English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 74993/106084 (71%)
造訪人次 : 19420181      線上人數 : 487
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/59627


    題名: 任務型導向教學法對國小六年級學童英文口語能力之效益研究
    The Effectiveness of Task-Based Instruction on English Speaking Proficiency for Sixth Graders
    作者: 彭怡玲
    Peng, I Ling
    貢獻者: 葉潔宇
    Yeh, Chieh Yue
    彭怡玲
    Peng, I Ling
    關鍵詞: 任務型導向教學法
    口語能力
    task-based instruction
    speaking proficiency
    日期: 2012
    上傳時間: 2013-09-02 17:44:16 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 本研究在探討任務型導向教學法對國小六年級學童英文口語能力的影響。研究對象為台灣北部某國小六年級的兩個班級,共57人。此口語能力相近的兩個班級經隨機分派指定為實驗組與控制組。在為期8週,每週一節的實驗教學中,實驗組接受任務型導向教學法進行口語練習,對照組則接受傳統教學法進行口語練習。兩組皆於教學前及教學後接受口語能力測驗,以了解接受不同教學法的學童在口語流暢度及正確度上是否有差異。測驗所得的資料以成對樣本t檢定及獨立樣本t檢定分析進行統計分析。
    研究結果顯示:(1)任務型導向教學法能顯著提升研究對象的口語流暢度及正確度;(2)傳統教學法僅能顯著提升研究對象的流暢度而非正確度;
    (3)在口語流暢度方面,接受任務型導向教學法的研究對象表現顯著優於接受傳統教學法的研究對象;(4)在口語正確度方面,任務型導向教學法與傳統教學法成效相同;(5)對於高成就學習者之口語流暢度及正確度而言,任務型導向教學法與傳統教學法無顯著不同。對於低成就學習者之口語流暢度而言,任務型導向教學法與傳統教學法有顯著不同。對於低成就學習者之口語正確度而言,任務型導向教學法與傳統教學法無顯著不同。最後,研究者針對任務型導向教學法與傳統教學法在實際教學上的應用提供建議,以為教育工作者參考。
    The present study aims at investigating the effectiveness of task-based instruction on English speaking proficiency for sixth graders. Two classes with homogenous speaking level comprising 57 sixth graders were selected from one elementary school in northern Taiwan and were randomly assigned as the experimental and control groups. During the 8-week instructional experiment with one period of class per week, the experimental group received task-based instruction while the control group received traditional instruction. The data collected from the pre-test and the post-test assessing the participants’ performances on speaking fluency and accuracy were analyzed by paired-sample t-test and independent t-tests.
    The major findings of the present study are summarized as below. (1) The experimental group who received task-based instruction made significant progress on both speaking fluency and accuracy. (2) The control group who received traditional instruction made significant progress only on speaking fluency but not on accuracy. (3) The experimental group who received task-based instruction performed better than the control group who received traditional instruction on speaking fluency. (4) The experimental group who received task-based instruction and the control group who received traditional instruction performed in an equal manner on speaking accuracy. (5) There was no significant difference between task-based instruction and traditional instruction for high proficiency learners on speaking fluency or accuracy. There was a significant difference between task-based instruction and traditional instruction for low proficiency learners on speaking fluency but not on accuracy. Finally, pedagogical implications and recommendations for future studies were stated at the end of the present study.
    參考文獻: Aliakbari, M., & Jamalvandi, B. (2010). The impact of “role play” on fostering EFL learners’ speaking ability; a task-based approach. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 15-29.
    Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
    Baturay, M. H., Tokmak, H. S., Dogusoy, B. & Daloglu, A. (2011). The impact of task type on oral performance of English language preparatory school students. H.U. Journal of Education, 40, 60-69.
    Boonkit, K. (2010). Enhancing the development of speaking skills for non-native speakers of English. Procedia Social and Behavioral Science, 2, 1305-1309.
    Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Pearson Education.
    Bygate, M. (2001): Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P. & Swain, M. (Eds.), Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing (pp.99-118). Harlow.
    Bygate, M. (1999). Task as context for the framing,reframing and unframing of language. System, 27(1), 33-48.
    Bygate, M. (2001). Speaking. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp.14-20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Bygate, M., Skehan, P. & Swain, M. (2001). Researching pedagogical tasks: second language learning, teaching, and assessment. London: Pearson.
    Deci, E. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
    Cameron, L. (2003). Advanced bilingual learners’ writing project. London: OFSTED.
    Chen, C.Y. (2011). The effects of task-based language teaching (TBLT) on first graders' English speaking proficiency in an elementary school in New Taipei City. Unpublished Mater’s Thesis. National Taipei University of Education.
    Courtney, M. (1998). Tasks, talk and teaching: Task-based language learning and the negotiation of meaning in oral interaction. Retrieved from http://repository.ust.hk/dspace/bitstream/1783.1/1054/1/MikeVIVAFINAa.pdf
    Ellis, R. (1984). The role of instruction in second language acquisition. In D. N.Singleton & D. G. Little (Eds.), Language learning in formal and informal contexts. Dublin: IRAAL.
    Ellis, R. (2000). Task-based research and language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 193-220.
    Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Estaire, S. & Zanon, J. (1994). Planning classwork: A task-based approach. Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann.
    Foster, P., Tonkyn, A. & Wigglesworth, G. (2000) Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics 21 (3), 354-375
    Gardner, D. & Miller, L. (1996). Tasks for Independent Learning. TESOL Publications.
    Gilabert, R., Baron, J. & Llanes, A. (2009). Manipulating cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners’ interaction during oral performance. IRAL. 47, 367-395
    Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd ed.). England: Pearson Education Limited.
    Hatch, E. (1987). Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In E. Hatch (Eds.) Second language acquisition: A book of readings. Rowley Mass.: Newbury House.
    Kennedy, J. M., (1974) A psychology of picture perception: Images and information. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Kirkgoz, Y. (2011). A blended learning study on implementing video recorded speaking tasks in task-based classroom instruction. TOJET, 10(4), 1-13.
    Krahnke, K. (1988). Approaches to Foreign Language Syllabus Design. Retrieved from http:www.ericdigests.org/pre-928/design.htm
    Krashen, S. (1982). Principle and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
    Krashen. S. D. (1985). The Input Hypothesis. London: Longman.
    Kuo, Y.J. (2006). Implementing a task-based approach with senior high school students: Characteristics of interactions and students’ perceptions. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. National Tsing Hua University.
    Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000) Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press
    Lee, B. (2010). Effects of task and feedback types on Korean adult EFL learners’ oral proficiency. English Teaching, 65(2), 101-130.
    Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical Approach. UK: Language Teaching Publications.
    Littlewood, W. (2004). The task-based approach: Some questions and suggestions. ELT Journal, 58(4), 319-326.
    Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.
    Long, M. H. & Porter, P. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 207-28.
    MacCarthy, M. (1998). Spoken language and applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold.
    Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
    Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 279-295.
    Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Pinter, A. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learners. New York: Oxford University Press
    Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
    Rulon, K. A. & J. McCreary. (1986). Negotiation of content: Teacher-fronted and small-group interaction. In Day. 182-199.
    Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language. 50, 696-735.
    Skehan, P. (1996). A Framework for the Implementation of Task-based Instruction. Applied Linguistics. 17(1), 38-62.
    Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    Swain, M. & Lapkin. S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391.
    Tarone, E. (1985). Variability in interlanguage use: A study of style-shifting in morphology and syntax. Language Learning. 35, 373-403.
    Waer, H. (2009). Authenticity in task-based interaction: A conversation analysis perspective. ARECLS. 6, 103-121.
    Willis, D. & Willis, J. (2007). Doing Task-based Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Willis, J. 1994. Preaching what we practice: Training what we teach. The Teacher Trainer, 8(1), 17-20.
    Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Longman.
    Willis, J. (2005). Introduction: Aims and explorations into tasks and task-based teaching. In C. Edwards & J. Willis (Eds.), Teachers exploring tasks in English language teaching. London. UK: Palgrave.
    Yuan, F. & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics 24, 1-27.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    英語教學碩士在職專班
    98951015
    101
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098951015
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[英語教學碩士在職專班] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    index.html0KbHTML359檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋