scholarly journals Pre-service Teachers’ Opinion about Inquiry-Based Learning Through Kindergarten Space

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 173
Author(s):  
Marina Sounoglou

The research process is a safe way for children to learn. The inquiry-based learning in kindergarten enables children to deepen their knowledge and expand it on existing ones. The kindergarten space contributes to it depending on its layout and how it is utilized of them. The methodology that used was the qualitative discourse analysis in the submitted minutes of students' activities and evaluations coded for the concept of inquiry-based learning. The research sample consists of the texts of 159 pre-service teachers from the School of Preschool Education of the University of Thessaly. The results make it clear that, based on the research questions posed in the present study, pre-service teachers believe that inquiry-based learning can be cultivated in relation to the way that the space is shaped.

2011 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Hui Chen ◽  
Mary K. Van Ullen

Workshops on the research process and plagiarism were designed to meet the needs of international students at the University at Albany. The research process workshop covered formulating research questions, as well as locating and evaluating sources. The plagiarism workshop focused on acknowledging sources, quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing materials, citation styles, and avoiding plagiarism. The effectiveness of the workshops was measured by administering pre-and post-tests and by interviewing students several months after the workshops. The results showed that students achieved significant improvement for both the research process and plagiarism by attending the training, and they continued to apply new skills several months later.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (06) ◽  
pp. A10
Author(s):  
Pavel Bína ◽  
Fredrik Brounéus ◽  
Dick Kasperowski ◽  
Niclas Hagen ◽  
Martin Bergman ◽  
...  

In 2021 Sweden’s first national portal for citizen science will be launched to help researchers practice sustainable and responsible citizen science with different societal stakeholders. This paper present findings from two surveys on attitudes and experiences of citizen science among researchers at Swedish universities. Both surveys provided input to the development of the national portal, for which researchers are a key stakeholder group. The first survey (n=636) was exclusively focused on citizen science and involved researchers and other personnel at Swedish University of Agricultural Science (SLU). 63% of respondents at SLU had heard about citizen science (CS) prior to the survey; however a majority of these (61%) had not been involved in any CS initiative themselves. Dominant reasons for researchers choosing a CS approach in projects were to enable collection of large amounts of data (68%), improving the knowledge base (59%), improving data quality (25%), promote participants’ understanding in research (21%) and promote collaboration between the university and society (20%). The other survey (n=3 699) was on the broader topic of communication and open science, including questions on CS, and was distributed to researchers from all Swedish universities. 61% of respondents had not been engaged in any research projects where volunteers were involved in the process. A minority of the researchers had participated in projects were volunteers had collected data (18%), been involved in internal or external communication (16%), contributed project ideas (14%) and/or formulated research questions (11%). Nearly four out of ten respondents (37%) had heard about CS prior to the survey. The researchers were more positive towards having parts of the research process open to citizen observation, rather than open to citizen influence/participation. Our results show that CS is a far from well-known concept among Swedish researchers. And while those who have heard about CS are generally positive towards it, researchers overall are hesitant to invite citizens to take part in the research process.


2021 ◽  
Vol 317 ◽  
pp. 05009
Author(s):  
Aïcha Boufenchoucha ◽  
Oktiva Herry Chandra

This study explained how English Master-2 students at Jijel-University dealt with problems and impacts when writing their dissertations and research papers during the Corona virus pandemic. The following research questions are identified as: what obstacles and effects has the Covid-19 crisis had on the research papers writing process of EFL Master Students, what coping strategies have teachers, students, and what administration used to avoid anxiety and ensure academic productivity? A questionnaire was administered to 25 Students. This inquiry is significant because, it documents the unique experience of research writing under Covid-19 pandemic and seeks to unravel the challenges and impacts of this situation on the graduating students to sensitize educational authorities and teachers about them in the view of averting them in the future and ensuring a better preparation for such eventualities in this unstable world. The results showed that Covid-19 pandemic had negative effects on the process of written a research papers at university, Students lacked the accessibility of some sources, and they had to carry out their study on an online platform and limit the sample size to fewer students, and there was a significant disruption in the provision of the needed atmosphere to do an experimental study.


2020 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bridget Grogan

This article reports on and discusses the experience of a contrapuntal approach to teaching poetry, explored during 2016 and 2017 in a series of introductory poetry lectures in the English 1 course at the University of Johannesburg. Drawing together two poems—Warsan Shire’s “Home” and W.H. Auden’s “Refugee Blues”—in a week of teaching in each year provided an opportunity for a comparison that encouraged students’ observations on poetic voice, racial identity, transhistorical and transcultural human experience, trauma and empathy. It also provided an opportunity to reflect on teaching practice within the context of decoloniality and to acknowledge the need for ongoing change and review in relation to it. In describing the contrapuntal teaching and study of these poems, and the different methods employed in the respective years of teaching them, I tentatively suggest that canonical Western and contemporary postcolonial poems may reflect on each other in unique and transformative ways. I further posit that poets and poems that engage students may open the way into initially “less relevant” yet ultimately rewarding poems, while remaining important objects of study in themselves.


Author(s):  
Jeasik Cho

This chapter discusses three ongoing issues related to the evaluation of qualitative research. First, the chapter considers whether a set of evaluation criteria is either determinative or changeable. Due to the evolving nature of qualitative research, it is likely that the way in which qualitative research is evaluated can change—not all at once, but gradually. Second, qualitative research has been criticized by newly resurrected positivists whose definitions of scientific research and evaluation criteria are narrow. “Politics of evidence” and a recent big-tent evaluation strategy are examined. Last, this chapter analyzes how validity criteria of qualitative research are incorporated into the evaluation of mixed methods research. The elements of qualitative research seem to be fairly represented but are largely treated as trivial. A criterion, the fit of research questions to design, is identified as distinctive in the review guide of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-383
Author(s):  
Rachel Clements ◽  
Sarah Frankcom

Sarah Frankcom worked at the Royal Exchange Theatre in Manchester between 2000 and 2019, and was the venue’s first sole Artistic Director from 2014. In this interview conducted in summer 2019, she discusses her time at the theatre and what she has learned from leading a major cultural organization and working with it. She reflects on a number of her own productions at this institution, including Hamlet, The Skriker, Our Town, and Death of a Salesman, and discusses the way the theatre world has changed since the beginning of her career as she looks forward to being the director of LAMDA. Rachel Clements lectures on theatre at the University of Manchester. She has published on playwrights Caryl Churchill and Martin Crimp, among others, and has edited Methuen student editions of Lucy Prebble’s Enron and Joe Penhall’s Blue/Orange. She is Book Reviews editor of NTQ.


Author(s):  
John D. Evans ◽  
Christopher Bang

The authors introduce the EFAB™ manufacturing process originally invented at the University of Southern California and currently being commercialized by MEMGen Corporation. They discuss its significant recent evolution as an alternative to conventional microdevice manufacturing technologies, suggest a range of geometries and applications that are enabled by this process, and develop the case that EFAB represents a fundamental shift in the way the microdevices are manufactured.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina L Kezios

Abstract In any research study, there is an underlying research process that should begin with a clear articulation of the study’s goal. The study’s goal drives this process; it determines many study features including the estimand of interest, the analytic approaches that can be used to estimate it, and which coefficients, if any, should be interpreted. “Misalignment” can occur in this process when analytic approaches and/or interpretations do not match the study’s goal; misalignment is potentially more likely to arise when study goals are ambiguously framed. This study documented misalignment in the observational epidemiologic literature and explored how the framing of study goals contributes to its occurrence. The following misalignments were examined: 1) use of an inappropriate variable selection approach for the goal (a “goal-methods” misalignment) and 2) interpretation of coefficients of variables for which causal considerations were not made (e.g., Table 2 Fallacy, a “goal-interpretation” misalignment). A random sample of 100 articles published 2014-2018 in the top 5 general epidemiology journals were reviewed. Most reviewed studies were causal, with either explicitly stated (13/103, 13%) or associationally-framed (71/103, 69%) aims. Full alignment of goal-methods-interpretations was infrequent (9/103, 9%), although clearly causal studies (5/13, 38%) were more often fully aligned than seemingly causal ones (3/71, 4%). Goal-methods misalignments were common (34/103, 33%), but most frequently, methods were insufficiently reported to draw conclusions (47/103, 46%). Goal-interpretations misalignments occurred in 31% (32/103) of studies and occurred less often when the methods were aligned (2/103, 2%) compared with when the methods were misaligned (13/103, 13%).


2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 95-105
Author(s):  
Thees F Spreckelsen ◽  
Mariska Van Der Horst

Significance testing is widely used in social science research. It has long been criticised on statistical grounds and problems in the research practice. This paper is an applied researchers’ response to Gorard's (2016) ‘Damaging real lives through obstinacy: re-emphasising why significance testing is wrong’ in Sociological Research Online 21(1). He participates in this debate concluding from the issues raised that the use and teaching of significance testing should cease immediately. In that, he goes beyond a mere ban of significance testing, but claims that researchers still doing this are being unethical. We argue that his attack on applied scientists is unlikely to improve social science research and we believe he does not sufficiently prove his claims. In particular we are concerned that with a narrow focus on statistical significance, Gorard misses alternative, if not more important, explanations for the often-lamented problems in social science research. Instead, we argue that it is important to take into account the full research process, not just the step of data analysis, to get a better idea of the best evidence regarding a hypothesis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document