基于高教自考课堂的互动英语教学研究

论文摘要

高等教育自学考试(简称高教自考)是中国特有的高等教育形式,为高考落榜生及其他社会人员打开了获得本科文凭和学士学位的大门。长期以来,英语(二)被认为是自考体系中最难通过的学科之一,通过率低下,高校组织的自考助学效果也不很理想。由于自考助学不属于高校常规教学体制范畴,高校教师针对这自考生的教研和科研几乎是一片空白。互动在第二语言习得中的重要作用得到了各个学派语言学家的认可,然而基础良莠不齐、课堂纪律涣散、唯“试”是图是自考助学课堂上的普遍现象,一直困扰着任课教师,也直接导致课堂上师生互动质量不佳、生生沟通数量不足、对课堂互动怀有偏见等问题。针对这些情况,作者提出了在自考助学课堂上开展互动教学的设想。60名文化产业专业的二年级自考学生被分成两个班参与了教学实验,B班仍延用传统教学法,A班引用互动教学法。在四个月后的实战考试中,A班学生在通过率、平均分、综合成绩等各方面都胜出一筹。虽然自考没有口语、听力等与互动最直接相关的题型,但是由于在课堂上能更多地参与意义协商与互动,学生的兴趣得到激发,信心得到增强,整体水平得到提高,这些都直接作用并反映到翻译、阅读等考察综合能力的题型上来。据此,作者得出结论:虽然自考助学课堂是以应试为直接目的,师生压力极大,但一味地埋头于课本和模拟题并不利用成绩和通过率的提高。相反,如果广大助学教师和自考学生能将目光放长远,摆脱急功近利的思想,致力于英语综合水平的提高,积极地采用和参与到互动教学中来,结果可能是事半功倍。

论文目录

• Acknowledgements
• Abstract （Chinese）
• Abstract （English）
• Chapter One Introduction
• 1.1 Research background
• 1.2 Significance of the study
• 1.3 Overall structure of the thesis
• Chapter Two Theoretical Foundations of Interactive English Language Teaching
• 2.1 Interaction and input, output in SLA
• 2.1.1 Input and interaction
• 2.1.1.1 Krashen’s Input Hypothesis and Long’s Interaction Hypothesis
• 2.1.1.2 Input and meaning negotiations
• 2.1.2 Output and interaction
• 2.1.2.1 Swain’s Output Hypothesis and Long’s Interaction Hypothesis
• 2.1.2.2 Output and meaning negotiations
• 2.1.3 Summary
• 2.2 Socio-cultural theories and interaction
• 2.2.1 The theory of Zone of Proximal Development
• 2.2.2 Scaffolding
• 2.3 Socio-constructive theories and interaction
• 2.4 Summary
• Chapter Three Problem Analysis in STHEE English Class
• 3.1 Problems in STHEE College English tutoring class
• 3.1.1 Small quantity of peer interaction
• 3.1.2 Low quality of teacher-student interaction
• 3.1.3 Bias on classroom interaction
• 3.1.4 Summary
• 3.2 Causes of the problems
• 3.2.1 Students’poor foundation in English
• 3.2.2 Students’weariness and lack of confidence in English learning
• 3.2.3 Influence of the traditional way —PPP pedagogy
• 3.2.4 Exam-pressed and exam-oriented class
• 3.3 Interactive ELT —a possible way out
• Chapter Four An Experimental Study
• 4.1 Description
• 4.2 Subjects
• 4.3 Instrument
• 4.4 Procedure and data collection
• 4.4.1 Pre-test
• 4.4.2 Implementation
• 4.4.3 Post-test
• 4.4.4 Post-survey
• 4.5 A description of the teaching activities
• 4.6 Results of the teaching experiment
• 4.6.1 The results of pre-test
• 4.6.2 The results of post-test
• 4.7 Results of the questionnaire
• 4.8 Research findings
• Chapter Five Analysis and Discussion
• 5.1 Analysis of the experiment data
• 5.1.1 STHEE pass rate
• 5.1.2 Total average
• 5.1.3 Average score of each part in post-test
• 5.1.4 Effectiveness of traditional ELT on different test parts in Class B
• 5.1.5 Effectiveness of interactive ELT on different test parts in Class A
• 5.2 Discussion on interactive ELT in STHEE classroom
• 5.2.1 Interaction and meaning negotiations
• 5.2.2 Role transformation in the teacher
• 5.2.3 Role transformation in students
• 5.3 Answers to the research questions
• 5.4 Major findings and pedagogical implications
• Chapter Six Conclusion
• 6.1 Suggestions for interactive ELT in STHEE classroom
• 6.2 Limitations of the research and recommendations for further study
• Appendix Ⅰ Pre-test
• Appendix Ⅱ Post-test
• Appendix Ⅲ Scores of Pre-test
• Appendix Ⅳ Scores of Post-test
• Appendix Ⅴ Post-survey
• References