In my course (Drugs, Brain, and Society), the material is divided into Modules and for each module, I assign an “Activity”; some are done in the classroom and others are done outside of the classroom.
These assignments can vary from filling out a worksheet on the brain, to watching a relevant TV series and commenting on it. When the assignment is done in class, I put the students into groups/breakout rooms and then try to have discussions on all of the activities, but the responses are limited.
I would like update these assignments to use more interactive modes to try and get engagement from all the students, not just the usual 5-6 that always speak.
Activity 1
Choose from any drug from Module 2 or 3 and name 2 myths (common belief, rumor, etc) about the drug you chose, one of which is true and one of which is false. Submit a one paragraph on your findings (references are fine but not required).
Activity 2
Find a song about any drug from Module 2 or 3; write a paragraph about the song, specifically thinking about some of the following questions: What perspective is the song writer expressing; one of a user or of someone who has been affected by a user? What message about the drug is the song writer expressing? Is it positive or negative?
My objectives are to: revise an assignment and increase student engagement in a course in the department of Black & Latino Studies in Baruch College. The course is ANT/SOC/LTS 3021 US/MEXICO BORDER (Beyond and Before the Border). I am a Latinamericanist with a speciality and love for Mexico and this was my dream course which I taught in spring 2020. Six weeks into the course we went on-line. I had used Blackboard, but in a very limited and inefficient manner till then, but I was stuck! The students, however, seemed to love the material, the learning, research, conversations, etc. My on-line technological skills are pre-101, or remedial! I have read my colleagues posts for Post 2 and am in awe, however, I do want to gain competency in the tools which will enhance the learning for my students. In that light, as a pedagogue, my analysis is that I have to scaffold my own learning, slow but steady. For this reason, I will work on increasing student engagement by the use of blogs. This course as well as OTE have made me aware of the multiple tools and resources available such as blocks and Vlog to support student learning and engagement which I hope to master and use at a future time
The assignment I am going to revise is about the Maya civilization; it was a week long assignment (2 classes) and I had actually used it successfully not only in LTS3021 but also several times in our basic departmental course on Latin America (LTS1003) . The assignment entailed reading and group work. The students had to manage on their own to work in groups which I had created from the beginning of the semester. They loved teaching each other; the assessment was their group document as well as both written and oral feedback about their experience. They also made reference to what they had learned throughout the semester and in the final take home exam.
The ways I would revise it would include more clarity in the instructions and setting up the blog site so they could communicate with each other as a group or individually. Here is the unrised assignment:
MAYA CIVILIZATION
Part I
I have posted a number of articles about Maya civilization : Math, Writing, Astronomy/Calendar in Course Documents.
You will each read and study ONE article before your next class. You will chose your article in coordination with your group so that there is at least one person in your group who becomes a specialist in Math or Writing, or Astronomy/Calendar. (You will be teaching each other later on). There is NO need to do further research, simple read your article carefully, slowly. THIS IS ALL THAT IS DUE by your next class so that you can better appreciate the history of the Mayan peoples.
This is an important intellectual exercise in distinguishing between what is important and what are details; that is what you should be focused on. This is something you can discuss together and arrive at conclusions
Part 2
After you have carefully read and studied your aspect of Maya civilization, each member of your group will present and teach the other members of your group. It’s up to each group how you do this.: Telephone,,media, in person socially distanced,etc.).
2. Each member of the group will write two sentences reacting to this group exercise – what worked, what didn’t , what skills you need to improve in relation to collaborative learning,. You will have your name in parenthesis after your two sentences and the entire document should be sent to my email by Weds. Sept 16. On the subject heading you include
Name of your groups as well as your class (M/W) or (T/TH). In other words, each group will send me one document.
The teaching artifact I would like to revise is based on a reading responses to a grouping of short essays about the meaning and function of reading and literature. I call these texts “Readings on Reading.” While all the texts are mandatory reading, I break up the reading responses alphabetically by last name so that each student only writes on one text. This results in groupings of about about 4-5 students who have both read a given text and written a response.
This is a mid-level assignment which requires a bit more time and attention that a typical reading response. A reading response is simply a series of question which are typically specific to a text. Normally I have these assignments posted in the Discussion Board. They normally involve a combination of different types of questions, either factual, interpretive or asking students their opinion and reasoning for it. Students are expected to answer each question in a few sentences and the typical function of such responses are to guarantee that students read for class and to have them thinking about matters and themes central to class discussion in preparation for it.
This particular particular response asks general, non-text specific, questions which apply to all the “Readings on Reading.” Typically when I cover the text in class I will make a point to call on those students who wrote on the text under discussion. However, I’ve never completely taken advantage of the group format. I would like to make this a more collaborative project in which the students formally assemble in blocks and collaborate as a group which would culminate in a group presentation to the class. This would allow students to engage with each other in different modes, as a group and then as a group interacting with the whole class. Each group would then run class for the duration of their presentation.
Here each group would lead class discussion of the text they wrote on. I think I envision this as a kind of semi-formal presentation in that one the one hand, they should have mastered their content by completing the written assignment, while on the other hand the presentation itself is a bit more impromptu and spontaneous, with me asking them question periodically, rather than something that is completely rehearsed and polished in advance.
Therefore, the assignment would consist of two graded components: a written part and an oral part in which each member of the group would be responsible for addressing one question or some portion of the overall assignment. The written component would be graded on both the substance and the quality of the writing and the group presentation on their general preparedness.
I’ve considered also having them include some small element of a PowerPoint presentation in order for the rest of the class to follow along visually and for the presenters to more easily stay on point. This is a type of project that could work in person and in the Zoom on-line format. I’d like to avoid asking students to meet outside of class to prepare their presentations because their schedules and their commuter status often make this burdensome. Breakout rooms on Zoom could be used in order for them to have time to “huddle” and discuss their presentation. Meanwhile students who are listening could be required to provide feedback to remarks they found engaging by using the Chat function on Zoom.
To make this artifact more complete. I would have to provide more information about what I expect them to do in their groups, as well as provide a grading rubric for the written and and oral components with an explanation of the focus and structure of the oral presentation.
Reading Response Prompt:
Assignment 1.5 page double spaced essay on One Reading from “Readings on Reading”
Instructions:
Read all the “Readings on Reading”
Answer the following question on a given reading based on the alphabetical groupings by your last name.
Collaborate with your group and present your responses to the class.
Questions:
What do you think the main point of this article is? (1 paragraph)
How does the author of this article understand the primary function or purpose of reading/What function this author focus on? (1 paragraph)
Quote what you believe to be either the most important or most interesting passage in the text. Explain what you think it means? What is the author saying? Then explain why you think this is the most important passage and what is most interest about it. (2 paragraphs)
Classwork: (10 mins)
Get in groups based on the reading you selected.
Talk about each of the questions in order. Debate and dispute with yourselves on what you think the answers are and reach some general consensus. Additionally discuss that things you do not agree on and reach and understanding of what your differences of thinking are which led to your differing conclusions.
As a group present your findings to the questions in order to the class and we will initiate our discussion of the reading based on your opening remarks.
I often feel like when I design or redesign a class that I get stuck in the many, and overwhelming details and spend a lot of time looking for a reading or assignment that I think will be “useful” or students will “like” from the beginning. Or, I spend a lot of time thinking about logistics or the parameters of an assignment: when will we meet, and should I use a discussion board, journaling, etc. This has meant that I sometimes don’t have a strong sense of why, or how the materials and assignments contribute to the goals of the course as a whole. So! After I read this, I decided to work backwards by first defining the big goals of the course. When I did this, I realized my module structure would need to be revised. Here’s what I wrote about the overarching learning goals.
By the end of this course, students will gain skills to describe, understand, and discuss the scope and degree of inequality in the United States. Students will be able to
Locate, use, and understand contemporary Sociological data about inequality produced by researchers and institutions in the U.S.
Recognize and analyze stratification associated with race, gender, sexuality, and other identities, statuses, and roles.
Analyze contemporary issues of inequality as discussed in the media and in relation to their everyday lives using the Sociological imagination.
Use these ideas and concepts to make an informed argument about inequality, social mobility, and democracy in capitalist societies.
Students will gain an understanding of key areas of inquiry in the Sociology of Inequality, and will be able to deploy the ideas and vocabulary developed in class to analyze inequality in the U.S. These concepts include
The Individual attributes and the structural approach to understanding and explaining inequality, including the materialist structural model and its use in analyzing and explaining our experiences, identities, and worldviews.
The structure and operation of the political economy of capitalism including stages and varieties of capitalist organization, class power and the relational and dynamic view of class, and social mobility and democracy in capitalist societies.
Racial capitalism and its relationship to contemporary forms of inequality with a focus on housing, labor, and forms of social control including policing and prisons.
Features of social welfare systems, and policies, structures, and techniques of governance related to the management of poor people including critiques of the “culture of poverty” thesis and the nature and function of policing and prisons.
For my teaching artifact, I’d like to implement a Slack channel. My main goal with this is to build community in my online classroom, which I hope in turn would foster better group and class-wide discussions.
I have never moderated a Slack group before, though I have used the product in my own personal and professional life. In Slack you can have channels for different purposes. I wouldn’t want to overwhelm the students with channels, but I think I would have a general questions channel, along with channels for each major assignment (short papers and the final paper). I would also have a just-for-fun, getting-to-know-you channel.
I want to avoid implementing Slack as just another thing they have to do. I want them to use it and get something out of it, rather than be forced to do so. For that reason, I’m thinking about setting up semester-long study groups for them to participate in- each group would have a channel. I would want to develop a scaffolded approach to sort of “seed” participation, though- I want to set it up, and encourage it, but not force it? And hope it takes hold and increases from there? That is the part I’m trying to work out how to do. I’d be very happy to see any guidance or tips from someone else who has used Slack in this way!
I don’t have a current version of this to paste here, as there is no extant version of this for my course. However, I can tell you what I have done so far to build community that hasn’t worked/has only worked a bit:
Have students each post a self-introductory blog post, and then have students start a conversation off those posts by commenting on someone else’s post
I am teaching a new course that is being introduced by the department this Fall to all business school students as a business core course. I am still in the throes of understanding how students are entering this course and how well they are prepped to receive this content. The primary take away is they are weak in their pre-requisite knowledge, and this is creating a bottleneck in terms of keeping up with my course schedule.
The teaching artifact I’d like to work on is teaching in chunks, and making my teaching more a briefing and less a lecture. This is particularly relevant since the first few weeks of my course syllabus is designed to be a review of their pre-requisite course (statistics) of which my students remember nada. Which means a two week statistics review ends up becoming a 4 week re-teach of statistics.
However I am trying to work out what is keeping students from engaging during the class sessions. Do my expectations of engagement need to be re-set? Thinking in progress…
The teaching artifact that I’m planning on revising is a course syllabus for ENG 2150T, the second part of a first-year writing course for English language learners at Baruch.
Writing II builds on the learning goals of Writing I, encouraging students to read, reflect on, write about, and synthesize ideas from a range of texts across a variety of genres. Students examine and learn how to employ different styles, various appropriate uses of evidence and counter-evidence, multiple methods of interpretations, and close readings of texts. Students further develop competency in the use and evaluation of multiple external sources as they research ideas related to the course theme, shape and express their ideas, and cast them into well organized, thoughtful, and persuasive argumentative essays. The goal is to prepare students not only for success in academic writing but also for effective participation in and critical understanding of composing in multiple discursive modes and media beyond the academic essay.
This course is required for all undergraduate degrees granted by Baruch College. It is required within the Baruch Common Core Curriculum (for students who entered Baruch prior to Fall 2013). For students who entered Baruch Fall 2013 or later under the PATHWAYS General Education requirements (or who “opt-in” to CUNY Pathways), ENG 2150 or ENG 2150T satisfies half of the “English Composition” requirement of the Required Core.
Spring 2022 will be my first time to teach this course, so I’m not exactly revising the course syllabus that I’ve already used, but revising it based on ways to make my syllabus more engaging for students in the course. This includes the following: 1. Include an introduction of myself in the syllabus. If you were to look at any of my course syllabuses now, you would see that the purpose of them is to communication information and policies about the courses to the students. There is nothing personal about myself for my students to engage or connect with. Since I will be teaching a hybrid course, I believe that it is extremely important to provide opportunities like this to be more connected and engaged in the online learning environment. 2. Include learning tools throughout the syllabus. These will include learning tips, study practices, and writing tips. Because this is a writing course, the incorporation of these learning tools in the syllabus works perfectly to increase student engagement. 3. Include statements throughout that explicitly offer help to students. These will be centered on writing, of course, but also other areas that students often need help with, for example, mental health. 4. Make the heading and sub-heading throughout the syllabus phrased as questions. The purpose of this is to stimulate interest and thinking about the information contained in the different sections.
I am thinking about using a Google Form as a way of students engaging with certain aspects of the content of the syllabus. The structure of this will be with a needs analysis in mind. I’m still working on what questions to include.
Because I am creating these from scratch, I don’t have an artifact developed yet. However, I have a model of the course syllabus and Google Form that I’m using to help with my designing of the artifact.
I have a series of low-stakes assignments in which students are asked in one week to submit a short argument on a recent course topic, and then in the next week they are asked to evaluate 3 other students’ short arguments, using the PeerMark assignment feature on Turnitin. All submissions and evaluations are anonymous (unless students deliberately put their names in the body of their work).
I have been tweaking this assignment model off and on for a few years, with mixed results, but this semester it is going very well. In their evaluations, I ask students to give the argument they are evaluating a score on various parameters and then to give constructive, helpful comments to explain their score and to help the arguer improve. I also ask them to present a counterargument.
I’ve been pleased with the effort students have been putting into these assignments this semester, but I am considering two changes in how I do this next time, and would love suggestions or comments on how best to carry them out (or for alternatives):
Have students create the rubric for what each score should represent (giving them a blank or pared down version to collaborate on completing).
Find ways to encourage follow-up or opening communication about the submissions after the initial argument/evaluation cycle. (I’m not sure how to do this without undermining or outright destroying the benefits of having everything be anonymous initially.)
Regarding 1, the evaluation questions and current rubric are below.
EVALUATION QUESTIONS (Those that require a scored response using the rubric are in bold.)
As I understand it, the thesis is that: (fill in or cut and paste from the argument itself)
How rationally persuasive is the author’s argument? Does it provide good evidence and reasoning to support the thesis?
Scale Highest: very persuasive, Lowest: not persuasive
What advice would you give for improving the rational persuasiveness of the argument? (Where, if anywhere, does the argument fail to rationally persuade? Or, if it is successful, what makes it work? Note that this is not the same as a counterargument; this is advice for how to improve the argument, versus a counterargument which gives reasons to reject the argument.)
How accurately does the author present course material from readings or lecture? Are terms defined, philosophers’ views explained, and issues interpreted correctly?
Identify and explain any inaccuracies noted above. If you gave a 3 or less, clarify exactly what you think is wrong in the definitions or presentation of class material!
Is the writing clear and well organized? Assess the quality of the writing itself (considering the grammar, spelling, style, and so on, rather than the content).
Scale Highest: very clear, Lowest: very unclear
What suggestions would you make to improve the writing clarity or organization? Or, if you have no suggestions, identify what makes it successful.
How original is the thinking shown? That is, does the author mostly repeat ideas from others, such as in the readings and class discussion, or does the author show independent thought, with new arguments or examples (or at least new twists or personalization of them)?
Scale Highest: very original, Lowest: not at all original
Provide the best counterargument(s) you can, which must include at least one piece of supporting evidence (NO questions, and NO mere disagreement).
Optional: other comments you wish to share with the arguer? An overall ‘grade’ for the argument?
THE CURRENT RUBRIC: (The formatting seems to have gone a bit wonky as posted on the blog – it’s not this ugly, really!)
Argument Evaluation Rubric
Needs Lots of Work/Poor1
Needs Some Work2
Average3
Pretty good, with room for improvement4
Excellent5
Rational Persuasiveness
Not at all convincing; supporting evidence is absent, false, irrelevant, highly controversial, too general, or badly explained.
A little convincing; the argument needs more or better supporting evidence, the evidence needs better explanation, or the assumptions are controversial.
Adequate, with an average level of persuasiveness.
Fairly convincing, but assumptions could be made more explicit, or the evidence could be further developed in other ways.
Extremely convincing; the supporting evidence is specific, accurate, relevant, and well explained. Assumptions are either uncontroversial or supported.
Accuracy
There were many errors, misinterpretation, or false claims.
Some important points were wrongly reported or were misinterpreted.
Basically okay, but lacks detail or precision, or misleads on minor points.
Almost everything was accurate and appropriately interpreted.
Everything stated was accurate and appropriately interpreted.
Clarity and Organization
The meaning was very difficult to understand.
The meaning and/or connection between ideas were often unclear.
Relatively easy to follow, with decent grammar, etc., but should be edited to bring it above average.
The meaning was mostly clear, with some bits that could be re-written for greater clarity or logical flow.
The meaning is clear throughout, and the ideas are well-organized with good logical flow. The writing is efficient and effective.
Originality
Arguments, examples, or ideas seem straight from the reading or class discussion.
Only minimal efforts have been made to personalize the arguments.
Average.
While perhaps a bit derivative, the author has clearly made the arguments his or her own.
Examples or ideas show innovative, independent thought.
The material that I plan to revise—my Teaching Artifact—is the final research assignment for my Writing I class. I want to adapt it to use in Writing II, which I’m teaching next semester. My main goal when revising this assignment is to allow students more freedom in how they present their research. Right now, the assignment is to write a 7-pg research paper. While I want to leave students that option, I also want to open it up to invite less traditional methods of composition—students could present their research as a podcast, for example, or they could create a website. I think that inviting students to think of composition as something beyond just writing papers for class is a really important part of my job as a writing teacher, and I hope that this assignment will help do that. It will also encourage students who might have really exciting skills that maybe fall outside of structuring a traditional essay to bring those skills to play in the class, and it might encourage students who are traditionally “good” writers to move outside of their comfort zone and create something new and interesting.
The current assignment sheet is pasted below–the prompts would probably be different for the revised version, as it would be for a different class.
Major Project 3 / Research-Based Argument
Your final project of the term asks you to learn more about a topic related to the course theme or one that arises for you from the course readings. You’ll investigate the topic, form a guiding question for your research, and attempt to answer the question, using course texts and sources outside the course. You’ll integrate these sources into your own writing, ultimately coming to a (perhaps tentative) conclusion or claim (thesis) from your research and learning.
I encourage you to take this assignment in any direction you like—research a topic that you are genuinely interested in and excited about. It does not have to relate to anything that we’ve read or discussed in this class. If you’re looking for places to start, though, looking back at some of your earlier assignments and prompts might be helpful. You might write an essay about code-switching, conducting personal interviews and reading articles that would help you form a thesis about how code-switching works, when and why it might be necessary, and when and how it can be harmful. Your literacy narrative or analysis project might have raised questions about language, culture, or the histories of a particular text or movement that you want to explore further.
If you’d rather work on something new, and don’t have anything that you’re particularly excited to research in mind, here are two prompts that you’re welcome to use:
In “The Danger of a Single Story,” Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie talks about how the stories that she read as a child did not contain characters who looked or lived like her. As a young reader and writer, she internalized the idea that characters in books must be white, upper/middleclass, and from a certain background. Using Adichie’s talk as a jumping off point, you might research a specific aspect of representation in literature/film/other media. Why does it matter if people (particularly, perhaps, young people) see people who look/live like them? What studies have shown that representation matters, and how? You might focus on the push to diversify school curriculums, children’s literature or television, museum collections, or something else that isn’t listed here.
In her essay “The Egg and the Sperm,” Emily Martin shows how language and narrative infuse gender stereotypes into scientific discourse, even on a cellular level. Think of other cases where something similar may be happening, and research one of them. How does language—and how do the stories that we use to frame our understanding of the world—imbue other discourses that are supposed to be unbiased with bias? What values do words bring with them, and how does that shape discourse? You might think about another aspect of science or medicine, or an aspect of technology, schooling, or political discourse.
Essays should be around 7 double-spaced pages, and should cite roughly 7-10 sources.
Final drafts of essays will be graded based on:
Argument: Is the thesis clear and compelling? Is it backed up with evidence? Are the stakes of the argument clear? (25%)
Structure: Does the argument progress and flow logically? Are paragraphs clearly marked with topic sentences? (15%)
Research: Does the essay have enough sources? Are they peer-reviewed, or otherwise from trusted sources? Does the author acknowledge sources that may be biased, or otherwise flawed? Do they interrogate the sources critically? Has the author clearly done research from numerous sources, from varying backgrounds, and not just tried to find sources that support one viewpoint? (25%)
Grammar, structure, etc. (10%)
Editing: Has the author taken the feedback given by the professor and by peer reviewers into account when editing the essay? Have they made meaningful changes to the essay that clearly improve the above categories? (25%)
Your grade on the final draft of the research project makes up 30% of your course grade.
I realized after our first seminar meeting that engaged learning is cognitive, social, and psychological–a way of being committed to the course work and learning process. In light of that session, I anticipate 3 artifacts. Artifact #1: In fact, the first artifact is one I developed immediately after our Core Session 1 meeting on November 4. Here it is--a contract of sorts that students and I sign at the start of the semester. It’s serious but also meant to elicit a giggle. Now, I’d like to develop two more artifacts–I guess with scaffolding? Artifact #2: VOCAT: I envision video group work where students, assigned to groups of three, post videos (at least nine videos over the course of the semester) of how each of the nine phases of research and writing is going, including (1) what they’ve accomplished and (2) what they’re struggling with; teammates will annotate peer videos offering both substantive (e.g., have you tried searching X database with keywords Y and Z) and psychologically supportive feedback. Artifact #3: B@B POSTS: I’ve used these a lot for class-wide comments (not discussion, really) of our synchronous lectures and assigned readings. I don’t find these very engaging, but they serve to ensure students have done the assigned task on time. Here’s a link–you have to click on the generic menu in the upper-right to see the posts, which is kind of clean but annoying. I am updating my prior B@B site; here’s the link.