請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
A Study of Chinese Teachers’ Beliefs in Grammar Teaching
|摘要:||語言課室裡應重視語言形式或溝通能力是長久以來爭議的話題。本文欲探究的是，在教師的信念裡，文法教學佔據什麼地位？教師以什麼方式來達成形式教學？引領他們實踐某些教學行為背後的影響因素為何？這些答案是否因為教學資歷的不同而不同？本文以台灣台北區十二位華語教師為研究對象，一組資深教師、一組初職教師，和一組實習教師，蒐集他們文法教學程序圖並進行訪談，從中研究華語教師對四個與文法教學相關之議題的意見，即語言形式和溝通功能，文法糾錯，文法教學活動設計，教學程序及階段比例分配等四項。結果發現教師信念和目前語言教學研究的結果有出入，組間的差異也再次印證教學經驗以及教師觀點對於個體信念具有深刻的影響。重視形式教學的原因與該區語言環境和教師專業背景訓練有關。教師重視文法糾正，但隨重點練習和溝通練習階段有所區別，前者的糾錯時機比溝通練習要即時，頻率也比較高。策略上，因老師對學習的理解不同而有所差異。活動設計方面，從機械式、有意義式，到溝通練習，顯示以形式為基礎再上升到溝通的教學模式。活動中教師雖注重溝通，但仍需要活動中培養溝通能力方面的專業訓練。從教學程序中階段的重要性分配，能看出教師對語言學習的理解分為兩種，一是以理解為基礎的學習(comprehension-based learning)，一是以應用為基礎的學習(production-based learning)，如何看待學習是教師信念中的核心信念，左右著教師活動的分配、教材中例句的呈現方式、糾錯策略、以及補救教學策略等。本文於末章提出現存問題以及解決的方針。|
To focus on linguistic form or communicative functions has remained a controversial issue in language classrooms. This study aims to discover teachers’ beliefs in the role of grammar teaching, approaches to grammar teaching, the factors that influence or urge teachers to carry out certain practices, and the differences among them. This study is carried out in Taipei, Taiwan. The subjects are divided into three groups by their teaching experience: four experienced, four in-service, and four pre-service teachers. To elicit each teacher’s beliefs, the study interviewed twelve teachers and collected the flow charts for grammar teaching procedures that they drew. Four issues concerning grammar teaching are focused on in the study: language form versus communicative function, corrective feedback, grammar activity design, and teaching procedure including the percentage distributed to each stage. The result shows that there exist differences among teachers’ beliefs and the research results in language pedagogy. In addition, group differences state that teaching experience and teachers’ perspectives have great influence on individual’s beliefs. The reasons why teachers think highly of grammar instruction are closely related to the complexity of outside-classroom language use in Taipei, as well as teachers’ professional background. Teachers in general stress the importance of grammar correction. However, the time and frequency allowed to make the corrections differ from focused practice to communicative practice. The correction tends to be more immediate and more frequent in focused practice than in communicative practice. Besides, how teachers view language learning influences their strategy. In activity design, teachers follow the sequence from mechanical practice to meaningful practice, and then to communicative practice. Teachers do not get to communicative practice as activity begins. This pattern indicates a teaching model based on language form with an aim for communicative teaching. Albeit teachers emphasize communication during communicative activities, they need further training in designing activities that can indeed foster learners’ communicative competence. Finally, it is observed in the arrangement of teachers’ teaching procedures that teachers have two kinds of beliefs in language learning, comprehension-based learning and production-based learning. How one views language learning is the core of teachers’ beliefs, influencing the weight of each stage, the way of presenting grammar examples in textbooks, the strategies of corrective feedback, and those of remedial teaching. This study raises the questions and problems that exist today and proposes solutions at the end of this study.
在 DSpace 系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。