All the readings for this past week were interesting, but the one that related most closely to my lesson was Warnock’s Principle 4 from Teaching the OWl Course. He reminds us that planning a class online requires the migration of onsite work to online environment, NOT doing everything from scratch (167). That was the process I used to create the following lesson. I had to remind myself that I did not need to not create a new lesson – the change in medium is enough.
The next quote is a governing principle of teaching my onsite class, and will be for online as well: that the best practices about writing essays and doing research comes from the students, just as it would in an onsite discussion, but better, because it’s all written down and more students contribute (169). I don’t know if all these points are true, but I sure hope so! It makes teaching online worthwhile.
And now for some context on my video: This would be for Essay 1. Let’s assume students have read the assigned texts, done preliminary writing/brainstorming on the essay prompt (in the form of homework questions), had deeper discussion questions getting into the prompt in a more detailed way, have submitted outlines of their essay plans, and now writing the essay itself. Here’s the link to my lesson on introductions.
I do not currently teach any fully-online or hybrid courses yet, so this was my imagined lesson for an online English 100 course. I’ve done my best to translate my onsite pedagogy into the online realm (à la Warnock, of course!).
…and I just realized I was a little out of order near the end there. My apologies! Thanks for watching!
By the way, this sample lesson only leads up to the rough draft. After this, there would be guided and mentored peer views in groups of 4-5 students via a chat session, individual conferences with me (zoom, or skype, or chat), and two or three more activities before submitting the final draft. To keep my lesson plan “low stakes” (Warnock 165), just as I allow in my onsite courses, I’d give students the opportunity to revise for a higher score after receiving their final paper back. The benefit of low-stakes writing is students have the chance to work with their writing to create as polished a product as they want. Nobody catches every single error the first, second, or even third time around. If we teach the writing process as recursive, then why would our demands be linear? The only stipulation I make is they meet with me during an office hour appointment–online this would be in a synchronous chat session–to discuss a “revision plan”. This plan is a collaborative effort between the two of us outlining what they’ll be focusing on and why, thus reducing the temptation to merely fix up commas and sentence run-ons :-).