writingwithmachines

What to do with all of those "virtual piles".

We have read about and discussed that the online writing course by its virtual nature demands more writing output from students than a traditional face-to-face course in that all communication that once might have occurred verbally must be converted to written communication. Warnock refers to this as “virtual piles” of “low-stakes writing”.

The first interesting suggestion in this week’s reading is that we do something with this low-stakes writing — in other words, make use of it. I do make some use of this output in my online courses. At the conclusion of most discussions, I typically post about the content they have produced and discuss the writing in relation to the goals for the forum, but also in the larger context of our coursework and the outcomes for the course. I have not had students formally assess their low-risk writing or rework it in any way.

A second suggestion is to use message boards or forums to recapture some of the opportunities for students to engage one another that could be lost when a course migrates online. Discussion forums are an important component of online courses for the reasons mentioned in the chapter. Discussions of readings and student writing samples are a weekly component of my on-the-ground courses, and I make use of forums in my online classes to achieve some degree of this same experience.

A final consideration, this from the Syrnyk article, would be the use of synchronous technology to teach writing in the online environment.  I have written about my concerns with synchronous tech in online classes in previous posts, so I won't go into again here.  He suggests live chat sessions, though there are many other opportunities for synchronous communication. I have been considering this for some time, though I have not implemented any synchronous components in my current online courses. I just finished a four-week course teaching Canvas, and I am planning to use Skype as a synchronous tool during workshops. I will likely divide students into groups that can meet via Skype and exchange feedback on their work.

I didn’t have time this past week to fancy this PowerPoint up, but I can see making a fabulous Prezi out of the foundation of these lecture notes I use to introduce my students to their Research Response 3 assignment, also attached.

Download Researchresponse3 — PowerPoint

Download Eng100resresp3 — Assignment

Writing Process

In this week’s readings, I found the following three points to be the most interesting in creating a student-centered writing process online:

• Warnock’s example from the “Low-Stakes, Risk-Friendly Message Board Text” of offering students the opportunity to share their “research secrets” (168) is an interesting way to jumpstart a writing process. Having students share their strategies can open up practical discussion of what works and what doesn’t, while also self-reflexively addressing their conceptions of process in a writing class. Whereas research skills are often taught in a directive manner, this student-generated discussion can also teach instructors about the ways in which students are navigating information and allow us to adapt how we teach research as a critical thinking process—asking questions, assessing sources, etc.—rather than following a formula for merely identifying information. I experienced this recently with my Puente mentee as she was showing me how she used Tumbler, Twitter, and Instagram (none of which I have used) to find topics and information that she then used as her basis for more “traditional” research. She challenged my kneejerk dismissal of those social media sources by showing how they sparked her interest and presented concise arguments, whether founded or not, that encouraged her to dig more deeply and cross reference multiple kinds of sources to come to her own conclusion about a controversial topic.

 

• Syrnyk’s point about “treat[ing] the writer as a person” is of course of utmost importance, and I found it interesting that he witnessed instructors providing more positive feedback online to “address the person behind the text.” I think that designing assignments that allow students to choose their topics and individuate their writing voice are also key to generating this kind of personalized dialogue between instructor and students, as well as students with each other. Doing so, I would imagine/hope, would also stymie some of the plagiarism issues raised by an online writing class format.

 

• Similarly, I think that when students can personalize their paper topics, they can, as Warnock suggests, become more aware of writing to specific audiences (170), which can be an otherwise abstract concept to teach. The writing process sample that I have discussed in my video addresses this issue of concretizing audience through a personalized topic:

 

 

That Darn Discussion Board Again…

Hi All! First, I want to apologize for the brevity of this post. I have a teething toddler at home (just hit the molars), so sleep has been lacking and I am constantly being beckoned to act as a shoulder to chew on.

There are two important elements to my class that focus on student-generated content. The first, as I discussed in the Google doc, is the use of logbooks to drive the discussion. As much as I love doing my best Riddler impression, I am really challenging myself to take a step back and let students’ questions drive the discussion with me acting as a facilitator (possibly another Batman villain?). The online format would obviously help with this concern as the asynchronous environment means students may beat me to the punch. However, as I have mentioned multiple times in the past weeks (I like to obsess over things), I worry about how the discussion board format will help/hinder this facilitation.  I have concerns over students not being truly invested in the conversation. I imagine that if it is their question driving a set point of the conversation that they would take it to heart, but I have flashbacks to my online classes (when I was a student) where the majority of my peers responded with the vaguest of responses.

The other element I am concerned about is activity generated texts. I love having activities in my course where groups work together to generate a text that the rest of the class can analyze and relate to assigned readings. During these activities I often become a cornerstone for answering questions; groups become very self-conscious about the text they are going to share, and I often help that worry by proposing ideas to help them build. I am concerned that migrating this aspect of my course to the online world raises multiple concerns. I worry the texts will not be as effective (even if written in a synchronous chat/document) since there is a lack of a strong verbal discussion. I also worry about my ability to provide guiding help—on the message boards—without being too influential.

Translating Teaching Moves Online

Over the past six weeks, we have been engaged in an online class and have had three facilitators of our burgeoning content, each bringing concepts to us through his own modeling, approach, and use of technology. On full display have been many of the best practices we are reading about this week. In Warnock’s text as well as in the HRC report, the construct that online courses work best when course delivery is dynamic and allows for student-generated content has been apparent here. One primary focus of this course from day one is that that we are a community of learners, and engagement among instructors and students is paramount to its success. We have also experienced a variety of uses of technology as our facilitators get us thinking and focused on the lessons and goals for each unit.

What I have really enjoyed is that we have evidence that our personalities, teaching philosophies, and lessons can be successfully translated to the online arena. Jim started us off with his DeNiro impression in his video that illustrated his humor, enthusiasm for engagement, and supportive nature as we explored a teaching framework; curry next took us to the world of tech tool exploration, and showcased his master ability to integrate technology with his calm, sweet (yes, sweet) nature; this week Tony showcases what he does best- setting up his learning space as an invitation to join the conversation and reinforce the power of the learner-centered classroom (the commercial break was brilliant- do we have a closeted karaoke enthusiast in our department?) Now we begin thinking practically as we explore and share our own moves or student centered activities and how they might be reimagined in an online class.

We know that learner-centered classrooms produce results and all of us engage in classroom activities where students work together as developers of content. In the learner centered activity I discussed on the Google doc, students are fully engaged in developing the content and doing the work which culminates in their presentations to the class. As we’ve discussed, in f2f we witness in real time how this work is progressing and whether students might need some support from us for successful facilitation. At the right time, we might come in to solicit input from a quieter student or answer a group’s question. In the online setting, we can still do the same, but with different tools or approaches. The HRC reports, “Research shows that many of the instances in which distance education courses fail to promote student learning, the cause is students‘ sense of isolation or low level of self-directedness.” I think this is true whether onsite or online, but it reinforces our role as facilitators who need to engage and empower students to be active learners and contribute to the student-centered classroom experiences we develop.

I can see moving my activity online by beginning with some open-ended questions at the Discussion Board about some of the broad topics from the reading selections to be analyzed later. From student responses, I can construct groups and then provide instructions on their task via a screencast as we’ve seen here along with some written instructions and links to the readings. I could then create Google docs for each group for students to begin their work and include some areas for discussion (big ideas, powerful quotes and reactions, vocabulary, analyzing concepts, composing potential prompts, etc.) I could monitor the documents and student contributions and come in where needed to ask or answer questions or offer encouragement. Students in their groups would then have flexibility and choice as to how they would put together and upload their presentations to the class (prezi, ppt w/ audio, etc.). I could then create a Discussion Board where students could pose questions to the group to respond to. Finally, I could use an online poll like PollEverywhere for students cast their vote for the reading which will become the basis for their writing task.

 For me, the big take aways this week have been the importance of modeling, monitoring, and encouraging student engagement in the online classroom and how important it is to design activities with clear instructions and think about the scaffolding that will allow for the students to take the lead in their learning. I especially liked the advice that we design materials but then teach, allowing for a dynamic classroom where we, along with our students, enjoy the experience.

Migrating Assignments through the Tech Buffet

As I watched the video and read through Chapters 4 and 5, I felt lucky that I teach in a discipline that lends itself to student generated content.  I can see how other disciplines might have trouble transitioning from the face-to-face to the fully online teaching environment.  I have found that most of my content and practices have transitioned fairly well, and the discussion this week has shown me why.  I teach with a fairly student centered approach.

However, the transition is not automatic.  As we have read this week, the transition takes place through a filter of technology(ies).  I have been reflecting on the assignment I mentioned earlier in the week in the Google Doc, since it is one that I have not yet migrated to the online environment (as I have not taught Engl. 201 online, though I want to try it), and I thought it might be useful to post some of my thinking regarding that particular assignment and how it might pair with available technologies — and maybe someone more adept might have some excellent tech suggestions that might make it even better.

As I mentioned, I teach my English 201 with a dystopian literature theme, so we read all kinds of great novels, short stories, plays, and poetry.  I designed the course so that we read one work from every decade between 1900 and 2000, and we examine the evolution of the genre. However, I leave out the 1960s, which is a great decade for dystopian works.  I allow students to choose the works we examine from this decade, in small groups, then they craft a presentation for the class about a particular work.  They choose their novel about halfway through the semester and present a few weeks before the end.

1. I allow the students, in small groups, to each choose a different work from that decade.  Online, I could assign students to groups and provide them with a private discussion thread to consider their options.  This could also be accomplished through a Google Doc or one of the many chat apps, though I would want to have access at this stage to provide thoughts/feedback/guidance. 
2. They then read the work and develop a presentation for the class that includes information about the work, the author, the time period, and then compares the novel to the other works we have read as a class.  Perhaps a private discussion thread might work well here, too, so they can discuss the work as they read it.  Or a WeChat group, which might be easier to participate in while reading.  A Google Doc, again, would be useful as they conduct initial research for their presentation and begin outlining it.  I'm also considering a synchronous video chat, maybe through Skype, for the individual groups so they can meet, talk, brainstorm, etc. during the process.
   
3. In my face-to-face class, they all present on the same day in front of the class.  They often use PowerPoint or bring visual aids.  Online, there are so many options.  I have been considering having them present through video, through a presentation platform like Prezi, or through a thorough, multi-media blog post.  Or through something amazing that I don't even know about.  I think there are a lot of options here.
4. I definitely want the class to be able to respond to the presentations, with questions, comments, evaluations.

I think the project will translate, largely because students drive the process.  The students get to use their developing understanding of the genre to make choices about the work they’d like to examine, then they develop biographical and historical context for the work through their own research and present their findings to the class. The insights and connections they make belong to them, and the presentations are typically excellent.  Throughout the process they are mining the biography and history associated with the work and determining what is relevant to understanding the work.

How to Khan

The importance of organizing and labeling lessons in clearly navigable ways has been one of the recurring topics in our discussions of migrating pedagogies from f2f classes to online modalities. Tony’s video concretized Warnock’s general discussion of migrating the Socratic Method online by providing a clear illustration of how to organize student-centered lessons using online tools. This example, along with Tony’s recommended reading of “Taking a Learner-Centered Approach in Online Courses” by Errol Craig Sull, helped me to brainstorm/draft a possible migration of a student-centered process analysis lesson online:

Warnock’s fifth chapter about an online-oriented syllabus was also useful. Over the years, I have made my syllabi increasingly interactive—namely by including images, questions, and text boxes that they have to write in or at least check off—in order to immediately establish critical reading and annotating practices. This is also intended (though it doesn’t always work this way) to hold students more accountable for the information therein and stave off the myriad questions throughout the semester that can be answered by the syllabus.

However, I have to consider how this would work in an online forum, and I would definitely have to revise in consideration of Warnock’s point about how course policies will “undergo significant change” (42) because the majority of my course policies are about being in a f2f classroom. Based on Warnock’s suggestions, I will also include a realistic stipulation on skill sets requisite to succeeding in the course and a statement on document conventions, including titling files. How many times have I received a document named “paper” or "english" and, in reflex, launched into my best Shatner in Wrath of Khan impression?

Getting the Student-Centered Discussion Right

I may have said this before, but my absolute favorite thing about teaching is the class discussions, and however much I want to believe Warnock that an online environment can be just as enjoyable as f2f, I just can’t. As I have discussions in my f2f classes, I think more about what is happening on site, the dynamism and interest, the tangents and personalities, and reflect on why I love my job. And so, having said that, I think it’s time for me to quit this online teaching sequence... JUST KIDDING!

No, but seriously, I may be jumping the gun here, but this is what’s on my mind this week:

I understand and like the progression Tony demonstrated in his video. What struck me as especially helpful is where he makes a mini lesson video using the ideas the students have submitted a day or so before, allowing him to tailor it exactly to his students. Since I like to prepare for class well ahead of time, I don’t know if that will work for me, but it is definitely the most effective way to go about the lesson. The trouble I’m having is the details of the discussion part.

Warnock acknowledges that the Socratic discussion style “might be served better by chats and other synchronous technologies than by asynchronous tools” (31). Given that synchronous opportunities may be limited or impossible (I mean, that’s why people take an online class, right?), I’m stuck. He describes the progression of these discussions, where the teacher “warms [students] up with easy questions, building [their]confidence and creating classroom energy before delving into the more difficult issues that [are] the object of the class lesson” (31). He says you can do this in message boards, building the questions throughout the week. Warnock promises to talk about this more in Chapter 8, and I am eager to hear the details. Until then, here are my concerns:

How do you ensure the following?

-it doesn’t drag on too long (if you want everyone to participate),

-students don’t repeat each other’s comments because they are required to comment,

-if they don’t have to comment every time, that students read earlier messages,

-students who only read the end comments still come to a full understanding of the issues

In class, not everyone participates, but they can’t help but listen and respond in their heads. They are still witnessing the flow and building of ideas. Perhaps the way Tony does it, the deepening of ideas happens over the week through the various assignments. But in a f2f class, we would have both: a building of ideas through various in- and outside- class activities, and also a Socratic discussion. Is there a way to retain even some of the dynamism of an onsite discussion asynchronously online? 

Structure Encourages Link Integration

I’m new to using advanced tools in CMS systems. I have used three different course systems in my teaching including WebCT, Blackboard, and Canvas. When I have used WebCT and Blackboard, I used it as an online posting mechanism. I would add the schedule, prompts, and pictures of students’ presentations and board work so that it could be saved and referenced later, and this method worked well if a student missed class, or if I wanted to make changes to the schedule.   While the course had different types of tools, I felt that I didn’t understand a lot of them. For example, when content is labeled as SCORM, I’m still not really sure what that is. A long list of tools that do not seem be organized in any way other than alphabetical organization is a bit overwhelming. The complexity of the way that tools are named has been a challenge for using them.

Canvas makes a lot of the extra steps easier. Canvas somewhat forces me to integrate files as hyperlinks, which is very effective because let’s say that I want to create an assignment, I can add a quick link to the Prompt and quick links to sample papers in one short paragraph that gives the students an overview. (These aren’t actual links, but the idea is that they easily recognize them as such.) Since the assignment window is shorter, it encourages the hyperlinks because students may miss content if they do not scroll down. Also, the students can easily access this information from the “files,” “Syllabus,” grades, and “calendar” sections of the course as well as anywhere I add a link. The window on the right side that pops up when I am editing makes this integration easy to build the course.

While I find that Canvas is the most versatile CMS, I find that it still has many challenges. One of the biggest challenges is that students with Macbooks have had a lot of trouble with Canvas. I have a student who uses her laptop for all of her assignments and content does not show up at all. Another student was gifted a Macbook from her job that is paying for her education. Canvas did not show up on her Mac, and she had to buy another computer after the second week of class out of her own pocket because several of her instructors were using Canvas.

LMS Trunk, Gaming Branches

I’ve only just begun to explore Canvas so I have used Blackboard as my primary LMS, though when I was teaching classes in the teaching credential program at CSU Long Beach, I used Ning to show single-subject credential students to create learning modules for their Language Arts classes. Together, we were able to create some pretty awesome multimodal, interactive lessons and resource pages. But that was before those money-grubbing jerkfaces started charging for their site-building platform.

In reverting back to Blackboard, I only use the basics: announcements, discussion boards, but mostly posting files to the content folders. I guess with the lack of the “wow” factor (or maybe just my knowledge) of Blackboard features, I rely on making interactive PowerPoints/Prezi/Google docs that don’t tell students what to know but show them how to think about the material. So, for example, a PowerPoint might introduce a term/concept, provide a link to a Dave Chappelle skit for illustration, then ask what, how, why questions to get the analysis jumpstarted before they share thoughts in a discussion board or in a more formally submitted assignment. Essentially, this basic technology helps me to visualize my scaffolding, just as it provides students a model for brainstorming, drafting, workshopping, and revising ideas. In this way, content like the PowerPoint slideshows have proven to be a useful resource for mapping the question-based critical reading, writing, and thinking processes of our course without merely documenting answer-based content or formulas that would forego the necessity of actively attending class. (This is important because I find that a lot of students erroneously expect that they can review materials on Blackboard in lieu of attending class.)

Because my main pedagogical needs are, in the language of Warnock’s map, the delivery of course lessons, creation of audiovisual materials, and facilitation of group projects, I was most intrigued by Warnock’s mention of programs external to the LMS, such as Second Life and video games. Not being a gamer myself (though I’m always reading to throw down a round of Just Dance) the learning curve for incorporating these prospective technologies feels daunting because I would surely be the avatar continuously walking into a wall as non-virtual me struggles to remember which button does what. However, my husband who teaches at CSU-level is currently involved in a system-wide technology course redesign for which his grant is focused on developing video games expressly designed for writing and composition courses—all the more reason to prepare our students for such innovative uses of technology upon their transfer to local four-year universities.

When he delivered this nerd news, I immediately thought back to my little brother—now award-winning scientist savant—who struggled through school because of ESL issues that bred a general anxiety toward reading and writing. I coached him through these linguistic issues through the role-playing games in which he was so immersed. In co-playing these virtual narratives with him, I witnessed his development of not only vocabulary acquisition through engaging contexts, but also process-oriented critical thinking and rhetorical analysis as his verbal and physical responses to events in the game resulted in distinct consequences to his avatar. Indeed, before I severed all ties with the show (R.I.P. Glenn!), I tried my hand at playing The Walking Dead video game (all while my brother heckled me for my lack of dexterity and speed), and while “playing” I realized the great weight that every word I said bore on the unfolding events and my relationships with other characters in the game. This dialogue-centric game revolves around matters of audience and rhetoric. Interspersed, of course, with lots of blood and guts.

My brother’s critical thinking skills proved to be invaluable when he pursued a major and career in science, as many of our students will, because STEM courses must cover so much content there is rarely time for discussing ethics or critical thinking. As my brother told me upon his graduation from UCLA, “I have the scientific knowledge to build bombs and cook meth, but our classes never addressed why we should not do that.” Since then, video games have been used to develop skills central to our discipline: https://ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2015/01/16/gone-home-a-video-game-as-a-tool-for-teaching-critical-thinking/

Video game narratives are so much more developed now (and being written by graduates of legit video game-writing college degree programs) that I am intrigued by the possibility of incorporating such technologies as a branch off of whatever LMS in use. That is to say, I don’t see the LMS as being the primary tool for online education. Rather, the LMS is the launching pad from which students can develop their skills through external resources and activities we have crafted for them, anything on the spectrum from a PowerPoint to a video game. I envision students returning from their explorations to the LMS as a home base for reflecting upon their experiences on the branches of the technological learning tree. How can we explore possibilities for scaffolding technological branches such as reading- and writing-centered video games into our learning modules and our course narratives overall?

p.s. Warnock’s point about talking on the phone with students made me think about how the only person I use my phone to call is my mom. What has been more useful is a tool recommended to me when I taught at Fullerton College where many students did not have computer access—the Remind service that allows you to text students reminders and updates from a distinct number that keeps your personal number private. In case you’re interested: https://www.remind.com/

Cool and Creative LMS Title!

I have started exploring Canvas in preparation for the upcoming shift. I find the Canvas interface to be more modern, and the ability to add in other tools really makes it exciting for me. I am currently using Blackboard—which my computer hates for some reason—and I have experience with Moodle, but after playing around with Canvas, I am looking forward to using it as my LMS. There were also a few specific tools brought up this week that I already use, or want to try out.

I currently use Prezi in my classes for my lectures and I love it. The feedback students have given me has been excellent. So while I like the fact that it allows me to preserve all my lectures in one place, and access those from any computer, my students enjoy the formatting and transitions. It is also easy to share the presentations via email without having to deal with attachments.

I also started using Google docs in my classes after attending one of Curry’s workshops. I ask some classes to keep their notes in a shared document, so everyone has the ability to see how other students respond to assigned texts. I also have students work on group work via google docs, and it has worked well.

The one tool that was posted on here this week that I am very excited for is FOLD. I am envisioning some amazing ways for students to use it to respond to texts. I encourage my students to reflect on texts and make connections between their everyday lives and the texts I assign, and the ability to have students annotate and respond to a text with other mediums (such as gifs or Youtube videos) could produce some wonderful content to further discussions.  

The only tool I am concerned about is the message board. I know this is the logical and widely accepted way to hold group discussions, but I am curious to see if there is any other way to push the conversation past text. I think FOLD could work as a way to mix up the monotony of pure text discussions, but I also do not want to limit a student’s ability to respond by forcing them into a medium they may struggle with. I do not mean to bash text discussions here, but I think mixing it up somehow over the course of 17 weeks could be beneficial.

Anyways, that’s my take. I am excited to explore this realm further and try out new tools that could also help my f2f classes. And, for the record, Bioshock doesn’t have zombies, it has mutants!