3 resultados para fostering
em DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Resumo:
In this dissertation, I use qualitative research methods to study relationships between compositionists and faculty in other disciplines in the context of cross-curricular literacy (CCL) work. Drawing on a two-year CCL project in the biology department, for which I was a participant observer, I argue that compositionists need to attend more carefully to issues that influence day-to-day interactions with disciplinary faculty in order to develop more meaningful CCL relationships. Toward that end, I offer a revisionary approach to cross-curricular literacy work that cultivates complex relationships by delaying consensus and embracing disconnection and disorientation. More specifically, I employ revisionary stance as a discursive strategy to complicate three key concepts in CCL literature and scholarship—expertise, change, and outcomes. I re-vision three texts produced during my time in the biology department in order to illuminate the complexities of negotiating expertise, recognizing change, and pursuing outcomes in CCL contexts. Given the reciprocal relationship between discursive and material change (Lee), I maintain that revision of CCL discourse can inspire revision on a pedagogical level, shaping how compositionists and disciplinary faculty participate in CCL interactions. Thus, a revisionary approach leads me to conceptualize revisionary pedagogy for cross-curricular literacy work. I theorize revisionary pedagogy as a means of fostering pedagogical relationships in CCL contexts, complicating how relationships are framed in traditional Writing Across the Curriculum/Writing in the Disciplines scholarship. The literature advances three main conceptual models of CCL, each of which embraces expertise, change, and outcomes in ways that sponsor potentially problematic relationships between compositionists and disciplinary faculty. I draw on Composition scholars’ rich conceptualization of revision (Jung; Lee; Welch) and pedagogy (Kameen; Qualley; Stenberg) to challenge the litany of next-best models and imagine alternative possibilities for relationships in CCL contexts. Revisionary pedagogy is a means of approaching material circumstances that reconstitutes how compositionists and disciplinary faculty conceive of and participate in CCL relationships.
Resumo:
Lessons from around the world; What does it matter about early childhood education? Why the controversy about public support for early childhood education? What process or system should be used to determine what works in early education? Can the same process be used to improve services? What is the role of government? Alternatives: 1. Consumers should determine… (What happens when private choices drive the market for early childhood services?) Observed quality of care in four Midwestern states; Parent data: “All things considered, how would you grade the quality of the care your child is receiving from his/her current caregiver?” Role of government What is a Quality Rating System? Ten states have implemented statewide systems (e.g. Colorado, Kentucky, Oklahoma, North Carolina) Findings 2. Objective science should determine… Firm findings from empirical research 3. Something else is needed: Some differences between Italian and American models. Teacher action research (and documentation) from a Reggio-inspired preschool in South Korea by Misuk Kim. Teacher Action Research at the Ruth Staples CDL. Can we now answer our opening questions? What process or system should be used to determine what is best for young children? Can the same process be used to improve the quality of services? Conclusions: The free market does not work well to determine quality in early education and care; Licensing, accreditation, and quality rating systems can help improve the market; Empirical research is useful for measuring what works; Teacher action research (reflective practice) is necessary for fostering continuous quality improvement. The tower of quality.
Resumo:
This inquiry reveals the crucial guidance of teachers toward surveying the capacity and needs of students, the formation of ideas, acting upon ideas, fostering connections, seeing potential, making judgments, and arranging conditions. Each aesthetic trace causes me to wonder how teachers learn to create experiences that foster student participation in the world aesthetically. The following considerations surface: • Given the emphasis in schools on outcomes and results, how do we encourage teachers to focus on acts of mind instead of end products in their work with students? • Given the orientations toward technical rationality, to fixed sequence, how do we help teachers experience fluid, purposeful learning adventures with students in which the imagi¬nation is given room to play? • Given the tendency to conceive of planning in teaching as the deciding of everything in advance, how do we help teachers and students become attuned to making good judgments derived from within learning experiences? • How do we help teachers build dialogical multivoiced conversations instead of monolithic curriculum? • What do we do to recover the pleasure dwelling in subject matter? How do we get teachers and students to engage thoughtfully in meaningful learning as opposed to covering curriculum7 • A capacity to attend sensitively, to perceive the complexity of relationships coming together in any teaching/learning experience seems critical. How do we help teachers and students attend to the unity of a learning experience and the play of meanings that arises from such undergoing and doing? The traces, patterns, and texture evidenced locate tremendous hope and wondrous possibilities alive within aesthetic teaching/learning encounters. It is such aliveness I encountered in the grade 4 art classroom that opened this account and continues to compel my attention. Possibilities for teaching, learning, and teacher education emerge. I am convinced they are most worthy of continued pursuit.