查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 中原大學英文能力分班政策實證研究
- Casting a Net on the Memorable Freshman Year: Infusing Webpage Construction into the Freshman English Syllabus
- "Freshman English" Curriculum: Using Video to Improve Listening and Speaking Skills
- English Newspapers as Reading Materials for "Freshman English"
- Student Expectations of the Freshman English Course at Chinese Culture University
- The Value of Using English Language Newspapers to Teach Freshman English
- Freshman English Learning Experiences: A Cross-Sectional Study
- 大一英文精進措施之研究
- Modifying Language Use and Teaching Strategy in All-English Language Classes: Perceptions of Students from Two Mixed-Major Freshman English Classes in Taiwan
- 師院生對大一英文課程的期望及其影響變因之關聯性
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 中原大學英文能力分班政策實證研究=Study on a Different Leveling English Instruction Policy for "Freshman English" in Chung Yuan Christian University |
---|---|
作者 | 錢景甯; 荊行倫; 高儷華; | 書刊名 | 中原學報 |
卷期 | 30:4 2002.12[民91.12] |
頁次 | 頁505-516 |
分類號 | 525.48051 |
關鍵詞 | 英文能力分班教學; 英語教學政策; 大一英文; Different leveling English instruction; English instruction policy; Freshman English; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本文研究重點是在評估大一英文能力分班教學以策是否有妓,世探討任課老師與學生對能力分班教學之意見,其最終日的在於找出台~本校英文能力分班之教學政策O參與實驗學生為本校理、1:、高三院雙班系所,分別為化學系、化玉系、資訊系、與資管系,每系-班,一共八班,總計443名學/主。甲班學生編入控制組﹒乙班學生編入實驗細。控制組隨系不分副教學,實驗組依隙前置測驗成績分成三級,採能力分班教學。控制組採統A教材,實驗組各班老師依學位程度選用不同教材設計課程與活動。實驗組與控制組於八十九年九月下旬(新生報主111主),以及九十年六月初(期末考自訂)相隔八個 月前後分別接受前測托福考試與後測托幅考試。本研究係依單悶子與雙l天|子變異數分析與多垂分析統計程序,以10%之顯著水准,結果發現(一)實驗組學生平均托福進步成績顯吾高於控制組學生平均托福進步成棋。(二)成績最差班級學生平均托福進步成績明顯增加c至於能力分班意見問卷調查而1;份,收回間在共406份,其中包括老師組15名,控制組176名,實驗組215名c分析結果發現一)整體的實驗組與控制組學生對分班意見沒有差異,兩組對分班與古都不太在乎(三)學生組與老師組的意見卻有差異,換言之,老師組認為英文能力分班有益英文之學習。(三)再進步分析實驗組不同級別學生問卷,發現不同級別學生看法有些差異,成績最好班級認為分班與否不會影響他們的學習興趣,成績最主班級之學生認為英文進步與否是與老師教法有關 |
英文摘要 | The emphasis of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Different Leveling English Instruction (DLEI) for the course of 'Freshman English' and to investigate English instructors and student~' views on DLEI so that an appropriate policy in the Chung Yuan context can be sug gested for decision-making. Four hundred and forty-three university students in science。engineerings and business from Chung Yuan Christian University participated in this experiment and served as the samples. They were parties from departments with dual classes (Class A and ClassB) majoring in Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, Information and Computer Engineering, and Management Information Systems. Classes in Group A and Group B were labeled respectively as the control group and the treatment group. Classes A in the control group formed into four classes according to their own departments and received English instruction with thc same teaching matcrial Classes B in the experill1ental group froll1 four departments were assigned to 3 different Icvelsaccording to their pre TOEFL test scoress and were provided with different level English materials corresponding to their placement. Both the experimental group and thc control group were admin- istered pre-TOEFL test in late September 2000 and postTOEFL in the early June 2001. The colected data froll1 di1'ferent groupings in the aspects ofTOEFL scores as well as pinion surveys were compared by ANOV A followed by Bonferrorni multiple comparison procedures. Thc significant level was set at 109(;. The analysis results indicated that (1) students in the experimental group had a greater progress in the post- TOEFL score than those i n the control group, and (2) for Group B, students in the k,west level made the greatest progress than those in higher 1evels As to opinion survey on DLEL the researchers colkcted 406 questionnaires. including 15 from English instructors, 176 froll1 the control group and 215 from the experimcntal group. The analysis results showed that students d,) not care much‘but instructors do care for the leveling policy.A further analysis found that students in the highest level do not see the relevance of the Icvelingpolicy to thelr intcrest in English learning. but those in the lower levcl do perceive the connection of teaching methods to their English improvement. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。