《教学研究：教师课堂提问的艺术（英文）.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《教学研究：教师课堂提问的艺术（英文）.doc（5页珍藏版）》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、A Report of Class Observation: Focusing on the Intention of Teachers in-class Questions梁 昭Abstract: this paper is intended to conduct a classification-based analysis on the authentic questions English teachers raise in class according to the results of real-time observations, focusing particularly o
2、n the exact intentions the questions are supposed to bear. By attentively observing the teaching process and faithfully recording the question raised, the author comes to a conclusion that teachers are, without exception, conscious of raising their questions which distinctively fall into three categ
3、ories: interpersonal relationship-, class contents- and further thoughts-oriented. Moreover, it is also found that the three categories are sharing different proportions among the total with the class contents-oriented ones enjoying a lion share, because teachers are required to be subject to the te
4、aching materials by the school authorities, thus the students attentions to the practical use of the language and to provide students the authentic situation-based methods of language learning.Key Words: class observation; authentic questions; teachers intentions摘要：英语教学过程是师生双边活动的过程，要求师生在课堂上互相配合，共同完成
5、语言交际活动和教学过程。合理提问则是教师引导学生积极思考、培养学生认知能力、分析能力和创新能力的重要手段。本文通过课堂观察教学程序和录制教师提问及分析得出教师的提问一般主要分为三类，并分析了此三类问题在教师提问中所占的比例及其原因。关键词：课堂观察；问题；教师目的1. IntroductionThe final purpose of language education is the acquisition of target language; therefore, the intercommunicative patterns in the English class are very c
6、ritical for each student. In recent years, many researches argue that interaction, especially the teacher-student interaction, is one of the important parts of English class. It is known that teacher talk has some characteristics of foreigner talk, so compared with the social talk, teacher talk will
7、 always be adjusted for the students to understand（Ellis 1994:288）. Questioning is the key part of teacher talk and the key method of class organizing. In most ESL class, the main part of interaction is led by questioning （Tsui，1995: 23）which is very important for information seeking. Some earlier L
8、1 studies divide questions into open question and closed question（Barnes 1969, cited in Chaudron 1988: 126）,while L2 researchers specific question and general information question（Chaudron 1988: 126）. And later it is divided into display question and referential question. But no matter what question
9、s they are, in English classes, the act of raising questions by the teachers is a time-honored routine. Many teachers find it an effective method facilitation the delivery of knowledge and enabling students to be engrossed in classes. Owing to the long-held significance of the raising of questions,
10、the following experiment of class observation is concentrated on the authentic in-class questions. More precisely, we are to focus our efforts on the intentions of the questions in particular, trying to figure out for what specific purposes teacher raise their questions.2. The Design of Class Observ
11、ationA. Attending authentic classesTwo classes are observed which last 135 minutes in all. The first is about 90 minutes and the students are undergraduates who are in their second year, while the second, 45 minutes, is for graduate who are freshmen. The details are as follows:Table1 The Two Classes
12、No.TimePlaceContentTeacherStudents1Friday8:009:40 a.m.Rm. 606, No.8 BuildingA Day of a SalesmanMrs. MaoSophomore (undergraduates)2Monday.10:0010:45 a.m.Rm. 205,Graduate SchoolScience News: Hubble Space TelescopeMiss ZhangFreshman(graduates)B. Questions Recording and Major FindingsThe two teachers ar
13、e both requested to provide teaching materials which are to use in class in advance and through reading and analyzing them the lecture content is soon known. And in observing the classes, the authentic questions are concentrated on the recording, whatever they might be, in an exhaustive manner. The
14、following table 2 contains the categories of the questions being observed. There are altogether 90 questions asked by the two teachers in 135 minutes. The first teacher asked 63, with the second asking 27 questions. The questions are analyzed and found that they can mainly be divided into three cate
15、gories, namely interpersonal relationship-oriented question, such as “When do you usually get up”; class content-oriented questions, like “How do you understand this sentence”; further thoughts-oriented questions, for instance, “What is the characteristics of news report”.Table 2 The Categories of Q
16、uestionsNo.Total questionsInterpersonal relationship-orientedClass content-orientedFurther thoughts-oriented163836192270198Form table 2, we can see that there are 8 interpersonal relationship-oriented questions among 63 in class one, taking up 12.7%, 36 class content-oriented questions, taking up 57
17、.1%, and 19 further thoughts-oriented questions that take up 30.2%; while in class two, there is no interpersonal question raised, however, there are 19 class content-oriented questions which take up 70.4%, 8 further thoughts-oriented ones that take up 29.6%. so the class content-oriented questions
18、are the main questions the teacher asked in the classed. The statistics can be seen clearly in the following graph:Graph 3 The Comparison of the Questions3. Discussion on the Major FindingsThe statistics obtain from the real-time observations shed a light on our common understandings of teachers in-
19、class questions. More specifically, these figures provide with an insight into this focus: What are the functions the three categories of questions play respectively? Moreover, why, as is shown clearly by these figures, do teachers grant such great attentions to the class content-oriented questions?
20、 And finally, is there any better arrangement of in-class questions that is likely to be suggested?As to the functions of the three categories of questions, we can draw a safe conclusion from our observation, that is, interpersonal relationship-oriented questions serve as initiators, transistors and
21、 ending signals in class. In another word, these questions can help establish the readiness for the further acts of raising question and to provoke the students attentions to a certain lecturing point. And class content-oriented questions are deliberately designed to figure out the point at which st
22、udents have actually understood about the text-content, language points and so forth, all being supposed to be central to the classes. And further thoughts-oriented ones function as a diving force that leads the students attentions to their self-reasoning, the actual use of language points in authen
23、tic situations and their-own-word expression of what they are thinking of.With the convincing figures presented by the observation, the first concern is how to explain the overwhelming proportion of class content-oriented questions. Taking the daily chatting with the two teachers involved in the exp
24、eriment and some other colleagues into consideration, it is assumed that this phenomenon reflects a long-standing attitude towards in-class questions among teachers that questions are by nature a means test how well students have absorbed class content. This concept is so far-reaching that no class,
25、 be it of physics of English or of whatever, takes a blind eye to it because teachers believe classes should be where knowledge is conveyed to students and English classes should be no exception. Apart from the ideological factor, this phenomenon is also attributed to the obligation imposed on the t
26、eachers to strictly follow the teaching syllables, which confined them to the textbooks and allows them little freedom to further inspire the students, let alone the down-to-earth drills for the improvement of students practical abilities of using English.Coming next is further thoughts-oriented que
27、stions, accounting for a somewhat small percentage indeed. It is impressed by the observation that teachers are far less ready to present this kind of questions than to raise the class content-oriented ones, that is, they seem not have made sufficient preparation to raise these questions and therefo
28、re these questions appear sporadic and less systematic. Thus the conclusion is that the teachers do not attach enough importance the raising these questions. This phenomenon is closely associated with the lion share of the class content-oriented questions, indication the teachers are more sticking t
29、o the knowledge to be conveyed than caring about the cultivation of students abilities of using English in practical situations. Another fact observed adds to the conviction upon such an understanding that students were seldom allowed time to make any language practice and the teachers, on the other
30、 hand, grabbed most of the class-time to plod along the texts. In this regard, the concept “what to learn” dwarfs that of “how to learn”.Last but not least, the category of interpersonal relationship-oriented questions is well worth mentioning as well. It is found that teachers have not reached an a
31、greement on the issue whether they should raise these questions and to what degree the amount of these questions remains proper. But in general, we can see these questions are actually employed, on a small scale, of course. As to whether the use of these questions is beneficial, it is another experi
32、ment that can serve to explain. But according to the impression, this can be a good method.4. SummaryTo sum up, the phenomenon that class content-oriented questions dominate in class while the further thoughts-oriented ones are to some degree ignored impressed deeply. And according to the discussion
33、s above this is actually no so desirable since it reflects that the students mechanism of how to learn English is not activated, which can possibly hinder their future learning although they may achieve high scores in examinations now.Therefore, a tentative conclusion (because only two cases are inv
34、olved in the observation) can be arrived that teachers should make better preparations to raise further thoughts-oriented questions so as to inspire the students to think, to reason, to summarize and to consciously put what they learned into use. This motion does not mean we can absolutely deny the
35、importance of text-centered patterns of teaching. What teachers are supposed to do is to take the two categories of questions and the respective intentions they bear into account and strike a dynamic balance between them. And the most important thing the English teachers have to keep in mind is that
36、 the ultimate purpose of English classes is to enable the students to learn and master the English language and they must cling to this goal by whatever means they may adopt.References:Chaudron, C.1988. Second Language Classroom: Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Tsui, A. 1995. Introducing Classroom Interaction. London: Penguin Group.Ellis, R.1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.穆凤良：“课堂对话和提问策略”，教育理论与实践2000 年第 11 期，33-36 页。许高厚课堂教学技艺M北京师范大学出版社，1999王恒年：“课文教学中的提问”，外语界1993 年第 1 期，25-28 页。