0
EN
1
المرجع الالكتروني للمعلوماتية

Grammar

Tenses

Present

Present Simple

Present Continuous

Present Perfect

Present Perfect Continuous

Past

Past Simple

Past Continuous

Past Perfect

Past Perfect Continuous

Future

Future Simple

Future Continuous

Future Perfect

Future Perfect Continuous

Parts Of Speech

Nouns

Countable and uncountable nouns

Verbal nouns

Singular and Plural nouns

Proper nouns

Nouns gender

Nouns definition

Concrete nouns

Abstract nouns

Common nouns

Collective nouns

Definition Of Nouns

Animate and Inanimate nouns

Nouns

Verbs

Stative and dynamic verbs

Finite and nonfinite verbs

To be verbs

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Auxiliary verbs

Modal verbs

Regular and irregular verbs

Action verbs

Verbs

Adverbs

Relative adverbs

Interrogative adverbs

Adverbs of time

Adverbs of place

Adverbs of reason

Adverbs of quantity

Adverbs of manner

Adverbs of frequency

Adverbs of affirmation

Adverbs

Adjectives

Quantitative adjective

Proper adjective

Possessive adjective

Numeral adjective

Interrogative adjective

Distributive adjective

Descriptive adjective

Demonstrative adjective

Pronouns

Subject pronoun

Relative pronoun

Reflexive pronoun

Reciprocal pronoun

Possessive pronoun

Personal pronoun

Interrogative pronoun

Indefinite pronoun

Emphatic pronoun

Distributive pronoun

Demonstrative pronoun

Pronouns

Pre Position

Preposition by function

Time preposition

Reason preposition

Possession preposition

Place preposition

Phrases preposition

Origin preposition

Measure preposition

Direction preposition

Contrast preposition

Agent preposition

Preposition by construction

Simple preposition

Phrase preposition

Double preposition

Compound preposition

prepositions

Conjunctions

Subordinating conjunction

Correlative conjunction

Coordinating conjunction

Conjunctive adverbs

conjunctions

Interjections

Express calling interjection

Phrases

Sentences

Clauses

Part of Speech

Grammar Rules

Passive and Active

Preference

Requests and offers

wishes

Be used to

Some and any

Could have done

Describing people

Giving advices

Possession

Comparative and superlative

Giving Reason

Making Suggestions

Apologizing

Forming questions

Since and for

Directions

Obligation

Adverbials

invitation

Articles

Imaginary condition

Zero conditional

First conditional

Second conditional

Third conditional

Reported speech

Demonstratives

Determiners

Direct and Indirect speech

Linguistics

Phonetics

Phonology

Linguistics fields

Syntax

Morphology

Semantics

pragmatics

History

Writing

Grammar

Phonetics and Phonology

Semiotics

Reading Comprehension

Elementary

Intermediate

Advanced

Teaching Methods

Teaching Strategies

Assessment

قم بتسجيل الدخول اولاً لكي يتسنى لك الاعجاب والتعليق.

Recasting the curriculum

المؤلف:  Rob Cowdroy & Anthony Williams

المصدر:  Enhancing Teaching and Learning through Assessment

الجزء والصفحة:  P91-C9

2025-06-14

730

+

-

20

Recasting the curriculum

These four examples illustrate the pre-eminence of thinking-as-behavior ability in practice, which is characteristically of a high-level conceptualization/ prognostication nature (Bergquist, 1999). However, this thinking behavior must be informed by theoretical knowledge at a lower schematization and diagnostic thinking level, referred to here as facilitative thinking. Further, the four examples above indicate that the behavioral thinking in each case is clearly domain specific to each discipline and, logically, the facilitative thinking that connects domain-specific theory to domain-specific thinking behavior must itself be domain-specific. Thus, achievement of the learning outcome objectives in the curricula requires three distinct forms of domain-specific thinking: domain specific knowledge-recall, domain-specific facilitative thinking and domain-specific thinking behavior. Usually, however, only the first is explicit in the syllabus and the other two are at best vague learning outcome objectives unsupported by appropriate syllabi.

 

The essential roles of facilitative thinking and thinking behavior seriously challenge conventional notions of lower-level and higher-level classifications of learning. They also challenge conventional notions of competency standards, competency-based assessment and transparency that underpin the present direction of institutional quality assurance policy and initiatives.

 

In order to adequately address these thinking abilities in context, the authors propose a "new-order" of levels of task ability that should be identified in the learning outcome objectives as follows:

lower-level task abilities are typically procedural, such as ability to follow set procedures. Facilitative thinking at this level is characteristically making linear connections between set knowledge/theory and set procedures. Thinking behavior required at this level is characteristically data collection, entry and ranking, informed by recall/recognition of domain-specific knowledge.

 

mid-level task abilities are typically analytic/ diagnostic and characterized by finding explanations/ solutions for phenomena/problems within a limited range of set theories. Facilitative thinking at this level is typically lateral thinking that makes connections between alternative abstract theories and applications. Thinking behavior required at this level is typically lateral, analytic and diagnostic "problem-solving", informed by recall/recognition of domain-specific knowledge and procedures. Both facilitative thinking and thinking behavior required at this level are significantly more demanding and more domain-specific than in lower-level task abilities, and must be identified as particular objectives accompanied by particular domain-specific syllabi, if problem-solving ability learning outcome objectives are to be met.

 

higher-level task abilities are typically anticipatory projections (prognostics, designs, strategies) to meet multiple complex requirements and to define complex future solutions. Thinking behavior at this level is typically individualistic, conceptual and multi-lateral, informed by both recall/recognition of multiple bodies of domain-specific knowledge and the outcome of mid-level analytic task activities. The facilitative thinking requirements at this level are multilateral, very demanding and very domain-specific, requiring special development, and they must be identified as specific learning outcome objectives accompanied by special domain-specific syllabi.

 

From the authors' perspective, therefore, both the learning outcome objectives and syllabi within curricula for effective education that meets societal expectations of graduate quality must be re-cast with increased emphasis on both facilitative thinking and thinking behavior in order to provide the essential underpinnings to practice, particularly in the professions, business and the sciences.

لا توجد تعليقات بعد

ما رأيك بالمقال : كن أول من يعلق على هذا المحتوى

اخر الاخبار

اشترك بقناتنا على التلجرام ليصلك كل ما هو جديد