论文总字数：28765字

摘 要

随着经济与技术的进一步发展，我国与世界接轨的范围越来越大，与世界的融合也越来越深入。英语已成为一个现代人所必须具备的一种重要素质和技能，而其最直接的表现是能否用英语进行流畅的口语交际。然而在我国初中英语口语教学中还存在着比较明显的应试特点，对于口语训练并不十分重视，导致学生缺少口语技能。基于此，本文从建构主义视角探讨现在初中英语口语教学中普遍存在的问题及改进方法，通过教学实验对比分析传统口语教学与建构主义指导下的口语教学。本文目的在于提高中学英语口语的教学效果,推动整个中学英语口语教学水平。

关键词：中学英语口语教学；建构主义；教学实验

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Literature Review 1

2.1 Relevant studies abroad 1

2.2 Relevant studies in China 2

3. About constructivism 3

3.1 Definition of constructivism 3

3.2 Constructivist teaching theory 3

3.3 Constructivist teaching mode 4

4. Research design and teaching experimental 5

4.1 Subjects 5

4.2 Aim of the experiment 5

4.3 Methodology 5

4.4 Class teaching 6

4.5 Questionnaire and its analysis 6

4.6 Tests 9

5. Oral English teaching under the constructivism 10

5.1 Creating an excellent language environment and psychological environment 10

5.2 Reinforcing the training of vocabulary 11

5.3 Changing teacher’s role 11

5.4 Cultivating students’ cooperation awareness 12

6. Conclusion 12

Works Cited 13

1. Introduction

Students can’t communicate in current Chinese junior middle school oral English teaching. In order to face the problem, it is imminent to reform the traditional oral English teaching mode and improve the level of oral English teaching. But if we want to achieve this point, efforts are not enough. Only with a scientific theoretical guidance, can we solve the problem of “dumb English”. This is why the author tries to apply constructivism theory to oral English teaching.

On the basis of previous studies, this paper introduces the definition of constructivism and relevant theory and its teaching mode. It is concluded that constructivism can improve the level of oral English teaching by experiment contrast. Thus it proves that constructivism can be used in junior middle school oral English teaching. Therefore, the paper approaches the current oral English teaching from the perspective of constructivism.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Relevant studies abroad

Constructivism was first put forward by Piaget (1996) who was a Swiss psychologist in 1960s. In the 1990s, a number of papers promoted the spread of constructivism as a scientifically educational theory or even a learning theory. Von Glasersfeld E. Who was the famous radical constructivist in America published some papers (1996:3-7; 1993:23-28), which deal with radical constructivism. There were quite a few academic works focus on constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning by Von Glasersfeld, E. (1995); The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education edited by K.Tobin (1993); Constructivism in Education by Leslie P. Steffeamp;Jerry Gale (1995); Constructivism and New Zealand Science Education by Matthhews.M (1995). Constructivism has become the leading theory of the educational reform. The United States of America takes constructivism as its guiding principle in National Science Education Standards in 1996. In Germany, Dr.R.Puit from Gell University has advocated reforming education under the guidance of constructivist theory. In Britain, constructivism has always been paid much attention to by the Science Education Research Centre(科学教育研究中心）of Leeds University.

2.2 Relevant studies in China

Zhang Jianweiamp;Chen Qi (1998) explored the constructivist theory in teaching and suggested many solutions. In their paper, they regarded constructivism as a further development of Piaget’ thoughts which emphasize learning as a process of meaning construction, and they also advanced some models such as Scaffolding, Anchored and Random Access and learning strategies--learning collaboratively and learning automatically. Li Kedong(1998) discussed the theoretical basis and technical requirements of multi-media teaching software development. In 1998 and 1999, college English teaching saw the first climax in exploration of combining constructivism with English teaching. Afterwards, many scholars investigated the topic in their paper. Accordingly, constructivism is widely accepted in the contemporary educational field, and it has become one of the leading theories in educational reform in the 21^st century (Peng Hongweiamp;Jiang Jingchuan 2004).

However, some scholars also present their questions with regard to constructivism point out its limitations. Peng Hongweiamp;Jiang Jingchuan (2004) emphasize that while advocating the theory, we should be aware of its limitations and the obstacles that will stand in the way when it is employed in teaching practice. In his paper entitled How Far We Are Away From Constructivism, Zhong Zhixian (1999) points out the obstacles that may come up in application of constructivism and the misunderstandings that constructivism may bring about in teaching a foreign language.

From the above, we can know that there are just few of researches on junior middle school oral English teaching from constructivist view. Lots of researchers have enriched and perfected constructivism, making it possible to apply the theory to teaching and learning practice. This paper will discuss problems on junior middle school oral English teaching and propose solutions from constructivism perspective for the purpose of helping oral English teachers and learners.

3. About constructivism

3.1 Definition of constructivism

Constructivism is a further development of cognitivism. Its earliest proposer can be traced back to Piaget in Switzerland. Constructivists believe that we are based on our own experience to construct reality or at least explain the reality. Our personal world is created by our own mind. As a result of our experience and the belief of experience is different, what we understand the outside world is also different. So we should pay more attention to constructing the knowledge on the basis of using the original experience, psychological structure and beliefs.

3.2 Constructivist teaching theory

The implication of constructivist teaching ideas mainly reflected in the knowledge view, learning view, students view, the role of teachers and students, learning environment and teaching principles. Knowledge is not purely objective reflection of reality, but is the explanation and hypothesis. Knowledge is not absolutely accurate to sum up the laws of the world or provide practical methods for any activity or problems. The true understanding can only be constructed by learners who based on their experiences and depended on the specific learning process. Otherwise, it will result in replicated passive learning. Learning is not the passive receiving information stimulation, but active construction of meaning. Learners should process and handle the external information choicely according to their own experience and background. Learning is not a simple accumulation of information, more important is that it contains the conflict between the old and new knowledge and experience as well as recombinant cognitive structure. The learning process is not a simple information input, storage and extraction, but an interaction process between the old and new knowledge. Teachers create the context and prompt clues between the old and new knowledge to help students to construct the meaning of current knowledge. Students should be good at connecting the study context with their existing knowledge as far as possible. The ideal learning environment should include situation, collaboration, communication and meaning construction.

3.3 Constructivist teaching mode

The mode of scaffolding instruction(支架式教学模式）as a teaching strategy is derived from Lev Vygotsky’s social-cultural theory and his view of Proximal Development(最近发展区). He defines scaffolding instruction as “role of teachers and others in supporting the learner’s development and providing support structure to get to the next stage or level” (Raymond, 2000:176). In scaffolding instruction, the teacher supplies scaffolds or supports to promote the learner’s development. Teacher helps learners study how to connect prior information or familiar knowledge with new knowledge by verbal and nonverbal communication and behaviors. However, the scaffolding is temporary. When the leaner’s abilities grow, the scaffolding provided by teacher will be slowly withdrawn. At last, the leaner can finish the task or master the conception independently. So the aim of the educator when using the scaffolding teaching strategy is to let student be an independent and self-regulating learner and problem solver (Hartman, 2001:23-69). Scaffolding instruction includes following steps: scaffolding, leading into the situation, exploring independently, learning collaboratively, self-assessing.

The model of random access instruction(随机通达式教学模式）is based on a new branch constructivist learning theories---Cognitive flexibility theory. Spiro (1988) divided learning into Junior Knowledge Acquisition and Advanced Knowledge Acquisition. Students only need to know a series of concepts and to make them exist again in the same situation in Junior Knowledge Acquisition. However, in Advanced Knowledge Acquisition, students need to master complex conceptions and apply them to various situations. Random access instruction is suitable for Advanced Knowledge Acquisition. Under the guidance of random access instruction, learners are able to acquire the same learning content in different ways. Random access instruction includes the following steps: showing basic contexts, learning randomly, train about thinking development, group cooperation and assessment of the effect of learning.

The model of anchored instruction(抛锚式教学模式）is closely related to situated learning, situated cognition and Cognitive Flexibility Theory. Anchored instruction is a technology-based learning approach which emphasizes the importance of placing learning in a meaningful, problem-solving context. It uses context as a learning device. Anchored instruction holds that learners need to study knowledge in the real world and environment, not just listen to others’ introduction and explanation. So this model requires teaching to be based on real events or real issues. Once events or issues are identified, the entire teaching content and processes will be identified as the ship is anchored fixed. Anchored instruction consists of the following steps: creating context, identifying the problem, autonomic learning, cooperative learning, effect evaluation.

4. Research design and teaching experimental

The research is designed to check whether the constructivism would help to enhance teaching effect and improve students’ oral English level.

4.1 Subjects

In the experiment, 80 junior school students from Yancheng Number 1 Middle School are randomly chosen as the subjects. Their average age is 16 and their gender and oral English level is different. They are divided into two classes. They are taught by the same teacher with the same workbooks, textbooks and other materials. One is the control class in which they are taught by the traditional way, the other is the experiment class in which they are taught in the constructivist model.

4.2 Aim of the experiment

The first aim is to prove the practicability of constructivism. The second aim is to testify the effectiveness of constructivism in junior middle school oral English teaching. The third aim is to find the problem in the traditional teaching method and solve the problem from the constructivism perspective.

4.3 Methodology

A set of methods used for carrying out the experiment is following: chatting face to face, observing, making questionnaires, contrasting analysis. By chatting with students and teachers freely, we can know students’ real thinking about junior middle school oral English teaching and teachers’ feeling on how to improve their teaching level. By observing students’ behavior in class and after class, we can find their change after experiment. After experiment, we make questionnaire in two class. By contrasting these dates, we can reach conclusion.

4.4 Class teaching

Due to the present English textbook is not suitable for oral English class, we chose NEC Conversation Practice(新概念英语口语) which was written by Hu Degang. There are five classes of NEC Conversation Practice every week. The teacher designs three periods for each class--1.warming up: lead-in questions and vocabulary preparation; 2.Conversation: watch the video and imitate the pronunciation and intonation; 3.Checking: teacher gives a similar situation or question and let students answer. The book contains 35 units and we need 7 weeks to finish.

4.5 Questionnaire and its analysis

The author had a discussion with about sixteen English teachers on their understanding of constructivism before the experiment. At the same time, the author discussed with many non-English majors from middle school in Yancheng about their comprehension of constructivism too. The writer also had personal interviews with students. This kind of informal conversation will create a pleasure atmosphere and thus students are more likely to tell some true experience in their oral English learning process. After a semester of teaching oral English in constructivist approaches, the writer used questionnaire to collect information about students’ oral English learning. The subjects’ answers to the questionnaire were analyzed by calculating percentages.

Table4.5.1 Motivation

Williams says “If asked to prove the most powerful influence on learning English, motivation would be the best choice” (Williamsamp;Burden2000:111). From Table4.5.1, 83% students learn oral English for the aim of communicating with English speakers freely. They have enough reasons and positive attitudes for learning oral English

Table4.5.2 Self-confidence

.

This table is related to the students’ self-confidence and we can easily find that more than half of the learners have confidence in learning oral English well. The teachers in constructivist classroom have tried many means to make their students more confident in speaking.

Table4.5.3 Circumstance

From table 4.5.3, we can know that 66% students agree that teacher build a suitable teaching model on the basis of students’ conditions. The table also shows that 78% students approve of the students-centered oral English learning atmosphere.

Table4.5.4 Determiner

Table4.5.4 shows that 94% students in the questionnaire survey think that diligence plays a more substantial part than aptitude does; 75% of the students agree that they should take the main responsibility for oral English study. As we can see, students are willing to get their oral English competence under the assistance of teachers and do not have puzzle any longer that who determines the result of learning.

Table4.5.5 Social strategies

Table4.5.5 indicates that 58% students are active in oral English class. 71% of the students can carry out study tasks assigned by teachers in cooperation with partners and 58% of the students hope to get corrections from teachers or classmates when they speak English.

Table4.5.6 Learning strategies

From Table4.5.6, we can know more than half of the learners have gained some learning strategies. This can help them to construct their own knowledge and use the language well.

In a word, these questionnaires reveal that most of the students were active in the oral English class and they could make full use of the chances that the teacher provided and contributed to group discussions actively. Some of them have had their own learning strategies. They testified that teachers created a suitable student-centered oral English learning atmosphere for them.

4.6 Tests

We designed two tests in order to check students’ improvement. One is before the Middle School designed the test papers. The test paper has five sections: I. Read the following words as clearly as possible (15points); II. Read the following sentences loudly with word stress and sentence stress (15points); III. Give a proper response to the picture given (20point); IV. Give a free talk according to the following topic (25points); V. Answer examiner’s questions (25points). The writer asked five students and three teachers to work out average scores in order to make sure the validity and reliability.

Table4.6.1 Mean Score before the experiment

Table4.6.2 Mean scores after the experiment

From the above two table, we know that control class changes a little, however, experiment class improve obviously.

5. Oral English teaching under the constructivism

From above research, we know that constructivism produces the desired effect on junior middle school oral English teaching. In the traditional oral English teaching, learners are only passive recipients but not active in talking. Collaborative learning would be neglected in traditional class and many learners keep silent and have no chance to participate in discussion. What’s worse, teachers always consider it’s a waste of time for learners to construct their own notion at such a low speed. On this occasion, the writer gives some suggestions as following.

5.1 Creating an excellent language environment and psychological environment

In China, English as a foreign language lacks a real and live fresh language environment. This environment usually appeared in the English class. However, there are too many students each class. This results in the less interaction between students and teachers, students and students. It can’t form a fixed language environment. For English course, it is a strong guarantee for realizing the objective of the course to create a good and real environment and provide rich language materials.

Because of the lack of adequate oral practice, students can’t communicate and are afraid of making mistakes. Sometimes, teachers correct errors inadequately and dampen the enthusiasm. Some students are worried that others say they enjoy the limelight. Some students are shy and don’t feel like speaking English. Over time, learning English has become ‘Dumb English’. The morning reading is more quiet than night sometimes. Teachers can build happy and relaxing environment by singing and playing games. Teachers are supposed to bridge the gap between students by praising and smiling.

5.2 Reinforcing the training of vocabulary

In oral English teaching in China, there’s much phenomenon such as “forget the word” or “without words”. Students have to consult in the dictionary. In language acquisition, vocabulary has a close relationship with listening, speaking, reading and writing. If you want to mast English, vocabulary is the key. The size of vocabulary can’t be ignored. Students need to remember some of the commonly used words for about 5000 which are enough to perform daily oral communication. Teachers should try to use simple words, phrases to teach difficult sentences and text meaning. Students can understand clearly. Students’ practical ability will be improved.

5.3 Changing teacher’s role

The key point of oral English teaching should be shift to the subjectivity of language teaching, from “teacher-centered” to “student-centered”, from “center of teaching” to “center of learning”, from “transfer, explain” to “support, help”. The teachers should play a role of guidance, support, help and encouragement. In oral English class, students’ oral practice should be at the center. Teacher’s role should be transferred to be the designer, demonstrators, guiders and participants, but not the controller. The whole teaching process facilitates learners who use language actively and creatively. The kind of teaching method can make students enhance self-confidence and arouse their learning enthusiasm. More important is that it can enhance students’ autonomous learning concept.

Teachers should take a tolerant attitude and pay attention to correcting errors. If the practice is to improve students’ oral accuracy, teachers can correct the mistake immediately. If the purpose of practice is to improve the fluency, teachers must wait until the practice is finished or class is over. At the same time, teachers ought to take care of students’ feeling and emotion. Teachers can declaim errors directly and can also consider using facial expression, body language and so on. Teachers can use methods such as mutual correction and group correction.

5.4 Cultivating students’ cooperation awareness

In fact, cooperative learning stimulates the small class mode and meets the needs of different level students in which each student has a chance to express themselves. Cooperative learning provides room to students in which they can think independently. It reflects the dominant position of students. It shows students’ initiative, enthusiasm and creativity. Adopting the way of cooperative learning in oral English teaching can improve students’ interests and learning motivation. It is important for students to make a chance to use language to create their new dialogue.

6. Conclusion

The paper mainly explores the application of constructivism in oral English teaching in junior middle school and proves the constructivism can really promote the development of junior middle school oral English teaching. Constructivism can improve the effect of junior middle school oral English teaching and promote the junior middle school oral English teaching level. According to this paper, constructivism can also be applied to other subjects such as Chinese, Maths, History and so on.

However, the experiment also has a lot of shortcomings such as insufficient subjects and confined experimental place. This experiment can be carried out in many other cities and middle schools. This can make sure the correction of the experiment.

Works Cited

[1] Hartman, H, Scaffoldingamp;Cooperative Learning: Human Learning and Instruction [M]. New York: City College of City University of New York, 2001:23-69.

[2] Matthews, M. Constructivism and New Zealand Science Education[M]. Auckland: Dunmore Press, 1995.

[3] Piaget. The Origin of Intelligence in Children. New York: International Universities Press, 1966.

[4] Raymond, E. Learners with Mild Disabilities: A Characteristics Approach [M]. Needham Heights, MA: Allynamp;Bacon, A Pearson Education Company, 2000:176.

[5] Steffe, L. P. and J, Gale. Constructivism in Education [M]. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Publishers, 1995.

[6] Spiro, R., R. Coulson, and P. Feltovich. Cognitive Flexibility Theory: Advanced Knowledge Aquisition in Structured Domains [A]. Proceeding of Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum Associates, 1988.

[7] Tobin, K, ed. The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education [C]. Washington, DC: AAAS Press, 1993:23-38.

[8] Von Glasersfeld, E. Introduction: Aspects of Constructivism [A]. Constructivism Theory Perspectives and Practice. Eds. Fosnot C.T.,et al. New York: Teachings College Press,1996. Hutchinson, T amp; Water, A English for Specific Purposes [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996:3-7.

[9] Von Glasersfeld, E. Questions and Answers about Radical Constructivism [A]. Ed. K Dubin. The Practice of Constructivism in science. Hillsdale, WJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Publishers 1993:23-28.

[10] Von Glasersfeld, E. Radical Constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning [M]. London: Falmer Press, 1995.

[11] Williams, M. and R.L. Burden. Psychology for Language Teachers [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2000:111.

[12] 陈琦，张建伟. 建构主义学习观要义评析[J]. 华东师范大学学报（教育科学版）1998（1）：61-68.

[13] 李克东. 多媒体教学软件开发的理论基础与技术要求[J].1998:52-59.

[14] 彭红卫，蒋京川. 对建构主义学习理论及其教育意义的反思[J].教育探索2004（5）：26-29.

[15] 钟志贤. 我们离建构主义有多远[J].电化教育研究1999（5）：8-11.

剩余内容已隐藏，请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：28765字