Some challenges of collaboration between academic literacies specialists and subject specialists: framing the difference

IF 0.1 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning Pub Date : 2019-09-03 DOI:10.5785/35-1-802
Y. Coetsee
{"title":"Some challenges of collaboration between academic literacies specialists and subject specialists: framing the difference","authors":"Y. Coetsee","doi":"10.5785/35-1-802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Collaboration between academic literacies (AcLits) specialists and subject specialists is still a significant issue in student support because AcLits practitioners now need to negotiate the advantages of both stand-alone and embedded courses. This paper focuses on some challenges of one such a collaboration between the provider of AcLits courses (the Language Centre) and the Department of Chemistry and Polymer Science at an institution of higher education. The t heory of f raming (as in Scheufele, 2013) is used to explain some of the frustration experienced during this collaboration. The study also draws on New Literacies Studies in suggesting that student autonomy in constructing knowledge is negated when focus is placed on academic skills that students lack instead of the contribution students can make towards their own learning. Where previous AcLits collaborations have sometimes used the deficit model (Smit, 2012) to measure the impact of interventions, this study attempts to show that the collaboration itself aids deep learning. However, some challenges have to be overcome, of which an important one is the measurement of impact when the deficit model is not used. Whereas ATLAS. ti has often been used to analyse data sets , this investigation opts for open coding to explicate the frames relevant to this kind of collaboration. Analysis of the findings shows that students perceived this collaboration as a valuable learning experience despite all the challenges experienced. The paper concludes by suggesting that identification, explication and management of the challenges of collaboration thus proved well worth the effort.","PeriodicalId":43109,"journal":{"name":"Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5785/35-1-802","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Collaboration between academic literacies (AcLits) specialists and subject specialists is still a significant issue in student support because AcLits practitioners now need to negotiate the advantages of both stand-alone and embedded courses. This paper focuses on some challenges of one such a collaboration between the provider of AcLits courses (the Language Centre) and the Department of Chemistry and Polymer Science at an institution of higher education. The t heory of f raming (as in Scheufele, 2013) is used to explain some of the frustration experienced during this collaboration. The study also draws on New Literacies Studies in suggesting that student autonomy in constructing knowledge is negated when focus is placed on academic skills that students lack instead of the contribution students can make towards their own learning. Where previous AcLits collaborations have sometimes used the deficit model (Smit, 2012) to measure the impact of interventions, this study attempts to show that the collaboration itself aids deep learning. However, some challenges have to be overcome, of which an important one is the measurement of impact when the deficit model is not used. Whereas ATLAS. ti has often been used to analyse data sets , this investigation opts for open coding to explicate the frames relevant to this kind of collaboration. Analysis of the findings shows that students perceived this collaboration as a valuable learning experience despite all the challenges experienced. The paper concludes by suggesting that identification, explication and management of the challenges of collaboration thus proved well worth the effort.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学术素养专家和学科专家之间合作的一些挑战:构建差异
学术素养(AcLits)专家和学科专家之间的协作仍然是学生支持中的一个重要问题,因为AcLits从业者现在需要协商独立课程和嵌入式课程的优势。本文主要讨论了一所高等教育机构的化学和高分子科学系与AcLits课程提供者(语言中心)之间的合作所面临的挑战。框架理论(如Scheufele, 2013)被用来解释在这种合作中所经历的一些挫折。该研究还借鉴了《新文学研究》,认为当把重点放在学生缺乏的学术技能上,而不是学生对自己学习的贡献上时,学生构建知识的自主权就被否定了。以前的AcLits合作有时使用赤字模型(Smit, 2012)来衡量干预措施的影响,本研究试图表明合作本身有助于深度学习。然而,必须克服一些挑战,其中一个重要的挑战是在不使用赤字模型的情况下测量影响。而阿特拉斯。Ti经常被用于分析数据集,本研究选择开放编码来解释与这种合作相关的框架。对调查结果的分析表明,尽管经历了各种挑战,但学生们认为这种合作是一种宝贵的学习经验。本文的结论是,协作挑战的识别、解释和管理证明是值得付出努力的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning
Per Linguam-A Journal of Language Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Iingxoxobunzululwazi zaseAfrika Iingxoxobunzululwazi zaseAfrika Ngokufa Kolwimi: izizathu neendlela zokukhawulelana nokufa kolwimi African scientific discussions on language death: reasons for, and methods of, dealing with language death Turn-taking in multilingual classroom interaction Le jeu comme outil de motivation en classe de Français Langue Etrangere au Lesotho: Le cas de Tsakholo High School Games as a way to motivate a French as a Foreign Language classroom: the case of Tsakholo High School Mediating meaning in booktalk: Reading Clubs as third spaces Using Process-oriented, Guided-inquiry Learning in the Teaching of Academic Literacy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1