Group items tagged

The author explores using podcast to get students work on research paper. The professor believes that podcast can help students form group study and really engage in preparing and writing the research paper. From the whole article, the podcast can be considered as a long-term project and send students into groups to study. The podcast group creates a community for students to discuss and revise the research topic; in this sense, students in the group study as co-learners and engage in one another's research paper. This article is again about an invention strategy, podcast, in academic settings. Podcast is done in the group working environment, so this strategy requires creating a community of practice to get students engaged in a common topic---research paper. Even though students' topics are different, they still can help each other and engage in others' success because the requirements for the research paper are the same. I believe this would be a good way to scaffold students to deal with research paper; still, this strategy requires careful designs and attention from professor, and professor works as a facilitator to support the students' learning and practicing in the group work.

This article by David M. Pegram is about taking the "research paper" out of a research paper. He uses a different title, calling it a "proposal writing," making the paper become a much more lucrative project. He has developed a blueprint for teaching in this creative manner which he begins by using characters from a tv show, X Files, to demonstrate the uses of the left and right sides of the brain. He shows how Mulder and Scully ask "what if" and then each goes about their right or left sided brain way to answer their own question. I was interested in this article because Pegram gives a very creative way to get students to think critically. I strongly believe that many of these young high school/college students lack the necessary skill of critical thinking. When I can start teaching, I really want to be able to instill this life skill with my students. I think Pegram's approach is definitely a doable and logical way of doing this.

This article focuses on the effects student-teacher relationships have on students' academic functioning and their level of disciplinary problems. It combines research from previous studies and combines first-hand research to develop an understanding of the differences between disruptive and non-disruptive students. They put a strong emphasis on how the research is conducted because the researched that they gathered was largely based on questionnaires and they proposed that interviews, or Teacher Relationship Interviews (TRI), could provide much more extensive and useful knowledge of the true interactions among teachers and students.

Becker's article discusses the various models researchers have used to blueprint the cognitive process writers use during revision. The discussion associated with these models came from Becker's inquiry on why novice writers have negative attitudes towards the revision process in comparison to more experienced writers. The goal of this research was to make explicit the most effective and efficient cognitive strategies teachers could use to help novice writers improve their revision process. Most of the models consist of evaluation skills and long-term memory associations. I find this article useful for teaching writing in the sense that it has potential apparatuses that teachers can use to motivate students to revise their work. Because revision is an important and sometimes complex part of the writing process, these models may serve useful or may serve as templates for other models to arise when applied to teaching. The important thing here is finding ways to encourage students to revise their work and examine what processes students use to motivate them to revise rather than have students assume their work is already perfect.

This is an interesting article of a professor describing how he strayed away from the typical freshman comp syllabus to teach a class that would be relevant to the students. He used a current event (the Immigration Debate) that was especially relevant to his students; the majority were Latino/Chicano and lived in Southern California. He starts the article by giving a history of the immigration debate which isn't important to what we're studying. But then he starts talking about his class at the bottom of page 20 (that's where the article starts to get interesting) and describes how he planned his lessons and writing assignments to be centered around this debate. He tried to make the class interesting for the students and wanted them to feel like they were really learning something. The students had to write a series of essays describing what side of the issue they were on and they had to back up their reasoning with sound evidence and support. Hale describes the work as "challenging assignments that focused on critical thinking and argumentation: (26). All of this led up to a final research paper they had to do which the students would have an easier time doing because they already have a wide range of knowledge on the subject which Hale says "helped to prepare the students to write their research paper" (26). After all the articles the students had read they also had "a good databank of sources to back them up" (27). Hale also describes how this take on teaching was helpful to him as an educator. This was a subject he was very interested in and he notes that he "was tired of placing such a huge firewall between my classroom and my outside activism" (27) so by making his assignment something he was interested in, his enthusiasm would get the students interested too. He states that "the immigration debate engaged my interest as a teacher in a way that standardized assignments did not" (27) and I think this is an important thing for educators to consider when ma

In this TED talk video Dave Eggers is talking enthusiastically about free tutoring centers where students receive one-on-one attention from either more experienced peers or teachers who volunteer to go to these centers at least two hours a week. He backs up the need of having individual help by research data (I would be interested to see the primary research) which say that 35-40 hours a year one-on-one attention students can get one grade level higher. The first center was opened to offer help in English and writing. Although there was an issue of trust at first to visit the center, with time and some advertising the center got packed with students. They even published their own writing in a form of a book, which is inspiring as it honors their work, hardship, creativity and thoughts. Now they have 1400 students in the center and they want to grow nationwide. Also, they have a website (http://www.onceuponaschool.org/) where there is somebody to show guidance to those who are interested in starting their own learning center in their town (for their public school students). To me, this is a great idea to inspire students and keep their motivation going in a particular subject. I wonder if they have done research and found out students of what achievement tend to go there, is it possible that those who are already into writing, science, languages, etc, are the ones visiting these centers. I also wonder if the volunteers who are there to help receive any kind training about certain methodology or ground rules.

This article by Laurie Grobman (also author of one of this week's article assignments from the course packet) describes the ways in which undergraduate participation in research and research publication contributes to increased authority and sense of authorship in undergraduate students. This authorship puts the students in discourse with their education and beyond, creating a purpose and identification with their course of study rather than making them passive receivers of it. This benefits their confidence and command of composition as well as putting them in the "driver seat", so to speak, of their participation in academia, and levels the playing field of student and "real" writing, erasing old and disadvantaging dichotomies.

This is a technical discussion on dopamine, rewards, and time by neurologist Robert Sapolsky. His research has shown that the anticipation of reward is more pleasurable than the reward itself and this pleasure increases when the reward is not a guarantee, but a possibility. This kind of discussion may seem overly abstract and distant from the classroom, but understanding how motivation works, even on a neuro-chemical level, can help us to not only design our courses, but develop new approaches to generating enthusiasm and performance in the classroom. It is a good place to start when crafting (or re-designing) a teaching (and/or writing) philosophy. What are the rewards students associate with writing? What is our role in creating, maintaining, and providing access to those rewards? Do the rewards always have to be attainable? How do we frame these ideas for use in academic planning?

I've decided to go in a different direction than the posts I have been submitting on diigo; however, where our research starts is certainly not where it finishes. I decided to approach the dynamics of voice and style and its relationship with "good writing." Moving along- This article directly engages in explaining "what makes good writing?" and how teachers view this complex question. Teachers alike analyze students' writing in very, very different ways and all hold their own literary interpretations in accordance to their curriculum. There is also much emphasis on "questioning a standardized writing style," "procedures and participants," and a variety of methodological approaches. There is also a list comprised of 31 perceptions on what establishes writing as "good." There is also much emphasis on the dynamics of structure, clarity, purpose, voice, and correctness. Near the end, there is an evaluation of controversy of a many statements revolving around "good writing", as well as "implications for the classroom." This is definitely a resourceful article for anyone endeavoring literary mentoring, and/or teaching of any kind. The diagrams are very concise and comprehensive, and above all, they are applicable to our instructive environments.

This article introduces several methodologies in order to tackle writer's block. It includes eight different strategies that range from talking to admirable advisors for their opinions on your current writing assignment and genre to listening to music--how even psychologists agree that the creation of writing with the presence of music playing is beneficial to breaking down stumps in the road of writing. I wanted to see if i could find Cynthia A. Arem's book, Conquering Writing Anxiety, in the Library's Research database due to the fact that her book contains "self-assessment charts and strategies to break cycles of both writer's anxiety and writer's block" but this article seems like the next best thing :) I'll find more articles and books on writer's block this week as well.

"I recently saw an old friend for the first time in many years. We had been Ph.D. students at the same time, both studying science, although in different areas. She later dropped out of graduate school, went to Harvard Law School and is now a senior lawyer for a major environmental organization. At some point, the conversation turned to why she had left graduate school. To my utter astonishment, she said it was because it made her feel stupid. After a couple of years of feeling stupid every day, she was ready to do something else. I had thought of her as one of the brightest people I knew and her subsequent career supports that view. What she said bothered me. I kept thinking about it; sometime the next day, it hit me. Science makes me feel stupid too. It's just that I've gotten used to it. So used to it, in fact, that I actively seek out new opportunities to feel stupid. I wouldn't know what to do without that feeling. I even think it's supposed to be this way."

I found this video actually looking for an informative video about students liking writing ---- goes to show that most students "hate" writing for multiple reasons. Many of the reasons in the control of educators. Teachers have the power to change the negative connotation students interpret writing to be - just an assignment, no further significance to, no interest to write ---- students should enjoy writing <<< school stems from learning through writing and reading ---- students want to write on things that interest them not pedagogical theories and research assignments. Students like to learn through their own eyes - students enjoy different genres of writing. Teachers have the power to enable their students in finding their interest in the writing realm. However, students should know the general rules and process of writing whether it be a narrative or research assignment, etc. Also, (as a teacher comments within the movie) - students don't always take blogs or social-media oriented writing forums with interest since self-representation is then transmitted into a educational institution. The video also covers the public's views on possible preventing of "writing hatred." This video also reflects the concept in the Casanava article in our class packet - teachers need to work on getting students immersed in writing through allowing their personal knowledge be combined with the values and lessons deemed by the institution they are writing for.

This study of second and fourth grade students examines student attitudes toward writing. The study suggests that the culture of high-stake testing has placed teachers in a bind that forces them to teach writing aggressively, which takes the fun out writing. The younger the students are, the authors claim, the more positive their attitude toward writing is. The older they are, the more likely they are to come face to face with these higher stake environments and the more negative their attitudes will become.The study actually has fourth grade students meet with and tutor the second grade students in writing in order to measure the positive or negative affect of tutoring on writing attitudes. I was especially drawn to the passage that said, "Some self-efficacy researchers have suggested that teachers should pay as much attention to students' perceptions of competence as to actual competence, for the perceptions may more accurately predict students' motivation and future academic choices." (182).

The amount of different types of social networking existing in today's students' lives is gigantic, also fascinating for me. I find it important and interesting to think about many different aspects of social networking, its effects on our lives. I am also interested in looking at how people's writing can reflect their true identity at that particular point in their lives. So, this article, which is based on a research project, seemed relevant to me. Basically, it examines and discusses 5 things: a) what SL (Second Life) is; b) how SL fits the definition of a Web 2.0 technology; 3) how SL can be beneficial in composition classrooms; 4) brief review of the research methodology; and 5) how identity and otherness can be viewed in a virtual world and the writing that comes from that. The author says: "SL is a medium that challenges students and gives them experiences, and ultimately confidence, helping to make their writing more engaging to read and more enjoyable for them to write". As I was reading this article, it was interesting to look at SL as an example of liminal spaces for those who are newbies and feel as outsiders. Will they always feel and be viewed as "others"? Will this affect the writing they will do? To what degree is composition linked to literacy today? Can we predict its future and take measures accordingly?