Gotowa bibliografia na temat „South Carolina Institution for the Education of the Deaf and the Blind”

Perspectives in Education (PIE) seeks to stimulate important dialogue and intellectual exchange on education and democratic transitions with respect to schools, colleges, non-governmental organisations, universities and universities of technology in South Africa and globally. In this issue, we foreground discourses on topical issues in the provisioning of schooling in South Africa and in Sub-Saharan Africa. In the opening article by Doniwen Pietersen on Pedagogy of care in online teaching and learning environments at tertiary institutions, the author argues that whereas several of the technological platforms adopted during the Covid-19 lockdown had the potential to reach more students, they had also overloaded educators and pupils. It is argued that the role of university teachers should be reflected not only by the number of students engaged in class content, but also by the embodied cultural capital that students bring to online, face-to-face and hybrid learning spaces. In the same vein, Desiree Moodley in her capacity as a writing consultant, critically reflects on the dialogue around the adopting Universal Design for Learning framework at higher education institutions in South Africa, and its implications for writing centres and for meeting individual students’ learning needs. In the third article on students’ experiences with stories as lenses for sense-making, Deborah Lees discusses the experiences of first-year university students using storytelling as a lens to reveal identity, and to better understand their transition from school to university. Staying with the theme of student experiences at university, Róan Slabbert analysed peer-assisted learning (PAL), which over the years have been subjected to ongoing development and ultimately implementation into many so-called 'high-risk' programmes. Slabbert concluded that a statistically significant difference was found in the overall comparison between the pre- and post-intervention results after the dependent t-test was performed. Staying with education and the Covid19 pandemic, Ramgovind, Valashiya and Pramjeeth discuss Educational resources leveraged by students at a Private Higher Education Institution during the Covid-19 pandemic. They found that by understanding the educational resources (i.e. human, material and financial) that were leveraged by students during Covid-19, PHEIs can streamline decision-making regarding operations, assistance provided to students, and manage online learning in a manner that mitigates pitfalls should events similar to the pandemic occur. Transitioning from university to the world of work is an often-neglected research area. In this section of PIE, we start by looking at beginner teachers transitioning from university graduates to fully legitimate participants in the teaching profession. Ruben Abraham, Stephen Daniels and Lucinda Du Plooy offer an insightful view on how a formal mentoring programme can assist students in the transitioning from university graduates into school practitioners. Keeping with the topic of transitioning, Dale Langsford asks the important question on how pedagogically focused conversations enable pre-service teachers to make sense of observed teaching. Moving into the classroom situation, Jacqueline Goldin, and Carolina Suransky report on their research where through there engagement with citizen science, they experienced the transformative power of affect and the relevance of emotions in education as a social and political project. In the next article, we explore the relationship between the philosophy of ubuntu and the principles of inclusive education. In their analyses, Jabulani Mpofu and Maximus Sefotho found that there is a very strong relationship between the philosophy of ubuntu and the principles of inclusive education. In the next cluster of articles, we move into the classroom situation. In the first of this series, Ottilia Goto and Jameson Goto look at Secondary school students' perceptions of the 21st-century teaching of critical thinking, collaboration, communication, creativity and innovation (4Cs) in Zimbabwe. Their findings highlight the need for teachers to embed critical thinking and creativity activities within collaborative and communication learning activities. In the next article, Fungirai Mudhefi, Koena Mabotja and Dimakatjo Muthelo analysed the use of Van Hiele’s geometric thinking model to interpret Grade 12 learners’ learning difficulties in Euclidean Geometry. They recommend that educators should use constructivist teaching approaches that encourage learners’ conceptual understanding instead of traditional methods that promote rote memorisation of geometric facts. The third in this cluster is an article by Bongumusa Gubevu and it examines geography teachers’, parents’ and learners’ understanding and experiences of the integration of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the teaching of that subject. A number of articles explore different management-related topics. First, Jama, Buka, Naidoo, and Moloi report on research into school support stakeholders’ perceptions in identifying learning barriers and reported that findings revealed insufficient knowledge about the identification of learning barriers. Next, we look at middle leaders pursuing teacher safety against learner victimization. In their research, Darrell de Klerk and June Monica Palmer explore teacher safety against learner victimization, which is a growing concern worldwide, and this problem is exacerbated by a lack of understanding and readiness to implement policies to address this matter. Selaelo Maifala analyses the school management team’s role of defining the school vision and mission at a South African rural school. He concluded that SMT members do not understand that the vision and mission could serve more than a visual purpose and that it must be designed to guide principles to direct smaller objectives within the organisation. Concluding the management section, Jardine, Shaik, and Adendorff reported in their research on the mentoring and to be mentored in Grade R. The last cluster of articles offers very stimulating and thought-provoking reading on three important topics. First, Obakeng Kagola discusses Foundation Phase male teachers’ experiences of teaching comprehensive sexuality education in the Eastern Cape. Next, we look at the right to education for children with autism in Lesotho as discussed by Mahlape Tseeke and Kelello Alicia Rakolobe. Beausetha Bruwer and Annalene van Staden explore the psychology of teaching deaf learners using the Bilingual-Bicultural approach's theory and application to accommodate the familial and social contexts, language use, and overall development differences among deaf learners and their hearing peers, and among themselves. The last contribution in this section deals with Foundation Phase learners with visual impairments. Jossie Steyn, Mariette Koen, and Hantie Theron look at a collaborative approach among teachers to support the teaching such learners. The authors describe the research in which teachers were actively involved in the research process, and how teachers contributed to changes that promoted the inclusion and success of Foundation Phase learners with visual impairments. We close this edition of Perspectives in Education with a thought-provoking article by Nomsa Mnisi and Thokozani Mathebula critically analysing the World Bank’s agenda to reframe inclusive education through its investment projects and inclusive policies. According to the authors this neoliberal approach results in unevenness and social inequalities. and the exclusion of learners in schools. They put forward recommendations to prevent the exclusion of its intended recipients, namely the poor, unprivileged and excluded learners in post-apartheid South African schools and instead to support universal and free public education. We trust that you will find this edition stimulating and thought-provoking and that the views presented will stimulate discourse and research that will further grow and develop the boundaries of education. Jan Nieuwenhuis Editor

The panel presents a research project funded by an internal grant at the University of South Carolina (USC) investigating equity of access to information by Blind, Visually Impaired, and Print-Disabled (BVIPD) students. BVIPD students often experience inequitable access to information, including but not limited to a time gap in receiving course content that is otherwise more readily available to non-BVIPD students (Scott and Aquino, 2020). This is a social justice and human rights issue. The researchers will explore ways in which university Disability Service Offices (DSOs) can work with university libraries to maximize access to accessible content to BVIPD students. The BVIPD population is historically underserved by libraries (Bonnici et al., 2015; Epp, 2006; Copeland, 2011; Copeland, 2012; Copeland, 2023; Kawooya, 2023). Most published literature is not available to the BVIPD students, with only 5% of published works available in formats accessible to BVIPD learners (National Federation for the Blind, 2019). The study is designed to develop a Campus Accessibility Partnership model between DSOs and academic libraries. The overarching research question is: How might DSOs and academic libraries better coordinate to effectively and efficiently serve BVIPD students? The presenters will share outcomes of phase one of the study, including a detailed review of literature, research design and preliminary results. Because it is essential to understand the perspectives and potential contributions of all stakeholders in developing a framework for improving equity of access and accessibility for BVIPD students, the researchers are also seeking faculty perspectives. Faculty includes all who teach semester-long courses, regardless of tenure or rank. The researchers will introduce the literature review, the methodological approach, and preliminary results. The session will continue with an interactive discussion with conference attendees, who will be invited to reflect on key concepts and the following questions: What, if any, problems have students at your institution(s) experienced with receiving course content in accessible formats? In working with DSOs to ensure BVIPD students receive materials in accessible formats in a timely manner, what, if any, barriers do you experience? What role(s) do you play to facilitate greater equity of access for BVIPD students? What is your knowledge and awareness of your students' experiences with your campus DSO? What formats of accessible course content does your campus provide as accommodations to BVIPD students? If DSOs coordinated with academic libraries to adopt practices for saving accessible format materials for future use, what impact do you think this would have? The theoretical framework is Jaeger and Burnett’s (2010) multi-level information worlds theory. In this framework, information worlds have structural and behavioral implications, in that social constructs (such as the value ascribed to disability and accessibility) and societal structures/infrastructures (such as law) directly and reciprocally inform one another. Information worlds “provides a framework by which to simultaneously examine information behavior at both the immediate and the broader social levels'' (Jaeger and Burnett, 2010, p. 1). The study will analyze five interconnected concepts of information worlds theory: social norms; social types; information value; information behavior; and boundaries. The study employs a mixed method design using both qualitative methods (interviews with DSO staff, academic librarians, and BVIPD students) and a quantitative method (survey-questionnaire with instructors). Prior to the design and execution of the questionnaires, the research team will do extensive literature review and preliminary analysis of the relevant trends using the University of South Carolina’s Social Media Insight Lab. Any news insights gleaned from both sources may lead to changes to the instructor questionnaire. The presenters will share the research design and preliminary results from the literature review and Social Media Insight Lab data. Conference participants will work in groups to reflect upon the questions above. Understanding the lived experiences of faculty working with BVIPD populations will help begin to bridge the gap experienced by these marginalized students by identifying strengths and failures of current policies and procedures between DSOs, academic libraries and librarians, and faculty. Discussions among library and information science (LIS) faculty will contribute significantly to developing a partnership model that serves the needs of all stakeholders in ensuring equity of access and accessibility for BVIPD students. They will also steer future efforts to reduce the inequalities experienced by BVIPD students. Faculty interact with students of all abilities on a more regular basis. Accordingly, faculty can offer their insights from working with BVIPD students, DSO staff, and academic librarians. The primary goal of the panel is to raise awareness for accessibility issues faced by BVIPD students and facilitate a dialogue amongst educators. Ultimately, bridging gaps in understanding the needs of BVIPD students and the roles faculty, DSOs, and academic librarians can and should play in fulfilling these needs can impact equitable access to education. Equitable access to education impacts BVIPD students’ likelihood of academic success, subsequent employment, income earning potential, and ability to enjoy a full life experience.

Welcome to Volume 3, Issue 1 of the International Journal for Educational Integrity. Since the last issue, the journal has received a large number of submissions; unfortunately, however, most of the submissions did not meet the journal's publishing criteria and were therefore rejected by the reviewers. Reasons for rejection included the following: The topic was not relevant to the readership of the IJEI. While the journal necessarily covers a broad and interdisciplinary range of topics, this does not mean that anything vaguely related to education will be reviewed and/or accepted. The submission was a thinly disguised version of an an already published paper. The IJEI only accepts original, previously unpublished work. If the paper has previously been presented at a conference, but not published in the proceedings, it will be considered eligible for review. However, please ensure that all related work is appropriately self-cited. For those interested in the controversial topic of selfplagiarism, please see the recent publication: Bretag, T. & Carapiet, S. (2007), A preliminary study to determine the extent of selfplagiarism in Australian academic research, in Plagiary: Cross-Disciplinary Studies in Plagiarism, Fabrication and Falsification. Vol 2(5), 1-15. http://www.plagiary.org/ The standard of work, from both a research and presentation perspective, was not of an appropriate standard. The IJEI encourages scholars from a variety of educational environments to submit papers, but asks that authors seek editorial assistance where necessary to ensure the readability of the submission. Early career researchers are encouraged to seek assistance with methodology and presentation of findings. After delaying publication of the journal for some months, I am pleased to publish the current issue with four high-quality and diverse papers. The first, by Geoffrey Crisp from the University of Adelaide, reports on the results of an online staff survey on attitudes to plagiarism issues and the resources in place at that institution to deal with plagiarism. In the second paper, Lorie Kloda and Karen Nicholson from McGill University in Quebec, explore the role of libraries in Canada to promote academic integrity. The third paper looks at educational integrity from a very different point of view. Mike Steer and Frances Gentle, from the Royal Institute for Deaf and Blind Children in Newcastle, Australia, discuss educational integrity in the context of providing 'educational accommodations' to students who are blind or visually impaired. The fourth and final paper in this issue also takes an unusual perspective. Martin Lipscomb, from the University of the West of England, presents an exemplar homophobic argument as a means of calling for 'communicative integrity' between educators and students. Lipscomb makes the case that communicative integrity is a necessary pre-requisite for open dialogue in moral education. All four papers make a valuable and unique contribution to the field. Given our experience with the current issue, we have decided to publish papers as soon as they have been accepted by reviewers and all recommended revisions have been made. This will not only change the 'look' of the journal, but will ensure that new work is disseminated in a timely fashion. It is anticipated that this will also encourage others researching in the broad field of academic/educational integrity to write and submit high quality papers to the IJEI. Finally, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Helen Marsden for her contribution as a Foundation Editor on the journal in 2005 and 2006. Helen has accepted a position with the Department of Education, Science and Training in Canberra, and we wish her all the best in this next exciting phase of her career. I hope readers enjoy the current issue, and I look forward to receiving submissions for the next issue/s, or for the upcoming 3rd Asia-Pacific Conference on Educational Integrity: Creating a Culture of Integrity, to be held at the University of South Australia, 6-7 December 2007. Please send all submissions for both media to me directly at tracey.bretag@unisa.edu.au. Tracey Bretag, Editor, International Journal for Educational Integrity. Co-Chair, 3rd Asia-Pacific Conference on Educational Integrity: Creating a Culture of Integrity http://www.unisa.edu.au/educationalintegrity/conference/