Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019of Community Colleges:Interstitial Practices in Developmental Reading and Career Technical EducationSonya L. Armstrong, Texas State UniversityNorman A. Stahl. Northern Illinois UniversityJames R. King. University of South FloridaM. Joanne Kantner, Kishwaukee CollegeMary Perkins. Elgin Community Coll Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019egeBetsy Sobin. Illinois Valley Conununity CollegeRuth Dalrymple. Texas State University43466Center for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literacy and LaLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
nguage Northern Illinois UniversityDeKalb. Illinois1Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ of Community Colleges:Interstitial Practices in Developmental NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019s. The study was designed to answer the following research question: "What constitutes college-level text-readiness?” The study design involved two simultaneous threads of data collection: one for career technical education (CTE) courses, and one for developmental reading ( DR) courses.Both qualitat Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019ive and quantitative methods were used in this investigation, with data sources including an online faculty survey, classroom observations, faculty anLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
d student focus groups, and course artifacts. Data analysis involved individual reviews of all data from within each data source, and a full data analNORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019es in class formats: DR classes generally followed what might be considered traditional GE liberal arts-style course formats with discussion as the primary mode. By contrast, CTE courses followed lab shop and application-foci.2Differences in text types: DR courses used multiple texts across a variet Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019y of text types: the majority of texts were workbooks, novels, and some instructor-designed compilations of GE content. By contrast, the CTE faculty uLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
sually made use of a single traditional (for CTE) textbook that was used primarily as a resource or reference, or for immediate use in application of NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019t the semester focused on reading and study strategics, to include text organization and structure, vocabulary-development, note-taking approaches, and strategies for dealing with graphics and visuals in text. C1L faculty also reported including strategy instruction, but the depth and Inning of the Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019instruction ranged based on the strategy type. The majority of the CTF. instructors focused on covering the content of the assigned reading material iLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
n class or via alternate sources (workarounds).4Text differences across the areas: One key finding that emerged from the systematic text analyses was NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019 text samples frequently scored at higher Lexile text measure scores than did the DR course texts. Students viewed these required course texts as being both information source and an unnecessary expense. The texts examined in the study included more than traditional texts, though. For example, for G Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019TE courses, they included a camshaft in auto, a drip bag and mannequin in nursing, and the help feature of a software program in industrial technologyLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
courses. Texts were used in very different ways across these areas, as the text usually formed the basis for the class discussions in DR courses wherNORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019eadiness: Both DR and CTE faculty reported having expectations that most students should be able to navigate and comprehend text independently at the outset of their specific course or for college reading in general. However, both faculty groups (DR and CTE) also reported that most students were3unr Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019eady for college literacy practices, and reported making adjustments to their instruction as a result. In short, faculty are holding and acting upon tLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
wo contradictory expectations simultaneously. Students recognized the increase in literacy expectations from high school to college, noting especiallyNORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019reased amount and difficulty of reading in college.6Faculty assumptions about student attitudes about reading: Both DR and CTE faculty perceived students' attitudes toward reading as generally negative. Both sets of faculties noted some differences in attitude across different populations of student Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019s, and provided specific student characteristics and demographics to explain these differences. Both groups of faculties made adjustments in their couLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
rses based on their perceptions of students’ negative attitudes (as well as the perceived lack of text-readiness). Despite a widespread faculty assumpNORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019 that they read more than 75% of the required reading, and only a very small minority—-just three who responded to the question—reported reading none of the assigned reading.7Use of workarounds in CTE: Because of the importance placed on content knowledge, CTE faculty tended to provide alternate sou Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019rces of information (workarounds), including PowerPoint slides, instructor-prepared lecture notes, and study guides. CTE faculty made it clear that hoLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
w information was acquired was less important than that it was acquired. Other stated reasons for the workarounds included faculty assumptions of low NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 20198Variation with instruction on disciplinary/professional literacy practices: DR faculty reported that they attempted to prepare students for the varied literacy demands across GE core disciplinary contexts. DR faculty did not include discussion of specialized language and literacy processes such as Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019those enacted within CTE areas. Although three-fourths of CTE faculty reported providing some reading instruction, the majority did not directly addreLiteracy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019
ss how experts in theừ respective fields read or utilized texts, a central tenet in disciplinary approaches to literacy. Students reported that instruNORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ o Literacy in the In-Between Spaces of Community Colleges January 2019 in literacy practices across disciplines and areas.NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITYCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language and LiteracyTechnical Report No. 2Literacy in the ‘In-Between Spaces’ oGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook