A Contrastive Study of Curriculum Implementation in English Gifted and Regular Classes:A Case Study of an EFL Teacher in Taiwan

[[abstract]]ABSTRACT This study aimed to investigate a senior high school English teacher’s curriculum implementation in both the second-year English gifted and regular classes in a public school in Taiwan. The focuses of this case study were placed on (a) the differentiation practices in terms of content materials, instructional strategies, and assessment implementation and (b) the factors influencing her decision-making in both classes. The data collection instruments in this qualitative study consisted of two-month classroom observations, semi-structured interviews, and questionnaire survey. Drawing on the comprehensive data, it was found that the target teacher adopted traditional teacher-centered and form-focused instruction, and there were no significant instructional differences between the two classes. Only slightly differentiated curriculum and instruction was discovered. Generally, in terms of content materials, compacted/accelerated, challenging, enriched and deepened materials were more salient in the English gifted class. Regarding instructional strategies, the two classes differed from each other mainly in the teacher’s use of the target language, training of processing skills, use of questioning, and implementation of discussions. As for assessment, the English talented learners were given stricter grading policies for oral presentations. Despite these few differentiations, the in-depth interview data have shown the target teacher’s ample knowledge and competence for providing differentiation for the English talented learners. Basically, in addition to student and administration factors, the target teacher’s controversial belief claiming equal curriculum provision between gifted/talented and regular learners also dictated her differentiation practices. For teacher thinking, the interview data indicated that both internal (e.g., teachers’ beliefs and personality) and external (e.g., student variables, content materials, administrative policies, social trends, and student and peer suggestions) factors influenced the participant teacher’s decision-making. Additionally, a general consistency between the espoused beliefs and real practices was observed. Results and findings of this research provide some pedagogical implications for gifted education, English education, and teacher education. First, this study reveals ways English teachers of the gifted can do, based on the existing curriculum, to provide appropriate differentiation. Second, it suggests the educational authority should attach importance to issues of English talented students’ identification and placement process. Third, in response to the teacher’s controversial theory of fairness, participations in in-service workshops are encouraged to broaden teachers’ understanding about gifted education and professional knowledge. Fourth, it demonstrates how EFL teachers can do to promote learning in mainstream education. Fifth, it is suggested that reflective teaching should be incorporated in teacher education to enhance teaching effectiveness and teacher growth. Moreover, increasing instruction hours for General English per week and recruiting outside part-time faculty to teach enrichment courses for the English gifted class are recommended as well.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field