東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Critiquing Critical Pedagogy: A Mult...

McKinney, Matthew R.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Critiquing Critical Pedagogy: A Multidisciplinary Theoretical Inquiry.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Critiquing Critical Pedagogy: A Multidisciplinary Theoretical Inquiry./
作者:	McKinney, Matthew R.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2017,
面頁冊數:	203 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 79-02, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International79-02A.
標題:	Rhetoric. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10280514
ISBN:	9780355052305

Critiquing Critical Pedagogy: A Multidisciplinary Theoretical Inquiry.
McKinney, Matthew R.

Critiquing Critical Pedagogy: A Multidisciplinary Theoretical Inquiry. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2017 - 203 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 79-02, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Nevada, Reno, 2017.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

This dissertation posits that while critical pedagogy reflects composition studies's understanding of how students learn to write in significant ways, it is also characterized by several limitations that can undermine its efficacy. Essentially, critical pedagogy does not comprehensively address the need to provide scaffolding from more traditional pedagogies, the influence of peer relationships on student engagement/agency, the rejection of empowerment through engagement with disciplinary discourses, and the tendency of political issues to favor the instructor's knowledgebase over students', to the point of hindering student-centered learning. In order to form a theoretical response to these limitations in critical composition pedagogy, this dissertation examines scholarship in critical pedagogy, other pedagogical traditions and models, cognitive psychology, and rhetoric and composition. Chapter 2 argues that critical composition instructors should structure their course around solicitations of student experiential knowledge and offer scaffolded practice for students' making meaningful choices through initially providing structured choices. Chapter 3 reviews the significance of cognitive psychology research on young adult neurocognitive development, specifically in terms of scaffolding critical pedagogical concepts and responsibilities for students, as well as cultivating strong, mutually agentic peer relationships. Chapter 4 argues that critical composition instructors can help students cultivate agency and critical engagement through textual relationships and disciplinary discourses by drawing on both classical and modern rhetorical scholarship, with the enthymeme in particular as a potentially valuable rhetorical tool for multidisciplinary discourse analysis. Chapter 5 reviews the limitations of critical pedagogy that I have identified, and also what a general response to these limitations should look like in practice. I then discuss a pedagogical model I designed around these limitations and responses. I review and reflect on what aspects of my pedagogy worked well and what did not, possible reasons for why certain elements did not work, and how those can be addressed in subsequent theorizing and practice.

ISBN: 9780355052305Subjects--Topical Terms:

516647
Rhetoric.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Cognitive psychology

Critiquing Critical Pedagogy: A Multidisciplinary Theoretical Inquiry.
LDR:03509nmm a2200385 4500 001 2268073
005 20200810100535.5
008 220629s2017 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780355052305
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10280514
035 $a (MiAaPQ)unr:12283
035 $a AAI10280514
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a McKinney, Matthew R. $3 3545329
245 1 0 $a Critiquing Critical Pedagogy: A Multidisciplinary Theoretical Inquiry.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2017
300 $a 203 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 79-02, Section: A.
500 $a Publisher info.: Dissertation/Thesis.
500 $a Advisor: Detweiler, Jane;Macauley, William.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Nevada, Reno, 2017.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a This dissertation posits that while critical pedagogy reflects composition studies's understanding of how students learn to write in significant ways, it is also characterized by several limitations that can undermine its efficacy. Essentially, critical pedagogy does not comprehensively address the need to provide scaffolding from more traditional pedagogies, the influence of peer relationships on student engagement/agency, the rejection of empowerment through engagement with disciplinary discourses, and the tendency of political issues to favor the instructor's knowledgebase over students', to the point of hindering student-centered learning. In order to form a theoretical response to these limitations in critical composition pedagogy, this dissertation examines scholarship in critical pedagogy, other pedagogical traditions and models, cognitive psychology, and rhetoric and composition. Chapter 2 argues that critical composition instructors should structure their course around solicitations of student experiential knowledge and offer scaffolded practice for students' making meaningful choices through initially providing structured choices. Chapter 3 reviews the significance of cognitive psychology research on young adult neurocognitive development, specifically in terms of scaffolding critical pedagogical concepts and responsibilities for students, as well as cultivating strong, mutually agentic peer relationships. Chapter 4 argues that critical composition instructors can help students cultivate agency and critical engagement through textual relationships and disciplinary discourses by drawing on both classical and modern rhetorical scholarship, with the enthymeme in particular as a potentially valuable rhetorical tool for multidisciplinary discourse analysis. Chapter 5 reviews the limitations of critical pedagogy that I have identified, and also what a general response to these limitations should look like in practice. I then discuss a pedagogical model I designed around these limitations and responses. I review and reflect on what aspects of my pedagogy worked well and what did not, possible reasons for why certain elements did not work, and how those can be addressed in subsequent theorizing and practice.
590 $a School code: 0139.
650 4 $a Rhetoric. $3 516647
653 $a Cognitive psychology
653 $a Composition
653 $a Critical pedagogy
653 $a Engagement
653 $a Interdisciplinary
653 $a Scaffolding
690 $a 0681
710 2 $a University of Nevada, Reno. $b English. $3 1043545
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 79-02A.
790 $a 0139
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2017
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10280514