1 / 25

Hypertext writing, observational learning, and inquiry learning as supplementary teaching methods

Hypertext writing, observational learning, and inquiry learning as supplementary teaching methods. Martine Braaksma, Gert Rijlaarsdam & Michel Couzijn Graduate School of Teaching and Learning, University of Amsterdam. Background of the project Overview of the lesson series

garrison-santana
Download Presentation

Hypertext writing, observational learning, and inquiry learning as supplementary teaching methods

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Hypertext writing, observational learning, and inquiry learning as supplementary teaching methods Martine Braaksma, Gert Rijlaarsdam & Michel Couzijn Graduate School of Teaching and Learning, University of Amsterdam

  2. Background of the project Overview of the lesson series Hands on: inquiry learning Hands on: (observation of) writing activities Discussion of experiences Program of the workshop

  3. “Digital text in which information is organized as a network and in which text blocks are connected via hyperlinks Hypertext

  4. Texts on the Internet en encyclopedias on CD ROM For instance

  5. Some examples of hypertexts Introduction Standpoint Definition good charity Pro arguments Counter arguments

  6. Examples (continued) Main arguments Conclusion Standpoint

  7. Writing skills Content knowledge Effects of hypertext writing versus linear writing on:

  8. Beneficial effects on: Writing skills (writing processes and text quality): Hypertext writing: students learn to cope with linearization process Hypertext writing: more planning and analysis than linear writing More planning & analysis = better product quality of hypertext and linear text Content knowledge (topic of writing): Hypertext writing: more knowledge transforming activities Hypertext writing

  9. Instead of writing themselves Learning from other writers at work (models) Different aspects of writing are focused on (e.g., starting, thinking of arguments, thinking of a title, revising) So: three comparisons: Linear writing Hypertext writing Observational learning (observation of (hypertext) writing activities) Extra didactic intervention: Observational learning

  10. Design

  11. Five lessons (about 60 minutes each) on writing argumentative texts Three conditions (HYP, LIN and OBS) All activities in class, no homework Theme: ‘good charities’, issue about connection commercial lotteries and good charities, documentation provided First 2 lessons, focus on content knowledge based on ‘inquiry learning’ (Hillocks, 1986) exactly the same for the three conditions Lesson 3-5: same learning activities, but writing in HYP, LIN or OBS-format Main overview lesson series

  12. No providing of knowledge by the teacher Students discover knowledge themselves Active interaction with subject Focus on criteria development, formulation of definitions Inquiry learning

  13. Main focus in lessons

  14. Good charities cards Writing a definition Evaluation of experiences A look at the ‘jury game’ Hands on: Inquiry learning

  15. Observation of hypertext writing Observation of thinking of a title Evaluation of experiences A look at the final writing instruction Hands on: (Hypertext) writing and observational learning

  16. Experiences during hands on and/or own experiences Questions, suggestions Implementation in own lessons? Discussion

  17. Lesson materials, research plan, pictures, examples hypertexts, slides at: http://www.ilo.uva.nl/homepages/martine.htm Email: braaksma@uva.nl More information

  18. Study 1: Effects of HYP versus LIN on writing skills and content knowledge (N = 105) Study 2: Differences between HYP and LIN writing processes (N=18) Study 3: Effects of HYP, OBS and LIN on writing skills and content knowledge (N = 139). Data analysis in progress Some results

  19. Global Text Quality (school mark between 0-10), based on requirements that were presented to the students, e.g., Goal of the text Attractiveness Awareness of the reader Study 1: Effects on Text Quality (NB of a linear text)

  20. Results study 1: Effects on global Text Quality

  21. Study 2. Differences between HYP and LIN writing: ‘Text measures’

  22. Study 2. Differences between HYP and LIN writing: ‘Process measures’

  23. Study 2. Differences between HYP and LIN writing: ‘Process measures’

  24. Different process characteristics for hypertext writing and linear writing HYP: + sentences, paragraphs, writing time More fluent writing, due to argumentation structure = document structure? LIN: + pausing time, longer pauses Involved in linearization process, formulation of linguistic indicators/connectives? Discussion study 2

  25. Argumentation structure

More Related