Four classes of ninth‐grade students in an international school in East Asia used a set of web‐based technology tools to evaluate two competing webpages about the Taiwan Straits. The findings highlight the ways these students developed disciplinary literacy in social studies by drawing upon cultural resources and contextual knowledge as they responded to and evaluated the claims and evidence within the two texts. Implications of this work point to the potential benefits of educators being more explicit about the relationship between metacognitive reading strategies and the metadiscursive skills that are part of the social studies. A related implication for practice is the need to guide students in discussing, comparing, and contrasting the cultural and contextual knowledge they use to make sense of different texts. لقد استخدمت أربع غرف صف من طلاب الصف التاسع في مدرسة دولية في آسيا الشرقية مجموعة الأدوات التقنية على الشبكة العالمية لتحليل موقعين متنافسين بشأن مديق تاوان. وتسلط النتائج الضوء على الطرق التي طور من خلالها هؤلاء الطلاب معرفة القراءة والكتابة في مجال الدراسات الاجتماعية بواسطة استخدام الموارد الثقافية والمعرفة السياقية حين أجابوا وحللوا الادعايات والأدلة في النصين. وتشير أعقاب هذا العمل إلى الفوائد المحتملة في حالة يكون المعلمون أوضح تجاه العلاقة بين إستراتيجيات القراءة ما وراء المعرفة والمهارات ما وراء الخطاب التي تكوّن جزءاً من الدراسات الاجتماعية ويوجد هناك عاقبة متعلقة بالممارسة وهي الحاجة لتوجيه الطلاب في النقاش حول المعرفتين الثقافية والسياقية والقيام بمقارنتها ومفارقتها التي يستخدمونها كي يفهموا النصوص المختلفة. 在东南亚一所国际学校就读的四班九年级的学生,利用一套以网络为主的科技工具来评估两个有关台湾海峡的相互竞争网站。研究结果凸显出这些学生在回应与评估该两个网站文本所提出的声称与证据时,如何利用文化资源与语境知识来增强他们社会科的学科知识。这项研究的启示就是:教育工作者如果能以更明确的态度,去处理社会科所涉及的元认知阅读策略与元语篇技能之间的关系,学生便可得到其潜在的裨益。另一个相关的教学实践启示就是,教育工作者需要指导学生讨论、比较及对比他们用以理解不同文本的文化与语境知识。 Quatre classes de neuvième année d'une école internationale en Asie du Sud‐Est ont utilisé un ensemble d'outils technologiques basés sur la Toile pour évaluer des pages web traitant des détroits de Taïwan. Les résultats mettent en évidence de quelle façon ces élèves ont développé une littératie disciplinaire en sciences sociales en se basant sur des ressources culturelles et des connaissances contextuelles lorsqu'ils ont répondu en faisant face à la demande et aux données des deux textes. Les implications de ce travail montrent le bénéfice potentiel qu'il y aurait pour les enseignants à être plus explicites quant aux relations entre les stratégies métacognitives de lecture et les compétences métadiscursives qui sont partie intégrante des études sociales. L'implication pratique est la nécessité de guider les étudiants pour discuter, comparer, et contraster les connaissances culturelles et contextuelles qu'ils utilisent pour donner du sens à des textes différents. Четыре девятых класса в международной школе в Юго‐Восточной Азии провели оценку двух конкурирующих вебсайтов, посвященных Тайваньским проливам, используя для этого определенный интернет‐инструментарий. Авторы демонстрируют, как девятиклассники реагировали на содержание текстов и анализировали пр...
In this article we draw from ecolingusitics and a civic media literacy framework to consider what happened when three pairs of preservice teachers with different academic backgrounds and climate change beliefs jointly evaluated the reliability of two media sources that make opposing arguments about climate change. An ecolinguistics perspective attends to the environmental impact of the "stories-we-live-by" and a civic media literacy lens highlights the centrality of dialogue and deliberation along with critical reading when evaluating the reliability of information sources about complex socioscientific topics like climate change. Our findings highlight the ways the three pairs of preservice teachers considered three aspects of reliability: provenance, purpose, and content. Findings also point to three reliability stories that the preservice teachers drew on as they evaluated the two media sources: (1) having the "other side" represented, (2) wanting more information or evidence to support an argument, and (3) acknowledging one's own identity and perspectives.
Promote climate justice literacy by guiding students to become more aware of ecologically destructive and beneficial stories-we-live-by.
This study examined what happened when 65 undergraduate prospective secondary level teachers across content areas evaluated the reliability of four online sources about climate change: an oil company webpage, a news report, and two climate change organizations with competing views on climate change. The students evaluated the sources at three time intervals based on 1. a screenshot of each source; 2. full web access to each source and prompted with critical questions to answer; and 3. after a whole class discussion about each source. Having the opportunity to evaluate the sources three times led students to modify their reliability ratings. Findings also reveal challenges some participants had differentiating between facts and opinions as well as distinctions in what they determined to be evidence in a source.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.