在学术素养教学中运用过程导向的研究性学习

IF 0.1 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Nandi Weder, M. de Waal
{"title":"在学术素养教学中运用过程导向的研究性学习","authors":"Nandi Weder, M. de Waal","doi":"10.5785/38-1-1018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents a quantitative analysis of an intervention study that used process-oriented, guided-inquiry learning (POGIL) to teach grammar as part of an academic literacy module in the Extended Curriculum Programme (ECP) at the University of Pretoria. In the first semester of the Language and Study Skills (LST) module, four key grammatical functions (parts of speech, sentence structure, punctuation, and discourse markers) are foundational to subsequent writing skills taught throughout the year. These grammatical functions are adaptable to quiz-style instruction and assessment and are taught online in this way; however, many LST students still struggle with the application of these functions well into the second semester. The POGIL method, which falls within the inquiry-based learning framework (Abraham, 2005) and is influenced by constructivisim and the learning cycle (Cracolice, 2009), presents an alternative approach which is suited to LST’s content and teaching mode. LST is presented in smaller classes of around 50 students, and emphasis is placed on practical application activities and student participation. The POGIL method aligns with this mode as it scaffolds the learning process through worksheets which students need to complete in small, carefully organised groups, thus requiring students to actively construct and apply knowledge, engage in deep learning and lay the foundations for independent learning. The potential applications of POGIL to academic literacy and language instruction have received little attention in teaching and learning research, as the method has typically been used and researched in STEM instruction. Furthermore, existing research is context-bound to institutions outside of South Africa. The POGIL-based intervention study for the LST module was thus designed to respond to the specific educational context and needs of the ECP students. Specifically, the study sought to establish whether the POGIL method of instruction improved students’ application of certain grammatical functions when compared to online, quiz-style instruction. A teaching intervention was conducted using POGIL-style worksheets, after which the performance of the intervention group was compared to the performance of a control group using data from items in formal assessments (two semester tests and an examination). Analysis of this data indicates that the POGIL group performed better than the control group in all five constructs, though the difference in performance was statistically significant in only four constructs. The paper concludes with a suggestion that further research should be conducted to investigate the relationship between students’ level of capability and their response to POGIL-style language instruction; some possibilities for the continuation of the study are outlined. The research therefore contributes to the small, but growing body of work on POGIL instruction by expanding it to include academic literacy and ECP instruction.","PeriodicalId":43109,"journal":{"name":"Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Process-oriented, Guided-inquiry Learning in the Teaching of Academic Literacy\",\"authors\":\"Nandi Weder, M. de Waal\",\"doi\":\"10.5785/38-1-1018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper presents a quantitative analysis of an intervention study that used process-oriented, guided-inquiry learning (POGIL) to teach grammar as part of an academic literacy module in the Extended Curriculum Programme (ECP) at the University of Pretoria. In the first semester of the Language and Study Skills (LST) module, four key grammatical functions (parts of speech, sentence structure, punctuation, and discourse markers) are foundational to subsequent writing skills taught throughout the year. These grammatical functions are adaptable to quiz-style instruction and assessment and are taught online in this way; however, many LST students still struggle with the application of these functions well into the second semester. The POGIL method, which falls within the inquiry-based learning framework (Abraham, 2005) and is influenced by constructivisim and the learning cycle (Cracolice, 2009), presents an alternative approach which is suited to LST’s content and teaching mode. LST is presented in smaller classes of around 50 students, and emphasis is placed on practical application activities and student participation. The POGIL method aligns with this mode as it scaffolds the learning process through worksheets which students need to complete in small, carefully organised groups, thus requiring students to actively construct and apply knowledge, engage in deep learning and lay the foundations for independent learning. The potential applications of POGIL to academic literacy and language instruction have received little attention in teaching and learning research, as the method has typically been used and researched in STEM instruction. Furthermore, existing research is context-bound to institutions outside of South Africa. The POGIL-based intervention study for the LST module was thus designed to respond to the specific educational context and needs of the ECP students. Specifically, the study sought to establish whether the POGIL method of instruction improved students’ application of certain grammatical functions when compared to online, quiz-style instruction. A teaching intervention was conducted using POGIL-style worksheets, after which the performance of the intervention group was compared to the performance of a control group using data from items in formal assessments (two semester tests and an examination). Analysis of this data indicates that the POGIL group performed better than the control group in all five constructs, though the difference in performance was statistically significant in only four constructs. The paper concludes with a suggestion that further research should be conducted to investigate the relationship between students’ level of capability and their response to POGIL-style language instruction; some possibilities for the continuation of the study are outlined. The research therefore contributes to the small, but growing body of work on POGIL instruction by expanding it to include academic literacy and ECP instruction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5785/38-1-1018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5785/38-1-1018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文对比勒陀利亚大学的一项干预研究进行了定量分析,该研究使用面向过程的指导性探究学习(POGIL)来教授语法,作为扩展课程计划(ECP)中学术素养模块的一部分。在语言和学习技巧(LST)模块的第一学期,四个关键的语法功能(词性、句子结构、标点符号和话语标记)是贯穿全年的后续写作技巧的基础。这些语法功能适用于测验式的教学和评估,并以这种方式在线教授;然而,许多LST学生在进入第二学期后仍然难以很好地应用这些函数。POGIL方法属于基于探究的学习框架(Abraham, 2005),受到建构主义和学习周期(Cracolice, 2009)的影响,提出了一种适合LST内容和教学模式的替代方法。LST以50人左右的小班授课,强调实际应用活动和学生参与。POGIL方法与这种模式相一致,因为它通过学生需要在小的、精心组织的小组中完成的工作表来构建学习过程,从而要求学生积极构建和应用知识,参与深度学习,为自主学习奠定基础。POGIL在学术素养和语言教学中的潜在应用在教学和学习研究中很少受到关注,因为该方法通常在STEM教学中使用和研究。此外,现有的研究与南非以外的机构有关。因此,LST模块的基于pogil的干预研究是针对ECP学生的特定教育背景和需求而设计的。具体而言,该研究试图确定与在线测验式教学相比,POGIL教学方法是否能提高学生对某些语法功能的应用。使用pogil风格的工作表进行教学干预,之后使用正式评估项目(两个学期测试和一次考试)的数据将干预组的表现与对照组的表现进行比较。对这些数据的分析表明,POGIL组在所有五个构念中的表现都优于对照组,尽管只有四个构念的表现差异具有统计学意义。最后,建议进一步研究学生能力水平与其对pogil式语言教学的反应之间的关系;概述了继续进行这项研究的一些可能性。因此,该研究通过将其扩展到包括学术素养和ECP教学,为POGIL教学的小型但不断增长的工作做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using Process-oriented, Guided-inquiry Learning in the Teaching of Academic Literacy
This paper presents a quantitative analysis of an intervention study that used process-oriented, guided-inquiry learning (POGIL) to teach grammar as part of an academic literacy module in the Extended Curriculum Programme (ECP) at the University of Pretoria. In the first semester of the Language and Study Skills (LST) module, four key grammatical functions (parts of speech, sentence structure, punctuation, and discourse markers) are foundational to subsequent writing skills taught throughout the year. These grammatical functions are adaptable to quiz-style instruction and assessment and are taught online in this way; however, many LST students still struggle with the application of these functions well into the second semester. The POGIL method, which falls within the inquiry-based learning framework (Abraham, 2005) and is influenced by constructivisim and the learning cycle (Cracolice, 2009), presents an alternative approach which is suited to LST’s content and teaching mode. LST is presented in smaller classes of around 50 students, and emphasis is placed on practical application activities and student participation. The POGIL method aligns with this mode as it scaffolds the learning process through worksheets which students need to complete in small, carefully organised groups, thus requiring students to actively construct and apply knowledge, engage in deep learning and lay the foundations for independent learning. The potential applications of POGIL to academic literacy and language instruction have received little attention in teaching and learning research, as the method has typically been used and researched in STEM instruction. Furthermore, existing research is context-bound to institutions outside of South Africa. The POGIL-based intervention study for the LST module was thus designed to respond to the specific educational context and needs of the ECP students. Specifically, the study sought to establish whether the POGIL method of instruction improved students’ application of certain grammatical functions when compared to online, quiz-style instruction. A teaching intervention was conducted using POGIL-style worksheets, after which the performance of the intervention group was compared to the performance of a control group using data from items in formal assessments (two semester tests and an examination). Analysis of this data indicates that the POGIL group performed better than the control group in all five constructs, though the difference in performance was statistically significant in only four constructs. The paper concludes with a suggestion that further research should be conducted to investigate the relationship between students’ level of capability and their response to POGIL-style language instruction; some possibilities for the continuation of the study are outlined. The research therefore contributes to the small, but growing body of work on POGIL instruction by expanding it to include academic literacy and ECP instruction.
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
Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning
Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
6 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