本文選題：《英語》(譯林版) + 英語課程標準(2011)��； 參考：《魯東大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：教材是英語課程實施的重要組成部分，選擇和使用合適的教材是完成教學(xué)任務(wù)和實現(xiàn)教學(xué)目標的重要前提。在《英語課程標準》（2011）的指導(dǎo)下，教材版本呈現(xiàn)多樣化，因此，教材評價顯得尤其重要。 自二十世紀八十年代以來，國內(nèi)外學(xué)者開始研究教材評價。國外學(xué)者提出了許多教材評價理論，，同時設(shè)計了諸多評價原則或評價清單。但是，我們并不能將國外的評價理論直接照搬用來評價中國的英語教材。研究中國英語教材應(yīng)該將相關(guān)的理論、當前英語課程標準以及教材使用者的需求考慮在內(nèi)。近幾年國內(nèi)的教材評價大多是從使用者的需求方面著手，而很少有基于認知學(xué)習(xí)理論和建構(gòu)主義學(xué)習(xí)理論進行的教材研究。因此有必要在這一領(lǐng)域?qū)⒗碚撆c實踐相結(jié)合進行研究。 基于評價理論和數(shù)據(jù)分析，本文對初中《英語》（譯林版）進行了評價分析。該套教材是在《英語課程標準》（2011）理念下編寫的教材，目前已使用兩年。然而，任何一種教材都不可能是完美的，這套教材也不例外，在實際的教學(xué)操作和學(xué)習(xí)過程中也有可能存在些許問題。 基于文本分析法和調(diào)查問卷法，本文將從以下幾個方面對初中《英語》（譯林版）進行分析與評價。首先，在認知學(xué)習(xí)理論和建構(gòu)主義學(xué)習(xí)理論的指導(dǎo)下，通過文本分析，分析評價該教材內(nèi)容是否注重學(xué)生原有知識結(jié)構(gòu)，是否貼近學(xué)生的社會生活，是否接近學(xué)生的“最近發(fā)展區(qū)”，是否為學(xué)生提供發(fā)現(xiàn)學(xué)習(xí)的機會。其次，通過解讀《英語課程標準》（2011），對該套教材從選材和編排方面進行評析，同時依據(jù)思想性、科學(xué)性、趣味性和靈活性這四大教材編寫原則對其進行評析。最后，對使用過該套教材的教師和學(xué)生進行問卷調(diào)查，對該教材的實際使用情況進行分析研究，從而發(fā)現(xiàn)其優(yōu)勢與不足。 本研究的主要問題如下： 1）《英語》（譯林版）是否體現(xiàn)了認知學(xué)習(xí)理論和建構(gòu)主義學(xué)習(xí)理論的思想？ 2）《英語》（譯林版）是否符合《英語課程標準》（2011）中教材編寫的原則？ 3）《英語》（譯林版）是否滿足了英語教學(xué)中教師的實際教學(xué)需要和學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)需求？ 本研究使用的主要研究工具是調(diào)查問卷。調(diào)查問卷的內(nèi)容是根據(jù)何安平的“中學(xué)英語教材評價表”和Grant設(shè)計的調(diào)查問卷并依照本研究的實際需要改編而來，該問卷包括教師問卷和學(xué)生問卷。本研究的實地調(diào)查于2014年10月下旬在江蘇省連云港市進行。調(diào)查對象為江蘇省連云港市一所重點中學(xué)和一所普通中學(xué)的340名學(xué)生和30名英語教師。最后有300份有效學(xué)生問卷和30份有效教師問卷。通過有效的數(shù)據(jù)收集并進行百分比統(tǒng)計，采用圖表方式呈現(xiàn)調(diào)查結(jié)果，分析圖表所呈現(xiàn)的調(diào)查數(shù)據(jù)并對其進行討論。 最后得出的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)如下： 首先，《英語》（譯林版）體現(xiàn)了認知學(xué)習(xí)理論和建構(gòu)主義學(xué)習(xí)理論的思想，教材的內(nèi)容重視學(xué)生的原有認知結(jié)構(gòu)并貼近學(xué)生的“最近發(fā)展區(qū)”。教材中的知識是小學(xué)學(xué)習(xí)的延伸，并且每個單元的主題都是學(xué)生所熟悉的，貼近學(xué)生的社會生活。整個材料也為學(xué)生提供了發(fā)現(xiàn)學(xué)習(xí)的機會。 其次，《英語》（譯林版）基本滿足《英語課程標準》（2011）提出的思想性、科學(xué)性、趣味性和靈活性四大教材編寫原則，但該教材的思想性與靈活性不夠，不是每個單元的內(nèi)容都體現(xiàn)思想性原則，且內(nèi)容未能考慮到城鄉(xiāng)差異。 再次，《英語》（譯林版）基本滿足初中英語教學(xué)中教師的實際教學(xué)需要和學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)需求。廣大教師和學(xué)生認為這套教材的語言知識安排較好，語音，詞匯和語法都有涉及到。該套教材中的題材也比較豐富，聽說讀寫各項技能的練習(xí)都涉及到，并且四項語言技能的練習(xí)能夠達到一定的平衡。這套教材有利于培養(yǎng)學(xué)生良好的情感態(tài)度。教材中有很多介紹中西方文化的內(nèi)容，這有助于學(xué)生了解中西方的知識，培養(yǎng)他們的文化意識。然而，有一半的學(xué)生對其中的英語寫作的話題不太感興趣。教材中涉及的一些學(xué)習(xí)策略對學(xué)生的英語學(xué)習(xí)有一定的幫助，但與教材其他部分相比而言，學(xué)習(xí)技巧這部分的設(shè)計不是很好。大多數(shù)學(xué)生認為教材中介紹的這些學(xué)習(xí)技巧對于他們養(yǎng)成良好的學(xué)習(xí)習(xí)慣幫助不大。
[Abstract]:Teaching materials are an important part of the implementation of English courses. Choosing and using appropriate textbooks is an important prerequisite for the completion of teaching tasks and the realization of teaching goals. Under the guidance of "English curriculum standard > (2011)", the textbooks are diversified. Therefore, the evaluation of teaching materials is particularly important.
Since 1980s, scholars at home and abroad have begun to study the evaluation of teaching materials. Foreign scholars have put forward many evaluation theories on teaching materials and have designed many evaluation principles or evaluation lists. However, we can not directly copy foreign evaluation theories to evaluate Chinese English textbooks. The theory of Guan, the current English curriculum standards and the needs of the users of the textbooks are taken into account. In recent years, most of the domestic textbooks have been evaluated from the needs of the users, but few of the textbooks are based on the theory of cognitive learning and constructivist learning. Therefore, it is necessary to combine theory and practice in this field. Do research.
Based on the evaluation theory and data analysis, this paper makes an evaluation and analysis of junior middle school < English > (translated forest Edition). The textbook is a textbook written under the concept of "English curriculum standard > (2011)". It has been used for two years. However, any kind of teaching material can not be perfect. This set of teaching materials is no exception, in the practical teaching and learning process. There may be some problems.
Based on text analysis and questionnaire, this paper will analyze and evaluate junior middle school < English > (translated forest version) from the following aspects. First, under the guidance of cognitive learning theory and constructivist learning theory, through text analysis, it analyzes and evaluates whether the content of the textbook emphasizes the original knowledge structure of the students and is close to the students' society. Whether life is close to the student's "Recent Development Zone" or not to provide students with the opportunity to discover and learn. Secondly, through the interpretation of the English Curriculum Standard (2011), this set of materials from the selection and arrangement of the material, and according to the ideological, scientific, interesting and flexible, the writing principles of the four teaching materials are evaluated. Finally, A questionnaire survey was conducted among the teachers and students who had used the textbook, and the actual use of the textbook was analyzed, so as to find its advantages and disadvantages.
The main problems of this study are as follows:
1) does the English version reflect the idea of cognitive learning theory and constructivist learning theory?
2) does the English version conform to the principles of the English Curriculum Standard (2011)?
3) does the English version satisfy the actual teaching needs of teachers and students' learning needs in English teaching?
The main research tool used in this study is the questionnaire. The questionnaire was based on He Anping's "middle school English textbook evaluation list" and the questionnaire designed by Grant and adapted according to the actual needs of the study. The questionnaire included the teacher questionnaire and the student questionnaire. The field survey was in Jiangsu in late October 2014. 340 students and 30 English teachers in a key middle school and a general middle school in Lianyungang City, Jiangsu Province, were carried out in Lianyungang. Finally, there were 300 valid student questionnaires and 30 effective teacher questionnaires. The survey data presented and discussed.
The final findings are as follows:
First, < English > (translated forest) embodies the thought of cognitive learning theory and constructivist learning theory. The contents of the textbook attach importance to the original cognitive structure of the students and close to the "Recent Development Zone" of the students. The knowledge in the textbook is the extension of the primary school, and the main questions of each unit are familiar to the students and close to the students' social life. The whole material also provides students with opportunities to discover and learn.
Secondly, < English > (translated forest) basically meets the principles of writing the four textbooks of ideological, scientific, interesting and flexible, which is proposed by the English Curriculum Standard (2011). However, the ideological and flexibility of the teaching material is not enough, and the content of each unit is not reflected in the ideological principle, and the content of the textbook does not take into account the differences between the urban and rural areas.
Again, < English > (translated forest) basically meets the actual needs of the teachers in the teaching of junior middle school and the needs of the students. The majority of the teachers and students think that the language knowledge is well arranged, the pronunciation, the vocabulary and the grammar are all involved. The subjects in this set of textbooks are also rich in the subjects, and the practice of listening and speaking, reading and writing are involved in all the exercises. There are four language skills to achieve a certain balance. This set of materials helps to develop a good emotional attitude. There are many introductory and Western cultures in the textbook. This helps students to understand the knowledge of the West and cultivate their cultural awareness. However, half of the students are about the topic of English writing. Not very interested. Some of the learning strategies involved in the textbook help students to learn English, but compared with the other parts of the textbook, the design of learning skills is not very good. Most students think that the learning skills introduced in the teaching materials help them to develop good learning habits.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：魯東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：G634.41

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 許峰;英語教材評估研究:回顧與前瞻[J];西北工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2004年03期

2 單良;孫勤;;基于認知學(xué)習(xí)理論的地理教材分析——以人教版必修1為例[J];地理教育;2014年05期

3 陳琦,張建偉;建構(gòu)主義學(xué)習(xí)觀要義評析[J];華東師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(教育科學(xué)版);1998年01期

4 程曉堂;;關(guān)于《英語課程標準》的幾點認識[J];教學(xué)月刊(中學(xué)版);2002年11期

5 劉道義;淺議英語教材的評價標準[J];教育實踐與研究;2004年12期

6 程曉堂;;基礎(chǔ)英語新課程英語教材評析——兼評外研社《英語》(新標準)初高中英語教材[J];山東師范大學(xué)外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報(基礎(chǔ)英語教育);2006年05期

7 喬愛玲;從外語教材編寫的宏觀設(shè)計與微觀設(shè)計評估教材[J];山東外語教學(xué);2002年03期

8 李寶峰;論建構(gòu)主義學(xué)習(xí)理論視野下的創(chuàng)新教育[J];教育探索;2005年08期

9 高凌飚;;教材評價維度與標準[J];教育發(fā)展研究;2007年12期

10 高凌飚;關(guān)于教材評價體系的建議[J];全球教育展望;2002年04期

本文編號：2107375