| 知觉学习风格对提高英语学习自主性
的教学功能表现
(人教版高三11) |
||||
| 中学英语教学资源网 → 英语论文 → 教学论文 手机版 | ||||
Perceptual Learning Styles in the Service of Improving the Learner Autonomy at Junior Middle School 摘要 《英语课程标准》中提出，在课堂教学过程中，教师应尊重学生的人格、“关注个体差异，满足不同学生的学习需要，促进学生在教师指导下主动地、富有个性的学习”。这说明，关注个体差异己成为当前课堂教学改革的要求之一。同时教育部也提出了另一改革——转变学习方式，把“培养中学生自主学习英语的能力”作为英语教学的主要目标。积极主动的学习是有效的语言学习。照顾学生风格的教学模式不仅可以提高学习过程中的认知效率，同时也可以提高学习自主表现。 本文旨在采用问卷调查和实验方法，研究初中英语教学中按照知觉学习风格设计学习者任务所能够对学习成绩和学生自主学习带来的影响。在既有的研究中，人们已经注意到认知风格在语言教学任务设计以及语言学习策略中的作用。但是，在我国初中英语教学中，这类个体差异如何体现于教学任务的设计和教学过程实施，如何通过教学模型的传递影响英语学习成绩以及学习者自主性的多项特征值，这些问题仍然有待具体的实证研究来获得答案。 本课题通过文献回顾在个体差异中颇具认知意义的知觉学习风格和自主学习的典型特征，设计出相应的符合学生认知类型的初中英语教学任务，考察此种教学对学习者各有关方面的影响。具体研究步骤是：采取合理的知觉学习问卷诊断初中英语学习者群体的知觉学习风格的分布；按照此种分布，实施相应的认知类型化的教学，考察目前知觉学习风格对该群体学习成绩的影响；在实验前和实验后分别采用自主学习调查问卷测定主体多项主观响应值，从而考察相应教学对英语学习自主性的影响。 经过三个月的教学实验，结果发现，考虑了知觉学习风格的教学在实验组和控制组之间产生了具有显著意义的学习成绩差异。同时也大大提高了实验组多项自主学习特征值，这一结果不仅取得了证实既有关于个体差异对语言学习的贡献方式，也为我国初中英语教学模型的完善揭示出一条有效的方法途径。 关键词: 知觉学习风格 自主学习 学习任务 Abstract It is required by the National English Curriculum that classroom English teaching should care about the learners’ individual differences, meet a variety of learner needs, and facilitate students’ autonomous language learning. Such a requirement has embodied an established language teaching principle that language learning tasks and language learning strategies are underpinned by just a few learning/cognitive styles. However, in the large body of literature concerning language learners’ differences, very few studies are directly targeted at improving teaching models in the Chinese junior middle school English classroom, there are even fewer studies that have produced solid experimental evidence. After reviewing the basic nature and typical features of perceptual learning styles, language learning autonomy, and tasked-based language teaching, this study aims at diagnosing the perceptual learning style distribution of a specific student body in the Chinese junior middle school, conducting a three-month experimental teaching designed according to the perceptual learning styles and, through various statistic analyses, finding out the specific influence of existing perceptual learning styles on the learners’ achievement and their development of language learning autonomy. Key Words: perceptual learning style, learner autonomy, English teaching task, 1.Introduction 1.1.The significance and background of the present study The National English Curriculum places more emphasis on students’ individual differences than previous curriculums. The students are supposed to be active autonomous learning and instruction should reach out to all of them. This will require teaching to adopt a more flexible and more learner-oriented style. Existing studies, such as that of Hartman (1995) suggests that students who are actively engaged in the learning process will be more likely to succeed. They feel empowered, and their personal achievement and self-direction levels rise. One way of getting and keeping students actively involved in the learning process lies in understanding learning style preferences. Students are taught entirely with methods antithetical to their learning style may be made too uncomfortable to learn effectively. Therefore, there should be continuous classroom teaching mode to explore. 1.2 The research questions A major issue in language learning is whether L2 develops on the basis of general rules or through highly individualized approaches. In language teaching, students are all placed in the same classroom process regardless of their individual differences. Recently, more and more attention is being paid to individual differences by both researchers and instructors in an environment of popularly-advocated student-centered teaching. Individual differences constitute a broad topic in the field of language learning and teaching. Existing studies (Garger and Guid, 1984; Skehan, 1998; Dunn & Dunn, 1993, Witkin, 1981; Messick, 1984; Kinsella, 1994; Reid, 2002; Erhman, 2003) have revealed that language learners can differ on many levels, such as modality dependence, sensory styles, perceptual styles, field dependence, memory dependence, decision making and problem solving in learning psychology, and language learning strategies. With regard to Chinese students in a junior middle school, this study places a special importance on the perceptual learning styles because of their developmental nature. Besides, as the result of this study is going to show, the perceptual-style-oriented teaching considerably raises students’ response scales in a questionnaire on the items that are meant to define language learning autonomy. This is an exciting achievement about the specific ways for autonomous language learning and the required teaching models. The study described below was motivated by empirical and theoretical considerations that led us to examine more closely whether the perceptual difference makes the achievement significantly different. This thesis begins by setting out the research questions, and, after discussion of the roles of learning styles, gets focused on the perceptual learning style as our major concern with the broad topic of individual differences. Then, after a brief review of the language teaching model, the author sets out on a real-situation teaching experiment that adopts the sensory earning styles in the designing process of the classroom tasks. 1) Is there a meaningful distribution of perceptual learning styles among the junior middle school students? In order to answer this question, I will perform a survey of perceptual learning styles with a questionnaire, and then conduct a teaching experiment to see if they have a significant influence on the learner achievement. 2) Is there significant difference between the learning results of the experimental group that are taught with tasked characterized by perceptual language learning styles and the control group from a normal task-based classroom. 3) What are the implications of the discoveries for English learning and teaching at junior middle school? I will pay special attention to the possible result of an improved language learning autonomy among the students in the experimental group. In the following, I will first search through the literature on individual differences for a theoretically-backed focus on the perceptual learning styles. In the review of the related literature, I also try to sum up a language teaching model that offers optional classroom tasks so that learners with different perceptual learning styles are able to choose a task according to their own preferences. After that, I will present my research design that includes a questionnaire on perceptual learning styles, a language pretest and a post test that are given to the students of the randomly divided experimental and control groups, a questionnaire on language learning autonomy before and after the teaching experiment, a teaching experiment that incorporates perceptual learning styles in the design of the classroom tasks. Finally, after the description and analysis of the elicited learner data, I will provide a discussion of the result in ways that would offer insights into the further improvement of the language teaching model chiefly for the purpose of raising the autonomous levels of the classroom language learners. 2.Literature review 2.1. Language learning styles There are a variety of theoretical constructs of learning styles in the studies of language learners’ individual differences. The most noticeable constructs include modality preferences (Barbe and Swassing, 1979; Skehan, 1998; Dunn & Dunn, 1993,), field dependence (Witkin, 1981; Messick, 1984; Brown 1994), and perceptual learning styles (Kinsella, 1994; Reid, 2002). 2.1.1.The nature of learning styles Though such studies differ more or less from each other in the theoretical construct, they all presume a cognitive or perceptual component as a common core. Skehan (1998) defines learning styles as the characteristic manner in which an individual chooses to approach a learning task. Ellis (1985) considers cognitive styles to be the manners in which people perceive, conceptualize and recall information. Garger and Guid （1984）define learning styles as stable and pervasive characteristics of an individual，express through the interaction of one’s behaviors and personality as one approach as a learning task. Dunn considers learning style to be a biological and developmental set of personal characteristics that makes the identical instruction effective for some students and ineffective for others (Dunn & Griggs, 1990). Kinsella (1994) defines learning styles as an individual’s natural, habitual, and preferred way of absorbing, processing, and retaining new information and skills. Erhman ( 2003) argues that learning style preferences refer to the way you like to learn. The learning styles is the broad topic. The terms learning style has been used in various and sometimes confusing ways in the literature, often interchangeably with the term cognitive style, personality type, perceptual preference, Modality, and others. 2.1.2. Modality preferences According to Skehan (1998), a modality preference is what partially determined learning style and learning strategies. It means that the learner relies more on the visual modality, the auditory modality or the kinesthetic modality in their learning. Reid (2002), however, recognizes the auditory, kinesthetic learner and the visual and tactile learner as sensory types. He used such terms as physical learner, left-brained (visual modality) learner and right-brained (auditory modality) learner that may be placed on the modality level. Dunn & Dunn (1993) found the features of the modality preference learners that like to snack and/or walk around intermittently when studying or taking tests. Barbe and Swassing (1979) developed a standardized performance measure of learning style based on modality strengths. They used a set of plastic shapes which are assembled in sequence after seeing them, feeling them with closed eyes, or hearing someone read the sequence (circle, square, triangle, cross). Modality strength is determined by the greatest number of correct pieces assembled. Modality preferences are determined by evaluating a person’s eye movements, language usage, the pace of language delivery, body movements, and reactions to learning experiences. For example “I see what you mean,” suggests a visual learner. “I hear you,” suggests auditory preferences “I get what you mean,” or “It feels right to me,” suggest tactile or kinesthetic learning preferences. 2.1.3. Field dependence FI/FD defined as a cognitive style, refers to whether people tend to rely on internal or external referents as they perceive and process information and as they interact with their environment. This concept of a cognitive style cuts across cognitive, personality, and social domains, and should therefore be relevant to second language acquisition in attention-involving, and affective, and sociological aspects (Messick, 1984). Another aspect of the FI/FD definition is relevant to L2 learning. Witkin and Goodenough (1981) suggested that individuals may differ in their cognitive style flexibility. That is, some individuals are more fixed in their FI/FD orientation, while others are more mobile, showing characteristics of both cognitive styles, depending on the learning situations. Brown (1994) suggested that the key to L2 success is mobility that allows learners to “exercise a sufficient degree of the appropriate style” in a given context. Field dependent learners typically learn more effectively in context，holistically，and intuitively. They are especially sensitive to human relationships and interactions, for example, seeing the “forest” instead of the trees. They prefer to rely on surrounding perceptual field or context for information and experience their environment in a global fashion by conforming to the prevailing context. One of their personalities is that they accept other people’s views before making a judgment and seek approval from authority by externally defined goals. They also like to work with others and perform better on essay and open-ended tests. Field independent learners typically learn more effectively step by step，or sequentially，beginning with analyzing facts and proceeding to ideas（see the “trees” instead of the forest）.They perceive objects as separate from the field or context and scan an item from the field in an analytical fashion. The way of their solving problems is on factual information. What’s more, they experience independence from authority，which leads to reliance on their own standards. They less affected by criticism and tend to be socially detached. Throughout the language learning, they like to try new tasks without the teacher’s help and prefer to work independently. They also perform better in multiple choice and cloze tests. Though field dependence has provided an important dimension of individual differences, its specific cognitive embodiments have not been clearly revealed yet. 2.1.4. Kinsella’s perceptual learning style construct The perceptual learning styles, which are to be adopted in this study, constitute an important cognitive representation of the language learner. The perceptual learning styles present a cognitively representative construct in the study of learner characteristics. Kinsella (1994) confirms the usually recognized learning styles as visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners. And the visual learners further developed into sub-types. For example, some visual learners absorb information most effectively by silent reading while some others may feel overwhelmed by extensive printed material and require a less visual/ verbal presentation of information through media such as pictures, graphs, charts, and diagrams. Kinsella (1994) thus developed a construct that can recognize further specific types of learners. He named these new learner categories “visual/verbal”, “visual/nonverbal” “auditory”, “kinesthetic or visual/tactile”. 1)Visual/verbal learners Visual/verbal Learners prefer to read books and magazines for both information and pleasure, and enjoy watching television documentaries and films in which both visual and verbal information are presented simultaneously. They also prefer to read what an expert has written on a subject than to listen to a lecture or discussion. They feel frustrated when teachers simply give oral instructions for assignments and test instead of also writing the instructions on a board or on a handout. Moreover, they take extensive notes during class lectures and discussions to review later and make list regularly of daily goal and activities. 2) Visual /Nonverbal learners Visual /Nonverbal learners are full of imagination. They typically understand and retain information well by looking at the picture, diagrams, charts, map, and films. They like to browse through books and magazines while focusing primarily on the picture, and learn how to do things through observation or modeling rather than verbal explanation. They prefer demonstrated tasks, visual models, or the television as a source of news rather than a newspaper or a radio. Another characteristic of these learners is a strong visual memory: remembering faces, locations, directions, where they put things. What’s more, they often doodle or draw while taking notes during a class lecture or a discussion. 3) Auditory learners Strong auditory learners do better with the spoken rather than the printed words. So they would probably benefit far more in revising their writing, for example, mastering new information by listening, then repeating or discussing with others, enjoying working collaboratively with a partner or a small group, preferring to have someone explain how to assemble or use something rather than look over written instructions or diagrams. They feel frustrated when teachers write assignment and test instructions on a handout but do not go over them orally. 4) Tactile-kinesthetic learners Tactile-kinesthetic learners enjoy working with their hands. They want to feel and touch everything, such as being good at repairing and assembling things, even without instructions, they explore their environment and focus well during “hand-on” project and activities. In the classroom, they like to variety in classroom activities and enjoy opportunities to work collaboratively with a partner or a small group on a task. Most researches have focused on finding out individual learning styles and combining teaching with learning. Reid is one of the pioneers to induce the theories of learning styles into pedagogy. Raid (1987) administered questionnaire to 1388 students of various language backgrounds to investigate their preferred modalities. The research showed that ESL learners' preferences differed greatly from those of native English speakers; ESL learners showed a general preference for kinesthetic and tactile learning styles; proficient level was not related with teaming style preferences. Before Reid's work, teachers seldom realized the different styles between ESL learners and native English speakers when they taught in class. Reid's research provides basis data on perceptual learning styles and on the similarities and differences between the styles of ESL learners and of the native English speakers. Each learner is a unique individual, with his or her own learning style preferences. Styles apply to all persons irrespective of age, creed, gender, or race. Students learn in many different ways. By seeing and hearing; reflecting and acting; reasoning logically and intuitively; memorizing and visualizing, learning style is a complex, multifaceted construct. Many kinds of learning style work in L2 learning, yet it is hard to say which is the most effective since they are value-neutral. There are some other paradigms of language learning styles, such as language learning strategy preferences (Oxford, 1990; Willing, 1989), Affective/Temperament Learning Styles (Myers&Briggs, 1987; Norton, 1975). However, the perceptual learning styles reviewed above may have represented learners’ cognitively functioning ability best in the specific context of Chinese learners of English and is preferred in this study with regard to the specific research purpose. 2.2. Language learner autonomy Rubin (1975) noticed that a good language learner appeared to use a larger number and range of strategies, and once identified, the strategies of successful learners could be made available to less successful learners. This study became one of the early efforts towards the understanding of language learning as an autonomous learning system. Language learner autonomy is one of the exciting cognitive constructs of the language learner. Existing studies emphasize the Holec’s learner autonomy model which focus on the ability of taking charge of one's own learning. The Huttunen’s model concerns on terms of performance. The Benson & Voller’s model combines the merits of the two models above. However, a truly autonomous language learner is yet to be accomplished by a proper attitude towards individual learning styles. 2.2.1. Definitions of language learner autonomy By 1981 Holec (1981) had defined autonomy as ‘the ability to take charge of one's own learning.’ This initial definition has been taken as a starting point in much subsequent work in the area. According to Holec, autonomy is a capacity and the possession of a capacity does not necessarily imply that it will be exercised. Holec (1988) further states that learner responsibility is a necessary requirement for self-directed learning. Little (1990) sees learner autonomy as ‘essentially a matter of the learner’s psychological relation to the process and content of learning’. Little’s definition is complementary to Holec’s , but adds a vital psychological dimension that is often absent in definitions of autonomy. For Holec, learner autonomy is ability instead of an action. However, Huttunen(1986) holds that the act of a certain type of learning is important. According to him, ‘a learner is fully autonomous when he is working individually or in a group, taking responsibility for the planning, monitoring and evaluating of his studies...’ Dickison (1987:11) regards autonomy as a ‘situation in which the learner is totally responsible for all of the decisions concerned with his or her learning and the implementation of those decisions’. Nunan (1995) considers that the ability is crucial and the autonomous learners are able to define their own goals and create their own learning opportunities. Benson & Voller (1997) defines learner autonomy in terms of different connotations. They explain that autonomous learners study entirely on their own. They determine the direction of their own learning and take responsibility for their own learning and apply in self-directed learning. What Benson &Voller try to tell us is that autonomy refers not only to an inborn capacity of the learner, but also learners' actual exercise of their responsibility for their own learning. 2.2.2. Characteristics of leaner autonomy Dam et al. (1990) characterize learner autonomy as ‘a readiness to take charge of one’s own learning’. Gardner and Miller (1996: vii) define autonomous language learners as those who ‘initiate the planning and implementation of their own learning program’. In a ward, leaner autonomy has the relation to learners’ metacognition and motivation. 1) Relation to metacognition In the theoretic framework of behaviorism, the language teaching emphasized the drilling, conditioning and imitation. Chomsky (1981) thinks that there is a linguistically specialized device (LAD) for the acquisition of language. However, even the widely influential Chomskian language construct cannot deny the general cognitive approach to language learning tasks. In the aspect of cognition, though language is naturally acquired, which is influenced by the different individuals. Some learners cannot learn something until they have seen it. Such learners fall into the group called visual learners, while others are strong at listening. One major source for the learning styles is the metacognitive knowledge. O'Malley & Chamot (1990) define that strategies due to metacognition as advanced organizers, directed versus selective attention, self-management, advance preparation, self-monitoring, delayed production and self-evaluation. Such factors as the development of an active attitude and motivation to language learning are also characteristics of an autonomous learner (Anderson, 2002). As Wenden (1991) says, metacognition is “one aspects of autonomy” and the focus of metacognitive theory is precisely on the characteristics of think in that contribute to students’ awareness of being self-regulatory organisms, or, of being agents of their own thinking. Dickinson (1992) lists the basic characteristics of an autonomous learner who can set his learning goals, choose and monitor learning strategies, assess his learning results. However, the cognitive character of language learning cannot be fully expressed if we neglect the learning styles. Cognitive language learning is scientific and able to keep up with the students’ cognitive processes. Cognitive language learning follows Bruner’s constructivist theory whose principles: Instruction must be concerned with the experiences and contexts that make the student willing and able to learn; Instruction must be structured so that it can be easily grasped by the student; Instruction should be designed to facilitate extrapolation and or fill in the gaps. 2) Relation to Strong motivation Motivation is the very pearl of the learning process. Chomsky (1998) points out the importance of activating learners’ motivation: ‘‘the truth of the matter is that about 99 percent of teaching is making the students feel interested in the material’’. The language-learning motivation can fall into extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation comes from the desire to get a reward or avoid punishment; the focus is on something external to the learning activity itself. Intrinsic motivation sees the learning experience as its own reward: ‘Intrinsic motivation is in evidence whenever students’ natural curiosity and interest energize their learning’ (Deci and Ryan, 1985). Brown (1994) makes some suggestions for stimulating the growth of intrinsic motivation in the L2 classroom: (1) help learners develop autonomy by learning to set personal goals and to use learning strategies, (2) encourage learners to find self-satisfaction in a task well done, (3) facilitate learner participation in determining some aspects of the program and give opportunities for cooperative learning, (4) involve students in content-based activities related to their interests, (5) and design tests which allow for some students input and which are face-valid in the eyes of students; provide comments as well as a letter or numerical evaluation. Gardner and Miller (2002: 8) see self-access as a way of encouraging learners to move from teacher dependence towards autonomy. The author of the thesis agrees with Dickinson and the other researchers. During the course of English teaching and learning, we can also see that the students who learn actively usually have a positive attitude and strong motivation to English learning. The autonomous learners in the class have common characteristics: (1) take initiatives in planning and executing learning instead of passive learning (2) accept responsibility for their learning (3) independent learning (4) take an active role in the learning process, generating ideas and cherish learning opportunities. 2.2.3 Elements of self-access Gardner and Miller (2002: 9) refer that elements of self-access includes the resources people management system individualization needs analysis learner reflection counseling materials development …they think the teachers to perform the roles of: information provider, counselor, authentic language user, manager, material writer, assessor, evaluator administrator organizer. The roles of the learners are planners, organizers, administrators, thinkers, evaluators of SALL, self-assessors, self-motivators, partners, peer-assessors. They consider individual differences in: learner styles, learning strategies, learning level, content of learning…… According to materials development, they state materials should support individualization and improve learning opportunities. From the learner autonomy presented above, we know that the learner autonomy refers not only to the ability and performance of language learning, but also to the active attitude and motivation. An autonomous learner will have strong motivation, high self-efficacy, and a strong interest in language learning. Evidence for learner autonomy shows that learners do not only have an inborn capacity, but are also able to determine the direction of their own learning. So the instruction should care for different individuals’ learning processes and their learning styles. The instruction should arouse the interest and improve the motivation. Thus, students can learn effectively. 2.3.The basic features of language teaching models A brief review of the basic features of more recent teaching models is to provide this study with the basic patterns for the designing of language teaching. 2.3.1. Basic principles Language teaching has been taking its models from language and language learning (Brown, 1994; Curzon, 1997;Robert, 1996). In such an understanding, the basic principles include: (1) Structuring real and natural language experience, as opposed to only repetitive practice or mechanical manipulation of vocabulary and structure; (2) Providing opportunities to explore relevant, meaningful, more personalized topics, in addition to the “external” themes presented in textbooks; (3) Creating a relaxed, friendly environment where students are free to guess, experiment, and discover what they are able to do in their new language without fear of embarrassment or constant correction; (4) Encouraging students to take more initiative and responsibility in their acquisition process via small-group and partnered tasks, independent of the teacher’s supervision and direction; (5) Addressing all learning styles----visual, kinesthetic, auditory, and oral---in order to reach each student and to provide repetition without tedious redundancy. The above expression of language teaching principles has rightly described some of the most important aspects of language teaching. 2.3. 2.The roles of the learner It is obvious that not all the students are successful learners in English study because of multiple variables. They widely differ from each other in abilities, personalities, intellects, interests, needs and so on. The students have different learning motivations, different learning styles and different learning strategies. It is necessary for teachers to pay much attention to these factors The learner individual are individual with different needs and preferences, since learners are different, they should be allowed the freedom to learn in the ways that suit them best. According to Nunan (2001), the development of learner-centered curriculum is different from that of the traditional curriculum in that it is a collaborative effort between teachers and learners, when the learners are involved in the process of decision-making according to the way the curriculum is taught and assessed. The learner-centeredness is defined the roles which learners should play in managing their language study. As Benson & Voller (1997) points out, “learner-centeredness” is characterized by a movement away from language teaching as the transmission of a body of knowledge (the language) towards language learning as the active production of knowledge, learners are desired to take totally different roles in learner-centered context. 2.3.3.The roles of the teacher Voller (1997) describes a teacher such a role as a facilitator, a counselor; and a resource combined. Holec (1985) endowed learning facilitation with such functions as helping the learner raise their awareness of responsibility and motivation, plan and carry out their learning independent tasks, monitor and evaluate their independent learning. Throughout task-based English teaching, the teacher-student relationship is democratic. According to Breen and Candlin(1980), the teacher has three main roles. The first is to act as facilitator of the teaching process, the second is to act as a participant, and the third is to act as an observer and learner, which is quite different from the traditional teacher’s roles. In democratic classroom, the emphasis is placed on the kids rather than on the teacher. Active learning hinges on the student individual in the learning process in order for it to be effective In all, Teachers should move the centers of focus in the classroom from themselves to their students by allowing students to experience responsibility for their learning. 2.3.4.Tapping the learner initiatives Language learning depends on quite a few cognitive processes in which the learner has to take the initiative. Only when the learning process accords with the cognitive requirements, can learning be made more effective. One important difference between effective and ineffective language learners is that effective learners make appropriate choices when it comes to the means through which they learn language. For example, some students prefer to work in groups or pairs for a particular task (Nunan, 2001:164). In the view of Bruner (1973), learning is an active process in which learners construct new ideas or concepts based on their current or past experiences. The learner selects and transforms information, constructs hypotheses, and makes decisions, relying on a cognitive structure to do so. Learner initiatives play a vital role in efficient language learning in task-based English teaching. Learners take on input that is appropriate to their current stage of learning. If they are allowed to make progress through tasks at their own rates, students can concentrate on aspects that are suitable for their learning levels. It has the advantage of tapping the learner initiatives. A good task can present an active learning process in which learners use their current or past knowledge and then go beyond the information given to acquaint new knowledge, which makes students feel successful in learning English. 2.3.5.The perceptual-style-oriented teaching 1) Language teaching models In the language teaching history, many teaching approaches and methods have appeared. The main teaching models include the Grammar-translation method, the Direct Method, Situational Language Teaching, the Audiolingual Methods, Alternative methods (total Physical Response, the Silent Way, Suggestopedia…) Communicative Language Teaching, the ‘Course Design Approach’, all the teaching models mentioned above have some in common, that is , they have assumed for convenience that all learners are more or less the same.( Davies,p. & Pearse,E. 2002.) 2) Learner-centered Teaching In learner-centered class, the teachers tries to find out about individual learners’ motivations, need, interests, and learning styles. These teacher prepare lesson plans that take into account the commonest motivations, needs, and interests of the learners and also offer different learners in group opportunities to work in the ways they find the most comfortable and useful. A truly student-centered classroom means that students select their own reading and writing topics, and participate regularly in lively class discussions. The student-centered classroom is a democratic educational environment that enables students to equitably develop their individual learning styles to meet the diverse demands of school and life with increased confidence and competence. A teacher who creates a student-centered classroom understands and respects the diversity of learning styles, and offers choices in how information and skills will be acquired. 3) The possibility of the perceptual-style-oriented teaching When Crabbe(1993:444) gives the reference point for all students’ classroom procedure, he comes up ‘public domain’ learning and ‘private domain’ learning . He holds that there must be an interface between ‘public domain’ learning, that is, learning that is based on shared classroom activities and ‘private domain’ learning, that is, personal learning behavior. Gardner and Miller (2002: 156) agree with Crabbe’s view that these two domains of learning should be integrated. Lamb (1996) proposes learning a foreign language should be that the teachers teach the core units of the courses, but the students are asked to use self-access materials to extend and consolidate their learning in ways they found useful and interesting. Lamb states the benefits of the approach. For example, pupils enjoy setting their own pace, pupils enjoy making informed choices about their needs according to their ability, being able to work as well or even better when they have responsibility for their own learning, pupils are able to draw on skills from other curriculum areas. Researches on the relationship between learning and instruction in class settings, Nunan (1995) suggests that even in the classroom, learners tend to follow their own agendas rather than those of their teachers Lame (1996) reports on an initiative in compulsory modern language classes in an English comprehensive school to encourage self-management in learning. Although general learning goals were determined by the National Curriculum and specific goals are made explicit in units of work, learners selects the order in which they work on subgoals and selects their own tasks for language practice from a bank of resources. Lamb also reported a majority preference for independence for independent study over teacher-directed work, increased motivation and improved examination results. In a word, the teacher should let the students’ needs and interests determine what they will learn, for themselves to decide how they will learn this material, and, above all, for themselves take over some of the control of the tasks in learning. Though there are still other theoretical constructs (such as humanistic psychological theory and multiple intelligence theory) that recognize individual differences, students’ learning styles are the most direct expressions in terms cognitive characteristics. Present teaching notions almost all focus on the student-centeredness. Student-centered teaching class helps learners identify their own preferred styles. Thus, the author addresses the cognitively-styled teaching which emphasizes perceptual learning styles in the student’s learning processes. In the following, I will describe a research design that pays attention selectively to perceptual learning styles as a learner resource that raises language learning achievement and facilitates the development of the language learning autonomy. 3. Research design 3.1. Participants The study administered involved 31 students, (15 males, 16females), aged 14–15, from Grade Eight in Hangzhou Caihe Middle School. 3.2. Instruments 3.2.1 Perceptual style learning questionnaire The main instrument in this part was the 32-item version of the Perceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire (Kinsella, 1993) designed for measuring students’ perceptual learning styles. It has been revealed through a review of related literature that the questionnaire is designed chiefly for adult learners is, nevertheless, adopted because it reflects the relevant cognitive aspects of the students better than other learning style constructs. Table 3.1 provides a statistic description of the investigation. Table 3.1 Distribution of junior middle school students’ learning styles Visual/verbal Visual/nonverbal Auditory Kinesthetic-tactile N Valid Missing percent 29 2 19% 29 2 21% 29 2 19% 29 2 41% The investigation elicited 29 valid responses for all the items. The results shows that 41% of the students are visual/tactile or kinesthetic learners, 21% are visual/nonverbal learners, 19% are visual/verbal learners, and 19% are auditory learners. Visual/tactile or kinesthetic learning styles are students' most preferred learning styles. 3.2.2. Learner autonomy questionnaire Two measurements were taken respectively before and after the teaching experiment. The same 29 participants that responded to the learning style questions gave rated responses on all the 40 items of the questionnaire cited from Pang Weiguo (2003). Nine of the items are used to assess the learners’ self -efficacy. Another 9 diagnose inner values. The cognitive strategy section consists of 13 items. The last section draws 9 responses on self- regulation. Table 3.2. is a statistic description of the responses elicited. Table 3.2. Result description N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Self-efficacy (control) 29 9.00 56.00 45.5862 10.1084 Self-efficacy (experiment) 29 13.00 61.00 49.4138 10.8711 Inner value(control) 29 10.00 59.00 44.8276 10.1597 Inner value(experiment) 29 16.00 61.00 48.0345 9.5300 Cognitive strategy use. (control) 29 21.00 74.00 57.7241 11.6585 Cognitive strategy use(experiment) 29 29.00 77.00 60.6897 10.2019 Self-monitoring(control) 29 23.00 49.00 36.2069 6.3041 Self-monitoring(experiment) 29 26.00 46.00 37.6552 4.7830 Valid N (listwise) 29 3.3. Teaching experiment The experiment and control groups are randomly divided into the experimental and control groups. The basic principle for the design is that the teacher should design tasks and activities based on an understanding of the students’ preferred learning styles and change their teaching styles to meet the different needs of students. Student, in turn, are encouraged to participate cooperatively during the process in terms of helping with the designing and bearing the responsibility to select activities that appeal to their own learning style. They should be able to make decisions and alter tasks according to their self-efficacy (see Appendix 2) The typical classroom tasks include common processes (organizational, instructional, and “read after me” tasks) and cognitively styled tasks designed for each type of students. The students are told to form efficiency groups (a group that share an efficient way of learning) according to their likes and dislikes. 3.3.1. Visual/verbal tasks Visual/verbal learners are allowed to choose from reading tasks. The reading material is usually the texts and supplementary reading material. They are encouraged to participate in all kinds of text-based reading activities. Thus, we can call this group “book-readers”. 3.3.2. Tasks for Visual/nonverbal Visual/nonverbal learners learn more efficiently when they see the “information” or watch pictures, images, etc. and they “acquire language through seeing language (including words and rules) as a visual process. Their typical task is to study wall-papers, cards, PowerPoint slides, graphs and maps that present all kinds of language information. 3.3.3. Task for visual/tactile or kinesthetic learners Visual /tactile learners process information in creating and making tasks. However, it is the visual experience that plays a crucial part in their learning. By creating and making wall-papers, card, powerpoint slides, graphs and maps, visual tactile learners will get access to the language information in their preferred ways and at same time bring benefit to others, especially to the visual/nonverbal learners. 3.3.4. Tasks for auditory learners Auditory learners need to ‘hear’ information other than just reading from a text,. Thus, the classroom instruction, tapes, oral report, shared classroom tasks like word-reading, and read-after-me tasks will be employed in the teaching. Meanwhile, they are required to search for related information by themselves. 3.3.5. Cognitively-styled tasks In the experiment class, the typical classroom tasks include common processes (organizational, instructional, and “read after me” tasks) and the cognitively- styled tasks. The cognitively styled tasks are designed according to an understanding of the students’ preferred learning styles. The students are encouraged to participate cooperatively. They should make decisions and alter tasks according to their self-efficacy. In the following part, the author typically designs three samples of the cognitively styled tasks in order to practice the target language. Those tasks are employed for teaching vocabulary, reading, and grammar. The materials are adopted from “Go for it” (Book II). 1) Cognitively-styled tasks for vocabulary learning and teaching Teaching materials: words for parts of body e.g. arm, leg, stomachache, hand, foot, back, head, eye, nose, mouth, tooth etc Goals: To acquire, during finishing tasks, the words are communicated in the situations, finally students can use the words in real communication. Optional tasks for students’ choice: a) games for saying and touching parts of body (for kinesthetic-tactile learners) b) draw a favorite friend and tell a story to partners “She has a long hair, big eyes ,long legs……”(for auditory learners) c) read aloud words correctly and fluently, then write a passage about a favorite friend (for visual/verbal learners) d) look and remember: look at a cartoon kid printed the target words on it(for visual/nonverbal learners) 2) Cognitively-styled tasks for grammar learning and teaching Teaching materials: the simple past tense Goals: through the meaningful practice, enable the student to understand the simple past tense, and apply in the reading and writing content Optional tasks for students’ choices: a) make a small wall paper on the grammar knowledge or grammar charts and present the production to their classmates(for kinesthetic-tactile learners) b) read the grammar materials (for auditory learners) c) read a short passage in which the sentences with the simple past tense are highlighted (for visual/verbal learners) d) look and write: look at the pictures and produce the sentences using the simple past tense (for visual/nonverbal learners) 3) Cognitively-styled tasks for reading learning and teaching Teaching materials: about asking for looking after a dog Goals: during reading the materials, get the students to learn how to look after a dog, and use the target language in the real world. Optional tasks for students’ choices: a) draw a pet and discuss how to look after the pet (for kinesthetic-tactile learners) b) change the reading materials into a conversation (for auditory learners) c) read a additional reading material in a sheet and complete the exercises (for visual/verbal learners) d) see flash cards and write a passage about looking after the pet (for visual/nonverbal learners) Thus, according to the distribution of the learning styles in the experiment class, different students have different preferences. The classroom activities in teaching English need to be different from the traditional ways. When the teacher chooses an activity, he should consider students' characteristics by asking the question of whether the students are visual or auditory, kinesthetic or tactile. He should also consider when the activity should be used. The teaching design presented here takes Unit7 in “Go for it” (Book II) for the teaching material. The topic is “How do you make a banana milk shake?” The procedure consists of seven activities. The purpose of the activities is to present the content of making milk shake and to facilitate the perceptually styled learning. For example, the Lead-in Activity is to facilitate styled learners with the presentation of an situation in which the new words are received in various ways so that each type of learners would feel at home in the learning environment. For example, in the yogurt-making experiment task, visual learners can watch the process, auditory learners listen to the on-going explanations, and the kinetic learners perform the whole experiment. The whole teaching process is presented in Appendix3. 3.3.6. Result description Table 3.3. Descriptive Statistics for the teaching results of the control and experimental groups. Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean The experimental group The control group 77.3793 91.0517 31 31 29.7248 25.8579 5.5198 4.8017 As Table 3.3. shows, Mean for the experimental group that are taught with tasked characterized by perceptual language learning styles (N=31) was 91.0517. For the control group from a normal task-based classroom (N=31), the mean was 77.3793. The Std. Deviation for the control group is 29.7248 and the experiment group 25.8579, the Std. Error Mean for the control group is 5.5198 and the experimental group 4.8017. The results indicate that there is a statistically significant change between the two groups. The classroom teaching including cognitively- styled tasks get higher scores than the conventional classroom teaching model. 3.4. Data processing results 3.5.1. Experimental data processing result Table 3.4. Paired Samples T-test result (the experiment and control groups) The Paired Sample T-test results here show that there is not a veritable difference between the pre-test result of the experimental and control groups. However, a significant or very significant difference exists between the post-test results of the two groups (t=2.207, p<0.05) or between the pretest and posttest of the experimental group (t= -3.719, p<0.05). The test results confirmed our hypotheses that the perceptual learning style as the independent variable does cause a significant difference in the learner achievement. 3.5.2. Two related sample tests We performed a test (Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test) for the occurences of the major features of the learner autonomy. 1) Self－efficacy Table 3.5. Two related self-efficacy measurements test (Wilcoxon) Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 Item 5 Item 6 Item 7 Item 8 Item 9 Z -2.000 -3.889 -1.063 -.756 -2.327 -.862 -2.309 -2.810 -3.437 Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .046 .000 .288 .450 .020 .389 .021 .005 .001 a Based on negative ranks. b Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test The result shows that the distributions of responses to the nine items in the self-efficacy group generally show significant or very significant differences between the pre-experiment and post-experiment measurements. Specifically, students become more competitive in learning (z= -2.000, Asym p< 0.05). 2) Inner value Table 3.6. Two related inner value measurements test (Wilcoxon) Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 Item 5 Item 6 Item 7 Item 8 Item 9 Z -1.190 -1.342 -3.720 -.447 -1.674 -.966 -.302 -3.898 -.276 Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .234 .180 .000 .655 .094 .334 .763 .000 .783 a Based on negative ranks. b Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test The result reveals significant or very significant differences between the two experiments’ measurements in the distributions of responses to the nine items in the inner value group. 3) Cognitive strategy use Table 3.7. Two related cognitive strategy use measurements test (Wilcoxon) Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 Item 5 Item 6 Item 7 Item 8 Item 9 Item 10 Item 11 Item 12 Item 13 Z -.318 -1.841 -2.234 -.526 -2.049 -2.180 -.434 -.107 -.635 -.467 -1.927 -2.853 -2.754 Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed .750 .066 .025 .599 .040 .029 .664 .915 .526 .641 .054 .004 .006 a Based on negative ranks. b Based on positive ranks. c Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test The result again shows that the quite a few of the distributions of responses to the thirteen items in the cognitive strategy use group generally show significant or very significant differences between the pre-experiment and post-experiment measurements. 4）Self－monitoring Table 3.8. Two related self－monitoring measurements test (Wilcoxon) Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 Item 5 Item 6 Item 7 Item 8 Item 9 Z -3.630 -2.850 -3.115 -1.604 -2.612 -.451 -2.076 -2.271 -.632 Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .004 .002 .109 .009 .652 .038 .023 .527 a Based on negative ranks. b Based on positive ranks. c Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test Significant or very significant differences in the ranked orders of response scales between the pre-experiment and post-experiment measurements are evident for six of the nine-item responses in the self-monitoring group. Students show a much better control over their learning and achieve a likewise much better understanding of their future responsibility (z= -3.630, Asym p< 0.05). 4. Result and discussion Results presented above strongly support that the difference in the English learning achievement between the experimental and the control groups is significant and reflects that there is a significant difference in the levels of the students’ autonomy between the two groups. Although much work remains to be done on promoting the efficiency of English teaching, the integration of the students’ perceptual learning styles into classroom teaching suggests that it is necessary for Chinese junior middle school English teachers to adopt a new pattern of language teaching. In the following, we are going to discuss the major findings, implications and some limitations in the research. 4.1. Major findings The evidence demonstrates that learning style constitutes one of the most important factors influencing the EFL learner’s self efficacy. It is paramount that teachers identify students’ learning styles and consciously match their own teaching styles with individual students in the light of learning styles. So firstly we assume that diverse perceptual learning styles are meaningfully distributed among individual students. Language teachers should create an appropriate teaching model that matches their teaching with students’ perceptual learning styles. Learning styles will upgrade the learners’ self-efficacy in a certain degree. In order to testify these hypotheses, we conducted the teaching experiment, which adopts Kinsella’s perceptual learning preferences survey. We got 29 valid responses from 31students of Grade 8 in Caihe Middle School, Hangzhou. The results of the survey display that diverse learning styles are meaningfully distributed among Chinese junior middle students, which comprise of visual/verbal learning styles, visual/nonverbal learning styles, auditory learning styles and kinesthetic-tactile learning styles. 19% of the children use visual styles, 21% tend to nonverbal style, 19% of them use auditory style and 41% prefer to kinesthetic-tactile styles. We also adopted teaching experiment to test if the classroom teaching pulsing perceptual learning can heighten learner’s autonomy and also be conducive for getting high scores. The whole teaching experiment was divided into three phases. Firstly, we tried to identify diverse perceptual learning styles by the investigation. Then we conducted a systematical teaching experiment. At the close of the teaching experiment, we adopted a T-Test to see if there was significant difference in terms of students’ learning autonomy and test scores between the experimental group and the control group. The results of the T-Test reveal that there are significant or very significant differences in correlation with self efficacy, self monitoring and cognitive strategies between the pre-experiment and post-experiment measurements. Specifically, students become more proficient in performing all types of assignment by the teachers. (Z=-.756, Asym P<0.05). Students can outline the whole text to facilitate memory. (Z=-2.853, Asym P<0.05) etc. Meanwhile, Statistics for the teaching results of the control and experimental groups presented that there was a statistically significant difference (t=-2.207, P<0.01) between the experimental group and controlled group. The mean of the experimental group is 91.0517(N=31), which is much higher than the control group, (N=31, 77.3793). Then we can say that the classroom teaching including cognitively-styled tasks is propitious to fostering students’ learning autonomy and also getting higher scores. It is significant to establish an effective teaching model in accordance with individual’s perceptual learning styles. Appropriate teaching models will meet the needs of different perceptual learning styles and contribute to successful language learning. To understand and respect individual's diverse learning styles, I suggest that teachers employ instruments to identify students' learning styles and provide instructional alternatives to address their differences, and that teachers plan lessons to match students' learning styles while at the same time encouraging students to diversify their learning style preferences. By doing this we can assist our students in becoming more effective language learners. 4.2.Discussions The above study has diagnosed a meaningful distribution of perceptual learning styles among the students, confirmed a positive correlation of the styles with autonomous language learning, and strongly supports the integration of perceptual learning styles in teaching through task designing. 4.2.1.The meaningful distribution of perceptual learning style Results of the questionnaire on perceptual learning styles strongly suggest that perceptual learning styles are meaningfully distributed in Chinese junior middle school students. Therefore, from this aspect, some creative teaching methods can be useful and helpful to English teaching. It is found that the teaching efficacy will be better if teachers can arrange their blackboard design more reasonable and acceptable to those visual learners. Meanwhile, we can employ more pictures or visual-teaching-aids. Towards those verbal learners, we must focus on the communicative function of language and employ more fast-speed reading to improve language proficiency. Auditory learners need more listening practice. So we must guarantee the quality of classroom listening materials to our best abilities. Confronting with visual /tactile or kinesthetic learners, we can design much meaningful activities to motivate learners’ interests. In addition, enhancing perceptual learning style in the teaching and learning process make teachers and learners become more productive, thoughtful, and conscious. More democratic, humane and empowering learning environment in which it may encourage learners to take great part in their language learning can be created by teachers and students. It is obvious that teachers might consider it worthwhile to create appropriate teaching models to match diverse learning styles so that any potential benefits might be made available to their learners. However, teachers are not aware of designing lesson with perceptual learning styles in teaching through task designing can’t get students to be comfortable. For a long time, we have been always ignorant of individual learning styles and design teaching plan mechanically. So we should try to create more relaxing language atmosphere and make it possible for all the students to participate in the whole teaching procedures, including classroom design. To conclude, it replicates Dunn & Dunn’s (1993) landmark study and found remarkably similar results, having addressed the importance of the perceptual learning styles in language learning, and having investigated the effect of the perceptual learning styles into English teaching and learning in Chinese situation in which English is a foreign language that differed significantly from those countries where English is a first or second language. 4.2.2.The positive correlation of perceptual learning styles with language learning autonomy The classroom teaching perceptual learning can promote students’ learning autonomy and enable them to get higher scores. Active learning hinges on the student individual in the learning process in order for it to be effective. The teaching pulsing perceptual learning has some benefits. First, The learning style as represented by the perceptual style in this study is one of the crucial factors in SLA, which can facilitate a fluid cognitive process. Secondly, the perceptual-style-oriented teaching can reduce the levels of learning difficulty because the learners can monitor themselves well. Thirdly, the perceptual-style-oriented teaching is able to avoid some learning barriers because of being concerned about individual learning. . The perceptual-style-oriented teaching can stimulate learners’ English learning interest. The result of this study showed that students can be motivated to learn English initiatively, autonomously and effectively by integrating the students’ perceptual learning styles; The perceptual-style-oriented teaching can also stimulate learners’ English learning self efficacy. The autonomous learners have a positive attitude and positive aims in class. The autonomous learners learn independently instead of depending on the teacher; besides, the perceptual-style-oriented teaching can improve learning self monitoring. The learners take initiatives in planning and executing learning instead of passive learning, and take an active role in the learning process, generating ideas. In all, the perceptual-style-oriented teaching help improve the learners’ learning autonomy. 4.2.3. The effective integration of perceptual learning styles in language teaching 4.3. Implications The above discoveries are suggestive for language teaching in quite a few ways. First of all, it provided evidence for English teachers at Chinese junior middle schools why English teachers at Chinese in junior middle schools should integrate the students’ perceptual learning styles into classroom teaching. This study also suggests most English teachers that there really is a useful way to promote their students’ English learning efficiency. The author aims to arouse most English teachers’ attention that they should design teaching plan with the consideration of their students’ perceptual learning styles. Based upon the above implications, thus, the theoretical and practical implications of the study can be concluded. The most important theoretical implication is that the findings prove the relationships between learning styles and classroom language teaching. This study confirmed the discoveries achieved by some previous studies (Kinsella, 1996; Witkin & Goodenough, 1981; Dunn & Dunn’s, 1993). The second theoretical implication is that the findings of this study confirm the relationships between classroom language teaching and learner autonomy. This relationship shows the learning and teaching should be in the context of the cognitive approach (Gardner and Miller, 1996; Wenden, 1991; Breen, & Candlin, 1980). The practical implication of the study is to achieve effective teaching and learning, the perceptual-style-oriented teaching in which the learners choose cognitively-styled tasks is more practical. It is accepted that students learn in different ways and teachers must provide instructional methods reaching the learning styles of all students and all the students with various perceptual learning styles can learn English well. Testing results indicate the advantages of adopting. The process of this language teaching approach can stimulate learners’ English learning interest; self efficacy and self monitoring; their motivation to learn English. Besides, it provides Chinese junior middle school teacher with a new pattern of design teaching plan and teaching process. It is obvious that no English teachers can solve all the teaching problems in language teaching at junior middle schools in China, but all the teachers hope that their teaching can be interesting, meaningful and effective. The author hopes that this thesis can be helpful for Chinese junior middle teachers. 4.4. Limitation of the design In spite of the findings obtained from the study, there are some aspects of problems existing in this study. First, the factors affecting English learning achievements are various and complicated, and the subjects involved in this study were just 29 students and could not represent all the junior students. Second, the study only had some theoretical test |
·语文课件下载
| |||
『 点此察看与本文相关的其它文章』『 搜索相关课件』
| ||||
| 【上一篇】【下一篇】 【教师投稿】 | ||||
本站管理员：尹瑞文 微信：13958889955