This essay has the objective of approximating a revision of the technologies I’ve used in different subject over this last academic year at college. As an Anthropology student of the Social Sciences Faculty of the Universidad de Chile, I think that the use of technologies presents itself as a big advantage as a learning tool for subjects, especially those that have to do with methodologies in social investigation. That’s why I pretend to demonstrate that the different technologies learnt this year, the 2009 Anthropology student has at his/her hands a considerable advantage over students licensed years earlier because, as it will be seen, these technologies facilitate the good exercise of the profession.
Years earlier, the Social Anthropology students weren’t taught technologies in depth. However, since this year, there has been an introduction to subjects, especially those that deal with methodologies, the teaching of technologies. Let’s review two of them to demonstrate how 2009 students have an advantage towards students from years before.
1. Atlas.ti. This software was learnt Qualitative Methods and Techniques in Social Investigation. Atlas.ti is an informatics tool being its objective the facilitation of the qualitative analysis of big volumes of textual data, mainly. Being that its focus is qualitative analysis, it’s not meant to automate the process of analysis, but simply to help the human interpreter, considerably speeding up a lot of the activities implicated in the qualitative analysis and interpretation. For example, the segmentation of texts in passages or quotes, codification or the writing of comments or notes, in other words, all of those activities that, if we didn’t have the software, we would have to do manually with the aid of paper, pencils, scissors, charts and photocopies.
2. SPSS. For the Quantitative Methods in Social Investigation course, we were taught how to use the software known as Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). SPSS is an informatics statistics program very used in the Social Sciences and the marketing studies. It is very popular due to the possibility of working with huge databases. It allows the reconfiguration of variables and registers according to the needs of the user. The software consists of a base module and annexed modules that have been constantly upgraded with new statistical procedures.
From the above review of two technologies learnt throughout the year 2009 by Anthropology students, we can conclude that it is absolutely important the teaching-learning of techniques capable of data processing, be them qualitative or quantitative. This is verified if we link that learning to the professional exercise of the discipline. It can also be pointed that being that the 2009 students learnt said technologies, they present an advantage over students from years before, who didn’t get the chance to learn about them. This is why we would like to end with the following question. How is it possible that in earlier years students weren’t taught how to use the above mentioned tools? An investigation is needed to clarify that answer.
Good Marcela, nevertheless, there are some structure problems and vocabulary problems.
ReplyDeleteFor example in the following paragraph:
"However, since this year, there has been an introduction to subjects, especially those that deal with methodologies, the teaching of technologies. Let’s review two of them to demonstrate how 2009 students have an advantage towards students from years before."
YOU COULD HAVE SAID, "THERE HAS BEEN AN INTRODUCTION TO METHODOLOGIES THAT MAKE USE OF TECHNOLOGY"
And, "It can also be pointed that being that the 2009 students learnt said technologies, they present an advantage over students from years before, who didn’t get the chance to learn about them. This is why we would like to end with the following question. How is it possible that in earlier years students weren’t taught how to use the above mentioned tools? An investigation is needed to clarify
YOU COULD HAVE SAID, "STUDENTS FROM THE 2009 CLASS ARE IN A MORE FAVORABLE POSITION COMPARED TO FORMER CLASSES THAT DID NOT RECEIVE ANY TRAINING IN THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN THE FIELD.
The final score breaks down as follows:
1. The task is well handled: 3 points
2. Good use of lexical resources /Coherence generally well handled: 2 points
3.Grammar is adequate despite minor errors: 2 points
Final score: 7 points: 5.5