Manifesto Revisited

When I wrote my original manifesto, I saw online teaching as a set of tools and approaches that could enhance my in-person classroom. Now, after revisiting it with new experiences and knowledge two months later, I see it as a design practice rooted in intentionality, equity, and community whether online or in person.

From Pacansky-Brock’s How to Humanize Your Online Class (2020), I learned that presence is not just about being visible. It’s about being human. Establishing trust, showing empathy, and communicating care are not optional extras. They are the foundation for any learning environment where students feel safe enough to take risks. Personalized communication, small relational gestures, and active listening have a huge impact in persisting through challenging tasks. Online, this means more than posting content, it means using warm, welcoming language, sharing pieces of my own learning journey, and designing opportunities for students to share their stories too.

From Design Justice (Costanza-Chock, 2020), I learned that design decisions either reinforce or challenge inequities. Before this course, I thought accessibility mainly meant “can students open the file?” Now, I ask, “Whose voices are centered here? Whose needs are prioritized?” It seems easy to simply have students contribute to an online forum, but it’s easy to forget about the students that don’t have the bandwidth or reliable enough connection to make that happen, meaning that students with slower connections couldn’t fully engage. I now avoid over-reliance on heavy video content without alternatives, and I design for multiple modes of participation.

From Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2018), I embraced the idea that flexibility in engagement, representation, and expression benefits all students. Tools like collaborative documents and polls aren’t just “extras”, but allow quieter or less confident learners to share ideas in ways that feel safe. I plan to start integrating choice in how students present understanding, whether through video, audio, visuals, or writing.

I still believe students are co-designers of learning, but now I see co-design as both a pedagogical value and a justice practice. I will solicit feedback mid-unit, adapt based on their responses, and make my design choices transparent so students understand why we’re doing things a certain way.

The biggest pitfall I encountered was assuming that my face-to-face instincts would naturally translate online. In reality, building trust and clarity online takes more scaffolding and redundancy. I need to plan more explicit instructions, offer multiple entry points for participation, and build in time for reflection because in online spaces, silence doesn’t always mean disengagement.

Ultimately, my teaching philosophy still centers on connection, relevance, and growth, but now, it’s informed by research-based strategies, design justice principles, and an awareness of how my choices can either close or widen gaps in learning. Whether I’m in a physical classroom or a digital one, I see myself not just as an instructor, but as a designer of equitable learning experiences that matter.

References:

Cast.org. (n.d.). The UDL guidelines. cast.org.

Constanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. The MIT Press. https://designjustice.mitpress.mit.edu/

Pacansky-Brock, M. (2020). How to humanize your online class, version 2.0 [Infographic]. https://brocansky.com/humanizing/infographic2