|
Peer Review and Feedback of MA pedagogic documentation教育学文献的同行评审与反馈
Author:作者：
Peer Reviewer:同行评审：
Please provide comments on your personal reflections as a result of reading the work:请就阅读本书后的个人思考提出意见：
在过去有关镜子测试的研究中，研究人员提出并询问了有关孩子行为的问题，然后评估了孩子的表现。然而，XX认为直接向儿童提问会使儿童难以表达清楚，这可能影响研究结果的正确性。XX建议用密切观察的方法来了解孩子在镜子前的行为，这更有利于发现孩子的真正兴趣和想法。XX的这一建议意义重大，因为其他研究也表达了类似的观点，例如Asendorpf（1996）指出，传统测试的缺点在于，它们会导致错误的否定，因为有些孩子可以通过镜子来识别自己，但由于个性或心理特点，他们不采取标记导向的行为，因为老师的鼓励和指导，这样的孩子不应被视为不认知者。XX提出的密切观察法在一定程度上可以避免假阴性。
In past research related to mirror tests, the researchers prompted and asked questions about the children’s behavior and then evaluated the children’s performance. However, XX believed that direct questioning to children would make it difficult for the children to express clearly, which might affect the correctness of the research results. XX proposed using a close observation method to understand children’s behavior in front of mirrors, which was more conducive to discovering children’s real interests and ideas. This suggestion from XX is significant because other studies have expressed similar views, such as what Asendorpf (1996) pointed out that the shortcomings of traditional tests are that they can lead to false negatives, because some children can recognize themselves through mirrors, but because of personality or psychological characteristics, they do not take mark-directed behavior because of a teacher's encouragement and guidance, such children should not be regarded as nonrecognizers. The method of close observation proposed by XX can avoid false negatives to a certain extent.
XX认为，在具体的教学实践中运用游戏教学法，可以更好地提高孩子的任性、满足感、求知欲，更好地实现师生之间的良好关系。XX的这一观点与卡茨（1996）和弗罗贝尔的游戏理论是一致的，虽然这一观点受到了一些质疑，但XX仍然坚持这种教学方法，因为这种教学方法对于理解儿童的内心思想有着重要的意义。儿童个性的发展与儿童智慧的发展。
传统的镜像测试主要利用标记导向行为来判断儿童是否具有自我意识，但儿童在镜像中有多种行为，而不仅仅是标记导向行为。例如，XX观察到孩子们会看镜子，在镜子里做鬼脸，表达各种情绪，模仿别人的表情，甚至在镜子里自言自语。XX分析了这些行为是否能显示出儿童有自我意识，这些行为产生的机制是什么，在镜子中鼓励儿童表现出什么样的行为更有利于培养教学中的自我意识，这些都需要o有待进一步研究和解释。XX的观察对于提高幼儿教育中镜检相关研究的广度和深度具有重要意义。
XX figured that the use of play teaching method in specific teaching practices can better improve children's willlingness, satisfaction, eagerness, and can better achieve a good relationship between teachers and children. This view of XX’s is consistent with what Katz (1996) believed and Frobel's theory about play, although this view has been met with some doubts, and XX still insists on this teaching method, because such teaching method is of great significance for understanding children’s inner thoughts, the development of children's personality and the development of children's wisdom.
Traditional mirror tests mainly use mark-directed behavior to judge whether children have self-consciousness, but children have a variety of behaviors in the mirrors, not just mark-directed behavior. For example, XX observed that children would look in the mirrors and would grimacing in the mirrors, expressing all kinds of emotions, imitating the expressions of others, even talking to themselves in the mirrors. XX analyzed that whether these behaviors could show that children have self-consciousness, what mechanisms are produced by these behaviors, what kind of behavior in the mirrors that children should be encouraged to show is more conducive to fostering self-consciousness in teaching, these all need to be researched and interpreted in further research. XX's observations are very meaningful for improving the breadth and depth of studies related to mirror test in early childhood education.
XX recognized that conversations could better maintain a good relationship between teachers and children, and could better understand children’s personality, abilities to develop children's social and communication skills. However, he also found that playing with adults helps children to develop relationships with their children, and there are few conversations in the process, but they can still share ideas with their children and learn about their children’s information. His point of view shows the importance of play, which contributes to a good understanding and training of children's personality, ability and so on.
Please provide some points in the document that might need clarification, or would benefit from more development:
XX found that the use of mirror tests to cultivate children's self-consciousness feasible, but this method has also been questioned. For example, Nielsena and Dissanayakeb (2004) commented that the emergence of pretend games, mirror self-identification, synchronic imitation and delayed imitation were reflected in the normal development of human babies. They research shows that delayed imitation is considered as a prerequisite for infants and toddlers to master the other three skills. These studies show that it is not enough to train children's self-consciousness through looking in the mirrors, because the ability of mirror self-recognition is also affected by other abilities. Therefore, more comprehensive measures must be taken to cultivate children's self-consciousness.
XX suggested in his article that play such as looking at themselves in the mirrors or autodyne played a positive role in establishing a good relationship between children and teachers, but he also raised the question of what specific methods and principles could help teachers to use mirrors or autodyne to maintain a good relationship with students. The study by Tarr (2010) presents a good way to answer XX's question that play and the record of play cannot be used to satisfy the so-called teaching purpose, and it should take to stimulate and satisfy children’s curiosity as a principle, while teachers should actively participates in the process of play, instead of being an objective observer to supervise children’s play.
XX proposed in his article that documentation could demonstrate his teaching philosophy and value, as well as understand children’s performance. However, in terms of early childhood education, documentation should also have some other functions. For example, recording is not only teachers’ responsibility, but also an open collaborative process in which teachers, children and even parents can participate, which is positive for raising children's interest in learning and improving parents’ understanding and support for teachers’ work, as well as promoting teachers’ own teaching skills (Tarr, 2010).
What work with pedagogical documentation focuses is in the processes of learning, rather that knowledge or goals it aims to obtain. Learning can not be predicted, planned, supervised or evaluated based on predefined standards. Moreover, pedagogical documentation should be treated as a means to advocate children as an active meaning-maker of the world where they are in, rather than a consumer of predetermined knowledge.
Please provide some recommendations for further reading:
The future research and application of tests in early childhood education can be in-depth from three aspects. First, the influence of personality and psychological factors on the generation and cultivation of children's self-awareness should be explored, and mirror tests should be optimized to eliminate the influences of personality and psychological factors on the test results. It should also explore how to combine mirror tests and other educational methods to comprehensively develop children’s self-awareness, followed by further discussion and analysis of specific methods and principles such as teaching and communication skills, and the use of scientific and technological means in helping teachers to maintain a good relationship with children through the use of mirrors or play of autodyne. Finally, it should discuss how teachers analyze and display documents so that early childhood education can better achieve its intended purpose.
References
Asendorpf, J. B. (1996). Self-awareness and other-awareness. II: Mirror self-recognition, social contingency awareness, and synchronic imitation. Developmental Psychology 32(2),313-321.
Katz, L.G., (1996). The contribution of documentation to the quality of early childhood education, ERIC Digest, EDO-PS-96-2.University of Illinois, Urbana.
Lemon, N. (2007). Take a photograph: teacher reflection through narrative. Reflective Practice, 8(2), 177-191.
Nielsena, M. and Dissanayakeb, C. (2004). Pretend play, mirror self-recognition and imitation: a longitudinal investigation through the second year. Infant Behavior & Development 27, 342–365.#p#分页标题#e#
Tarr, P. (2010). Curiosity, Curriculum and Collaboration Entwined: Reflections on Pedagogical Documentation. Canadian children, 35(2), 10-14.
To help you think about peer review dialogues (adapted from our MA level marking criteria for ped doc):
‘some of the underlying goals that motivate documentation, (are related to) the desire to create new relationships (with) children and their experiences’ (Turner and Wilson, 2010, p. 9). Please could you explain how this work has provoked your thoughts and how this might have helped you to have a new relationship with, or empathy for children and their experiences. For example, how did this documentation help to make young children visible as protagonists?
The learning outcomes for this module are below.
-a detailed knowledge and understanding of key current Early Childhood issues and themes related to pedagogy and practice;
-developed skills in analysis and synthesis of a range of ideas relating to history, philosophy, theory, research and practice in Early Childhood Studies;
-developed skills in evaluating approaches to curriculum, planning and assessment for young children;
-considered a range of key perspectives to teaching practice in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS);
-a critical understanding of the wider ethical, political and social implications of Early Childhood Studies and be able to debate issues in relation to ethical perspectives in early years;
Criteria for the pedagogic documentation in Master’s Level Early Childhood Pedagogy and Practice:
-must be about or relevant with regard to early years pedagogic principles (birth to age 8)
-must be conducted in accordance with the MA ECS ethics of observing children.
-If children were observed and photographs, permission must have been granted and Form C must be submitted with the work on turn-it-in
-must provide commentary and raise questions related to pedagogy with young children
-must be related to one of the learning outcomes for the module (please identify this in your abstract)
-must be fit for purpose with regard to the audience and how the document will be used (please identify this in your abstract)
-must demonstrate that you have at least a ‘good’ understanding of relevant literature
-M level academic literature is found on the reading list for the module (on moodle)
-Engagement with the literature is evidenced by more than just making reference to an idea in connection to your work, but showing (in the case of theory) that you know the details of how the theory was derived, the depth and breadth of the theory, and its broader implications; (in the case of research) that you understand how the findings were determined and you have given consideration to the strengths or weaknesses of the research in relation to the overall body of research in that area.
-This will require that it is clear to the reader of your work that you understand the difference between theories and research. For our purposes, theories are those ideas that are based on a collection of ‘evidence’ and form a position in relation to a concept. Research can have many forms, but it should be specific, and based on a particular method to collect evidence.
-A better than good understandings of the literature are evidenced by your critical engagement with the literature, your use of the literature to raise questions, and possibly your questions about the literature that are raised by your documentation
-Wide reading is desired, but also you must be able to show an engagement with the wider reading, as well as a depth of knowledge regarding the literature. In other words, making reference to 30 sources does not show evidence of engagement with wider reading. The reader of your work must be able to clearly see how you have engaged, and for the highest marks, how you have ‘an authoritative grasp of a very good range of relevant literature and in-depth understanding of concepts and theories demonstrating an integration of relevant literature and analysis’ and how you have used your pedagogic document to engage in an ‘iterative processes of critique, including critical analysis of theory using practice and/ or other theory, and a further critical analysis or the generation of models drawing upon that analysis’.
-must be written in standard English
-serious errors in spelling, grammar, word choice or sentence structure will prevent you from passing
-must be properly referenced
-all ideas that are attributable to others must be cited
-must use consistent style (Harvard style is recommended)
-if you would like to use an alternative style (for example using footnotes) you may do this, but you must be consistent within the document.
-must have a coherent structure – however, this structure may be linear or non-linear/non-standard as Tiziana said: ‘Documentation is not about the reorganization and arranging of material with the aim of assembling a descriptive linear story. Rather, documentation is a narrative pathway with arguments that seek to make sense of the events and processes’ … ‘Documentation is not about finding answers, but generating questions. It is a bit of a paradox because we do come to know things about the children and what we might do next, but this knowledge should not lead us to closure. Rather, it sparks more wonder and inquiry about the children and the teaching that follows. A focus on linearity and closure are two ways that documentation often gets misinterpreted’ (Turner and Wilson, 2010, pp. 8-9).
-the structure of the whole document should fit the purpose of the document (identified and explained in the abstract)
-if the document follows a linear structure, then the coherence of the document will be judged in how well the pedagogic story and commentary is written with regard to standard conventions of essay writing
-if the document does not follow a linear structure, then the coherence of the document will be judged on how well the non-linear structure is fit for purpose, and how well each of the elements of the document are structured and coherent
-please keep this in mind, whether linear or non-linear:
-Structure: Paragraphs should have one main idea, all sentences within the paragraph relate to the one idea.
-If you are producing an avant-garde (unorthodox) format (ie, poetry, word-play, emphasis on the photos, rather than the text) you will need to discuss this and have it ‘approved’ by the tutor. In these cases, you will be required to write a critical/analytic commentary explaining how your work is fit for purpose, and how you have drawn on theory and research to develop your ideas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
‘Excellent or Outstanding’ work has the following features:
Written well in standard English, with very few errors.
All references are made correctly.
Draws on a range of literature.
Draws on suitable academic literature (see above).
Provides analysis and critique.
The piece needs to clearly articulate your pedagogy in work with young people, or possibly how you use principles of early years pedagogy to work with children of an older age range.
Excellent or outstanding work will provide at least one of the following:
-your piece could be used for evaluation: as a piece of evidence that shows evaluation of pedagogy and practice, not against ‘standards’ but as a form of critical thinking
-professional development: as an example for other professionals
-research: as a form of understanding children and pedagogy better
-democratic practice: as an example of respect and visibility of childhood
Excellent or outstanding work will not be descriptive of ‘practice as it is’ but will raise a question or issue and help the reader to question further, and to gain wisdom needed to contest the forces of ‘normalisation’ that may be occurring in the time, place, and context that is being documented.
Excellent or outstanding work will clearly demonstrate valuing of children’s subjectivities.
Excellent or outstanding work will show that you are in search of meaning.
Excellent or outstanding work will have the potential to create political and epistemological shifts.
Excellent or outstanding work will show the efforts of the documenter in positioning themselves (or their work) in relationship with the subject/object of the documentation
Excellent or outstanding work will show respect for who children are and how they can be actors in society and co-constructors of culture.
Children should not be positioned as passive learners within documentation.
(how children meet) pPredetermined developmental milestones or standard learning outcomes should not be a focus of the documentation (with the exception of critiques of this).
Excellent or outstanding work will be crafted with care and consideration of how the images work with the text to tell the story.
|
 |
|||
| 网站地图 |
