism (results, engagement, development, achievement, and challenge)? In the past I fell firmly in the constructivist camp of learning. I have taught the same level and age before and to compare: Students achieved the same milestones faster and there was a noticeable difference as time went by. At first students struggled to engage and took a awhile to warm up to the new leaning philosophy. This alternated as time went by and students got really into the learning and took more pride in their work. Connectionism was definitely a bigger challenge too and without the right support from peers and the teacher it can too often be defeating. This can be overcome but may require some diligence especially as some people choose to suffer in silence.

Regarding instructivist methods, I have never really used these but have experienced them in my work with public school. Students who study this method generally struggle to develop.

At the end the exam results were better.
Students developed stronger soft skills as well as language skills (except in pronunciation where constuctivism is more successful).
Students were more engaged mostly apart from a few outliers.
Students felt more challenge, than usually found on constructivist and instructivist methodologies but felt mostly that it was worth it.

What was the best moment? Finally seeing students take their own curiosity and getting carried away by the learning! As I there were quite a few ups and downs, but it was worth it.

What was the worst? Motivating some students. This can be a problem in cultures where traditional instructivist teaching is the standard. Students can sometimes have the expectation that education is a transaction with teachers transmitting knowledge. Most students adapted, but a few let homework, collaborative responsibilities, and their motivation slip.

Best advice for other teachers? Support you students, and create a supportive classroom! This will likely be the thing that will make the course sink or swim. It may not be the first thing that comes to mind but underlying things like this are very important. Even if that means going against connectivism once in a while it will really help your learners in terms of motivation and ability.