help with assgn due in 24 hours

combs

Main

Home >Homework Answsers >Education homework help

essy

attached

2 years ago
01.12.2024
32

Report issue

files (3)

3.14DiversifyingResearch.docx
WC107AssessingCuriousAnnotation.docx
finalessay107.docx

3.14DiversifyingResearch.docx

Diversifying our Research and Connecting to Classroom Practice

Directions: Make a copy of this assignment by going to “file” and “make a copy”.

As we continue to strengthen our arguments and build up our ability to advocate for students, we will take some time, this week, to diversify our research and build connections to classroom practice.

Please complete the following two activities and add the work to your essay.

Part 1: Diversifying Research

As we discussed in class, there is danger to the “single story” because it is not the whole story. The issues that you are addressing are experienced by a diverse group of students and written about by a diverse group of experts.

Consider the texts and interviews you are using for evidence. Who are you listening to? How can you broaden the scope of who is represented in your essay?

Find an article that is written by an expert or conduct another interview that broadens the perspective of your essay. Perhaps you want to include an expert of color’s research, or someone who is multilingual, or differently abled. Perhaps you have many articles written by mature scholars and you would like a younger expert voice represented. You choose how to best diversify your research.

Step 1: Annotate the article according to our annotation guidelines found here .

Step 2: Synthesize your findings using the Cornell note taking guide below.

Text Title	(enter the exact name of the learning resource here and then delete this sentence)
Cues	Notes
(insert questions that you’ve gathered from the resource in this box and delete this sentence)	(Note key evidences or ideas that relate to the claims in your essay.)
Summary
(Describe how this article enhances the claims you are making in your essay) This section should be different from your answers in the "notes" section and should be written in your own words. Delete these directions)

Part 2: Connecting to Classroom Practice

It is important to include some elements of application to our essays. To do this, we will draw on the content you are studying in WC100, 103, and 106 (CTLE). Look back on your learning logs from those courses to gather quotes, insights,or article references to use to support your recommendation for a classroom practice that relates to your topic.

Think about a practice you discussed from the WC100, WC103, and WC106 (CTLE) that supports the student population you are researching within the research context focus?

In the box below, write a paragraph that describes a classroom practice and how it relates to your research. You will add this paragraph to the body of the essay.

Application to your essay: You can either add this paragraph to your essay where it seems to fit best, OR use parts of this paragraph throughout your essay. You are the writer, and ultimately, you need to do two things with this assignment:

1. Consider using the whole paragraph, or using parts of the paragraph in different parts of your essay.

2. Decide the best way to use this in your essay, or if to use it at all..

Grading:

This assignment will be based on:

Diversifying research:

· Candidates can identify evidence from the article that supports their claims.

· Candidates can articulate how the perspective of the writer or interviewee enhances their argument.

Paragraph:

Candidate writes a paragraph that outlines a classroom practice and thoughtfully explains how that practice connects to their claims.

Remember, In all your writing, your voice matters. Proofread for errors, and NEVER use sentence correctors, modifiers, or suggested rewrites in editing programs like Grammerly.

These take away from your voice and put you at risk of AI plagiarism.

WC107AssessingCuriousAnnotation.docx

Assessing Curious Annotation

Guiding questions for the document: What does it look like to annotate with curiosity? How do we know if annotation is done well? What are the artefacts/ what is the evidence of a well-annotated article?

Good annotation practice implies an active engagement with the text. How can we tell if someone has engaged actively? Well, there will be ‘metatext’: diverse annotations and various markings indicating another reader’s presence. Some of these may include:

· A variety of annotations including questions, comments, connections, and highlights

· Use of symbols, colour-coding, or marginal notes to differentiate types of annotations

· Summaries and paraphrasing in-text (e.g. sticky notes or end-notes)

· Summaries and paraphrasing of the whole piece

Within these annotations, curiosity can be indicated by the nature of the commentary the reader provides as well as what is indicated in the choice of highlights and questions. For instance:

· Open-ended questions about the content, context, and implications of the text. (e.g. "Why did the author make these word choices/choose this example?"; "How does this concept connect to what I have experienced/read previously?"; "What are the potential applications/implications of this idea?")

· Making connections to what we’ve talked about in class, to other texts, to lived personal and professional experiences, or to broader concepts. (e.g. "This reminds me of...", "This is similar to...", "This contrasts with...")

· Making an effort to clarify complex ideas by summarising the main ideas, looking up new concepts, or paraphrasing in the reader’s own words.

Below is an attempt to codify the above thinking into assessable terms. The rubric below identifies quality annotation practices and assigns grade-point values to them.

	High Competency 5 to >4	Competency 4 to >3	Some competency 3 to >2	Developing competency 2 to >1	Lacking competency 1 to 0
Highlighting and underlining	Key phrases, sentences and sections are identified as important and thought-provoking. Highlights differentiate between key arguments and interesting ideas.	Key phrases, sentences and sections are identified as important or thought-provoking. Highlights indicate key arguments and/or interesting ideas.	Some key phrases, sentences and sections are identified by highlights and underlining.	There is some logic to the choice of sections that are highlighted and underlined, but evidence is sparse/insufficient.	No evidence of highlighting or underlining, or there is evidence, but the sections selected are irrelevant/nonsensical.
Definitions and clarifications	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are defined with specificity and in detail, and confusing sections are clarified completely.	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are defined, and confusing sections are clarified completely.	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are noted and confusing sections are clarified.	Unfamiliar terms are noted without appropriate definition or clarification.	No indication of unfamiliar terms or any attempt to define or clarify them.
Lingering questions	Questions are open-ended and consider the content, context and implications of the text.	Questions are mostly open-ended and consider the content, context and/or implications of the text.	Some of the questions are open-ended and may consider the content, context and/or implications of the text.	Questions about the content, context and/or implications of the text form part of the annotation.	There are no questions/the questions are simple yes/no questions/the questions could be easily answered with a definition.
Comment and reflections	Insights far exceed the surface-level of observation and show personal engagement with the text, as well as meaningful connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Insights go beyond the surface-level of observation, showing some personal engagement with the text. Comments show connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Insights tend to be surface-level observations, showing little personal engagement with the text. Some comments show connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Commentary is sparse or one-dimensional, showing little personal engagement with the text.	There is no evidence of commentary or reflection.
Summaries and paraphrasing	Summaries effectively and efficiently convert complex ideas into simpler terms which improve understanding; paraphrasing translates the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries convert complex ideas into simpler terms which sometimes improve understanding; paraphrasing translates the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries are used to simplify terms; paraphrasing sometimes translate the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries may be too long/wordy to be helpful, or too short to grasp concepts properly. Paraphrasing misapprehends meaning.	Little to no evidence of summary and paraphrasing.
Connections	Connections drawn create the sense of active dialogue, with responses to questions posed in the text and elaborate on points made by the author. Connections aptly set the stage for synthesis.	Connections drawn create the sense of dialogue, offering responses to questions in the text or elaborating on points made by the author. Connections may set the stage for synthesis.	Some of the connections drawn create the sense of dialogue, but don’t consistently respond to questions posed in the text or elaborate on points made by the author. Connections could expand to synthesis.	Connections are drawn inconsistently. There is limited scope for synthesis.	No connections are drawn, or seem incomplete/unrelated to the text.

3.14DiversifyingResearch.docx

Diversifying our Research and Connecting to Classroom Practice

Directions: Make a copy of this assignment by going to “file” and “make a copy”.

As we continue to strengthen our arguments and build up our ability to advocate for students, we will take some time, this week, to diversify our research and build connections to classroom practice.

Please complete the following two activities and add the work to your essay.

Part 1: Diversifying Research

Consider the texts and interviews you are using for evidence. Who are you listening to? How can you broaden the scope of who is represented in your essay?

Step 1: Annotate the article according to our annotation guidelines found here .

Step 2: Synthesize your findings using the Cornell note taking guide below.

Text Title	(enter the exact name of the learning resource here and then delete this sentence)
Cues	Notes
(insert questions that you’ve gathered from the resource in this box and delete this sentence)	(Note key evidences or ideas that relate to the claims in your essay.)
Summary
(Describe how this article enhances the claims you are making in your essay) This section should be different from your answers in the "notes" section and should be written in your own words. Delete these directions)

Part 2: Connecting to Classroom Practice

Think about a practice you discussed from the WC100, WC103, and WC106 (CTLE) that supports the student population you are researching within the research context focus?

In the box below, write a paragraph that describes a classroom practice and how it relates to your research. You will add this paragraph to the body of the essay.

1. Consider using the whole paragraph, or using parts of the paragraph in different parts of your essay.

2. Decide the best way to use this in your essay, or if to use it at all..

Grading:

This assignment will be based on:

Diversifying research:

· Candidates can identify evidence from the article that supports their claims.

· Candidates can articulate how the perspective of the writer or interviewee enhances their argument.

Paragraph:

Candidate writes a paragraph that outlines a classroom practice and thoughtfully explains how that practice connects to their claims.

Remember, In all your writing, your voice matters. Proofread for errors, and NEVER use sentence correctors, modifiers, or suggested rewrites in editing programs like Grammerly.

These take away from your voice and put you at risk of AI plagiarism.

WC107AssessingCuriousAnnotation.docx

Assessing Curious Annotation

· A variety of annotations including questions, comments, connections, and highlights

· Use of symbols, colour-coding, or marginal notes to differentiate types of annotations

· Summaries and paraphrasing in-text (e.g. sticky notes or end-notes)

· Summaries and paraphrasing of the whole piece

Within these annotations, curiosity can be indicated by the nature of the commentary the reader provides as well as what is indicated in the choice of highlights and questions. For instance:

· Making an effort to clarify complex ideas by summarising the main ideas, looking up new concepts, or paraphrasing in the reader’s own words.

Below is an attempt to codify the above thinking into assessable terms. The rubric below identifies quality annotation practices and assigns grade-point values to them.

	High Competency 5 to >4	Competency 4 to >3	Some competency 3 to >2	Developing competency 2 to >1	Lacking competency 1 to 0
Highlighting and underlining	Key phrases, sentences and sections are identified as important and thought-provoking. Highlights differentiate between key arguments and interesting ideas.	Key phrases, sentences and sections are identified as important or thought-provoking. Highlights indicate key arguments and/or interesting ideas.	Some key phrases, sentences and sections are identified by highlights and underlining.	There is some logic to the choice of sections that are highlighted and underlined, but evidence is sparse/insufficient.	No evidence of highlighting or underlining, or there is evidence, but the sections selected are irrelevant/nonsensical.
Definitions and clarifications	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are defined with specificity and in detail, and confusing sections are clarified completely.	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are defined, and confusing sections are clarified completely.	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are noted and confusing sections are clarified.	Unfamiliar terms are noted without appropriate definition or clarification.	No indication of unfamiliar terms or any attempt to define or clarify them.
Lingering questions	Questions are open-ended and consider the content, context and implications of the text.	Questions are mostly open-ended and consider the content, context and/or implications of the text.	Some of the questions are open-ended and may consider the content, context and/or implications of the text.	Questions about the content, context and/or implications of the text form part of the annotation.	There are no questions/the questions are simple yes/no questions/the questions could be easily answered with a definition.
Comment and reflections	Insights far exceed the surface-level of observation and show personal engagement with the text, as well as meaningful connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Insights go beyond the surface-level of observation, showing some personal engagement with the text. Comments show connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Insights tend to be surface-level observations, showing little personal engagement with the text. Some comments show connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Commentary is sparse or one-dimensional, showing little personal engagement with the text.	There is no evidence of commentary or reflection.
Summaries and paraphrasing	Summaries effectively and efficiently convert complex ideas into simpler terms which improve understanding; paraphrasing translates the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries convert complex ideas into simpler terms which sometimes improve understanding; paraphrasing translates the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries are used to simplify terms; paraphrasing sometimes translate the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries may be too long/wordy to be helpful, or too short to grasp concepts properly. Paraphrasing misapprehends meaning.	Little to no evidence of summary and paraphrasing.
Connections	Connections drawn create the sense of active dialogue, with responses to questions posed in the text and elaborate on points made by the author. Connections aptly set the stage for synthesis.	Connections drawn create the sense of dialogue, offering responses to questions in the text or elaborating on points made by the author. Connections may set the stage for synthesis.	Some of the connections drawn create the sense of dialogue, but don’t consistently respond to questions posed in the text or elaborate on points made by the author. Connections could expand to synthesis.	Connections are drawn inconsistently. There is limited scope for synthesis.	No connections are drawn, or seem incomplete/unrelated to the text.

3.14DiversifyingResearch.docx

Diversifying our Research and Connecting to Classroom Practice

Directions: Make a copy of this assignment by going to “file” and “make a copy”.

As we continue to strengthen our arguments and build up our ability to advocate for students, we will take some time, this week, to diversify our research and build connections to classroom practice.

Please complete the following two activities and add the work to your essay.

Part 1: Diversifying Research

Consider the texts and interviews you are using for evidence. Who are you listening to? How can you broaden the scope of who is represented in your essay?

Step 1: Annotate the article according to our annotation guidelines found here .

Step 2: Synthesize your findings using the Cornell note taking guide below.

Text Title	(enter the exact name of the learning resource here and then delete this sentence)
Cues	Notes
(insert questions that you’ve gathered from the resource in this box and delete this sentence)	(Note key evidences or ideas that relate to the claims in your essay.)
Summary
(Describe how this article enhances the claims you are making in your essay) This section should be different from your answers in the "notes" section and should be written in your own words. Delete these directions)

Part 2: Connecting to Classroom Practice

Think about a practice you discussed from the WC100, WC103, and WC106 (CTLE) that supports the student population you are researching within the research context focus?

In the box below, write a paragraph that describes a classroom practice and how it relates to your research. You will add this paragraph to the body of the essay.

1. Consider using the whole paragraph, or using parts of the paragraph in different parts of your essay.

2. Decide the best way to use this in your essay, or if to use it at all..

Grading:

This assignment will be based on:

Diversifying research:

· Candidates can identify evidence from the article that supports their claims.

· Candidates can articulate how the perspective of the writer or interviewee enhances their argument.

Paragraph:

Candidate writes a paragraph that outlines a classroom practice and thoughtfully explains how that practice connects to their claims.

Remember, In all your writing, your voice matters. Proofread for errors, and NEVER use sentence correctors, modifiers, or suggested rewrites in editing programs like Grammerly.

These take away from your voice and put you at risk of AI plagiarism.

WC107AssessingCuriousAnnotation.docx

Assessing Curious Annotation

· A variety of annotations including questions, comments, connections, and highlights

· Use of symbols, colour-coding, or marginal notes to differentiate types of annotations

· Summaries and paraphrasing in-text (e.g. sticky notes or end-notes)

· Summaries and paraphrasing of the whole piece

Within these annotations, curiosity can be indicated by the nature of the commentary the reader provides as well as what is indicated in the choice of highlights and questions. For instance:

· Making an effort to clarify complex ideas by summarising the main ideas, looking up new concepts, or paraphrasing in the reader’s own words.

Below is an attempt to codify the above thinking into assessable terms. The rubric below identifies quality annotation practices and assigns grade-point values to them.

	High Competency 5 to >4	Competency 4 to >3	Some competency 3 to >2	Developing competency 2 to >1	Lacking competency 1 to 0
Highlighting and underlining	Key phrases, sentences and sections are identified as important and thought-provoking. Highlights differentiate between key arguments and interesting ideas.	Key phrases, sentences and sections are identified as important or thought-provoking. Highlights indicate key arguments and/or interesting ideas.	Some key phrases, sentences and sections are identified by highlights and underlining.	There is some logic to the choice of sections that are highlighted and underlined, but evidence is sparse/insufficient.	No evidence of highlighting or underlining, or there is evidence, but the sections selected are irrelevant/nonsensical.
Definitions and clarifications	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are defined with specificity and in detail, and confusing sections are clarified completely.	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are defined, and confusing sections are clarified completely.	Unfamiliar terms and concepts are noted and confusing sections are clarified.	Unfamiliar terms are noted without appropriate definition or clarification.	No indication of unfamiliar terms or any attempt to define or clarify them.
Lingering questions	Questions are open-ended and consider the content, context and implications of the text.	Questions are mostly open-ended and consider the content, context and/or implications of the text.	Some of the questions are open-ended and may consider the content, context and/or implications of the text.	Questions about the content, context and/or implications of the text form part of the annotation.	There are no questions/the questions are simple yes/no questions/the questions could be easily answered with a definition.
Comment and reflections	Insights far exceed the surface-level of observation and show personal engagement with the text, as well as meaningful connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Insights go beyond the surface-level of observation, showing some personal engagement with the text. Comments show connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Insights tend to be surface-level observations, showing little personal engagement with the text. Some comments show connection to other texts or personal experiences.	Commentary is sparse or one-dimensional, showing little personal engagement with the text.	There is no evidence of commentary or reflection.
Summaries and paraphrasing	Summaries effectively and efficiently convert complex ideas into simpler terms which improve understanding; paraphrasing translates the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries convert complex ideas into simpler terms which sometimes improve understanding; paraphrasing translates the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries are used to simplify terms; paraphrasing sometimes translate the text into the reader’s own words.	Summaries may be too long/wordy to be helpful, or too short to grasp concepts properly. Paraphrasing misapprehends meaning.	Little to no evidence of summary and paraphrasing.
Connections	Connections drawn create the sense of active dialogue, with responses to questions posed in the text and elaborate on points made by the author. Connections aptly set the stage for synthesis.	Connections drawn create the sense of dialogue, offering responses to questions in the text or elaborating on points made by the author. Connections may set the stage for synthesis.	Some of the connections drawn create the sense of dialogue, but don’t consistently respond to questions posed in the text or elaborate on points made by the author. Connections could expand to synthesis.	Connections are drawn inconsistently. There is limited scope for synthesis.	No connections are drawn, or seem incomplete/unrelated to the text.

other Questions(10)