reflective writing uwa

EAP UWA CELT

English for Academic Purposes, Centre for English Language Teaching

Latest from the Blog

Module c week 3: reviewing your learning.

Task: Return to your initial Week 1 Reflective writing post and revise it by reflecting on what you’ve learned on this course. You should include: any new insights key steps/stages of your language and learning development what you will take away with you that you didn’t have when you first came to the class a comparison to…

Module C Week 2: Effective Study Techniques

Task: For your second reflective writing entry, you will describe a discussion with another student about good (and not so good) study techniques. First, you should read and take notes on an article and a video from one of the links below: Skills and strategies for improving spoken English 10 tips you need to know about learning a…

Module C Week 1: How do you learn?

What is reflective writing? Studies show that our thinking is shaped by many things: the values of our family and culture for example, our religion, the media, past teachers and so on. Reflection means thinking about your thoughts and actions, examining your own beliefs, attitudes, and assumptions about your understanding of a topic, situation or problem.…

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.

Email Address

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Follow Following
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Assessing Reflective Writing: Analysis of Reflective Writing in an Engineering Course

Peer Review is used in a first year engineering design course to assess a series of reflective writing entries on the engineering design process and teamwork. Peer review can be beneficial for both reviewer and writer in increasing their awareness of how well they are communicating their learning, and, in providing opportunities to gain insights from each others' experiences and understandings of the engineering design process. However, there is limited literature on objective assessment of reflections about the engineering design process. This paper explores the question, what are the linguistic features that distinguish different levels of reflection? The first stage of the investigation was a text analysis of reflective writing representing both high and low peer review scores, to identify similar and dissimilar linguistic features in the texts. While the analysis is ongoing, preliminary findings have revealed clear differences between "good" and "poor" reflective writing. These...

Related Papers

Carolina Mirallas

Scientific writing is a very complex albeit crucial activity for researchers who need to share findings and become a part of, or maintain, a position as members of a wide international discourse community. Since most scientific communication happens in English, the task of writing in this foreign language for researchers in Argentinian universities is a challenge for both researchers themselves and teachers of English who need to facilitate the writing path for students. With increasing evidence of its usefulness, Genre Pedagogy has been shown to greatly improve EFL (English as a Foreign Language) writing. In this research, the Sydney School Genre Pedagogy (SSGP) approach as offered by the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) perspective is applied to the teaching of writing, with a twofold aim. A linguistic objective is pursued in analysing student-produced abstracts and Scientific Research Articles (SRAs), with a special focus on interpersonal meanings and rhetorical components in student-produced scientific discourse. Second, this investigation assesses the effectiveness of SFL Genre Pedagogy in the teaching of one of the most important scientific genres used for the communication of findings, i.e. the SRA. To achieve these objectives, a genre-based scientific writing course was taught to researchers in Facultad de Ciencias Físico Matemáticas y Naturales (FCFMyN) at Universidad Nacional de San Luis (UNSL) on how to write an SRA, having SSGP as the informing theoretical framework. A comparative Appraisal analysis of students' abstracts was conducted considering before and after versions. A lexicogrammatical and rhetorical description was also carried out of student-produced Titles and Introduction sections of the SRA. For the second aim, students' perceptions of the teaching cycle were collected in surveys during and after the course to assess the effectiveness of the SFL Genre Pedagogy. Students' response discourse was analysed in terms of Appraisal. In relation to the description of students' scientific discourse, abstracts produced after the course display appropriate use of Appraisal resources. After-course abstracts show a larger amount of ATTITUDE and GRADUATION elements, as well as the incorporation of rhetorical components when compared with before-course samples. Titles written by students closely resemble the patterns and semantics of those of disciplinary sample models. Introductions exhibit highly frequent realisations used to establish and occupy the niche of investigation. In addition, there is evidence of students' increased awareness of rhetorical constituents in Introductions. In connection with the assessment of the SSGP, students' answers to surveys show that entities of the course which were evaluated positively as "useful" include class activities, like Joint writing and Text analysis, and materials, such as language repertoires. Among negatively appraised entities, language contents and exercises can be mentioned, which were perceived as "difficult". Time was evaluated negatively as "not enough" in relation to contents taught in the course. Most students felt that they gained awareness on genre constituents of scientific texts, but they were not so positive about their ability to identify and use frequent lexicogrammatical resources in SRA constituents. As to students' scientific discourse, we may state that students were capable of producing appropriate texts, as they deployed frequent and expected Appraisal and rhetorical constituents for abstracts and SRAs. In relation to their answers to surveys, it is possible to assess the teaching of abstracts and SRA writing through the SSGP as effective. More precisely, teacher-guided activities that are jointly carried out with students were found to be the most useful. As a conclusion, the implementation of the SSGP for the teaching of scientific writing has been positive, making it a suitable methodology for a highly specialised audience like the one that took part in this study. Key Words: Abstract - Scientific Research Article - Scientific Writing - Sydney School Genre Pedagogy - SFL - EFL

Widhi Widhiyanto

Abstract This thesis is concerned with the quality of argument in lengthy academic texts. The aim of the research reported in this thesis is to better understand the ways arguments in undergraduate dissertations are constructed through the employment of a range of linguistic resources. It investigates two dissertations written by student writers who, while from very different linguistic background and educational contexts, are both neophyte participants in an increasingly global higher education market. In this research, argument refers to “a mode of thinking and composition or ‘metagenre’” (Andrews, 2005), by which undergraduate student writers create and organise meanings in the dissertations. The research is particularly interested in the textual and the interpersonal zones in academic texts where novice writers must learn in constructing effective arguments that embody the organisation of the texts as unified whole, the staging of meanings to achieve texts’ communicative purposes, and the enactment of the writers’ engagement with others in the literature as they take up their positions in the discourse community. The research is underpinned primarily by comprehensive theoretical frameworks of the model of “language as social semiotic” (SFL) (Halliday, 1994, 2004). Particularly, the research draws on the Periodicity framework (Halliday, 1985b; Martin & Rose, 2007), the genre theories (Swales, 1990; Martin, 1992; Martin & Rose, 2008), and the Appraisal framework (Martin, 2000a; Martin & White, 2005) to conduct in-depth linguistic analyses on the linguistic resources utilised to construct the arguments, focusing on three-key text features: Periodicity, genre and Engagement. A complementary theory of the model of “the layout of argument” by Toulmin (1958, 2003) is utilised to assess the organisation of the elements of arguments laid out across stretches of the dissertations. This research is descriptive in nature; in which, the in-depth linguistic analysis is conducted to investigate the phenomena emerging in both texts with a view to noticing the similarities and differences in the ways the two student writers manage these tasks. It analyses an Honours dissertation from an Australian university and a dissertation written by an Indonesian student writer studying English as a foreign language (EFL) in an English department at an Indonesian university. Three-stage analyses are conducted in the top-down manner suggested by the three-key text features. Firstly, Periodicity analysis explores each dissertation to see how each student writer organises meanings as unified whole hierarchically and construct the macro-argument effectively. Secondly, genre analysis examines three selected chapters from each dissertation to see how writers stage meanings to achieve their communicative purposes in the meso-level of argument. Thirdly, analysis on Engagement in the sentence level (i.e. micro-level of argument) is conducted to samples from each text those that potentially show how the writers engage with readers and other writers in the field. The research uncovers that the two writers employ linguistic resources to organise meanings to construct arguments in both similar and different ways. The Periodicity analysis reveals that both writers structure their texts at the macro-level of arguments according to conventional ways of organising dissertations. This suggests commonality in modelling practices across the students’ institutions. However, genre analysis and Appraisal analysis show important differences that emerged in how students structure their texts at the meso-level (at chapter, section and paragraph levels), and in how the writers accomplish negotiation by their employment of evaluative language at the micro-level of sentence and below. The arguments within these levels are differently organised that might influence their soundness (quality). These practices indicate the dissimilarities the way each discourse community employs linguistic resources in academic setting, and the academic discourse practices within communities where each student writer participated in. The thesis contributes to the understanding of how arguments are constructed across lengthy texts through (i) choices in the ways meanings are hierarchically organised at various levels of texts, and (ii) in the ways meanings are staged to achieve the texts’ communicative purposes, together with (iii) how writers engage with others in respect to other voices in the discourse within the academic context. The research extends existing explanations of text development and its relations to genre staging. This staging is verified by the evaluative linguistic analysis in which the staging is signposted. Pedagogically, the findings of the research contribute to the advancement of the teaching of argument in academic genre in EFL educational context. More specifically, a more nuanced approach to pedagogy is necessary in the Indonesian tertiary context.

To boldly proceed

Inggy Yuliani

Ingrid Wijeyewardene

Educational Studies in Mathematics

Betina Zolkower

How does classroom interaction support students’ apprenticeship into the ways of speaking, writing, and diagramming that constitute the practice of mathematics? We address this problem through an interpretative analysis of a whole-group conversation about alternative ways of solving a problem involving percent discounts that occurred in a sixth grade classroom. This research study draws upon Dewey’s theory of inquiry, Vygotsky’s cultural–historical psychology, Freudenthal’s realistic mathematics education, and Halliday’s systemic functional linguistics (SFL). From Freudenthal, we borrow the notions of mathematizing and guided reinvention—the former notion offers a view of mathematics as an activity of structuring subject matter and the latter one provides insights into the processes whereby mathematizing is learned and taught in the classroom. We glean from Dewey his view of reflective thinking as inquiry and the role that conversations may serve therein. We rely upon Vygotsky’s notions of a verbal thinking plane and a social phase of learning in order to reconsider the function of whole-class interaction in apprenticing students into mathematizing. Finally, SFL provides us with tools for explaining the choices of grammar and vocabulary students and teachers make as they realize meanings in whole-group conversations. Treating the selected whole-class conversation as a text, we focus our analysis on how this text came to mean what it did. Our central questions are as follows: What meanings were realized in the whole-class conversation by teacher and students and how were these meanings realized? How did the teacher’s lexico-grammatical choices guide the students’ choices? In addressing these questions, we advance an interpretation of the conversation as paradigmatic of students and teacher thinking aloud together about percents.

Social Development

Diane Phillips

Ruth Harman , Amber M. Simmons

Janine Delahunty , Pauline Jones

This paper reports a study-in-progress examining interactions in the asynchronous discussions of a post-graduate TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages) distance subject, focusing on the impact of scaffolding collaborative knowledge construction. Two complementary theories were used: sociocultural theory, which views interaction as essential to the knowledge building process, in particular dialogically between expert-novice, and students as equals; and Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) which highlights language as a meaning-making resource deployed in social interactions and allows insight into the unfolding construal of knowledge and the interpersonal relationships being enacted. The results confirmed the significant role of the instructor in shaping dialogic opportunities that move learners towards new understandings. Close attention to the unfolding language choices of the participants provides a logogenesis of the online discussion texts, offers fresh insights into the nature of adult learning, and into the complex relationships between the intersubjective and experiential in online learning environments.

Moosa Ahmed H A S S A N Bait Ali Sulaiman

A case of “multiple intelligences.” Iranian EFL …

Jaleh Hassaskhah

RELATED PAPERS

Prof. Reima Al-Jarf

Mansura Mahmuda

Mansour Amini

Zak Lancaster

Ihtiara Fitrianingsih

Ali Al-Issa

Internet-mediated intercultural foreign …

Steven L Thorne

E-Structural

estructural FIB UDINUS , inggy yuliani pribady

Rianti Situmorang

Joshua Schulze

Gumarding Gumarding

3rd international conference on educational and educational psychology UK

Kelly-Ann Allen

Journal of Faculty of Letters and Humanities

Arman Abednia

Derek Irwin

Redfame Publishing

Shamala Paramasivam , Muhamad Izzat Rahim

Alirio Angarita

Zehra Gabillon

Proceedings of ISFC35

Jorge Arús-Hita

Rita Inderawatirudy , afshin soori , Parviz Ahmadi , Biook Behnam

iskhak iskhak , Muhammad A Budiman , Kurniawan Yudhi Nugroho , Bowo2609yahoo Com

Dina Tsagari

Alessia Valfredini

Muhammad Thahir

Anngieline Lu alias Angelia Lu

Peter Serdyukov

Claire Urbach

Language in a digital age: Be not afraid of digitality

Maria Grazia Sindoni

Dirk Ifenthaler

Tom Morton , Ana Llinares

Journal of The American Society for Information Science and Technology

Casey Whitelaw

US-China Education Review A & B

Miranda Legg

Lacrimoo Tonatilo

Estrella Montolio , Ben Clarke , Anne McCabe

Alexander Mikroyannidis

Donatella Persico , Karl Steffens

Phanlapa Khathayut

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2023

First reflections: third-year dentistry students' introduction to reflective practice

Affiliation.

• 1 Medical Education, Education Centre, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia. [email protected]
• PMID: 23279416
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0579.2012.00763.x

Introduction: To develop both professionally and personally, health professionals need to build essential skills in reflective practice. Educators generally agree that these skills should be developed as part of curricula for health professional students. The aims were to introduce reflective practice to third-year dentistry students and to evaluate the students' self-perceived reflective skills before and after their reflective activities.

Materials and methods: Using a written questionnaire, third-year dentistry students' perceptions of reflective practice were gathered before and after their first clinic placement. Students also completed two reflective writing pieces about their clinical placements.

Results: The students' reflective writing pieces were allocated into one of the three categories: non-reflector, reflector and critical reflector. Content analysis of students' perceptions of reflective practice revealed nine themes. Eight main themes emerged from students' suggestions for improving their reflective abilities.

Discussion and conclusion: Issues around the assessment of reflective writing are discussed, and students' suggestions for improving their reflective abilities are presented.

© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

• Curriculum*
• Education, Dental / methods*
• Qualitative Research
• Self-Assessment*
• Students, Dental / psychology*
• Surveys and Questionnaires