Today I went to see Dr Towndrow to go through my first assignment. Succinctly put, my short literature review to talk about the kind of students SST is going to have was too descriptive. It should have also been critically-nuanced to bring out the gaps those authors have said in the context of my problem. This would be a good opportunity for me to then propose the solutions.
There was also no curriculum design philosophy that could be used as an anchor point for me to discuss my data. For example, if I were to adopt UbD, it would have been more helpful for the reader to see how certain writing tasks fell short because they did not adhere to or bring out the design principles.
Lastly, I should have talked abit more about the design of the tasks - it would have been good to talk about students' work with reference to those tasks to bring out the issues of designing such tasks. Besides, those authors are usually more general and do not cater to specificity.
Lots more to do! I must do better!
No comments:
Post a Comment