3 ms·

A few years ago I abandonned the project of studying part-time while working, I hated it. Today, I'm well into a distance program and remain motivated. This is

by mtone 11y ago

A few years ago I abandonned the project of studying part-time while working, I hated it. Today, I'm well into a distance program and remain motivated. This is at a local uni, not a Mooc, with some live chat/interaction during lectures That I watch later. Key experience points: - For me, the most difficult part of in-person was managing my schedule and transportation. I would come in to class, all stressed out about being 10 mins late, only to listen to 15 minutes of unimportant chit chat. The energy expenditure felt hugely wasteful. - In-class questions from others were generally not the questions I had in mind. I find forums more tailored. When someone asks a question, another student with access to books and google can take a thoughtful crack at it any time of the day, with the teacher/assistant adding in precisions regularly. Just like with any teacher/group, this is hit or miss. - Pausing is key. For math classes for example, the ability to stop a lecture after a concept is introduced and spend the next 2 hours on books/internet/exercises/etc to really assimilate it before continuing is the best way I've ever learnt maths. - Pace is good, but focus is also important. The ability to sleep 1 hour after work before starting a lecture makes a world of difference in my sustained alertness and interest. I understand the arguments for traditional school, but for me they are outweighted by the immediate, tangible benefits I get from distance learning. YMMV. Edit: shorten

bphogan 11y ago
Look what you're saying though - you're agreeing with me. 1. You were motivated to learn. 2. The in-class time wasted your time with 15 minutes of chit-chat rather than purposeful doing. 3. Pausing is key. But you are motivated to spend 2 hours working on the concept. It has been my experience that many do not. They simply move to the assessment to get it done. Then retention is lost. I'm not at all arguing for traditional school. Traditional school seems to be "let's talk at a room of people for an hour 4-5 times a week, then give them tests to see how much they remember." I want to see "you watch the 15 minute videos and then we engage together to create something meaningful where you apply what you learned." Which sounds exactly like what you want. Make no mistake - I can't drive because I don't see well. I have to take a bus to go teach my face-to-face classes. The bus ride can be 30 minutes to an hour depending on when I pick it up. To teach an hour class, I need 3 hours of my day. And this puts in me in the same boat as my students. When students come to my classes, I don't waste their time because it's precious. I'd love an online version of this. But with online classes, it's hard to find common times because people take classes around work and other duties.
- mtone 11y ago
  Fair enough. And I agree that progressive/hybrid approaches to teaching don't all translate/scale online well -- I'm thinking for example of programs built on being highly project-oriented in applied engineering or vocational schools, or the Khan-academy-style of doing homework in class (which I would have loved in high school) But presently for me this is not a requirement. I suppose that, being okay with the lecture format as the core, I wanted to pursue learning but with less of the contextual hassle and inefficiencies (I have enough of my own!). On that, online courses certainly delivered -- which is what I wanted to convey. However, I won't deny that this may be approaching the upper limit of what online education can manage to do well.

by mtone 11y ago

bphogan 11y ago

Look what you're saying though - you're agreeing with me. 1. You were motivated to learn. 2. The in-class time wasted your time with 15 minutes of chit-chat rather than purposeful doing. 3. Pausing is key. But you are motivated to spend 2 hours working on the concept. It has been my experience that many do not. They simply move to the assessment to get it done. Then retention is lost. I'm not at all arguing for traditional school. Traditional school seems to be "let's talk at a room of people for an hour 4-5 times a week, then give them tests to see how much they remember." I want to see "you watch the 15 minute videos and then we engage together to create something meaningful where you apply what you learned." Which sounds exactly like what you want. Make no mistake - I can't drive because I don't see well. I have to take a bus to go teach my face-to-face classes. The bus ride can be 30 minutes to an hour depending on when I pick it up. To teach an hour class, I need 3 hours of my day. And this puts in me in the same boat as my students. When students come to my classes, I don't waste their time because it's precious. I'd love an online version of this. But with online classes, it's hard to find common times because people take classes around work and other duties.

mtone 11y ago
Fair enough. And I agree that progressive/hybrid approaches to teaching don't all translate/scale online well -- I'm thinking for example of programs built on being highly project-oriented in applied engineering or vocational schools, or the Khan-academy-style of doing homework in class (which I would have loved in high school) But presently for me this is not a requirement. I suppose that, being okay with the lecture format as the core, I wanted to pursue learning but with less of the contextual hassle and inefficiencies (I have enough of my own!). On that, online courses certainly delivered -- which is what I wanted to convey. However, I won't deny that this may be approaching the upper limit of what online education can manage to do well.