Skip to content


Subversion checkout URL

You can clone with HTTPS or Subversion.

Download ZIP
Fetching contributors…

Cannot retrieve contributors at this time

80 lines (80 sloc) 4.347 kb
Persönliche Beiträge im Forum können bewertet
werden auf der Grundlage einer Skala, die auf der Theorie vom
<strong>geteilten und verbundenen Wissen (separate and connected
knowing)</strong> basiert. Der Ansatz basiert auf
unterschiedlichen Wahrnehmungen und Gewichtungen in der
Kommunikation, manchmal vereinfachend typisch m&auml;nnlichen und
typisch weiblichen Kommunikationsformen bezeichnet. Im deutschen
Sprachgebrauch wird von der Fokussierung auf die Sachebene oder
auf die Beziehungsebene (nach Watzlawick oder auch Schulz von
Thun) gesprochen. Die Bewertung von Beitr&auml;gen
erm&ouml;glicht es, unterschiedliche Wahrnehmungen und
Interpretationen zu verdeutlichen. Diese Theorie erm&ouml;glicht
es Ihnen zwischenmenschliche Interaktionen auf eine andere Art
und Weise zu betrachten. Sie beschreibt zwei unterschiedliche
Wege, die Dinge die wir sehen und h&ouml;ren zu evaluieren und zu
lernen. Hier nun der Originaltext:
<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>
<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
<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 "understand things from their point of view". 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>
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. For a collaborative and effective group of learners it
may be best if everyone were able to use BOTH ways of knowing. 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:
<blockquote>a) help you think about these issues when reading
other posts b) provide feedback to each author on how they are
being seen by others</blockquote>
The results are not used towards student assessment in any way,
they are just to help improve communication and learning.
Im Folgenden finden Sie einige Texte des Autors, der diese Ideen
entwickelt hat:
<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 &#8220;Women&#8217;s Ways of Knowing&#8221;
(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.<br></li>
Jump to Line
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.