EDCI 335 blog post#1 + introduction

Hello, my name is Tommy Lee. I am a third year Comp-Sci student at University of Victoria. I was born and raised in South Korea then I immigrated to Canada with my family. I enjoy spending time on things that help me relax and stay balanced, such as playing games, learning new skills, and going to gym. In the future, I hope to become a game developer as I enjoy playing video games and was always interested in how coding works for video games.

Motivation

One technology-mediated learning experience I started but did not get to finish was an online tutorial series about web development from a reputable source known as “Udemy”. As a Computer Science student preparing for future job and Co-op, I was motivated because I wanted to improve my skills and build professional projects for my portfolio. Since I had no experience in web coding, I thought learning from this site would help me understand how the actual developers code.

When did your motivation start to shift?

However, my motivation started to shift when the course became too focused on following steps without explaining the reasons behind them. At the beginning, the course felt really easy because all I need to do was simply copying the instructor’s code, but, It did not take long to realize I was following the instruction without understanding the content. Somehow, I was able to make the project work after following the steps, but whenever an error happened, I was lost and did not how to fix it by myself. This connects to the idea introduced from Smarter Every Day’s Backwards Brain Bicycle (“Why is learning hard?”, 2023), where knowledge and understanding are shown as different things. Although I had some knowledge of the steps, I did not fully understand the concepts.

What aspects of the design contributed to disengagement?/ Which learner needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness, relevance) were not well supported?

The design of the course also contributed to my disengagement. There was not much interaction, feedback, or connection with other learners. The course also did not give me many choices. I had to follow the exact project, exact tools, and exact structure of code which limited my autonomy. According to Self-Determination Theory, motivation is supported when learners experience autonomy, competence, and relatedness. In my case, competence was also not well supported because the course did not include enough practice problems or explanations in detail. I felt like the instructor was assuming that viewers have the knowledge already. Also, relatedness was missing because there was no community or forum to discuss problems with other people taking the course.

How might the experience have been designed differently?

If the experience had been designed differently, I think I would have stayed more motivated. For example, the course could have included small quizzes about the concept learned after each lesson and explanations of common mistakes. Having a community for discussion or peer feedback would also have helped me feel connected. As suggested by Ertmer & Newby (2013), I think a constructivist approach would have helped because I could have built something more personally meaningful instead of only copying the instructor’s example. Additionally, using outside resources, sharing progress with peers, and learning from other students could have made the experience feel better connected (“Connectivism”, 2010).

Overall, this experience showed me that motivation is not only about personal effort. Instead, good design can keep students motivated. I was able to understand that learning environment should support autonomy, competence, relatedness, and relevance to achieve proper education.

References

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.

Why is learning hard? (2023). EDCI 335:

Motivation and learning. (2023). EDCI 335

Connectivism. (2010). EDCI 335