Shanel: Tensions Between Coverage and Skill Attainment in History Intro Courses
9. What are the tensions between coverage and skill attainment in introductory history courses? pg 97-107 or location pages 155-172
Traditionally, introductory history survey courses focused on a wide breadth of coverage within the class, and smaller seminar courses encountered later in students' careers were where they had the opportunity to build skills in history. The tension between skills-building and coverage in introductory courses can also be thought of as barriers preventing non-majors from developing skills and critical thinking that they may not encounter later in their careers.
There are several preventive barriers contributing to the tension between the two pedagogical goals. First, introductory survey courses are typically much larger than seminar courses. It can be daunting for staff to be faced with teaching higher-level skills-building to hundreds of students instead of a few dozen. These courses are also typically focused on writing papers with professors in mind and intensive reading. Courses would have to be completely restructured in order to accommodate both goals. Second is a structural barrier. Universities and history departments have set course offerings, and they include classes that give students the promise of learning history from a start year to an end year. That shifts an instructor's focus to efficiently and quickly delivering content, and perhaps less flexibility in narrowing the scope. Third comes from within student expectations. Students have certain mental models about how a history course should be studied and conducted. They have a set notion that its focus is on memorizing dates, facts, and figures, and deviating from this could be unsettling.
The historians who wrote the chapter then go on to describe the process by which they were able to synthesize these two goals into introductory courses.
Question: In many of my LIS courses, an individual solution to increasing information literacy skills is having students complete traditional research projects so that they understand the process of gathering reliable evidence, crafting an argument, and defending it against peers in the field.
How might the shift from "traditional" research writing to publishing research in digital spaces affect information literacy? Will it affect it all?
Traditionally, introductory history survey courses focused on a wide breadth of coverage within the class, and smaller seminar courses encountered later in students' careers were where they had the opportunity to build skills in history. The tension between skills-building and coverage in introductory courses can also be thought of as barriers preventing non-majors from developing skills and critical thinking that they may not encounter later in their careers.
There are several preventive barriers contributing to the tension between the two pedagogical goals. First, introductory survey courses are typically much larger than seminar courses. It can be daunting for staff to be faced with teaching higher-level skills-building to hundreds of students instead of a few dozen. These courses are also typically focused on writing papers with professors in mind and intensive reading. Courses would have to be completely restructured in order to accommodate both goals. Second is a structural barrier. Universities and history departments have set course offerings, and they include classes that give students the promise of learning history from a start year to an end year. That shifts an instructor's focus to efficiently and quickly delivering content, and perhaps less flexibility in narrowing the scope. Third comes from within student expectations. Students have certain mental models about how a history course should be studied and conducted. They have a set notion that its focus is on memorizing dates, facts, and figures, and deviating from this could be unsettling.
The historians who wrote the chapter then go on to describe the process by which they were able to synthesize these two goals into introductory courses.
Question: In many of my LIS courses, an individual solution to increasing information literacy skills is having students complete traditional research projects so that they understand the process of gathering reliable evidence, crafting an argument, and defending it against peers in the field.
How might the shift from "traditional" research writing to publishing research in digital spaces affect information literacy? Will it affect it all?
Comments
Post a Comment