技术援助(TA)提供者的书面报告和通信错误

Darwin D. Bargo
{"title":"技术援助(TA)提供者的书面报告和通信错误","authors":"Darwin D. Bargo","doi":"10.32996/bjtep.2022.1.1.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Writing reports and correspondence are just some of the tasks that technical assistance (TA) providers do as they accomplish their day-to-day duties and functions. This study investigates errors found in the documents written by the TA providers including coordinators, master teachers, head teachers, school heads, district supervisors, and division supervisors considering Error Analysis (EA) Model by Carl James (1998). The data were taken from 94 soft copies of purposively collected and classified documents according to types. Results revealed that the topmost written documents based on percentages as used in this study are memorandum, narrative reports, and letters although there are still others in accordance with their mandates and job descriptions specifically on their respective Key Results Areas (KRAs). There were errors identified in the written reports and correspondence of the TA providers in the sentence level which revolve on (1) grammar – which highlighted points pertaining to preposition, article, agreement, verb, pronoun, noun, redundancy, determiner, quantifier, sentences, and adjective, (2) punctuation – mainly revolved on comma, hyphen, colon, and other punctuations, (3) capitalization – that falls on changing or checking, and congruency on the capitalization of words, and (4) spelling – words from the sentences were marked check, change, and correct spellings. There were also errors in the paragraph level under (1) development – which errors generally include inconsistencies of the expected patterns, formats which were not in accordance with relevant issuances, reports were merely collected from the concerned persons, thoughts within the reports need to be polished for clarity, reports also need to be rechecked considering the flow and organization of ideas, and mechanical aspects, (2) coherence – connection of thoughts from the paragraph before and after paragraphs, and use of transitional markers (TM) to connect ideas, (3) unity – word/s change, join or merge, replace, and separate which is sometimes a result of typo errors, and (4) point of view - written in lower positions' point of view, and improper use of 1st, 2nd and 3rd persons. The writing skills enhancement program and activities offered to the TA providers, the conclusions and recommendations on the basis of the results are presented in the full paper.","PeriodicalId":268908,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Teacher Education and Pedagogy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Written Report and Correspondence Errors of Technical Assistance (TA) Providers\",\"authors\":\"Darwin D. Bargo\",\"doi\":\"10.32996/bjtep.2022.1.1.3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Writing reports and correspondence are just some of the tasks that technical assistance (TA) providers do as they accomplish their day-to-day duties and functions. This study investigates errors found in the documents written by the TA providers including coordinators, master teachers, head teachers, school heads, district supervisors, and division supervisors considering Error Analysis (EA) Model by Carl James (1998). The data were taken from 94 soft copies of purposively collected and classified documents according to types. Results revealed that the topmost written documents based on percentages as used in this study are memorandum, narrative reports, and letters although there are still others in accordance with their mandates and job descriptions specifically on their respective Key Results Areas (KRAs). There were errors identified in the written reports and correspondence of the TA providers in the sentence level which revolve on (1) grammar – which highlighted points pertaining to preposition, article, agreement, verb, pronoun, noun, redundancy, determiner, quantifier, sentences, and adjective, (2) punctuation – mainly revolved on comma, hyphen, colon, and other punctuations, (3) capitalization – that falls on changing or checking, and congruency on the capitalization of words, and (4) spelling – words from the sentences were marked check, change, and correct spellings. There were also errors in the paragraph level under (1) development – which errors generally include inconsistencies of the expected patterns, formats which were not in accordance with relevant issuances, reports were merely collected from the concerned persons, thoughts within the reports need to be polished for clarity, reports also need to be rechecked considering the flow and organization of ideas, and mechanical aspects, (2) coherence – connection of thoughts from the paragraph before and after paragraphs, and use of transitional markers (TM) to connect ideas, (3) unity – word/s change, join or merge, replace, and separate which is sometimes a result of typo errors, and (4) point of view - written in lower positions' point of view, and improper use of 1st, 2nd and 3rd persons. The writing skills enhancement program and activities offered to the TA providers, the conclusions and recommendations on the basis of the results are presented in the full paper.\",\"PeriodicalId\":268908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Teacher Education and Pedagogy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Teacher Education and Pedagogy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32996/bjtep.2022.1.1.3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Teacher Education and Pedagogy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32996/bjtep.2022.1.1.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

撰写报告和通信只是技术援助(TA)提供者在完成其日常职责和功能时所做的一些任务。本研究以Carl James(1998)的错误分析(EA)模型为基础,调查了包括协调员、主任教师、校长、校长、地区主管和部门主管在内的助教提供者所撰写的文件中的错误。数据取自94份有目的收集并按类型分类的文件软拷贝。结果显示,本研究中使用的百分比最高的书面文件是备忘录、叙述性报告和信件,尽管仍有其他文件根据其任务规定和职位描述,具体针对其各自的关键成果领域(KRAs)。在句子层面上,助教的书面报告和通信中发现的错误主要集中在(1)语法——强调介词、冠词、协议、动词、代词、名词、冗余、限定词、量词、句子和形容词;(2)标点符号——主要集中在逗号、连字符、冒号和其他标点符号上;(3)大写——主要集中在更改或检查上;(4)拼写——对句子中的单词进行检查、更改和正确拼写。在第(1)项下的段落级别也有错误-这些错误通常包括预期模式的不一致,格式不符合有关的发行,报告只是从有关人员那里收集的,报告中的想法需要完善以使其清晰,考虑到想法的流动和组织以及机械方面,报告也需要重新检查。(2)连贯性——将段落前后的思想联系起来,并使用过渡标记(TM)来连接思想;(3)统一性——单词的变化、连接或合并、替换和分离,有时是由于打字错误造成的;(4)观点——用较低的位置写观点,不恰当地使用第一、第二和第三人称。全文介绍了为助教提供的写作技能提升计划和活动,以及基于结果的结论和建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Written Report and Correspondence Errors of Technical Assistance (TA) Providers
Writing reports and correspondence are just some of the tasks that technical assistance (TA) providers do as they accomplish their day-to-day duties and functions. This study investigates errors found in the documents written by the TA providers including coordinators, master teachers, head teachers, school heads, district supervisors, and division supervisors considering Error Analysis (EA) Model by Carl James (1998). The data were taken from 94 soft copies of purposively collected and classified documents according to types. Results revealed that the topmost written documents based on percentages as used in this study are memorandum, narrative reports, and letters although there are still others in accordance with their mandates and job descriptions specifically on their respective Key Results Areas (KRAs). There were errors identified in the written reports and correspondence of the TA providers in the sentence level which revolve on (1) grammar – which highlighted points pertaining to preposition, article, agreement, verb, pronoun, noun, redundancy, determiner, quantifier, sentences, and adjective, (2) punctuation – mainly revolved on comma, hyphen, colon, and other punctuations, (3) capitalization – that falls on changing or checking, and congruency on the capitalization of words, and (4) spelling – words from the sentences were marked check, change, and correct spellings. There were also errors in the paragraph level under (1) development – which errors generally include inconsistencies of the expected patterns, formats which were not in accordance with relevant issuances, reports were merely collected from the concerned persons, thoughts within the reports need to be polished for clarity, reports also need to be rechecked considering the flow and organization of ideas, and mechanical aspects, (2) coherence – connection of thoughts from the paragraph before and after paragraphs, and use of transitional markers (TM) to connect ideas, (3) unity – word/s change, join or merge, replace, and separate which is sometimes a result of typo errors, and (4) point of view - written in lower positions' point of view, and improper use of 1st, 2nd and 3rd persons. The writing skills enhancement program and activities offered to the TA providers, the conclusions and recommendations on the basis of the results are presented in the full paper.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Integrating STEM in Early Childhood Education: A Cutting-Edge Study on PAUD Development in Indonesia Academic Performance and Attitudes toward Mathematics Challenge of Junior High School Students Theorizing Filipino Pedagogical Beliefs: Narratives of Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Before and After Teaching Immersion Music, Arts, `Physical Education and Health (MAPEH) Learning Objectives’ Level of Attainment and Utilization of Learning Resources Refinement and Validation of Research Instrument for Assessing Executive Functioning Skills in the Post-Pandemic Education: The MEASURE Approach
×
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