Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/86234
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor曾金金zh_TW
dc.contributorTseng, Chin-Chinen_US
dc.contributor.author郭鋐濬zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorGuo, Hong-Jyunen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-28T03:35:15Z-
dc.date.available2019-03-01
dc.date.available2019-08-28T03:35:15Z-
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifierG060584005I
dc.identifier.urihttp://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=%22http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22G060584005I%22.&%22.id.&
dc.identifier.urihttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/86234-
dc.description.abstract本研究旨在從筆者的教學影片中分析筆者執行跨文化遠距教學時的優劣為何。跨文化教學為現今許多華語文教學的重要課程環節之一,語言是文化的載體,傳授語言之時必定會牽涉文化教學,然而現今許多對外華語教學的課室中,往往僅注重「文化認知課」,如介紹特定華人如何過年、節慶之特色為何、傳統技藝之類型等等,或是「文化技藝課」,如扯鈴課、烹飪課、剪紙課等等,忽略了「跨文化溝通」與人際互動之重要性,因此筆者利用認知(cognition domain)、情意(affective domain)、技能(psychomotor domain)作為跨文化溝通課的教學面向,結合同儕評估(peer review)之方式審核自身教學是否皆達到目標。 筆者根據已錄製之教學影片,分為三個段落,依序分別檢測認知、技能、情意之教學,一個部分設定三道題目,由同儕看過影片之後給予筆者最低1分、最高5分之評分。評分的結果為認知得4.2分、技能得4分、情意得3.3分,充分表現了筆者在情意教學嚴重的不足。為了改進教學,筆者搜集同儕的文字意見,將之質化分析出具體的改進目標,並且陳列在認知、情意、技能方面亟需改進之具體作法,包含「認知面」的多音節聲調練習以及音義結合訓練、「技能面」的多元文化表達語練習、以及「情意面」的多元情境設計等,作為往後教學之參考,讓跨文化溝通教學確實落實於課室環境中,讓學生得以接觸最全面的跨文化溝通課。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractThis research intends to analyze the pros and cons of my teaching from my distant teaching videotape in which I teach cross-culture communication. Cross-culture teaching is one of the most significant topics among CSL courses. Language is the carrier of culture, which leads to the fact that when we teach language, we teach culture simultaneously. However, many CSL courses nowadays focus on merely “culture knowledge”, such as how Chinese celebrate Lunar New Year, the features of specific festivals, sorts of traditional arts, etc., or “cultural art class”, such as Chinese yo-yo, Chinese cuisine, Chinese papercuts, etc. All the above neglect the significance of interpersonal interaction from the perspective of “cross-cultural communication”. Therefore, I refer to the framework composed of 3 domains of cross-cultural communication teaching—cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domain, and use them as the criteria to examine my teaching. The result is done through peer review so as to evaluate whether I have achieved those goals belonging to those domains. I segment my teaching videotape into 3 parts, evaluating my results on cognitive, psychomotor, affective domains in order. One domain has 3 questions. Reviewing my videotape, peers score me from 1-5. As the result shows, I receive 4.2 on cognitive domain, 4 on psychomotor domain, and 3.3 on affective domain, which fully manifests my ineffective teaching on affective domain. In order to improve my teaching, I collect peers’ written opinions, analyzing them qualitatively and listing out the actual solutions to improve my teaching on all 3 domains individually. Those solutions include multi-syllable practice and sound-meaning combination learning in “cognitive domain”, diverse cultural expressions learning on “psychomotor domain”, and diverse situations of communication on “affective cognition”, etc. The result could be teachers’ potential references on cross-cultural communication teaching.en_US
dc.description.sponsorship華語文教學系zh_TW
dc.language中文
dc.subject同儕評估zh_TW
dc.subject跨文化溝通zh_TW
dc.subject自我反思zh_TW
dc.subject遠距教學zh_TW
dc.subjectpeer reviewen_US
dc.subjectcross-culture communicationen_US
dc.subjectself-examinationen_US
dc.subjectdistance teachingen_US
dc.title線上華語遠距互動應用於跨文化溝通教學之自我反思zh_TW
dc.titleSelf-Examination on Cross-Cultural Communication Applied to CSL Distance Teachingen_US
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
060584005i01.pdf3.81 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.