内容依托式教学在中职英语教学的应用研究

本文是一篇教学论文，首先，本研究的结果表明，应用CBI模式的高职生在一定程度上可以提高学习者的学习兴趣和英语水平。实验结束后，实验班学生的平均成绩（83.2143分）高于实验前（72.5000分）。有显著性差异。这在一定程度上说明CBI教学模式对学生的学习有积极的影响，这意味着本研究中的CBI教学模式能够有效地提高中职英语教学的有效性。

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Research Background
English teaching in China began in the 1920s. With the development of society,English teaching has been constantly reformed and changed in recent decades. Fromthe Grammar-translation Approach, the Audio-lingual Approach, and theCommunicative Approach to the present, people have been constantly exploring theEnglish teaching model that is in line with the requirements of the times for thecultivation of talents. The current English teaching methods in China still mainlyfocus on grammar learning and language explanation. Language learning materialsonly serve vocabulary, language points and grammar learning, while the contents ofmaterials are often ignored. Language learning is out of context and practical use,which is time-consuming and inefficient, and obviously can not adapt to the times.The demand for talents is imminent to explore a new English teaching model.
Besides, in English teaching in secondary vocational schools, most studentsgenerally have weak English foundation, poor learning motivation, low interest andlack of initiative, which seriously affect classroom teaching and learning effect. Basedon the theory of Content-Based Instruction (CBI) defined by Stryker and Leaver(1997), this paper studies the first-year students of Nanbo Vocational and TechnicalSchool in Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, and explores the CBI model suitablefor business English learning in secondary vocational schools. And also, the empiricalstudy of this model on business English teaching for secondary vocational schoolstudents will be conducted. The purpose is to provide the relevant guidance andsuggestions for business English teaching in secondary vocational schools.
.........................

1.2 Significance and Purpose of the Research
First of all, according to the SVES promulgated by the Ministry of Education in2009, the goal of English teaching in secondary vocational schools is to initiallydevelop the English practical ability of workplace, motivate students’ interest ofEnglish learning, promote the self-confidence in learning, help students masterlearning strategies, shape good learning habits, improve their autonomous learningability, guide students to know and understand the cultural differences between Chinaand the West, foster their correct emotions, attitudes and values, and finally enhancestudents’ English application ability in the daily life and workplace. However, inEnglish teaching, the traditional teaching method of "top-down" is mostly adopted.From the perspective of syllabus and objectives, the teaching effect is not satisfactory.Traditional teaching focuses on the grammatical and discourse ability, which can notstimulate students’ interest and motivation, but increase students’ anxiety. As for this,CBI is to teach knowledge in a subject area in the target language so as to ensure thatstudents can master the subject knowledge while learning the target language. It caninspire students’ interest and initiative, lessen students’ anxiety in the course ofEnglish learning, and improve students’ English proficiency remarkably.
........................

Chapter 2 Literature Review

2.1 Content-Based Instruction (CBI)
2.1.1 Definition of CBI
The present Content-Based Instruction (CBI) is a teaching model that integratesthe target language with some meaningful contents. In the past periods the linguistsfrom different aspects and fields defined it differently.
Brinton, et al (1989) claimed that “CBI is a combination of specific contents andlanguage teaching objectives, that is, subject knowledge and language skills are taughtsimultaneously. Students use target language as a tool to learn subject knowledge, andprofessional English language skills at the same time”.
Crandall & Tucker (1990) stated that “CBI is a concept that contains manycontents, including curriculum design, teaching projects, as well as language teachingmeans and methods”.
Met (1991) believed that “the contents of CBI are not just including the targetlanguage and perse culture, but also the contents and information of meetinglearners’ cognitive and emotional needs.
Genesee (1994) argued that “the content of CBI does not need to be academicand can include any topics, subjects, or other non-linguistic issues of interest orimportance to learners”.
Stryker & Leaver (1997) defined that “CBI embodies a philosophical idea, apedagogical system and a kind of teaching method. The syllabus design or theteaching framework of the whole course means the integrated learning of languageand content”.
......................

2.2 Theoretical Foundation
In this part, it mainly introduces four kinds of theoretical foundations of CBI.That is, Krashen’s Input Hypothesis, Swain’s Output Hypothesis, Cummins’Framework Theory of Language Proficiency, and O’Malley & Chamot’s CognitiveAcademic Language Learning Approach.
2.2.1 Krashen’s Input Hypothesis
Snow and Brinton (1997) stated that Krashen’s Input Hypothesis provided abasis for CBI. Krashen’s Input Hypothesis (1985) emphasized the key role ofadequate, meaningful, non-grammatical comprehensible input in the acquisition oflanguage. The theory and model of CBI are to make a combination of subject contentsand language learning, aiming at creating a real and conducive communicativeenvironment for students. Meaningful input centers on the interesting and meaningfulinput contents, and the input material focuses on the knowledge that learners havemastered. In the process of CBI, students apply the target language to do theexploration and searching of the subject contents. This kind of activity belongs to anatural language learning activity rather than the meaningless language practice.Non-grammatical procedural arrangement means that learners should develop theirlanguage knowledge in natural order rather than relying on the order of language rulestaught by teachers. Understandable input is that language acquisition can occur onlywhen language input is absorbed and internalized by learners as part of theirknowledge structure.
...............................

Chapter 3 Research Methodology................................ 16
3.1 Research Questions.............................. 16
3.2 Subjects.................................. 16
3.3 Instruments.....................................16
Chapter 4 Results and Discussions.............................. 28
4.1 Results and Discussions of Pre-test and Post-test..........................................28
4.1.1 Pre-test Results and Discussions of English Achievements..................28
4.1.2 Analysis of Pre-test among High-score, Medium-score, and Low- scoreGroup................................29
Chapter 5 Conclusion......................................42
5.1 Major Findings of the Study............................... 42
5.2 Pedagogical Implications for English Teaching..............................43
5.3 Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Future Research.....................44

Chapter 4 Results and Discussions

4.1 Results and Discussions of Pre-test and Post-test
In this part, it will talk about the results and discussions of pre-test and post-test,which are the following:
4.1.1 Pre-test Results and Discussions of English Achievements
The results of the English proficiency test of the experimental class before theexperiment are as follows:


........................

Chapter 5 Conclusion

5.1 Major Findings of the Study
First of all, the results of this study showed that the application of CBI model insecondary vocational students could improve the learners’ interest in learning andEnglish level to a certain extent. After the experiment, the mean scores of theexperimental class (83.2143 points) were higher than those in the pre-test (72.5000points). There were significant differences. To some degree, this seems to indicate thatCBI model has a positive effect on students’ learning, which means the teachingmodel of CBI in this study can effectively improve the effectiveness of secondaryvocational English teaching.
Second, students’ questionnaires revealed that many secondary vocational schoolstudents lacked interest, foundation and confidence in English at the beginning. Thereasons for this situation were students’ own factors, but there are also factors thatteachers’ teaching methods are not suitable for secondary vocational school students.More than 95% of the students in the experimental class reported that the mainmethods of language training were memorizing words, reciting sentences and doingexercises. This kind of boring mechanical training often failed to satisfy students’interests and needs. However, the strong interest of secondary vocational students inCBI model might be a positive factor for teachers to use. Over 96% of studentsbelieved learning English well would contribute to their future career development,which might inspire teachers to use students’ knowledge to help students improvetheir motivation to learn English. Teachers should treat CBI differently and adoptflexible strategies, which may achieve good results to some extent.
Third, the interview results also made clear that CBI model had a positive impacton students’ learning. 9 students had different achievements in listening, speaking,reading, writing and learning strategies. Most of them have improved their interestand level of English through CBI. Although their progress was different, they shouldbe affirmed.
Finally, we can conclude that the English teaching model of CBI is effective inthe practice of secondary vocational students’ English teaching. To a certain extent, itenhances the interest and initiative of learners in learning English and improves theteaching effect of secondary vocational English.
reference(omitted)