英语听力学习形成性评估对大学英语教学影响的初探
|
摘要
在传统大学英语教学评估体系中,终结性评估占据统治地位,这导致了教学过度关注学习结果、忽略学习过程中的体验和积累,应试教学倾向严重,阻碍了大学英语教学,因此探索包含形成性评估在内的教学评估体系势在必行。外语学习中,实践证明听力学习能有效促进语言综合技能的提高(Dunkel 1991,Feyten 1991,Oxford 1993,et al.)。近年大学英语的教学改革将目标重点集中在培养学生的听说能力,因此英语听力教学值得在教学实践中探讨和摸索。
本研究分析了形成性评估以及英语听力学习的理论和实践,在结合二者特点的基础上设计了英语听力学习形成性评估模式,对来自广西大学四个自然班共170名非英语专业学生实施了历时三个学期的实验教学。实验分为三个阶段:84名大学二年级的两个自然班学生参加了第一、二阶段实验教学,86名大学一年级的两个自然班学生参加了第三阶段实验教学。每个年级的两个自然班被随机分为实验组和对照组,实验组接受英语听力学习形成性评估与传统评估,对照组仅接受传统评估。旨在摸索探讨英语听力学习形成性评估的实践,以便促进大学英语教学改革,提高学生的英语综合能力。研究问题为:(1)实施英语听力学习形成性评估需要对传统大学英语教学做出哪些改革?(2)与传统评估方式相比,英语听力学习形成性评陆对不同年级学生的学习效果、行为以及态度主要有什么影响?研究采用则试、观察、问卷和采访等方法收集定性与定量数据进行分析讨论。
实验表明:英语听力学习形成性评估的教学模式实施是可行的,但需要教师们的合作与坚持以及相关部门的配合;另外现代教育技术的应用是它实施的基本保障。实验教学中发现,与传统评估方式相比,英语听力学习形成性评估确保了不间断听力输入,丰富了教学内容;评估结果的反思能有效促进师生交流,帮助教师了解教学动态并及时改进,增强学生英语学习的自信心与自主性。
本研究将教育科学与二语习得研究相结合,遵循二语习得的规律,强化学习过程中监控和评估,促进了大学英语教学改革实践,为培养学生英语综合能力提供了积极参考。文章最后指出了研究的局限性,建议使用多样化的评估手段丰富评估实施体系;加强教师在实施过程中的引导作用;将英语听力形成性评估与网络技术结合得更紧密,使这一改革模式得到更完善的实施。
In College English teaching, summative assessment is pervasive in the traditional evaluation system, which causes test-oriented education. To change this, it is imperative for researchers to explore an evaluation system that integrates with formative assessment. Listening learning has been proved to contribute to overall language proficiency (Dunkel 1991, Feyten 1991, Oxford 1993, et al.). In recent years, the objective of College English teaching reform has been focused on fostering students' listening and speaking, therefore, English listening teaching is worthy of this exploration.
This study analyzes the theories and practice of formative assessment and English listening, and designs a mode of formative assessment of English listening learning (FAELL, hereafter), and conducts a three-semester experimental study involving 170 non-English majors from four intact classes in Guangxi University. The experiment was divided into three phases: 84 sophomores were in the first two phases and 86 freshmen were in the third phase. The two intact classes at each grade were randomly divided into experimental groups (EGs) and comparison groups (CGs). EGs received the integrated evaluation system combining FAELL and summative assessment, whereas, CGs received only the traditional evaluation. This study discusses and explores the practice of FAELL with aims to facilitate College English teaching reform and develop students' overall English abilities. The research questions are: (1) what changes should be made to the traditional English teaching? (2) Compared with the traditional evaluation, what are the main effects of FAELL on learning results, behaviors and attitudes to students in different grades? The study used weekly quizzes, observations, questionnaires, interviews and other instruments to collect quantitative and qualitative data for analysis and discussion.
The results indicate that: FAELL is feasible, but it needs perseverance and close cooperation among teachers, and the coordination of relevant departments. Modern educational technology is the basic requirement for FAELL. Compared with the traditional evaluation, FAELL guarantees the consistent listening input and exposes students to more choices of learning resources; it stimulates reflection on learning and teaching which promotes communications between teachers and students, from which teachers know the dynamic process of students' learning so that they can make adjustments in time. All this will finally enhance students' self-confidence and initiatives for English learning.
This study combines education science with second language acquisition, reinforces the learning in process according to the scientific way of second language acquisition. And it facilities the practice of College English teaching reform and provides constructive insights to foster students' overall English abilities. Limitations have been pointed out at the end of the thesis. Various formative assessment tools are recommended to be involved in the evaluation system; teachers' guidance in implementation needs to be underlined; and FAELL can intertwines more closely with internet technology, with a purpose to implement the reform model for better effects.
本研究分析了形成性评估以及英语听力学习的理论和实践,在结合二者特点的基础上设计了英语听力学习形成性评估模式,对来自广西大学四个自然班共170名非英语专业学生实施了历时三个学期的实验教学。实验分为三个阶段:84名大学二年级的两个自然班学生参加了第一、二阶段实验教学,86名大学一年级的两个自然班学生参加了第三阶段实验教学。每个年级的两个自然班被随机分为实验组和对照组,实验组接受英语听力学习形成性评估与传统评估,对照组仅接受传统评估。旨在摸索探讨英语听力学习形成性评估的实践,以便促进大学英语教学改革,提高学生的英语综合能力。研究问题为:(1)实施英语听力学习形成性评估需要对传统大学英语教学做出哪些改革?(2)与传统评估方式相比,英语听力学习形成性评陆对不同年级学生的学习效果、行为以及态度主要有什么影响?研究采用则试、观察、问卷和采访等方法收集定性与定量数据进行分析讨论。
实验表明:英语听力学习形成性评估的教学模式实施是可行的,但需要教师们的合作与坚持以及相关部门的配合;另外现代教育技术的应用是它实施的基本保障。实验教学中发现,与传统评估方式相比,英语听力学习形成性评估确保了不间断听力输入,丰富了教学内容;评估结果的反思能有效促进师生交流,帮助教师了解教学动态并及时改进,增强学生英语学习的自信心与自主性。
本研究将教育科学与二语习得研究相结合,遵循二语习得的规律,强化学习过程中监控和评估,促进了大学英语教学改革实践,为培养学生英语综合能力提供了积极参考。文章最后指出了研究的局限性,建议使用多样化的评估手段丰富评估实施体系;加强教师在实施过程中的引导作用;将英语听力形成性评估与网络技术结合得更紧密,使这一改革模式得到更完善的实施。
In College English teaching, summative assessment is pervasive in the traditional evaluation system, which causes test-oriented education. To change this, it is imperative for researchers to explore an evaluation system that integrates with formative assessment. Listening learning has been proved to contribute to overall language proficiency (Dunkel 1991, Feyten 1991, Oxford 1993, et al.). In recent years, the objective of College English teaching reform has been focused on fostering students' listening and speaking, therefore, English listening teaching is worthy of this exploration.
This study analyzes the theories and practice of formative assessment and English listening, and designs a mode of formative assessment of English listening learning (FAELL, hereafter), and conducts a three-semester experimental study involving 170 non-English majors from four intact classes in Guangxi University. The experiment was divided into three phases: 84 sophomores were in the first two phases and 86 freshmen were in the third phase. The two intact classes at each grade were randomly divided into experimental groups (EGs) and comparison groups (CGs). EGs received the integrated evaluation system combining FAELL and summative assessment, whereas, CGs received only the traditional evaluation. This study discusses and explores the practice of FAELL with aims to facilitate College English teaching reform and develop students' overall English abilities. The research questions are: (1) what changes should be made to the traditional English teaching? (2) Compared with the traditional evaluation, what are the main effects of FAELL on learning results, behaviors and attitudes to students in different grades? The study used weekly quizzes, observations, questionnaires, interviews and other instruments to collect quantitative and qualitative data for analysis and discussion.
The results indicate that: FAELL is feasible, but it needs perseverance and close cooperation among teachers, and the coordination of relevant departments. Modern educational technology is the basic requirement for FAELL. Compared with the traditional evaluation, FAELL guarantees the consistent listening input and exposes students to more choices of learning resources; it stimulates reflection on learning and teaching which promotes communications between teachers and students, from which teachers know the dynamic process of students' learning so that they can make adjustments in time. All this will finally enhance students' self-confidence and initiatives for English learning.
This study combines education science with second language acquisition, reinforces the learning in process according to the scientific way of second language acquisition. And it facilities the practice of College English teaching reform and provides constructive insights to foster students' overall English abilities. Limitations have been pointed out at the end of the thesis. Various formative assessment tools are recommended to be involved in the evaluation system; teachers' guidance in implementation needs to be underlined; and FAELL can intertwines more closely with internet technology, with a purpose to implement the reform model for better effects.
引文
[1]Allal,L.& Lopez,L.M.2005.Formative Assessment of Learning:A Review of Publications in French[A].In OECD[eds.].Formative Assessment:Improving Learning in Secondary Classrooms[C]France:OECD Publishing.PP.241-264.
[2]American Educational Research Association,American Psychological Association &National Council on Measurement in Education.1999.Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing[S].Washington,D.C.:American Educational Research Association.
[3]Arends,Richard I.Learning to Teach.1998.[4th edition].USA:The McGraw-Hill Companies,Inc.
[4]Bachman,L.F.1999.Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing[M].Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[5]Baroudi,Ziad M.2007.Formative Assessment:Definition,Elements and Role in Instructional Practice[J].Post-Script:Postgraduate Journal of Education Research.8:37-48.
[6]Black,P.& Wiliam,D.1998a.Assessment and Classroom Learning[J].Assessment in Education:Principles,Policy & Practice.5:7-74.
[7]Black,P.& Wiliam,D.1998b.Inside the black box:Raising standards through classroom assessment[J].Phi Delta Kappan.80:139-148.
[8]Boston,Carol.2002.The Concept of Formative Assessment[J].Practical Assessment,Research & Evaluation.8:1-8.
[9]Brownell,J.1986.Building Active Listening Skills[M].Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall,Inc.
[10]Denes,P.B.& Pinson,E.N.1963.The Speech Chain:The Physics and Biology of Spoken Language[M].New York:Anchor Press.
[11]Ewing,Randy.2007.Assessment.http://www.lytle-isd.net/vnews/display.v/ART/45f94cacca5fd
[12]Freeman,D.L.& Long,M.H.2000.An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[13]Galvin,Katheleen M.& Terrell,Jane.2001.Communication Works![M]USA:National Textbook Company.
[14]Geddes,M.& White,R.1978.The Use of Semi-scripted Simulated Authentic Speech and Listening Comprehension[J].Audio Visual Language Journal,3:137-145.
[15]Genesee,F.& J.Upshur.1996.Classroom-based Evaluation in Second Language Education[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[16]Glasson,Toni.2003.The Assessment for Learning Project.http://www.curriculum.edu.au/leader/default.asp?issuelD=9691 &id=4666
[17]Gu Yongqi.2007.Potentials and Boundaries of Formative Assessment.http://www.pearsonedmeasurement.com/bulletin/Formative%20Assessment-Bulletin.pdf
[18]Harford Community College.2006.Student Learning Assessment Reporting Form.http://www.harford.edu/irc/assessment/SLO%20Reporting%20Form%20&%20Appendi xes%20A-C.doc.
[19]Harlen,W.1998.Classroom Assessment:A Dimension of Purposes and Procedures[R].Dunedin:Annual Conference of the NZARE,December.
[20]Hedge,Tricia.2002.Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom[M].Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[21]Krashen,Stephen.1985.The lnput Hypothesis:lssues and Implications[M].New York:Longman Press.
[22]Lebauer,Roni.S.2000.Learn to Listen-Listen to Learn:Academic Listening and Note-taking(2nd edition)[M].NJ:Prentice Hall.
[23]Marshall,Jame M.2005.Formative Assessment." Mapping the Road to Success.http://www.dcsclients.com/-tprk12/Research_Formative%20Assessment_White_Paper.p df
[24]Morley,J.2001.Aural Comprehension Instruction:Principles and Practices[A].In M.Celce-Murcia[eds.].Teaching English as A Second or Foreign Language[C].Boston:Heinle & Heinle,PP:69-85.
[25]Nunan,D.2001.Second Language Teaching and learning[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[26]Oosterhof,A.2003.Developing and Using Classroom Assessments(3rd ed.)[M].NJ:Merrill Prentice Hall.
[27]Oswald,John & Bennett,Randy.2006.ETS:Making Present Assessments Better and Innovating for the Future http://www.doe.in.gov/media/video/stateboard/2006-07-special/Educational%20Testing %20Service.ppt
[28]Palomba,C.A.& Banta,T.W,1999.Assessment Essentials:Planning,Implementing,and Improving Assessment in Higher Education[M].San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
[29]Richards,J.C.,Schmidt,R,Hendricks & Kim,Yongkyu.2003.Longman Dictionary of Language teaching and Applied Linguistics[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[30]Rost,M.2005.Teaching and Researching Listening[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[31]Rowntree,D.1987.Assessing Students:How Shall We Know Them?[M].New York:Nichols.
[32]Sadler,D.R.1989.Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems[J].Instructional Science,18:119-144.
[33]Striven,M.1967.The Methodology of Evaluation[M].Washington DC:American Educational Research Association,
[34]Ur,Penny.2000.A Course in Language Teaching:Practice and Theory[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,
[35]Vandergrift,Larry.2004.Listening to Leam or Learning to Listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.24:3-25.
[36]Wiske,M.S.1998.Teaching for Understanding[M].San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
[37]Yang,Chao-Chi(Teresa).2006.The Dominant Listening Strategy of Low-Proficiency Level Students of Mandarin Chinese:Bottom-Up Processing or Top-Down Processing [Dissertation].USA:Brigham Young University.
[38]龚亚夫,罗少茜,2002,《英语教学评估一行为表现评估和学生学习档案》[M]。北京:人民教育出版社。
[39]郭丽,2003,大学英语校内测试模式的调查与分析[J],《外语界》第2期,76-80页。
[40]郭茜,2004,利用形成性评价促进大学英语教学中学习者自主性的培养[J],《西安外国语学院学报》第2期,66-68页。
[41]黄斌,2007,《建构主义视野下外语评估策略的构建》[硕士论文],西南大学。
[42]蒋宇红,2005,在线同伴评价在写作能力发展中的作用[J],《外语教学与研究》第3期,226-230页。
[43]教高厅,2007,教育部办公厅关于印发《大学英语课程教学要求》的通知,http://www.moe.edu.cn/edoas/websitel 8/inf035346.htm
[44]教育部高等教育司,2004,《大学英语课程教学要求(试行)》[M]。北京:高等教育出版社。
[45]李冬梅,2002,近十年来国内英语听力理解研究述评[J],《外语界》第2期,30-34页。
[46]刘建达,2002,学生英文写作能力的自我评估[J],《现代外语》第3期,241-249页。
[47]彭为萍,2007,《形成性评价在中学英语教学中的应用》[硕士论文]。山东:曲阜师范大学。
[48]秦晓晴,2003,《外语教学研究中的定量数据分析》[M]。武汉:华中科技大学出版社。
[49]王伟,1991,英语听力训练中的听力要素及听力障碍[J],《解放军外语学院学报》第1期,27-35页。
[50]王宇,2000,策略训练与听力理解[J],《外语与外语教学》第8期,61-63页。
[51]王初明,2005,外语写长法[J].《中国外语》第1期,45-49页。
[52]王初明,2006,外语学习的必要条件与大学英语四、六级考试改革的反思[J],《中国大学教学》第11期,48-51页。
[53]王华,富长洪,2006,形成性评估在外语教学中的应用研究综述[J],《外语界》第4期,67-72页。
[54]王颖萍,2005,《建立基于网络和课堂的大学英语教学模式下的评估体系》[硕士论文],福建师范大学。
[55]文秋芳,2001,应用语言学研究方法与论文写作[M],北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
[56]徐锦芳,2006,《现代外语教学的理论与实践》[M]。武汉:华中科技大学出版社。
[57]杨惠中,2008,怎样提高英语听说能力[J],《外语界》第1期,7-10页。
[58]杨祖华,2006,《大学英语》形成性评价实践研究[J].《中国科技信息》,第23期,260-261页。
[59]张仲连,2001,《第二语言课堂评估(导读)》[M],北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
[60]周娉娣,秦秀白,2005,形成性评价在大学英语网络教学中的应用[J],《外语电化教学》第10期,9-13页。
[2]American Educational Research Association,American Psychological Association &National Council on Measurement in Education.1999.Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing[S].Washington,D.C.:American Educational Research Association.
[3]Arends,Richard I.Learning to Teach.1998.[4th edition].USA:The McGraw-Hill Companies,Inc.
[4]Bachman,L.F.1999.Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing[M].Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[5]Baroudi,Ziad M.2007.Formative Assessment:Definition,Elements and Role in Instructional Practice[J].Post-Script:Postgraduate Journal of Education Research.8:37-48.
[6]Black,P.& Wiliam,D.1998a.Assessment and Classroom Learning[J].Assessment in Education:Principles,Policy & Practice.5:7-74.
[7]Black,P.& Wiliam,D.1998b.Inside the black box:Raising standards through classroom assessment[J].Phi Delta Kappan.80:139-148.
[8]Boston,Carol.2002.The Concept of Formative Assessment[J].Practical Assessment,Research & Evaluation.8:1-8.
[9]Brownell,J.1986.Building Active Listening Skills[M].Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall,Inc.
[10]Denes,P.B.& Pinson,E.N.1963.The Speech Chain:The Physics and Biology of Spoken Language[M].New York:Anchor Press.
[11]Ewing,Randy.2007.Assessment.http://www.lytle-isd.net/vnews/display.v/ART/45f94cacca5fd
[12]Freeman,D.L.& Long,M.H.2000.An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[13]Galvin,Katheleen M.& Terrell,Jane.2001.Communication Works![M]USA:National Textbook Company.
[14]Geddes,M.& White,R.1978.The Use of Semi-scripted Simulated Authentic Speech and Listening Comprehension[J].Audio Visual Language Journal,3:137-145.
[15]Genesee,F.& J.Upshur.1996.Classroom-based Evaluation in Second Language Education[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[16]Glasson,Toni.2003.The Assessment for Learning Project.http://www.curriculum.edu.au/leader/default.asp?issuelD=9691 &id=4666
[17]Gu Yongqi.2007.Potentials and Boundaries of Formative Assessment.http://www.pearsonedmeasurement.com/bulletin/Formative%20Assessment-Bulletin.pdf
[18]Harford Community College.2006.Student Learning Assessment Reporting Form.http://www.harford.edu/irc/assessment/SLO%20Reporting%20Form%20&%20Appendi xes%20A-C.doc.
[19]Harlen,W.1998.Classroom Assessment:A Dimension of Purposes and Procedures[R].Dunedin:Annual Conference of the NZARE,December.
[20]Hedge,Tricia.2002.Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom[M].Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[21]Krashen,Stephen.1985.The lnput Hypothesis:lssues and Implications[M].New York:Longman Press.
[22]Lebauer,Roni.S.2000.Learn to Listen-Listen to Learn:Academic Listening and Note-taking(2nd edition)[M].NJ:Prentice Hall.
[23]Marshall,Jame M.2005.Formative Assessment." Mapping the Road to Success.http://www.dcsclients.com/-tprk12/Research_Formative%20Assessment_White_Paper.p df
[24]Morley,J.2001.Aural Comprehension Instruction:Principles and Practices[A].In M.Celce-Murcia[eds.].Teaching English as A Second or Foreign Language[C].Boston:Heinle & Heinle,PP:69-85.
[25]Nunan,D.2001.Second Language Teaching and learning[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[26]Oosterhof,A.2003.Developing and Using Classroom Assessments(3rd ed.)[M].NJ:Merrill Prentice Hall.
[27]Oswald,John & Bennett,Randy.2006.ETS:Making Present Assessments Better and Innovating for the Future http://www.doe.in.gov/media/video/stateboard/2006-07-special/Educational%20Testing %20Service.ppt
[28]Palomba,C.A.& Banta,T.W,1999.Assessment Essentials:Planning,Implementing,and Improving Assessment in Higher Education[M].San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
[29]Richards,J.C.,Schmidt,R,Hendricks & Kim,Yongkyu.2003.Longman Dictionary of Language teaching and Applied Linguistics[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[30]Rost,M.2005.Teaching and Researching Listening[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[31]Rowntree,D.1987.Assessing Students:How Shall We Know Them?[M].New York:Nichols.
[32]Sadler,D.R.1989.Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems[J].Instructional Science,18:119-144.
[33]Striven,M.1967.The Methodology of Evaluation[M].Washington DC:American Educational Research Association,
[34]Ur,Penny.2000.A Course in Language Teaching:Practice and Theory[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,
[35]Vandergrift,Larry.2004.Listening to Leam or Learning to Listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.24:3-25.
[36]Wiske,M.S.1998.Teaching for Understanding[M].San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
[37]Yang,Chao-Chi(Teresa).2006.The Dominant Listening Strategy of Low-Proficiency Level Students of Mandarin Chinese:Bottom-Up Processing or Top-Down Processing [Dissertation].USA:Brigham Young University.
[38]龚亚夫,罗少茜,2002,《英语教学评估一行为表现评估和学生学习档案》[M]。北京:人民教育出版社。
[39]郭丽,2003,大学英语校内测试模式的调查与分析[J],《外语界》第2期,76-80页。
[40]郭茜,2004,利用形成性评价促进大学英语教学中学习者自主性的培养[J],《西安外国语学院学报》第2期,66-68页。
[41]黄斌,2007,《建构主义视野下外语评估策略的构建》[硕士论文],西南大学。
[42]蒋宇红,2005,在线同伴评价在写作能力发展中的作用[J],《外语教学与研究》第3期,226-230页。
[43]教高厅,2007,教育部办公厅关于印发《大学英语课程教学要求》的通知,http://www.moe.edu.cn/edoas/websitel 8/inf035346.htm
[44]教育部高等教育司,2004,《大学英语课程教学要求(试行)》[M]。北京:高等教育出版社。
[45]李冬梅,2002,近十年来国内英语听力理解研究述评[J],《外语界》第2期,30-34页。
[46]刘建达,2002,学生英文写作能力的自我评估[J],《现代外语》第3期,241-249页。
[47]彭为萍,2007,《形成性评价在中学英语教学中的应用》[硕士论文]。山东:曲阜师范大学。
[48]秦晓晴,2003,《外语教学研究中的定量数据分析》[M]。武汉:华中科技大学出版社。
[49]王伟,1991,英语听力训练中的听力要素及听力障碍[J],《解放军外语学院学报》第1期,27-35页。
[50]王宇,2000,策略训练与听力理解[J],《外语与外语教学》第8期,61-63页。
[51]王初明,2005,外语写长法[J].《中国外语》第1期,45-49页。
[52]王初明,2006,外语学习的必要条件与大学英语四、六级考试改革的反思[J],《中国大学教学》第11期,48-51页。
[53]王华,富长洪,2006,形成性评估在外语教学中的应用研究综述[J],《外语界》第4期,67-72页。
[54]王颖萍,2005,《建立基于网络和课堂的大学英语教学模式下的评估体系》[硕士论文],福建师范大学。
[55]文秋芳,2001,应用语言学研究方法与论文写作[M],北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
[56]徐锦芳,2006,《现代外语教学的理论与实践》[M]。武汉:华中科技大学出版社。
[57]杨惠中,2008,怎样提高英语听说能力[J],《外语界》第1期,7-10页。
[58]杨祖华,2006,《大学英语》形成性评价实践研究[J].《中国科技信息》,第23期,260-261页。
[59]张仲连,2001,《第二语言课堂评估(导读)》[M],北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
[60]周娉娣,秦秀白,2005,形成性评价在大学英语网络教学中的应用[J],《外语电化教学》第10期,9-13页。