Engaging Ideas. John C. Bean

Engaging Ideas - John C. Bean


Скачать книгу
Research on Higher Education, argues that “no one has sufficient time or gray matter to master a knowledge base that is growing exponentially every decade or so.” Rather than focus exhaustively on content coverage, Zemsky urges educators to prioritize content, focusing on high‐priority material while simultaneously teaching the critical thinking and problem‐solving skills needed to acquire and apply new knowledge:

      Discussions of the changing nature of knowledge often morph into what a successful learning outcome would be if detailed content were actually becoming less important than a well‐executed learning process. The former is static; the latter is dynamic in the sense that learning processes change as the learner seeks new knowledge and tackles new problems.

      Misconception 2: Writing Assignments Are Unsuitable in My Course

      Most teachers believe that writing applies naturally to English courses, liberal arts courses, and certain specialized courses in their fields. They may not, however, believe that writing is equally appropriate in their own courses. These doubts are frequently expressed by teachers of quantitative or technical courses or ones that focus on basic facts, concepts, or algorithmic procedures that, according to the teacher, must be “committed to memory” before the student can move on to problem‐solving and analysis. If we apply some conceptual blockbusting, however, we see that writing assignments can be used profitably in any course. (Our point is exemplified by the wide range of disciplines represented in this book—accounting, physics, chemistry, all levels of mathematics, nursing, business, education, and engineering, as well as the humanities and social sciences.) By conceptual blockbusting, we mean primarily rethinking what constitutes a writing assignment. Many of the assignments in this book are nongraded or are very short formal tasks designed to help students understand an important course concept. Others have a metacognitive aim—helping students reflect on their own thinking processes or productively altering their methods of studying or reading. Still others have a procedural aim—helping students learn disciplinary methods of inquiry and analysis. Whatever a teacher's goals for a course, writing assignments can be designed to help students meet them.

      Misconception 3: Adding More Writing to My Course Will Bury Me in Paper Grading

      Many teachers would gladly require more writing in their courses if it were not for the need to mark and grade all those papers. If teachers do not currently assign any writing in their courses, adding a writing component will admittedly require extra work, although not necessarily more total time devoted to teaching if some of the teacher's current preparation or conference time is shifted toward responding to writing. If teachers already require writing in their courses (say, a couple of essay exams and a term paper—assignments that often have low learning value for students), following the suggestions in this book might reduce the total time they spend on student writing while simultaneously making that time more rewarding for themselves and more productive for students. The NSSE/WPA research cited at the beginning of this chapter (Anderson, Anson, Gonyea, and Paine, 2009) has shown that what matters in using writing to promote deep learning is not the amount of writing in a course but the quality of the writing assignments themselves.

      Misconception 4: I Am Not Knowledgeable Enough about Writing and Grammar to Help Students with Their Own Writing

      Many teachers across the curriculum will admit that English was not their favorite subject. Although they produce competent professional writing in their own fields, they believe that because they struggle with their own writing and because they do not know grammatical terminology or composition theory, they lack the skills to help students. This book aims to allay these fears. Because the best teacher commentary focuses primarily on students' ideas and the strengths, weaknesses, or clarity of their arguments, no special terminology is needed. Teachers simply need to be honest readers, making comments such as these:

       “I'm getting lost. How does this paragraph connect to the previous one?”

       “Readers will need more evidence here.”

       “What about Petriono's research on this problem? Can you summarize and respond to her argument?”

       “Excellent point!”

      A main aspect of teaching writing, as chapter 2 argues, is to encourage students to revise their drafts, showing students how global revision reveals critical thinking at work. The more teachers can show students their own thinking processes as they move from an initial idea to a finished article, the more they can serve as role models for students. In short, your own experience as an academic writer and reader, combined with your expertise in how scholars in your field inquire and argue, should be all the background you need to help your students with their writing.

      Some teachers make only minimal changes in their courses. We know of one teacher, a brilliant lecturer, who has changed nothing in his course except for adding a series of three microtheme options (students must choose any two) that he grades using models feedback (see chapter 14). Each microtheme assignment focuses on what he considers a threshold concept for his discipline. From each microtheme set, he selects examples of good responses as well as examples of different kinds of misunderstandings. In‐class discussion of these samples lets him focus again on helping students understand the threshold concept. He is happy with this minimalist approach, which he thinks has improved student learning.

      But


Скачать книгу