Производители сварочных материалов, имеющие сертификат соответствия в системе УкрСепро, выданный в НТЦ «СЕПРОЗ» (по состоянию на 01.01.2009)

Deliberate practice is increasingly recognised as necessary for professional development. This paper sets out to explore in what ways student teachers’ learning activities in a teacher education programme can be characterised as deliberate practice. Based on an in-depth exploration of 574 learning activities, our results highlight the different ways in which activities in teacher education programmes can be designed, the different motivations students have to engage in them repetitively, and different ways in which feedback can be organised, within contextual constraints posed by all professional environments. Results also indicate that self-improvement is not the only motivation for engaging in deliberate practice for student teachers, as pupil improvement is also considered important. These results support a context-specific operationalisation of deliberate practice and provide starting points for teacher education programmes to promote deliberate practice in their curriculum

The regulation of constructive learning processes

\u3cp\u3eBackground. Classical instructional design theories and constructivist theo ries disagree on the issue of how high-quality learning can be realised. Research on student learning has identified a large number of learning components, but the problems of overlap among conceptualisations and the direction of interrelations among constructs have received little attention. Aims. The main aims of this study were: increasing integration of existing models of student learning; gaining understanding of the regulation of con structive learning processes; and investigating the degree to which these phenomena generalise across contexts. Samples. A total of 717 students from an open university (OU) and 795 students from a regular university (RU), from various academic disciplines, participated in the studies. The mean age of the OU students was 36.2 years and of the RU students 22.5 years. Methods. Based on phenomenographic studies, a diagnostic instrument was constructed that covered four learning components: cognitive processing, metacognitive regulation, mental learning models, and learning orientations. It was administered to all students from the samples. Factor analyses on the data were conducted to achieve a more integrated model of student learning. Regression analyses were performed to study the directionality in the regula tion of learning processes. Results. Four learning dimensions were consistently found: an undirected, reproduction-directed, meaning-directed and application-directed style. These styles consisted of typical combinations of learning components. More over, students' use of constructive processing strategies was explained much better by self-regulation of learning than by external regulation. These find ings were almost identical at both educational institutions, indicating a high degree of generalisability. Conclusions. The integrated model of student learning developed in this study can reduce the overlap among learning component conceptualisations considerably. The results stress the importance of process-oriented teaching models for improving the quality of student learning.\u3c/p\u3

Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and strategies: a phenomenographic analysis

\u3cp\u3eThis paper addresses the following questions: how do students perform metacognitive, cognitive and affective learning functions; how is the execution of learning functions regulated by internal and external sources; what learning styles can be discerned from the viewpoint of learning functions and regulation? Subjects were students from an open distance university and a regular university. They were interviewed extensively about their learning strategies, mental models of learning, learning orientations and interpretations and appraisals of instructional measures. The interviews were analyzed in a phenomenographic way. The results indicate that there are large differences among students in the manner in which they carry out learning functions, that these differences are associated with internal and external sources, and that four qualitatively different learning styles can be discerned: an undirected, a reproduction directed, a meaning directed and an application directed learning style. Mental models of learning and learning orientations turn out to be related to the way in which students interpret, appraise and use instructional measures to regulate their learning activities. It is concluded that in many instances instructional measures do not have the intended effects. Suggestions are given regarding the implications of these results for the improvement of teaching practices in higher education.\u3c/p\u3