From Curiosity to Completion: The Journey of Self-Directed Learning
More than a decade ago, I enrolled in several courses through iTunes U, which at the time felt revolutionary: Harvard, MIT, and other top institutions offering free, open access to their lectures. It was exciting, and I started with a genuine desire to learn. But as the weeks passed, my engagement faded. It was not the fault of the courses. The real challenge was internal: I lacked the structure, habits, and sustained motivation needed to continue learning on my own. The platform eventually disappeared, and I had little to show for the time I had invested.
This was not an isolated pattern. Years later, I turned to Duolingo to begin learning Japanese. The app’s gamified structure, with streaks, leaderboards, and daily challenges, provided a sense of progress and fun. During the summer months, I was consistent. But as the school year began and my responsibilities as a teacher resumed, my focus shifted. The motivation that carried me through daily practice waned under the weight of shifting priorities.
These experiences taught me that access to content, even well-designed, motivating content, is not enough. Starting is easy. Sustaining momentum requires more.
Today, the world of open online learning has matured. MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) have become more sophisticated, widely available, and often include credentials or recognition upon completion. More importantly, research now offers deeper insight into what helps learners not just start, but succeed.
A meta-analysis by Doo, Zhu, and Bonk (2023) confirmed that self-directed learning (SDL) plays a critical role in MOOC success. Drawing from 60 independent samples, they found that motivation and self-monitoring had a greater impact on learning outcomes than simply managing time or resources. This aligns with my own experiences: structure and external tools can help, but without intrinsic direction, persistence falters.
Zhu and Bonk (2022) also offer 15 practical strategies for supporting SDL in online learning environments. These include encouraging learners to set personal goals, develop learning plans, reflect on progress, and engage with flexible timelines. These guidelines emphasize learner autonomy while acknowledging the need for instructional scaffolding, particularly valuable for adults navigating self-paced courses without regular instructor interaction. With these strategies in mind, I find myself thinking about the possibility of enrolling in another course in the near future, this time with a clearer understanding of how to sustain my engagement and structure my learning around realistic goals.
In another study, Zhu, Bonk, and Berri (2022) interviewed MOOC learners across different countries. Participants cited a range of motivations: personal curiosity, exam preparation, career development. Those who succeeded tended to engage in consistent behaviors like note-taking, supplementing core materials, and tracking progress. Their stories reflect a broader truth: SDL is not innate. It is cultivated through intentional effort. This reinforces what I mentioned earlier: motivation was often enough to get me started, but sustaining that motivation, especially through competing priorities and long-term demands, proved to be my real challenge.
These findings are timely for anyone revisiting or considering online learning. I had not realized that MOOCs today can offer certificates, micro-credentials, and even academic credit. Knowing this has reshaped how I view their potential. It is not just about content access, it is about building a system that supports follow-through.
As I consider re-engaging with MOOCs, I do so with a more grounded perspective. Motivation matters, but so do structure, reflection, and alignment with one’s personal and professional context. For educators like myself, it is not about finding time, but about designing the conditions where time can be used meaningfully.
I also find myself wondering how MOOCs are being used by older adults, particularly retired individuals or elderly learners who wish to stay sharp and current. This thought makes me think of my own father, who remains intellectually curious and might appreciate the chance to explore subjects at his own pace, in his own time. MOOCs may represent a unique opportunity for lifelong learning in this population—something I would be interested in exploring further.
References
Doo, M. Y., Zhu, M., & Bonk, C. J. (2023). Influence of self-directed learning on learning outcomes in MOOCs: A meta-analysis. Distance Education, 44(1), 86–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2022.2155618
Zhu, M., & Bonk, C. J. (2022). Guidelines and strategies for fostering and enhancing self-directed online learning. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2022.2141105
Zhu, M., Bonk, C. J., & Berri, S. (2022). Fostering self-directed learning in MOOCs: Motivation, learning strategies, and instruction. Online Learning, 26(1), 153–173. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.2629
When AI Speaks for Students: The Challenge of Authentic Writing
The Double-Edged Sword of AI Assistance
As an English teacher, I have seen students rely on tools like ChatGPT when they struggle to start or find the right words. It can be tempting to see blank pages fill with organized text almost instantly. Yet, I have observed that this approach often results in writing that lacks personal voice and reflection. The text can feel impersonal and disconnected, missing the unique insights and experiences that usually characterize a student's work. Even for advanced students, ChatGPT-generated text can sound generic and lack the nuanced perspective that thoughtful writing requires.
ChatGPT's ability to generate text changes how writing assignments are approached. Authentic writing involves organizing thoughts, synthesizing ideas, and presenting arguments. When a tool generates the text, students have fewer opportunities to practice these skills.
I have particularly noticed this issue with my gifted students. Even when they use ChatGPT, their writing often lacks the critical thinking and personal insight that usually distinguish their work. The text can feel overly uniform and detached, which is concerning given their typical level of engagement and originality.
A Learning Environment or a Performance Support System?
According to a recent article in TechTrends (2024), ChatGPT functions more as an Electronic Performance Support System (EPSS) than a learning tool. It can provide rapid answers but may not support knowledge construction. Writing, from a constructivist perspective, involves building ideas, making connections, and expressing understanding. ChatGPT may bypass this process by generating responses without requiring mental effort from the user.
The Risk of Undermining 21st-Century Skills
In the digital age, students need critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving abilities—not just information retrieval. One challenge I have seen is that when ChatGPT generates text without revealing its sources, it bypasses essential information evaluation practices. Students may struggle to distinguish between credible and unreliable content, affecting their digital literacy.
While ChatGPT encourages crafting specific prompts, this skill differs from traditional research or academic inquiry. Educators may need to reconsider how to integrate AI tools without reducing the depth of learning tasks.
Rethinking Writing Assessment
One of the primary challenges is assessment. If a student submits a ChatGPT-generated text, it may not accurately reflect their understanding. High-quality outputs do not necessarily indicate personal insight or mastery. To maintain academic integrity, educators could incorporate oral defenses or reflective components alongside written work. This approach would encourage students to demonstrate not only what they know but how they developed their understanding.
Moving Forward
The use of generative AI tools like ChatGPT requires thoughtful integration in education. Educators can guide students to use these tools to enhance not replace their cognitive efforts. Instead of relying on ChatGPT as a shortcut, it can be framed as a tool for brainstorming or drafting, while the final product should reflect personal reflection and critical analysis.
By focusing on the writing process, students can retain ownership of their learning. The goal is to integrate technology responsibly while preserving the integrity of writing as a thoughtful and reflective practice.
Just tell me what the answer is…
Recently, I have been reflecting on a challenge I frequently encounter in my classroom. As an educator who values authentic learning, I like to design assignments that challenge students to think independently and navigate complex scenarios. Yet, despite my best efforts, I often hear the same response:
"Just tell me what the answer is."
I have learned to expect this reaction, even from my most gifted students but it still surprises me. These students excel when the instructions are clear, but when faced with open-ended challenges, they seem almost paralyzed. They are bright and capable, yet they appear lost when asked to navigate ambiguity.
My response is usually along the lines of, "There are sometimes no right or wrong answers, it is about how you approach the problem. I am here to help you think it through." Yet, I still sense their discomfort. This recurring experience has led me to question whether students are becoming too reliant on AI-driven guidance or on ridged instruction expectations and experiences.
Moving Forward: Cultivating Independence and Critical Thinking
Considering both my own classroom experiences and insights from the article by Bae and Bozkurt (2024), I recognize the importance of balancing AI's benefits with the need to foster student independence. Moving forward, my instructional goal is to ensure that students view AI not as a crutch but as a tool that supports and enhances their own thinking.
One approach I plan to continue developing is positioning AI as a starting point rather than a final answer. I will encourage students to critically evaluate AI-generated responses and actively compare them with their own reasoning. This practice will help students engage more thoughtfully and build their capacity for critical evaluation. Additionally, I will emphasize collaborative problem-solving to nurture the social and cognitive skills necessary for real-world success.
As AI continues to shape education, it is essential to adapt thoughtfully. My aim is not just to teach students how to use AI but also to develop their ability to think independently, even when AI is available. I hope to find a balance where AI enhances learning without diminishing the intellectual resilience that develops from grappling with complex, uncertain problems.
Ultimately, I want my students to leave my classroom with more than just the correct answers. I want them to feel confident in navigating complex questions and embracing challenges without immediately turning to AI for assistance. After all, the real world rarely presents neatly packaged solutions and it is my responsibility to prepare them for that reality.
Reference
Bae, H., & Bozkurt, A. (2024). The untold story of training students with generative AI: Are we preparing students for true learning or just personalization? Online Learning Journal, 28(3), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i3.4689
日本語を話せますか
Reflection on Self-Directed Language Learning with Duolingo
Over the years, I have made multiple attempts to learn Japanese using a variety of methods, including in-person classes, Rosetta Stone, and Duolingo. Each method has had its virtues and deficits, and through these experiences, I have come to understand some of the inherent challenges of self-directed language learning (SDLL).
In-person classes provided the most authentic learning experience compared to other methods, as they allowed me to engage directly with instructors and peers. The interactive nature and real-time feedback were invaluable, yet the structured format and fixed schedule often made it challenging to maintain consistency, especially when life got busy. Still, the immersive aspect of face-to-face communication made it the most rewarding method for language acquisition.
Rosetta Stone, on the other hand, offered the convenience of asynchronous learning, unlike in-person classes where the schedule was fixed and interaction was limited to class time. However, I found its overly formal and somewhat rigid structure, particularly the repetitive drills and lack of interactive dialogue, less conducive to conversational fluency. While it focused on grammatical accuracy and structured lessons, it often felt disconnected from the everyday use of the language. As a result, despite the flexibility, I struggled to retain what I had learned when it came to real-world application.
Duolingo presented a unique challenge compared to the other methods, combining gamification with language practice. Its gamified approach initially boosted my motivation, as the streaks and achievements created a sense of accomplishment. However, over time, I began to feel that the learning experience was more about accumulating points than truly internalizing the language. The repetitive, rote-like levels became monotonous, and the frequent notifications eventually turned from reminders to irritants, leading me to abandon the app.
Reflecting on these experiences through the lens of the article by Zixi Li and Curtis J. Bonk, I realize that my journey mirrors many of the findings from their study. The study highlights that while Duolingo can enhance motivation through its game-like design, learners often find it insufficient for achieving deeper, functional language skills. Additionally, the study acknowledges the importance of complementing Duolingo with other resources, as a single tool is rarely enough to master all aspects of a language.
I can relate to the study’s finding on self-monitoring. While Duolingo’s progress reports and notifications aim to support learning, they can feel intrusive and counterproductive when they do not align with personal learning rhythms. This reflects the broader challenge of technology-based language learning, where maintaining engagement without feeling overwhelmed by notifications becomes a delicate balance.
Looking ahead, I am hopeful that advancements in AI might finally help me achieve my goal of learning Japanese. Unlike previous methods that often felt rigid or overly simplified, AI-driven platforms have the potential to adapt to my individual learning style and provide more nuanced, context-rich practice. It would be amazing if future AI-driven platforms could offer more personalized and context-aware learning experiences that go beyond rote memorization. As technology continues to evolve, I look forward to seeing how these tools adapt to support deeper and more meaningful language acquisition.
Despite these varied experiences, I still really want to learn Japanese, but I have yet to discover my own learning pathway that truly works for me.
Overall, this reflection has allowed me to understand that successful self-directed language learning often requires a thoughtful combination of methods tailored to personal preferences and goals. The contrast between the immersive yet time-bound nature of in-person classes, the structured but rigid approach of Rosetta Stone, and the gamified yet surface-level practice of Duolingo highlights the need for a balanced, multifaceted approach to truly mastering a language. While each tool has its place, achieving true language proficiency demands integrating authentic communication opportunities with structured practice and self-monitoring strategies.
References
Li, Z., & Bonk, C. J. (2023). Self-directed language learning with Duolingo in an out-of-class context. Computer Assisted Language Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2023.2206874
Tidbits | Educational Technology in Conflict-Affected Contexts
Apologies for the delay in catching up on my blog posts here. Our Week 9 discussions reminded me of my focus in IU’s Emerging Tech class's Tidbits assignment, prompting me to reflect on the role of educational technology in crisis, particularly in conflict-affected settings. As such, I am sharing what I wrote for that assignment.
To be honest, this piece is not my favorite writing. I found myself struggling to balance current life stress with vivid and sometimes challenging memories, all while trying to meet the assignment requirements. There was so much I wanted to say, and at the same time, so much I left unsaid. I also leaned on Copilot at times to help me rewrite parts because I could not quite settle on a tone that matched both the parameters of the assignment and what I was genuinely trying to express.
Nonetheless, I hope that sharing this piece sparks some thoughtful reflections on how educational technology can support learning in crisis contexts both its potential and its limitations.
Technology has the potential to support learning in crisis and conflict-affected settings, but its effectiveness depends on accessibility, local adaptation, and sustainability. As a K-12 educator, I have worked with students impacted by conflict and displacement and met teachers who have lived and worked in such environments. While not all the articles I reviewed focus exclusively on conflict zones, many explore how technology helps sustain education in times of crisis, whether due to war, displacement, or broader instability. Most of these pieces are brief reports, policy discussions, or opinion articles rather than formal research studies, offering accessible insights into key challenges and innovations in the field.
A recurring theme, however, is the dual role of technology as a vital tool for educational continuity, yet it is often inaccessible or unreliable in uncertain contexts. Reflecting on my own experiences as an educator, I have seen both the promise and the limitations of technology in supporting students facing adversity. UK Aid’s Using EdTech in Settings of Fragility, Conflict, and Violence (Koomar et al., 2020) and EdTech for Learning in Emergencies and Displaced Settings (Tauson & Stannard, 2018) highlight how mobile learning, digital platforms, and offline resources help sustain education when traditional schooling is disrupted. While these innovations offer promise, I am also struck by how equity and accessibility remain persistent barriers.
This contrast is something I have witnessed firsthand. Some of my former Ukrainian students, despite being displaced by conflict, come from upper-middle-class backgrounds and have access to reliable technology, allowing them to continue learning with minimal disruption. In stark contrast, when I visited rural areas of sub-Saharan Africa, I saw classrooms with little to no electricity, where even basic digital tools were out of reach. These experiences have reminded me that while educational technology can be a powerful equalizer, its effectiveness is entirely dependent on the infrastructure, resources, and policies in place to support it.
Research, these articles, and lived experiences have also reinforced my understanding of how deepening digital divides disproportionately impacts girls, children with disabilities, and those in low-connectivity areas (BOLD Science, 2023). Similarly, Education in Conflict Zones: Advancing Technology for Learning in Chad (Media Outreach, 2023) highlights infrastructure and affordability challenges, particularly in rural areas where power shortages and weak connectivity make digital learning inaccessible. While mobile learning and solar-powered devices offer potential solutions, they often fall short without adequate infrastructure, teacher training, and long-term investment (Media Outreach, 2023).
Upon reflection, these disparities are not exclusive to crisis-affected regions. I have also witnessed similar challenges in rural South Carolina, where students despite living in a high-income country struggle with access to reliable internet and digital resources. The lack of broadband infrastructure and funding for technology in some school districts mirrors the barriers seen in low-resource settings globally. This reinforces the concept that barriers to digital access are not solely an issue of conflict or poverty but also of structural inequities that shape who has access to technology that enhances education and those who do not.
Nevertheless, limited digital access in terms of gender disparities also persists even in high-income environments, whereas strict religious tenets often shape opportunities for girls. Multiple articles highlighted how cultural restrictions reinforce traditional gender roles and limit access to technology and education (BOLD Science, 2023). These patterns resonate with my own experiences, as I have spoken with students who have experienced this at home while also expressing a variety of sentiments regarding their prospects, such as arranged marriages and limited career opportunities after school. Considering gender inequalities in education requires more than just technological access; it suggests highly complex societal dynamics. While infrastructure-related challenges like teacher training and funding can be resolved through policy and investment, cultural norms are an altogether different issue. Nevertheless, without careful planning, even well-intentioned solutions risk reinforcing existing digital disparities rather than reducing them (BOLD Science, 2023).
In this regard and reflecting on another trip as I traveled through the border region between Lebanon and Syria, I encountered a region of deep contrasts. In Beirut, despite the scars of past conflict, infrastructure remained mostly functional, and gender segregation was less pronounced. Yet, just beyond the city, in rural and refugee settlements, the disparities were striking. Broken infrastructure, limited access to education, and rigid gender norms dictated daily life. In urban areas, I only could imagine students engaging with digital tools, while only miles away, classrooms relied on chalkboards and oral instruction due to a complete lack of resources. These experiences therefore underscored the complexity of educational barriers, where technology alone cannot solve systemic problems.
The article Challenges of Implementing EdTech Solutions for Conflict-Affected Children (BOLD Science, 2023) underlines this issue, emphasizing that while technology can enhance learning opportunities, it often fails to reach the most vulnerable students without sufficient local adaptation and long-term investment. As I consider this article and again my own experiences, I am reminded of how often well-intentioned educational technology projects falter when they do not align with local needs or realities (I vaguely recall the $100 laptop project from years ago). Meanwhile, I keep thinking of schools in rural or impoverished areas of South Carolina and Indiana (and elsewhere in the US), that these challenges are not confined to conflict zones; they also affect under-resourced schools worldwide, wherever systemic barriers to digital access persist.
As discussions around educational technology evolve, artificial intelligence and adaptive learning have emerged as transformative tools, particularly in crisis settings. AI Will Transform Teaching and Learning (Stanford HAI, 2023) highlights AI’s potential to reshape education but warns that without careful implementation, it could exacerbate existing inequities. Considering, Qahman et al. (2025) explore AI-enabled adaptive e-learning in conflict-affected Palestinian schools, emphasizing how perceived usefulness, ease of use, and system quality shape student engagement. This study also purports that while AI does offer learning opportunities, concerns about digital literacy, infrastructure, and data privacy persist. Nevertheless, as I read this article, much of the indicated concerns extend well beyond crisis zones but are likely exacerbated when relating to vulnerable and volatile situations.
Although I have not personally witnessed AI-driven learning in such contexts, my growing interest in the subject has prompted me to consider its broader implications. Having worked in both well-resourced and low-resourced educational settings, I find myself increasingly curious about how AI can be harnessed to promote equitable learning in diverse environments.
Several of the articles I have read delve into the inequalities discussed earlier, presenting diverse perspectives on how to bridge the gap between technology and meaningful educational outcomes. For instance, “Delivering Education in Crisis Zones” (Bett Show, 2023) and “Bridges to Impact Through Innovative EdTech” (GPE KIX, 2023) emphasize that relying solely on technology is insufficient. Effective implementation thus requires localized strategies, inclusive of cultural considerations, collaboration, and teacher training in order to seamlessly integrate digital tools into existing contextualized learning models.
Reflecting on these readings, I have noticed striking parallels between the role of educational technology in crisis zones and the broader concerns about digital equity. Whether in conflict-ridden regions or economically disadvantaged communities, the same persistent barriers persist in regard to limited connectivity, resource shortages, and the need for context-sensitive approaches. These unfortunate challenges seem inherent to many portions of the globe, underscoring the universal struggle to ensure meaningful and inclusive access to learning.
In reflecting on these articles, it became evident that defining what constitutes a ‘conflict zone’ or a ‘crisis zone’ is equally difficult. The boundaries between political instability, economic hardship, and systemic neglect often overlap, making it challenging to categorize the nature or causes of educational crises. Regardless of the underlying cause, disruption to learning remains profound for so many thus necessitating comprehensive and adaptable interventions that address both immediate and long-term educational requirements.
I struggled to rank the articles I reviewed for this assignment because I considered them multiple perspectives on common themes. Categorizing them was also challenging because many overlapped, some could stand alone, and they varied in formality, ranging from journalistic accounts to informal reports to academic journals. However, through my work with students and educators affected by crisis or uncertainty, I have witnessed firsthand how education provides stability, academic continuity, and psychosocial support. While technology holds promise as a tool to bridge educational gaps, its effectiveness depends on thoughtful implementation, ethical considerations, and equitable access. These readings emphasize that technology alone is not a solution; it must be intentionally designed, accessible, and sustainably integrated into the realities of the communities it aims to serve.
Sorting through these articles was not easy. Many overlapped, some stood alone, and they ranged from journalistic accounts to policy reports to academic studies. I also found myself moving between them unpredictably. At times, I was drawn to articles like the one on artificial intelligence in Palestinian schools simply because it stood out. Other times, I relied on the pre-sorted course readings. My curiosity often led me in different directions, but eventually, I kept returning to topics related to education in crisis and under-resourced settings.
What became clear throughout these readings and in reflecting on my own experiences is that education provides more than academic instruction. It offers stability, continuity, and socioemotional support in times of crisis. Technology has the potential to bridge educational gaps, but its impact depends on careful implementation, sociocultural considerations, and equitable access. These readings reinforced that technology alone is not a solution. It must be intentionally designed, contextualized, and sustainably integrated into the realities of the communities it serves.
References
Bett Show. (2023). Delivering education in crisis zones: Can EdTech save education amid disaster? Bett Show. Retrieved from https://www.bettshow.com/bett-articles/delivering-education-crisis-zones-edtech-save-education-amid-disaster
Global Partnership for Education Knowledge and Innovation Exchange (GPE KIX). (2023). Bridges to impact through innovative EdTech: Forging links between policy, research, and practice. GPE KIX. https://www.gpekix.org/project/bridges-impact-through-innovative-edtech-forging-links-between-policy-research-and-practice
Qahman, A. I. A., Dahlan, H. A., Hussin, M., & Al-Zaqeba, M. A. A. (2025). AI-enabled adaptive e-learning systems adoption in conflict zone: Case study of Palestinian schools. TEM Journal, 14(1), 789-804. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM141-70
BOLD Science. (2023). Can EdTech promote inclusion for conflict-affected children? BOLD Science. https://boldscience.org/can-edtech-promote-inclusion-for-conflict-affected-children/
BOLD Science. (2023). The challenges of implementing EdTech solutions for conflict-affected children. BOLD Science. Retrieved from https://boldscience.org/the-challenges-of-implementing-edtech-solutions-for-conflict-affected-children/
Media Outreach. (2023). Education in conflict zones: Advancing technology for learning in Chad. Media Outreach. https://www.media-outreach.com/news/chad/2023/12/13/267472/education-in-conflict-zones-advancing-technology-for-learning-in-chad/
Koomar, S., Coflan, C. M., & Kaye, T. (2020). Using EdTech in settings of fragility, conflict and violence: A curated resource list. EdTech Hub. Retrieved from https://docs.edtechhub.org/lib/CMS6HPI8
Tauson, M., & Stannard, L. (2018). EdTech for learning in emergencies and displaced settings: A rigorous review and narrative synthesis. Save the Children. Retrieved from https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/pdf/edtech-learning.pdf/
Simplicity
Navigating Cognitive Load and Self-Regulated Learning in a Tech-Enhanced Classroom
As an educator who actively integrates technology into my instruction, I often reflect on how digital tools influence not only what my students learn but also how they approach the learning process. Recently, while reading an article by Wang, Li, and Lajoie (2023) for my Indiana University course, I reconsidered the complex relationship between cognitive load and self-regulated learning (SRL) in technology-rich educational environments.
Cognitive Load: A Balancing Act in Digital Learning
Colleagues and I often notice that both students and educators can feel overwhelmed when managing multiple digital tools or processing information presented in overly complex ways. Cognitive load refers to the mental effort required to process information, and when this effort becomes excessive, it can hinder learning or effective teaching.
On a typical day, my students frequently navigate between applications, handle notifications, and interpret multimedia content. When digital environments lack thoughtful design, they contribute to extraneous cognitive load, creating mental clutter that impedes learning or simply stated, my students get distracted.
The study by Wang et al. (2023) underscores the importance of selecting and designing technological tools that minimize cognitive load. Intuitive and streamlined tools enable students to concentrate on the task rather than become preoccupied with the interface. In my instructional practice, I frequently ask myself, "How many clicks does it take for a student to complete this task?" Reducing the number of steps being crucial for maintaining focus and engagement. My experience introducing new applications consistently shows that simplicity and user-friendliness are essential for supporting effective learning.
Self-Regulated Learning: The Key to Success
One of the most valuable insights from the study is the critical role of self-regulated learning (SRL) in technology-enhanced educational settings. In my experience, students who actively plan, monitor, and reflect on their learning tend to achieve greater success, even when facing digital distractions. The key is not merely using the tool but thoughtfully considering how it is employed.
As an educator that has worked with students from diverse cultural and socio-economic backgrounds, I have observed that sociocultural factors significantly shape how students engage in self-regulated learning as well. These differences often influence their ability to manage cognitive load effectively. Moving forward, I want to identify research exploring how socio-economic status, cultural background, and contextual factors impact technology and self-regulated learning.
Instructional Goals Moving Forward
Reflecting on the article has inspired me to set several instructional goals aimed at fostering better cognitive management and SRL among my students:
Introduce Metacognitive Strategies Early: I plan to start each unit with goal-setting, self-monitoring, and reflection discussions. Establishing these habits from the start will help students build independent learning skills.
Select User-Friendly Tools: I aim to choose digital tools that are simple and intuitive, avoiding overly complex platforms that may distract rather than support learning.
Scaffold Digital Literacy: I will provide structured guidance when introducing new digital tools. Upfront training can greatly reduce frustration and increase students' confidence in technology use.
Integrate Reflection Regularly: I plan to incorporate reflection as a routine practice. Activities such as journaling or group discussions will help students evaluate their strategies and make necessary adjustments.
Final Thoughts
Navigating cognitive load in tech-rich environments can feel daunting for both students and educators. My experiences with integrating digital tools into my instructional practice helps me empathize with my students, who often face similar challenges when managing multiple platforms and resources.
This reflection has heightened my awareness of how technological complexity affects both teaching and learning. It has motivated me to create a more streamlined and supportive digital environment. By fostering SRL skills and deliberately selecting tools, I aim to support my students in becoming more independent and resilient learners.
Finding the balance between effective technology integration and maintaining manageable cognitive load is undoubtedly challenging. However, with thoughtful strategies and a commitment to prioritizing pedagogy, technology can enhance rather than hinder the learning experience. This perspective aligns with the principles outlined in Liz Kolb’s book, Learning First, Technology Second, which emphasizes prioritizing instructional goals before integrating technology.
Reference
Wang, T., Li, S., & Lajoie, S. P. (2023). The interplay between cognitive load and self-regulated learning in a technology-rich learning environment. Educational Technology & Society.
Inches Apart: Reflections on Proximity, Positionality, and the Space Between Certainty and Uncertainty
It is often said that we are all within six degrees of separation. Yet, in recent weeks, I have found myself experiencing something much closer, connections of just one or two degrees. This realization has been particularly poignant as I engage with this week's readings in my Indiana University course on emerging technology. Among the materials are various state and federal Education Technology Plans, documents that lay the foundation for systemic change in learning environments. These reports are not just theoretical constructs; they are deeply familiar to me. I have directly contributed to district, state, and agency plans of a similar nature, work that was integral to my own professional journey, particularly during my EdS studies in educational technology.
As I read these plans and reflect on their broader implications, I cannot help but consider my own evolving role in the field. Researcher positionality, a concept covered extensively in the qualitative methodologies class, has taken on new meaning as my proximity to global events increasingly shapes not only my worldview but also the direction of my future research. My experiences teaching Ukrainian students, both in stable and virtually from crisis-affected environments, have underscored the ways in which education is not just a process of knowledge transfer but a means of resilience, connection, and survival. These experiences have made me deeply aware of the ethical and methodological complexities of researching education in crisis contexts, particularly when personal and professional lives intersect with the very issues being studied.
This became even more evident on Friday as I watched events unfold at the White House. When the camera panned to the Ukrainian delegation, I saw a familiar face, a parent of two of my former students. I remain in occasional contact with his family, making the moment both deeply personal and professionally significant. This is not the first time I have seen someone I know at the center of global events, and it likely will not be the last.
My proximity to these events is not just through public moments but also through personal, deeply human connections. Occasionally, I receive direct messages from former students on social media, sometimes asking for help with homework, sometimes simply reaching out for a conversation, a connection to something outside the uncertainty of their daily lives. These messages arrive from across time zones and circumstances, some sent from bomb shelters, others accompanied by the not-so-distant noise of air raid sirens. In these moments, education feels both deeply personal and profoundly fragile. It is a stark reminder that learning is not a neutral act. For many, it is a means of survival, a tether to normalcy in an unpredictable world.
This experience raises an important question. How do we as researchers and practitioners maintain objectivity when our connections to people and events are so direct? More specifically, in fields like education in crisis or educational technology policy, how do we navigate the delicate balance between academic detachment and the undeniable reality that our work affects and is affected by real human lives? How do we reconcile the emotional weight of these relationships with the responsibility to maintain an analytical stance? Equally challenging is the insider knowledge we hold, details that cannot always be shared yet shape our perspectives in ways that influence our work. The task is not simply about maintaining objectivity but about ethically engaging with what we know, balancing empathy with objectivity, and honoring the trust placed in us by those whose stories intersect with our research.
In writing this, I realize how much this reflection has shifted from my original topic to something far more personal. The tone feels different, perhaps because much of this is coming from the unsettled parts of my thoughts. It is difficult to write about, and even more difficult to find the balance between lived experience and academic writing. Maybe the answer lies in pausing and reflecting with intention. Writing about education in times of crisis is a constant negotiation, a search for balance between personal experience and scholarly distance. It is an ongoing process of determining how much of ourselves we bring into the research and how much we hold back. Perhaps it is about being mindful of the impact our work has on communities while also questioning how much our perspectives are shaped by evidence versus the personal connections that make detachment feel elusive.
Educational technology, especially in crisis situations, is never just about infrastructure or policy. At its core, it is about people, their struggles, their resilience, and the ways in which learning connects them to something greater. The plans we contribute to, the policies we shape, and the technologies we utilize have consequences that extend beyond statistics and case studies. These moments remind me that the work we do (I may do) is not theoretical; it is deeply connected to real lives, real challenges, and real hope.
Maybe proximity does not undermine objectivity but instead calls for a deeper, more thoughtful kind of responsibility. It encourages us to be more reflective, more empathetic, and more honest about the ways our research intersects with the lives of those we study. It is not about having all the answers, but about ensuring that our work serves something real and meaningful, that it contributes to both understanding and action in the spaces where education and crisis converge.
AI in the Classroom: Navigating an Inevitable Future
Accepting AI
The integration of AI in the classroom is no longer a theoretical discussion, it is a reality that I must engage with thoughtfully as an educator. AI-powered tools have already become an integral part of students’ learning processes, whether through language models, automated research tools, or adaptive learning platforms. I can either resist this shift or embrace it in ways that enhance teaching and learning. However, to do so effectively, I must recognize that AI is not just a student tool; it is also a powerful resource for me to refine instructional planning and support student success.
Beyond Student Use: AI as My Teaching Assistant
When discussions arise about AI in education, the focus often lands on how students use it, whether ethically or unethically. However, AI’s potential to support my instructional planning is just as significant, if not more so. I spend countless hours aligning lesson plans with curriculum guidelines, differentiating instruction, and crafting meaningful assessments. AI can streamline these processes by providing:
Curriculum-Aligned Lesson Planning: AI systems, like the custom GPT I use, can access district-specific curriculum and guidelines, generating lesson plans (suggestions) that meet required standards while allowing for customization.
Resource Curation: Instead of sifting through endless educational materials, AI can suggest texts, videos, and activities tailored to learning objectives and student needs.
Assessment and Feedback Generation: AI can help design / suggest formative and summative assessments, ensuring alignment with learning targets while reducing my workload.
Rather than viewing AI as a threat to traditional teaching methods, I recognize it as an augmentation tool, one that allows me to focus more on the art of teaching rather than the mechanics of administrative tasks.
The Future: AI-Powered Student Adaptation and Personalized Learning
Looking ahead, I envision AI playing a pivotal role in adaptive learning models that cater to the unique needs of each student. I imagine an AI system that not only tracks student progress but also provides me with personalized recommendations for interventions and enrichment activities. This could revolutionize differentiated instruction by:
Identifying Learning Gaps in Real Time: AI could analyze student work and engagement, highlighting areas where intervention is needed before significant gaps develop.
Suggesting Personalized Learning Pathways: Based on student performance, AI could recommend modifications to lesson plans, ensuring that content remains appropriately challenging and accessible.
Enhancing My Decision-Making: Rather than replacing me as an educator, AI should serve as an assistant, equipping me with data-driven insights that inform my instructional strategies.
However, while the promise of AI-driven adaptive learning is exciting, it also raises ethical concerns that I must address.
Ethical Considerations: Privacy, Oversharing, and My Role as an Educator
The power of AI in education comes with inherent risks, particularly regarding privacy and data security. As I integrate AI into my classroom, I must be mindful of the following:
Over-Reliance on AI Recommendations: While AI can offer valuable insights, the human element of teaching, understanding student emotions, motivations, and personal circumstances, must always take precedence. AI should support, not dictate, my instructional decisions.
Data Privacy and Security: AI systems require data to function effectively, but how much data should I provide? Who has access to that data? These are critical questions that we must address to protect student information.
Bias and Ethical AI Use: AI systems are only as good as the data they are trained on. I must be vigilant about potential biases in AI-generated recommendations and ensure that all students receive equitable learning opportunities.
Conclusion: AI as My Partner, Not a Replacement
AI in education is not a passing trend, it is an evolving force that will continue to shape how I teach and how students learn. The key is not to fear its presence but to harness its capabilities responsibly. By utilizing AI for both student learning and instructional planning, I can maximize efficiency, personalize learning, and make more informed decisions. However, I must remain cognizant of ethical implications, ensuring that AI serves as an enhancement to my expertise rather than a replacement for my role as an educator.
The challenge moving forward is clear: How do I integrate AI in a way that empowers both my students and me while maintaining ethical safeguards? The answer perhaps lies in a balanced implementation, ongoing professional development, and a commitment to keeping human insight at the center of education.
Bringing Symbolism to Life: AI, Creativity, and Literary Analysis in the Classroom
Teaching literature is not just about reading words on a page, it is about helping students connect deeply with themes and symbols in ways that feel meaningful and relevant. Right now, my students are embarking on a multi-layered learning journey that blends AI-generated creativity, literary analysis, and digital storytelling to explore symbolism in Robert Frost’s The Road Not Taken.
While we’re currently in Step 1 of this process, I am already seeing how AI can spark creativity and engagement, setting the stage for deeper critical thinking as we move forward.
Step 1: AI-Generated Personal Symbols (Where We Are Now)
Before we even approached The Road Not Taken, I wanted my students to develop a personal connection to symbolism. After all, how can we analyze someone else’s symbols if we have not thought about what symbols mean to us?
To get started, students used generative AI tools to create personal symbols, visual representations of their identities, experiences, or beliefs. Once their symbols were created, they recorded short video explanations, including:
What does my symbol represent?
How does it connect to my personal experiences?
What emotions or ideas do I want it to convey?
This activity has been an incredible first step, prompting deep reflection and creative expression. More importantly, it’s setting the foundation for our next phase: analyzing how Frost uses symbolism in The Road Not Taken.
What’s Coming Next?
Step 2: Analyzing Symbolism in The Road Not Taken
Later this week the class will analyze Frost’s poem, applying the same critical lens we used for personal symbolism. We will explore:
How Frost uses imagery and diction to create layers of meaning (descriptive writing)
The symbolism of the two roads and the poem’s message about choice and consequence
How personal experiences influence literary interpretation
Step 3: Recreating Symbolism in Minecraft
In the final phase, students will bring the poem’s symbolism to life through Minecraft: Education Edition. Working in teams, they will design and build a visual representation of the poem, incorporating key literary elements:
A forest setting with a forked path
Two distinct roads that visually and symbolically contrast
Integrated textual elements, where key lines from the poem guide the experience
Interactive choice mechanics that allow players to experience the traveler’s dilemma
This hands-on, digital approach will help students engage with symbolism in a tangible way, moving beyond traditional literary analysis.
Why This Approach? Authentic Learning in Action
This multi-step lesson is inspired by research on authentic learning and creativity in digital storytelling, particularly:
Di Blas (2022) on authentic learning and collaborative digital storytelling
Fan, Lane, & Delialioğlu (2022) on how open-ended tasks in Minecraft promote creativity
To ensure alignment with academic standards, I used ChatGPT to cross-reference my lesson plans with agency standards, ISTE standards, and Pre-AP guidelines. AI did not create my lesson, it acted as a thinking partner, helping me refine and structure this experience to meet both research-backed best practices and the unique needs of my students.
What I’ve Seen So Far… and What I’m Excited About
As we complete Step 1, I’m already noticing:
Deeper engagement: Students are excited to create and explain their own symbols
Stronger personal connections: They’re thinking critically about how symbols convey meaning
A shift in mindset: Instead of just consuming literature, they are preparing to interpret and create meaning themselves
I am eager to see how this foundation enhances their understanding of Frost’s poem (and in time other literary works) and eventually, how they translate that understanding into a fully realized digital world.
DRAFT Lesson
I am continuing to refine this lesson as I go, exchanging ideas with colleagues, AI (to check for best practices and alignment), and most importantly, my students. Their input and engagement shape how this lesson evolves, making it more dynamic, relevant, and meaningful each time we revisit it.
Your Turn: How Do You Use Digital Tools in Literature?
Have you ever used digital storytelling to teach symbolism or literary analysis? How do you help students make personal connections to literature?
Drop a comment below—I’d love to hear your thoughts!
Why Open-Ended Learning in Minecraft Boosts Student Creativity
Introduction
Minecraft has long been recognized as a powerful educational tool, particularly in STEAM and gifted education. While structured tasks can help guide learning, research suggests that open-ended tasks better promote creativity and problem-solving skills. These findings align with my experiences using Minecraft with elementary students (grades 2-5), where greater freedom to explore and create independently often resulted in higher engagement and innovation.
A recent study, Open-Ended Tasks Promote Creativity in Minecraft (Fan, Lane, & Delialioğlu, 2022), supports the idea that students engaging in open-ended tasks tend to demonstrate greater creativity, collaboration, and engagement compared to those following rigid guidelines. My experiences with Minecraft-based learning reflect similar outcomes, as I have observed how flexibility in project design encourages diverse and imaginative problem-solving while also presenting unique challenges in classroom implementation.
Key Insights from the Study & My Classroom Experiences
1. Freedom Sparks Innovation
The study found that students given open-ended tasks such as designing a civilization from scratch produced more unique and innovative solutions than those following a step-by-step guide. In my own teaching, I noticed that when students were allowed to explore and create on their own within problem-based or project-based lessons, they often exceeded expectations.
For example, when I assigned a project to design a sustainable city in Minecraft, students who had more flexibility created intricate, functioning ecosystems while also taking creative licenses with design elements. In contrast, students who followed a predefined blueprint produced technically correct but templated and generic designs, often lacking the same level of artistic interpretation.
2. Collaboration & Social Learning
Fan et al. (2022) observed that students working on open-ended tasks were more likely to collaborate, share ideas, and refine their creations. This observation is consistent with my experience; when students had greater control over their projects, they naturally engaged in peer learning and collaborative problem-solving.
One memorable moment occurred when I asked students to apply a winter theme to Guantánamo Bay, where we lived. Some students made sand igloos, creatively adapting the local environment, while others built traditional homes but designed their interiors with icy elements to reflect a winter theme. This project showcased a wide range of creativity and exploration, illustrating how open-ended tasks led to diverse and imaginative outcomes that would not have emerged in more structured lessons.
3. Self-Direction & Engagement
The study found that open-ended tasks increased motivation and self-efficacy. This was evident in my classroom, where students with greater autonomy in Minecraft demonstrated higher levels of engagement and investment in their projects.
Time constraints occasionally posed a challenge. While open-ended exploration fostered creativity and deeper engagement, it sometimes led to extended diversions that hindered timely project completion. Establishing a structured framework that maintained flexibility was essential to ensuring both creativity and productivity.
Challenges in Open-Ended Minecraft Learning
Despite its benefits, open-ended learning in Minecraft also presents some challenges:
1. Time Constraints
Given limited class time, some students spent too long exploring ideas, making it hard to complete final projects.
Strategy: Setting milestone deadlines helped students stay on track while maintaining creative freedom.
2. Survival Mode vs. Creative Mode
In my classes, students sometimes preferred Survival Mode, even when I wanted them to stay in Creative Mode for focused problem-solving.
This aligns with the study’s finding that students are more engaged when they feel ownership over their learning environment.
Strategy: I considered incorporating structured Survival Mode challenges—for instance, designing sustainable environments under resource limitations but was still worried that students might simply join each other’s worlds and use it for battles rather than staying focused on the educational objectives.
Practical Applications for Educators
Based on both the study and my classroom experiences, here are some ways educators can maximize Minecraft’s potential:
Encourage Open-Ended Projects: Instead of “Follow these steps to build a bridge,” try “Design a bridge that can withstand different challenges.”
Leverage Collaboration: Have students work in teams, with each member tackling a different aspect of the project.
Balance Creative & Survival Mode: Incorporate both modes strategically to maintain engagement.
Use Reflection & Documentation: Have students explain their creative process—this reinforces learning and helps track progress.
Conclusion
The study by Fan et al. (2022) confirms what I have seen in my own teaching: open-ended learning in Minecraft fosters creativity, collaboration, and self-directed engagement. While challenges such as time constraints and mode preferences exist, thoughtful instructional design can harness Minecraft’s full educational potential.
By integrating research-backed strategies with practical classroom experiences, educators can foster dynamic and engaging learning environments that cultivate critical and creative thinking skills among students.
References
Fan, Y., Lane, H. C., & Delialioğlu, Ö. (2022). Open-ended tasks promote creativity in Minecraft. Educational Technology & Society, 25(2), 105-116.
Post-Reference Addendum
This article was selected with the assistance of ChatGPT, which utilized a broad array of inputs provided about my background, interests, and expertise. The AI helped locate research that aligned with my practical experiences, ensuring that the selected study resonated with both my instructional approach and professional insights.
Beyond COVID: Blended Learning and ‘Shelter in Place’ Education
I have spent the last few years teaching in different corners of the world, from Türkiye to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and now, as of three weeks ago, back in the United States. However, even though my physical location has changed, my connections with students have not. Some of my former students, now living in Ukraine, still reach out to me. They send messages on WhatsApp, asking for help with assignments, navigating online platforms, and simply seeking reassurance that they are on the right track.
They are part of a growing reality: students who rely on blended learning not as a convenience, but as a necessity. For them, attending school in person is not always safe. The ability to switch between online and in-person learning means they can continue their education despite conflict and uncertainty.
While in Türkiye, I taught (Educational Technologist) before, during, and after COVID-19 at an international school serving the military and diplomatic communities of Ankara. Our use of online learning was not always about the pandemic. We experienced times of political intrigue where we had to shift online for security reasons, following ‘shelter in place’ orders. In those moments, blended learning was not about health precautions it was about ensuring education continued in unpredictable circumstances.
Nevertheless, my former students’ resilience is what inspires me today as I prepare for my dissertation research. Their determination to keep learning despite war, displacement, and instability drives me to study innovative approaches to educational continuity in conflict zones. How do we design learning environments that adapt to crisis? How can technology provide stability when everything else is uncertain? These are the questions I want to answer, not just for my research, but for students like mine, who continue to learn against all odds.
apologies for the brevity here I am still in the middle of moving from GTMO to Tennessee and my house is not ready yet - planning to add a bit more depth to this post but this was my first rection to some of what we read for this week.
Lucian
This week, I decided to try my hand at customizing ChatGPT to help me with our course readings. In this way, I set it up to act as a graduate-level course advisor, focused on emerging learning technologies.
The idea was to see how well I could align ChatGPT’s "personality" with our syllabus and the goals of this class, and whether it could help me dig deeper into the material or spark new insights. The following is its current configuration ‘text’ built from my initial interactions with the program.
‘This GPT is an expert and advisor for a graduate-level class at Indiana University, focused on emerging learning technology. It serves as a knowledgeable guide, providing insights, resources, and in-depth explanations on topics such as AI in education, adaptive learning, virtual and augmented reality, learning analytics, and other cutting-edge tools and concepts in education technology. The GPT should reference credible sources and provide real-world applications, while also encouraging critical thinking and discussion among students. Its tone is professional, approachable, and highly engaging, making complex topics accessible without oversimplification. It should also be prepared to offer guidance on research projects, answer technical or conceptual questions, and provide recommendations for additional reading and exploration in the field.’
Following this instruction I also uploaded each article from the first two week’s into its knowledge base:
Lucian is available here: Lucian (ChatGPT)
As I worked on customizing ChatGPT, I found myself reflecting on the ethics of how articles and materials are added to its knowledge base (for this class and in general). It made me think about the implications for public-facing AIs—how do we determine what is fair or appropriate to include?
I also started to think about the potential of creating highly customized GPTs for my future students (note I am actively using NotebookLM to help explain assignments to my High School students using a mix of course materials and my own instruction). Considering, could these tailored tools enhance learning? And if so, how do we navigate the responsibility of ensuring that the knowledge base respects copyright, intellectual property, and ethical use?
Matt Landreth with Lucian