No abstract

The ill-structured nature of design problems makes them particularly challenging for problem-based learning. Studio-based learning (SBL), however, has much in common with problem-based learning and indeed has a long history of use in teaching students to solve design problems. The purpose of this ethnographic study of an industrial design class, an architecture class, and three human-computer-interaction classes was to develop a crossdisciplinary understanding of the goals and expectations for students in a SBL environment and the ways in which experienced facilitators assist students in solving complex design problems. The expectations that students are to iteratively generate and refine design solutions, communicate effectively, and collaborate with others establishes the studio as a dynamic place where students learn to experiment on their own, to teach and to use all studio members as resources in that search. Instructors support students as they grapple with complexity of design problem-solving through pedagogical practices that include assignments, associated meta-discussions, explicit prompts, reminders, modeling, and coaching. Using sample illustrations from our cross-case analysis, we present the studio method as a legitimate constituent of problem-based learning methods.

No abstract

Nutzungsbedingungen 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 The TOBTOT's design was grounded in a syncretic theoretical framework. Syncretism refers to merging and analyzing originally discrete traditions, asserting an underlying unity, or reconfirming an underlying discontinuity with more clarity. We argue that such syncretic approaches, when combined with constantly checking against the data, are important to the emerging discipline of research on learning in informal learning settings.In the sections below, we first situate the development of The TOBTOT theoretically and provide an orientation to its purposes; second, describe what The TOBTOT can do as well as its limitations; and, finally, situate this research within three epistemic tensions: particularistic and holistic data collection and analysis, qualitative and quantitative representations, and everyday and formal science discourse. Theoretical UnderpinningsSeveral theoretical traditions inform our methodological decisions. Following Vygotsky (1987), language is viewed as the pre-eminent tool for learning and teaching. Such assumptions are based on the idea that conversation is both emergent and structured (Halliday, 1975;Halliday & Hasan, 1985;Wells, 1993Wells, , 1996. Following Bakhtin (1986) we view dialogue in terms of "multiple authorship of…all texts, written or spoken," (Wertsch, 1991, p. 49). Lemke (1998) expressed such views succinctly saying, "All language in use, whether spoken or written, is explicitly or implicitly dialogical…it is addressed to someone, and addresses them and its own thematic content, from some point-ofview" (p. 181). Such theory suggests that talking, listening, responding, gesturing, interacting with others and with the artifacts and living objects in museums and aquaria are central activities in making sense of science.Key aspects of such research include identifying and tracking the quality and quantity of scientific subject matter content. The development of science concepts within dialogic contexts has been reported in classrooms (Kelly & Chen, 1999;Warren et al., 2001); similar research has been less evident in informal learning settings. Classroom researchers have found it useful it to look for thematic patterns (Ash, in press b; Lemke, 1990) to understand the development of science content. Lemke (1998) has suggested that the "direct uses of scientific concepts can be directly sampled, assessed, and compared…[but] you need to be familiar with both the subject matter content of the discourse or text, and with the semantics…at the level of Halliday (1985) and Hasan (1984)" (p. 184). We are reminded that content and dialogic process need to be studied in tandem in order (Gumperz, 1982; Schiffrin, 1994; Scott et al, 2001). This framework cannot, however, organize data into discrete units for reliably coding conversational movement t...

No abstract

Despite completing undergraduate degrees in the life sciences, few Indigenous women choose to pursue careers in scientific research. To help us understand how American Indian students engage with science, this ethnographic research describes (1) how four Navajo women identified with science, and (2) the narratives they offered when we discussed their experiences with scientific discourse. Using intensive case studies to describe the experiences of these women, my research focused on their final year of undergraduate study in the life sciences at a university in southwestern US.

No abstract

This case study explores how an American Indian woman experienced scientific discourse and the issues of language, power, and authority that occurred while she was an undergraduate student at a university in the southwestern United States. This ethnographic research, using a phenomenological perspective, describes her experiences as she searched for the discursive resources she required to cross-cultural borders between her traditional worldview and Eurocentric science. Data from interviews, participant observation, and artifacts offer a narrative of how she became aware of the "game rules" of scientific discourse. The findings are expressed in terms of a cartographic metaphor where the student's world became less of a list of categories and more of a map outlining where she ventured and the ways in which she oriented herself to scientific language. To facilitate the border crossing and reduce the obstacles that some students experience in crossing between worldviews, educators can look at cross-cultural perspectives and explore with students how language fosters or hinders their progress. This research suggests that we allow room in our pedagogy for students to learn the rules of using scientific language, make explicit the cultural norms associated with this practice, thereby promoting a "metaknowledge" of how scientific discourse functions in the academy.