http://hdl.handle.net/2428/47956 Fri, 24 May 2013 08:01:40 GMT 2013-05-24T08:01:40Z http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49634 Title: It ain't (simply) what you know, it's the way you communicate it: curriculum knowledge and communication Authors: Edwards, R Description: This is an article for practitioners, drawing mainly on the Scottish FE context for its examples. It presents the findings of the Literacies for Learning in Further Education research project regarding the literacy practices which mediate learning, teaching and assessment on FE courses. It focuses on differences between literacies for learning and literacies for assessment, between higher and lower level courses, between educational and occupational objectives, and on issues concerning progression. The downloadable pdf contains the whole SFEU publication; this article begins on page 14. Mon, 01 Jan 2007 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49634 2007-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49236 Title: Literacies for Learning in Further Education: promoting inclusive learning across boundaries through students' literacy practices Authors: Mannion, G; Miller, K Description: This paper gives a theoretical framing for the study of literacy practices in context, focusing on issues of identity, multimodality and polycontextuality. It describes the 'icon mapping' methodology used to elicit students' perspectives on the polycontextuality of their literacy practices, providing both quantitative and qualitative findings emerging from the analysis of this data. Two contrasting student case studies - one of a Catering student and one of a Music student - show how different the interface can be between life, workplace and college. The concept of 'boundary object' is shown to be useful for theorising this interface. Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49236 2005-09-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49038 Title: Educational neuroscience and neuroscientific education: in search of a mutual middle-way Authors: Geake, J Description: Cognitive neuroscientific research into learning, especially literacy and numeracy, is well into its second decade. The potential benefits to education, particularly for SEN, were also noted many years ago (Byrnes & Fox, 1998), viz that cognitive neuroscience might offer new data and a fresh perspective on some hitherto intractable educational problems, for example, why do some children not learn to read as easily as most; why doesn’t every child ‘get’ fractions (O’Boyle & Gill, 1998)? The responses of the education profession, especially in the UK, have been mixed. On the one hand, there are those ageing education academics who, after a lifetime of not understanding and disparaging all science, see no need to change their ways now. On the other hand, there are the ‘brain-based’ enthusiasts who hope that the current fads of left-right thinking, brain gym, etc., will address the complexities and daily challenges of the mixed-ability classroom (Goswami, 2004). A middle-way would seem to involve neuroscientific education for both groups so that education can shape a professionally informative educational neuroscience research agenda of the future. This paper discusses five arguments (Geake, 1998) in favour of the development of an educational neuroscience. Mon, 01 Aug 2005 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49038 2005-08-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/2428/48674 Title: 'Obsessive compulsive font disorder': the challenge of supporting pupils writing with the computer Authors: Matthewman, S; Triggs, P Abstract: Writing with the computer provokes and enables pupils to engage with aspects of multimodal design [Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures, Routledge, London, 2000]. At the same time the traditional stages of the writing process become much more fluid and integrated [Aust. J. Language Literacy 17(3) (1994) 183]. These consequences of technology are not recognised within the curriculum, the assessment system or current models of teaching the writing process in the UK. Using examples from current classroom research this paper argues that the significance of pupils uses of the available designs of digital experience [Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures, Routledge, London, 2000] is undervalued. Furthermore it suggests that this undervaluing leaves teachers without well-developed pedagogic models of literacy when computers are involved. Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/2428/48674 2004-01-01T00:00:00Z