MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1237348 · doi:10.1177/070674377502000410

How Has a Literacy Focus Changed Pedagogy across the Curriculum in Sydney Catholic Secondary Schools, 1995-2000?.

2001· article· en· W1237348 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
T. J. McMullen

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Psychiatric Association Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueEducation Systems and Policy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCurriculumLiteracySyllabusPedagogySociologyMathematics educationReading (process)Professional developmentPsychologyPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Prior to about 1995, few secondary schools teachers outside the English KLA (Key Learning Areas) in Sydney's Catholic schools consciously focused on the development of literacy in their teaching approaches. By the mid-1990s however, a number of educational perspectives (e.g. genre approaches, teaching/learning cycles integrating content with literacy skills, different students' learning styles, explicit methods of teaching literacy) had converged to produce pedagogical approaches that were more concrete and more easily understood than had been the case with the Language Across the Curriculum policies of earlier decades. In particular this has involved teaching writing and reading through an understanding of text types. National Professional Development funding (1994-7) was instrumental in training a large number of school-based facilitators in pedagogical approaches utilizing a number of written text types. After this the Sydney Catholic Education Office developed a Secondary Writing Position Paper outlining the knowledge about text types already possessed by incoming Year 7 students as a result of the new English K-6 Syllabus, and explaining how secondary teachers could develop these further in their specific subjects. A Secondary Literacy Strategy for 1999-2001 was established to provide funding for school-based professional development and assistance in analyzing Year 7 ELLA (English Language and Literacy Assessment) test results and providing follow-up at cohort and individual level. The paper concludes with examples of changed pedagogy in Sydney Catholic secondary schools. (Author/RS) How Has a Literacy Focus Changed Pedagogy Across the Curriculum in Sydney Catholic Secondary Schools: 1995-2000? T. J. McMullen Sydney Catholic Education Office, NSW Paper presented at the AATE/ALEA Joint National Conference in Hobart, 12-15 July 2001 Abstract Prior to about 1995, few secondary teachers outside the English KLA in Sydney Catholic schools consciously focused on the development of literacy in their teaching approaches. By the mid '90s however, a number of educational perspectives (eg genre approaches, teaching/learning cycles integrating content with literacy skills, different students' learning styles, explicit methods of teaching literacy, etc.) had converged to produce pedagogical approaches that were more concrete and more easily understood than had been the case with the Language Across the Curriculum policies of earlier decades. In particular this has involved teaching writing and reading through an understanding of text types. National Professional Development funding (1994-7) was instrumental in training a large number of school-based facilitators in pedagogical approaches utilising a number of written text types. After this the Sydney Catholic Education Office developed a Secondary Writing Position Paper outlining the knowledge about text types already possessed by incoming Year 7 students as a result of the new English K-6 Syllabus, and explaining how secondary teachers could develop these further in their specific subjects. A Secondary Literacy Strategy for 1999-2001 was established to provide funding for school-based professional development and assistance in analysing Year 7 ELLA test results and providing follow-up at cohort and individual level.Prior to about 1995, few secondary teachers outside the English KLA in Sydney Catholic schools consciously focused on the development of literacy in their teaching approaches. By the mid '90s however, a number of educational perspectives (eg genre approaches, teaching/learning cycles integrating content with literacy skills, different students' learning styles, explicit methods of teaching literacy, etc.) had converged to produce pedagogical approaches that were more concrete and more easily understood than had been the case with the Language Across the Curriculum policies of earlier decades. In particular this has involved teaching writing and reading through an understanding of text types. National Professional Development funding (1994-7) was instrumental in training a large number of school-based facilitators in pedagogical approaches utilising a number of written text types. After this the Sydney Catholic Education Office developed a Secondary Writing Position Paper outlining the knowledge about text types already possessed by incoming Year 7 students as a result of the new English K-6 Syllabus, and explaining how secondary teachers could develop these further in their specific subjects. A Secondary Literacy Strategy for 1999-2001 was established to provide funding for school-based professional development and assistance in analysing Year 7 ELLA test results and providing follow-up at cohort and individual level. (see http://schoolsnet.syd.catholic.edu.au/Recsite/extrapages/literacy.htm.) This paper will conclude with examples of changed pedagogy in Sydney Catholic secondary schools. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) *This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. BEST COPY AVAILABLE 2 PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,156
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,310

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,012
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,002
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0010,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,337
Écart entre enseignants0,317 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2001
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Psychiatric Association JournalMême sujetEducation Systems and PolicyTravaux en français237 207