moodle/lang/no/help/forum/ratings.html

<p align="center"><b><EFBFBD> gi foruminnlegg poeng/karakter</b></p>
<p>Hver enkelt post kan vurderes med en skala basert p<> teorien om <strong>
separate and connected knowing</strong>. </p>
<p>Denne teorien kan hjelpe deg <20> se p<> interaksjoner mellom mennesker p<> en ny 
m<EFBFBD>te. Den beskriver to ulike m<>ter vi kan evaluere og l<>re om det vi ser og 
h<EFBFBD>rer. </p>
<p>Although each of us may use these two methods in different amounts at 
different times, it may be useful to imagine two people as examples, one who is 
a mostly separate knower (Jim) and the other a mostly connected knower (Mary).</p>
<ul>
  <li>Jim likes to remain as 'objective' as possible without including his 
  feelings and emotions. When in a discussion with other people who may have 
  different ideas, he likes to defend his own ideas, using logic to find holes 
  in his opponent's ideas. He is critical of new ideas unless they are proven 
  facts from reputable sources such as textbooks, respected teachers or his own 
  direct experience. Jim is a very <strong>separate knower</strong>.<br>
  <br>
&nbsp;</li>
  <li>Mary is more sensitive to other people. She is skilled at empathy and 
  tends to listen and ask questions until she feels she can connect and 
  &quot;understand things from their point of view&quot;. She learns by trying to share 
  the experiences that led to the knowledge she finds in other people. When 
  talking to others, she avoids confrontation and will often try to help the 
  other person if she can see a way to do so, using logical suggestions. Mary is 
  a very <strong>connected knower</strong>. </li>
</ul>
<p>Did you notice in these examples that the separate knower is male and the 
connected knower is female? Some studies have shown that statistically this 
tends to be the case, however individual people can be anywhere in the spectrum 
between these two extremes. </p>
<p>For a collaborative and effective group of learners it may be best if 
everyone were able to use BOTH ways of knowing.</p>
<p>In a particular situation like an online forum, a single post by a person may 
exhibit either of these characteristics, or even both. Someone who is generally 
very connected may post a very separate-sounding message, and vice versa. The 
purpose of rating each post using this scale is to:</p>
<blockquote>
  <p>a) help you think about these issues when reading other posts<br>
  b) provide feedback to each author on how they are being seen by others</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The results are not used towards student assessment in any way, they are just 
to help improve communication and learning.</p>
<hr>
<p><br>
In case you're interested, here are some references to papers by the authors who 
originally developed these ideas:</p>
<ul>
  <li>Belenky, M.F., Clinchy, B.M., Goldberger, N.R., &amp; Tarule, J.M. (1986). 
  Women's ways of knowing: the development of self, voice, and mind. New York, 
  NY: Basic Books. </li>
  <li>Clinchy, B.M. (1989a). The development of thoughtfulness in college women: 
  Integrating reason and care. American Behavioural Scientist, 32(6), 647-657.
  </li>
  <li>Clinchy, B.M. (1989b). On critical thinking &amp; connected knowing. Liberal 
  education, 75(5), 14-19. </li>
  <li>Clinchy, B.M. (1996). Connected and separate knowing; Toward a marriage of 
  two minds. In N.R. Goldberger, Tarule, J.M., Clinchy, B.M. &amp; </li>
  <li>Belenky, M.F. (Eds.), Knowledge, Difference, and Power; Essays inspired by 
  <20>Women<65>s Ways of Knowing<6E> (pp. 205-247). New York, NY: Basic Books. </li>
  <li>Galotti, K. M., Clinchy, B. M., Ainsworth, K., Lavin, B., &amp; Mansfield, A. 
  F. (1999). A New Way of Assessing Ways of Knowing: The Attitudes Towards 
  Thinking and Learning Survey (ATTLS). Sex Roles, 40(9/10), 745-766. </li>
  <li>Galotti, K. M., Reimer, R. L., &amp; Drebus, D. W. (2001). Ways of knowing as 
  learning styles: Learning MAGIC with a partner. Sex Roles, 44(7/8), 419-436.
  </li>
</ul>