Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Research Background
With the rapid development of economic globalization, English, as a communication tool,plays an increasingly important role in communication among people from different languagebackgrounds. Therefore, learning English has become a necessary behavior for people all overthe world. However, there isn’t a natural foreign language learning environment in China, sothe English classroom has become the main place for Chinese students to learn English.
In an English classroom, teachers play a very important role, because they should notonly teach knowledge, but also improve students’ language skills. National EnglishCurriculum Standards (2011) also pointed out that teachers should cultivate students'comprehensive language ability. Therefore, English teachers should keep these requirementsin mind, and 40 minutes of each English course should be fully utilized. As we all know,questioning is a very important teaching strategy which can enhance the interaction betweenteachers and students, especially in reading classes. In other words, effective questioning cannot only cultivate students’ thinking ability, but also help teachers to understand students’ideas. Therefore, if teacher’s questions (henceforth TQ) can be used effectively, students canbetter understand the text. What’s more, their thinking abilities and oral communication skillscan be improved. However, there are few researchers and discussions on the effects of TQtypes on students’ oral output in junior high school reading classes.
Therefore, this research attempts to explore the relationship between teacher'squestioning types and students' oral output. The author collected data by observing tenreading classes videos from 13th National Middle School English Demonstration Classes(henceforth NMEDC). There are two main reasons for choosing these videos as researchsubjects. The first reason is that teachers in these videos all have rich teaching experiencedand excellent. The second reason is that there are very few researchers have investigatedteachers’ questions in the demonstration classes at present. After analyzing these ten readingclasses, the relationship between teachers’ questioning types and students’ oral output couldbe found out, which can help teachers to know what kind of TQ types are more efficient so asto design more effective questions before the reading class.
................................
1.2 Purpose and Significance of the Study
Numan (1982) points out, in the process of foreign language acquisition, teacher’squestioning is not only as a tool for teachers’ teaching, but also as an important source ofstudents’ language input. Besides, teachers’ questioning not only allows students to obtaincorrect language information, but also guides students to think and answer these questions.For teachers, teacher’s questioning can help teachers to understand the degree of students’knowledge and adjust the difficulty of teaching in time. That is to say, teachers’ questioningcan not only lead students to participate in the interactive activities, but also can help teachersto adjust students' oral output to make their output more understandable (Richards ＆Lock-hart,1996). Therefore, the importance of teacher’s questioning is self-evident, and thisfield attracts more and more scholars’ interests.
In EFL classroom, especially in reading classes in junior high schools, TQ is consideredas one of the most important teaching strategies. Reading class is usually pided into threestages: pre-reading, while-reading and post-reading. In these three stages, different types ofTQ can not only stimulate students’ interests in the reading materials, but also arouse them toengage in various classroom activities, which is beneficial for the development of readingskills and strategies in the long term (Fang Yihui, 2016). That is to say, different stages of thereading class need different questions which can help students to get the main ideas of the text,search for detailed information, and evaluate the characters, things, or stories in the discourse.
.............................
Chapter Two Literature Review
2.1Relevant Concepts
2.1.1 The Definition of TQ
From the perspective of etymology, “question” is derived from the Latin “quaerere”which means to seek and pursue. “require”, “acquire”, “inquire” and “quest” have the sameroots, which all mean to obtain something from others. According to Longman Dictionary ofEnglish Language (the fourth edition), a question is defined as command or questionexpressions used to elicit information or test knowledge. Borich (1988) points it out that anyoral speeches or gestures that could activate students' responses or answers could be regardedas questions. Wilen (1991) mentioned that questioning is usually about finding certaininformation and stimulating or thinking about certain mental activities. Richards & Rodgers(2002) defined questions as sentences presented to listeners or readers in the hope that theywill express their facts or opinions.
The New Oxford English Dictionary also provides the definition of TQ as teaching hintsor the stimulation of what is learned and instructions for students. What’s more, manydomestic scholars regard teachers’ questioning as an important way to transmit teachingcontent and guide activities in class. Besides, it is also an effective way to promote thedevelopment of students’ thinking. Rong Jingxian (2000) indicates that questioning is ateaching method raised by teachers according to their knowledge and experience in the class,which can enlighten students’ thinking, make students drawing their own conclusions fromthe text, and develop student’s thinking abilities. Zhou Xingsheng (2002) points thatquestioning is an important way for teachers to input and transmit teaching information tostudents, to build a bridge between teachers and students, and to arouse emotional resonancebetween teachers and students. Chen Ling (2006) believes that an effective questioning canlead students to give a relative and complete response, and motivate students’ sense ofparticipation. Liu Jiarong (2008) holds that an effective questioning can inspire students togive a relative and complete response, and their response can engage them in the learningprocess more actively. Li Tianhua (2012) argues that teacher’s questioning is regarded as astimulating teaching direction to convey to students what they should be and how they shoulddo.
.............................
2.2Reaserch on TQ Aboard and at Home
2.2.1 The Classifications of TQ Types
As for the classifications of TQ types, different scholars have different kinds of anglesand aspects. Among them, two classification methods have been accepted and recognized bymany scholars and researchers. They are question types according to communicationfunctions and Bloom's Taxonomy of cognitive levels. Therefore, in the following literaturereview, these two question types have received more attention.
2.2.1.1 Question Types According to Communicative Functions
According to the communicative functions of classroom questioning, Long ＆ Sato(1983) pided questions into referential questions and display questions. They believe thatopen questions are commonly required in naturalistic discourse, whereas closed question aretypically raised in English class as a foreign language classroom. Display questions refer toquestions which the teachers already know the answers before asking questions. Most of thesequestions will focus on some detailed information that students have learned in class. What’smore, display questions mainly focus on grammar, sentence patterns and text. That is to say,students can find those answers directly from the reading material. For example, “What didteacher say to her students in the morning in the text? What color of the shirt does the boy buyat the end?” There is only one correct answer for “say” and “color”, which students can findthe answers from the textbook directly. By asking display questions, teachers can test thereading level of learners. For example, after reading the passage, the teacher asks the student,“Where is Mickey Mouse from? Who’s Mickey Mouse’s girlfriend?”
初中英语论文怎么写
................................
3.1 Long's Interaction Hypothesis............................... 18
3.2 Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives ................................19
3.3 Swain's Output Hypothesis.....................................22
Chapter Four Research Methodology................................ 23
4.1 Research Questions...............................................23
4.2 Research Subjects............................................... 23
4.3 Instruments..............................................25
Chapter Five Results and Discussion..................................... 28
5.1 The Frequency and Characteristic of DQ and RFQ....................... 28
5.1.1 Pre-reading Stage..........................................29
5.1.2 While-reading Stage.......................................... 30
Chapter Five Results and Discussion
5.1 The Frequency and Characteristic of Display Questions and ReferentialQuestions
According to Long and Sato's (1983) classification of TQ, the author mainly focuses ontwo dimensions: display questions and referential questions.
Display question refers to the question that teacher already knows the answer in his mindbefore raising it. Most of the display questions are required to check students’ understandingof the text. That is to say, teacher should read and analyze the text before class. Whenanswering display questions, students only need to produce declarative knowledge.Referential questions are questions for which teachers do not know the answers in their mindsbefore the class. Most of the referential questions can be understood as opening questions.That is to say, teacher does not know the correct answers before raising referential questions,but students can answer them based on the characters or stories in the text or their ownexperience.
In junior high school reading classes, what are the frequencies and characteristics of TQtypes? This is a question which be worth to explore. Therefore, based on the recorded of theseten reading lessons, there are total 193 display questions and 140 referential questions forfurther study. The application of two main TQ types is shown as following.
初中英语论文参考
Chapter Six Conclusion
6.1 Major Findings of the Study
This study mainly applies the research method of classroom observation and aims toexplore the research questions as well as the effects of TQ types on students’ oral output. Afterrecording, analyzing, and discussing the data, some major findings are shown as follows.
Firstly, frequencies and characteristics of different TQ types are different in reading class.From the perspective of Long＆Sato’s classification of questions, most of observed teachersprefer to raise display questions than referential questions among ten reading classes. Inpre-reading stage, display questions account for 56.63% while referential questions accountfor 43.37%. In while-reading stage, the percentages of display questions are 68.89% andreferential questions are 30.91%. In post-reading stage, the percentages of referentialquestions account for 69.74% while display questions account for 30.26%. It can be seen thatmost of observed teachers would rather raise display questions than referential questions,especially in pre-reading and while-reading stage, which aims to activate students’background knowledge and help students to comprehend the text. However, the observedteachers prefer to raise referential questions than display questions in post-reading stage,which aims to cultivate students’ critical and creative thinking. Similarly, from the perspectiveBloom's classification of questions, the frequencies and characteristics of different TQ typesare different. From the data in chapter fifth, it can be found that most of observed teacherswould rather to raise low-level questions than high-level questions in reading class, especiallyremembering questions (83.13%) in pre-reading stage, understanding questions (75.56%) inwhile-reading and applying questions (27.63%) in post-reading stage. They seldom raisehigh-level questions, especially evaluating questions and creating questions in pre-reading andwhile-reading stages.
Secondly, students’ oral output has different characteristics to different TQ types inreading classes. From the perspective of Long & Sato’s classification of questions, theaverage length of students’ oral output to referential questions (13.40 words) is significantlyhigher than display questions (5.02 words). The difference between the means is 8.38 wordson students’ oral output. In addition, the percentage of word/phrase on students’ oral output todisplay questions reaches to 57.07%, while the percentages of simple sentence and complexsentence are 34.55% and 8.38%. In terms of referential questions, the percentage ofword/phrase is only 17%, but the percentages of simple sentence and complex sentence are48.23% and 39.72% respectively. From the perspective of Bloom’s classification of questions,the average length of students’ oral output to low-level questions from high to low, applyingquestions (14.94 words), understanding questions(9.12 words) and remembering questions(7.83 words). As for the high-level questions, the average length of students’ oral output tohigh-level questions from high to low, creating questions (25 words), evaluating questions(12.3 words) and analyzing questions (8.74 words). What’s more, high-level questions, theirpercentage of complex sentences on students’ oral output (44%) is higher than the low-levelquestions (12.05%). That is to say, the average length of students’ oral output to high-levelquestions (15.3 words) is significantly higher than low-level questions (10.63 words). Thedifference between the means is 4.67 words on students’ oral output. In addition, it could beseen that, high-level questions can stimulate more complex sentences.
reference(omitted)