August 2015 - Page 2 of 2 - Prof Pérez-Paredes

Link here.

This course teaches scientists to become more effective writers, using practical examples and exercises. Topics include: principles of good writing, tricks for writing faster and with less anxiety, the format of a scientific manuscript, and issues in publication and peer review. Students from non-science disciplines can benefit from the training provided in the first four weeks (on general principles of effective writing).

In the first four weeks, we will review principles of effective writing, examples of good and bad writing, and tips for making the writing process easier. In the second four weeks, we will examine issues specific to scientific writing, including: authorship, peer review, the format of an original manuscript, and communicating science for lay audiences. Students will watch video lectures, complete quizzes and editing exercises, write two short papers, and edit each others’ work.

COURSE SYLLABUS

Week 1 – Introduction; principles of effective writing (cutting unnecessary clutter)
Week 2 – Principles of effective writing (verbs)
Week 3 – Crafting better sentences and paragraphs
Week 4 – Organization; and streamlining the writing process
Week 5 – The format of an original manuscript
Week 6 – Reviews, commentaries, and opinion pieces; and the publication process
Week 7 – Issues in scientific writing (plagiarism, authorship, ghostwriting, reproducible research)
Week 8 – How to do a peer review; and how to communicate with the lay public

New session starts September 1

Through the EUROCALL list
Provisional Book Title: Learner Autonomy and Web 2.0

Call for Abstracts

The 2017 CALICO Monograph, published by Equinox, aims to explore how the notion of learner autonomy is being reshaped within Web 2.0 environments. In early definitions, dating from the 1980s, learner autonomy was largely conceived of in terms of individuals working in ‘self-access’ mode, selecting the learning resources and methods they saw as effective, in pursuit of personal goals, perhaps with the aid of a learning adviser (Holec 1981). Other theorists of learner autonomy – such as Dam (1995), Little (2012) or Trebbi (1989) – viewed the concept as having a social dimension, rather than being purely individualistic. This second view of learner autonomy is more and more relevant given the advent of social media, where students have unprecedented opportunities for collaborative learning (Lamy & Zourou 2013). Consequently, social theories of learning (e.g. sociocultural theory, communities of practice, connectivism) have increasingly informed research into learner autonomy in foreign language learning (see Murray 2014). Of equal importance is the opportunity afforded by Web 2.0 of using multiple modes for making meaning, in learning to communicate online. This has enabled some to suggest a possible recasting of learner autonomy in the digital world as ‘the informed use of a range of interacting resources in context’ (Palfreyman, 2006; Fuchs, Hauck and Müller-Hartmann, 2012). Others may feel that being digitally literate alone does not constitute learner autonomy in the online world.

The question is: ‘What does?’ In this monograph, we welcome chapters grounded in sound theoretical frameworks and/or analyzing empirical data which investigate how learner autonomy intertwines with the social and/or the modal affordances of Web 2.0 environments. The questions raised for educational users of Web 2.0 environments about the relationship between CALL and learner autonomy include, but are not restricted to:

-Do online learners require or acquire learner autonomy in practising CMC?

-What affordances of CALL environments, and more particularly Web 2.0 environments, could help develop the different facets of learner autonomy?

-How do (a) digital literacy and (b) L2 proficiency relate to learner autonomy in online environments?

-What space exists for individuals to exercise learner autonomy in Web 2.0? How does individual autonomy relate to group autonomy in Web 2.0?

-How can online learning tasks be designed to foster both individual and group autonomy?

-How can individual learning gain be monitored and assessed in Web 2.0?

-With such questions at stake, what is the expected role of language centers?

-Which (new, or existing) forms of counselling may foster students’ learning-to-learn skills within Web 2.0 environments?

Interested authors should send a chapter abstract (200-300 words, plus references) and an author biography (100 words) to calico2017monograph@gmail.com before the end of August 2015.

Timeline

Notification of contributors 31 August 2015

First draft of papers to be submitted 1st Dec 2015

Second draft of papers to be submitted 15 Apr 2016

Special Issue to be published April 2017

Editors

Tim Lewis, Open University

Annick Rivens Mompean, Lille3 University

Marco Cappellini, Lille3 University