Learning Outcomes

Teaching is one of the most interesting professions because it enables teachers to be able to evaluate their performance in class. This essentially leads to the analysis of the teaching objectives which have been set. Learning outcomes are statements of desired outcomes of learning expressed in terms that make it clear how measurements can be achieved.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Learning Outcomes specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More As such, they act as a logical basis for measuring and reporting on the students’ achievements (Melton, 1997). In particular, they focus attention on what is to be learnt. Bearing in mind that learning outcomes are a form of the referenced objectives, it follows that they may derive from, and be identified by the type of strategies for objectives and competences that have already been described.It is therefore important for the teacher to be as specific as possible when they a re assigning the learning objectives in order to be able to achieve the desired outcomes at the end of the lesson (Melton, 1997). Learning outcomes should have certain characteristics for one to be effective (Kubiszyn Borich, 2010). Thus, first of all, this implies that they have to be specific. In this case, the learning outcomes should be described in specific terms and they should guide the teacher in dissemination of knowledge. Secondly, they should be realistic. In this case, the teacher should ensure that they are within what can be achieved. Thirdly, they should be measurable, as such, the outcomes should be described in terms which are quantifiable. They should also be time bounded, that is, they should be within a given set of time. Having this information in mind, it is important to ensure that the learning and instructional objectives which are set are attainable. Based on the information provided, the teacher intends to prepare learning instructions for an arithmetic cl ass. In this case, the learning outcomes should ensure that the learner is able to carry out basic arithmetic operations. This should go hand in hand with ensuring that the learner is attuned to understanding the basic principles which govern the utilization of these operative signs during a class room operation. In essence, by the end of the lesson, the learner should be able to work out basic arithmetic operations.Advertising Looking for essay on education? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More These operations should be addition and subtraction. The learner in this case should be able to apply the basic principles which are in line with the processes which are involved in carrying out these operations. In addition, the learner should be able to use practical approaches in carrying out these operations. During this lesson, learning materials which are going to be used include visual charts, flash cards, marbles and crayons to be u sed by the learner. It is also important to note that the lesson will take fifty minutes within which the teacher should introduce the lesson, build on the topic and then conclude the lesson. Lastly, the teacher should give the learners home assignments to make sure that they have acquired the knowledge that they have learned in class. While the main goal of the classroom’s learning objectives is to obtain, valid, reliable and useful information about student achievement, the assessment procedures also assist in checking on the effectiveness of the learning outcomes (Kubiszyn Borich, 2010). A well designed assessment plan will help you identify your own strengths and weaknesses and will guide your teaching approach. The result of a classroom test based on the objectives can also provide answers to the following questions; what is the level of the students’ achievement? Are the course objectives realistic? Are the instruction methods appropriate? And how well are the l earning experiences sequenced? Thus, the teacher will be able to follow through the important aspects of the learning process which is to attain the set objectives. References Kubiszyn, T., Borich, G. (2010). Educational testing measurement: Classroom application and practice (9th ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley Sons, Inc. Melton, R. F. (1997). Objectives, competences and learning outcomes: developing instructional materials in open and distance learning. New York: Routledge.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Learning Outcomes specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More This essay on Learning Outcomes was written and submitted by user Kas0n to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

The History of Semantics Essays

The History of Semantics Essays The History of Semantics Essay The History of Semantics Essay semantics  [Gr. ,=significant] in general, the study of the relationship between words and meanings. The empirical study of word meanings and sentence meanings in existing languages is a branch of linguistics; the abstract study of meaning in relation to language or symbolic logic systems is a branch of philosophy. Both are called semantics. The field of semantics has three basic concerns: the relations of words to the objects denoted by them, the relations of words to the interpreters of them, and, in symbolic logic, the formal relations of signs to one another (syntax). In linguistics, semantics has its beginnings in France and Germany in the 1820s when the meanings of words as significant features in the growth of language was recognized. Among the foremost linguistic semanticists of the 20th cent. are Gustaf Stern, Jost Trier, B. L. Whorf, Uriel Weinreich, Stephen Ullmann, Thomas Sebeok, Noam  Chomsky, Jerrold Katz, and Charles Osgood. In the linguistics of recent years an offshoot of transformational  grammar  theory has reemphasized the role of meaning in linguistic analysis. This new theory, developed largely by George Lakoff and James McCawley, is termed generative semantics. In anthropology a new theoretical orientation related to linguistic semantics has been developed. Its leading proponents include W. H. Goodenough, F. G. Lounsbury, and Claude  Levi-Strauss. In philosophy, semantics has generally followed the lead of symbolic logic, and many philosophers do not make a distinction between logic and semantics. In this context, semantics is concerned with such issues as meaning and truth, meaning and thought, and the relation between signs and what they mean. The leading practitioners have been Gottlob  Frege, Lady Welby, Bertrand  Russell, Otto Neurath, RudolfCarnap, Alonzo Church, Alfred Tarski, C. I. Lewis, Ludwig  Wittgenstein, J. L. Austin, W. V. Quine, P. F. Strawson, Steven Schiffer, John Searle, H. P. Grice, Saul Kripke, Donald Davidson, and Gilbert Harman. Since the publication of the influential  The Meaning of Meaning  (1925) by C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards, semantics has also become important to literary criticism and stylistics, in which the way that metaphors evoke feelings is investigated and differences between ordinary and literary language are studied. A related discipline, general semantics (so called to distinguish it from semantics in linguistics or philosophy), studies the ways in which meanings of words influence human behavior. General semantics was developed by Alfred  Korzybski. The key term in Korzybskis system is evaluation, the mental act that is performed by the hearer when a word is spoken. Among the most prominent followers of Korzybski are Stuart Chase, S. I. Hayakawa, and H. L. Weinberg. Bibliography A useful introduction to general semantics is H. L. Weinberg,  Levels of Knowing and Existence  (1959) and F. R. Palmer,  Semantics  (1981). For semantics in linguistics, see S. Ullman,  Semantics  (1962) and  The Principles of Semantics  (1957, repr. 1967); N. Chomsky,  Studies on Semantics in Generative Grammar  (1972); G. Leach,  Semantics  (1974); and J. Lyons,  Language, Meaning, and Context  (1981). For semantics in philosophy, see R. Carnap,  Meaning and Necessity  (2d ed. 1956); K. and A. Lehrer,  The Theory of Meaning  (1970); J. F. Rosenberg and C. Travis, ed. ,  Readings in the Philosophy of Language  (1971); and D. Davidson and G. Harman, ed. ,  Semantics of Natural Language  (2d ed. 1973). For semantics in literary criticism, see K. Burke,  A Rhetoric of Motives  (1950) and  A Grammar of Motives  (1955) and the works of W. Empson and P. Wheelwright. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia ® Copyright  © 2013, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www. cc. columbia. edu/cu/cup/ Ads by Google Have You Written a Book? Talk to a Publishing Advisor. Get published now. Get our Free Guide! AuthorHouse. co. uk [pic] semantics Study of meaning, one of the major areas of linguistic study (see  linguistics). Linguists have approached it in a variety of ways. Members of the school of interpretive semantics study the structures of language independent of their conditions of use. In contrast, the advocates of generative semantics insist that the meaning of sentences is a function of their use. Still another group maintains that semantics will not advance until theorists take into account the psychological questions of how people form concepts and how these relate to word meanings. For more information on  semantics, visit Britannica. com. Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. Copyright  © 1994-2008 Encyclop? dia Britannica, Inc. Ads by Google 3 50 www. sharqacademy. com [pic] semantics The study of the meaning of words. Contrast with  syntax, which governs the structure of a language. See  Semantic Web  and  Systemantics. Computer Desktop Encyclopedia copyright  ©1981-2013 by  The Computer Language Company Inc. All Right reserved. THIS DEFINITION IS FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. All other reproduction is strictly prohibited without permission from the publisher. Ads by Google High School Online Self-paced online courses help you Finish High School your way. www. aiuhs. org [pic] semantics 1. the study of the relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent 2. Logic a. the study of interpretations of a formal theory b. he study of the relationship between the structure of a theory and its subject matter c. (of a formal theory) the principles that determine the truth or falsehood of sentences within the theory, and the references of its terms Collins Discovery Encyclopedia, 1st edition  © HarperCollins Publishers 2005 Ads by Google egypt. dubizzle. com [pic] semant ics  [si? man ·tiks] (communications) The branch of semiotics that deals with the relations between symbols and what they stand for, and defines the meaning that is prescribed for a statement by its originator. McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific Technical Terms, 6E, Copyright  © 2003 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Ads by Google www. englishforarabs. com [pic] |(theory) |semantics   The meaning of a string in some language, as opposed to  syntax  which describes how symbols may be | | | |combined independent of their meaning. | | | | | | | |The semantics of a programming language is a function from programs to answers. A program is a  closed term  and, in | | | |practical languages, an answer is a member of the syntactic category of values. The two main kinds are  denotational | | | |semantics  andoperational semantics. | | This article is provided by FOLDOC Free Online Dictionary of Computing (foldoc. org) Ads by Google StudiesInAustraliaArabic. com [pic] Warning! The following article is from The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1979). It might be outdated or ideologically biased. Semantics the branch of linguistics that studies the meanings of linguistic units. Semantics can also be defined as an aspect of the study of signs in semiotics or as the meaning of linguistic units. [This article will discuss linguistic semantics, that is, semantics as first defined above. ] The term â€Å"semasiology† is historically a synonym for â€Å"semantics. † In linguistic semantics, the elementary object of study consists of the three elements of the linguistic sign- especially the word- considered in their unity: the signifier, the denotatum, and the signified. The signifier is the external element, the sequence of sounds or graphic signs. It is linked with the denotatum (a signified object or phenomenon of reality) and with the referent (an object or phenomenon signified by a given linguistic unit within an utterance or by an utterance as a whole). It is also linked with the signified, which is the reflection of that object or phenomenon in human consciousness. The signified is the result of the social understanding of reality and is usually identical to a concept or mental representation. The three-way link of signifier-denotatum-signified constitutes the category of meaning and the basic unit of semantics. These tripartite units enter into regular and systemic relationships with one another. One unit may be compared to another on the basis of one of the three elements: the signified (in the case of synonyms), the signifier (in the case of homonyms), and the denotatum and referent (in the case of a special form of synonymy known as transformation or periphrasis). Synonymy, homonymy, periphrasis (transformation), and polysemy form the basis of the systemic quality in semantics. The systemic quality is manifested most clearly in relatively small groups of words that are similar in one respect (in which they are synonyms) and opposed in another (in which they are antonyms). Such groupings, which differ depending on the language, constitute structural oppositions. For example, the Russian words  ekhat  (â€Å"to go [by vehicle]†),  idti  (â€Å"to go [on foot]†)  plyt’  (â€Å"to swim,† â€Å"to go [by boat]†), and  letet’ (â€Å"to fly†) have a common feature of â€Å"human locomotion† but are opposed as regards the feature of â€Å"means of locomotion. Such features within groups are studied and described as components of meaning or semantic factors. Elementary word groups may be combined in a relationship of content, forming thematic groups and semantic and lexical â€Å"fields. † For example, all the means of expressing the concept of joy in a given language constitute the lexica l-semantic field â€Å"joy. † Linguistic semantics seeks to provide a complete description of the semantic system of a given language in the form of a thesaurus. The thesaurus vividly demonstrates that semantics preserves what results from the reflection and comprehension of the objective world in human social practice. For example, the concepts â€Å"to be,† â€Å"to have,† â€Å"time,† â€Å"form,† and â€Å"content,† which were developed in European culture, may be represented differently or not at all in other cultures. In the language of the Hopi Indians, there are no nouns of the type â€Å"spring,† â€Å"winter,† â€Å"present,† and â€Å"future†; corresponding- but not identical- concepts are expressed adverbially (for example, â€Å"when warm†). Rain† is named as an object (substance) in Indo-European languages but as a process (feature) in the American Indian language of the Hupa (literally, â€Å"it comes down†). On the other hand, the opposition of substance (â€Å"object†) and feature (â€Å"process,† â€Å"action,† and so fort h) is objective and universal: every language maintains the opposition through its own means and within the framework of its own system as an opposition between noun and verb. Semantics seeks to discover and study these universal semantic categories. The polysemant is a most important object of semantic study and one of the key points in the interrelationships between system and speech (or text). It represents a complex of lexical-semantic variants, related to one another in the system as specific lexical meanings and behaving in speech as the concrete realization of these meanings. In speech or text, words also enter into elementary relationships of another type. The relationships are determined by the ability of words to combine with one another. The combinations permitted by the system of a language determine the distribution of each word relative to others. For example, the distribution will vary for the Russian words  krichat’ (vo vsiu moch’) (â€Å"to shout [with all one’s might]†),  bezhat’(vo vse lopatki) (â€Å"to run [as fast as one  can]†), pozdravliat’ (ot vsego serdtsa) (â€Å"to congratulate [with all one’s heart]†), and  naedat’sia (do otvala) (â€Å"to eat [until one can eat no more]†). The distributive analysis of meanings is a special task of semantics. The word combinations  vo vsiu moch’, vo vse lopatki, ot vsego serdtsa, and  do otvala  have the common meaning of â€Å"to the highest degree,† but the specific form used to express this meaning depends on the combining word; thus,  vo vsiu moch’  is combined with  krichat’, vo vse lopatkiwith  bezhat’, and so forth. The form of expression is therefore a function of the combination. Semantics seeks to discover and study such functions- known as lexical parameters- which allow extensive groups of words, word combinations, and sentences to be represented as systemic periphrases (transformations) of one another. The creation of a thesaurus of functions is a long-range task of semantics. When transformations are studied, the distinction between lexical semantics (the meaning of root morphemes, words, and word combinations) and grammatical semantics (the study of the meanings of grammatical forms) recedes into the background, and traditional semasiology becomes simply a part of semantics. On the other hand, the distinction between the denotatum and the referent becomes essential. Thought correspondence to the denotatum is called meaning, and thought correspondence to the referent and the reflection in consciousness of a whole situation is often called sense. Thus, the content of the term â€Å"semantics† expands and semantics acquires a new task: to study the system of such â€Å"senses. † The study is known as syntactic semantics. Semantics also studies characteristic changes in meaning that occur in the history of a language and seeks to discover semantic laws. The conceptual fund of a language is divided into that which is the common property of all members of a given society and that which is the property of science. The former includes the everyday, â€Å"naive,† or linguistic, concepts (the â€Å"immediate† meanings of words), whereas the latter includes scientific concepts and terms (the â€Å"more distant† meanings of words). An example of the difference is seen in the colloquial use of the Russian word  kapital  to mean a large sum of money and the specialized use of the term in political economy to mean capital. One general semantic law is that everyday words having features in common with scientific concepts constantly strive to merge their parameters of content with those of the scientific terms. Key cultural terms, which differ for each era, occupy a special place between everyday and scientific concepts. Such key terms include â€Å"civilization,† â€Å"revolution,† â€Å"democracy,† â€Å"science,† â€Å"technology,† â€Å"individual,† â€Å"love,† and â€Å"machine. † The meanings of a language’s everyday words and the dominant ideas of society are combined in the semantic content of these terms. In studying the development of key cultural terms and concepts of different types, the tasks of semantics coincide with those of cultural history and semiotics. Semantics emerged in the late 19th century, simultaneously in Russia (M. M. Pokrovskii) and France (M. Breal), as a historical discipline studying semantic laws. According to the aspect of the semantics of language that is taken as the basis for the discipline, various directions are distinguished. These directions include analysis of lexical-semantic variation (V. V. Vinogradov, A. I. Smirnitskii, N. N. Amosova, A. A. Ufimtseva, and D. N. Shmelev of the USSR); oppositive (componential) analysis, or semantic factoring (L. Hjelmslev of Denmark, A. Kroeber and W. Goodenough of the USA, and O. N. Seliverstova of the USSR); and the method of fields and thesauri (R. Hailing and W. Wartburg of the Federal Republic of Germany and Iu. N. Karaulov of the USSR). Among other directions are distributive analysis (R. Langacker of the USA and V. A. Zvegintsev and Iu. D. Apresian of the USSR); logical-transformational analysis based on the category of lexical parameter, or function (I. A. Mel’chuk and Iu. D. Apresian of the USSR and A. Wierzbicka of Poland); and analysis of key cultural terms (G. Matore and E. Benveniste of France and Iu. S. Sorokin and R. A. Budagov of the USSR).