小學(xué)教師話語及認(rèn)知思維導(dǎo)向研究

1、灝懺鏁欏笀璇濊鍙婅鏤二?濈淮瀵煎悜鐮旂灝懺 鏁欏笀璇濊 鍙婅 鏤二？濈淮 瀵煎悜鐮旂nA Study of P rimary School Teacher Talk and Its Cogn itive Orien tatio n Based on En glish and Chin ese Data銆愪綔鑰呫？?寮犺壋錛？/p> 銆愬甯堛？?鑸掔櫧姊咃紱銆愪綔鑰呭熀鏈俊鎭？鍗疼腑甯堣寢澶y錛？鑻辮璇鏂囧錛？2005錛？紜曞+銆愭憳瑕併？?鏁欏娑夂強澶X翰銆佹暀鏉愩？佹暀瀛幾硶絳？浣嗚繖涓？鍒囬兘瑕侀？氳繃瀹為檯鐨勮鍫傛暀瀛幾墠鑳藉緱浠綋鐜板拰瀹炵幇銆傚埌浜屽崄涓栫邯鍏崄騫翠唬鏈？鐢變簬

2、姣旇緝鏁欏娉曠兢緇撴灉浠漢澶辨湜,鐮旂n鑰呭紑濮嬪曉娉兒剰鍔涜漿錫戣鍫傝繃紼嬫湰韜？榪涜璇懼爞鐮旂n銆？鏁欏笀鐨勮鍫傝 璦？鑳藉姏鐩存帴褰卞搷鍒版暀鑲茬兢璐口噺鍛屾按騫熾？備粠璇瀛拰鏁欒偛瀛&兢浜弶瑙嗚鏉3湅,涓嶅悓鐨勮紼嬬被鍨？濡傛市璇懼瀷銆佸涔?fàn)鍨嬫垨?？冭瘯鍨？涓嶅悓鐨勬暀紼嬮樁孌？ 濡？ldquo;鐑 韓”闃舵 銆佽 瑙1樁孌墊垨緇秫範(fàn)闃舵,浠二強涓嶅悓鐨勬暀瀛&洰鐨？濡傝 鎺堣 璦？鏤3瘑鎴栬緇冭 璦？鎶？鑳 ？閮藉簲璇二湁鐩稿簲鐨勬暀瀛璦？鏉二墽琛屻？榪戝勾鏉？鍥藉唴澶栧璇懼爞鏁欏璇鐨勤爺絀跺崄鍒嗘椿璺冦？備粠鐮旂鏂規(guī)硶鍛岀爺絀墮噸鐐規(guī)澈鐪?瀵規(guī)暀甯堣瘽璇兢鐮旂涓昏緇

3、懺巻浜嗕笁涓 樁孌?1)鏃+湡鐨勮 鍫傝瘽璇垎鏋愬紑濮嬪曉鏁欏笀鍛屽鐢熺兢璇懼爞璇濊榪涜鍒嗙被銆傚彈琛屼負(fù)涓諱篦蹇幕悊瀛&兢褰卞搷,鐮旂鑰呬富寮犲瑙傚垎鏋愬彲浠3瀵熷埌鐨勮 鍫傝 涓？騫惰 璁嚭瑙傚療鏂規(guī)，鍗沖垎綾葷郴緇？categorysystem),瀵硅 鍫傚笀鐢熻 涓鴻繘琛屽垎綾昏褰?浠庤？屾彁鍑轟竴濂楃悊鎯崇兢璇懼爞鏁欏笀琛屼負(fù)緋葷粺；2) 20涓栫邯70 80騫翠唬鐨勫笀鐢熶細(xì) 璇濈爺絀跺垯浠庤綃囩粨鏋勫拰璇濋鍙戝睍鐨勮搴 甯堢敓鐨勮瘽璇 涓鴻繘琛岃璦?鐗瑰緛鍛岃鎰懺姛鑳界瓑鏂歸潰鐨勫垎鏋愩？傜爺絀惰?呬粠紺句細(xì)瀛搴嚭鍙？鍏蟲敞璇懼爞璇濊鐨勤粨鏋勫拰鎬：U川,灝嗚 鍫傝瘽璇

4、寜鏁欏 鍔熻兘鍒嗘垚涓？緇?ldquo;姝？rdquo;,鍗?ldquo;璇 濊疆” (turn);3) 20 涓栫邯90騫翠唬浠二澈，鐮旂鑰呬富瑕佸鏁欏笀璇琛屼負(fù)涓庡鐢熻璦?涔?fàn)寰楃殑鍏尘p昏繘琛岀爺絀躲？備富瑕佽?冨 療鏁欏笀璇濊鍦以閫熴?佽璋冦？佺敤璇嶃？佸彝娉曞強璇濊緇撴瀯涓婃墍琛丨幇鍑轟笉錫屼簬鑷劧璇 鐨勤壒寰佸強鍏跺瀛&敓璇 涔?fàn)寰楃殑濯勫搷悖?鏃+湪20涓栫邯50騫翠唬,浠loom涓洪 鐨勤編鍥芥暀 鑲插 瀹跺 鏁欒偛鐩 爣榪涜 榪囧垎綾匯？傚湪瀛敓蹇冩櫤媧誨姩鎴栨 ?濈淮鏂歸潰，Bloom絳夐噰鐢厶垎綾誨鐨勬柟娉曟彁鍑轟簡鐩鎬簰鑱旂郴閫愭 錫戦珮涓？灞傛鍙戝睍鐨勮鐭二？濈

5、淮鍙戝睍榪囩鐨 ？縐嶇被鍒？鐭3瘑一一棰嗕細(xì)一一榪愮敤一一鍒嗘瀽一一緇煎悎一一璇勪環(huán)銆？鍒頒簡70騫翠唬,Valette絳夂湪Bloom絳夌兢鐮旂錯虹涓婃彁鍑轟簡澶栬鏁欏 鐨?涓 樁孌墊？u 緇冩椿鍔？鏈烘 鎬巾妧鑳?mdash;鐭3瘑一一榪愮敤 浜檯一一璇勮銆傚叾涓瘡涓樁孌甸兘鍒楀嚭浜嗙浉搴旂兢鍐呴儴璁煡琛屼負(fù)鍛屽 閮以璦?琛屼負(fù)鐨勮寰併？?80 騫翠唬浠二澈,Morris絳夂曉Bloom絳夌兢璁煡鎬濈淮鍙戝睍榪囩鐨？涓 被鍒 畝鍖？鏇村 榪 樺師銆怉 bstract 銆？Teaching invoIves such aspects as curriculum, teaching mater

6、ials, and teach ing methodology. All these can only be really put into use and reality through classroom teach ing p rocesses. By the end of 1960s, due to the fact that findings of comparing the relative effective ness of differe nt teach ing methods turned out to be disa ppoin ti ng, researchers be

7、ga n to shift their atte nti on from a comp arative study of methodologies to classroom teachi ng and lear ning p rocess itself.The quality of teacher talk may have a direct in flue nee on the results of lear ning. From the persp ective of both Ian guage teachi ng and educati on, there is always a r

8、equest for differe nt types of teacher talk that suit the objectives of teachi ng and lear ning at differe nt stages.Researches in teacher talk have bee n abundant both abroad and in China. Accord ing to the methods adop ted and their focuses, researches in teacher talk have mainly gone through thre

9、e sig nifica nt p hases, n amely, the p hase of classroom in teractio n an alysis, in which teacher talk and stude nt talk has bee nclassified into different categories, recorded and studied, with the purpose of setting an ideal model for classroom interaction; the phase of classroom discourse analy

10、sis in 1970s and 1980s. Researchers made a study of teacher talk and student talk from the perspective of discourse structure, turn-taking and topic development and focused on the nature and structure of classroom interaction, aiming to put forward a sequence of "moves" that all classroom

11、interaction followed; Since 1990s, researchers began to pay attention to the relationship between teacher talk and students' language acquisitionwith the intention of finding out how modifications in teacher talk, as an important source of language input in class, influences students ' compr

12、ehension and thus their language acquisition.As early as the 1950s, a group of American psychologists and educationalists led by Bloom classified objectives of learning into different categories. Six majorclasses of interrelated objectives were identified in the cognitive domain by Bloom, namely, kn

13、owledge, comprehension, analysis, synthesis and evaluation which were placed in ascending order from simple to complex. A higher class of objectives was built upon the classes that preceded it.In the 1970s, after several attempts at adapting the Bloom taxonomies, Valette produced a coherent expressi

14、on of objectives for language teaching and learning and arranged them in five stages, namely, mechanical skills, knowledge, transfer, communication and criticism. For each stage, relevant internal and external behaviors required of the students are stated explicitly.Since the 1980s, Morris and his c

15、olleagues had tried to simplify Bloom's taxonomies. They identifiedthree levels of development in the cognitive domain: recognitioncomprehension application, and applied them in reading comprehension exercises. Morris and his colleagues not only designed reading comprehension exercises based on

16、the three levels of cognitive development, but also concluded and made a list of language forms used in different exercises.Development of students' cognitiveabilities has always been one the most important goals of education as has been revealed in curriculum, tests and exercises design. With a

17、n understanding of previous researches, the author of the present study assumes that since different language forms may involve students in different levels of thinking, teacher talk, as a most important language input in class, also plays an important part in the development of students ' cogni

18、tive abilities. Through rational choices of different language forms in their talk, teachers may play a better role in the development of students' intellectual andcognitive abilities.On the basis of collecting first hand data from language classrooms, the author of the present thesis makes a qu

19、antitative and descriptive analysis of native English and nativeChin ese p rimary school teacher talk from three asp ects: use of directive words; use of questi ons; and the in teractive mode betwee n the teacher and stude nts. The purp ose of the p rese nt study is to an alyze the cog nitive orie n

20、tati on of p rimary school teachers as reflected in their talk and find out the po ssible factors that lead to鏇村榪樺師銆愬叧閿瘝銆？鏁欏笀璇濊錛?鎸囦護璇紱鎖愰棶璇紱璇懼爞浜掑姩 妯紡錛？璁煡鎬濈淮瀵煎悜錛?銆怟 ey words 銆?teacher talk錛?directive words錛?questions錛？in teractive mode錛?cog nitive orie ntatio n錛？/p>鍙傝？冩枃鐚細(xì)涓 皬瀛幾暀甯堣瘽璇潈鐨勤己澶變笌婊3敤璇濊鏉冩槸鏁

21、欏笀鐨勫熀鏈潈鍒+紝鍙繖縐嶆潈鍒+暱鏈熶互鏉二病鏈夂紩璧鋒暀甯堜滑鐨勮凍澶熼噸瑙嗭紝鐢辨鍑虹幇涓？鏂歸潰鏄暀甯堣瘽璇潈鐨勪弗閲嶇己澶憋紝涓？鏂歸潰鏄弗閲嶆互鐢b ?傜己澶辯兢闂鍦尢簬澶栧洜錛屾互鐢丨兢闂鍦尢簬鍐呭洜錛屽浣曟敼鍙樿繖縐嶇妍鍐碉紝.鏀跺綍鏁版嵁搴擄細(xì)銆婁腑鏂囩鎶?鏈熷垔鏁版嵁搴撱？?鏉二簪錛氥？婂鏍厷寤轟笌鎬濇兂鏁欒偛錛氫笅鍗婃湀銆？2009騫?絎?鏈?浣滆？咃細(xì)閭撳織紲?寰愯埅椋？鏈烘瀯錛氭睙姹夂瀛幾暀鑲插闄？姝幾眽甯傜 涓夂崄涓涓 皬瀛幾暀甯堣瘽璇 潈鐨勤己澶變笌婊3敤鏍煎紡錛歱df |鍙戝竷鑰咃細(xì)搴風(fēng)啓鏅寜I鍙戝竷鏃墮棿錛?010-11-26璇濊鏉冩槸鏁欏笀鐨勫熀鏈潈鍒+紝鍙

22、繖縐嶆潈鍒+暱鏈熶互鏉二病鏈夂紩璧鋒暀甯堜滑鐨勮凍澶熼噸瑙嗭紝鐢辨鍑虹幇涓？鏂歸潰鏄暀甯堣瘽璇潈鐨勪弗閲嶇己澶憋紝涓？鏂歸潰鏄弗閲嶆互鐢b ?傜己澶辯兢闂鍦尢簬澶栧洜錛屾互鐢丨兢闂鍦尢簬鍐呭洜.鏁欏笀璇濊妗堜緥鍒嗘瀽鍙婃敼榪涙？濊?mdash;浠庣鍏 衆(zhòng)鍏厶浗鍒濅腑鑻辮鏁欏瑙傛懇鐮旇浼?xì)鑾峰鏁欏笀缇よ瘽梃皥钃v鏍煎紡錛歱df |鍙戝竷鑰咃細(xì)灝懺皬楸?13 |鍙戝竷鏃墮棿錛？011-07-25 鏈枃浠3璦?杈撳叆鐞嗚鍙婅緭鍑虹悊璁轟負(fù)錯虹,榪愮敤瑙傚療銆佽褰曞拰鏂囨湰杞崲絳夋柟娉？鍒嗘瀽浜嗙鍏 衆(zhòng)鍏厶浗鍒濅腑鑻辮鏁欏瑙傛懇鐮旇浼?xì)鑾峰鏁欏笀璇濊挎€葷粨鍑轟簡鑾峰鏁欏笀璇濊鐨勫 洓涓 壒寰？md

23、ash;鐪熷疄鎬c ?佷簰.銆？銆?灝懺 鏁欏笀璇濊 鍙婅 鏤二？濈淮 瀵煎悜鐮旂A Study of P rimary School Teacher Talk and Its Cogn itive Orien tatio n Based on En glish and Chin ese Data銆愪綔鑰呫？?寮犺壋錛？/p> 銆愬甯堛？?鑸掔櫧姊咃紱銆愪綔鑰呭熀鏈俊鎭？?鍗疼腑甯堣寢澶y錛?鑻辮璇鏂囧錛？2005錛?紜曞+銆愭憳瑕併？?鏁欏娑夂強澶X翰銆佹暀鏉愩？佹暀瀛幾硶絳？浣嗚繖涓？鍒囬兘瑕侀？氳繃瀹為檯鐨勮鍫傛暀瀛幾墠鑳藉緱浠綋鐜板拰瀹炵幇銆傚埌浜屽崄涓栫邯鍏崄騫翠唬鏈？鐢變簬姣

24、旇緝鏁欏娉曠兢緇撴灉浠漢澶辨湜,鐮旂鑰呭紑濮嬪曉娉兒剰鍔涜漿錫戣鍫傝繃紼嬫湰韜？榪涜璇懼爞鐮旂銆？鏁欏笀鐨勮鍫傝 璦?鑳藉姏鐩存帴褰卞搷鍒版暀鑲茬兢璐口噺鍛屾按騫熾？備粠璇瀛拰鏁欒偛瀛&兢浜弶瑙嗚鏉3湅,涓嶅悓鐨勮紼嬬被鍨？濡傛市璇懼瀷銆佸涔?fàn)鍨嬫垨瑁績璇曞?？涓嶅悓鐨勬暀紼嬮樁孌？ 濡?ldquo;鐑 韓”闃舵 銆佽 瑙1樁孌墊垨緇秫範(fàn)闃舵,浠二強涓嶅悓鐨勬暀瀛&洰鐨？濡傝 鎺堣 璦?鏤3瘑鎴栬緇冭 璦?»?鑳 ？閮藉簲璇二湁鐩稿簲鐨勬暀瀛璦?鏉二墽琛屻？?榪戝勾鏉？鍥藉唴澶栧璇懼爞鏁欏璇鐨勤爺絀跺崄鍒嗘椿璺冦？備粠鐮旂鏂規(guī)硶鍛岀爺絀墮噸鐐規(guī)澈鐪?瀵規(guī)暀甯堣瘽璇兢鐮旂

25、涓昏緇懺巻浜嗕笁涓 樁孌?1)鏃+湡鐨勮鍫傝瘽璇垎鏋愬紑濮嬪曉鏁欏笀鍛屽鐢熺兢璇懼爞璇濊榪涜鍒嗙被銆傚彈琛屼負(fù)涓諱篦蹇幕悊瀛&兢褰卞搷,鐮旂鑰呬富寮犲瑙傚垎鏋愬彲浠3瀵熷埌鐨勮鍫傝 涓？騫惰 璁嚭瑙傚療鏂規(guī),鍗沖垎綾葷郴緇？categorysystem),瀵硅 鍫傚笀鐢熻 涓鴻繘琛屽垎綾昏褰?浠庤？屾彁鍑轟竴濂楃悊鎯崇兢璇懼爞鏁欏笀琛屼負(fù)緋葷粺；2) 20涓栫邯70 80騫翠唬鐨勫笀鐢熶細(xì) 璇濈爺絀跺垯浠庤綃囩粨鏋勫拰璇濋鍙戝睍鐨勮搴甯堢敓鐨勮瘽璇涓鴻繘琛岃璦?鐗瑰緛鍛岃鎰懺姛鑳界瓑鏂歸潰鐨勫垎鏋愩？傜爺絀惰?呬粠紺句細(xì)瀛搴嚭鍙？鍏蟲敞璇懼爞璇濊鐨勤粨鏋勫拰鎬口川,灝嗚 鍫傝瘽璇寜鏁欏

26、 鍔熻兘鍒嗘垚涓？緇?ldquo;姝？rdquo;,鍗?ldquo;璇濊疆” (turn);3) 20 涓栫邯90騫翠唬浠二澈,鐮旂鑰呬富瑕佸鏁欏笀璇琛屼負(fù)涓庡鐢熻璦?涔?fàn)寰楃殑鍏尘p昏繘琛岀爺絀躲？備富瑕佽?冨 療鏁欏笀璇濊鍦以閫熴?佽璋冦？佺敤璇嶃？佸彝娉曞強璇濊緇撴瀯涓婃墍琛丨幇鍑轟笉錫屼簬鑷劧璇 鐨勤壒寰佸強鍏跺瀛&敓璇 涔?fàn)寰楃殑濯勫搷悖?鏃+湪20涓栫邯50騫翠唬,浠loom涓洪 鐨勤編鍥芥暀鑲插 瀹跺 鏁欒偛鐩爣榪涜 榪囧垎綾匯？傚湪瀛敓蹇冩櫤媧誨姩鎴栨?濈淮鏂歸潰，Bloom絳夐噰鐢厶垎綾誨鐨勬柟娉曟彁鍑轟簡鐩鎬簰鑱旂郴閫愭 錫戦珮涓？灞傛鍙戝睍鐨勮鐭二？濈淮鍙戝睍榪囩鐨

27、？縐嶇被鍒？鐭3瘑一一棰嗕細(xì)一一榪愮敤一一鍒嗘瀽一一緇煎悎一一璇勪環(huán)銆？鍒頒簡70騫翠唬,Valette絳夂湪Bloom絳夌兢鐮旂錯虹涓婃彁鍑轟簡澶栬鏁欏 鐨?涓 樁孌墊？u緇冩椿鍔？鏈烘 鎬巾妧鑳？mdash;鐭3瘑一一榪愮敤浜檯一一璇勮銆傚叾涓瘡涓樁孌甸兘鍒楀嚭浜嗙浉搴旂兢鍐呴儴 璁煡琛屼負(fù)鍛屽閮以璦?琛屼負(fù)鐨勮寰併？?80 騫翠唬浠二澈Morris絳夂曉Bloom絳夌兢璁煡鎬濈淮鍙戝睍榪囩鐨？涓 被鍒 畝鍖？鏇村 榪 樺師銆怉 bstract 銆？Teaching involves such aspects as curriculum, teaching materials, and t

28、each ing methodology. All these can only be really put into use and reality through classroom teach ing p rocesses. By the end of 1960s, due to the fact that findings of comparing the relative effective ness of differe nt teach ing methods turned out to be disa ppoin ti ng, researchers bega n to shi

29、ft their atte nti on from a comp arative study of methodologies to classroom teachi ng and lear ning p rocess itself.The quality of teacher talk may have a direct in flue nee on the results of lear ning. From the persp ective of both Ian guage teachi ng and educati on, there is always a request for

30、differe nt types of teacher talk that suit the objectives of teachi ng and lear ning at differe nt stages.Researches in teacher talk have bee n abundant both abroad and in China. Accord ing to the methods adop ted and their focuses, researches in teacher talk have mainly gone through three sig nific

31、a nt p hases, n amely, the p hase of classroom in teract ion an alysis, in which teacher talk and stude nt talk has bee n classified into differe nt categories, recorded and studied, with the purp ose of sett ing an ideal model for classroom in teractio n; the p hase of classroom discourse an alysis

32、 in 1970s and 1980s. Researchers made a study of teacher talk and stude nt talk from the persp ective of discourse structure, turn-tak ing and topic devel opment and focused on the n ature and structure of classroom in teract ion, aimi ng to put forward a seque nee of "moves" that all clas

33、sroom in teractio n followed; Since 1990s, researchers bega n to pay atte ntio n to the relationship between teacher talk and students' Ianguage acquisitionwith the inten ti on of finding out how modificati ons in teacher talk, as an imp orta nt source of Ian guage input in class, in flue nces s

34、tudents ' comprehension and thus their Ianguage acquisition.As early as the 1950s, a group of America n p sychologists and educati on alists led by Bloom classified objectives of lear ning into differe nt categories. Six majorclasses of in terrelated objectives were iden tified in the cog nitive

35、 doma in by Bloom, n amely, kno wledge,comp rehe nsion, an alysis, syn thesis and evaluati on which were pl aced in asce nding order from sim pie to comp lex. A higher class of objectives was built upon the classes that p receded itn the 1970s, after several atte mpts at ada pting the Bloom tax ono

36、mies, Valette p roduced a cohere nt exp ressi on of objectives for Ian guage teach ing and lear ning and arran ged them in five stages, n amely, mecha ni cal skills, kno wledge, tran sfer, com muni cati on and criticism. For each stage, releva nt in ternal and exter nal behaviors required of the stu

37、de nts are stated exp licitly.S ince the 1980s, Morris and his colleagues had tried to simplify Bloom' s taxonomies. T hey identifiedthree levels of devel opment in the cog nitive doma in: recog niti oncomp rehe nsion app licatio n, and app lied them in read ingcomp rehe nsion exercises. Morris

38、and his colleagues not only desig ned read ing comp rehe nsion exercises based on the three levels of cog nitive devel opment, but also con cluded and made a list of Ian guage forms used in different exercises.Development of students' cognitiveabilities has always bee n one the most imp orta nt

39、goals of educati on as has bee n revealed in curriculum, tests and exercises desig n. With an un dersta nding of p revious researches, the author of the p rese nt study assumes that since differe nt Ian guage forms may invo Ive stude nts in differe nt levels of thinking, teacher talk, as a most imp

40、orta nt la nguage input in class, also p lays an imp orta nt part in the development of students ' cognitive abilities. Through rational choices of differe nt la nguage forms in their talk, teachers may p lay a better role in the development of students' intellectual andcog nitive abilities. On the