METHODS OF TEACHING TEXTILE TERMINOLOGY IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37547/Keywords:
textile terminology, higher education, teaching methods, lexical approach, contextual learning, task-based learning, collaborative learning, technology-enhanced learning, textile industry, vocabulary acquisition, pedagogy, assessment.Abstract
The teaching of textile terminology in higher education institutions is a critical aspect of specialized education within the field of textile science and technology. Given the complexity and specificity of textile terminology, educators must employ various pedagogical methods to ensure that students not only acquire an extensive vocabulary but also understand its practical application. This article explores the key methods used to teach textile terminology, examining their effectiveness and providing recommendations for improving the learning process.
Downloads
References
Djanibekov, U., van Assche, K., Boezeman, D. and Djanibekov, N. (2013). Understanding contracts in evolving agro-economies: Fermers, dekhqans and networks in Khoresm, Uzbekistan. Journal of Rural Studies, 32, 137-147.
Dries, L. and Swinnen, J. (2004). Foreign direct investment, vertical integration, and local suppliers: evidence from the Polish dairy sector. World Development, 32(9), 1525–1544.
Glover, D. and Kusterer, K. (1990). Small Farmers, Big Business: Contract Farming and Rural
Development. London: Macmillan.
Gow, H. and Swinnen, J. (2001). Private enforcement capital and contract enforcement in
transition countries. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83(3), 686–690.
Key, N. and Runsten, D. (1999). Contract farming, smallholders, and rural development in Latin America: the organization of agroprocessing firms and the scale of outgrower production. World Development, 27(2), 381–401.
Lerman, Z. (2010). Agricultural recovery and individual land tenure: Evidence from Central Asia. Imre Ferto, Csaba Forgacs, Attila Jambor (Eds.): Changing landscape of European agriculture. Essays in honour of professor Csaba Csaki. Budapest: Agroinform, pp. 95–113.
Little, P. and Watts, M. (1994). Living Under Contract: Contract Farming and Agrarian Transformation in Sub-Saharan Africa. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.
Mensch, G. (1979). Stalemate in Technology: Innovations overcome the Depression. Cambridge, Masachusetts, pp. 87–90.
Morrissy, J. D. (1974). Agricultural Modernization through Production Contracting. New York: Praeger.
Pandey, P. (2013). Triple Helix for Communication of Innovations: Case Study of Bt Cotton in India. Asian Biotechnology & Development Review, 15(1), 21-42.
Petrick, M. and Djanibekov, N. (2015). Institutional change in land and labour relations of Central Asia’s irrigated agriculture (AGRICHANGE). Project description. IAMO.
Petrick, M. and Djanibekov, N. (2016). Obstacles to crop diversification and cotton harvest mechanisation: Farm survey evidence from two contrasting districts in Uzbekistan: IAMO Discussion Papers 153. Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO).
Pomfret, R. (2008). Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, Ch 8. In Dostortions to Agricultural Incentives in Europe’s Transition Economies. K. Anderson and J. Swinnen (Eds.). World Bank, Washington, DC, pp. 297-338.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles published in this journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0). Under this license:
- Share: Copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt: Remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercially
Attribution required: You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Authors retain copyright of their work while granting the journal first publication rights.
