An Alternative Approach for Designing and Teaching Communication Skills to University of Technology Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the contents and teaching strategies of communication skills courses at a South African higher institution: Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT). It seeks to understand why the courses have not been very responsive to increasing academic and professional challenges undergraduate students’ experience at this university. Also, it proposes alternative contents and methods of teaching that can ensure that these courses remain relevant to the diversity of vocational diploma programmes offered by the university. The article is written against the backdrop of conceptions of ‘unpreparedness’ and ‘disadvantage’ repeatedly used by academics of this institution to justify the poor academic performance of students. The article draws on data gleaned from sustained one-on-one interviews with fifteen students and four communication skills lecturers as well as on course reflections with 1 st year students collected during one academic year. This empirical data revealed that Communication courses provide a unique space for the development of generic cognitive skills which are critical for academic development and which can put graduates at a competitive advantage in the workplace. However it argues that for these courses to provide students with lifelong academic and professional skills, existing curricula and teaching approaches should be revised. This is because the current delivery methods are seemingly very pedantic, less stimulating and do not promote higher-order thinking in students. This piece therefore recommends a model, which focuses on the development of metacognitive skills such as critical thinking, creative and innovative thinking as well as problem solving.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".