Tips for building quality introduction activities. A means to build instructor presence, expectations for student presence, and content presence ASAP.

Introduction, a definition: a formal presentation of one person to another, in which each is told the other's name.

By this definition, the introduction is mediated. A person other than one's self initiates the proceedings.

In education, this is the Instructor putting the prompt before the class. So, instructors should begin from the point of view as a partner, and begin with the concept, "What's in a name?" (Shakespeare, "Romeo and Juliet")

Model professionalism:
Establish humanity & Instructor Presence and reveal a relationship to the content.

Often instructors either justify their credentials via a litany of accomplishments or ignore this establishing presence altogether. Matching one's self to the activity can offer both conciseness and empathy.

Instructors can white-out hypocrisy by never asking students to do something they've not done or are not willing to do right by their sides (Greathouse, "Articles of Pyratical Pedagogy").

Model quality presentation.
After Instructor presence is a go, isn't this a good time to set the bar as a teaser to quality? Model the balance with professionalism, tone, and expectations for evaluation.

The slide on rubrics is coming. We're not there, yet.

Modeling quality can include:
1) Use of Technology;
2) Level and quality of participation;
3) displaying methods, such as questioning, to encourage more conversation.

If you want more than the yes/no, agree/disagree answers, try to avoid directly evaluative statements. Promote the challenge to continue speaking.

Ensnare interest & relevance: Catch them on the hook, feed them the line to the rod, and you hold the reel to bring them in.

Link the content of the introduction to the focus and purpose of the class while forcing students to recognize their connection to it.

Examples: A math class can "solve for the learners" as a variable (each class is unique after all) where an instructor can then build the equation of the class; Create buy-in and simultaneously justify the format of the introduction

Dare to Pair:
Introductions just don't exist at all without at least 2 people present.

If the definition mentions that these often occur when an intermediary actually promotes a partner, meaning there are at least 3 people involved, an option is to tier the interaction by offering the chance to get to know one another, and having one person present their partner to the class. This isn't a time to sacrifice the relevance, however.

It's possible to promote this as an idea to evaluate potential study buddies, too.

Design Simply:
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." -Leonardo Da Vinci

There's a difference between complex and difficult. Neither should be a part of the Introduction Activity. Too much is at stake.

*See the Directions LIFT available: https://www.haikudeck.com/p/1d3e130fbf/directions-

Respect Time:
This is an issue of student workload. Give them the time to establish themselves in the activity, but also save your time and theirs for tasks and assessments that really should require more time relative to the increasing complexity of concepts in relation to their output.

Encourage Creativity:
Provide options. Allow contributors to exhibit personality while practicing the balance of presentation.

Examples: Online, model some technology and invite the use of it, but keep the request simple.
In person, invite participants to either speak or come up with ways without their speaking to display their answers. (This can lead to finding audio or video self-presentation).

Need a strategy to encourage the creativity? Offer some sort of trade or recognition, such as a free pass on one question of a test or quiz down the road, or being allowed to pick a point down the road they really want to launch a class with from a topic of interest based on course content. Try not making creativity a part of the point system/grading within the introduction, however. This really does require more complex thinking and should be built up over time as assessments develop.

Invite course and content ownership: Try allowing participants to create a rubric from this conversation/introduction. Give them the categories and have them develop criteria with coming to a 2/3 vote (quorum).

Take the time and have a classwide evaluation of what makes a good conversation and what it looks like in-person and/or online. That conversation itself can be deconstructed in the moment.

Guide them to keep it very simple and concrete with specificity.

If you really want a challenge, work with different students to evaluate their peers alongside you through the class. A triad of you and 2 students might cut down on grade disputes, and could lead to accountability later with group work and model methods for peer review.

Evaluate Gently but Specifically:
Whether an instructor works cooperatively with students to create the rubric criteria, use the activity as part of participation, but keep it low stakes. This is the time to begin to 1) get a sense of who follows directions;
2) offer guidance to see who can exhibit learning by exhibiting change; 3) construct the overall view of the real human beings in the course for possible cohesion.