Vocabulary Use by Low, Moderate, and High ASL-Proficient Writers Compared to Hearing ESL and Monolingual Speakers. (65/547)

The written English vocabulary of 72 deaf elementary school students of various proficiency levels in American Sign Language (ASL) was compared with the performance of 60 hearing English-as-a-second-language (ESL) speakers and 61 hearing monolingual speakers of English, all of similar age. Students were asked to retell "The Tortoise and the Hare" story (previously viewed on video) in a writing activity. Writing samples were later scored for total number of words, use of words known to be highly frequent in children's writing, redundancy in writing, and use of English function words. All deaf writers showed significantly lower use of function words as compared to their hearing peers. Low-ASL-proficient students demonstrated a highly formulaic writing style, drawing mostly on high-frequency words and repetitive use of a limited range of function words. The moderate- and high-ASL-proficient deaf students' writing was not formulaic and incorporated novel, low-frequency vocabulary to communicate their thoughts. The moderate- and high-ASL students' performance revealed a departure from findings one might expect based on previous studies with deaf writers and their vocabulary use. The writing of the deaf writers also differed from the writing of hearing ESL speakers. Implications for deaf education and literacy instruction are discussed, with special attention to the fact that ASL-proficient, deaf second-language learners of English may be approaching English vocabulary acquisition in ways that are different from hearing ESL learners.  (+info)

Emergent literacy of deaf children. (66/547)

This article reviews the literature on emergent literacy in young deaf children, focusing on the nature and course of both emergent reading and emergent writing. Beginning with definitions and background information concerning emergent literacy as a field of study, it examines instructional approaches that support emergent literacy learning. The review of the literature is organized into four major sections that reflect the body of work to date. The article concludes with an eye toward the future of emergent literacy in pedagogy, theory, and research.  (+info)

An investigative laboratory course in human physiology using computer technology and collaborative writing. (67/547)

Active investigative student-directed experiences in laboratory science are being encouraged by national science organizations. A growing body of evidence from classroom assessment supports their effectiveness. This study describes four years of implementation and assessment of an investigative laboratory course in human physiology for 65 second-year students in sports medicine and biology at a small private comprehensive college. The course builds on skills and abilities first introduced in an introductory investigations course and introduces additional higher-level skills and more complex human experimental models. In four multiweek experimental modules, involving neuromuscular, reflex, and cardiovascular physiology, by use of computerized hardware/software with a variety of transducers, students carry out self-designed experiments with human subjects and perform data collection and analysis, collaborative writing, and peer editing. In assessments, including standard course evaluations and the Salgains Web-based evaluation, student responses to this approach are enthusiastic, and gains in their skills and abilities are evident in their comments and in improved performance.  (+info)

How to write an abstract that will be accepted for presentation at a national meeting. (68/547)

Preparation, submission, and presentation of an abstract are important facets of the research process, which benefit the investigator/author in several ways. Writing an abstract consists primarily of answering the questions, "Why did you start?" "What did you do?" "What did you find?" and "What does it mean?" A few practical steps in preparing to write the abstract can facilitate the process. This article discusses those steps and offers suggestions for writing each of an abstract's components (title, author list, introduction, methods, results, and conclusions); considers the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating a table or figure into the abstract; offers several general writing tips; and provides annotated examples of well-prepared abstracts: one from an original study, one from a method/device evaluation, and one from a case report.  (+info)

Anatomy of a research paper. (69/547)

Writing, editing, and publishing the paper is the last step in the research process. The paper tells the story of the project from inception, through the data-collection process, statistical analysis, and discussion of the results. Novice authors often struggle with writing and often find themselves with either nothing on paper or a weighty version of random thoughts. The process of writing the paper should be analogous to the research process. This article describes and provides a template for the essential sections and features of a scientific report (structured abstract, introduction, hypothesis, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions), describes authorship guidelines that have been established by professional societies, and discusses the importance of adequate and correct references.  (+info)

How to write the methods section of a research paper. (70/547)

The methods section of a research paper provides the information by which a study's validity is judged. Therefore, it requires a clear and precise description of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for why specific experimental procedures were chosen. The methods section should describe what was done to answer the research question, describe how it was done, justify the experimental design, and explain how the results were analyzed. Scientific writing is direct and orderly. Therefore, the methods section structure should: describe the materials used in the study, explain how the materials were prepared for the study, describe the research protocol, explain how measurements were made and what calculations were performed, and state which statistical tests were done to analyze the data. Once all elements of the methods section are written, subsequent drafts should focus on how to present those elements as clearly and logically as possibly. The description of preparations, measurements, and the protocol should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be presented, information should be presented in sub-sections according to topic. Material in each section should be organized by topic from most to least important.  (+info)

Effective use of tables and figures in abstracts, presentations, and papers. (71/547)

In some situations, tables, graphs, and figures can present certain types of information (including complicated relationships and sequences of events) more clearly and in less space than the same information would require in sentence form. However, do not use tables, graphs, and figures for small amounts of data that could be conveyed clearly and succinctly in a sentence. Also, do not reiterate in sentences the data that are shown in a table, graph, or figure: the point of creating a table or graph or figure is to eliminate that type of sentence from your manuscript. In building a data table you must balance the necessity that the table be complete with the equally important necessity that it not be too complex. Sometimes it is helpful to break a large table into several smaller ones to allow the reader to identify important information easily, but, conversely, it is a common mistake of novice authors to split up into several tables data that belong in one table. In almost all cases, only one table or graph or figure should be included in an abstract, and then only if it can convey essential information in less space and in a more easily interpretable way than the sentence form. For a poster, in almost all instances you should use only one typeface and one font in a table, graph, or figure. In general, do not use bold, italics, or color unless you are presenting a great deal of data and you need to highlight certain data values and you are certain that using bold, italics, or color will improve readability, which is rare. Do not include identical information in a table and a graph/figure. In reporting a clinical trial you will need to include a patient flow chart that identifies the number of patients initially screened for the study, the number of patients who were excluded (and why) after initial screening or in the final analysis, and how many patients entered, exited early, and completed each arm of the study. A treatment protocol should also be described with a flow chart. In preparing a graph the most common error is to include a line that suggests an unsubstantiated extrapolation between or beyond the data points. In selecting the graph's axes, avoid truncating, enlarging, or compressing the axes in ways that might make the graph confusing or misleading. To prepare clear, accurate, easily interpretable tables, graphs, and figures, rely on the rules described in authoritative guides such as the Council of Science Editors' Scientific Style and Format and the American Medical Association's Manual of Style.  (+info)

How to write an effective discussion. (72/547)

Explaining the meaning of the results to the reader is the purpose of the discussion section of a research paper. There are elements of the discussion that should be included and other things that should be avoided. Always write the discussion for the reader; remember that the focus should be to help the reader understand the study and that the highlight should be on the study data.  (+info)