22 SES 03C, Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (Part 2)
Laurence Edward Lomas
In this paper a model for training writing and reviewing papers are discussed. The framing of the writing was relatively strong but the classification of subject for the paper was relatively weak, the students had influence on what problem they wanted to investigate. The result of the experiment will be analysed by the theoretical framework of Basil Bernstein During the spring 2008 the student within the program, for Behavioural science at Mid Sweden University, peer-reviewed their fellow students writing process during the production of the paper for their baccalaureate. The process for peer reviewing was framed by an instruction for the course written by the teachers for the program. The writing process was divided into for parts: how the authors viewed the problem in the paper, the construction of the aim of the paper and the literature review, description of chosen method(s) and design, and finally results including discussions and conclusions. The student was writing the paper together with a fellow in the program. The course was lasting for ten weeks and they had to download a file in a First Class map at time limit decided by the teachers. In the map also another part of a paper was downloaded written by another students. The task, for the students, was to write a critical refection on the arguments the other authors had created in their paper regarding: the relation between chosen problem and chosen concepts, theoretical assumptions or models. The written analysis was then discussed together by the student and teachers. The second task was about the other students’ argument for the relation between the aim of the paper and how they performed in the analysis of literature. The third task was to critically discuss how the other students’ arguments for chosen design and method had a strong ore pure relation to the aim and literature review. The task was also to discuss the validity of the results, discussion and conclusions. The teachers followed up each written discussion task. Finally, the fourth task was to critically discuss the other students’ papers in general, from chosen problem to conclusion. The internal logic of the paper also had to be critically examined by the students. The course was finished with a classical seminar according to the Nordic model for the disputation ritual.
textanalysis of papers
The study is ongoging
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity. Theory, Research, Critique. Lanham, Boulder, New York and Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC.
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.