Modes of Participation for Diverse Students - Essay Example

MODES OF PARTICIPATION FOR DIVERSE STUDENTS by Student’s Name Code + Name of Course Date Modes of Participation for Diverse Students The ability of students from diverse backgrounds to understand specialist discourse instructions should be given critical consideration in instruction delivery. This is due to the present challenges that are persistently faced in higher education. These challenges can be attributed to the wide range approaches of delivery of learning outcomes particularly for students with diverse expectations, settings, and preparedness levels. Thus, the old teaching methods are unproductive on students from dissimilar backgrounds. Thus, there is need for a change in the methodologies of teaching rather than merely including remedial support into the present teaching programs. This essay will examine different modes of participation that are recommended for enhancing the effective participation of students from diverse settings in contemporary classroom. These modes are generative participation, appropriate assessment, and vicarious participation. By applying these participation modes, lecturers will improve the levels of participation of non-traditional learners in higher education. Vicarious participation is one of the modes that can improve the participation levels of non-traditional students in higher education. According to Northedge (2003), this mode of participation is where learners gain knowledge by watching their lecturer demonstrating something. For instance, students observing the procedure of completing a task illustrate this mode. Moreover, vicarious participation is a common way students can use to participate by watching national TV or through reading newspapers. Students take part in the specialist debate while they listen and read, merely through the determination of partaking in the implication recommended by their instructor. Vicarious participation is undoubtedly crucial, as it gives all learners the capacity to; gather knowledge or information from experienced discourse participants; follow how the debate or lecture flows; and see how implications are outlined within it. In this mode, learning is livelier and does not over rely on the speaker. Nevertheless, it is important to generate meaningful situation studies to reinforce learning. Students from diverse settings can thereafter hypothesize the scenarios within their minds, and then contrast them with scenarios from individual experiences, ask related queries and generate their personal replies. Li and Gasser (2005) posit that vicarious participation allows students to gather important steps, which assist them to succeed in the subject being taught. By merely repeating the illustrated approaches, they will accomplish the task with ease. According to Osland and Bird (2000), learners also assume a vibrant role if they are encouraged to make notes, particularly if they look at structuring and cleaning up their notes. These notes will enable them to practice conferring to themselves and in this way they gather, the meaning implied with their tutor or lecturer. Northedge (2003) contends that vicarious participation ought not to be likened with passivity. Through vicarious participation, students will be enabled to gauge their understanding levels by matching themselves with others (Fletcher, 2005). These comparisons will enable the students to experience rising motivation to participate when surrounded by other equally active students. The outcome will most likely augment the students’ behavioral skills and knowledge in relation to others. The students will also be motivated to show more cooperation and will be able to exert a direct effect on their personal behavioral intentions and learning outcomes. Generative participation is another mode that can potentially influence the participation levels of non-traditional students. Students can be stimulated to become more generative contributors through classroom discussions. An important aid to participation is a supportive classroom setting in which it is not just “the brave and the bright” who participate. The classroom participation can be reinforced through things such as using pairing students or using small groups to discuss issues, which can then implant confidence in the students to participate in in their classroom. In this mode, students make specialist discourse within their small groups (Northedge, 2003). Short writing tasks are recognized as a tremendous way of discursive involvement (Kim, 2008). Mercer (1995) as cited in Northedge (2003) recommends the role of tutor as ‘discourse guide’. Northedge (2003) denotes to the lecturers as “listener” because they have to “listen” to whatever it is that the students imply. The response should pay attention on enabling the student to derive meaning within the specialist debate instead of just indicating that they are incorrect (Rowe and Wood, 2008). As tutors read they have an obligation of ‘listening’ to what the learner is attempting to say, and give feedback through their comments. Certainly, group discussions improve involvement of students in learning. In this kind of participation, it is recognized that written tasks are valueless if students do not get feedback from the teachers. Subsequently, their abilities will remain stagnant. Making comments on the work they have written is an important element of teaching. The reply will supply the other part of the discussion and thereby assist in developing the learner’s personality as a participant the discourse. These comments seek to advance the student’s attempts in producing meaning in that specific discipline. Given the ‘textual’ nature of knowledge communities, writing is a crucial and important platform for generative participation. Consistent short writings allow learners to apply the mode of participation to produce their particular implications. Northedge (2003) recommends that student’s active engagement in metacognition can enable students to improve on their dispositions and skills of critical thinking, which can be obtained and used precisely. As the student advances towards an added generative participation in discourse, his or her critical thinking skills progress in parallel, unsurprisingly shaping their influences making the discourse to grow more convergent with the knowledge shared. However, for students to apply this discourse successfully there is need for them to learn how to assume obligation for framing collective meaning. The students have to learn deriving meaning to other students coming from the information community. An important chance could be a group in a classroom discussion. However, such a discussion could certainly be made very low, in a way that ensures the students maintain the processes in daily learning so that learners can never advance to the intended learning. On the other hand, the discourse can be pitched very high, in a way that only few students can participate genuinely. As Mercer (1995) posits s cited in (Northedge, 2003), disintegrating into several groups can assist students to learn producing specialist courses with each other, through a “rough-and-ready form,” after which they assemble in the bigger assembly where the instructor could assist the students in outlining the learning further ‘convergently’. The evaluation of learning should be tailored to the learning ability of the student. Northedge (2003) posits that if a students of a diverse cohort engage with their course of different variety levels, each conferring to their individual development, the resultant outcome will certainly vary quite widely, which must be mirrored by this model. Their instructor must have the ability to consider possibly, the starting point of the students, and should tolerate their ‘variant’ comprehension as long as the students show symptoms of meaningful commitment to the course. Through this arrangement, the students will learn. This is in contrary to them being marked down or being corrected for failing to replicate the discourse precisely (Li and Gasser, 2005). This will not always imply disregarding weak, conflicting application of the course, but reasonably responding in means that represent an acceptable application of the model. The response should not necessarily imply abandoning the expected standards but rather concentrating very closely, on what comprises creative and intelligent application of the discourse for learners who are coming from other academic or environmental settings (Li and Gasser, 2005). Students require a fair and realistic return for their progress. The best result of a discourse is that all students learn for as long as they are capable. Any assessment practice that contributes to a result of this kind by inspiring learners into more vibrant participation is warranted. Bizzell (1986) posits that by setting appropriate assessment undertakings, all students will access an all-inclusive and accessible curriculum. Constructive academic reinforcements for diverse student has to go alongside appropriate assessment design, which is sensitive to different student needs and cultures. For effective assessment, there has to be the alignment between the students’ academic skills and a mastery of present knowledge against the documented learning outcomes for a given course. In some instances, teachers try as much as possible to use several assessment tasks in order to ensure that their students are assessed over different range of forms. However, the application of different assessment standards to students in one class is a questionable practice that is subject for debate (Earl, 2012). Nevertheless, there are some instances where particular institutions of learning provide students with a choice of different kinds of assessment; for example, a student exhibiting anxiety may decide on taking an essay instead of sitting for an exam. Some variations to the assessment mode to accommodate difficulties or diverse students’ learning styles comprise of informal dialogues, peer assessments, teamwork projects, online tests, and holistic evaluation of course-performance. In conclusion, the three modes of participation discussed in this essay can assist non-traditional students improve on their achievement. In order for diverse students to have genuine opportunities, there has to be a shift from unclear student-centered approaches or teaching as merely an activity of transmission of knowledge transmission, which render students in a dilemma every day. Thus, it is important for lecturers to recognize that participating in knowledge communities generates appropriate access to knowledge, and that involvement grants social and intellectual difficulties to beginners. Subsequently, learners require facilitators who can provide platforms for reinforced involvement in the pertinent knowledge community. Learners have a duty of participating vicariously and generatively for them to develop identities close to those of the knowledge community. The students should become active and should competently engage with the knowledge community in meaningful debates. Given that knowledge persistently encompass different kinds of students taking part in different points, learners from different experience levels and backgrounds participate alongside one another effectively as long as the learning curriculum is properly planned and the education provided with this in mind. Reference List 1. Bizzell, P. 1986, What Happens When Basic Writers Come to College?’, College Composition and Communication 37 (3): 294­-301. 2. Kim, Y. (2008). The role of task‐induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language learning, 58(2), 285-325. 3. Li, A., & Gasser, M. B. (2005). Predicting Asian international students’ sociocultural adjustment: A test of two mediation models. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29(5), 561-576. 4. Northedge, A. (2003). Rethinking teaching in the context of diversity. Teaching in Higher Education 8, no. 1 (2003): 17-32. 5. Osland, J. S., & Bird, A. (2000). Beyond sophisticated stereotyping: Cultural sensemaking in context. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 65-77. 6. Rowe, A. D., & Wood, L. N. (2008). Student perceptions and preferences for feedback. Asian Social Science, 4(3), P78. Read More