Dear all,

I may be wading in on this rather late, so apologies if this has been covered, and in more depth than I can manage here.

Through a small research project here, I have asked tutors how they see their students progressing in their knowledge formation and theoretical positioning. Bearing in mind the programmes at my institution are practice-based, I think this is an interesting area to explore as the outcome can be written or spoken and can be based on many forms of knowledge input, but the transformation is in the thinking process. The questions/themes which have arisen are:

How do students develop a process of enquiry?

How do students engage with existing debates in their field and develop their own position?

How do students develop this position in order to push their practice forward?

In response to this research we are developing a cycle to show students a process of engagement to help them formulate their own ideas/arguments/thoughts resulting in reformulated/transformed knowledge. This cycle is still in the early stages, but we have called it a process of enquiry:

Siân Lund SFHEA

EAP (English for Academic Purposes) Co-ordinator

Please check our online learning pages for details of support: EAP MOODLE

@lund_sian

Learning Support
Royal College of Art
Kensington Gore, London
SW7 2EU
E: [log in to unmask]
T: +44 (0)20 7590 4543
www.rca.ac.uk
twitter.com/rca
facebook.com/rca.london

logo

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 11:53, Aileen Hanrahan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Very interesting discussion. On your remarks - writing for learning- writing theorists have analysed how knowledge is transformed during writing, which is a distinct form of learning (Hayes & Flower, 1980, 1981), and how knowledge is "constituted" during writing (Galbraith et al, 2005, 2008). The distinction is between learning as transformation, constitution and formulation, as distinct from learning as memorisation - banking given knowledge as if like a deposit.

Not only does knowledge transform during writing, but the writer's identity as a learner and writer transforms through writing (Ivanic, 1998; Burgess & Ivanic, 2010). This is how, in those activities of writintg, writers disambiguate their own ideas from the main ideas of others. Argument is always perspectival, and coheres around adopting a perspective from which other perspectives can be measured. Thus, identity building is embedded in adopting a perspective, in the writer's point of view, balanced from the availability of other perspective- new perspectives being a key point of new learning and new knowledge. Aileen

On 8 Oct 2019, at 10:12, larisa ulkina<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Dear all,

So happy to receive all your feedback. I have printed everyone’s responses and am studying them, a pencil in my hand. Thank you for relating your top-notch expertise to a rookie’s question.

Writing must be considered another theory of learning, as it best helps to «dis-assimilate» outside knowledge and «assimilate» it into our own.

Thanks again,

Sincerely

Larisa

Пятница, 4 октября 2019, 13:33 +05:00 от larisa ulkina <[log in to unmask]>:

A question:

In writing an analytical summary, what is the difference between main idea and the author's view?

I am not native English speaker, so these seem to me very same.

Thank you

Sincerely

--
Larisa Ulkina

--
Larisa Ulkina

_________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe login to https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=EATAW You find the 'Unsubscribe' button in the blue 'Options bar'
_________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe login to https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=EATAW You find the 'Unsubscribe' button in the blue 'Options bar'