scholarly journals College Students' Revision Behaviors: Are they Motivated by the Inner-drive or Teacher Feedback?

2015 ◽  
Vol null (31) ◽  
pp. 7-39
Author(s):  
Hoyeol Ryu
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 1555
Author(s):  
Jiachun Wang

For college students majoring in English, English writing is a relatively difficult project. How to effectively improve the English writing ability of students of English majors in vocational colleges is an important issue that every college teacher needs to pay attention to. As a teaching tool, the intelligent computer automated essay evaluation system can help students improve their English writing ability more objectively, efficiently and accurately. This paper employs the intelligent computer automated essay evaluation system as a teaching tool, taking college students as the research object, and carried out an 18-week online self-writing teaching experiment and traditional writing experiment. This paper conducts a comparative study on the washback effects of teacher feedback plus intelligent feedback versus teacher feedback on English writing teaching in higher vocational college, which provides a prominent research value and research significance for the reform and innovation of English writing teaching in higher vocational colleges.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-96
Author(s):  
Mary R. T. Kennedy

Purpose The purpose of this clinical focus article is to provide speech-language pathologists with a brief update of the evidence that provides possible explanations for our experiences while coaching college students with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Method The narrative text provides readers with lessons we learned as speech-language pathologists functioning as cognitive coaches to college students with TBI. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather to consider the recent scientific evidence that will help our understanding of how best to coach these college students. Conclusion Four lessons are described. Lesson 1 focuses on the value of self-reported responses to surveys, questionnaires, and interviews. Lesson 2 addresses the use of immediate/proximal goals as leverage for students to update their sense of self and how their abilities and disabilities may alter their more distal goals. Lesson 3 reminds us that teamwork is necessary to address the complex issues facing these students, which include their developmental stage, the sudden onset of trauma to the brain, and having to navigate going to college with a TBI. Lesson 4 focuses on the need for college students with TBI to learn how to self-advocate with instructors, family, and peers.


1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 767-776 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Don Franks ◽  
Elizabeth B. Franks

Eight college students enrolled in group therapy for stuttering were divided into two equal groups for 20 weeks. The training group supplemented therapy with endurance running and calisthenics three days per week. The subjects were tested prior to and at the conclusion of the training on a battery of stuttering tests and cardiovascular measures taken at rest, after stuttering, and after submaximal exercise. There were no significant differences (0.05 level) prior to training. At the conclusion of training, the training group was significandy better in cardiovascular response to exercise and stuttering. Although physical training did not significantly aid the reduction of stuttering as measured in this study, training did cause an increased ability to adapt physiologically to physical stress and to the stress of stuttering.


1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard R. Martin ◽  
Gerald M. Siegel

Seventy-two college students were divided into three groups: Button Push-Speech (BP-S), Speech-Button Push (S-BP), and Control. BP-S subjects pushed one of two buttons on signal for 8 min. During the last 4 min, depression of the criterion button caused a buzzer to sound. After the button-push task, subjects spoke spontaneously for 30 min. During the last 20 min, the buzzer was presented contingent upon each disfluency. S-BP subjects were run under the same procedures, but the order of button-push and speech tasks was reversed. Control subjects followed the same procedures as S-BP subjects, but no buzzer signal was presented at any time. Both S-BP and BP-S subjects emitted significantly fewer disfluencies during the last 20 min (Conditioning) than during the first 10 min (Baserate) of the speaking task. The frequency of disfluencies for Control subjects did not change significantly from Baserate to Conditioning. In none of the three groups did the frequency of pushes on the criterion button change significantly from minute to minute throughout the 8-min button-push session.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document