在全球COVID-19大流行的第一年,威特沃特斯兰德大学的教师团队对写作强化课程的质量和思维方式的思考

Q3 Social Sciences
Pam Nichols, Avril Joffe, R. Pillay, Bontle Tladi
{"title":"在全球COVID-19大流行的第一年,威特沃特斯兰德大学的教师团队对写作强化课程的质量和思维方式的思考","authors":"Pam Nichols, Avril Joffe, R. Pillay, Bontle Tladi","doi":"10.14426/cristal.v11i1.583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Writing Intensive (WI) courses depend on student engagement and continuous responses to student work. The sudden move to online learning in the face of COVID-19 presented profound challenges to this model. This is unsurprising since it is widely accepted that globally the quality of learning, particularly the acquisition of deep literacy, declined significantly throughout the pandemic (OECD, 2021; Garfinkle, 2020). This paper draws on the reflections of three course teams in different disciplines and follows the method pioneered by John Bean and Barbara Walvoord in the evaluation of writing programmes (Bean, et al., 2005). It mines iterative and comparative teacher team reflections but does not seek to provide quantitative data on ‘proof of impact’. From the evidence of these three courses, it is suggested that student learning and problem solving can be enhanced through the explicit teaching of the types of reasoning required, in these cases analogic, empathetic, and inferential. The argument is located within wider international arguments on the crisis of deep literacy and the work of The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development on developing literacy skills in a digital world (OECD, 2021).","PeriodicalId":36957,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teacher-team reflections on the quality and modes of thinking in Writing Intensive courses at the University of the Witwatersrand during the first year of the global COVID-19 pandemic\",\"authors\":\"Pam Nichols, Avril Joffe, R. Pillay, Bontle Tladi\",\"doi\":\"10.14426/cristal.v11i1.583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Writing Intensive (WI) courses depend on student engagement and continuous responses to student work. The sudden move to online learning in the face of COVID-19 presented profound challenges to this model. This is unsurprising since it is widely accepted that globally the quality of learning, particularly the acquisition of deep literacy, declined significantly throughout the pandemic (OECD, 2021; Garfinkle, 2020). This paper draws on the reflections of three course teams in different disciplines and follows the method pioneered by John Bean and Barbara Walvoord in the evaluation of writing programmes (Bean, et al., 2005). It mines iterative and comparative teacher team reflections but does not seek to provide quantitative data on ‘proof of impact’. From the evidence of these three courses, it is suggested that student learning and problem solving can be enhanced through the explicit teaching of the types of reasoning required, in these cases analogic, empathetic, and inferential. The argument is located within wider international arguments on the crisis of deep literacy and the work of The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development on developing literacy skills in a digital world (OECD, 2021).\",\"PeriodicalId\":36957,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14426/cristal.v11i1.583\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14426/cristal.v11i1.583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

写作强化(WI)课程依赖于学生的参与和对学生作业的持续回应。面对COVID-19,突然转向在线学习对这种模式提出了深刻的挑战。这并不奇怪,因为人们普遍认为,在全球范围内,学习质量,特别是深度扫盲的获得,在疫情期间大幅下降(经合组织,2021年;Garfinkle, 2020)。本文借鉴了三个不同学科的课程团队的反思,并遵循了John Bean和Barbara Walvoord在写作项目评估中开创的方法(Bean等人,2005)。它挖掘迭代和比较教师团队的反思,但不寻求提供“影响证明”的定量数据。从这三门课程的证据来看,我们建议学生的学习和解决问题的能力可以通过明确的推理类型的教学来提高,在这些情况下,类比、移情和推理。这一论点位于关于深度扫盲危机的更广泛的国际争论中,以及经济合作与发展组织在数字世界中发展扫盲技能的工作中(OECD, 2021)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Teacher-team reflections on the quality and modes of thinking in Writing Intensive courses at the University of the Witwatersrand during the first year of the global COVID-19 pandemic
Writing Intensive (WI) courses depend on student engagement and continuous responses to student work. The sudden move to online learning in the face of COVID-19 presented profound challenges to this model. This is unsurprising since it is widely accepted that globally the quality of learning, particularly the acquisition of deep literacy, declined significantly throughout the pandemic (OECD, 2021; Garfinkle, 2020). This paper draws on the reflections of three course teams in different disciplines and follows the method pioneered by John Bean and Barbara Walvoord in the evaluation of writing programmes (Bean, et al., 2005). It mines iterative and comparative teacher team reflections but does not seek to provide quantitative data on ‘proof of impact’. From the evidence of these three courses, it is suggested that student learning and problem solving can be enhanced through the explicit teaching of the types of reasoning required, in these cases analogic, empathetic, and inferential. The argument is located within wider international arguments on the crisis of deep literacy and the work of The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development on developing literacy skills in a digital world (OECD, 2021).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning
Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信