Spelling suggestions: "subject:"study anda teaching (bigher)"" "subject:"study anda teaching (2higher)""
61 |
General education and geography in Florida junior collegesUnknown Date (has links)
"The purpose of this study is to identify geography as a general education subject, to determine the type of geography which best serves the objectives of general education and to determine the general education value of the present geography courses in the Florida junior colleges. An analysis will be made of the present geography programs in the Florida public junior colleges to determine their orientation. This analysis will be concerned with the development of geography in the curriculum rather than with methods of instruction. A study of the catalogs of the various institutions plus information gathered through questionnaires constitute the main basis of analysis. Taking into consideration the objectives of general education, the objectives of the junior colleges, and the objectives of geography, the writer hopes to offer suggestions and recommendations which will make a useful contribution to the concurrent achievement of these objectives in Florida"--Introduction. / Typescript. / "August, 1958." / "Submitted to the Graduate Council of Florida State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science." / Advisor: Harry Brubaker, Professor Directing Study. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 36-38).
|
62 |
The entry-level generalist dietitian : expectations of the hospital dietetic practitionerLoyd, Marilyn S January 2011 (has links)
Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries
|
63 |
Problem solving in introductory physics : demons and difficulties.Lin, Herbert S January 1979 (has links)
Thesis (Sc.D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Physics, 1979. / MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND SCIENCE / Bibliography: p. 424-432. / Sc.D.
|
64 |
Culture as inhibitors of change : an ethnographic study on the impact of culture on teachers' ICT adoption in a university faculty in ChinaLi, Ling January 2015 (has links)
No description available.
|
65 |
Undergraduates' views and uses of teacher feedback in writing classes: an exploratory study in Hong Kong.January 2007 (has links)
Lui, Nga Kwan. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 164-170). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / ABSTRACT --- p.i / ACKNOWLEDGEMENT --- p.iv / Chapter CHAPTER 1 --- INTRODUCTION --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- Two Writing Approaches Practiced in Hong Kong Classrooms --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1.1 --- A Glimpse of the Situation of Hong Kong Secondary School Classrooms --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1.2 --- A Glimpse of the Situation of Hong Kong University Classrooms --- p.6 / Chapter 1.2 --- Different Roles of Teacher Feedback in the Two Writing Approaches --- p.8 / Chapter 1.2.1 --- The Content of Teacher Feedback --- p.8 / Chapter 1.2.2 --- The Timing of Teacher Feedback --- p.9 / Chapter 1.2.3 --- The Purpose of Teacher Feedback --- p.10 / Chapter 1.3 --- The Importance of Students' Views of Teacher Feedback in Process Writing --- p.11 / Chapter 1.4 --- Overview of the Thesis --- p.12 / Chapter CHAPTER 2 --- LITERATURE REVIEW --- p.14 / Chapter 2.1 --- From Product to Process: A Brief Account of the Change in Teaching Approach Towards Writing --- p.14 / Chapter 2.1.1 --- Product Writing --- p.14 / Chapter 2.1.2 --- Process Writing: The Overriding Concern over Writing Process --- p.15 / Chapter 2.1.3 --- Process Writing: The Method --- p.15 / Chapter 2.2 --- Teacher Feedback on Student Writing: Definition and Rationale --- p.16 / Chapter 2.3 --- From Error Feedback to All-round Teacher Feedback --- p.19 / Chapter 2.4 --- Importance of Acknowledging Students' Views: the Claims --- p.21 / Chapter 2.4.1 --- ESL Context --- p.21 / Chapter 2.4.2 --- EFL Context --- p.22 / Chapter 2.5 --- Importance of Acknowledging Students' Views: the Behaviour --- p.25 / Chapter 2.6 --- The Hong Kong Context --- p.27 / Chapter 2.7 --- Research Gaps: Triangulation in Understanding Students' Needs --- p.30 / Chapter CHAPTER 3 --- METHODOLOGY --- p.32 / Chapter 3.1 --- Research Questions --- p.32 / Chapter 3.2 --- Research Design: The Case Study Approach --- p.33 / Chapter 3.2.1 --- Definition of Case Study --- p.33 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- Rationale of Employing Case Study --- p.34 / Chapter 3.3 --- Instrumentation and Rationale Behind --- p.36 / Chapter 3.3.1 --- Questionnaires on Student Writers --- p.37 / Chapter 3.3.2 --- Interviews --- p.37 / Chapter 3.3.2.1 --- Interviews with Student Writers --- p.38 / Chapter 3.3.2.2 --- Interviews with Writing Instructors --- p.38 / Chapter 3.3.3 --- Text Analysis on the Marked Preliminary Drafts and Final Versions of Writing --- p.39 / Chapter 3.4 --- Pilot Study --- p.39 / Chapter 3.4.1 --- Modification of Text Analysis Guide --- p.40 / Chapter 3.4.2 --- Modification of Other Instruments --- p.40 / Chapter 3.5 --- Main Study --- p.41 / Chapter 3.5.1 --- The Writing Courses --- p.41 / Chapter 3.5.1.1 --- Writing Class A --- p.43 / Chapter 3.5.1.2 --- Writing Class B --- p.44 / Chapter 3.5.1.3 --- Writing Class C --- p.44 / Chapter 3.5.2 --- Profiles of Informants --- p.45 / Chapter 3.5.2.1 --- Profiles of Teacher Informants --- p.46 / Chapter 3.5.2.2 --- Profiles of Student Informants --- p.47 / Chapter 3.5.3 --- Data Collection Process --- p.48 / Chapter 3.5.4 --- Limitations --- p.49 / Chapter 3.5.5 --- Data Analysis --- p.51 / Chapter 3.6 --- Chapter Summary --- p.51 / Chapter CHAPTER 4 --- RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS --- p.53 / Chapter 4.1 --- Teacher Feedback on Preliminary Drafts and Final Version --- p.53 / Chapter 4.1.1 --- Teacher Feedback on Preliminary Drafts --- p.54 / Chapter 4.1.1.1 --- Student Views of Teacher Feedback on Preliminary Drafts: Questionnaires and Interviews --- p.54 / Chapter 4.1.1.2 --- Text Analysis on Preliminary Drafts --- p.57 / Chapter 4.1.2 --- Teacher Feedback on Final Version --- p.59 / Chapter 4.1.2.1 --- Students' Views of Teacher Feedback on Final Version --- p.60 / Chapter 4.1.2.2 --- Text Analysis on Teacher Feedback on Final Version --- p.62 / Chapter 4.1.3 --- Teacher Feedback on Preliminary Drafts and Final Version: Teachers' Rationale --- p.65 / Chapter 4.1.3.1 --- Teacher A's Rationale on Teacher Feedback --- p.66 / Chapter 4.1.3.2 --- Teacher B's Rationale on Teacher Feedback --- p.67 / Chapter 4.1.3.3 --- Teacher C's Rationale on Teacher Feedback --- p.69 / Chapter 4.1.4 --- Teacher Feedback on Preliminary Drafts and Final Version: A Comparison --- p.71 / Chapter 4.2 --- "Students' Response to Teacher Feedback: Attended, Deleted, and Ignored" --- p.73 / Chapter 4.2.1 --- Feedback Attended to and Received Positively --- p.73 / Chapter 4.2.1.1 --- Feedback Attended to: Student Questionnaires --- p.73 / Chapter 4.2.1.2 --- Feedback Attended to: General Picture From Text Analysis --- p.77 / Chapter 4.2.1.3 --- Feedback Attended to and Its Easiness and Difficulties: Student Interviews and Questionnaires --- p.78 / Chapter 4.2.1.3.1 --- Teacher Feedback Students Found Easy to Deal With --- p.79 / Chapter 4.2.1.3.2 --- Teacher Feedback Students Found Difficult to Deal With --- p.82 / Chapter 4.2.1.3.3 --- Summary of Feedback Students Attended to --- p.88 / Chapter 4.2.1.4 --- Feedback Received Positively --- p.89 / Chapter 4.2.1.5 --- Feedback Received Positively: Critical (Negative) Feedback --- p.90 / Chapter 4.2.1.6 --- Feedback Received Positively: Minimal Use of Symbols in Feedback --- p.91 / Chapter 4.2.1.7 --- Feedback Attended to and Received Positively: Summary --- p.93 / Chapter 4.2.2 --- Feedback Partially Attended to or Deleted --- p.94 / Chapter 4.2.2.1 --- Teacher Feedback Partially Attended to: Students' Views From Questionnaires --- p.94 / Chapter 4.2.2.2 --- Teacher Feedback Partially Attended to: Student Interviews and Text Analysis --- p.95 / Chapter 4.2.2.2.1 --- “I Delete to Condense´ح --- p.95 / Chapter 4.2.2.2.2 --- “I Delete to Clarify´ح --- p.96 / Chapter 4.2.2.2.3 --- "“I Delete to Save Myself Trouble""" --- p.96 / Chapter 4.2.2.3 --- Teacher Feedback Partially Attended to: General Picture From Text Analysis --- p.97 / Chapter 4.2.2.4 --- Feedback Partially Attended to or Deleted: Summary --- p.99 / Chapter 4.2.3 --- Feedback Ignored and Received Negatively --- p.99 / Chapter 4.2.3.1 --- Feedback Ignored: Students' Views From Questionnaires --- p.100 / Chapter 4.2.3.2 --- Feedback Ignored: Students' Views From Interviews --- p.100 / Chapter 4.2.3.2.1 --- Feedback Difficult to Revise Accordingly --- p.101 / Chapter 4.2.3.2.2 --- Feedback Obscure in Letting Students Know What the Problem Was --- p.102 / Chapter 4.2.3.2.3 --- Feedback on Earlier Drafts --- p.103 / Chapter 4.2.3.2.4 --- Feedback on “Minor´ح Things --- p.104 / Chapter 4.2.3.2.5 --- Feedback Not Unique to the Essay --- p.104 / Chapter 4.2.3.2.6 --- Feedback Violating the Expression of Personal Voice --- p.105 / Chapter 4.2.3.3 --- Teacher Feedback Ignored: General Picture From Text Analysis --- p.106 / Chapter 4.2.3.4 --- Feedback Ignored: Two Extreme Cases as Illustrations --- p.108 / Chapter 4.2.3.4.1 --- Case of Jeff --- p.108 / Chapter 4.2.3.4.2 --- Case of Dorothy --- p.109 / Chapter 4.2.3.5 --- Feedback Ignored: Teachers' Views --- p.111 / Chapter 4.2.3.6 --- Feedback Received Negatively --- p.112 / Chapter 4.2.3.6.1 --- Positive Feedback --- p.112 / Chapter 4.2.3.6.2 --- Feedback Without Explanations --- p.113 / Chapter 4.2.3.7 --- Feedback Ignored and Received Negatively: Summary --- p.115 / Chapter 4.2.4 --- Students' Response to Teacher Feedback: Summary --- p.115 / Chapter 4.3 --- Reasons Behind Students' Preferences --- p.116 / Chapter 4.3.1 --- Personal Factors --- p.116 / Chapter 4.3.1.1 --- Proficiency in English --- p.116 / Chapter 4.3.1.2 --- Repertoire of Revision Strategies --- p.119 / Chapter 4.3.1.3 --- "Balancing Between Personal Voice and the ""Standard""" --- p.121 / Chapter 4.3.2 --- Interpersonal Factors --- p.124 / Chapter 4.3.2.1 --- Communication Between Teachers and Students --- p.124 / Chapter 4.3.2.2 --- Sources for Support or Advice --- p.126 / Chapter 4.3.3 --- Reasons Behind Students' Preferences: Summary --- p.129 / Chapter 4.4 --- Students' Views and Teachers' Views --- p.130 / Chapter 4.4.1 --- Students' Use of Teacher Feedback During Revision Process --- p.130 / Chapter 4.4.1.1 --- A Brief Overview of the Revision Process Undertaken by Students --- p.131 / Chapter 4.4.1.1.1 --- Revision Process Undertaken by English Majors (Class A) --- p.131 / Chapter 4.4.1.1.2 --- Revision Process Undertaken by Non-English Majors (Classes B and C) --- p.133 / Chapter 4.4.1.1.3 --- Common Feature of Revision Process Shared by the Two Groups of Students --- p.134 / Chapter 4.4.1.2 --- Strategies Used in the Revision Process --- p.135 / Chapter 4.4.1.2.1 --- Contemplating on Their Own --- p.135 / Chapter 4.4.1.2.2 --- Consulting Their Peers --- p.136 / Chapter 4.4.1.2.3 --- Consulting Their Teachers --- p.136 / Chapter 4.4.1.2.4 --- Consulting Other Resources --- p.136 / Chapter 4.4.2 --- Teachers' Expectations on the Use of Teacher feedback in Revision Process --- p.137 / Chapter 4.4.2.1 --- Summary of Teachers' Recommendations of the Revision Process --- p.137 / Chapter 4.4.2.1.1 --- Teacher A's Recommendations --- p.137 / Chapter 4.4.2.1.2 --- Teacher B's Recommendations --- p.139 / Chapter 4.4.2.1.3 --- Teacher C's Recommendations --- p.139 / Chapter 4.4.2.2 --- Strategies Recommended in the Revision Process --- p.140 / Chapter 4.4.3 --- Students' Views and Teachers' Views: A Comparison --- p.141 / Chapter CHAPTER 5 --- CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS --- p.143 / Chapter 5.1 --- Conclusions --- p.143 / Chapter 5.2 --- Significance --- p.145 / Chapter 5.3 --- Pedagogical Implications --- p.147 / Chapter 5.3.1 --- Short-term Implications --- p.147 / Chapter 5.3.1.1 --- Make Teacher Feedback More Comprehensible and Specific --- p.148 / Chapter 5.3.1.2 --- Hold Teacher-student Conferences --- p.150 / Chapter 5.3.1.3 --- Introduce Peer Review --- p.151 / Chapter 5.3.1.4 --- Teach Revision Strategies --- p.151 / Chapter 5.3.2 --- Long-term Implications --- p.152 / Chapter 5.3.2.1 --- Read More! --- p.153 / Chapter 5.3.2.2 --- Think More! --- p.154 / Chapter 5.3.2.3 --- Write More! --- p.155 / Chapter 5.4 --- Limitations --- p.156 / Chapter 5.4.1 --- Insufficient Testing of the Instruments (Pilot Study) --- p.156 / Chapter 5.4.2 --- Uneven Distribution of Student Interviewees Among the Three Writing Classes (Main Study) --- p.157 / Chapter 5.4.3 --- Inconsistent Proportion of Writing Gathered From the Three Writing Classes (Main Study) --- p.158 / Chapter 5.4.4 --- Inconsistent Timing Between the Three Writing Classes (Main Study) --- p.158 / Chapter 5.4.5 --- The Scope of Teacher Feedback on Students' Writing (Main Study) --- p.159 / Chapter 5.5 --- Recommendations for Future Studies --- p.160 / Chapter 5.5.1 --- Comprehensive Testing of Instruments With Tailored Design --- p.160 / Chapter 5.5.2 --- More Even Distribution of Student Interviewees With Different Characteristics --- p.160 / Chapter 5.5.3 --- More Consistent Number of Papers Collected From Different Writing Classes --- p.161 / Chapter 5.5.4 --- More Consistent Schedule Among Writing Classes --- p.161 / Chapter 5.5.5 --- Wider Scope of Enquiry of Teacher Feedback --- p.162 / APPENDICES / Appendix A Student Questionnaire --- p.171 / Appendix B Student Interview Guide --- p.176 / Appendix C Teacher Interview Guide --- p.177 / Appendix D Text Analysis Guide --- p.178 / Appendix E Consent Letter (to students) --- p.179 / Appendix F Consent Letter (to instructors) --- p.181 / Appendix G Response Rate and Characteristics of Student Respondents of Student Questionnaires --- p.183
|
66 |
Physics students' approaches to learning and cognitive processes in solving physics problemsBouchard, Josée. January 2005 (has links)
No description available.
|
67 |
Socialisation to higher mathematics : men's and women's experience of their induction to the disciplineBuckingham, Elizabeth Ann January 2004 (has links)
Abstract not available
|
68 |
Methods college students use to solve probability problems and the factors that support or impede their successBamberger, Mary E. 06 June 2002 (has links)
The purpose of this descriptive case study analysis was to provide portraits of the
methods college students used to solve probability problems and the factors that
supported or impeded their success prior to and after two-week instruction on probability.
Fourteen-question Pre- and Post-Instructional Task-Based Questionnaires provided
verbal data of nine participants enrolled in a college finite mathematics course while
solving problems containing simple, compound, independent, and dependent probabilistic
events.
Overall, the general method modeled by the more successful students consisted of
the student reading the entire problem, including the question; breaking down the
problem into sections, analyzing each section separately; using the context of the
question to reason a solution; and checking the final answer. However, this ideal method
was not always successful. While some less successful students tried to use this approach
when solving their problems, their inability to work with percents and fractions, to
organize and analyze data within their own representation (Venn diagram, tree diagram,
table, or formula), and to relate the process of solving word problems to the context of the
problem hindered their success solving the problem. In addition, the more successful
student exhibited the discipline to attend the class, to try their homework problems
throughout the section on probability, and to seek outside help when they did not
understand a problem.
However, students did try alternate unsuccessful methods when attempting to
solve probability problems. While one student provided answers to the problems based
on his personal experience with the situation, other students sought key words within the
problem to prompt them to use a correct representation or formula, without evidence of
the student trying to interpret the problem. While most students recognized dependent
events, they encountered difficulty stating the probability of a dependent event due to
their weakness in basic counting principles to find the size of the sample space. For those
students who had not encountered probability problems before the first questionnaire,
some students were able to make connections between probability and percent. Finally,
other inexperienced students encountered difficulty interpreting the terminology
associated with the problems, solving the problem based on their own interpretations. / Graduation date: 2003
|
69 |
Graphing calculators in college calculus : an examination of teachers' conceptions and instructional practiceBarton, Susan Dale 28 July 1995 (has links)
The study examined classroom instructional practices and teacher's
professed conceptions about teaching and learning college calculus in
relationship to the implementation of scientific-programmable-graphics (SPG)
calculators. The study occurred at a university not affiliated with any reform
project. The participants were not the catalysts seeking to implement calculus
reform, but expressed a willingness to teach the first quarter calculus course with
the SPG calculator. The research design was based on qualitative methods using
comparative case studies of five teachers.
Primary data were collected through pre-school interviews and weekly
classroom observations with subsequent interviews. Teachers' profiles were
established describing general conceptions of teaching calculus, instructional
practices, congruence between conceptions and practice, conceptions about
teaching using SPG calculators, instructional practice with SPG calculators, and
the relationship of conceptions and practice with SPG calculators.
Initially, all the teachers without prior experience using SPG calculators
indicated concern and skepticism about the usefulness of the technology in
teaching calculus and were uncertain how to utilize the calculator in teaching the
calculus concepts. During the study the teachers became less skeptical about the
calculator's usefulness and found it effective for illustrating graphs. Some of the
teachers' exams included more conceptual and graphically-oriented questions,
but were not significantly different from traditional exams.
Findings indicated the college teachers' conceptions of teaching calculus
were generally consistent with their instructional practice when not constrained
by time. The teachers did not perceive a dramatic change in their instructional
practices. Rather, the new graphing approach curriculum and technology were
assimilated into the teachers' normal teaching practices. No major shifts in the
role of the teachers were detected. Two teachers demonstrated slight differences
in their roles when the SPG calculators were used in class. One was a consultant
to the students as they used the SPG calculators; the other became a fellow
learner as the students presented different features on the calculator. Use of the
calculator was influenced by several factors: inexperience with the calculator,
time constraints, setting up the classroom display calculator, preferred teaching
styles and emphasis, and a willingness to risk experimenting with established
teaching practices and habits. / Graduation date: 1996
|
70 |
Reaching for the Accounting Education Change Commission's recommendations through cooperative learningSwanson, Janice M., 1944- 17 May 1994 (has links)
The Accounting Education Change Commission (AECC) is
a consortium of concerned accounting professionals and
accounting educators that advocates the redesigning of
accounting curriculums in higher education. Traditionally
accounting programs have focused on the technical aspects
of the profession. Although technical competence is
necessary for the profession, the AECC urges accounting
curricula to provide students with experiences that will
foster decision-making skills, communication skills and
interpersonal skills.
This study was an attempt to respond to the
recommendations of the Accounting Education Change
Commission through cooperative learning pedagogy. Related
research suggests that employing particular elements of
cooperative learning can improve intellectual skills,
communication skills, interpersonal skills, learning to
learn, active learning, achievement, attitudes and student
evaluations of teachers.
The data from this study indicate that while imposing
the AECC's recommendations through the use of cooperative
learning pedagogy most students attained high levels of
achievement on unstructured problems requiring high levels
of cognitive applications. However, student achievement
was not as high as expected on structured problems
requiring lower levels of cognitive applications.
In addition, students' reactions to cooperative learning
and implementation of the AECC's recommendations were
mixed. Team work was not perceived by many students to be
important in introductory accounting. However, learning
to learn and active participation in the learning process
were deemed important to students in introductory
accounting. Furthermore, students evaluated the
professor's teaching effectiveness significantly lower
than did previous students taking introductory accounting
from the same professor using traditional lecture-recitation
methods. Imposing the AECC recommendations
through cooperative learning techniques in introductory
accounting in higher education clearly calls for further
research and longer-term exposure to the changes in
classroom pedagogy. / Graduation date: 1995
|
Page generated in 0.0685 seconds