scholarly journals Writing To Learn: The Effect Of Peer Tutoring On Critical Thinking And Writing Skills Of First Year Engineering Students

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Damron ◽  
Karen High
Obiter ◽  
2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo Broodryk

This article will explore the use of writing-intensive courses across the law curriculum, vested in the belief that writing, as an articulation of thinking, enhances learning where it is meaningfully and intentionally embedded into a course structure. The article commences by pointing out that law students often regard the writing process and the critical thinking process as mutually exclusive and therefore fail to appreciate that writing is in fact the end-result of a process of argumentation or analysis. As a result of students‟ inability to engage effectively in a process of critical thinking, they tend to reach closure too quickly when presented with a critical-thinking problem. Consequently, students often fail to engage in a process of exploratory thinking, enabling them to suspend judgment and to enter into the spirit of opposing views. The article specifically focuses on the writing strategy recently implemented by the Faculty of Law, Stellenbosch University with the primary aim of establishing a coordinated approach to the development of research and writing skills within the LLB programme as an integral part of legal education within the Faculty. The Strategy is intended to enhance the writing and research skills of LLB students through a number of interrelated interventions implemented across the entire LLB programme. A principal aim is to inculcate both generic and specific writing skills in LLB graduates in a manner that is integrated into the curriculum. A key component of the Strategy, on which the article will focus, entails the identification and development of writing-intensive courses in terms of which writing and research assignments are integrated into substantive courses. Writing-intensive courses support the notion of “writing to learn” as opposed to “learning to write” and thus encourage critical thinking. They are assignment-centred rather than text- and lecture-centred; they are structured so as to enable exploratory thinking (and thus writing); they encourage students to become actively involved in their own learning processes; and they consist of assignments that require students to arrive at well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards, justifying their ideas in writing or other appropriate modes. In these courses, students are instructed on writing skills alongside the substantive content of the particular course and given exercises to develop such skills with reference to the substantive content of the course. Each course is focused on specific writing skills and successive courses are focused on developing these skills. The article concludes by dealing with the practical difficulties and benefits associated with the development of writing-intensive courses, one of which is the fact that students not only develop generic writing skills, but they also develop specific writing skills within the academic discourse of our environment – they therefore do not only learn to write, but to write in law.


Author(s):  
Emmeline Evans ◽  
Jessica Menold ◽  
Christopher McComb

Abstract Within the domain of education, the term “critical thinking” is widely understood to mean the various skills that comprise an individual’s logical and reasoning abilities. It is critical that designers possess these abilities so that they can solve the complex problems of an increasingly interconnected world. In order to better understand patterns in engineering students’ critical thinking, this research applies the classifications of the 2001 revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy to 49 reflections written by first-year engineering students on a two-hour design practicum. Reflections were thematically coded to identify when students operated in different levels of the cognitive process and knowledge dimensions. Using k-means clustering analysis, genres of reflection were then determined. Four unique clusters of responses were identified. Notable trends in clusters included application and evaluation of procedural knowledge. Additionally, a difference was observed between the two largest clusters regarding deviance from the design process. While one cluster of responses generally minimized discussion of deviance, the second largest cluster emphasized this deviance, highlighting it as an opportunity for future growth. This work provides insight into how students learn design and how they communicate their learning, providing insight for instructors hoping to encourage deeper critical thinking in design courses.


Author(s):  
Concepcion Rebollar ◽  
Carolina Varela ◽  
Olatz Eugenio

Computational thinking is an essential skill set for today's students, given the digital age in which we live and work (CT). Without a precise definition, it is generally understood to be a collection of abilities and attitudes required to deal with difficulties in any aspect of life, whether or not a computer is involved. Measurement and evaluation of students' progress in CT abilities are critical, and this can only be done using instruments that have been tested and shown to work before. New students at the Basque Country's University of the Basque Country's Engineering Degrees are tested for critical thinking, algorithmic thinking, problem solving, cooperation and creativity using a previously proven tool.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lizzie Santiago ◽  
Anika Pirkey ◽  
Mustapha Animashaun ◽  
Melissa Morris

Author(s):  
Brian Frank ◽  
Jake Kaupp ◽  
Ann Chen

This paper presents a portion of a study on how model eliciting activities (MEAs) impact critical thinking development in first year engineering. Model eliciting activities (MEAs) are realistic problems used in the classroom that require learners to document not only their solution to the problems, but also their processes for solving them. Studies have shown MEAs to be valuable in helping students to develop conceptual understanding, knowledge transfer , and generalizable problem--‐solving skills. This study is investigating the impact of the MEA- integrated course on students’ development of critical thinking skills. Ultimately, the team aims to determine whether the MEA-integrated course facilitates students’ critical thinking. During the fall semester of the 2012/2013 academic year three instruments will be used to evaluate the critical thinking skills (CTS) of first year engineering students. These instruments will be used as both a pre--‐ and post--‐test in order to benchmark CTS of the incoming first year students, and determine the effectiveness of MEA instruction on developing student critical thinking ability. These instruments are the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z (Cornell Z), the International Critical Thinking Essay Test (ICTET) and the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA). This paper will present the preliminary findings from analysis of the MEA results and pre and post tests from the study.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document