Global Education in Second Language Teaching

This article paints an optimistic picture of the role we second language teachers can play not only in improving our students' language proficiency but also in infusing global education into our classes as we join with our students to address global concerns, such as peace, prosperity, environmental protection, and human rights. The article is divided into four parts. The first part describes global education and identifies organizations of second language educators participating in global education. The second part of the article focuses on two key areas of global education: peace education and environmental education. Next, we address questions that second language teachers frequently ask about including global education in their teaching. Lastly, we supply lists of print and electronic resources on peace education and environmental education

Advancing Learner Autonomy in Tefl Via Collaborative Learning

Learner autonomy has been defined as \u27a capacity to control important aspects of one\u27s learning\u27(Benson, 2013, p. 852). In the teaching of additional languages, learner autonomy dates back at least to the 1970s. For instance, Trim, who was a leader in the teaching of additional languages in Europe, stated that a goal of language education was to: make the process of language learning more democratic by providing the con- ceptual tools for the planning, construction and conduct of courses closely geared to the needs, motivations and characteristics of the learner and enabling him [sic] so far as possible to steer and control his own progress. (1978, p. 1

BER of MRC for M-QAM with imperfect channel estimation over correlated Nakagami-m fading

In this contribution, we provide an exact BER analysis for M-QAM transmission over arbitrarily correlated Nakagami-m fading channels with maximal-ratio combining (MRC) and imperfect channel estimation at the receiver. Assuming an arbitrary joint fading distribution and a generic pilot-based channel estimation method, we derive an exact BER expression that involves an expectation over (at most) 4 variables, irrespective of the number of receive antennas. The resulting BER expression includes well-known PDFs and the PDF of only the norm of the channel vector. In order to obtain the latter PDF for arbitrarily correlated Nakagami-m fading, several approaches from the literature are discussed. For identically distributed and arbitrarily correlated Nakagami-m channels with integer m, we present several BER performance results, which are obtained from numerical evaluation and confirmed by straightforward computer simulations. The numerical evaluation of the exact BER expression turns out to be much less time-consuming than the computer simulations

Ten Strengths of How Teachers Do Cooperative Learning

Cooperative learning involves students in working together with peers to learn, to develop learn-ing skills and to enjoy the learning process. This paper examines ten areas in which the author be-lieves he and other teachers do cooperative learning well. These areas are: (1) keeping group size small, usually four or fewer; (2) encouraging students to form heterogeneous groups; (3) monitoring groups as they cooperate and encouraging groups to rely on themselves; (4) creating tasks that the groups find challenging, but not too challenging; (5) encouraging group members to do their fair share in their groups; (6) facilitating a feeling of positive interdependence among group members; (7) being willing to try new ideas in their implementation of cooperative learning; (8) learning from their ex-periences in using cooperative learning; (9) looking for opportunities to share with colleagues about their use of cooperative learning; (10) being cooperative in their lives outside the classroo

An appropriateness review of urgent in-hours nontrauma CT brain scans at a single tertiary referral centre in South Africa - are we scanning rationally?

Aim: To determine if urgent, non-trauma in-hours CT head scan requests in the GSH department of radiology are being appropriately requested and completed, as well as determining the radiation dose for each study. Secondly, to make recommendations to improve local practice based on the findings of this study. Methods: A retrospective study was undertaken of 100 qualifying in-hours urgent, nontrauma CT head scans completed at the GSH department of radiology between 01/10/2015 and 31/03/2016. All qualifying CT request data and dose records were collected and anonymised, after ethical and institutional approval. Three radiologists at GSH were enlisted to review the request information. Each request was reviewed and categorised by both the researcher and each consultant individually to determine the indication and appropriateness. The researcher used previously published, objective criteria (Rothrock Criteria) to review requests, while the radiologists used their own interpretation of accepted local practice. The researcher recorded positive and negative scan outcomes, radiation doses and calculated the Effective Dose (ED) for each study. Results were recorded in Excel and statistical analysis using weighted Kappa analysis was undertaken. Results: Study cohort CT scans made up 15.6% of the total emergency head CT scans over the study period. The mean patient age was 52.3 years (range: 18.8-87.4 years). One-third (34; 34%) were older than 60 years with 33 (97%) having at least 2 positive Rothrock criteria. Most CT scans (86%) consisted of a single study, while the remaining comprised two or more. Average ED was 3.27 mSv (range: 1.03-4.33 mSv). 52 (52%) participants had abnormal CT findings, independent of age-group. Discrepancy in assigning study indication and appropriateness between the researcher and consultants was present, with at best moderate agreement (weighted-Kappa range 0.09-0.52). The researcher showed slight to fair agreement between scan outcome and request appropriateness using the Rothrock criteria (weighted kappa 0.20; 95% CI: 0.06-0.35, p=.00861), while the consultant consensus performed slightly worse (0.10; 95% CI: -0.05-0.26, p=.19728). Conclusion: Retrospective application of the Rothrock criteria to patient referrals produced better correlation with outcome than current departmental practice. However, there is at best moderate agreement between consultants with regard to classification of referrals which could negatively affect the application of Rothrock criteria in practice. Incorporating the Rothrock criteria into published departmental guidelines, in conjunction with other interventions to improve clinician requesting practices, is recommended. The formation of a Quality Assurance team and the use of existing dose-reducing techniques may assist in reducing radiation doses further

Suggestions on Writing for Publication in Language Learning Journals

This article provides suggestions on writing for journals in the field of language learning. These suggestions are presented in the three sections. The first section discusses how to begin. Suggestions in this section are that we appreciate the benefits of writing for publication, develop good ideas, work efficiently, ponder options as to what type of writing to do, choose a good topic, consider replication of other's research, and cooperate with others. The second section presents suggestions on doing the actual writing. Here, it is suggested that we connect ideas, delve deeply into the ideas we present, strive to write the reader friendlymanner, use visuals, and improve our writing by noticing how other journal authors write. The third section concerns relations with editors. The advice given is that we choose carefully the journal to which we submit our work, follow that journal's directions to contributors, include a cover letter, be prepared to wait patiently, welcome critical feedback from editors and reviewers, and view editors as colleagues. Received: 10th November 1998; Revised: 31st December 1998; Accepted: 5th January 1999How to cite: Jacobs, G. (2015). Suggestions on Writing for Publication in Language Learning Journals.TEFLIN Journal - A publication on the teaching and learning of English, 10(1), 1-16. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v10i1/1-16Permalink/DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v10i1/1-16Cited by (Google Scholar)Â

Collaborative Learning or Cooperative Learning? The Name Is Not Important; Flexibility Is

Abstract A great deal of theory and research, not to mention students’ and teachers’ practical experience, supports the use of group activities in education. Collaborative learning and cooperative learning are two terms commonly used in discussions of how and why to use group activities. This article looks at the issue of whether the two terms collaborative learning and cooperative learning are synonymous or whether they represent different conceptualisations of how and why students should interact as part of their learning. Those scholars who differentiate the two terms often see collaborative learning as more student centred and cooperative learning as a more teacher centred way to facilitate student-student interaction. The present article argues that collaborative and cooperative learning should be seen as synonymous student centric approaches, and that teachers and students, regardless of which of the two terms they use, should and will vary the ways they shape their learning environments in order to best facilitate the cognitive and affective benefits that student-student interaction offers. Keywords: Collaborative learning, cooperative learning, flexibilit