I-Click Photography: An Exploration of Student Perspectives on Learning and Engagement
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
As has been seen in previous research, school engagement is a necessary factor in student success (Al-Hendawi, 2012; Baker, Derrer, Davis, Dinklage-Travis, & Linder, 2001; Boyle & Lipman, 2002; Covell, 2009; Gamoran, 1992; Simons-Morton & Chen, 2009; Willms, 1999a; Wolfe & Mash, 2006). However, students with emotional and/or behavioural difficulties tend to have lower rates of academic success and school completion (Wagner et al., 2003; Kauffman, 2008; Ryan, Pierce, & Mooney, 2008). Shedding light on how these students perceive their learning environments can help to facilitate the development of effective prevention and intervention programs that seek to promote success for all learners. \nThis research study aims to explore students’ perspectives on their learning environments at school, through the use of participatory action research (PAR). In collaboration with the teachers and parents, a photography project took place at an elementary school in the Montreal area in Canada. Seven elementary students from grade one to grade six, who had been identified as having socio-emotional difficulties participated and took photographs of what was most important to them about learning at school. Students were interviewed about their photographs and were then invited to share their stories and photographs with their teachers, parents, and peers through a final closing photo exhibition. Teacher focus groups were also conducted in order to understand how these students’ environments may play a role in their learning. \nUsing grounded theory to guide this qualitative analysis of the students’ visual storytelling narratives, we explored emerging themes and patterns from these narratives to understand student perceptions. Interestingly, consistent with other research pointing to the importance of family-school collaboration, students’ perspectives of their school environment seems to always be coupled with how it relates to their home lives. Secondly, although this study discussed learning and engagement, student narratives seem to focus more on social relationships as highly influential in their school life; the students did not seem to include much on academic engagement. Finally case study summaries using focus group discussions and field notes reveal the strengths and challenges that each child was perceived to have, as well as how each child engaged with the methodology of using photography as a tool to express various needs and wants. \nOverall it seems that the findings may suggest that these students put other forms of learning and engagement at the forefront of their school experience. With this understanding, a supportive environment can be created for these students and adapted to their perceptions of engagement in school. Final discussions include reflections on the methodology as a school engagement activity.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».