The concepts of instructor-centered and student-centered learning are new to me but do not feel unfamiliar. I say this because I think I have a general idea of what the two things are, but never had the words such as instructor-centered or student-centered to use. Looking back at my own educational experiences I think my teachers did a good job of integrating both kinds of learning into the classroom. I remember listening to my teachers explain something new, but also remember having a lot of time to practice those new skills on our own. I took an online course in my third year and it was a very different experience in comparison to my courses on campus. There are obvious reasons why they would be different, but the biggest difference that I noticed was being able to do the coursework whenever I decided. There wasn’t a determined time every week or day that I was expected to do the work, as I was able to do it when I found the time. This helped me to become more of a “self-determined learner” (Crosslin, 2018, para 3). One con that I would point out is that there are a lot of opportunities to procrastinate. I am certainly guilty of doing that sometimes, and if the student can’t be self-determined then they most likely would not succeed in a class like that. For me personally, I really enjoy having student-centered learning experiences, and I think that having online classes has helped me be more self-determined even in my courses on campus.
Asynchronous and synchronous learning are interesting and are also new concepts to me. I can see how both types of learning can be beneficial. Synchronous learning can work well because everyone is learning together in real time (Crosslin, 2018), which can make it easier to connect with other classmates. Asynchronous can also be beneficial because there is more autonomy and students have the freedom to learn on their own time and pace (Crosslin, 2018). An interesting point Crosslin (2018) makes about asynchronous learning is that it might be better suited for adults who usually have things going on outside of school such as work. Perhaps synchronous learning would be more beneficial for elementary to high school classrooms, and asynchronous would be better when it comes to post-secondary schooling.
Based on the readings, my understanding is that connectivism has to do with connecting everything and anything in order to further ones learning. Crosslin (2018) mentions that connectivism involves networking to gain information. To me, networking implies a social aspect – reaching out to people and having discussions about a certain topic. I think it also means having people to go to when you need help understanding something and vice versa. On the other hand, for Siemens (2005), it seems that connectivism is broader than that and can include making connections yourself between certain concepts or subjects which shows a more in depth understanding. I personally think both authors have valid understandings of connectivism. In relation to the other concepts I previously discussed, I think it is clear that connectivism is essential in any kind of learning.