综合英语教学方式整改分析

综合英语教学方式整改分析

来源:www.51fabiao.org作者:lgg发布时间:2013-08-12 09:49论文字数:37120字
论文编号:fbo201308111733284892论文地区:中国论文语言:English论文类型:硕士毕业论文
Regarding the general problems in current English teaching on the teachers’ part andlearning on the students’ part, it is an urgent task to update the backward teaching model in thenewly-built colleges so that the mindset of both teachers and stud

Introduction


I. Background of the Study
21世纪要求的合格的英语专业人才。英语专业教学大纲的高校由教育部发出的(2000)强调21世纪英语专业人才的五个基本素质:坚实的语言能力,广博的知识,丰富的专业知识,高能力和全面质量。综合英语,英语专业综合语言技能在第一2年,一直是高等院校英语专业课程的核心课程之一。它构成每学期教学时间约108延伸到四个方面,涵盖了最根据英语专业课程在英语专业课程的教学时数。高等学校英语专业教学大纲(2000)描述的过程为:通过语言技能培训和文本分析,逐步提高学生听,说,读,写,翻译的语言技能和教师指导学生获得交际在课堂上通过各种交际活动能力。因此,综合英语是英语专业学生的语言技能,整体语言能力开发的根本,它也是必不可少其得到进一步的研究,此外,联营公司与培养英语人才的高等院校的长远目标。在20世纪50年代开发的英语精读,目前,综合英语仍然是主要的影响下,传统工商业的语法翻译教学模式,已经暗淡的课程目标和限制学生的语言能力全面发展。The 21st century calls for the well-qualified English major talents. The English MajorTeaching Syllabus of Higher Learning issued by the Ministry of Education (2000) stresses thefive essential qualities of the English major talents of the 21st century: solid lingualcompetence, broad knowledge, rich professional knowledge, high capability and all-roundquality.Comprehensive English, featuring integrated lingual skills of the English major in thefirst two years, has been one of the core courses of English major curriculum of higherlearning. It constitutes about 108 teaching hours each term and extends to four terms, whichcovers the most teaching hours among the English major courses according to the Englishmajor curriculum. The English Major Teaching Syllabus of Higher Learning (2000) describesthe course as: through language skills training and text analysis, students’ lingual skills aslistening, speaking, reading, writing, and translating will gradually improve and teachersinstruct the students in acquiring communicative competence through various communicativeactivities in class. And hence, Comprehensive English is fundamental in developing theEnglish major students’ lingual skills, overall lingual competence, and it is also essential totheir further study, besides, it associates with the target of cultivation of English talent ofhigher institutions in the long run. Developing from the English Intensive Reading in the1950s, at present, the Comprehensive English are still largely under the influence of thetraditional Grammar-Translation teaching model, which has dimmed the course target andrestricted all-round development of students’ lingual competence.
约翰·杜威(1859-1952),务实的办学理念,ISA以及著名的20世纪的美国哲学家,教育家的领先代表。他的代表作“民主与教育”(1916年),标志着达成务实的教育理念,以及建立教育哲学作为一门独立的学科建设。作为一家综合性的教育哲学体系,他的务实思想的核心在于教育,教育的本质是生活,教育即生长,教育就是经验。 Heup持有“以学生为本”的教学模式和“做中学”,他提出了“自反思维智慧”和“5步情境教学模式”。杜威实用主义哲学的研究,1978年以来,已在中国复兴。赵祥林嫂(1980)提出,“如今,约翰·杜威的实用主义保​​持其只要作为的无效传统的学校形式保持生命力。”掸中汇教授(2002)指出,目前,“约翰·杜威的实用主义思想仍然充满生机和活力”和他还呼吁向公众重新研究杜威的实用主义思想。此外,日本学者,研究会,认为务实的教育课程改革取得了突破性进展,并留下对世界产生巨大的影响。他务实的理念,以现代教育技术改革和创新留下了巨大的影响。关于传统的教学模式,杜威(1915)指出,它已经把孩子培养成一个机械和被动修复。John Dewey (1859-1952), a leading representative of Pragmatic education philosophy, isa well-renowned American philosopher and educator of the 20th century. His masterpiece“Democracy and education” (1916) marks the fulfillment of construction of Pragmaticeducation ideas as well as the establishment of education philosophy as an independent subject.As a comprehensive education philosophical system, the core of his Pragmatic ideas lies in the essence of education—education is life; education is growth; education is experience. Heupholds the “students-centered” teaching model and “learning by doing”; he proposes“reflexive thinking intelligence” and “5-step situational teaching model”. Since 1978, thestudy on John Dewey’s Pragmatic philosophy has revived in China. Zhao Xianglin (1980) putsthat “nowadays, John Dewey’s Pragmatism maintains its vitality as long as the void traditionalschool forms remains.” Professor Shan Zhonghui (2002) states that “currently John Dewey’spragmatic ideas are still full of life and vitality” and he also appeals to the public to re-studyJohn Dewey’s Pragmatic ideas. Besides, Japanese scholar, Kenkyukai, holds that thePragmatic education has made breakthroughs in curriculum reform and leaves an enormousimpact to the world. His pragmatic ideas have left a tremendous impact to the moderneducation reform and innovation. Concerning the traditional teaching model, Dewey (1915)points out that it has put children into a mechanical and passive fix.


II. Problems to be Addressed
The early 21st century has seen a booming development of newly-built colleges at locallevel. However, they still lag behind famous universities in the advanced teaching concept,model, rich teaching resources, educational experiences, and etc (He Jinyu, 2008). Based ondaily teaching experiences and observation, the author finds the certain problems exist incurrent English teaching in the newly-established colleges at local level.


1) Backward Teaching Concept in Newly-built Colleges
Currently most of these colleges have adopted the traditional teaching model duringEnglish teaching, which hampers students’ learning motive, interest and ingenuity. Teachingprocess of each lesson could be generalized as “previewing new words, analyzing textstructure, paraphrasing key sentences, explaining grammar points and completing exercises”.In spite of new technologies applied in teaching, new problems ensue. Students are easilyattracted to the vivid audio-visual teaching approach in negligence of the major teaching tasksand contents; they may simply follow the notes input on the screen rather than take down thekey points by themselves; they may just look at the screen and listen to teachers’ instructionsinstead of taking the initiatives for self-learning (Xu Jun, 2010).


Chapter One Literature Review


1.1 A Review of Studies on Teaching Model
The concept and theory of teaching model came into being in the late 1950s. Teachingmodel was a sort of teaching strategic system, guided, designed, organized and implementedwith a certain teaching idea and teaching objective based on practice. Teaching model, a majorelement in teaching, comes from teaching practice and instructs it. The publishing of “Modelsof Teaching” by Bruce Joyce in 1972 marks the beginning of theoretical study on teachingmodel.
Originally the concept of teaching model appeared since ancient time. The typical onewas “teaching-listening-reading-memorizing-exercising” approach, featuring that teachersimparted knowledge and students passively received knowledge, and that students’ acquisitionof knowledge was done through memorization and repetition of textbook knowledge. Till the17th century, with the introduction of scientific knowledge, J. A. Comenius (1592-1670) firstput forward “perceiving-memorizing-comprehending-judging” model; then J. J. Rousseau(1717-1778) upheld the natural education, which focused on the natural growth of humangenius and has been so illuminating to modern education and reform (John Dewey, 1915);later in the 19th century, J. F. Herbart (1776-1841), who is regarded as the founders of modernscientific pedagogy, advocated “five-step” formal teaching model: “first, preparation; second,presentation; third, association; fourth, generalization; fifth, application”. This step waspresumed possible only if the student immediately applied the new idea, making it his own.His theory of education—known as Herbartianism, has been so influential over the century.


Chapter Three Methodology.......... 49-52
    3.1 Hypotheses of the Research.......... 49
    3.2 Instruments of the Research.......... 49-50
    3.3 Subjects of the Research.......... 50
    3.4 Data Collection.......... 50-51
    3.5 Data Analysis ..........51-52
Chapter Four Results and Discussion.......... 52-62
    4.1 Results of Proficiency Tests.......... 52-59
    4.2 Discussion ..........59-62
Chapter Five Conclusions.......... 62-70
    5.1 Major Findings.......... 62-63
    5.2 Teaching Implications ..........63-67
5.3 Suggestions for Further Study ..........67-70


Conclusion


For all the findings and implications in the present study, certain limitations still exist andremain open for further discussion. The limitations of the study and suggestions for furtherresearch are presented in the following part.
First, the limited numbers of the subjects and the experiment period may lead to theunreliability of the collected data. The experiment just involved 44 students of English major,which may affect the validity and reliability of the experiment. It would be more reliable if itcould apply to more classes in the department. Besides, the period of the experiment isrelatively short to test the overall improvement of students’ English competence. Many factorsaffecting students' test scores shall be considered, such as the improvement of students learning interest and motivation, the increasing of students’ major knowledge and relevantinformation, and instructions and influence from other teachers.
Secondly, the assessment approach is far from complete. As for the English speakingproficiency test, the oral English test paper is hard to totally objective since the some biasesmay occur during judging students’ speaking competence, and hence the results of the oralEnglish pretest and posttest may not be a thorough reflection of the students' real Englishcompetence. The speaking proficiency test only applies to the experimental class. It would bemore objective and reliable if it could extend to the controlled class as well.
Third, the enhancement of students’ critical thinking competence and practicalcompetence consists in a subtle and complicated way, to some degree, it also rests withstudents’ different personality traits and character development. It is almost impossible tounify a sole evaluation system to measure how effectively students have developed theircritical thinking competence and practical competence. Students’ participation into the diverseclass demonstrations and professional practices is part of the reflection of the enhancement ofstudents’ critical thinking and practical competence, whereas, not an overall reflection.


Bibliography
[1] Bachman.& Lyle F. Fundamental Considerations http://www.51fabiao.org/yysslw/ in Language Testing [M]. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, 1990.
[2] Bailin S., Case R., Coombs J. R. & Daniels L. B. Conceptualizing Critical Thinking [J]. Journal ofCurriculum Studies, 1999 (31).
[3] Breen M. & Candlin C. N. The Essentials of Communicative Curriculum in Language Teaching [J].Applied Linguistics, 1980 (2).
[4] Brookfield.& Stephen D. Assessing Critical Thinking [J]. New Directions for Adult and ContinuingEducation, 1997 (17).
[5] Cortazzi M. & Jin L. X. Cultures of Learning: Language Classrooms in China [M]. London: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1996.
[6] D.Tanner. Curriculum Development, Theory into Practice [M]. New York: Macmillan, 1980.
[7] Ellis R. The Study of Second Language Acquisition [M]. 上海:上海外语研究出版社, 1999.
[8] Fromkin V, et al. An Introduction to Language [M]. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1998.
[9] Hu G. W. The People's Republic of China Country Report [R]. English Language teaching in the People'sRepublic of China. English Language Japan, and Singapore. Singapore: Nanyang TechnologicalUniversity, English Language Education in China, and Masakazu Iino. 2003.
[10] Jack C. & Richard S. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics [M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社, 2005.