内容与语言融合型教学在大学英语基础阶段应用效应研究——《大学英语教学指南》指导下的课程内容改革
|
摘要
本研究根据《大学英语教学指南》指导原则,在北京市属某高校大学英语一年级尝试课程内容改革,开展学科内容与语言融合型教学实践研究。我们采用定性与定量研究范式,通过收集和分析学生反思日志、调查问卷、全国大学生英语四级考试成绩,发现该教学模式下学生的写作、口头交际能力及认知能力得到极大提高,学生认可度最高的是课题型项目;同时学生在大学生英语四级考试中阅读、写作与翻译成绩提高显著。
In accordance with Guidelines on College English Teaching, an empirical study is conducted to investigate the efficacy of content and language integrated learning(CLIL) in the first year college English teaching. It employs qualitative as well as quantitative research methods. Drawing on the qualitative data elicited from students' journals and quantitative data from questionnaire, and CET-4 scores in reading, writing, and translation, we explore students perception of CLIL and the various tasks. Findings suggest that a majority of the students acknowledge that CLIL facilitates their progress in communicative competence, both oral and written, and cognitive ability. The findings also show that they give recognition to the term project, which is claimed to lay a solid foundation for their academic study. Finally, the study reveals that CLIL group outperforms EFL in CET-4, in particular in productive performance.
In accordance with Guidelines on College English Teaching, an empirical study is conducted to investigate the efficacy of content and language integrated learning(CLIL) in the first year college English teaching. It employs qualitative as well as quantitative research methods. Drawing on the qualitative data elicited from students' journals and quantitative data from questionnaire, and CET-4 scores in reading, writing, and translation, we explore students perception of CLIL and the various tasks. Findings suggest that a majority of the students acknowledge that CLIL facilitates their progress in communicative competence, both oral and written, and cognitive ability. The findings also show that they give recognition to the term project, which is claimed to lay a solid foundation for their academic study. Finally, the study reveals that CLIL group outperforms EFL in CET-4, in particular in productive performance.
引文
[1] Admiraal,W.,Westhoff,G.& K.de Bot.Evaluation of bilingual secondary education in the Netherlands:Students' language proficiency in English[J].Educational Research and Evaluation,2006(12):75-93.
[2] Coyle,D.Theory and planning for effective classroom:Supporting students in content and language integrated learning contexts[A].In J.Masih(ed.).Learning Through a Foreign Language[C].London:CLIT,1999:46-62.
[3] Coyle,D.Content and language integrated learning:Motivating learners and teachers[J/OL].Scottish Language Review,2006(13):32-38.http://www.librarything.com/work/9865383/book/59330614.
[4] Coyle,D.Content and language integrated learning:Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogy[J].International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,2007(5):543-562.
[5] Cummins,J.Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children[J].Review of Education Research,1979(2):222-251.
[6] Cummins,J.Immersion education for the millennium:What have we learned from 30 years of research on second language immersion?[A].In M.R.Childs & R.M Boswick(eds.).Learning through Two Languages:Research and Practice.Second Latoh Gakuen International Symposium on Immersion and Bilingual Education[C].Katoh Gakuen,1998:34.
[7] Dalton-Puffer,C.Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL):Current research from Europe[A].In W.Deanoy & L.Volkmann(eds.).Future Perspectives for English Language Teaching[C].Heidelberg:Carl Winter,2008:139-157.
[8] Dalton-Puffer,C.Content-and-language integrated learning:From practice to principles?[J].Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,2011(31):182-204 .
[9] Day,M.& S.T.Shapson.Integrating formal and functional approaches to language teaching in French immersion:An experimental study[J].Language Learning,2001(supplement 1):47-80.
[10]DeCourcy,M.& M.Burston.Leaning mathematics through French in Australia[J].Language and Foundation,2000(2):79-95.
[11]Jexenflicker,S.& C.Dalton-Puffer.The CLIL differential:Comparing the writing of CLIL and non-CLIL students in higher college of technology[A].In C.Delton-Puffer,T.Nikula & U.Smith(eds.).Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classroom[C].Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2010:169-190.
[12]Lasagabaster,D.English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings[J].Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching,2011(1):3-18 .
[13]Lingle,D.A task-based approach to teaching a content-based Canadian studies course in an EFL context[J].The Modern Language Journal,2006(3):122-139.
[14]Lo,Y.Y.& V.A.Murphy.Vocabulary knowledge and growth in immersion and regular language learning programs in HongKong[J].Language and Education,2010(3):215-238.
[15]Marsh,D.CLIL/EMILE:The European Dimension:Actions,Trends and Foresight Potential Public Services Contract DG EAC[M].Brussels:European Commission,2002.
[16]Marsh,D.Using language to learn and learning to use language[EB/OL].http://archive.ecml.at/mtp2/clilmatrix/pdf,accessed 28/04/2014.
[17]Master,P.Grammar in content-based instruction[A].In L.Kaspe(ed.).Content-based College ESL Instruction[C].Hillsdade:Erlbaum,2000:93-106.
[18]Seikkula-Leino,J.CLIL learning:Achievement levels and affective factors[J].Language and Education,2007(4):328-341.
[19]Short,J.D.Assessing integrated language and content instruction[J].TESOL Quarterly,1993(4):627-656.
[20]Short,J.D.Language learning in sheltered social studies classes[J].TESOL Journal,2002(1):18-24.
[21]Smith,U.The AILA research network-CLIL and immersion classrooms:applied linguistics perspectives[J].Language Teaching,2008(2):295-298.
[22]Ting,T.A Collective End-of-Symposium Reflection:The State of the Art of CLIL and Future Prospects[EB/OL].http://www.ichm.org/clil/pdfs/summary_symposium 07.pdf,accessed 2014.
[23]蔡基刚.再论我国大学生英语教学发展方向:通用英语和学术英语[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2015(4):83-93.
[24]常俊跃,刘晓蕖,邓耀臣.内容依托式教学改革对英语专业学生阅读理解能力发展的影响分析[J].中国外语,2009(5):40-53.
[25]黄甫全,李灵丽.新兴课语整合式学习的有效实施策略[J].外语界,2015(3):16-24.
[26]林岩.语言模板在英语辩论课思辨能力培养中的应用效果研究[J].外语教学,2019(1):66-71.
[27]刘会英,黄甫全.欧洲新兴课语整合式学习(CLIL)的背景、视角与启示[J].广东外语外贸大学学报,2013(9):87-91,100.
[28]刘会英,黄甫全.开辟外语教学走向文化自觉的新路径——论欧洲新兴课语整合式学习的文化原理[J].比较教育研究论,2015(8):73-78.
[29]米保富.内容与语言融合型教学研究的新进展[J].现代外语,2015(5):715-724.
[30]盛云岚.欧洲CLIL模式:外语教学法的新视角[J].山东外语教学,2012(4):65-69.
[31]盛云岚.学术英语的语境化教学[J].外语界,2015(5):35-41.
[32]束定芳.德国的英语教学及其对我国外语教学的启发[J].中国外语,2011(1):4-10.
[33]王守仁.《大学英语教学指南》要点解读[J].外语界,2016(3):2-10.
[34]杨德祥,赵永平.内容依托式教学对英语专业学生思辨能力的影响[J].外语教学,2011(5):61-64.
[35]俞理明,韩建侠.内容驱动还是语言驱动——对我国高校大学英语教学的一点思考[J].外语与外语教学,2012(3):1-8.
[36]袁平华.以内容为依托的大学外语教学模式研究[J].外语教学与研究,2008(1):59-64.
[37]袁平华.以学科内容为依托的语言教学对学生评判性思维能力影响的实证研究[J].外语界,2010(6):49-56.
[38]袁平华.大学英语教学环境中依托式教学实证研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2011(1):41-45.
[39]袁平华.依托学科内容的大学英语教学对学生学习动机及焦虑感的影响[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2012(3):41-45.基金项目
[2] Coyle,D.Theory and planning for effective classroom:Supporting students in content and language integrated learning contexts[A].In J.Masih(ed.).Learning Through a Foreign Language[C].London:CLIT,1999:46-62.
[3] Coyle,D.Content and language integrated learning:Motivating learners and teachers[J/OL].Scottish Language Review,2006(13):32-38.http://www.librarything.com/work/9865383/book/59330614.
[4] Coyle,D.Content and language integrated learning:Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogy[J].International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,2007(5):543-562.
[5] Cummins,J.Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children[J].Review of Education Research,1979(2):222-251.
[6] Cummins,J.Immersion education for the millennium:What have we learned from 30 years of research on second language immersion?[A].In M.R.Childs & R.M Boswick(eds.).Learning through Two Languages:Research and Practice.Second Latoh Gakuen International Symposium on Immersion and Bilingual Education[C].Katoh Gakuen,1998:34.
[7] Dalton-Puffer,C.Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL):Current research from Europe[A].In W.Deanoy & L.Volkmann(eds.).Future Perspectives for English Language Teaching[C].Heidelberg:Carl Winter,2008:139-157.
[8] Dalton-Puffer,C.Content-and-language integrated learning:From practice to principles?[J].Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,2011(31):182-204 .
[9] Day,M.& S.T.Shapson.Integrating formal and functional approaches to language teaching in French immersion:An experimental study[J].Language Learning,2001(supplement 1):47-80.
[10]DeCourcy,M.& M.Burston.Leaning mathematics through French in Australia[J].Language and Foundation,2000(2):79-95.
[11]Jexenflicker,S.& C.Dalton-Puffer.The CLIL differential:Comparing the writing of CLIL and non-CLIL students in higher college of technology[A].In C.Delton-Puffer,T.Nikula & U.Smith(eds.).Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classroom[C].Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2010:169-190.
[12]Lasagabaster,D.English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings[J].Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching,2011(1):3-18 .
[13]Lingle,D.A task-based approach to teaching a content-based Canadian studies course in an EFL context[J].The Modern Language Journal,2006(3):122-139.
[14]Lo,Y.Y.& V.A.Murphy.Vocabulary knowledge and growth in immersion and regular language learning programs in HongKong[J].Language and Education,2010(3):215-238.
[15]Marsh,D.CLIL/EMILE:The European Dimension:Actions,Trends and Foresight Potential Public Services Contract DG EAC[M].Brussels:European Commission,2002.
[16]Marsh,D.Using language to learn and learning to use language[EB/OL].http://archive.ecml.at/mtp2/clilmatrix/pdf,accessed 28/04/2014.
[17]Master,P.Grammar in content-based instruction[A].In L.Kaspe(ed.).Content-based College ESL Instruction[C].Hillsdade:Erlbaum,2000:93-106.
[18]Seikkula-Leino,J.CLIL learning:Achievement levels and affective factors[J].Language and Education,2007(4):328-341.
[19]Short,J.D.Assessing integrated language and content instruction[J].TESOL Quarterly,1993(4):627-656.
[20]Short,J.D.Language learning in sheltered social studies classes[J].TESOL Journal,2002(1):18-24.
[21]Smith,U.The AILA research network-CLIL and immersion classrooms:applied linguistics perspectives[J].Language Teaching,2008(2):295-298.
[22]Ting,T.A Collective End-of-Symposium Reflection:The State of the Art of CLIL and Future Prospects[EB/OL].http://www.ichm.org/clil/pdfs/summary_symposium 07.pdf,accessed 2014.
[23]蔡基刚.再论我国大学生英语教学发展方向:通用英语和学术英语[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2015(4):83-93.
[24]常俊跃,刘晓蕖,邓耀臣.内容依托式教学改革对英语专业学生阅读理解能力发展的影响分析[J].中国外语,2009(5):40-53.
[25]黄甫全,李灵丽.新兴课语整合式学习的有效实施策略[J].外语界,2015(3):16-24.
[26]林岩.语言模板在英语辩论课思辨能力培养中的应用效果研究[J].外语教学,2019(1):66-71.
[27]刘会英,黄甫全.欧洲新兴课语整合式学习(CLIL)的背景、视角与启示[J].广东外语外贸大学学报,2013(9):87-91,100.
[28]刘会英,黄甫全.开辟外语教学走向文化自觉的新路径——论欧洲新兴课语整合式学习的文化原理[J].比较教育研究论,2015(8):73-78.
[29]米保富.内容与语言融合型教学研究的新进展[J].现代外语,2015(5):715-724.
[30]盛云岚.欧洲CLIL模式:外语教学法的新视角[J].山东外语教学,2012(4):65-69.
[31]盛云岚.学术英语的语境化教学[J].外语界,2015(5):35-41.
[32]束定芳.德国的英语教学及其对我国外语教学的启发[J].中国外语,2011(1):4-10.
[33]王守仁.《大学英语教学指南》要点解读[J].外语界,2016(3):2-10.
[34]杨德祥,赵永平.内容依托式教学对英语专业学生思辨能力的影响[J].外语教学,2011(5):61-64.
[35]俞理明,韩建侠.内容驱动还是语言驱动——对我国高校大学英语教学的一点思考[J].外语与外语教学,2012(3):1-8.
[36]袁平华.以内容为依托的大学外语教学模式研究[J].外语教学与研究,2008(1):59-64.
[37]袁平华.以学科内容为依托的语言教学对学生评判性思维能力影响的实证研究[J].外语界,2010(6):49-56.
[38]袁平华.大学英语教学环境中依托式教学实证研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2011(1):41-45.
[39]袁平华.依托学科内容的大学英语教学对学生学习动机及焦虑感的影响[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2012(3):41-45.基金项目