Video Transcript: Welcome to my online unit!
I chose to use Google classroom as it’s the learning management system my school uses. As this provided some familiarity for me, I wanted to challenge myself by using it to build an asynchronous course. Though this is an asynchronous format, I still wanted to include constructivist elements in my pedagogy. This not only aligns with my personal philosophy towards education, it builds off of recommended best practices for online learning. As Pacansky-Brock (2020) found, relationship and community building is crucial to effective pedagogy in online spaces. To help foster connection between students, and between the students and instructor, intentional interactions are planned. I also encourage students to reach out to me if ever they have questions, comments, or concerns. Though not posted yet in order to not clutter up the announcement stream, I plan to host several informal “lunch chats” on the classroom Google Meet where students can “drop in” for a more laid-back version of office hours as a further way of developing community in an online setting.
We begin with the home page, where I incorporated humanizing elements. Instead of choosing from the stock banners, I made one specifically for this course. I also included a photo of myself as my icon so students can associate my face with my name. The first announcement in the stream is one that welcomes students to the unit. In it, I explain where they likely learned about argumentative writing in the past. This connects to the building knowledge section of the UDL framework. Then, I lay out course objectives, in accordance with the OSCQR standards. The objectives for this unit, phrased as “I can” statements, are:
- Identify claims, evidence, and reasoning in multiple forms of media
- Explain how rhetorical devices help an author’s argument
- Recognize logical fallacies and explain their impact on an argument
- Use synthesis to support my own arguments
I remind students I will be in contact with them, but if they’re ever struggling to please reach out to me. Reminders for required technology and grading procedures are also included.
Moving to the classwork tab, the introduction is provided again so if a student hasn’t seen it or needs a reminder, it is easily accessible. I then provide an agenda for the overall unit, stressing that this is a living document, and that adjustments will be made throughout the unit.
The first activity is designed to have students call upon prior knowledge and interact with forms of persuasion they likely encounter in their daily lives. Students then move to a screencast where captions are enabled for accessibility, and I include video of myself as a humanizing element. The microlecture covers how to analyze a political cartoon. Students then practice this concept, and for homework, keep an eye out for additional examples of persuasion.
Day two moves from analyzing images to analyzing reading. Students watch another microlecture on one of the key components of this unit identifying claims, evidence, and reasoning. They then practice this through reading. The attached PDF looks odd, so I wanted to show you what students would see. This is the text they have access to. Students can listen to the text by clicking this icon.
Days 3-7 work more with the unit objectives of identifying rhetorical devices and explaining how authors build arguments through claims, evidence, and reasoning. A few activities I want to highlight are: on day three, students partner up to discuss what they have learned; day four, students participate in a digital four corners, and days 5-7 function as a first assessment towards the unit goals by having students apply what they’ve learned through writing.
Day eight contains a mid-point check. This allows me to get a pulse of the class and adjust the rest of the unit accordingly.
I wanted to use technology intentionally in this unit. As part of this, I wanted to make sure not to introduce too many new platforms to students. However, peardeck is one I use often, so it’s good for students to get familiar with. I also like it because it provides self-paced options and allows students to take notes directly in the notes. This day focuses on the objective working with logical fallacies. Students will then apply what they learned here to reading the article in day nine.
In days 10-12 students jigsaw an article by reading it through different lenses. Students will then share their annotations with their group members and then reflect on the reading as a whole.
Days 13-15 utilize a documentary. Instead of filling out notes, I wanted to offer students an opportunity to discuss it as they might in an in-class setting. As such, I offer two options: a synchronous Google Meet, or an asynchronous quick-write option, that will have students interact with a peer. Either way, students will be asked to speak to the rhetoric of the documentary, and evaluate how effective the documentary is in asserting its point.
Days 16-20 are the culmination of the unit. The summative assessment is a synthesis essay that requires the use of all of the skills they have been practicing throughout the unit. I walk students through what synthesis is in another microlecture – and provide a review of how to set up an essay if students need it. The synthesis essay document itself is set up with tabs to allow students easy access to navigate between outline to draft to peer review and polished piece. While I want to see what students have learned, it is also important for them to realize what knowledge they have received. Therefore, I created an argumentative writing concept map for students to connect key terms from the unit and reflect on their own learning.
With this unit, I wanted to leverage technology to build community and foster communication in an asynchronous class for high school students. This unit accomplishes this through intentional interactions and a variety of learning activities.
Thank you so much for listening.
References
Cast.org. (n.d.). The UDL guidelines. cast.org.
Gardner, H. and Davis, K. (2016). From The App Generation. In J. Burke (Ed.), Uncharted Territory: A High School Reader (pp. 308-323). W.W. Norton.
Headlee, C. (2021). Unit 1: The Power of An Argument. In SpringBoard Team (Eds.), Springboard: English language arts II (pp. 4-115). The College Board.
Lo, C. K. & Hew, K. F. (2017). A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: Possible solutions and recommendations for future research. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(4), 1–22.https://doi-org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1186/s41039-016-0044-2
McGonigal, J. (2021). Unit 1: The Power of An Argument. In SpringBoard Team (Eds.), Springboard: English language arts II (pp. 4-115). The College Board.
Orlowski, J. (Director). (2020). The Social Dilemma [Film]. Exposure Labs.
Pacansky-Brock, M. (2020). How to humanize your online class, version 2.0 [Infographic]. https://brocansky.com/humanizing/infographic2
Turkle, S. (2021). Unit 1: The Power of An Argument. In SpringBoard Team (Eds.), Springboard: English language arts II (pp. 4-115). The College Board.
SUNY Online Teaching. (2022, March 29). Overview of OSCQR 4.0 [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/W1W-RploaiM?si=RU98S9_jH4VafRot