Teachersandcoursedesign語言教師與語言課程設(shè)計(jì)Whenonehasanewcoursetodesign,whenacourseneedstoberevisedoradapted,forwhateverreason,shouldoneconcentrateonmethodologytobeginwith,andlookatclassroomtechniquesasapriority?Orshouldasyllabusbemappedoutinadvance?Methodologyfirst:thepathThesyllabusfirst:thegoalAsynthesis兩者矛盾的統(tǒng)一ConstraintsinsyllabusdesignMethodologyfirst:thepath

Terrell’snaturalapproachImmersionteachingTeachinglanguageascommunicationTerrell’snaturalapproachBackgroundThenaturalapproachisanapproachproposedbyKrashenandTerrelltodevelopteachingprincipleswhichemphasizenaturalcommunicationratherthanformalgrammarstudyandaretolerantoflearner’serrors.Itpaysparticularattentiontotheinformalacquisitionoflanguagerules.ThecoreoftheNaturalApproachislanguageacquisitionwhichisconsideredasubconsciousprocess,dependentontwofactors:theamountofcomprehensibleinputthestudentsget,andthestrengthoftheiraffectivefilters,thatis,theamountofinputthestudents“allowin”.Theoreticalbasis1)Acquisition-learningdistinctionhypothesis2)Monitorhypothesis3)Naturalorderhypothesis4)Inputhypothesis5)Affective-filterhypothesisGeneralprinciplesTerrellstressedthreegeneralprinciplesonwhichlanguageteachingshouldbebased:1)theclassroomshouldbedevotedprimarilytoactivitieswhichfosteracquisition(activitieswhichpromotelearningmightbeassignedashomework);2)theinstructorshouldnotcorrectstudentspeecherrorsdirectly;and3)thestudentsshouldbeallowedtorespondineitherthetargetlanguage,theirnativelanguage,oramixtureofthetwo.(Terrell1982:12)Intake“Themajorfunctionofthesecondlanguageclassroom,istoprovideintakeforacquisition…onecouldalsosaythatthemajorchallengefacingthefieldofappliedlinguisticsistocreatematerialsandcontextsthatprovideintake”(Krashen1981:101).Intakedoesnothaveasyllabusthatcanbecreatedbythelinguistoranyoneelse.Itappearsofitsownaccord,andbothlinguistandteachermustbealivetoitspresence.Immersionteaching

由來：“沉浸式雙語教育”(immersionbilingualeducation)源于加拿大雙語教育實(shí)驗(yàn)，也被譯為“浸入式雙語教育”、“浸泡式雙語教育”。20世紀(jì)60年代，居住在加拿大魁北克省圣·蘭伯特學(xué)區(qū)的英裔單語加拿大人意識到，讓子女掌握法語是他們未來就業(yè)和生存的必要條件。于是他們聯(lián)合起來向教育當(dāng)局提交了一份法語沉浸式雙語教學(xué)方案，方案被教育當(dāng)局接受。1965年以后，加拿大先后建立了2000所左右的沉浸式雙語學(xué)校。到20世紀(jì)70年代，這一教學(xué)模式取得了意想不到的效果。

“沉浸式”雙語教育模式不僅在加拿大得到了肯定和發(fā)展，而且先后被借鑒到美國、澳大利亞、愛爾蘭、芬蘭、日本、瑞士、新西蘭等許多國家和地區(qū)，極大地推動(dòng)了世界許多國家和地區(qū)雙語教育的發(fā)展。

含義：在加拿大，“沉浸式雙語教育”是一個(gè)籠統(tǒng)的概念。在實(shí)施過程中，起始時(shí)間與時(shí)間長短存在較大的差異。按起始時(shí)間，沉浸式雙語教育可以劃分為三種類型：一是早期沉浸式雙語教育，通常從幼兒園或幼兒階段開始實(shí)施;二是中期沉浸式雙語教育，通常從9歲或10歲開始實(shí)施;三是后期沉浸式雙語教育，通常從中學(xué)時(shí)代開始實(shí)施。按第二語言或外語的使用比例，沉浸式雙語教育可劃分為兩種類型：一是“完全沉浸式雙語教育”，開始時(shí)，第二語言作為100%的教學(xué)語言，兩年或三年以后，第二語言的比例降低至80%，再過三年或四年以后，第二語言的比例降至50%左右;二是“部分沉浸式雙語教育”，第二語言的比例始終占50%左右。ImmersionprogramsinCanadaTheimmersionprogramsinCanadawhichalsomadegreatachievements.Immersionprogramreferstoabilingualeducationapproachinwhichchildrenwhospeakonlyonelanguageenteraschoolwhereasecondlanguageisthemediumofinstructionforallthestudents(Genesee,1983).Inthiscase,thisforeignlanguagebecomesamediumoflearningandteaching,bywhichstudentsnotonlylearntheknowledgeofacademicsubjects,butalsoimprovetheirproficiencyofthesecondlanguage.Itsastonishingachievementsandsuccessfulexperiencehavedeeplyimpressedtheworld.Chinesescholarshavenoticedthisfashionandbegantohaveatry.Inarecentreviewoftheliteratureonimmersionexperiments,Geneseecharacterizesimmersionbythefollowingpedagogicalconditions:1.Thestudentsarepermittedtousetheirhomelanguageinschoolandintheclassroomatleastduringtheinitialpartoftheprogram.Thestudentscontinuetousetheirhomelanguageamongstthemselvesatallstagesoftheprogram.2.Attemptsbythestudentstousethesecondlanguageforcommunicativepurposesarestronglyencouragedbytheteachersorconversely,grammaticalorstructuralerrorsinthestudents’communicativeuseofthesecondlanguagearenotgivenundueattention.3.Boththefirstandsecondlanguagesareusedforregularcurriculuminstructioninadditiontolanguageartsinstruction.(Genesee1983:3)WhatistheDifferencebetweensyllabusandcurriculum?

Answer:

Curriculumisafocusofstudy,consistingofvariouscoursesalldesignedtoreachaparticularproficiencyorqualification.Forinstancesomehighschoolsofferacollege-prepcurriculum,whichisdesignedtoprepareastudentfortherigorsofcollegestudy.Emphasiswillbeonthehumanities(history,English,etc.)andsciences(biology,math,chemistry,physics,etc.).Ontheotherhand,somehighschoolsofferavocational-prepcurriculum,whichincludesspecificskill-buildingcourses(cosmetology,constructiontrades,electronics,computerscience,etc.).

Asyllabusissimplyanoutlineandtimelineofaparticularcourse.Itwilltypicallygiveabriefoverviewofthecourseobjectives,courseexpectations,listreadingassignments,homeworkdeadlines,andexamdates.Itistypicallyavailableonthefirstdayofacollegecourse,andastudentisexpectedtoknowwhatisinthesyllabusthroughoutthecourse.Thepurposeofthesyllabusistoallowthestudenttoworktheirschedulefortheirownmaximumefficiencyandeffectiveness.Ithelpstoavoidconflictswithothercourses,anditpreventssomeonefromaccusingaprofessorofunfairlyaddingassignmentsmid-term.Sterndescribedthebasicphilosophyofimmersionintheseterms:

Inordertolearnalanguage,itisimportantthatlearnersfromaveryearlystageoflanguagelearningbecomeinvolvedinreal-lifecommunication….Themostaccessibleformof‘reallife’istheschoolsituationitself,andbyofferingpartoftheschoolcurriculumoreventhewholecurriculuminthesecondlanguage,thelearnerisimmersedintoacommunicativesettinginwhichthesecondlanguageisusednaturally.(Stren1980:57-8)Thelearnerhastoconcentrateonacquiringnotlanguage,but“techniquesforlanguageacquisition,”orwhatSternhascalled“copingtechniques”(Stern1981).第二語言不僅是學(xué)習(xí)的內(nèi)容，而且是學(xué)習(xí)的工具。Teachinglanguageascommunication

Ithasbeensuggestedthatmanyteachers,seeingtheirmainpurposenowasenablinglearnerstobecomecommunicativelyproficient,requirenewkindsoflanguageteachingmaterials.Usingthesematerials,learnerswillbeencouragedtoapplytheirnaturalabilitiesofinterpretation,expression,andnegotiation-thelastbeingthecentralorpivotalactivityinperformingallcommunicativeacts.TeachinglanguageascommunicationAlthoughthisisanargumentbaseduponatheoryofthenatureoflanguageascommunication(alinguistictheory),ratherthanonatheoryofhowweacquireit(apsycholinguistictheory),itleadstoconclusionsthataresimilartotheargumentsoutlinedpreviously–namely,thatteachersandcoursedesignersoughttobemuchmoreconcernedwiththewayslearnersmayactuponandinteractwithlinguisticdatathanwiththepriorselectionandorganizationofthedata.Thesalientcharacteristicofallthreeapproachesisthattheyareallprocess-oriented.Allcomeviadifferentpathstosimilarconclusionsaboutlanguageteaching:thattheteacher’sconcernshouldbeprimarilywiththeroute,notthegoal-withwhatRichterichhascalledthe“l(fā)earner’strajectory”(Richterichetal.1981).Alongtheway,proceduresoflinguisticsyllabusdesignareconsideredmarginallyimportantifnotirrelevant.Thesyllabusfirst:thegoalInChapter1,variationsonthetraditionallinguisticsyllabuswerepresented,andinChapter6fivecontemporaryapproachestosyllabusdesignwerediscussed.AccordingtoTheElementsofLanguageCurriculum:ASystematicApproachtoProgramDevelopment,languageteachingactivitiescanbedividedintofourdifferentcategories.CATEGORIESDEFINITIONApproachesWaysofdefiningwhatandhowthestudentsneedtolearnSyllabusesWaysoforganizingthecourseandmaterialsTechniquesWaysofpresentingthematerialsandteachingExercisesWaysofpracticingwhathasbeenpresentedMcKay(1987,p11)usesthetermsyllabusinaspecialwaythatseemstoapplyhere:“Aaylllabusprovideafocusforwhatshouldbestudied,alongwitharationaleforhowthatcontentshouldbeselectedandordered.Currently,theliteraturereflectsthreemajortypesofsyllabuses:structural,situational,andnotional.”TheopinionsofYaldenFromtheperspectiveoflanguagecourseplanning,thoughthetrajectoryisimportant,onecannotignorethegoal.Atleastfornow,societyexpectsteacherstobeabletodescribeandjustifyobjectivesintermsoflanguagebehavioratthepointofexitfromacourseorcourses.Teachersareaccountable;learnerswanttoknowwheretheyaregoing.Theproblemthusbecomestoaccommodatebothconcerns:ontheonehand,concernforappropriateandeffectiveclassroominteraction,andontheother,forasatisfactoryoutcomegiventhetimeandfacilitiesavailable.Concernwithmethodologyaswellaswithsyllabusdesigncanhelpinthistask.AsynthesisHowmayasynthesisbeaccomplished?Thebalancebetweenlanguagestudyandlanguageuse.Sheputforwardaproposalthatproportionalapproachwouldmeettheneedsofcoursedesigntoagreatextend.Inplanningsecondlanguageprogramstoday,theoryfrombothschoolsofthoughtsshouldbeapplied.Threemajorcontributionscomefromthemethodologists:-generalprinciplesgoverningclassroominteraction-accesstotheuseofauthenticsamplesoflanguagethroughworkindiscourseanalysis-awiderangeofsuitablemethodologyConstrainsinsyllabusdesignTwophasesincoursedesignReprise:criteriaforselectionSegmentingthecurriculumFrameworkforcoursedesignTwophasesincoursedesignThefirstphaseiswhatisthoughtofasclassicsyllabusdesign:thepreparationofsyllabusspecifications,comprisingagreaterorlessernumberofcomponents,astheoryandpracticedictate(seethediscussionofproficiencyinChapter2).Thisisthestageatwhichonemightfirstobtaindataonthelearnersaswellasonthephysicalconstraintspresentintheteachingsituation,and,second,askoneselfinhowmanycategoriesinformationisavailable–andifavailable,useful.Finally,onemightproduceadescriptionofthelanguageteachingsituation-itslearners,goals,andclassroomenvironment-aswellasoneofthetargetlanguagesituations,asfarastheseareknown.Thesecondphaseofthedesignprocessconsistsinexploitingtheinformationthuscollectedsothatcommunicationandinteractionmaytakeplaceintheclassroom.Herearesomeoftheproposedsolutions:Amodelinwhichfunctionalteachingisgraftedontoastructuralcore(Brumfit1980)Thevariable-focusmodel,whichinvolveschangingemphasisorfocusfromoneaspectoflanguagetoanotherastimeprogresses(Allen1980)Theproportionalmodel,inwhichtopicsorspecificnotionsareusedasaframeworkforagradualchangeofproportioninthetimedevotedtolanguageformontheonehandandcommunicativefunctionanddiscoursestructureontheother-orviceversa,dependingontheunderlyingtheoryofsecondlanguagelearning(Yalden1983)TheentirelyfunctionalmodelsusedinEnglishforscienceandtechnologyandEnglishforacademicpurposes,designedforlearnerswhohavetocarryoutpredictableroles.Theproceduralmodel(Johnson1982:135-44;Brumfit1984a;BerettaandDavies1985),inwhichtasksaredesignedtoproducegenerallanguagecompetence.Anothertask-basedmodel,inwhichtasksaredesignedtofosterstrategiesforlearningandcommunication(CandlinandBreen1979)Aprocess-orientedmodel,inwhich“apredesignedcontentsyllabuswouldbepubliclyanalysedandevaluatedbytheclassroomgroup,oranemergingcontentsyllabuswouldbedesigned(andsimilarlyevaluated)inanon-goingway”(Breen1984:55)Themodelinwhichsomeothersubjectmatterprovidesanonlinguisticsyllabus,asinshelteredcoursesandinimmersionprograms.ConstraintsinsyllabusdesignHowthenisonetocopewithdefiningcontentandsettingstandards,aswellaswithclassroominteraction?Asyllabusisaninstrumenttobeusedtocoordinatealltheseaspectsoflanguageteaching.Assuch,itshouldnotberigid,butflexible;notclosed,butopen-ended;andnotstatic,butsubjecttoconstantrevisionasaresultoffeedbackfromtheclassroom.Reprise:criteriaforselectionCriteriaappearfromoutsidetheteachingcontext,aswellasfromwithinit.Governmentpolicy----functionalmodellanguagepolicy-------proportionalorthevariable-focusmodel