Your search found 14944 results.

Descriptors:
Prediction; Photography; Discriminant Analysis; Language Patterns; Models; Gender Differences; Aesthetics; Communication Skills; Interpersonal Competence; Social Cognition; Writing (Composition); Coding; Language Usage; Sex Stereotypes; Sexual Identity

Abstract:
The gender-linked language effect (GLLE) is a phenomenon in which transcripts of female communicators are rated higher on Socio-Intellectual Status and Aesthetic Quality and male communicators are rated higher on Dynamism. This study proposed and tested a new general process model explanation for the GLLE, a central mediating element of which posits that males and females have socialized schema of how each gender normatively communicates. Participants described five landscape photographs in writing. Participants were asked to describe the first photograph with no other instructions. The next four randomly ordered photos were described under two guises: "as if you were a man," and "as if you were a woman." Under both gender guises, participants described the photograph "to a man" and "to a woman." Transcripts were coded for gender-distinguishing language features. Discriminant analysis indicated that the language used by male and female respondents in the male guise differed from that used by the same respondents in the female guise, supporting communicators' consistent gender-linked language schemata, and stereotypes, and the new process model. While the data supported the new gender-linked language model, no effects were found for predictions also made regarding communication accommodation or gender identity salience. (Contains 6 tables and 1 figure.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
College Faculty; Scholarship; Writing (Composition); Editing; Faculty Publishing; College Instruction; Teacher Effectiveness; Business Administration Education; Law Related Education

Abstract:
In this article, the author shares his thoughts on being a "scholarly" teacher. He points out that engaging in scholarly activity, which includes publishing as well as other ways to engage with relevant research, like reviewing and editing for journals, can lead to better teaching. This sort of scholarly commitment allows an instructor to maintain his/her status as an informed expert and, thereby, to open new and exciting ways to introduce content in the classroom. There is both a horizontal and vertical character to the benefit of engaging oneself in the research literature. It broadens and deepens the expertise one brings to the classroom. Each is important in its own way to a business law and legal studies professor. (Contains 17 footnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Evidence; Writing (Composition); Special Education Teachers; Academic Standards; Writing Instruction; Writing Tests; Educational Environment; Secondary School Students; Secondary School Teachers; Writing Teachers

Abstract:
This article examines the Common Core State Standards as they apply to writing and students with learning disabilities (LD). We first consider why the implementation of these standards is advantageous to writing instruction for students with LD as well as the challenges in implementing them. Next, we make the following four recommendations in terms of their implementation: (1) increase general and special education teachers' knowledge about writing development; (2) create a writing environment in which students with LD can thrive; (3) employ evidence-based writing practices in general education classes (where most students with LD are taught); and (4) use evidence-based writing practices effective with students with LD. We conclude by considering research that still needs to be undertaken to help educators maximize the probability that students with and without LD meet the writing benchmarks proposed in these Standards. (Contains 3 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Writing Instruction; Literacy Education; Written Language; Foreign Countries; Bilingualism; Writing (Composition); Oral Language; Comparative Analysis; Teaching Methods; Role; Japanese

Abstract:
Literacy education is always a potentially problematic undertaking, one that shifts people's relationships among themselves, with bodies of transmitted knowledge and with structures of political control (Collins & Blot, 2003; Lee, 2004; Mazrui, 1990). The teaching of writing and composition in early 20th-century Japan presented a number of unique challenges, centered on the complexity of the writing system and the historical diglossia that had separated the spoken and written forms of the language for centuries. In this article, the author compares the responses of Makiguchi Tsunesaburo (1871-1944) and Ashida Enosuke (1873-1951) to these challenges. Where Ashida promoted the idea of writing as a spontaneous expression of the "self," Makiguchi encouraged a more deliberate, conscious and "scientific" approach to the teaching of writing, one that encouraged more interactive and socialized understanding of language and the self-other relations it embodies. These approaches are compared against the background of the role assigned to language learning and teaching in defining the contours of an emerging national "self." Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Writing (Composition); Reading Instruction; Writing Instruction; Writing Strategies; Writing Processes; Sentences; Vocabulary; Educational Practices; Teaching Methods

Abstract:
When instructing reading and composition, teachers should have students write down dictated vocabulary, short phrases, simple sentences, etc., occasionally modifying these, in order to deepen their understanding of how "kana" (i.e., phonetic characters) and vocabulary are used. This can be broken down into the following four activities: (1) Transcribing dictated vocabulary; (2) Transcribing dictated short phrases; (3) Transcribing dictated simple sentences; and (4) Modifying simple sentences. However, dictation practice is limited to the first two activities [of transcribing vocabulary and short phrases], and no attention is paid to the other activities, with the result that the relation between reading and composition instruction becomes [as disconnected] as described in the early part of this article. Thus, the main argument the author wishes to pursue will be made by focusing on the third and fourth activities [transcribing dictated simple sentences and modifying simple sentences]. (Contains 2 footnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Language Tests; Reading Processes; Reading Tests; Test Format; Integrated Activities; Reading Comprehension; Language Usage; Writing (Composition); English for Academic Purposes; Test Validity; Cognitive Processes; Foreign Students; English Language Learners; College Students

Abstract:
Integrated reading/writing tasks are becoming more common in large-scale language tests. Much of the research on these tasks has focused on writing through reading; assessing reading through writing is a less explored area. In this article we describe a reading-into-writing task that is intended to measure both reading comprehension and language use on an academic English test. The task involves responding to short-answer questions (SAQs) that require examinees to use their own words to state the main idea of a text, draw inferences, or synthesize information across multiple texts. The article presents results of a two-part study addressing the validity of this method of assessing reading by investigating the cognitive processes involved in responding to SAQs. First, we present the results of a qualitative study of five nonnative English-speaking students, who provided verbal protocols as they read the texts and responded to the SAQs. Next, we present data from a larger sample of students focusing specifically on the cognitive processes used when reading the texts for the purpose of responding to SAQs. Implications of the study for the validity of this method of testing are discussed. (Contains 4 tables and 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Language Tests; Integrated Activities; Reading; Writing (Composition); Information Sources; Writing Tests; Academic Discourse; Evaluation Research

Abstract:
The five studies presented in this special issue offer unique evidence, analyses, and theoretical rationales for assessment tasks that involve writing in reference to information from source material with substantial content. I review the five studies in respect to five "promises" and five "perils," concluding that, collectively, the promises were mostly fulfilled, but so were most of the perils. The promises are that these task types (a) provide realistic, challenging literacy activities; (b) engage test takers in writing that is responsible to specific content; (c) countertest method or practice effects associated with conventional item types; (d) evaluate language abilities consistent with construction-integration or multiliteracies models of literacy; and (e) offer diagnostic value for instruction or self-assessment. The perils of these task types, however, are that they (a) confound the measurement of writing abilities with abilities to comprehend source materials; (b) muddle assessment and diagnostic information together; (c) involve genres that are ill-defined and so difficult to score; (d) require threshold levels of abilities for competent performance, producing test results that may not compare neatly across different ability levels; and (e) elicit texts in which the language from source materials is hard to distinguish from examinees' own language production. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
English (Second Language); Graduate Students; Written Language; Oral Language; Language Styles; Second Language Learning; Academic Discourse; Language Usage; Self Concept; Student Role; Computational Linguistics; Form Classes (Languages); Speech Acts; Writing (Composition); Speeches

Abstract:
The purpose of the present study is to shed some light on the subtle interplay between oral and written academic genres in the context of graduate student academic presentations. The analysis was based on a corpus of successful TESOL graduate student academic presentations (n = 20) with a focus on the genre identity roles students encode in their uses of the first person singular pronouns and determiner ("I," "me," "my"). The analysis pointed to three main categories of roles (genre roles typical of academic writing, socially-motivated roles, and speech event roles) which comprise the set of identity roles that characterize student presentations as a genre. It also revealed that the academic writing genre roles were far better represented than the other two categories, which suggests that the presenters gave the greatest preference to projecting their scholarly selves in their presentations by staying close to the written academic genres while still giving a glimpse of their personal and social selves in relation to the topic content. The analysis further focused on the identity roles influenced by academic writing with an eye to the roles that dominated in students' presentations, their function, and linguistic realizations. (Contains 1 table.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; Writing (Composition); Writing Processes; Writing Ability; Writing Difficulties; Elementary School Students; Special Education; Educational Research; Instructional Effectiveness; Writing Instruction; Special Needs Students; Writing Achievement

Abstract:
By the upper elementary grades, writing becomes an essential tool both for learning and for showing what you know. Students who struggle significantly with writing are at a terrible disadvantage. Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress indicate that only 25% of students can be classified as competent writers; students with learning disabilities (LD) have even greater problems with writing than their normally achieving peers and frequently demonstrate a deteriorating attitude toward writing after the primary grades. In this article, we focus on composing and the writing process, and examine the knowledge base about writing development and instruction among students with LD. We address what research tells us about skilled writers and the development of writing knowledge, strategies, skill, and the will to write, and how this relates to students with LD. Next, we summarize what has been learned from research on writing development, effective instruction, and the writing abilities of students with LD in terms of effective instruction for these students. Finally, we indicate critical areas for future research. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Familiarity; English (Second Language); Foreign Countries; College Faculty; Protocol Analysis; Semi Structured Interviews; Second Language Instruction; Second Language Learning; Editing; Language Teachers; Native Speakers; Scientific Research; Teacher Attitudes; Academic Discourse; Writing (Composition); Japanese; Cooperation; Medicine; English for Special Purposes; Apprenticeships; Vocabulary

Abstract:
Native-English-speaking English teachers at universities in EFL contexts are often asked to edit scientific manuscripts written by English as an additional language (EAL) colleagues. However, a lack of familiarity with scientific writing can make such editing tasks burdensome to English teachers. Using Lave and Wenger's (1991) notion of legitimate peripheral participation as an analytical lens, this study explored how English teachers who regularly edited healthcare-related texts learned the "craft" of scientific editing. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with four English-teaching editors employed at universities in Japan, with a focus on these editors' initial difficulties with editing and how editors overcame these difficulties. Two participants also completed think-aloud editing tasks, which were followed by stimulated recall interviews. Results indicate that four issues are of potential significance to these English teachers' learning of and attitudes towards the craft of scientific editing: 1) the various styles and terminology of medical academic writing; 2) authors' involvement in the editing process; 3) the ability to communicate with authors in Japanese; and 4) early apprenticeship or immersion experiences. We conclude that universities in EFL contexts should encourage greater collaboration, involving both education and research, between English teachers and scientific professionals. (Contains 2 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website