We examine the quantity and quality of uptake of surface-level and meaning-level feedback provided by peers and an instructor on writing assignments in an online graduate-level research course at a North American English-medium university. In this study, the instructor and peers (9 graduate students) endeavored to provide feedback that was timely, specific and embedded in writing (Wolsey, 2008). Students integrated this feedback on their writing assignments approximately 84.89% of the time, with the rate of uptake for instructor-provided feedback slightly higher than that of peer-provided feedback. This study also found that students addressed surface-level feedback focusing on writing mechanics, more frequently than meaninglevel feedback, which focuses on argumentation, flow, and content. Overall, instructor surfacelevel feedback was most likely to be taken up, peer meaning-level feedback items was least likely. These results reveal the need for student training in the provision and uptake of feedback in online graduate contexts and beyond.
This article explores the linguistic identity of young multilingual learners through the use of a Language Portrait Silhouette. Examples from a research study of children aged 6–8 years in a German bilingual program in Canada provide teachers with an understanding that linguistic identity comprises expertise, affiliation, and inheritance. This article also provides additional concrete examples of how teachers can openly reference linguistic identity with students and help children to see stronger connections between home and school learning. The validation and understanding of linguistic identity is beneficial to young children’s emotional, social, and educational development.Cet article examine l’identité linguistique de jeunes apprenants plurilingues par l’emploi d’un portrait silhouette langagière (Language Portrait Silhouette). Quelques exemples d’une recherche portant sur des élèves âgés de 6 à 8 ans dans un programme allemand bilingue au Canada démontrent aux enseignants que l’identité linguistique comprend les aspects l’expertise, l’affiliation et l’héritage. Cet article offre également des exemples concrets sur diverses façons de parlerouvertement d’identité linguistique avec les élèves et de les aider à établir des liensplus solides entre ce qu’ils apprennent à l’école et à la maison. Le fait de valider et de comprendre l’identité linguistique favorise le développement affectif, social et éducationnel des jeunes enfants.
This study is an examination of signage and sign-making practices in one elementary (Kindergarten to sixth grade) public school which offers a German Bilingual Program (GBP) for the development of German-English bilingualism. Schools are public spaces in which the visible language choice on signs reveals the circulating discourses around language status. Surprisingly, little is known about the creation of these signs and the decision-making behind their creation. This linguistic landscape is analysed using nexus analysis which sheds light on the convergence of (1) the historical body of social actors in which teachers are primarily responsible for sign making, (2) an interaction order in which teachers practise organic sign placement and (3) discourses in place which include the promotion of bilingualism. This research reveals that signage is limited in its promotion of German-English bilingualism, constrained strongly by practices that define sign maker's responsibility and the GBP's reach. This study contributes to our understanding of linguistic landscape research by exploring the degree to which a school offering a Bilingual Program promotes bilingualism through signage. Educators and researchers looking critically at school signs are given cause to question accepted practices and strong discourses which limit the promotion of bilingualism.
Reflective writing is a practice often encouraged in study abroad programs. Reflection can be facilitated through experiential learning, but little research is available on how to guide or structure related learning activities. In this article, we discuss the Cross-cultural Reflection model (CCR), which emerged through our own process of researching three commonly used models for reflective writing (Gibbs, 1988; Johns, 2010; Rolfe, Freshwater & Jasper, 2001). We document our procedure for researching, creating, testing, and modifying the CCR model, before and after using it with students in a post-sojourn debriefing workshop. In the discussion, we examine which aspects of the models examined informed the CCR model and which elements we introduced as a result of working with the models in two research retreats. The sharing of the process is intended to inform practices of reflective writing in post-sojourn debriefing to enhance international experiences, programmes and practices.
Short‐term study abroad programs are growing in popularity, and educators and researchers are exploring effective tools to enhance the learning and cultural experiences of students in these programs. Dialogue journals, writing journals in which students respond to instructor prompts and in turn initiate topics for further written discussion, are a useful pedagogical tool in a variety of educational contexts, but their use in the short‐term study abroad setting remains largely unexplored. This article looks at the dialogue journal writing of eight Japanese students in a 4‐week visit to a Canadian faculty of education. Themes that emerged from their writing in conversation with their English for academic purposes instructor reveal that the dialogue journals provided a venue for students to express their feelings, draw upon their learning outside of class, and bring their intercultural learning into the dialogue. The use of dialogue journals facilitated the building of rapport between teacher and students and served to bridge cultural differences.
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.