[quoting Solomon, 10 Dec 98.a] A couple of sets of circumstances puzzle me. In set one, I attend a great class in courseware development, come home, turn on the computer, and sit in front of it doing what I saw demonstrated until 3 a.m.This is also a compliment of the class you took. If the classroom experience didn't motivate or interest you : would you have stayed up 'till 3 a.m.?
Games get my attention, but so do projects. Some of the projects, to get through to the end, required a lot of drudgery. But my own recognition of the potential for growth led me to stick with them without a lot of flow easing the burden.
Let's use the word creativity here for a second. NO project has to be boring and uninteresting!! By using creativity and looking at the project as a "game", or in some other way that increases its interest for you, and using your imagination and creativity, flow should occur.
The conclusions that I draw from my experiences, however limited they may be:
(1) Flow is not inimical to learning.
(2) Flow is not necessary to learning.
It does make it easier though. Sometimes that flow has to come from "inside" not be handed to you as a part of the design. This is where the concept of using learning styles in design of on-line courses could be useful.
(3) The presence of flow does not indicate the presence of learning.(4) Learning aided by flow seemed a more efficient process than learning without flow.
Agree!