CE: martin. Based on the linguistic analysis of a corpus of scholastic essays, in this article we explore the discursive resources that university students use in the construction and expression of opinion during the final courses of their academic studies. Our objective is to identify, through a qualitative approximation within the analysis of discourse, the linguistic marks that students make when taking their position with regard to an area of knowledge. The results show that the construction and expression of opinion require the mastery of discursive resources associated with the insertion and handling of voice, the text structure, and above all, the construction of discursive perspective. The findings emphasize the need to present didactics of argumentation with a discursive orientation that allows students to recognize and use the appropriate mechanisms for constructing opinions that are pertinent for their area of disciplinary formation. Keywords: academic writing, students, higher education, analysis of discourse, disciplines, argumentation, Mexico.
|Published (Last):||14 December 2016|
|PDF File Size:||10.59 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.35 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
REx 1 Full Report. The study aimed at describing undergraduates' and teachers' perspectives on literacy practices that take place in Argentine universities. It has comprised 12 social science courses in three public universities through a multimethod approach. We ran two focus groups with 45 first-year students about the customary reading and writing assignments in high school and in university. In addition, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 27 teachers and 39 undergraduates around four topics: a differences between university and high school literacies, b university reading tasks and support needed by students and offered by teachers, c university writing tasks and needed or offered support, and d types and usefulness of written feedback given by teachers on students' midterm exams.
We also analyzed teachers' comments on exams. Finally, we scrutinized course syllabi for any mention of reading and writing. Inspired by Mary Lea and Brian Street's research design, we have not intended a representative sample of the universities as a whole, but a corpus of perspectives in which to explore and specify our initial hypothesis about the institutional experiences we were surrounded with.
We aimed to apprehend everyday, unquestioned practices that appeared as transparent, natural, and necessary in order to make them observable by their actors and stakeholders. The ultimate goal of our study was to open those practices to critique. Graciela Fernandez, Ph. Grant identification number given by the funding agency: PlP Number 3-year research project. What are undergraduates' and teachers' perspectives about literacy practices that take place in social sciences courses regarding differences with high school literacies and support needed and offered?
The study followed a qualitative approach and comprised 12 Social Sciences subjects in three public universities. Two focus groups with 45 freshmen were organized after which students individually responded to two questions: --What are the usual reading and writing assignments in high school?
We also carried out in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 27 teachers and 39 undergraduates see below, Related Publications, Carlino article, Appendix A , developing three types of questionnaires, which focused alternatively on reading, writing, and feedback. At the end of half of the writing interviews, interviewees were shown a set of cards with written accounts of hypothetical teaching situations showing different kinds of writing to learn and learning to write support.
Students and teachers were asked whether these situations looked alike or resembled their own classes, whether they found them useful, and eventually why they thought they were infrequent in their experiences.
Alternatively, in the feedback interviews, we requested students and teachers to show us an already assessed exam or essay and inquired about the meanings they gave to the teachers' written feedback on students' work. In addition, we examined syllabi searching for what teachers said about reading and writing for each course. Student writings after focus groups and interview transcriptions were analyzed seeking for common themes while also paying attention to diversity of viewpoints.
At the beginning of the study, the scholarship and teaching of writing in the disciplines were endeavors only recently undertaken in Argentine universities. Most research focused instead on undergraduates' difficulties with college-level reading and writing. In contrast, the present study arose from the relevance to our context of U. WAC and WID emphasize college instruction to promote learning, while academic literacies' studies direct their attention to the institutional power relationships between what teachers and students do, think, and expect regarding written assignments.
A further and congruent theoretical root for the present work was an Argentine constructivist approach, the didactic of language practices Lerner, , which questioned the tendency to blame students for what they do not know and claimed for teaching the required literacy to take part in school and society.
Reference guide to writing across the curriculum. Effective composition instruction: What does the research show? From mystery to mastery. Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach.
Studies in Higher Education, 23 2 , Lerner, David. Leer y escribir en la escuela. Lo real, lo posible y lo necesario. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Economica. Lillis, Theresa. Whose "common sense"? Essayist literacy and the institutional practice of mystery.
Russell, David. Writing across the curriculum in historical perspective: Toward a social interpretation. College English, 52, Reading and writing assignments are ubiquitous in social science courses but tend to go unnoticed: They do not appear mentioned in the subjects' syllabi, and they are not explained by the teachers.
Instead, they are taken for granted. Teachers and students' perspectives reveal that 1. Literacy practices in Argentine universities are new and challenging to undergraduates because they greatly differ from modes of reading and writing required in high school.
Reading from various sources and writing about diverse authors' perspectives are typical requirements of university social science courses. In spite of 1 above, teachers in the disciplines do not make college-level expectations explicit; guidelines are rare, and feedback is minimal condensed, ambiguous, and not specific.
Most of the interviewed teachers and students think that reading and writing in the disciplines should not be an object of instruction within the university. They base this idea on common-sense assumptions about reading, writing, learning, teaching, and university students e. There is a small proportion of teachers who do address undergraduates' reading and writing and give different kinds of support, as they are aware that these tasks help students learn subject content.
However, they tend not to acknowledge that their support also helps students to improve their literacy. Some of our interviewees attribute teachers' disregard of literacy practices to institutional limitations scarce instructional time and teachers' workload. While institutional constraints need to be reconsidered by stakeholders, the pervasive assumptions referred to in 3 above also hinder teachers' taking care of writing and reading in their subjects.
These findings are illustrated with interviewee quotes and discussed in light of other studies in the field. Carlino, Paula. Reading and writing in the social sciences in Argentine universities. New York, NY: Routledge. Writing and reading in Argentine social science courses: University teachers and students' viewpoints. Colloque international Litteracies universitaires: Savoirs, Ecrits, disciplines.
Villeneuve-d'Ascq, France: Universite de Lille 3. Leer y escribir en las ciencias sociales en universidades argentinas. Revista Contextos de Educacion. Argentina: Universidad Nacional de Rio Cuarto. See also related publications here. I would conduct more focused interviews, with more direct questions taking into account my current knowledge.
At the time of this study, we thought of dichotomous states: teachers taking care of student writing and reading in their disciplines or neglecting them. Now, we think that there exists more variance: Teachers can take care in very different ways, some more useful for student learning and some less useful.
Therefore, now we would pay attention to thick descriptions of how teachers and students declare that reading and writing are being dealt with in their courses. Furthermore, we have understood that literacy practices in the disciplines cannot be described by interviews but they need to be observed.
Our current studies go in this direction. See our most recent publications here. Some material is used with permission. Print Format. IRB Human Subjects Approval and Granting Institution s : No No response Section 5: Reflections and Outcomes Motivations: At the beginning of the study, the scholarship and teaching of writing in the disciplines were endeavors only recently undertaken in Argentine universities. Findings: Reading and writing assignments are ubiquitous in social science courses but tend to go unnoticed: They do not appear mentioned in the subjects' syllabi, and they are not explained by the teachers.
Distribution: Academic journals, conferences, faculty workshop, curriculum committees. Related Publications: Carlino, Paula. New Questions: At the time of this study, we thought of dichotomous states: teachers taking care of student writing and reading in their disciplines or neglecting them. Section 6: Related Files The following files have been added to this entry.
Escribir, Leer y Escribir en la Universidad: Una Introduccion a la Alfabetizacion Academica
In this article, a proposal intervention is described to reveal the actions undertaken in the Speech Therapy Degree at UCLM to train both teachers and students in the development of competence in written communication. First, training theorical and methodological is offered to the teachers that provided tools to work with students in writing skills in academic areas. In this sense, the most important was the methodology of intervention proposed to teachers to approach the teaching of academic writing and the beginning of a collaborative teaching job with opportunities to across the training of graduate students. Second, this methodology was implemented in the first course degree classroom by introducing different forms of textual difficulty contextualized in meaningful writing activities in different subjects. The texts, written in group by students, were reviewed by both teachers and students themselves, generating a process of peer review. Speech genres and other late essays.
Escribir, Leer y Escribir en la Universidad : Una Introduccion a la Alfabetizacion Academica
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Other editions. Enlarge cover.
To continue, please check the box below:
Our multidisciplinary team comprises pedagogues, linguists, psychologists, a biologist, and a Math teacher. We study the relationships between teaching, learning, reading and writing in different disciplines at the secondary, higher education and postgraduate levels. Read about our understanding of academic literacies. Our main contribution attempts to show in what ways reading and writing can be dealt with and taught in context and meaningfully in all disciplines and levels of education, avoiding exercises that fragment and distort reading and writing practices.
- BEHRINGER MON800 MINIMON PDF
- INTRODUCTION TO FOLIATIONS AND LIE GROUPOIDS PDF
- 2SD1556 PDF
- D&D 4E H1 KEEP ON THE SHADOWFELL PDF
- JIM KNIPPENBERG PDF
- KOMPONEN PERANCANGAN ARSITEKTUR LANSEKAP PDF
- GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE SCULPTURE PAINTING BY ROLF TOMAN PDF
- TRAINING INSTRUMENTS IN HRD AND OD BY UDAI PAREEK PDF