PiE 2016 Volume 34 Issue 1

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11660/3209

Browse

Browsing PiE 2016 Volume 34 Issue 1 by Subject "Academic rigour"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Humanising pedagogy: an alternative approach to curriculum design that enhances rigour in a B.Ed. programme
    (Faculty of Education, University of the Free State, 2016) Geduld, Deidre; Sathorar, Heloise
    The minimum requirements for teacher education qualifications (MRTEQ) draws attention to the complexity of teaching as an activity that is premised upon the acquisition, integration and application of different types of knowledge practices or learning. As such, all initial teacher education programmes in South Africa should be designed such that they include disciplinary knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, practical knowledge, fundamental knowledge and situational knowledge. These types of knowledge underpin a teacher’s ability to facilitate meaningful learning in the classroom, which in turn facilitates higher education’s responsiveness to societal needs. In this article, we reflect on the faculty’s recent curriculum renewal journey towards designing a coherent and rigorous B.Ed. programme. We locate our curriculum renewal journey in critical theory and our new curriculum itself is grounded in humanising pedagogies, critical reflection and inquiry. We also describe the consultation and collaborative processes we engaged in to ensure that our new B.Ed. programme would be responsive to the needs of our students and society.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The struggle for academic rigour in assessment education
    (Faculty of Education, University of the Free State, 2016) Steinberg, Carola; Waspe, Tom
    This article explores the meaning of academic rigour in relation to a fourth year assessment education course for pre-service teachers. We present the requirements for a course to be considered academically rigorous, describe the course we offered in the light of these criteria and then present the students’ responses. Our findings indicate differing perspectives between lecturers and students on what it means to learn about assessment and to be academically rigorous. Whereas the lecturers were expecting engagement with assessment theory and practice from all students, many students ‘tuned out’ whenever the course did not engage them in practical examples related to their subject specialisation. Only exceptional students moved beyond compliance with course requirements. The struggle for academic rigour involves developing a better alignment between lecturer and student expectations. This has implications for more explicit explanation of course purposes as well as increased cooperation with subject specialisation methodology courses.