《小学英语课堂教师提问现状的调查研究》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在学术论文-天天文库。
分类号：H05单位代码：10719学号：12052003密级：延安大学论文题目：小学英语课堂教师提问现状的调查研究论文作者：杨艳指导教师、职称：李小芳副教授学科、专业名称：课程与教学论（英语）提交论文日期：二〇一五年六月 InvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolYangYanAThesisSubmittedtotheSchoolofForeignLanguagesInPartialFulfillmentoftheRequirementsfortheDegreeofMasterofArtsinLinguisticsandAppliedLinguisticsYANANUNIVERSITYJUNE,2014 创新性声明本人声明所呈交的论文是我个人在导师指导下进行的研究工作及取得的研究成果。尽我所知，除了文中特别加以标注和致谢中所罗列的内容以外，论文中不包含其他人已经发表或撰写过的研究成果；也不包含为获得延安大学或其它教育机构的学位或证书而使用过的材料。与我一同工作的同志对本研究所做的任何贡献均已在论文中做了明确的说明并表示谢意。申请学位论文与资料若有不实之处，本人承担一切相关责任。本人签名：日期：关于论文使用授权的说明本人完全了解延安大学有关保留和使用学位论文的规定，即：研究生在校攻读学位期间论文工作的知识产权单位属延安大学。本人保证毕业离校后，发表论文或使用论文工作成果时署名单位仍然为延安大学。学校有权保留送交论文的复印件，允许查阅和借阅论文；学校可以公布论文的全部或部分内容，可以允许采用影印、缩印或其它复制手段保存论文。（保密的论文在解密后遵守此规定）本学位论文属于保密在年解密后适用本授权书。本人签名：日期：导师签名：日期： 小学英语课堂教师提问现状的调查研究摘要:课堂提问作为英语课堂教学中的一个重要手段，被应用到教学过程中的各个环节，成为联系教师和学生双边互动的纽带。课堂提问是有效教学中的一个重要组成部分，并且长期受到国内外许多学者和教师的高度重视。认真设计和灵活运用各种不同类型的问题,不但可以激发学生积极思考、主动学习,还使得学生真正参与到课堂互动中来,从而促进了语言的输出和语言的习得，最终不断提高课堂教学效果。因此，调查和研究英语课堂提问的现状，发展优势，改进不足，对于提高英语教学质量有着十分重要的意义。本研究以子长秀延小学六位英语教师和230名学生为研究对象，采用了访谈法和问卷调查法，进行了关于小学英语教师课堂提问方面的调查研究。使用SPSS（17.0）软件对收集到的数据进行统计分析。研究结果如下：（1）总体上来说，学生对教师课堂提问的态度比较积极，学生更愿意被老师提问,而不是主动回答问题；教师在课堂中提的问题类型比较单一，层次性不够明显，大多是层次比较低的展示性问题和一些回忆性问题；大部分教师提问能够面向全体学生，只有一小部分教师在提问时喜欢叫成绩好的学生或者会选择积极举手的学生。(2)教师在提出问题后能留给学生一定的思考时间，但候答时间总体上比较短，一般都控制在3秒钟内，对难度大的问题，可能会多留出一点时间；课堂中教师经常采用重复的提问策略，较少采用追问，重新定向，解释等提问策略。(3)当学生能够正确回答教师的问题时，教师多数情况下会采用简单的积极反馈；当学生回答错误时，教师往往会立即纠正学生的错误，并给出正确答案；学生在课堂中主动发问的机率很少。本研究对小学英语教师课堂提问的建议是：1）教师应该明确提问的目的。一个清晰地目标是课堂提问成败的先决条件。带着明确的目标去提问，可以较好地达到教学目的。2）教师应当转变教学观念，真正将“以学生为中心”的教学思想落i 到实处，鼓励学生积极提问。3）教师要提高自身的提问策略水平，避免单一提问策略的运用。及时和恰当的反馈可以提高学生的学习动机，激发他们参与课堂互动。对于学生的回答，老师应该提供更多积极的反馈，多给予学生表扬和鼓励。4）教师应该不断提高提问行为和教学效果。为了加深学生的理解，引发更多的口语输出，教师应充分设计问题，并充分利用各种问题类型。关键词:教师提问；提问策略；现状；建议ii InvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolAbstractClassroomquestioningisalwaysanimportantmeansofEnglishclassroomteaching,whichisusedineveryprocedureofclassroomteaching.Itisalsothelinkofbilateralactivitiesbetweenteachersandstudents.Scholarsathomeandabroadattachgreatimportancetoclassroomquestioning.Carefullypreparingandproperlyusingdifferentkindsofquestioningstrategycanmakethestudentsthinkandlearnactively,andenablethestudentstotakepartinclassroomcommunication.Thus,itcanincreasethestudents’languageoutput,stimulatelanguageacquisitionandultimatelyimprovetheteachingeffectiveness.Therefore,ithasgreatsignificancetoinvestigatethecurrentsituationofEnglishclassroomquestioning.ThisstudysubjectsaresixEnglishteachersand230studentsofXiuyanprimaryschoolinZichang,Shaanxi.TheresearchdealswithEnglishclassroomquestioninginprimaryschoolthroughquestionnaireandinterview.ThesoftwareSPSS(17.00)isusedtododatastatisticalanalysis.Theresearchresultsareasfollows:(1)Ingeneral,thestudents’attitudetowardclassroomquestioningispositive,thestudentsaremorewillingtobeaskedtoanswerquestionsproposedbytheteacher,ratherthantaketheinitiativetoanswerthequestion;Teacherquestioningtypesarerelativelysingular,thehierarchyisnotobvious,mostofthequestionsarelow-levelquestionsandrecallingquestions;mostoftheteachers’questionsareavailabletoallstudents,onlyasmallpartoftheteachersarelikelytocallthehigh-markstudentsorchoosethestudentswhoactivelyputuptheirhands.(2)Teachersoftensparestudentscertaintimeafterproposingaquestion,butthewaiting-timeisrelativelyshortwhichgenerallycontrolsin3seconds.Forthedifficultquestions,theteachermayleavethemalittlelongertime;inclassroomteaching,teachersoftenadoptthestrategyofrepeating,theyseldomusethestrategiesofprobing,redirecting,paraphrasingandotherstrategy.(3)Whenthestudentsanswerthequestioncorrectly,theteachertendtousesimplepositivefeedback;Whenstudentsanswerthequestionincorrectly,teachersinclinedtoiii immediatelycorrectstudents’errors,andannouncethecorrectanswer.Thechancesareveryfewthatthestudentsinitiativetoaskquestionsinclass.ThesuggestionsthatthisstudyhaveontheprimaryschoolEnglishteachers’classroomquestioningareasfollows:1)teachersshouldmakeclearthepurposeofquestioning.Aclearpurposeistheprerequisiteforthesuccessorfailureofclassroomquestioning.Questioningwithadefiniteobjectcanbetterachievethepurposeofteaching.2)Teachersshouldchangetheirteachingidea,genuinelyputthe“students-centered”teachingideaintopracticeandencouragethestudentstoputforwardquestionsactively.3)Teachersshouldimprovetheirownabilitiesofquestioningstrategies,andavoidusingasinglequestioningstrategy.Timelyandappropriatefeedbackcanenhancethestudents’learningmotivationandstimulatetheirdesiretoparticipateintheclassroominteraction.Teachersshouldgivemorepositivefeedback,morepraiseandmoreencouragementtostudents’answer.4)teachersshouldcontinuouslyimprovethequestioningbehaviorandtheteachingefficiency.inordertodeepenstudents’understandingandcausemoreoraloutput,theteachershouldfullydesignquestionsandmakefulluseofvariousquestiontypes.Graduate:Yangyan(MajorEnglishCurriculumandTeachingMethodology)Directedby:AssociateProf.LiXiaofangKeywords:Teacherquestioning;Questioningstrategies；Situations；Suggestionsiv ContentsChapter1Introduction........................................................................................11.1ResearchBackground............................................................................................11.2SignificanceoftheStudy………………………………………………………..31.3TheResearchPurposes…………………………………………………………..41.4InnovationsoftheStudy………………………………………………………....4Chapter2LiteratureReview..........................................................................................62.1TheMainConcepts................................................................................................62.1.1DefinitionofTeacherQuestioning.............................................................62.1.2TypesofQuestions...................................................................................102.1.3FunctionsofTeacherQuestioning............................................................112.1.4ThePrinciplesTakenonTeacherQuestioning..........................................132.2StudiesofTeacherQuestioningAbroad..............................................................152.3StudiesofTeacherQuestioningatHome............................................................19Chapter3TheoreticalFoundation...............................................................................233.1ComprehensibleInputHypothesis......................................................................233.2ComprehensibleOutputHypothesis....................................................................243.3InteractionTheory...............................................................................................26Chapter4Methodology...................................................................................................284.1ResearchQuestions.............................................................................................284.2Researchsubjects.................................................................................................284.3ResearchInstruments...........................................................................................284.3.1Questionnaire............................................................................................294.3.2Interview...................................................................................................294.4DataCollection....................................................................................................30Chapter5ResultsAnalysisandDiscussion.............................................................................325.1ThesituationofteacherquestioninginPrimaryEnglishclasses........................325.1.1Students’AttitudetowardTeacherQuestioning.......................................325.1.2TypesofTeacherQuestioning..................................................................325.1.3QuestioningObject...................................................................................335.1.4Waiting-time.............................................................................................375.1.5QuestioningStrategy................................................................................38v 5.1.6TeacherFeedback.....................................................................................415.2TheProblemsExistedasforTeacherQuestioninginPrimarySchoolEnglishClasses...............................................................................................................................44Chapter6Conclusion......................................................................................................476.1MajorFindings....................................................................................................476.2LimitationsoftheStudy......................................................................................516.3SuggestionsforFurtherResearch........................................................................516.4NecessityofFurtherResearch.............................................................................55References.........................................................................................................................56Acknowledgments............................................................................................................63Publications......................................................................................................................64vi ListofTablesintheThesisListofTablesintheThesisTable4-1ReliabilitystatisticsofquestionnaireTable5-1DescriptiveStatisticsofStudents’AttitudetowardteacherquestioningTable5-2DifferenceofGradesinStudents’AttitudetowardTeacherQuestioningTable5-3DescriptiveStatisticsoftheTypesofTeacherQuestioningTable5-4DifferenceofGradesinTypesofTeacherQuestioningTable5-5DescriptiveStatisticsofQuestioningObjectTable5-6DifferenceofGradesinQuestioningObjectTable5-7DescriptiveStatisticsofWaiting-timeTable5-8DifferenceofGradesinWaiting-timeTable5-9DescriptiveStatisticsofQuestioningStrategyTable5-10DifferenceofGradesinQuestioningStrategyTable5-11DescriptiveStatisticsofTeacherFeedbackTable5-12DifferenceofGradesinTeacherFeedbackvii AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolChapter1Introduction1.1BackgroundofthestudySincethe1970s,languageteachingmethodgraduallyevolvedfromtheaudio-visualmethodtocommunicationmethod.Asthecommunicativeapproachwidelyimplemented,theresearchersbegintopayattentiontothestudents’behaviorandtheteachers’behaviorthathappenedintherealclasses.Theinteractionisthemainactivitybetweenteachersandstudentsintheclassroom.TheInteractionisreflectedbyquestioningoftheteacherandansweringofthestudents.Thequestioningandansweringbetweenteachersandstudentsisaubiquitousphenomenon.Foreignlanguageclassroominteractionisnotonlytheteachingprocess,butalsotheopportunitiesforstudentstolearnandmasterthelanguage(YangXueyan,2003),ofwhichtheteachers’questioningnotonlyletthestudentsgetthelanguageinput,butalsodeterminethestudents’languageoutput.Teachers’questioningisoneoftheteachers’necessaryteachingskills.InEnglishlearning,listening,speaking,readingandwritingarethefourbasicskillsofEnglishlearning.Whentalkingabouttheirrelationship,(French,F.G.1996)thinkthatspeakingisthefoundation,theothercapabilitiesareallbasedonit.Jespersonsaidthatthefirstrequirementofteachingforeignlanguagewellistomakethestudentcontactandusetheforeignlanguage.Foreignlanguageteachersshouldcreateopportunitiesforstudentstopracticelisteningandspeaking.TheEnglishcurriculumstandard(revisededition)“formulatethatthestudentsshouldmasterthebasicEnglishlanguageknowledge,developtheirfourbasicskillsandinitiallyformtheabilitytocommunicatewithothersinEnglishthroughEnglishcourse,andfurtherpromotethedevelopmentofthinkingability.Researchshowsthat,thequestionaccountfor20%to40%ofteacher’sclassroomdiscourse(Mehan,1979;Barden,1995),therefore,teacherquestioningbecomethelearners’mainsourceofinput.While70%ofthestudentsoutputistriggeredbyteacherquestions(XiaXiaojuan,2004).Effectiveteacherquestioningcanguidethestudentstospeakoutandcanpromotestudents’secondlanguageacquisitionClassroomquestioningisthemainformofteacher-studentexchangeofinformation-1- Chapter1IntroductionandlanguagePractice.Richardsholdsthat“Questioningisoneofthemostfrequentlyusedteachingtechniques”(Richards’setal.2002:379).Italsoplaysanimportantpartineffectiveteaching.Tosomeextent,theartofclassroomteachingistheartofclassroomquestioning.Teacherquestioningwilldirectlyinfluencethequalityofclassroomteaching.SterlingG.Callahan,anAmericaneducationalexpert,thinksthatquestioningisthebasiccontrolmeansforteacherstopromotestudents’thinking,evaluatetheteachingeffectandsupervisesandurgesstudentstoachievethedesiredgoal.AccordingtoPostman(1979:140),“Allourknowledgecomesfromquestioning”.Chuska(1995)claimsthatteacherquestioningcanhelpstudentstoconnectcurrentlearningwithpreviousandevensubsequentlearning.Nottosaytheleastthatwecanhardlyfindalessonwithoutquestionsfrombeginningtoend.Accordingtothesurvey,questioningtakenup20%to40%intheactivitiesofEnglishclassroominteraction(WangDuqin,2002),whichplaysanimportantroleinthesuccessorfailureofEnglishteaching.Manyeducatorsandteachersencouragestudentstothinkfarmorecrucialthantoimpartinformation.Andtheultimatepurposeofeducationistoenablestudentstothinkcreativelyandresolvetheconfusionbythemselves”(FuLi,2008:81-82).TeacherquestioningplaysanimportantroleinEnglishclassroomteaching.Inanotherwords,questioningisthenecessarycomponentofclassroominteractionandbilateralcommunicationbetweenteachersandstudentsorstudentsandstudents.Andthecommunicationistheessenceofteachingandalsothemostimportantandbasicfactorofeffectiveteaching.Teachersplaymultiplerolesintheclassroomteachingandeffectiveclassroomquestioningcangivefullplaytoteachers’multipleroles.Classroomquestioninghasbeentheresearchfocusoflanguageteachingovertheyears.Underthenewcurriculum,anidealclassshouldbeastageofinteractionandspiritualdialoguebetweenteachersandstudents.Teacherquestioningisthemainformofteacher-studentexchangeofinformationandlanguageexercise.SoitisaveryimportantteachingmeaninEnglishclassroomteaching.InChina,English,asaforeignlanguage,ismainlyobtainedthroughtheclassroomteachinginprimaryschool.AndEnglishteachingisinseparablefromeffectiveclassroomquestioning.However,itshouldnotbeignoredthatseveralproblemsexistedinclassroomquestioninginChinaatthemoment.Allinall,agreatnumberofresearcheshavebeendoingresearchonteacherquestioning(Shomoossi,2004).However,mostofthesestudiesonteacherquestioninginChinaarecarriedoutincollege-levelEnglishclassroomsormathandChinese-2- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolclassroomsinprimaryschool.ItrarelyinvolvesteacherquestioningEnglishclassofprimaryschool.SoitisextremelynecessarytoconductresearchesonthisfiledanditisimportanttoprovideEnglishteacherswithsomeusefulsuggestionstooptimizethewayofquestioning.EffectiveEnglishteachingneedsappropriateclassroomquestioning.Andteachers’behaviorsinthisprocessinfluencethewholeteachingeffect.Therefore,adeepresearchontheteacherquestioningofEnglishclassroominprimaryschoolwillplayanimportantpartintheaspectsofimprovingstudents’thinkingability,encouragingmorestudentstotakepartintheclassroominteractionandstimulatethecommunicationandcooperationbetweenteachersandstudents,orstudentsandstudents.Asaresultofthis,improvingandenhancingEnglishteacherquestioningbehaviorinprimaryschoolsistheneedofEnglishteachers’professionaldevelopmentandtherequirementofnewcurriculumreform.1.2SignificanceofthestudyThepreviousresearchesprovideboththeoreticalandpracticalsignificance.Theoretically,sincethereislittleresearchrelatingaboutthesituationofEnglishclassroomteacherquestioningofprimaryschoolstudents,mostoftheresearchesareaboutcollegestudentsorjuniormiddleschoolstudents.Throughthestudyofteacherquestioningofprimaryschoolstudents,itcanofferaclearunderstandingofthecurrentsituationofprimaryschoolEnglishclassroomteacherquestioningandthestudents’attitudestowardteacherquestioning.Furthermore,bydiscussingthetheoriesaboutteacherquestioning,itcanprovideanewperspectivefortheenrichmentoftheoreticalresearchonteacherquestioning,whichmaylayfoundationoftheoreticalframeworkforthefuturestudies.Practically,EnglishislearnedasaforeignlanguageinourcountryandithasnorealLanguagecommunicationenvironment.AndEnglishasalanguage,itaimstobeappliedincommunication.ThedegreeoffluencyinspokenEnglishdeterminesthesuccessofcommunication.Themainplacethatthestudentsexpressthemselvesinourcountryistheclassroom.Hence,theteachersshouldusesometeachingskillstoencouragestudentstospeakinEnglishasmuchaspossibleinthelimitedteachingtimeandthemainmethodshouldbeteacherquestioning.Students’comprehensivelanguageabilitycanbeimprovedthroughtheinteractionbetweenteachersandstudentsbymeansofteacherquestioning.Ononehand,somequestioningstrategieshavebeenproposedby-3- Chapter1Introductionthescholars,butwhetherthestrategycanleadtoeffectiveteachinghasnotyetbeendetermined.Ontheotherhand,somefindingsmadebyforeignscholarsarebasedontheforeignsituation;itmaynotsuitablefortheteachingpracticeofourcountry.Weshouldtaketheforeignresearchasareferenceandstudytheteacherquestioningaccordingtoournationalconditions.Thispapertriestoenrichtheempiricalresearchonquestioning,andprovidesomepracticalwaystoimprovetheteacherquestioning.1.3TheResearchPurposesAsweallknown,questioningplaysaveryimportantroleinEnglishclassroomteaching,itishelpfulforteacherstofindwaystoimprovethefunctionofquestionsanditisalsoimportantforustoconductresearchonthisphenomenon.ThepurposeofthisthesisistogetaclearerpictureaboutthecurrentsituationofteacherquestioninginEnglishclassroomteachingofprimaryschoolandtoexplorethemainproblemsofteacherquestioning,andthenputforwardsomeeffectivesuggestionstoEnglishteachers.Atthesametime,itcanalsosupplementthefindingsofthepreviousresearchesinthisfieldofteacherquestioningandbebeneficialforstudents’learning.1.4InnovationsofthestudyTheinnovationsofthestudymainlyincludethefollowingaspects.Firstly,despitetheplentifulstudiesonclassroomquestioning,mostofthesubjectsofthestudiesarethemiddleschoolorthecollegestudents,andonlyafewstudiestakentheprimaryschoolstudentsastheresearchobjects.Therefore,basedonthepreviousstudiesofclassroomquestioning,thepresentstudyisconductedforthesakeofinvestigatingthegeneralsituationofprimaryschoolEnglishclassroomquestioningandtheproblemsexistedinit.Secondly,thepreviousstudiesthatconcernabouttherelatedfactorsthataffectclassroomquestioning,fewstudieshaveconcernedabouttherelationshipbetweenteacherquestioningandstudents’oralEnglish.Therefore,thepresentstudyintendstoconductanresearchonprimaryschoolEnglishclassroomquestioninginordertohavenewexperience.-4- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolChapter2LiteratureReview2.1TheMainConcepts2.1.1DefinitionofTeacherQuestioningQuestioningistocausethelearners’verbalstatementsorgesturesexpression.KathleenCottonhasthoughtthatintheclassroomenvironment,teacherquestioningreferstotheteachingtipsorstimulationthatsenttostudentsabouttheteachingcontents.Thequestioninginteachers’ideasisjustconsideredwhetherthesentencecontainsquestionmarkornot,ratherthanfromtheangleofcausingstudent’sreaction.FromthepointviewofCraig,aslongasitcanmakethestudentsthinkinghappenedandcausethestudent’sdiscussion,itcanbecalledquestioning.Thescholarthinksthatclassroomquestioningreferstoacommonlyusedteachingmethodthattheteacherappliedtoenlightenthestudents’thoughtandguidestudentstofulfilltherequirementsoftheteachinggoalaccordingtotheteachingcontentsandtheactualsituationofstudents.Andstillsomescholarshavemadeitclearthatthenatureofclassroomquestioningisakindof“dialogue”.Thequestioningisaprocessofcommunication.Thepurposeofcommunicationiscomprehension,therebytheprocessofcommunicationisdisplayedbythequestionsanditcanpromotethestudents’understanding.Inthisstudy,theresearcherdefinethe“teacherquestioning”asakindofteachingbehavior:intheclassroomteaching,theteachersetupaseriesofproblemscontextsandhopetogetthestudents’feedbackaccordingtotheneedsofstudentsandteachinggoals.Thisstudythinksthatintheprocessofteaching,accordingtotheneedsofteachingobjectivesandtheneedsofstudents,questioningisateachingmeansthatsetaseriesofquestionsinordertogetresponsefromthestudents,therebyimprovingthequalityofteaching.Accordingtotheresearch,wecanconcludethat,firstofall,questioningisanindispensablelanguageformandimportantlinkintheclassroomteachingactivities.Secondly,questioningstrategieshaveextremelystrongmaneuverabilityintheclassroomteaching.Duringtheprocessofclassroomoperation,eachteacherhashisorherdesign.-5- Chapter2LiteratureReviewDifferentdesignscanreflectdifferenteducationalconceptsandteachinglevel.Finally,questioningisateachingmeansormethodtoguidestudentstolearnknowledgeandcultivateabilities.Effectiveteachingisakindofteachingthattheteachersfollowtheobjectivelawsofteachingactivitiestoachievetheteachingeffectasmuchaspossible,withthelesstimeinvestmentandlessmaterialinputs.Effectiveteachingmeansthattheteachermakesthestudentsgetthecomprehensivedevelopmentincertaintimethroughteachingactivity.Effectiveteachingisinseparablefromtheeffectivequestioning.Thenewcurriculumrequiresthattheteachinggoalshouldletthestudentsreceiveactualeffectasmuchaspossiblewithtimeinvestmentandenergyconsumptionaslittleaspossible,andrealizethehighqualityandefficientofclassroomteaching(LuJianzhong,2003).Inrecentyears,withtheemergenceanddevelopmentofeffectiveteaching,theeffectiveclassroomquestioninggetsalotofattentionfromthepublic.Inthevividandactiveteachingenvironment,moreandmoreclasstimeisusedtoaskquestions.Therearesomanyquestionsinclassthatforceustodoubttheeffectivenessofquestioning.Nowadays,moreandmorescholarsbegintodotheresearchoneffectivequestioning.LuZiwenandWangDuqinstateinANewTheoryofEnglishTeachingthateffectivequestioningcanenablestudentstomakearelevantandcompleteresponse,andatthesametime,tostimulatetheirparticipationconsciousness.Meanwhile,itcanstimulatestudents’thinking,encouragetheirparticipation,developtheircogitation,organizetheclassroomteachingeffectivelyandimprovetheimplementationofteachingobjectives.Theyalsofigurethatthepurposeofquestioningistoencouragestudentstoparticipateinandachievetheteachinggoals.Ifthequestionisnotconducivetotheexpectedgoals,itcannotbecalledeffectivequestioning.Theefficiencyofquestioningreliesnotonlyonthewords,butalsoontheeffectsofsound,thestress,thechoiceofthewordandthecontextofquestions.XiaoChengquanwritesinhisEffectiveTeachingthateffectivequestioningmeansthequestionsposedbyteacherscanarousethestudents’responseoranswers,andenablestudentstoparticipateinthelearningprocessactively.Questionscanbeproposedinmanywaysandeachwaydetermineswhetherornotyourstudentsacceptthisquestionandhowtoacceptit(GaryDBorich,2000).WangFanglin(2002)pointsoutthattheeffectiveclassroomquestioningshouldpossesstheskillsasfollows:itshouldpresentfewerandbetterquestions,whichhaveprofundityandbreadth;itshouldusethewaitingtime,selectthestudentsandgiveuseful-6- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolfeedbackfromtheteachers.Itaimstodemonstratetheeffectiveclassroomquestioningistheeffectiveteaching.Itcannotonlyleadthestudentstospeakoutsome”clearandvivid”pointsofview,butalsocanactivatethestudents’imagination,arousethestudents’thinkingandencouragethestudents’action.Throughthisway,eachstudentcanexperiencethefeelingofsuccess,andthentheclasswillbecomeaplaceforstudentstotaketheinitiative,displaytheirtalentandwalkuptosuccessfullearningroad.LiZhihou(2004)dividestheclassroomquestioningintoeffectivequestions,low-efficiencyquestionsandinefficientquestions,buthedoesnotgiveallofthemaspecificdefinition.Hebelievesthatinefficientquestionsmainlyincludefourtypes:(1)thequestionswithirrelevantanswers,namelysillyquestions.Thiskindofquestionreflectsinthefollowingfouraspects.First,thequestiondoesn’tconcerntheideasofstudents;second,thequestionisnotsensitivetotheexpressedfeelingsorthoughtsofstudents;third,thequestionisnotrelatedtostudentsordoesnotrespectstudents;fourth,thequestionunderestimatesthecognitivelevelofstudents.(2)Toocomplicatedquestions.Thiskindofquestiontranscendstheirunderstandingabilityandknowledgelevel,orthescopeistoolargeandthefactoristoocomplex.(3)Thequestionsansweredbyteachers’own.Theemergenceofthiskindofquestionsisbecausetheteachers’habitsinclass.Thestudentsguessthattheteacherwillanswerithimself.(4)Theembarrassingquestions.Inefficientquestionsmainlyrefertothetrivial,vague,abstractandendlessquestions,etc.Whileeffectivequestionsmainlyincludethreetypes.First,thequestionswhichcontainsomethoughtandphilosophy,andcanmakestudentsdomoredeep-levelthink.Second,thequestionscanproducegoodeffects.Third,thequestionscanorganizestudentstocarryoutdiscussioneffectively.Thedomesticresearchesonclassroomquestioningputmoreemphasisonthequestioningskills.Itseemsthatgoodquestioningskillswillproducegoodquestions.Infact,everykindofteachingbehaviorneedspayingattentiontoskills,althoughitcannotsolvealltheproblemsinclassroomquestioning.Questioningstrategyisjustapartofquestioningbehavior.Iftheteachersonlyemphasizetheskills,theywillhaveanexactlyoppositeeffectandcannotreachtheexpectedpurposeofquestioning.Therefore,weshouldstudytheteacherquestioningbehaviorfromamorecomprehensiveandopenangle.Questionsaredesignedtomakestudentsparticipateinactivities,whicharerelatedtotheexpectedlanguagematerials.Theeffectivequestioningshouldbeabletostimulate-7- Chapter2LiteratureReviewstudentstogivetherelatedorcompleteanswer,andatthesametimeinspirethestudents’senseofparticipation(Ur,1996).Onthecontrary,ifthequestioningmakesthestudentskeepsilentforalongtime,orthestudentscanonlyapplyasimpleorinappropriateanswer,thensuchkindofquestionwouldbemeaningless.Fordifferenttypesofclassanddifferentstagesofclassroomteaching,thepurposeandtheroleofquestioningwillalsobedifferent.Theeffectivequestioningcanachievetheexpectedquestioningpurposebyusingthequestioningstrategiesandarousestudents’learningactivitiesandthinkingactivities.Francine·F·Peterman(1996)foundthateffectivequestionsshouldhavethefollowingfeatures.Effectivequestionsaregenerallyopenquestions,Divergentquestionsandreferentialquestions,anditrequiresthestudentstogivetheanswerbyusingitsthinkingmechanism.Effectivequestionscanhelpstudentstodeveloptheircognitiveandthinkingabilitythroughencouragingthestudentstomaketheirownanswer.Effectivequestionsshouldbespecificandclear,andofferunambiguouspatternfortheanswering.Effectivequestionscaninitiatevigorousclassroomdialogue.Effectivequestionscantakeaccountthestudents’mindorcomprehension,andcangivestudentsasafeatmosphereusethelanguage,andmakethestudentsspeakoutfreelybyusingthestudents’languageEffectivequestionscanprovidestudentswiththeopportunitytodeepentheirunderstandingoftheteachingmaterialthroughorganizingthestudentstomakeinference,summarizationandexplanation.Effectivequestionsrequirethestudentstomaketheconnectionbetweenthedifferentkindsofconcepts.Foreffectivequestioning,pennyUr(1996:230)putforwardsixcriteria:(Clarity):thequestionmustbeabletomakestudentsgraspthekeyandimmediatelyfigureoutwhatistheexpectedanswer;(Valueoflearning):thequestioncanstimulatestudents’thinking,andtheansweringofthisquestionwillbehelpfulforthefurtherprocessingoflearningmaterial.Thequestionneedstoberelatedtothematerial,andhelpfulforthestudents’learning.Itshouldnotjusttofillthetime;Thequestioncaninvitestudents’interestanditmustbeinteresting,challenging,atthesametimemakethestudentsexcited;Stimulateparticipation:questionsshouldmakethemostofthestudentsbeabletoparticipateintheactivity,insteadofafewstudents,whoareconfident,outstandingandwithrelativelywiderangeofknowledge;Hasextendedfunction:thequestionneedstomotivatestudentstogivethedeep-levelthinkinganswer,makethestudentsgiveplaytotheirimaginationandenrichthevariabilityoftheanswer;Appropriateteacher-8- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolfeedback,feedbackcangivestudentsasenseofsecurity,getthestudentsbelievethatevenifhisorheranswerisnottotallyright,heorshewouldnotbehumiliatedandlaughedatbytheteacher,butcanwintherespectoftheteacher.Wilen(1987:11)offersteachers’effectivequestioningninesuggestions,specificasfollows:1.Theeffectivequestioningcanpromptthetextstructureandguidethekeyissue.2.Thewordingofthequestionmustbeclearandexplicit.3.Thequestionsmustconformtothestudent’scapability.4.Theteachershouldproposethequestioncontinuallyandlogically.5.Thedesignedquestionshouldbeofhorizontaldifferentiation.6.Thequestionsneedtoemphasizethestudents’feedback.7.Theteachershouldspareenoughthinkingtimetostudentsafterposingthequestion.8.Theteachershouldchoosethequestions,whichcanstimulatemorestudents’participation.9.TheteachershouldencouragestudentstoaskquestionsTherearemanyfactorsaffectingtheeffectivenessofclassroomquestioning,itincludesnotonlythefactorsonthestudents’side,butalsothefactorsontheteachers’side.Intermsofstudents,itcontainsthestudents’knowledgelevelandstudents’emotionalfactors.Intermsofteachers,itcomesdowntothewaitingtimeaftertheteacherproposingthequestionandeventheteachers’moodandemotionalattitude.Exceptthetwofactors,thedifficultyofthequestionssetshouldbetakenaccountintoit.2.1.2TypesofQuestionsInordertoconductagoodresearchonteacherquestioning,itisverynecessarytomakeaclearandcomprehensiveclassificationofclassroomquestioning.Scholarshavedevelopedandanalyzedmanyadvancedtaxonomiestodescribedifferentcategoriesofteacherquestioning.Thispartmainlytalksaboutthepreviousstudiesonthetypesofquestions.Basedondifferentcriteria,therearevariouswaysofclassification.Asforthis,expertsabroadandinChinahavedifferentopinions.DomesticexpertsaremainlyrepresentedbyWangDuqin:(1)Accordingtotheformsofquestions,itincludes:Yes/NoQuestions,AlternativeQuestionsandWhat/How/WhyQuestions;(2)Accordingtothecontentofquestions,itcontainsInformationQuestions,ComprehensionQuestion,ApplicationQuestions,AnalysisQuestionsandEvaluationQuestions;(3)Accordingtotheretractilityofanswers,itincludes:Close-questionsandOpen-questions;(4)Accordingtothecontentandmaterials,itcontains:ExplicitQuestions,ImplicitQuestionsand-9- Chapter2LiteratureReviewQuestionsbeyondthetext(5)Accordingtothedifficultydegreeofthequestions,itcontains:ShallowLevelQuestionsandDeepLevelQuestions(WangDuqin,2002)AnAmericaneducator,Bloom,dividetheteacherquestioningintothefollowingsixtypesaccordingtotheeducationalobjectivetheoryincognitivedomain.(1)Questionsincognitivelevel--askstudentstosaytheconceptandprincipleofknowledge;(2)Questionsinunderstandinglevel--requirestudentstounderstandandcontrasttheknowledge;(3)Questionsinappliedlevel--requirestudentstojudgeorcommunicatebyapplyingtheirknowledge;(4)Questionsinanalyticlevel--requirestudentstoclarifytherelationshipsbetweenmattersorthecauseandeffectofthingsthroughanalysis,andthengettheconclusion;(5)Questionsincomprehensivelevel--thiskindofquestionscanhelpstudentsapplylearnedknowledgeinneworcreativeways,andthenformanewknowledgesystem;(6)Questionsinevaluativelevel--thiskindofquestionshelpstudentsmakeajudgmentaccordingtocertainstandards.QuestionsaredividedintothreetypesbyLongmanDictionaryofLanguageTeachingandAppliedLinguistics:(1)DisplayQuestions--forlanguagepractice;(2)Evaluationquestions--requireteacherstogiveanevaluation;(3)Referentialquestions--teachersdon’tknowtheanswers.(Richards,2006)ThisresearchaimstoconductthedetailedstudyontheteacherquestioningofEnglishclassroominprimaryschool.TheauthorthinksthatLongandSatoclassificationistoogeneral,itdoesnotsuitableforthequestiontypeanalysisofthisresearch.Therefore,theauthorwilladopttheBarnes(1976),heputthequestionsintofourcategories:thefirstoneisthefactualquestion,namelythequestionwith“what”;thesecondoneisthereferentialquestion,namelythequestionwith“how”or“why”;thethirdoneistheopen-question,thiskindofquestionneedsnoreasoning;thefourthoneisthecommunicativequestions,suchquestionscanaffectorcontrolthelearners’behavior.Heputthequestionsintofourcategories:Inthispaper,theauthoradoptsthemostcommonclassificationusedatpresent,namely,thedisplayquestionsandreferentialquestions.2.1.3FunctionsofTeacherQuestioningClassroomquestioningisthekeylinkthatorganizingclassroomteachingandthemainforminimpartingknowledge,trainingskillsandconductingbilateralactivitiesin-10- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolclassroom.Itaccountsfor20%-40%ofclassroominteraction.Aprofoundunderstandingoftheroleofteacherquestioningisveryimportantforapplyingclassroomquestioningcorrectly.Generallyspeaking,teacherquestioningcanplayaimportantpartinevaluatingteaching,stimulatingstudents’interestoflearningandattractingstudents’attention.Appropriatequestionshaveanumberofdifferentfunctions.Teacherquestioningoffersopportunitiesforstudentstofindoutwhattheythinkbyhearinglanguageinformation.Teacherquestioningisveryhelpfultoinitiateachainreactionofstudents.Byproposingaquestion,ateachercancheckthestudents’linguisticorcontentweaknessafterthestudents’response.Lastbutnotleast,teacherquestioningcanprovidestudentswithchancestoproducetheoutput.Intheclassroomteaching,teacherquestioningisanimportantmeansofcommunicationandinteraction.XuGuanghousummarizesfivepurposesandfunctionsofquestioninginclassroomteachingskills.First,itcancheckthelearnedknowledgeandskills,playingaroleofreviewingwhatyouhavelearnedandlearninganew.Second,itcanbroadenthestudents’thoughts,inspiretheirthinkingabilityanddeveloptheirintelligenceandcompetence.Psychologicalresearchshowsthatquestioningistheimportantfeatureofthinking.Thinkingactivityiscenteredaroundthequestionstocarryontheoperation.Thedevelopmentlevelofthinkingreliesontheoperationlevelofthinking.Third,itcancreateanactiveclassroomatmosphere,enhancetheteacher-studentemotions,andpromotetheharmoniousdevelopmentofclassroomteaching.Fourth,itcangiveafullplayoftheteachers’leadingandthestudents’dominantrole.Fifth,itcangetfeedback,changeteachingmethodstimely,adjusttheteachingprocessandimprovethequalityofteaching.Nunan(1989)pointsoutthatintheprocessofforeignlanguageandsecondlanguageacquisition,teacherquestioningisofgreatimportanceforboththeorganizationofclassroomteachingandlanguagelearning.Theteachingcontentcanachievetheidealteachingeffectonlythroughtheteachers’discourseperfectorganizationandimpartation,andteacherquestioningcanalsoplaytheexemplaryroleofusingtargetlanguagebyitself.Itisalsoanimportantwayoflanguageinput.LiuXianguo(2000)likenstheclassroomquestioningtoakindofteachingart.Hesumsupthefunctionsofquestioninginthefollowingeightaspects:(1)Itcaninspirethestudents’interest.(2)Itcanimprovethedevelopmentofstudents’thinking.(3)Itcanadjusttheteachingprocess.(4)Itcan-11- Chapter2LiteratureReviewgiverisetounconsciousattention.(5)Itcanguidethedirectionofteachingideas.(6)Itcanplayadominantrole.(7)Itisconducivetotheformationofmentalskill.(8)Itcanmakeactiveclassroomatmosphere.Teachersshouldcreateagoodatmospherebeforequestioning,sotheyshouldposesuchquestionswithsmile,suchassituationalquestions,generalquestions,visualquestions,interest-initiatingquestions,reward-questionsandprogressivequestions.Teachersshouldgrasptheopportunityofquestioningcorrectly.Afterposingaquestion,theyshouldgivethefeedbacktimely,andstrengthenthepositivereinforcementoftheevaluation.GrayDBorich(2002)putforwardsixpurposesofquestioninginEffectiveTeachingMethods.First,itcaninspirestudents’interestandattention.Second,itcanfindoutandchecktheexistedproblems.Third,itcanhelpstudentsrecallthespecificknowledgeandinformation.Fourth,itcanencouragestudents’classroommanagement.Fifth,itcanencouragestudents’deeperlevelthinkingactivity.Sixth,itcanorganizeandguidestudents’learning.Inviewofthis,classroomquestioningisnotonlyakindofteachingmethod,butalsoateachingart.Questioningisakindofthinkingorientationandclassroomquestioningisacatalystofcommunicativeactivities.Effectiveclassroomquestioningcanbringstudentstoawonderfulworld,whichenablesthemtothinkactivelyandracktheirbrainstosolvetheproblem.Thisprocesscantrainthestudents’analyzingcompetence.ThiswilleffectivelyimprovetheefficiencyofEnglishclassroomteaching.2.1.4ThePrinciplesTakenonTeacherQuestioningAsweallknown,teacherquestioningisveryimportantforEnglishclassroomteaching.Whilethestudentssometimesanswerquestionswithlittleconfidenceandhavetheafeardmentality.Atthesametime,thestudentspaymoreattentiontothetime,waysandinterestofquestioning.Theyarealsoverycareabouttheteachers’guidancetotheiranswers.Sotheprinciplesofteacherquestioningshouldbeemphasized,suchasthefollowingprinciples.Asfortheprincipleoffairness,itmeansthatteacherquestioningshouldfaceallthestudentsandmakeeverystudenthastheopportunitytobequestionedorparticipateintheclassroomquestioning.Itisveryimportantforstudentstoobeytheprincipleoffairness,becausetheprocessofansweringquestionsishelpfulforstudents’comprehensive-12- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchooldevelopment.Firstly,itishelpfulfortheimprovementofpresentationskillexpressingability.Secondly,itiscontributetothetrainingofpsychologicalresistance.Eachpersonmayfeelmoreorlessnervouswhenheorshespeaksinfrontofpeople.ItcanmakestudentsgetexerciseofthetoleranceofanxiousnessthroughclassroomquestioningThirdly,itisconductivetothecultivationofself-confidence.Theprincipleoffairnessisalsoveryimportantforteachers.Oneoftheimportantfunctionsofclassroomquestioningistoprovidestudentswithfeedback.Throughclassroomquestioning,teacherscanknowaboutthestudents’comprehensionlevelofthelearnedknowledge,checkthestudents’weaknessoftheknowledgechainandthenanalyzetheexistedproblemsinteacherquestioning.Thus,teacherscanadjustthesubsequentteachingarrangementaccordingtoteacherfeedback.Asfortheprincipleoflevels,itreferstothatthedifficultyofquestions.whichshouldbeprogressive.Questionsshouldbedesignedfromsimpletocomplex,fromtheshallowonetothedeepone,andfromtheconcretetotheabstract,thusthequestionscanguidethestudentstothecorrectanswergradually.Teachersshouldnotkeepthequestionsinalevelandavoidtherandomlyquestioning.Atthesametime,thedifficultyofquestionsshouldcloselyconformtotheexistinglevelofstudents.Theteacherdotheirbesttofindoutthe“zoneofproximatedevelopment”ofthestudents,whichmakesthequestionsnotexcessivelybeyondtheactuallevelofstudents,butstillhavesomechallenge.Thestudentscantouchitwhentheyhaveajump.Toosimplequestionscannotinvitestudents’interestofthinkingandanswering;toodifficultquestionswillmakestudents’havenocouragetohaveatry,whichhaveinfluenceontheclassroomatmosphereandteachingprocess.Thereby,onlyfollowinglongthestudents’existinglevel,theembeddedandprogressivequestionsareeffective.Asforthebilateralprinciple,ifteacherswouldliketoauthenticallyachievethedominantpositionofstudents,theyshouldchangetheirhabitualteaching.Therefore,theteachershouldcarefullydesignthequestion,encouragestudentstoaskquestionsontheirownandtrytosolvetheproblembythemselves.Studentsalsocanaskteachersandclassmatesforhelpwhentheymeetdifficulties.Teacherscanadoptthemethodofroletransformation,letthestudentsactasateacher.Bydoingthis,itcancreateanewclassroomatmosphereandprovideopportunitiesforstudentstoachievehigher-levelabilityofthinking.Asfortheprincipleofinterest,fromtheeducationalpsychologypointofview,when-13- Chapter2LiteratureReviewthestudentsareinterestedinteachingcontent,theycanconcentrateonlearningandgetabetterperception,memory,thinkingandrichimaginationoflanguagematerial.Andthenobtainmoreknowledgeandskills.Thusteachersshouldtrytheirbesttomakeuseofquestionstoinspirestudents’interest,createvigorousclassroomatmosphereandmakeeverystudents’brainexcited.Atthesametime,teachersalsoshouldfocusonthestudents’senseofachievementinansweringquestions.Infact,students’smallprogressalsoneedstobeaffirmedandencouraged,whichcanfurtherfacilitatestudents’learninginterest.2.2StudiesofTeacherQuestioningAbroadAfamouseducationistintimeofancientGreece,Socrates(BC469-399BC)believesthatitisanadvancedteachingarttoinspirestudents’thinkingintheteachingbyusingthemethodofconversationandquestioning.TheMaieuticsofSocratesclaimstousetheconversationtoleadstudentstoacquireknowledge.Henevertellstheconclusiontostudentsdirectly,buttoguidestudentscometotheirownconclusionsthroughthecomparisonofindividualfacts,whichstillhaveimportantsignificanceincurrentsituations.In1912,theStevensinUnitedStateshavemadeasystematicresearchonteacherquestioning.Shehasfoundthat“thenumberofteacherquestioningintheclassroomisamazing-395timesperday”(Dantonio2006:29).Amongthesequestions,thelowcognitivelevelquestionsaccountsformostoftheproposedquestions.In1992,Stevenshasfoundthatthelowlevelquestionsthatneedstudents’recalloffactsaccountsfor66%oftheteacherquestioning.Fiftyyearslater,Floyd’sstudyshowsthat75%ofthequestionsposedbytheteacheristhelowlevelquestions,whichrequiresstudentstorecallthespecificfacts;In1970,Flanders’studyshowsthattwo-thirdsoftheteachers’questionsputparticularstressonthefactandthememory.ThemostrepresentativefigureinforeignstudyofclassroomquestioningisthepsychologistCraig.Hehasmadethecomprehensivestudyfromthefollowingaspects:thedefinitionofquestioning,thetypeofquestioning,thepurposeofthequestioningandthefrequencyofquestioning.Inordertounderstandtheconceptofquestioningonteachers’side,Craighasinvited36teachersoffiveschoolsandhasmadeaseriesof-14- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolinvestigationonthem,whichaskedthe36teacherstoanswertwoquestions:First,whatkindofquestioningformcanbecalledquestionsinyourmind?Second,canyougiveadefinitionofquestioning?Throughtheinvestigation,Craigthinksthattheconceptofthequestioningdefinedbyteachersisonlydependsonwhetherthesentencecontains“questions”ornot,ratherthanfromtheangleofcausingstudents’reactions.InCraig’sview,aslongasthequestioncancausestudents’interests,responsesanddiscussion,itcanberegardedasaquestion.Thereexistsgreatdifferenceinteachers’opinionsonthedefinitionofquestioning.Tosumup,therearethreekindsofview.Thefirstoneisthatitisnotnecessarytogiveadefinition;Thesecondoneisthecommandandthequestionisdifferent,anychangeformsofnarrativesentencecannotbecalledquestionsaslongasithasthenatureofcommand;Thethirdoneisthatanynarrativesentencecanbecalledquestions,whichistryingtoelicittheverbalresponses.Craigthinksthatthethirdpointofviewismorepersuasive(quotedinwangxuemei,2006:3).TheArtofClassroomQuestioning(Dantonio,2006)ThisbookintroducesDantonio’sandPaul’steacherquestioningbehavior,whichlastedfor24years.Theywanttoknowhowtheteacherachievestheeffectivequestioning.Atthesametime,theykeeptryingthepracticeofvariouseffectivequestioningtodeterminetheeffectsthatteacher’sbehaviorhaveonstudents’thinkingandunderstanding.Throughtheresearch,theyputforwardQu:Estteachingstrategythatistoposeaquestionforthepurposeofunderstanding:letthestudentssethiswitstowork(theEnglishexpressionofQuEstisshortedforQuestioningunderstanding;Empoweringstudentthinking)”(Dantonio,2006:53).Thiskindofquestioningstrategyhastwopurposes:theoneistohelpstudentsdescribetheaccuratepsychologicalschema,whichcanbeinternalizedandcanestablishassociationwithothertypesoflearning;theotheristourgethestudentstodevelopandimprovetheirviews.Theauthorsharesthequestionsoftheirownandotherteachers’teachingexperienceinthebook,andalsogivesusadetailedprocessoftheirwaysofusingeffectivequestioningintheteaching.Inaddition,asfortheclassificationofclassroomquestioning,mostoftheresearchersadoptBloom’scognitivetargetclassification,andthelevelofthequestioningcanbedividedintomemorization,comprehension,application,analysis,synthesisandevaluation.Althoughthiskindofclassificationcanclearlyidentifythetypesofquestioning,itoftentrulyplaysitsroleafterclassanditisnothelpfulfortheimprovementoftheteachers’classroomteachingbehavior.Asweallknown,thedaily-15- Chapter2LiteratureReviewteachingisone-off,itisimpossibletoreplicatealessonfromthebeginning,sothiskindofclassificationishelpfultotheteachingresearch.Theeffectofthisclassificationislittleinthechangeofteachers’behaviorsinrealclassroomteaching,ifwechangeanangletothink,thiskindofclassificationstillhavesomebenefitstoteachers’teaching,whichcanhelptheteacherchangethequestionsfromBloom’sclassificationofonecategorytoanothercategory.Asfortypesofquestions,theteacherquestioninghasgraduallyevolvedintoanindependentfieldofstudysincethe1980s,moreandmoreresearchersstarttoexploreteacherquestioningfromallkindsofangles.Fortheresearchontheclassificationofquestions,themostrepresentativeresearchisBarnes(1976)classification:heputsthequestionintofourcategories:Thefirstcategoryisfactualquestions,thatis,thequestionwith“what”;Thesecondcategoryisinferentialquestionswith“how”or“why”;Thethirdcategoryisopen-questions,itdoesnotneedanyreasoning;Thefourthcategoryiscommunicativequestions,itcaninfluenceorcontrolthelearner’sbehavior.Inaddition,Barneshasmadeafurtherclassificationofinferentialquestions:Questionswithonlyonecertainanswerisknownasclosed-questions;Questionswithseveralanswersarecalledopen-questions;Thequestionsseeminglyhaveavarietyofanswers,butonlyhaveonecorrectansweriscalledpseudo-questions.LongandSato(1983)dividequestionsintoreferentialquestionsanddisplayquestions.Referentialquestionsreferstothequestionsthattheteacherdon’tknowtheanswer,itisakindofclosedquestions;Displayquestionsreferstothequestionsthattheteacheralreadyknowtheanswer,itisakindofopen-questions.Thesetwotypesofquestionsarewidelyused,especiallyinourcountry(Brock,1986;Chaudron,1988)Asforquestioningstrategies,BrownandEdmond’saretheearliestonetocarryontheempiricalresearchonquestioningstrategy;theysummarizeseveralquestioningstrategiesthroughquestionnaire:askthestudentsonebyone;importantquestionsrequirestudentstoanswerinwrittenform;Studentsareencouragedtoaskeachotherandsoon.AmericanscholarMarylouDantonio&PaulC.Beisenherz(2006)putforwardthe“understandingQuestionsstrategy”,whichincludes:collectionstrategy(observationandrecall),bypassstrategy(compare,contrastandgrouping),anchorstrategy(labelandclassification).Inrecentyears,theresearchersstillconducttheresearchonquestioningstrategiesdeeply.Fusco(2012)putforwardsomeeffectivequestioningstrategiesindesigningquestions,askingquestionsandevaluatingstudents’response.Healso-16- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolproposestheexpandingquestiontypeonthebasisofstudents’answering.Olsher(2012)hasfoundthatthedifferentuseofquestioningstrategiesthroughthecomparisonofnoviceteachersandmasterteachers.Asforteachers’waitingtime,Tobin(1987)hasfoundthatthequestionnumberthatstudentansweredwillalsoincreasesomewhat,withtheincreaseofteachers’waitingtime.Thenstudentsaremorewillingtoanswerquestions,andthelengthoftheanswerwillincreaseaccordingly.Feldman(2003)pointsoutthatteachersshouldwaitformorethan3secondsafterproposingthequestions,sothatthestudentshavemoretimetoorganizelanguageandthelengthoftheanswerwillincrease.Ur(2000)emphasizethatifthewaitingtimeprolongseveralseconds,itcangetmorestudentstothinkabouttheteacher’squestions.Youngh.Choetal.(2012)suggeststhatteachersshouldwaitfor10to15secondsafterproposingthequestionthroughtheresearch.Onestudyhasfoundthatthelengthofwaitingtimeincreasedto3secondscanincreasethelengthofstudents’answering,andalsoincreasethelevelofteacherquestioning.Therefore,inordertomakethestudentsgivemoreaccurateanddeeper-levelexpressions,itisverynecessarytogivestudentsenoughwaitingtimeisverynecessary,anditisveryimportantforimprovingtheclassroominteraction.Asforteachers’feedback,teacherfeedbackisakindofinformationthatmeansthestudentshavecompletedacertaintaskanditaimstoimprovethestudents’learning(Ur,1998).Feedbackcanbedividedintodifferenttypes.Someresearchershavedividedfeedbackintodirectfeedbackandindirectfeedback.Mostoftheresearchersdividefeedbackintopositivefeedbackandnegativefeedback(Chaudron,1993;Nunan,1991).Positivefeedbackreferstothepositiveaffirmation,praiseandencouragementthattheteachergavewhenthestudentsgivetherightoutput,whichincludessimplepositivefeedback(suchas“Goodjob”“VeryGood”andsoon),andwithadditionalinputfeedback(provideadditionalinformationbasedonthestudents’correctanswer)andtriggerfurtheroutputfeedback(furtherposetherelatedquestionsbasedonthestudents’correctanswer).Whilethenegativefeedbackmainlyreferstoallkindsofreactionsthattheteacherhaveonstudents’mistakes,whichincludesexplicitfeedback(directcorrection,plainlanguageexplanation)andimplicitfeedback(repetition,clarificationrequest,induction,recastingtype)Brown(2001)pointsoutthatifthemistakeisnotrectified,thestudentswillinternalizeit,sothecorrectivefeedbackisverynecessary.Atthesametime,Brownpointsoutthatthenumberoferrorcorrectioncannottoomuch;-17- Chapter2LiteratureReviewotherwiseitwillhittheenthusiasmofthestudents.RenateA.Schulz(2001)alsothinksthatteachersshouldcarryonthecorrectivefeedbackasmuchaspossible,butshouldputthestudents’emotionalfactorsintoconsideration.Truscott(1999)arguesthaterrorcorrectionmaybringavarietyofnegativeeffectstostudents.Gattegnoarguesthatteacherscanguidestudentstocorrectmistakesbythemselves,ratherthandirectlycorrectedbytheteacherwhentheerrorcomesout.2.3StudiesofTeacherQuestioningatHomeChineseancientteachingartismorelikelytobeconcernedwiththeunderstandingofteachingmethodsandskills;itcangiveapersonausefulhint.QuestioningresearchinChinacanbetracedbacktotheperiodofeducatorConfuciusintheSpringandAutumnPeriodandWarringStates.Heproposed:“notangrynotrev,notunabletoexpressorexplainoneselfnothair”(comefrom“theanalectsofConfucius·abovethe”),whichmeansthatifthestudenthasnoexperienceandthinking,hewantstosaysomething,butcannotsayanything,theteacherwon’ttoenlightenhim;Ifthestudenthasnotrackhisbrains,theteacherwouldnottoinspirehim.LiuXianguo(2000)theclassroomquestioningartregardtheclassroomquestioningasakindofteachingart,whichmainlydescribetheclassroomquestioningartofelementaryschoolChineseandmathcourse.Hehassummedupthefunctionofquestioningasthefollowingeightaspects:(1)stimulatestudents’interest;(2)promotethedevelopmentofstudents’thinking;(3)regulationoftheteachingprocess;(4)arousethestudents’unconsciousattention;(5)guidethestudentsthinkingorientation;(6)playaleadingrole;(7)conducivetotheformationofmentalskills;(8)activeclassroomatmosphere.LiuXianguowrites:classroomquestioningshouldbe“WuYouXian”,questioningbeforeappointing;thinkingbeforeanswering;discussionbeforeconclusion;Studentsfirstthentheteacher;inspirationbeforethecorrection.Theteachershouldcreateagoodatmospherebeforequestioning:askingquestionswithsmile,suchassituationalquestions,generalquestions,andavoidtheboringquestionsandprogressivequestions.Teachersshouldgraspthegoodtime“whentoaskeandaskwhom”.Afterquestioning,theteachershouldtimelyprovidethefeedbackandstrengthentheeffectofpositiveevaluation.Theseviewsprovidemypaperalotofusefulreferenceandtrainof-18- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolthought.Allthesestatementnotonlypointsoutthenatureofthequestions,butalsodescribestheformandwayofimplementofaskingquestions.Chenyao(2002)theGuidanceofClassroomObservationfocusesonthevariousmethodsofclassroomresearch.Toputitsimply,classroomobservationmeansthattheresearchersorobserversrelyontheirownsensessuchas(eyes,ears,etc.)andrelatedauxiliarytools(watchlist,setupsoundrecordingorvideorecording,etc.),directlyorindirectly(mainlydirectly)fromtheclassroomsituationincollectingdata,andaccordinglyconducttheresearchonthebasisofthegraspedmaterials,whowithaclearpurpose.Sheputstheclassroomobservationintothreebasicsteps.Firstly,determiningtheobservationpurposeandplanning,thetime,theplaceandthenumber,etc.;secondly,determiningthecenterorthefocusoftheobservation,inotherword,torecordthecoreeventsandbehavior;thirdly,designingorselectingtherecordswaysandthetoolsofobservation.Codingsystemareintroducedintothisbook,itconductstheresearchontheinteractionbetweenteachersandstudents.Codingsystemdividetheclassroomspeecheventintovarioustypes,eachtypehasacode,namelyanumberwhichstandsforacertainbehavior.(Chenyao,2002:45).Chenyaoalsoreferstosomethingabouttheeffectivenessofclassroomquestioninginhisbook.Questioningisthemostfrequentwayofinteractionbetweenteachersandstudents,butalsothefocusoftheclassroomresearchabroadandathome.Althoughtheteacherquestioningfrequentlyoccursintheclassroomteaching,butthetypesofteacherquestioning,theways,theobjectsandtherhythmarealllackofgooddesign,itgreatlyreducedtheeffectivenessofthequestions...Theseimproperorinefficientquestioningbehaviormaynotbeclearlyrecognizedbytheteachersthemselves.However,theycanimprovetheeffectivenessofquestioningbyconsciouslymakingtheadjustmentthroughtheobservation.(Chenyao,2002:2002).ChengXiaoqiao(2003)concernsaboutwhetherthestudentshavegiventhesametreatmentintheclassroom,especiallytheequalopportunityofansweringteachers’questionsinthebookEqualOpportunityofClassroomInteraction.HehasconductedtheclassroomobservationontheChineseandmathematicsofShanghaielementaryschoolandhehasfoundthattheclassroomquestioningandansweringisthemaintypeofinteractionbetweenteachersandstudents.“Theteachers’teachingandstudents”learningisaccomplishedbymeansofclassroomquestioning”(ChengXiaoqiao,2003:2003).CaiNanrong(2006)haseditedtheArtofClassroomControl,hepointsoutthatbyoptimizingtheformofclassroomquestioning,theways,thecontents,andetc.,Itcan-19- Chapter2LiteratureReviewpromotestudents“interaction–generation”intheclass.Hethinksthattheclassroomquestioningisakindofteachingmethod,butalsoateachingart.(CaiNanrong,2006:52).TheresearchcontentofWangChunhui(2003)andLiSuzhi(2003)sharesomesimilarities.TheformerdotheinvestigationandcomparisonoftheChineseandforeignteachers’questioningstrategies.ThelattercarriesonthecomparativestudyofChineseandforeignteachers’Englishclassroominteractionpatternandthewayoffeedback.Andhehasfoundthatclassroominteractiontakeplacemorefrequentlyandthestudents’participationaremorepositiveintheexperiencedteacherclassroomteaching.Inrecentyears,theresearchofclassroomquestioninghasgreatlytakenastepforward;itismainlymanifestedinthefollowingaspects.Firstofall,thepreviousresearchesonclassroomquestioningarelikelytofocusonthetheoreticalresearch,whichisbasedontheforeigntheory.Thecurrentclassroomquestioningresearchtheoryisgraduallyformed,whichisassociatedwithdisciplinesteaching;Second,inthepast,researchersseequestioningasakindofeducationandteachingartandtheirresearchisbasedontheoreticalthinking,Atpresent,theempiricalresearchonclassroomquestioningappears,whichisbasedonthepracticallevel;Finally,theperspectiveoftheoreticalthinkingchangesalot.Thepreviousclassroomquestioningresearchmainlyfocusontheteacher’squestioningandstudent’sanswering,whilethecurrentresearchesfocusonthe“equaldialogue”betweenteachersandstudents,whichembodiestheteachers’dominantstatusandthestudents’subjectivityinteachingactivity.Asfortypesofquestions,manyscholarsuseBloom’squestioningclassificationtoanalyzethequestioningbehavior.(WangHuiliang,2008;XuLiqun,2008;CaoMin,2012;ShenPing,2012).Asforquestioningstrategies,XiaoFengsumsupthe17classroomquestioningtechniques,includingthequotedseniorquestions,exploration,lightstechnologythroughclassobservationandliterature.CaoMin(2012)insiststhatrepetition,paraphrasing,simplificationandadetailedinquiring;suchskillswillletstudentsproducemoreoraloutput.Inordertomaketheoperationanalysisconvenient,thequestioningstrategyinthisstudyreferstoaseriesofauxiliarymeasuresthattheteacherusedwhenthestudentcouldn’tanswerthequestion,whichincludesrepetition,tips,explorationandquotedseniorquestions,thefourcommonquestioningstrategies.Asforteachers’waitingtime,itincludestwotypes,oneisthefirstwaitingtime,thatmeansaperiodoftimewhentheteachersproposedthequestionandthestudents-20- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolanswered;Anotherkindisthesecondwaitingtime,itreferstoaperiodoftimewhentheteacherdecidestogivethesupplementtostudents’answering.Thefirstkindofwaitingtimeisoftenshorterthanthesecondcategoryofwaitingtime.Theteachershouldmaketheappropriatepauseandspareenoughtimeforstudentstothinkaboutafterheorsheproposedquestions.Psychologists’studyshowsthataperson’sresponsetosomethingcanlastatleastfor3secondsandthestudentsneedatleast3secondstounderstandaproblem;theappropriateextensionofthewaitingtimecanpromotethestudents’languageacquisitionabilitygreatly.Onestudyhasfoundthatthelengthofwaitingtimeincreasedto3secondscanincreasethelengthofstudents’answering,andalsoincreasethelevelofteacherquestioning.Therefore,itisverynecessarytogivestudentsenoughwaitingtime,inordertomakethestudentsgivemoreaccurateandmorecomplexexpression,whichhasgreatimportanceinimprovingtheclassroominteraction.Asforteachers’feedback,ZhouJunping(2006)hasfoundthatpositivefeedbackcanstrengthenthestudents’learningmotivation.Butinpracticalteaching,theteachershouldavoidtheuseofgeneralsimplepositivefeedback,suchas“verygood”,“excellent”;otherwiseitwillhavenegativeeffectonstudents.GuJie(2008)putsthefeedbackintosixtypes:simplerecognition,repetition,extension,Tips,elicitationansweranddirectlycorrection.LiJunfen(2008)sumsuptheimplicitnegativefeedback,whichincludes:refactoring,repetition,clarificationrequest,confirmationandtrigger.(1)Feedbackisanindispensablepartofteacherquestioningbehavior.Someresearcheshavefoundthat:“thepositivefeedbackisnotonlytomakelearnersknowtheirperformanceisverygood,butalsotoenhancetheirenthusiasmandcreateagoodclassroomatmosphere”.Teachersshouldgivestudentsmorepositivefeedbackinclass.Itwillbringstudentsgreatlearningmotivation,andchangestudents’behavior.Inaddition,differentscholarshavedifferentviewsontheerrorcorrection.Inspecificoperations,LiuXiongzi(2010)hasfoundthatteachersaremoreinclinedtoimplicitcorrectivefeedback,especiallytheformofrestatement.Allinall,researchersabroadandathomehavedonealotofresearchonteacherquestioningbehaviorandsomeofthemhaveachievedvaluableresults.-21- Chapter3TheoreticalFoundationsChapter3TheoreticalFoundations3.1ComprehensibleInputHypothesisTheinputhypothesisisahypothesisinsecondlanguageacquisitionproposedbyStephenKrashen,whichdemonstratesthatalanguagelearnergetsthemostbenefitfromreceivinglinguisticinputthatisjustexceedhisorherpresentinterlanguage,orthecurrentgrammaticalunderstandinglevel.Thistypeofinputisreferredtothecomprehensibleinputor“i+1,”where“I”meansthelearner’sinterlanguage.AccordingtoKrashen,comprehensibleinputismostlikelytobegainedfrominteractingwithanotherspeakerofthelanguage.Insomerespects,theinputhypothesisisfairlyintuitive.SomeonewhounderstandsonlyafewbasicphrasesofChinesewillnotderivemuchbenefitfromlisteningtoscientificdiscourseinChinesesinceitwillbeincomprehensible.Likewise,someonewhoisnearlyfluentinItalianwillnotgainmuchgrammaticalknowledgefromachild’spicturebook,becauseitwillnotintroduceanynewgrammaticalfeatures.SDKrashen,however,drawsonmorecomplextheoriesofsecondlanguageacquisitiontomakehisclaim.Theinterlanguagehypothesisstatesthatlearnersacquirethegrammaticalfeaturesofalanguageinapredictableorder,andthatatanygiventimethelearnerhasaninternallyconsistentgrammaticalframeworkknownastheinterlanguage.Whenthelearnermakesprogresses,theinterlanguagebecomesincreasinglysimilartothetargetlanguage’sactualgrammar.Theinputhypothesesclaimsthatinputonestageclosertothetargetlanguage—ori+1input—helpthelearneracquirethenextsetofgrammaticalfeatures.Itisnotenough,however,foralearnertoreceivecomprehensibleinputpassively;heorshemustthenanalyzethenewdatainordertomovetheinterlanguageforward.Theinputhypothesisclaimsthatthebestwayforlearnerstogaincomprehensibleinputbymeansofasortoftrial-and-errorprocessofcommunication.Thelearnerfindoutconversationpartners,whoretouchtheirspeechaslongasitbecomescomprehensibletothelearner.Thisprocesscanbehelpedbynonverbalcommunication,forinstance,bygesturesandbyfeedbackfromthelearner.-22- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolWhenthewholeprocessissuccessful,thelearner’sinterlanguagechangetoaccommodateandadapttothenewgrammaticalfeaturesthatheorshehasobserved.ComprehensibleinputhypothesistheorywasputforwardbytheAmericanlinguistS.D.Krashenintheearly1980s.Alotofresearchersregard“comprehensibleinput”asamajorincentivefactorinsecondlanguageacquisition.ThemostinfluentialtheoreticalopinionarethosedevelopedbykrashenandLong(ellis,1985).Krashen’sinputhypothesismakesthefollowingclaims:learners’progressadheretothenaturalorderbyunderstandinginputthatcontainsstructuresalittlebitsurpasstheircurrentlevelofcompetence.Basedonthecomprehensibleinputhypothesistheory,thelearner’sinputmaterialisdeterminedbytheexistingabilitylevel,theinputmaterialmustbeabovethelearnerlevel,butintherangeofthelearner’sunderstandingability,namelycomprehensibleinput.Onlythesekindsofinputcanpositivelypromotinglearners’languageacquisition.Inputishelpfultodevelopthelanguage.Inthepracticeteaching,teachersshoulddotheirbesttoprovidecomprehensibleinputtothestudents.Onlywhenstudentscanunderstandthe“input”thatgivenbytheteacher,cantheygetthebetterlanguageacquisitionandalsoimprovethestudents’enthusiasmofparticipatinginclassroominteraction.Moreover,Krashenalsopayattentiontotheeffectsthataffectivefilterhaveonsecondlanguageacquisition.Thestrengthoftheaffectivefilterinfluencestudents’absorptionofthecomprehensibleinput.Therefore,inordertopromotestudents’secondlanguageacquisition,teachersshouldcreateconditionsforstudentsandprovideanenvironmentoflowaffectivefilter.Inclass,teacherquestioningisoneofthestudents’languageinputform.WecanbeseenfromthecomprehensibleinputhypothesisofKrashen,onlytheinputcanbeunderstoodbystudents,namelycomprehensibleinput,canithelpthestudents’languageacquisition.Therefore,theteachers’questioningshouldadoptcertainstrategyandmakethequestionmeetthestudent’sunderstandinglevel.Thestudents’affectivefilterwillaffecttheunderstandingofthequestion.Inordertominimizetheaffectivefilter,teachersshouldgivethestudents’answeringappropriateandeffectivefeedbackandminimizethestudents“affectivefilter”,soastopromotestudents’secondlanguageacquisition.-23- 3.2ComprehensibleOutputHypothesisComprehensibleoutputhypothesisisadvancedbySwain(1995),whichisdependonthecomprehensibleinputhypothesistheory.Inthefieldofsecondlanguageacquisition,thereexistsmanytheorieswhichisrelatedtothemosteffectivewayforlanguagelearnerstoanewlanguageobtainnewlanguageisoneforms.ComprehensibleOutputHypothesisisonetheoryamongthelanguageacquisition.DevelopedbyMerrillSwain,thecomprehensibleoutputhypothesisclaimsthatlearningtakesplacewhenalearnerencountersaninformationgapinhisorherlinguisticknowledgeofthesecondlanguage(L2).Bynoticingthisgap,thelearnerbecomesawareofitandmaybeabletomodifyhisoutputsothathecanlearnsomethingnewaboutthelanguage.AlthoughSwaindoesnotstatethatcomprehensibleoutputissolelyresponsibleforallorevenmostofthelanguageacquisition,shedoesclaimthat,undercertainconditions,comprehensibleoutputpromotessecondlanguagelearninginwaysandaccelerateinputduetothementalprocessesconnectedwiththeproductionoflanguage.Thishypothesisiscloselyconnectedwiththenoticinghypothesis.Swainproposesthreefunctionsofoutput:1.Noticingfunction:Learnersencountergapsbetweenwhattheywouldliketoexpressandwhattheyareabletoexpress,thereforetheynoticewhattheydonotknoworonlyknowpartiallyinthislanguage.2.Hypothesis–testingfunction:Whenalearnertalksaboutsomething,thereisalwaysanatleasttacithypothesisunderlyinghisorherutterance,suchasthegrammarpoint.Byutteringsomething,thelearnerteststhishypothesisandgetsfeedbackfromaninterlocutor.Thisformoffeedbackenablesreprocessingofthehypothesisifnecessary.3.Metalinguisticfunction:Learnersreflectonthelanguagetheylearn,andtherebytheoutputenablesthemtomonitorandinternalizelinguisticknowledge.Outputprocessistheprocessofactivationofknowledgeinstudentsmindandalsotheprocessoflanguageuse.Inputhasundoubtedlyimportantroleinlanguagelearning,butonlythelanguageinputdoesnotguaranteetheaccuracyofthelearners’languageperformance.Therefore,languageoutputisessentialinlanguagelearning.Languageoutputcanalsopromotelanguagefluency,becauseintheprocessoflanguageoutput,thelearnerswillgraduallyandskillfullyusethetargetlanguage(Skehan,1988).Thus,providingthestudentsopportunitytopracticethesecondlanguageoutputisveryimportant.Swainproposedthethreeimportantfunctionsoftheoutput,namely,beawareofthetrigger,hypothesistestingandmetalinguisticreflection.AccordingtotheSwain’s(1995)comprehensibleoutputhypothesis,whenthestudentscomeacrossthedifficultyin-24- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolexpressing,theywillsynthesizetheirexistingknowledgewiththecontentthattheyneedtoexpress,thustheexpressionwillinevitablyfacedwithanerror.Theoutputmakethelearnershavetheopportunitytofindtheirmistakesandcorrectthemistakesintime,thuswillmaketheoutputmoreaccurate.Hence,thelanguageoutputisalsoanintegralpartoflanguageacquisition,andithasanimportantroleinpromotingthelanguagelearningandmastering.Intheactualteaching,thelanguageoutputtakenplaceintheinteractionactivitybetweenteachersandstudentsintheclassroom.Studentsacceptteachers’questionsandgivetheanswer,namelytoproduceoutput.Onthebasisofthecomprehensibleoutputhypothesis,teachersshouldcreateasmuchasopportunitiestothestudents’languageoutput,inordertopromotethestudents’secondlanguageacquisition,especiallytheopportunityoforaloutput.Theteachershouldalsomakeuseofthecertainquestionstoguidestudents’oraloutput,soastoimprovestudents’oraloutputlevel.3.3InteractionTheoryTheInteractionHypothesis,whichwasfirstputforwardbyMichaelLonginearly1980s,whichisregardedasafurthersupplementorextensionoftheInputHypothesisinthefieldofsecondlanguageacquisition.Inhishypothesis,Longclaimsthatgreaterattentionshouldbepaidtotheinteractioninwhichlearnersareengagedinordertothoroughlyunderstandthenatureandusefulnessofinputforsecondlanguageacquisition.Thesesinteractionsshouldnotberegardedonlyasaone-directionalsourceoftargetlanguageinput,feedingintothelearner’spresumedinternalacquisitiondevice.Infact,themoretheinputisacquired,recycledandparaphrased,thegreateritspotentialusefulnessasinput(Mitchell&Myles,2004:160).Longputsemphasisontheimportanceoftheinteractionalmodificationsadoptedbyalltheparticipantsofinheinteraction,whichcanstimulatethecomprehensionaswellasthecommunicationprocessofcommunicating.what’smore,inhispointofview,theprocessofinteractiveinputismoreimportantthannon-interactiveinput.(Ellis,1994:273)ThreestepsaremainlydiscussedinLong’shypothesisasawayofobtainingunderstandingofhowinput/interactionaffectsacquisition:Step1:Showthat(a)linguistic/conversationaladjustmentspromote(b)comprehensionofinput.Step2:Showthat(b)comprehensibleinputpromotes(c)acquisition.-25- Chapter3TheoreticalFoundationsStep3:Deducethat(a)linguistic/conversationaladjustmentspromote(c)acquisition.(Ellis,1994:273-274)Boththecomprehensibleinputandthecomprehensibleoutputrelyontheinteraction.ThisinvolvesLong’sinteractionhypothesis.Inlanguageteaching,theinteractionisthecoreofcommunication.InteractivetheoryisformedbyMichaelLong,whichisbasedonKrashen’scomprehensibleinputhypothesis.Longbelievedthatlanguageisacquaintedintheprocessofusingtargetlanguageincommunication,theso-called“learningbydoing”.Long’sinteractiontheoryisdifferentfromKrashen’sinputhypothesis,themaindifferenceliesinthewayoftheinput.Longthinkinteractiveinputismoreimportantthannon-interactiveinput.Whenthereexistsissuesintheinteractivecommunication,heemphasizedtheimportanceofsessionadjustment;interactioncanbetterimprovethelanguageacquisitionthanone-waycommunication.Intheprocessofinteractioncommunication,whensomeonecannotunderstandtheother,hehastheopportunitytolettheinterlocutorthinkagain,thusimprovethemeaningofnegotiationandincreasethecomprehensibilityoflanguageinput.Theimportanceofinteractionusingthetargetlanguageshouldnotbeignoredaswell.Long(1991:143)doesn’tregardlearnersaspassiverecipientsofinputthatismadecomprehensibleforthembyothers,andthusmuchattentionshouldbepaidtolearner’sprocessingoftheinputbythemselvesandtheuseofthetargetlangugethroughinteractionwithothers.Intheteacher-studentsmodeofinteraction,theteachershouldmodifyhistalktosimplifyitincertainways,inordertomakeitmoreaccessibletostudents.AsLong(1991:119)claims,markeduseof“easier”items,issomethingsomesecondlanguageteachersoccasionallydoinanefforttokeepwithinaclass’s“know”knowledge.Besides,whenencouragingtheinteractionbetweenstudentsthroughclassroomactivitieslikegroupwork,itisadvisablefortheteachertoeffectivelyarrangethepairsofgroupsofstudentswhodifferonlanguageproficiencytoensuretheeffectivenessandhelpfulnessofinterlanguagetalkamongthem.Teachers’questioningisoneofthemainformsofclassroominteraction;itofferstheopportunitytothestudents’oraloutput.Theclassroominteractionincludestheinteractionbetweenteachersandstudentsandtheinteractionbetweenthestudents.Teacherscanusemanywaystoinitiatetheclassroominteraction,oneofthemosteffectiveapproachtoinitiatingtheclassroominteractionisquestioning.-26- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolChapter4ResearchMethodologyInthischapter,theresearchwilldisplaytheresearchquestions,researchsubjects,researchmethods,anddatacollection.4.1ResearchQuestions(1)WhatisthesituationofteacherquestioninginprimaryEnglishclasses?(2)WhatproblemsareexistedasforteacherquestioninginprimaryEnglishclasses?4.2ResearchSubjectsThesubjectsofthisstudyaremadeupof6teachersrandomlychosenwhogivelessonstosixdifferentclassesinGrade5andGrade6andtheirstudentsinXiuYanprimarySchoolofZiChang.Inthisthesis,thetotalnumberofthesubjectsis230students(GradeFive115,GradeSix115),andthereare120boysand110girlswillbechosenrandomlytoconductaquestionnairesurvey.StudentsevaluatetheEnglishteachers’classroomteachingandquestioningaccordingtotheirdailyclasses.ItishopedtoexplorethecurrentsituationofteacherquestioningincountyprimaryschoolEnglishclassesfromtheviewofstudents.Fortheinterview,theauthorchoosessixteachers,amongthesixteachers,therearefivefemaleteachers,onlyoneisthemale.Fortheteachers’professionaltitle,fourteachersarebelongtothesecond–levelteachers,thelefttwoarebelongtothefirst-levelteacher.Fortheteachingage,threeofthemhaveworkedmorethan5years,theothertwohaveworkedjustthreeyears.Theseteachershavedifferentteachingexperiences,differentwaystoaskanddifferentnumbersofquestionsappearingintheirclasses.AllofthestudentsaretaughtinEnglish.Theyarenon-nativespeakersofEnglish,whichistheirprimaryforeignlanguage.24studentswillbechosenaccordingtotheirscoresindailytests,respectivelyonhigh-level,mid-levelandlow-level.-27- Chapter4ResearchMethodology4.3ResearchInstrumentsTheinstrumentsthattheauthorhasadoptedfortheresearchincludetwotypes:questionnaireandinterview.Questionnaireisthemaininstrument,whileinterviewisusedascomplementarymeasure.4.3.1QuestionnaireThequestionnaireusedinthisthesisisadoptedfromthepaperwrittenbyGuoYanmin,shemajoredinCurriculumandTeachinginShanxiNormalUniversity,thetitleofthesisisAnPracticalStudyoftheTeacherQuestioningonStudents’OralProductioninEnglishClassroomofJuniorHighSchool.Thequestionnaireisissuedinthehopetogetadeeperunderstandingoftheprimaryschoolteacherquestioningsituation.(SeeappendixA)Itconsistsofthreeparts,namely:instructions,students’basicinformationandclosedquestions.Closedquestionscontain6aspects:students’attitudetowardsteacherquestioning(item1-item2),questioningtypes(item3-item6),questioningobjects(item7-item11),waitingtime(item12-item14),questioningstrategies(item15-item19),andfeedback(item20-item30,andincludesthreesubdimensions:Positivefeedback,negativefeedbackandzerofeedback).ValidityandreliabilityofthequestionnairesTable4-1ReliabilitystatisticsofquestionnaireCronbach’sAlphaNofItems.81730Justastheabovetablehasshown,thevalueofreliabilityis0.817,whichismorethan0.8.Itcanbeconsideredthatthisquestionnaireisconsistentandreliable,anditcanbeadoptedinthepresentstudy.4.3.2InterviewItisextremelynecessarytomakeuseofinterviewstorealizemorecomprehensivelywhatisgoingonduringclasses.Theyhavetheaimoftryingtounderstandteachers’-28- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolquestioningbehaviorandwhatstudents’attitudeaboutit.Theinterviewsincludetwoparts,theteachers’partandthestudents’parts.Thepurposeoftheinterviewistogetamoreaccurate,comprehensiveunderstandingofthecurrentsituationandfindtheexistingproblemsofteacherquestioningincountyprimaryschoolEnglishclassesfromtheperspectiveofteachers,atthesametime,increasethecredibilityofthestudy.TheauthorwillusetheMP3torecordtheinterviewandthecontentoftheinterviewwillbetranscribed.4.4DataCollectionTwopartsofdatainthisthesisareveryimportant.Onepartofthedataisthequestionnairesurvey.Thequestionnaireisdesignedrationallyandparticularlyforstudents.Theauthordothesurveyafterthestudentssittingthemid–termexam.Throughthefriendlydiscussionwiththeteachers,whoinchargeoftheclasses,theauthortaketheadvicefromthemandcarryoutthequestionnairesurveyunderthehelpofthesesteachersononemorningbeforethestudentshavetheclass.Thestudentswhofillinthequestionnairearechosenrandomly.Therearestudentsoffourclassesandtheyaretoldtherequirementsoffillinginthequestionnaire.Furthermore,thewriteremphasizethattherearenorightorwronganswerstoeachquestionandtheirresultsarejustusedforthedataanalysis.Therefore,itcanmakesurethestudentscanfillinthequestionnairesfactuallyandanonymously.230questionnairesarehandedin,but25questionnairesarethoughttobeinvalid,becausesomequestionshavenotbeenanswered.Finally,only205students’questionnairescanbeusedtododataanalysis.(GradeFive105,GradeSix100).Therateofvalidityreaches89.6%.Basedontheresultsofthequestionnaire,theauthorchooseaWednesdaytocarryontheinterview.Withrespecttotheobjectoftheinterview,therearesixteachersand24studentsattendtheinterview.Theauthorwillchoose6studentsfromfourclassesonaverage.Thesestudentswillbechosenaccordingtotheirscoresindailytests,whobelongstothehigh-level,mid-levelandlow-levelrespectively.Alltheparticipantshaveafacetofaceinterview,andeachtakesabout8minutesatfreetime.Theyareinterviewedjustaftertheclassorattheirsparetime.Inordertoavoidmisunderstanding,Chineseisusedintheinterviews.Theauthoradoptsthemethodoffreetalktoavoidadullatmosphere.Theinterviewonteacherstakesplaceinteacheroffice,whentheyfinish-29- Chapter4ResearchMethodologytheirteaching.Theauthorwillchecktheirsyllabusinadvance,andtheninterviewthemaftertheyfinishtheirteachingortheyhavenoclasses.Theinterviewmainlytargetatteachers’classroomquestioningintheclassontheaspectsofthetypeofquestions,waitingtimeandthefeedbacktostudents’answer.Alltherawdatawillbecodedandrecodedandfilledintothesoftwareofstatisticpackageforthesocialscience—17.0version(SPSS17.0)forstatisticalanalysis.-30- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolChapter5ResearchResultsandAnalysisInthissection,firstly,itshowstheresultsofthequestionnaire,whichisusedtoanswerthefirstresearchquestion.Then,indiscussion,itrevealstheresultsofinterview,whichistoanswerthesecondresearchquestion.5.1TheSituationofTeacherQuestioninginPrimaryEnglishClassesTheresultsofquestionnairearepresentedinthefollowingpart.Thequestionnaireadoptsthefollowingmethodstodisplaystheinvestigation.Firstly,DescriptiveStatisticsisusedtoknowallthestudents’opinionsonthequestionsinthequestionnaire.Secondly,GroupStatisticsisusedtoknowthedifferencebetweenGrade5andGrade6students.Thirdly,IndependentSamplesTestisusedtofindouttheiropinionondifferentquestionsandtoseewhetherthereexistsdifferenceornot.5.1.1Students’attitudetowardteacherquestioningInordertohavetheunderstandingofthestudent’sattitudetowardteacherquestioning,thequestionnairesetuptwoquestionstoexamine,theresultsareshowinthefollowingtables.Table5-1DescriptiveStatisticsofStudents’AttitudetowardteacherquestioningItemmeanSDQ12.311.438Q23.881.289Note:Analysisofthestudents’attitudetowardteacherquestioningForQ1(M=2.31SD=1.438),itshowsthatallthestudentsthinkthattheyliketobeaskedtoanswerthequestionbytheirteachertosomedegree.ForQ2(mean=3.88SD=1.289),itshowsthattheallthestudentswouldliketoanswerthequestionsvoluntarilyandhopetobeaskedtoanswerthequestionbytheirteacher.Fromtheoverall,thestudents’attitude-31- Chapter5ResearchResultsandAnalysisonteacherquestioningiscomparativelyactive.Thestudentsaremorelikelytoanswerteacher’squestionsvoluntarilycomparedwithbeingaskedbytheteacherthemselvestovaryingdegrees.Table5-2DifferenceofGradesinStudents’AttitudetowardTeacherQuestioningGrade5Grade6(n=105)(n=100)MSDMSDMDt(203)Sig.Q13.511.6063.881.217-3.66-1.843.067Q24.091.3603.671.181.4162.332.021Note:Analysisofthestudents’attitudetowardteacherquestioningTable5-2showstheresultsoftheattitudesforQ1andQ2indifferentgrades.Fromtheabovetable,itcanbefoundthatthereexistsnodifferencebetweenGradeFiveandGradeSixstudentsonQ1(t=-1.843,Sig.=.067>.05).ForQ1,thestudentsofGradeSixarenotmorereluctanttobeaskedtoanswerthequestionsthanGradeFivestudents.ThereexistssignificantdifferencebetweenGradeFiveandGradeSixstudentsonQ2(t=2.332,Sig=.021<.05).ForQ2,thestudentsofGradeFivearemoreactiveinansweringthequestionsthattheteacherproposedthanGradeSixstudents.5.1.2ThetypesofteacherquestioningInordertounderstandtheteacherquestioningtype,thefollowingfourquestionsaredesignedinthequestionnairetoexamine,resultsareshowninthefollowingtables.Table5-3DescriptiveStatisticsoftheTypesofTeacherQuestioningItemmeanSDQ33.601.270Q42.921.588Q53.421.455Q64.311.119Note:AnalysisofthequestioningtypeAccordingtothetable5-3,itcanbeseenthatthemeanvalueofQ3is3.60(SD=1.270),theresultshowsthatitisnotsurethatallthestudentsthinktheycannotdirectlyfinetheanswerofthequestionintextbook,whichisproposedbytheteacher.-32- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolAndtheyneedtosortouttheanswerbythemselves.ForQ4(M=2.92,SD=1.588),itshowsthatthestudentsthinkitisnotaccordwiththefactthattheteachergenerallydoesnotproposetheopenquestions.Infact,theteacheroccasionallyproposestheopen-questions.ForQ5(M=3.42,SD=1.455),itindicatesthatthestudentsclaimthatitrelativelyconformtothepracticalteaching,namelytheteacheroftenposethequestionwith“why”or“how”.ForQ6(M=4.31,SD=1.119),whichmeansthatthestudentsthinkitistruethattheteacheroftenaskthequestionlike“canyouunderstandit”or“haveyoufinished”inclass.Generallyspeaking,thetypesofthequestionsthattheteacherproposedareuncertain,maybeitbelongstotherecallingquestions,orthequestionthatcanfindtheanswerinthetextbook,fortheopen-questions,ittakesupaverysmallproportionofthequestions.Table5-4DifferenceofGradesinTypesofTeacherQuestioningGrade5Grade6(n=105)(n=100)MSDMSDMDt(203)Sig.Q33.741.3453.461.176.2831.600.111Q42.951.7562.891.399.062.282,.778Q53.471.5263.371.383.097.475.636Q64.371.0764.241.164.131.840.402Note:AnalysisofthequestioningtypeFromTable5-4,wecanseethatthestudentsindifferentGradehavedifferentopinionthesamequestion.ForQ3,theGrade5studentsholdthemeanvalueof3.74,(SD=1.345),Grade6studentsoccupythemeanscoreof3.46(SD=1.176),itindicatesthattheGradeFivestudentsandGradeSixstudentsallagreethatthequestionproposedbytheteachercannotbedirectlyfinedintextbookandtheyneedtosortouttheanswerbythemselves.What’smore,theresultsshowthatthereexistsnodifferencebetweenGrade5andGrade6studentsonQ3(t=1.600,Sig.=.111).IntermsofQ4,Grade5studentswiththemeanvalueof2.95(SD=1.756),Grade6studentsownthemeanscoreof2.89(SD=1.399),thereforecomparedwiththestudentsinGradeFive,theGradeSixstudentsthinkitrelativelynotconformtothefact.Theythinkthattheteachergenerallysometimesproposetheopenquestions.AsforQ5,Grade5studentswiththemeanvalueof3.47(SD=1.526),GradeSixstudentswiththemeanof3.37(SD=1.383).AllthesedatashowthatthestudentsinGradeFivearemoreagreewiththeideathattheteacheroften-33- Chapter5ResearchResultsandAnalysisasksthequestionwith“why”or“how”.WithrespecttoQ6,theGrade5studentsownthemeanvalueof4.37(SD=1.076),themeanofGradesixstudentsis4.24(SD=1.164),allthesestatisticsindicatethatbothgradesofstudentsstatethattheteacheroftenasksthequestionlike“canyouunderstandit”or“haveyoufinished”inclass.AsisshownintheTable5-4,thereisnogreatdifferencebetweentheGrade5andGrade6studentsonQ3(t=1.600,Sig=.111)Q4(t=-.282,Sig=.778),Q5(t=.475,Sig=.636),Q6(t=.840,Sig=.402).ItmeansthatthereexistsnodifferencebetweenGradeFiveandGradeSixstudents.Allthestudentsinthequestionnairehavethesameideaofthequestioningtypeappearedinclass.5.1.3QuestioningobjectInordertounderstandthechoiceofquestioningobjects,theresearcherssetupfivequestionstoinvestigate,theresultasshownintables.Table5-5DescriptiveStatisticsoftheQuestioningObjectItemmeanSDQ73.011.194Q84.141.105Q91.981.157Q103.301.215Q113.591.448Table5-5showstheresultsofthequestioningobjectamongallthestudents.ThedataintheabovetableshowsthatQ8“theteacherwillchoosetheindividualstudenttoanswerthequestionthattheyproposed”occupiesthehighestmeanvalueof4.14(SD=1.105),whichshowsthatitrelativelyconformtothefactthattheteacherwillchoosetheindividualstudenttoanswerthequestionthattheyposed.Q9“theteacherliketoaskthetopstudentstoanswerthequestion”holdsthelowestvalueof1.98(SD=1.157),whichrevealsthatthestudentsconsiderthatitdoesnotaccordwiththefactthattheteacherliketoaskthetopstudentstoanswerthequestion.ForQ7(M=3.01,SD=1,194),thestudentsinthequestionnairethinkthatitisnotsurethattheteacheroftenaskthewholeclasstoanswertogether,whentheyproposingthequestion.IntermsofQ10(M=3.30,SD=1.215),thestudentsfindthesituationthattheteacheroftenaskthestudentswhoputuptheirhandsisnotsure.Q11withthemeanvalueof3.59(SD=1.448),-34- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolitshowsthatthestudentsconsiderthatitisrelativelytruethattheteacherchoosethestudentstoanswerthequestionsrandomly.Ingeneral,theauthorfindthatteachersarelikelytoasktheindividualstudenttoanswerthequestion,forthesayingthattheteacherpreferstoaskthestudentswhohasagoodreport,itisnottrue.Soitiscomparativelyequalandreasonable.Table5-6DifferenceofGradesinQuestioningObjectGrade5Grade6(n=105)(n=100)MSDMSDMDt(203)Sig.Q72.941.2233.091.164-.147-.881.379Q84.211.2464.07.935.140.910.364Q91.601.1822.37.991.000-5.042.000Q103.101.0973.521.299-.425-2.524.012Q113.421.6043.761.248-.341-1.639.090Note:AnalysisofobjectThestudentsaredividedintotwogroupsaccordingtotheirGrade,thenanalyzedthembymeanandStd.Deviation.Accordingtotheabovetable,itcanbefoundthatthereexistsdifferenceindifferentgradesonthesamequestion.ForQ7,Grade5studentsgetthemeanvalueof2.94(SD=1.223),itindicatesthattheydon’tthinkteacherssometimesaskthewholeclasstoanswerthequestionaftertheyproposingthequestion.Grade6studentsholdthemeanvalueof3.09(SD=1.164),itindicatesthattheythinkteacherssometimesaskthewholeclasstoanswerthequestionaftertheyproposingthequestion.ForQ8,theGrade5studentsholdthemeanvalueof4.21(SD=1.246),Grade6studentswiththemeanscoreof4.07(SD=.935),itrevealsthatthestudentsofbothgradesclaimthatitrelativelyconformtothefactthattheteacherwillchooseindividualstudenttoanswerthequestionthattheyposed.WithrespecttoQ9,Grade5studentswiththemean(M=1.60,SD=1.182),itshowsthattheythinkitiscompletelynotaccordwiththefactthattheteacherlikelytoaskthetopstudentstoanswerthequestion.Grade6studentsoccupythemeanvalueof2.37(SD=.991),itindicatesthatthestudentsthinkteachersdon’tliketoaskthetopstudentstoanswerthequestion.IntermsofQ10,Grade5studentswiththemeanscoreof3.10(SD=1.097),Grade6studentsholdthemean(M=3.52,SD=1.299),allthesestatisticsshowthatthestudentsofGrade6aremoreuncertainthattheteacherusuallyasksthestudentswhoputuptheirhandstoanswerthe-35- Chapter5ResearchResultsandAnalysisquestionthanGrade5students.ForQ11,Grade5studentsgetthemeanvalueof3.42(SD=1.604);Grade6studentsoccupythemeanscoreof3.76(SD=1.248),whichshowsthatthestudentsofbothgradesthinkthattheyarenotsurethattheteacheralwaysrandomlychoosethestudentstoanswerthequestions.TheabovetablealsoshowsthatthereexistssignificantdifferencebetweenGrade5andGrade6studentsonQ9(t=-5.042,Sig=.000),Q10(t=-2.524,Sig=.01).Onthecontrary,thereisnodifferencebetweenGrade5andGrade6studentsonQ7(t=-.881,Sig=.379),Q8(t=.910,Sig=.364)andQ11(t=-1.639,Sig=.090).5.1.4Waiting-timeInordertounderstandthewaiting-timethattheteachergivetothestudents,theresearchershavesetupthefollowingthreequestions,theresultsareshowninthefollowingtables.Table5-7DescriptiveStatisticsoftheWaiting-timeItemmeanSDQ124.151.294Q132.601.341Q143.091.456Theresultsofstatisticsindicatethat:ForQ12(M=4.15,SD=1.294),itcanbefoundthatallthestudentsinthequestionnaireholdthatitisrelativelytruethattheteacherwillsparethestudentsseveralsecondstothinkaboutthequestionbeforetheyansweringthequestion.ForQ13(M=2.60,SD=1.341),itmeansthatthestudentsthinkitisnotconformtotheactualsituationthattheteacherwillimmediatelymakethestudentsgivetheansweraftertheyproposingthequestion.ForQ14(M=3.09,SD=1.456),itshowsthatthestudentsdeemthatitisuncertainthattheteacherwillwaitforamoment,andthenmakecommentonouranswersafterweansweringthequestion.Onthewhole,theauthorthinksthatteacherswillleavestudentssomethinkingtime,forthespecifictimelength,itisuncertain.Table5-8DifferenceofGradesinWaiting-timeGrade5Grade6(n=105)(n=100)-36- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolMSDMSDMDt(203)Sig.Q124.071.4504.231.109-.163-.909.365Q132.571.4472.641.227-.069-.367.714Q143.181.6102.991.275.191.944.347Note:Analysisofwaiting-timeAScanbeseenfromtheabovetable,forQ12,Grade5studentswiththemean(M=4.07,SD=1.450),theGrade6studentsownsthemeanscore(M=4.23,SD=1.109).ItcanbeknownthatGrade5andGrade6studentsallagreewiththefactualsituationthattheteacherwillsparethestudentsseveralsecondstothinkaboutthequestionbeforetheyansweringthequestion.Italsoshowsthattheyhavedifferentunderstandingofthewaiting-timeinclass.ForQ13,Grade5studentsoccupythemeanvalueof2.57(SD=1.447),Grade6studentsgetthemean(M=2.64,SD=1.227),allthesedatashowsthattheyallstatethatitdoesnotaccordwiththeirexperiencethattheteacherwillimmediatelyaskthestudentstogivetheansweraftertheyproposingthequestion.IntermsofQ14,Grade5studentsholdthemeanscoreof3,18(SD=1.610),whichshowsthatitisrelativelyaccordwiththefactthatteachersometimeswaitforamomentandthenmakecommentonouranswers,afterweansweringthequestion.Grade6studentsownthemeanscore(M=2.99,SD=1.275),itindicatesthatteachersgenerallydonotwaitforamomentandthenmakecommentonouranswers,afterweansweringthequestion.ThestatisticsintheabovetablerevealsthatthereexistsnodifferencebetweenGrade5andGrade6studentsonQ12(t=-.909,Sig=.365),Q13(t=-.367,Sig=.714)andQ14(t=.94,Sig=.347)5.1.5QuestioningStrategyInordertounderstandthequestioningstrategiesusedbytheteacher,thequestionnairesetupthefollowingfivequestions,theresultsareshownintablesbelow.Table5-9DescriptiveStatisticsofQuestioningStrategyItemmeanSD-37- Chapter5ResearchResultsandAnalysisQ153.671.474Q163.351.500Q174.051.226Q182.101.308Q193.941.183Accordingtotheresultsintheabovetable,Q17“theteacherwillmakeuseofsomeinstructionaldiscourse,whenwecannotgivetheanswer”occupiesthehighestmeanvalueof4.05(SD=1.226),whichmeansthatthestudentsthinkitrelativelyconformtotheactualsituationthattheteacherwillmakeuseofsomeinstructionaldiscourse,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.ForQ15(M=3.67,SD=1.474),whichshowsthatthestudentsareuncertainaboutthesituationthattheteacherwilltranslatethequestionintoChinese,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.IntermsofQ16(M=3.35,SD=1.500),itindicatesthatthestudentsarenotsureaboutthesayingthattheteachergenerallydonotrepeatthesamequestionwhenwecan’tgivetheanswer.WithrespecttoQ199M=3.94,SD=1.183),itrevealsthatthestudentsthinkthatitisrelativelyconformwiththedescriptionthattheteacheroftenaskotherstudentstoanswerthequestion,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.Thusteachersusedifferentwaystodealwiththesituationwhenstudentscannotanswerthequestion,butthewaysarerelativelyrandom,theyfailtogivestudentssufficientguidance.Q18“theteacherwilldirectlytellthestudentsanswer,whenwecannotgivetheanswer”withthelowestmeanscoreof2.10(SD=1.308),whichindicatesthatthestudentsclaimthatitdoesnotconformtothefactthattheteacherwilldirectlytellthestudentsanswer,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.Table5-10DifferenceofGradesinQuestioningStrategyGrade5Grade6(n=105)(n=100)MSDMSDMDt(203)Sig.Q154.031.4173.301.446.7293.643.000Q163.571.5623.121.402.4512.174.031Q174.101.3764.011.049.085.497.618Q181.841.3162.381.245-.542-3.024.003Q193.961.1603.921.212.042.253.801Note:Analysisofquestioningstrategies-38- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolTheabovetableshowstheresultsofquestioningstrategiesindifferentgrades.ForQ15(M=4.03,SD=1.417),itcanbefoundthattheGrade5studentsthinkitisrelativelycertainaboutthesituationthattheteacherwilltranslatethequestionintoChinese,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.Grade6studentsgetthemeanscoreof3.30(SD=1.446),itshowsthattheteachesusuallydonottranslatethequestionintoChinese,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.ForQ16,Grade5studentswiththemean(M=3.57,SD=1.562),Grade6studentsholdthemean(M=3.12,SD=1.402),allthesedatashowthattheGrade5studentsaremoreuncertainaboutthesituationthattheteacherwillrepeatthesamequestionwhenwecan’tgivetheanswerthanGrade5students.ForQ17,theGrade5studentsownsthemeanvalueof4.10(SD=1.376),Grade6studentswiththemeanscore(M=4.01,SD=1.049),allthesestatisticsindicatethatthestudentsofbothgradesnearlyhavethesameopinionthatitrelativelyconformtotheactualsituationthattheteacherwillmakeuseofsomeinstructionaldiscourse,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.ForQ18,theGrade5studentsoccupythemean(M=1.84,SD=1.316),whichshowsthatthestudentsdeemthatitistotallynotinconformitywiththefactthattheteacherwilldirectlytellthestudentsanswer,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.ButtheGrade6studentsholdthemeanvalueof2.38(SD=1.245),itrevealsthatthestudentsbelieveitisrelativelynotinconformitywiththefact.IntermsofQ19,theGrade5withthemeanscoreof3.96(SD=1.160),Grade6studentsholdthemeanscoreof3.92(SD=1.212),allthesedatashowthatthestudentsinbothgradesthinkthatitisuncertainaboutthecasethattheteacherwillaskotherstudentstoanswerthequestion,whenwecannotgivetheanswer.ThedataintheabovetableshowsthatthereexistssignificantdifferencebetweenGrade5andGrade6studentsonQ15(t=3.643,Sig.=.000),Q16(t=2.174,Sig.=.031))andQ18(t=-3.024,Sig.=003),whichmeansthattheyhavedifferentunderstandingofthequestioningstrategiesthattheirteacherusedinclass.WhilethereisnodifferencesbetweendifferentgradesonQ17(t=.497,Sig.=.618)andQ19(t=.253,Sig.=.801),itmeansthattheirideasaremoreconsistentonthesequestioningstrategies.5.1.6TeacherfeedbackInordertounderstandteacherfeedbackonstudents’answer,theresearchersetupthefollowing11questions,theresultsasshowninthefollowingtables.-39- Chapter5ResearchResultsandAnalysisTable5-11DescriptiveStatisticsofTeacherFeedbackItemmeanSDQ204.35.997Q213.921.289Q224.17.966Q233.731.253Q242.141.296Q251.541.002Q264.151.197Q273.191.468Q284.081.052Q294.55.848Q302.031.262Table5-11revealstheresults(byDescriptiveStatistics)ofthesituationofteacherfeedbackamongthestudents,whofillinthequestionnaire.Q29“theteacherwilltryherorhisbesttoleadthestudentstotherightanswer,whenthestudentmakeamistakeinansweringthequestion”occupiesthehighestmeanvalueof4.55(SD=.848),whichshowsthatthestudentsfindthatitverymuchinconformitywiththefact.AndfollowedbyQ20,withthemeanscoreof4.35(SD=.997),whichindicatesthatthestudentssomewhatidentifywiththesituationthattheteacherwillprovidereasonableevaluationafterthestudentsansweringthequestion.Q25“theteacherwillpunishthestudentssuchas(makestandaspunishmentordothehomeworkagain)whenthestudentscannotgivetherightanswer”holdsthelowestmeanscoreof1.54(SD=1.002),whichrevealsthatthestudentsfeelthatitistotallynotconformtothefactthattheteacherwillpunishthestudentssuchas(makestandaspunishmentordothehomeworkagain)whenthestudentscannotgivetherightanswer.ThesecondlowestmeansQ30(M=2.03,SD=1.262)“theteacherwillletthestudentsitdownanddonotgivehimorheranycomment,whenheorshemakeamistakeinansweringthequestion”,itshowsthatthestudentsthinkthatitcomparativelynotinconformitywiththesituationthattheteacherwillletthestudentsitdownanddonotgivehimorheranycomment,whenheorshemakeamistakeinansweringthequestionForQ23(M=3.73,SD=1.253),itshowsthatthestudentsstatethatitisuncertainthattheteacherwillgivethecommentonstudents’answerandmakeadetailedinquiryafterthemansweringthequestioncorrectly.Forteacherfeedback,teachersusually-40- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolprovidesimpleandpositiveencouragementwhenstudentsanswerthequestionscorrectly;Andteacherstendtoaskotherstudentstoanswerthequestion,whenstudentsfailtoanswerthequestion.Sometimes,teacherswillguidestudentstocorrectthemistakebythemselves,whilethiskindofprobabilityissmall.Table5-12DifferenceofGradesinTeacherFeedbackGrade5Grade6(n=105)(n=100)MSDMSDMDt(203)Sig.Q204.361.0204.34.977.022.157.875Q213.761.4844.091.026-.328-1.849.066Q224.081.0074.26.917-.184-1.365.174Q233.921.2303.531.251.3942.272.024Q242.041.3862.251.192-.212-1.171.243Q251.461.0291.63.971-.173-1.236.218Q264.251.2154.051.175.1981.183.238Q273.361.6063.011.291.3521.733.085Q284.191.0573.971.039.2201.505.134Q294.65.7474.44.935.2081.751.082Q301.941.3362.131.178-.187-1.062.290Note:AnalysisoffeedbackThestudentsaredividedintotwogroupsaccordingtodifferentgrades,andthenanalyzedthembyMeanadDeviation.ThroughtheGroupStatistics(Table5-12),itcanbeseenthat,ForQ20,theGrade5studentswithameanvalueof4.36(SD=1.020),Grade6studentsholdthemeanscoreof4.34(SD=.977),itindicatesthatthestudentsIbothgradeshavethesameopinionthatitiscomparativelyconsistentwiththeiractualsituationthattheteacherwillprovidereasonableevaluationafterthestudentsansweringthequestion.ForQ21,theGrade5students(M=3.76,SD=1.484),itrevealsthattheyareuncertainaboutthefactthattheteacherwillrepeatthestudent’sanswerandgivethemsimpleevaluationaftertheyansweringthequestioncorrectly,whileGrade6students(M=4.09,SD=1.026),itshowsthatthefinditiscomparativelyconsistentwiththeclasssituation.ForQ22,theGrade6students(M=4.26,SD=.917)aremoreagreewiththestatementthattheteacherwillgivestudentsimpleencouragement,whentheygivethecorrectanswerthanGrade5students(M=4.08,SD=1.007).ForQ23,theGrade5-41- Chapter5ResearchResultsandAnalysisstudents(M=3.92,SD=1.230)aremoreuncertainthattheteacherwillgivethecommentonstudents’answerandmakeadetailedinquiryafterthemansweringthequestioncorrectlythanGrade6students(M=3.53,SD=1.251)tovaryingdegrees.ForQ24,theGrade6students(M=2.25,SD=1.192)aremoredisagreewiththefactthattheteacherwillletthestudentsitdownanddonotgivehimanycomment,whenheorsheansweringthequestioncorrectlythanGrade5students(M=2.04,SD=1.386)tosomedegree.ForQ25,Grade5studentsholdthemean(M=1.46,SD=1.029),Grade6students(M=1.63,SD=.971),bothGrade5andGrade6studentsfeelthatitistotallynotconformwiththefactthattheteacherwillpunishthestudentssuchas(makestandaspunishmentordothehomeworkagain)whenthestudentscannotgivetherightanswer,whiletheGrade6studentsaremoredisagreewithit.IntermsofQ26,Grade5students(M=4.25,SD=1.215)aremoreagreewiththesituationthattheteacherwillimmediatelycorrecttheirmistakesandspeakouttherightanswer,whenthestudentcannotdoit.ForQ27,Grade6students(M=3.01,SD=1.291)arelessuncertainaboutthesituationthattheteacherwillrepeatthestudent’sanswerandaskarhetoricalquestion,whenheorshegivethewronganswer.ForQ28,Grade5students(M=4.19,SD=1.057)claimthatitisrelativelytruethattheteacherwillasktheotherstudenttoanswerthequestion,whenheorshegivethewronganswer,whiletheGrade6students(M=3.97,SD=1.039)areuncertainaboutit.WithrespecttoQ29,Grade5(M=4.65,SD=.747)andGrade6students(M=4.44,SD=.935)allthinkitrelativelyinconformitywitthefactthattheteacherwilltrytheirbesttoleadthestudenttotherightanswer,whenheorshecannotdoit,buttheGrade5studentsaremoreagreewithit.IntermsofQ30,Grade6students(M=2.13,SD=1.178)thinkthatitcomparativelynotinconformitywiththesituationthattheteacherwillletthestudentsitdownanddonotgivehimorheranycomment,whenheorshemakeamistakeinansweringthequestion,whiletheGrade5studentsclaimthatitcompletelynotinconformitywiththefact.Accordingtotheabovedata,itcanbeseenthatthereissignificantdifferencebetweenGrade5andGrade6studentsonQ23(t=2.272,Sig.=.024),itshowsthattheteacherwillassessstudents’answerandmakeadetailedinquiry,whenthestudentsanswerthequestioncorrectly.While,thereexistsnodifferenceontheotherquestionsleft.Q20(T=.157,Sig.=.875),Q21(t=-1.849,Sig.=.066),Q22(t=-1.365,Sig.=.174),Q24(t=-1.171,Sig.=.243),Q25(t=-1.236,Sig.=.218),Q26(t=1.183,Sig.=.238),Q27(t=1.733,Sig.=.085),Q28(t=1.505,Sig.=.134),Q29(t=1.751,Sig.=.082)and-42- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolQ30(t=-1.062,Sig.=.290)5.2TheProblemsExistedAsForTeacherQuestioninginPrimarySchoolEnglishClassesThroughquestionnairesurveyandanalysis,wecanseethatthereexistproblemsinteacherquestioningbehavior.Inordertofurtherunderstandtheteacherquestioning,theresearcherconducttheinterviewonthe6Englishteachersand24students.Theresultoftheteacherinterviewandstudents’interviewareasfollows:Firstofall,theteacherfeedbackisnotveryreasonable.Basedontheresultofthequestionnaire(Q26,Mean=4.15),theauthorcarryontheinterviewon6teachersand24students.Whenaskedabout“Whenthestudentsanswerthequestionscorrectly,whatwouldyoudo?”5teacherssaythattheywillgivestudentssimpleencouragement,ateachersaythattheywillgivethestudentssimplecommentandthenmakesomesupplement.“Whenaskedabout“whenthestudentsgivetheincorrectansweronthequestionthatyouproposed,whatwouldyoudo?”Fourteacherssaythattheyareinclinedtoimmediatelycorrectthestudents’mistakeandthengivethemrightanswer.Only2teacherssaythattheywillasktheotherstudentstoanswerthequestion.Whenaskedaboutthereasonfordoingthis,fiveteacherssaythattheyareafraidofdelayingtheteachingtime.Withregardtothequestion“whenyouanswerthequestioncorrectly,whatwouldyoudo?”themedium-levelstudentssaythattheteacherwillrepeattheiranswersandthengivethesimpleevaluation.Thelow-levelstudentssaythattheteacherwillgivethemsimpleencouragement.Thehigh-levelstudentsstatethattheteacherwillmakethesimplecommentandmakeadetailedinquiry.Asforthequestion“Whenyouanswerthequestionwrongly,whatwouldyourteacherdo?”Mostofthelow-levelstudentsandapartofmedium-levelstudentssaythattheteacherwillimmediatelycorrecttheirmistakeandthentellthemthecorrectanswer.somemedium-levelstudentsclaimthattheteacherwillasktheotherstudentstoanswerthequestion.High-levelstudentssaythattheteacherwilltrytoleadthemtotherightanswer.Accordingtotheteacher’sdiscourseandthestudents’discourse,theauthorfindthatwhenthestudentsanswerthequestioncorrectly,theteacherfeedbackisgivenprioritytosimplepraiseandrarelymakeappropriatecomments.Forthewronganswer,mostoftheteachersdonotgivestudentssufficientguidanceandtheyprefertodirectlycorrectitor-43- Chapter5ResearchResultsandAnalysistochoosetheotherstudents,teachersarenotwillingtospendmoretimetoguidethestudentstocorrectthemistakesbythemselves.Althoughthestudentscorrecttheirmistakebasedontheteachers’requirement,itstillaffectthestudents’confidenceofansweringthequestionanddecreasethestudents’oraloutput.Asforthestudents’mistake,teacherscanadoptthestrategiesofprobing,redirecting,induction,clarification,orothererror-correctionstrategies.Byusingthedifferentstrategies,itcanmakethestudentsrealizetheirmistakesandcorrectitvoluntarily.Thiskindofdoingsnotonlyprotectthestudents’self-esteem,butalsoimprovetheirenthusiasmsinansweringthequestion.Then,thelaggedteachingideamakethestudentslacktheopportunityofproposingquestionsbythemown.Forthisquestion,theauthordotheinterviewonthe6teachersand24students.Whenaskedabout“Doyouthinkthestudents’questioninginclassisimportant?”allteacherssay“yes”.Asforthequestion“Doyourstudentsoftenvoluntarilyposeaquestioninaclass?”4teacherssay“no”,theysaythatthestudentsjustanswerthequestionproposedbytheteacher.2teachersstatethatthestudentsmayputforwardoneortwoquestionswhentheteacherstronglyinvitethestudentstoraiseaquestion.Whenaskedaboutthestudents“Doyouoftenproposequestionsvoluntarilyinclass?”thehigh-levelstudentsandasmallpartofmedium-levelstudentssay“notveryoften,sometimestheymaybeproposeaquestion,whentheyholdsdoubtsonthepoint,althoughtheteacherhasexplainedthepoint.Mostofthemedium-levelstudentsandthelow-levelstudentssaythattheynevervoluntarilyposeaquestioninclass,whentheauthormakeadetailedinquiryonthestudents“whydoyouneverraiseaquestion?”Thesestudentswillsaythattheyhavenosenseofproposingthequestionbythemselves.Itcanbeseenfromtheteacher’sdiscourseandthestudents’discoursethatmostofthestudentslacktheopportunityofproposingquestionsbythemselvesvoluntarily.Although,mostoftheteachershaveacknowledgedtheimportanceofstudentsaskingquestions,theyhavenotdohisorherbesttoimprovethissituationorexplicitlyrequiringstudentstoaskquestionsinclasses.Thefactorsresultinginitmaybetheteachers’professionalknowledgelevelandteacher’sin-gameadjustmentsability,etc.AfamouseducatorinancientGreece----Socratessaythat“midwife”isbyconstantlyquestioning,toinspirethestudenttoanswer,eventuallymakestudentsawareoftheirmistakesanddotheself-correcting.Apartofteachersapplythepredecessors’reasonableteachingmethodtotheirteaching-44- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolactivities.Teacherfeedbackcanbedividedintopositivefeedbackandnegativefeedback.(Chaudron,1993;Nunan,1991)Theauthorthinksthatwhenthestudentsanswerthequestioncorrectly,theteachershouldnotonlygivethestudentssimplepositivefeedback(suchasGoodjob”“Verygoodandsoon),theyshouldalsoprovidestudentswithadditionalinformationbasedonthestudents’correctanswer.Forthestudents’wronganswering,theteachershouldguidethestudentstocorrectmistakesbythemselves,ratherthandirectlycorrectedbytheteacher.Ifthefrequencyoftheerror-correctionistoohigh,itwillhittheenthusiasmofthestudents.Althoughthecorrectioncannotensurethelanguageacquisition,itistheclueoflanguagedevelopment.Somoderateuseofnegativefeedbackcanhelpstudentsinternalizethecorrectlanguage,thuspromotetheiroraloutput.Theresearchersalsosuggestteachersletthestudentsposemorequestions(LuoXiaojieMouJinjiang,2002).Butinpracticalteaching,wecanseethatteachersarestillthemajorroleofquestioning,theopportunityofelementaryschoolstudentsaskingquestionsisless.Thebehaviorofaskingquestionsismostlyundertheteacher’scontrol,anditusuallyappearsintheprocessofgameteaching.Thestudentsjustblindlydependontheteachers’questionsandcan’tgettherealopportunitytodevelopthinkingabilityWhat’smore,students’questioningisthemaincontentoflearning,itistheproductoftheteachingactivitydesign,ratherthantherealcommunication.Someteacherslacktheconsciousnessoftakingthestudentsinthedominantposition.Aconsiderablepartofteachers,theyhavenotreallyrecognizetheimportanceofstudents’questioningandtheyhavenodeepunderstandingofthestudents’demandintheaspectofquestioningandfeedback.Fromthelongrun,thissituationwillinevitablyaffectstudents’comprehensivedevelopmentinlistening,speaking,readingandwriting.Italsowillignorethecultivationofstudents’activeparticipationinEnglishlearning.Infact,onceastudentformthehabitofproposingthequestionsandknowhowtoposeaquestions,thestudentsaremorelikelytoraisequestionsvoluntarilyinclassroomteaching.-45- Chapter6DiscussionandConclusionChapter6ConclusionThestudyaimstofindthepresentsituationofteacherquestioningandtheproblemexistedinunderstandingtheteacherquestioninginprimaryschoolEnglishclassroom.BasedontheabovecomprehensivediscussionandresearchinprimaryschoolEnglishclassroomquestioning,itresultsintheresearchconclusion.Inthissection,summaryofthethesis,limitationsofthestudyandnecessityoffurtherresearchwillbeinvolvedin.6.1FindingsofthethesisThisstudyisbasedonComprehensibleInputHypothesis,ComprehensibleOutputHypothesisandMichaelLong’sInteractionHypothesis.TheauthorinvestigatesandanalyzesthecurrentsituationofteacherquestioninginprimaryschoolEnglishclassroomteachingandprovidessomesuggestionsforteacherquestioningthroughquestionnaireandinterview.Theresearchresultsareasfollows:(1)Ingeneral,thestudents’attitudetowardclassroomquestioningispositive,thestudentsaremorewillingtobeaskedtoanswerquestionsproposedbytheteacher,ratherthantaketheinitiativetoanswerthequestion;Teacherquestioningtypesarerelativelysingular,thehierarchyisnotobvious,mostofthequestionsarelow-levelquestionsandapartofthequestionsbelongtotherecallingquestions;Asfortheobjectsofclassroomquestioning,mostoftheteachersdobetterinthisaspect,questionsareavailabletoallstudents,onlyasmallpartoftheteachersarelikelytocallthehigh-markstudentsorchoosethestudentswhoactivelyputuptheirhands.(2)Teachersoftensparestudentscertaintimeafterproposingaquestion,butthewaiting-timeisrelativelyshortitgenerallycontrolsin3seconds.Forthedifficultquestions,theteachermayleavethemalittlelongertime;Inclassroomteaching,teachersoftenadoptthestrategyofrepeating,theyseldomusethestrategies,suchas,probing,redirecting,paraphrasingandsoon.-46- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchool(3)Whenthestudentsanswerthequestioncorrectly,theteachertendtousesimplepositivefeedback;Whenstudentsanswerthequestionincorrectly,teachersinclinedtoimmediatelycorrectstudents’errors,andannouncethecorrectanswer.Thechancesareveryfewthatthestudentsinitiativetoaskquestionsinclass.Combinedwiththequestionnaire,theauthorcarryontheinterviewontheteachersandthestudents,inordertofindtheproblemsexistedinteacherquestioning.TheproblemsexistedinprimaryschoolEnglishclassroomquestioningareasfollows:first,theteacherfeedbackisnotveryappropriate.Teacherfeedbackcanbedividedintopositivefeedbackandnegativefeedback.Inpracticalteaching,teachersaretendtousethesimplepositivefeedback(suchas“Goodjob”“VeryGood”andsoon),theyseldomtriggerthestudents’furtheroutputbyprovidingthestudentswithadditionalinformation.whenthestudentsmakeamistake,teachersareusedtocorrectitdirectlyandimmediatelytellthestudentsrightanswer.Thiskindofdoingwillfrustratethestudents’enthusiasms.Itisnothelpfulforstudentstocultivatetheirthinkingability.Then,thelaggedteachingideamakethestudentslacktheopportunityofproposingquestionsbythemown.Undertheimpactofexamination-orientededucation,aconsiderablepartofteachersarenotreallyawareoftheimportanceofstudents’questioning.Theyfailtotakethestudentsinthedominantposition,sotheysometimesspeakfrombeginningtoendasaone-manshowintheclassroom.Inordertocultivatethestudents’realcommunicationability,theteachershouldencouragestudentstoparticipateinquestioningbydesigningsomeactivities.Therearealsosomeotherproblemsexistedinteacherquestioning,whichhavebeenconfirmedinalotofstudy(WangRonghua,2011;LiXue,2012).Toexplorethereasons,theresearcherattributestheseintothefollowingseveralaspects:firstly,theteacherdoesnotmakeinadequatepreparationbeforeaskingthequestion.Throughteacherinterview,theresearcherhaslearnedthatthemajorityofteacherswillconsiderwheretoaskquestions,butdonotpreparealotonthecontentofthequestionsinpreparinglessons.Forthequestioningtype,thechoiceofobjectandthefeedback,mostofteacherslackofelaboratedesign.Mostofthequestionsarearbitraryandlackofdepth,whichbreaksawayfromthestudents’cognitivedevelopmentandcharacteristics,andresultsintoomuch“questionandanswer”inclass.Fortheunexpectedproblemsappearedinthestudents’answering,theteachermaymakeinappropriatefeedbacktostudents,duetothelackofpreparation.Thequalityof-47- Chapter6DiscussionandConclusionquestioninghasacloserelationshipwiththequestiondesign.Onlybydelvingintotheteachingcontentandunderstandingthestudents’cognitivelevel,cantheteachergraspthedifficultyofquestiondesignandproposethehighqualityquestions,soastoplaytheroleofthequestionsandstimulatesthestudents’positivethinking.Secondly,theteacherneedtoknowthepurposeofunderstandingisone-sided.Mostofteachersthinkthatthepurposeofteacherquestioningistostrengthenthekeyknowledge,otherpurposesarealwaysbeoverlooked.Intheteacherinterviewofthisstudy,mostoftheteachersbelievethatthepurposeistoemphasizekeypoints,orcheckthestudents’graspoftheknowledge.Teachersmakeuseofquestioningtostrengthenknowledge,whichmakesclassroomquestioninglackofinterestandcannotattracttheattentionofstudents,andcannotinspirestudents’deep-levelthinking.Aristotlehassaid:“thinkingisstartfromdoubt.”Forthepurposeofdevelopingthestudents’thinkingability,promotingstudents’classroomparticipation,makingstudentsactivelyparticipateinclassroominteraction,atthesametimeincreasingtheeffectivenessofteaching,classroomteachingshouldchangetheideaof“teacher-centered”teachingto“student-centered”teaching.Thirdly,teachers’abilitytodesignquestionsneedtobeenhanced.Asthecarrierofclassroomquestioning,teachersmustimprovetheircomprehensivequalities.6.2SuggestionsforTeacherQuestioningInviewofthelimitationforthepresentstudies,theauthorwouldliketogivesomesuggestionstoteacherquestioning.Accordingtotheaboveresearchconclusion,thereexistsproblemsinEnglishteacherquestioning,anditneedstobefurtherimproved.Asforthis,thisstudyputsforwardsomesuggestionstoEnglishclassroomquestioningandhopestoprovideEnglishteacherswithreference,andthusimprovetheprimaryschoolEnglishteacherquestioning.Thefuturestudiesshouldenlargethenumberofthestudysubjects.Ifpossible,thestudysubjectsshouldcomefromdifferentcountyandfromdifferentgrades.AndthefuturestudymayadoptmorereliableandvalidinstrumentstomeasuretheEnglishclassroomteacherquestioning.Inthisresearch,theauthorhasemphasizedtheimportanceofclassroomquestioning.AndthetypesofteacherquestioningandthemainproblemsexistedinteacherquestioninginprimaryschoolEnglishclassroomteachinghavebeentalkedabout.Inordertosolvethesesproblems,somesuggestionshavebeen-48- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolputforward,accordingtotheinterviewandquestionnaire.Specificallyspeaking,teachersshouldpromotethefollowingaspectsoftheirquestioningbehaviors.ThespecificsuggestionsthatthisstudyhaveontheprimaryschoolEnglishteachers’classroomquestioningareasfollows:Firstly,tomakeclearthepurposeofquestioningAclearpurposeistheprerequisiteforthesuccessorfailureofclassroomquestioning.Intheconcreteprocessofteaching,teachersshouldproposedifferenttypesofquestionsaccordingtotheteachingpurposeandtasksofeachclass.Beforeaskingaquestion,theteachermustcautiouslydesignandlimitthepurpose,scope,extent,andtheangleofquestioning.Questioningwithadefiniteobjectcanachievethepurposeofteaching.Teachersshouldcontinuetoadopttheconceptofteachingtogetherwitheducationreform,curriculumandteachingreform.Oncetheoriginalteachingideasdonotaccommodatetheexistingteachingandcurriculumpractice,itneedsfindingtherootcausetoadaptthechangingeducationalandteachingpractice.Especiallywhenthepurposeofeducationandteachingchanges,itistimeforteacherstoactivelychangetheoldideasandputthenewideasintopractice.Thatisaseveretestandhigherrequestforteachers.Inaddition,thevocabularythatteachersusedtoaskquestionsshouldbeclearandinaccordwithstudents’actuallevel.Afterproposingquestioning,teachersshouldlistencarefullytostudents’answers.Onlyinthisway,canthestudentstakepartintheclassroomactivitiesactively,andquestioningcanbeatwo-waycommunication,namelyaninteractionbetweenteachersandstudents,studentsandstudents.Secondly,teachersshouldchangetheirteachingidea,genuinelyputthe“students-centered”teachingideaintopracticeandencouragethestudentstoputforwardquestionsactively.Thefollowingactivitiescanbeusedtoencouragestudentstoparticipateinquestioning:Firstly,setquestioningtime“teacherscanprovidethestudentswithquestioningtimeonceaweek.(6to8minutes)Duringthisperiod,thestudentscanputforwardanyquestionsthatarerelatedwithwhattheyhavelearnrecently.Secondly,setupthesituation.Inspirethestudents’desireofposingquestionsandletthestudentsspeakoutwhatheorshewanttoknowbasedonthesituationthattheteachersetup.Thirdly,payingattentiontocreateinformationgap,andencouragetherealcommunication.Inordertocultivatethestudents’realcommunicationability,theteachershouldfocusoncreatinginformationgap,theguessinggame!Roleplay!Intervieworpressconferences,-49- Chapter6DiscussionandConclusionaslongastheactivityhasthecharacteristicsofinformationgapandcaneffectivelyimprovethechanceofstudents’questioning.Thesekindsofactivitiescantriggeratruecommunication,forthestudents’informationisincomplete,theyneedmoreinformationtosupplementtheirweakpoints.Fourthly,inviteaguestorcreateacharacter.“ifteacherswanttotriggerarealcommunication,theyneedtoinviteaguestorintroduceacharacter.”Thiskindofpracticingcanbetterachievetheeffectofrealcommunication.Thirdly,teachersshouldimprovetheirownabilitiesofquestioningstrategies,andavoidusingasinglequestioningstrategy.Timelyandappropriatefeedbackcanenhancethestudents’learningmotivationandstimulatetheirdesiretoparticipateintheclassroominteraction.Teachersshouldgivemorepositivefeedback,morepraiseandmoreencouragementtostudents’answer.Praiseorpositiveevaluationmeansanaffirmationtostudents’ability,whichcanimprovethestudents’positivityandinitiative,inspiretheircommunicativeenthusiasmandincreasetheirconfidenceintheprocessofcommunication.Therefore,teachersshouldnottoostingytogivepraisetostudentswhentheymakeanevaluation.Forthestudentswithpoorfoundation,teachersshouldespeciallytakeamoreeffectivewaytoinspiretheirthinkingabilityandencouragethemtouseEnglishtocommunicate.Teacherscanapplyvariouswaysoffeedbackaccordingtothestudents’differentlearningstyles.Forexample,forthebackwardandintrovertedstudents,teachersshouldgivemoreencouragementandguidethemtobecomemoreactivetoconveytheirviewpoint.Itisanartforteacherstohandlestudents’errorsormistakes.Teachersshouldnotonlygivethelearnersthecognitivefeedback,butalsotheemotionalsupport(Allwright&Bailey,1991:99).Infact,thelengthofwaittimeisoneofthefactorsthataffecttheratioofstudents’answers.Soitisverynecessaryforteacherstoprovidestudentswithenoughwaiting-time.Ifstudentshaveenoughwaittime,theiroutputwillincreaseandbecomemoremeaningful.Andtheeffectivecommunicationwillbeachievedbetweenateacherandhisorherstudents.Thesufficienttimewillhelpstudentsarousetheirthinkingability,andimprovetheirorganizeability.Onthecontrary,ifthestudentsarenotgivenenoughtimetothinkaboutaquestion,theywillgraduallyloseinterestinansweringquestions.Therefore,studentscanformulatetheiranswerbetterundertheconditionofadequatewaiting-time.Thentheinteractionbetweenteachersandstudentscanbeshapedandthecorrectrateofthestudents’answerwillincrease.Afterproposingthequestion,teachersneedtoembellishthequestionbyusing-50- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolcertainquestioningstrategieswhenthestudentfailtoanswerit.However,accordingtothedatacollection,fewerteachersusevariousquestioningstrategiesinrealclass.Asreferredinthepreviouschapter,questioningstrategiesincludeprompting,paraphrasing,repeating,probing,redirecting,translatinganddecomposing.Theproportionofthesestrategieshasabigdifference.Somestrategiesareusedfrequentlywhileothersarerarelyused.Ifthestudentshavedifficultiesinansweringthequestions,teachersshouldapplysuitablequestioningstrategiestoguidethestudentstothecorrectanswer.Intermsoftheeffectivestrategiesofclassroomquestioning,thewordsteacherusedinquestioningshouldbesimple,detailed,clear,andaccurate.IntheEnglishclassroomteaching,usingdifferentquestioningstrategiesrelyondifferenttime,peopleandplace.Intheauthenticclassroom,teachersshouldnotonlyemphasizewhatkindofstrategiesareused,butalsopayattentiontothemutualcomplementofthesedifferentstrategiesaccordingtotheactualsituationoftheclass.Teachersshoulddotheirbesttoprovidethestudentswiththesameopportunitytoanswerthequestion.Inaddition,intheclassroomteaching,teachersshouldnotcompletelycontrolthepowerofquestioning.Onthecontrary,teachersshouldguidethestudentstoaskquestionsbythemselves.Theteachershouldalsodelivertheinitiativetostudentsandencouragethemtoaskmorequestions.Thiswayof“question-answer”betweenteachersandstudentsshouldbeinteractiveandbidirectional.Teachersmuststudythematerialsintensivelyintheprocessofpreparinglessons,accuratelygraspthekeypointsanddifficultpointsandcarefullydesignthequestionsaccordingtotheteachingobjectives.Meanwhile,teachersneedtoputstudents’actuallevel,students’interestinlearningandtheirthinkingabilityintoconsideration,whentheydesignthequestions.Andthequestionsdesignedbyteachersshouldstimulatethestudents’interest,guidethestudentstounderstandstepbystepandmakethestudentsindifferentlevelsgetanimprovementintheaspectsofknowledge,cognizanceandthinking.Inaddition,theteachershouldalsoconsidertheexpandabilityofstudents’answersandthecorrespondingfeedback.Asmentionedintheprevioussection,teachersshoulddesignvarioustypesofquestionsaccordingtotheteachingcontentandstudents’differentlevels.Besides,teachersshouldmakeuseofpropertypesofquestionsonthebasisofteachingobjectives,teachingcontentandstudents’existinglevel.Teachersshouldkeepinmindthatonepurposeofteacherquestioningistostimulatesthestudentsinterestinlearningandinspiretheirthinkingability.-51- Chapter6DiscussionandConclusionFourthly,toimprovethequestioningbehaviorandtheteachingefficiencyFirstofall,inordertodeepenstudents’understandingandcausemoreoraloutput,theteachershouldfullydesignquestionsandmakefulluseofvariousquestiontypes.ThisneedsEnglishteachertopreparethequestioninadvance.Whentheteachersdesignthequestion,heorsheshouldputthestudents’factorintoconsideration.Forexample,students’cognitivelevel,languageability,familiarwiththesubject,students’interestandsoon.Suchquestionscanconformtothestudents’abilityandexperience.Inordertoguaranteetheabilitylevelofstudents’demand,theeffectivemethodistoincreasethequestionfromsimpletocomplex.Itcanstimulatetheenthusiasmofstudents’learningandencouragethepassivestudentsparticipateinclassroominteraction.Inaddition,thequestionsthattheteacherproposedshouldbecloselyrelatedwiththecontent.Studentscanlearnalotfromthequestionsassociatedwiththetext;therefore,Englishteachersshouldnotonlypayattentiontotheproblemandpayattentiontothecontentofthequestionandthechoiceofwords.Iftheteacher’squestionsarethestudents’existingknowledge,experienceandability,thestudentisverywillingtoanswerteacher’squestion.Moreover,teachersalsoshouldchoosetheappropriatetime,whenheorshedecidestoproposethequestion.Secondly,teachersshouldmakefulluseofquestioningstrategies,inordertoincreasethequalityofthestudents’oraloutput.Furthermore,teachersshouldusedifferentquestioningstrategiesfordifferentstudents.Forexample,promptstrategiesandexplorationstrategiescantriggerstudents’oraloutput.Teachersusepromptstrategiestoencouragestudentstomakecertainabouttheirresponse,andleadtocompleteanswer.Explorationstrategiescanhelplearnerstodeepentheirunderstandingofthetopic.Althoughself-explainingstrategyisnoteffectivecomparedwithotherstrategies,thisstrategycanhelpnon-nativelanguagelevelstudentsgettherealunderstandingofthequestion.Inaddition,thequestioningstrategiescanencouragemorestudentstoparticipateinclassroominteraction,sotheteachersshouldproperlyusedifferentquestioningstrategies.Asfortheappropriatewaiting-time,sothatstudentshaveenoughtimetoorganizetheanswer.Ingeneral,theteachershouldprovidestudentswithenoughthinkingtimebeforethestudentcananswerthisquestion.But,thereisnoidealtimelimit.Inthiscase,teachersneedtoadjustthewaiting-time,accordingtoseveralaspects,suchasstudents’cognitivelevel,thedifficultydegreeofthequestion,theteachinggoal,andsoon.Forexample,ifthestudentsfindthequestioniseasytoanswer,andthequestionmainly-52- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolreviewthetextcontent,thenteachersshouldshortenthewaitingtime.Shorterwaitingtimecannotonlyattractthestudents’attentionandsavethevaluableteachingtime.Ifthequestionisdifficultforstudentstounderstand,theteachermainlywanttotriggerafurtherdiscussion,thenslowingdownabitcanmakemorestudentsparticipateinclassroominteraction.Asforthefeedback,thetimelyuseofteacherfeedbackandtheflexibleuseofpositivefeedbackandnegativefeedback.Properfeedbacktostudent’sanswercanmakestudentshaveasenseofaccomplishmentandtheywillfeeltheirthinkingiscorrect.Thepositivefeedbackcanimprovethestudents’enthusiasmandreducethestudents’anxiety.Therefore,theappropriatelyuseofpositivefeedbackwillhavepositiveeffectonstudents’learning.Therearethreetypesofstudentsanswer:correct,partiallycorrectornotcorrect.Sometimes,thestudentshavenoresponsetothequestion.Theteachershouldguidestudentstopayattentiontotheerrorsintheanswerandprovidecorrectivefeedback,sothattheycancorrecterrorsbythemselves,ratherthansimplyuseyesornofeedbackordirectlygivetherightanswer.Atthesametime,amongvariouskindsofnegativefeedback,inductionfeedback,clarificationfeedbackandmeta-languageexplanationshouldbeadopted,teacherscangivestudentsmoreopportunitiestoexpressthemselves,andfurtherguidethestudenttoanswer.Ifteacherseffectivelydealingwiththestudent’sanswer,thestudentwillgetagreatencouragement,thelearningenthusiasmwillbeimproved,soastopromotetheimprovementoftheirexpressability.Itisalsoimportanttocreateaharmoniousclassroomatmosphere.Intheteacher-centeredclass,studentsarenotwillingtoanswerquestionsandevenaskaquestionbythemselves.Thedominantpositionofstudentscannotbeignored.Thusinordertoenhancestudents’self-study,weteachersshouldcreateastudent-centeredclass.Intermsofteacherquestioning,students’subjectivityshouldbeemphasized.Intheactualclasses,whentheteachergiveslessons,thestudentsjustlistenandtakenotes.Studentsgetknowledgeinapassivestate.Althoughteacherscanmakegooduseofquestionstointeractwithstudents,itisstillunderthechargeofteachers.Sometimes,thestudentsarenotwillingtoputuphisorherhandtoanswerthequestionevenifheorsheknowstheanswer.Itistheresultofteacher’sdominationinclass.Ifteacherscannotcreateanequalandharmoniousclassroomatmosphere,studentswillhavenocouragetoanswertheteacher’questionandtheyaredaringnottoaskquestionsinclass.Instudent-centeredclass,teachersoftenencouragethestudenttobeaquestioner.Infact,a-53- Chapter6DiscussionandConclusionfewquestionsareposedbystudentsinrealclass.Inordertoenhancestudents’self-confidenceandreducetheiranxietyinansweringquestions,weteachersshouldpaycloseattentiontotheireffectivefactorsandpsychologyfactorsintheprocessofaskingaquestion.6.3LimitationsoftheStudyAlthoughtheauthordoesherbesttocarrythroughtheinvestigation,therearestillsomelimitationsinthisresearch.First,thelimiteddatacollectionofmypresentstudy,becauseofthelimitedtimeandenergy,theauthorjusttake220students(110grade5and110grade6)fromprimaryschoolofonecounty(ZiChangCounty)asthesubjectstodothequestionnaire;whileonly6Englishteachersaretakenastheinterviewees.Theyarenotenoughtocoverallvariablesandconditions.Moreover,theresearchsubjectscouldnotrepresentthegeneralpersonofEnglishlearnersinallprimaryschools,foralltheteachersandstudentsarefromthesameprimaryschool.Then,themaininstrumentsinthisstudyareaquestionnaireandinterview,whichmaybeinsufficienttoreflecttheauthenticsituationofthestudents.Somestudentsmaynotfullyunderstandaboutsomequestionswhentheyfillinthequestionnaires.Therefore,maybesomeimproperanswersaregiven,whichhavenotbenoticedbytheauthor.Sothereistoomuchroomleftforustoimprovetheresearchmethodsofthisfield.Itisespeciallynecessaryforustoovercometheabovelimitationsanddofurtherresearch.6.4NecessityofFurtherResearchAsteacherquestioninginprimaryschoolEnglishclassroomsiscomplexandextensive,webelievethattherewillbemoreandmoreinvestigatorsinthefuturewhocandomorereliableresearchonthistopic,overcometheabovelimitations,exploretheaccurateandcomprehensiveapplicationofteacherquestioninginprimaryschoolEnglishclass,andteacherscanapplyclassroomquestioningeffectivelyandscientifically.Twosuggestionsareshowninthefollowing;theymaybehelpfulforthefurtherresearch.Oneisthatweshouldtrytomakethesubjectsmoreextensiveandmorerepresentative.Wecanchoosedifferentteachersandstudentsfromdifferentschools.Theresearchresultsof-54- AnInvestigationoftheTeacher’sQuestioninginEnglishClassofPrimarySchoolteacherquestioningwillbemorepersuasiveonlywhenthenumberofresearchsampleissufficient.Theotheroneisthatweshouldusedifferentkindsofinstrumentstodotheresearch,thuswecanhavemoredatasourcesandanalyzethecollecteddatafromvariousaspects.Inaddition,teachersshoulddotheirbesttoimprovestudents’languageabilitiesandmaketheclassroomatmospheremoreharmoniousthroughteacherquestioning.-55- ReferencesReferencesAllwright,D.(1991).FocusontheLanguageClassroom:AnIntroductiontoClassroomResearchforlanguageTeachers.1991:CambridgeUniversityPress.Borich,G.D.(2002).EffectiveTeachingMethods.NanJing:JiangSuEducationPress.Barnes，D．FromCommunicationtoCurriculum[M]．PenguinBooksLtd：Reprintedition，1976BrownHDPrinciplesofLanguageLearnersandTeaching[M]．Beijing：ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress，2001Chuska,K.R.(1995).ImprovingClassroomQuestions.Indiana:PhideltaKappaEducationalFoundationBloomington.ClassroomResearchStudy.TheReadingMatrix,4(2),96-104Dantonio,M.(2006:29).TheArtofClassroomQuestioning.[M].Beijing:ZhongGuoQingGongYePress,(2006-7)Ellis,R.(1994).TheStudyofSecondLanguageAcquisition.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Fusco，Esther．EffectiveQuestioningStrategiesintheClassroom：AStep-by-StepApproachtoEngagedThinkingandLearning，K-8[M]．TeachersCollegePress，2012，4Feldman，D．H．．Thecreationofmultipleintelligencestheory：Astudyinhighlevelthinking，InV.John-Steiner&K.Sawyer(Eds.)，Developmentandcreativity[M]．NewYork：OxfordUniversityPress．2003Jacobsen,D.A.(1999).Methodsforteaching:promotingstudentlearning.NewJersey:Prentice-Hall,Inc.Hawkes，Rachel.TalkingtoLearnandLearningtoTalk:TeacherandLearnerTalkintheSecondaryForeignLanguagesClassroom[J].InternationalJournalofLearningandChange.2010，4Krashen,S.D.(1981).SecondLanguageAcquisitionandSecondLanguage.Oxford:PergamonPress.Krashen,S.D.(1985).TheInputHypothesis.Essex:LongmanGroupLimited.-56- ReferencesLong,M.H.(1983).Nativespeaker/nonnativespeakerconversationandthenegotiationofcomprehensibleinput.AppliedLinguistics,4,126-141.LongM&CSato．ClassroomOrientedResearchinSecondLanguageAcquisition[M]．NewburyHouse，1983Mitchell,R.&Myles,F.(2004).SecondLanguageLearningTheories.London.Nunan,D.(1989).DesigningTasksfortheCommunicativeClassroom.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Olsher，Gila．AskingQuestionsasaKeyStrategyinGuidingaNoviceTeacher：ASelf-Study[J]．StudyingTeacherEducating．2012，8．P157-168Postman,N.(1979).TeachingasaConservingActivity.NewYork:LaurelPress.Richard,C.(2002).SupportiveTeacherTalk:theImportanceoftheF-move.ELTJournal,56(2),117-127.Richards,J.C.(2002).LongmanDictionaryofLanguageTeachingAppliedLinguistics.Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress.Richard，C.R.&Lockhart.ReflectiveTeachinginSecondLanguageClassroom[M].Beijing.People’sEducationPress，2000.P85-210Stern,H.H.(1983).FundamentalConceptofLanguageTeaching.Oxford:OxfordUniversitypress.Shomoossi,N.(2004).TheEffectofTeachers’QuestioningBehavioronEFLClassroomInteraction:ASchultz，RenateA．CulturalDifferencesinStudentandTeacherPerceptionsConcerningtheRoleofGrammarInstructionandCorrectiveFeedback：USA&Colombia[J]．TheModernLanguageJournal，2001，85SwainM，LapkinS.FocusOnFormthroughCollaborativeDialogue:ExploringTaskEffects[C]//BygateM，SkehanP，SwainM.Task-basedLearning:LanguageTeaching，LearningandAssessment.Harlow，Essex:AddisonWesleyLongman，2004Stern,H.H.(1983).FundamentalConceptofLanguageTeaching.Oxford:OxfordUniversitypress.Shomoossi,N.(2004).TheEffectofTeachers’QuestioningBehavioronEFLClassroomInteraction:AClassroomResearchStudy.TheReadingMatrix,4(2),96-104.Krashen,S.D.(1985).TheInputHypothesis.Essex:LongmanGroupLimited.-57- ReferencesLong,M.H.(1983).Nativespeaker/nonnativespeakerconversationandthenegotiationofcomprehensibleinput.AppliedLinguistics,4,126-141.LongM&CSato．ClassroomOrientedResearchinSecondLanguageAcquisition[M]．NewburyHouse，1983Mitchell,R.&Myles,F.(2004).SecondLanguageLearningTheories.London.Nunan,D.(1989).DesigningTasksfortheCommunicativeClassroom.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Olsher，Gila．AskingQuestionsasaKeyStrategyinGuidingaNoviceTeacher：ASelf-Study[J]．StudyingTeacherEducating．2012，8．P157-168Postman,N.(1979).TeachingasaConservingActivity.NewYork:LaurelPress.Richard,C.(2002).SupportiveTeacherTalk:theImportanceoftheF-move.ELTJournal,56(2),117-127.Richards,J.C.(2002).LongmanDictionaryofLanguageTeachingAppliedLinguistics.Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress.Richard，C.R.&Lockhart.ReflectiveTeachinginSecondLanguageClassroom[M].Beijing.People’sEducationPress，2000.P85-210Stern,H.H.(1983).FundamentalConceptofLanguageTeaching.Oxford:OxfordUniversitypress.Shomoossi,N.(2004).TheEffectofTeachers’QuestioningBehavioronEFLClassroomInteraction:ASchultz，RenateA．CulturalDifferencesinStudentandTeacherPerceptionsConcerningtheRoleofGrammarInstructionandCorrectiveFeedback：USA&Colombia[J]．TheModernLanguageJournal，2001，85SwainM，LapkinS.FocusOnFormthroughCollaborativeDialogue:ExploringTaskEffects[C]//BygateM，SkehanP，SwainM.Task-basedLearning:LanguageTeaching，LearningandAssessment.Harlow，Essex:AddisonWesleyLongman，2004Stern,H.H.(1983).FundamentalConceptofLanguageTeaching.Oxford:OxfordUniversitypress.Shomoossi,N.(2004).TheEffectofTeachers’QuestioningBehavioronEFLClassroomInteraction:AClassroomResearchStudy.TheReadingMatrix,4(2),96-104.Tobin，Kenneth．TheRoleofWaitTimeinHigherCognitiveLevelLearning．ReviewofEducationalResearch，1987Yuan，F．&Ellis，R．Theeffectsofpre-taskplanningandon-lineplanningonfluency，-58- ReferencescomplexityandaccuracyinL2oralproduction[J]．AppliedLinguistics，2003，1．P2-13陈琳，王蔷，程晓堂．英语新课程标准解读．北京：北京师范大学出版社，2003曹敏．英语课堂中促进学生话语输出的教师提问策略研究．《海外英语》．2012，11．P20-22陈瑶.(2002).课堂观察指导.北京:教育科学出版社.程晓樵.(2003).课堂互动中的机会均等.南京:江苏教育出版社.蔡楠荣.(2006).课堂掌控艺术.北京:教育科学出版社傅利.(2008).英语作为外语的课堂问答话语语用研究.北京:科学出版社顾杰.英语课堂教学中的成功教师反馈语个案研究.西南大学硕士论文，2008郭艳敏，(2013).初中英语课堂教师提问对学生口语输出的影响研究.山西师范大学硕士论文，2013加里·D·鲍里奇，2002，《有效教学方法》，江苏：江苏教育出版社.刘显国.(2000).课堂提问艺术.北京:中国林业出版社.路建中.(2003).初中新课程课堂教学策略.北京:科学出版社.刘雄姿．外语课堂教学中纠错性反馈研究综述．《兰州教育学院学报》．2010，5．P74卢仁顺．“输出假设”研究对我国英语教学的启示．《外语与外语教学》．2002，4．P34-37李志厚.(2004).通过有效提问促进学生思维发展.教育导刊.马冬梅．英语教学中小组口语活动后的学生自我纠错．《外语教学与研究》．2002，3．P131-135秦杰，田金平．英语学科教育学．北京：外语教学与研究出版社，2008沈萍．试论英语课堂上教师的展示性问题和参考性问题．《凯里学院学报》．2012，5．P134-136童淑华．输出策略能力发展研究—对第二语言学习者实证分析．《外语教学》．2009，3．P63-68王笃勤.(2002).英语教学策略论.北京:外语教学与研究出版社.王笃勤.(2004).英语教学策略论.北京:外语教学和研究出版社.王方林.(2002).何谓有效的课堂提问.教育理论与实践,7.王晓光.(2004).英语课堂教师提问研究.吉林大学.王雪梅.(2006).课堂提问的有效性及其策略研究.西北师范大学.翁勋章．利用互动教学模式提高学生的语言输出能力．《继续教育研究》．2010，11．P145-146许高厚.《课堂教学技艺》[M]．北京：北京师范大学出版社，1997.夏笑娟．教师提问的方式与外语习得．《黑龙江高教研究》．2004，6．P134-136徐立群．英语课堂教师提问类型的调查与分析．《外语界》．2010，3．P60-65肖锋．学会学习——课堂教学技能的理论与实践．杭州：浙江大学出版社，2004杨雪燕.外语教师课堂策略研究：状况与意义[J]．《外语教学与研究》.2003,(1):54-61-59- References郑庆生.(1997).教学工作技能训练.上海:华东师范大学出版社.张羚.(2003).中学英语课堂提问方式的研究.华东师范大学外国语学院,上海.张文忠，吴旭东．第二语言口语流利性发展定量研究．《现代外语》．2001，4．P341-351周军平．教师话语与第二语言习得．《外语教学》．2006，3．P69-72中华人民共和国教育部.(2011).义务教育英语课程标准.北京:北京师范大学出版社.-60- AppendixAppendixI关于小学英语教师课堂提问情况的调查问卷（学生卷）亲爱的同学：你好！欢迎参加我们的问卷调查。本问卷主要是想了解你们英语教师课堂提问情况况，每个句子后面有五个分值，请按照自己的实际情况打分，你只能选择其中一个，答案不分对错，你只要在最适合你的答案上打√。每题选项一次代表：1，非常不符合：2，比较不符合;3,不能确定;4,比较符合：5，非常符合。调查的结果只用于数据统计分析和英语课堂提问现状研究，不会公开您的任何个人信息，不会对您个人的生活学习带来任何负面影响。您的意见非常宝贵，感谢您的合作。为了避免再次填写的麻烦，在答完题目后请注意检查，不要漏选。年级：性别：年龄：非比不比较非常常较能不符不符编号题目符符确合合合合定1我不喜欢被老师提问543212我愿意主动举手发言并非常希望老师让我回答54321课堂提问3老师提问问题的答案不能直接从课文中找到，54321需要自己整理思考4老师一般不提开放性问题(即不知道答案的问54321题)5老师经常会问“why”“how”类的问题543216在课堂上，老师经常会问“大家听明白了吗”54321“完成了吗”这样的问题7老师提出问题后，经常全班集体回答543218老师提出问题后，会选择个别学生回答543219老师喜欢叫成绩好的学生回答问题5432110老师经常叫举手的学生回答问题5432111老师总是随机挑选同学回答问题5432112在回答老师的提问之前，老师会留一些思考的54321时间13老师提出问题后，会立即叫同学回答5432114我们回答完问题后，老师会等待一会，然后再54321评论我们的答案15答不上问题时，老师会将问题译成中文54321-61- Appendix16答不上问题时，老师会重复问同一个问题5432117答不上问题时，老师会用一些提示性问题引导5432118答不上问题时，老师会直接告诉我们正确答案5432119答不上问题时，老师会让其他同学回答5432120回答问题后，老师给我们的评价很合理5432121当我回答正确时，老师会重复我的答案并简单54321评论22当我回答正确时，老师给予我简单鼓励5432123当我回答正确时，老师会对我的答案进行评论54321并进一步发问当我回答正确时，老师会直接让我坐下，不做5432124任何评论回答不对问题，老师会惩罚（罚站，罚做作业5432125等）我们回答错误时，老师会立即纠正，并给出正确答5432126案27回答错误时，老师会重复我的答案并反问我54321当我们回答错误时，老师会再让其他同学来回5432128答29回答错误时，老师会尽力引导我答对54321回答错误时，老师会让我们坐下，不给我们任5432130何评论-62- AppendixAppendixII对学生的访谈：1..当你回答正确时，老师会怎么做？2..当你回答错误时，老师会怎么做？3.你们经常在课堂上主动发问吗？对教师的访谈：1.当您的学生回答正确时，您通常会怎么做？2.当您的学生回答错误时，您会如何处理学生的回答？3.您的学生在课堂中经常主动发问吗？-63- AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgmentsThreeyears,suchastheblink.Lookingbackthreeyearsofgraduatelife,Iamdeeplytouched.Inthisthreeyears,underthehardteachingofteachers,myroommates’sincerehelp,Ihavegrownupalot,andalsogetalotofharvest.TheseareallIgrewupthevaluableexperiencesontheroad.Firstofall,IwouldliketosincerelythankmyrespectedteacherLiXiaofangassociateprofessor,shehasprofoundknowledge.Herhardsolidstyleofwork,rigorousattitudeindoingscholarlyresearchandinfatigablespiritofteachingmotivateandinspireme,whichmakesmealifetime.Thispaperfromtheselectedtopic,openingtothefinalized,teacherLi,inspiteofbeingverybusy,shespendtimetoguidemeduringthethesiswritingandputforwardsomevaluablesuggestions.Here,IsendmyhighrespectandheartfeltthankstoteacherLi!ThankLiangRunsheng,GaoZhidong,LiShirongteachers’learningguidanceandhelptome,thankthemforputtingforwardsomevaluablesuggestionstomythesis;Especially,IwanttothankmyroommatesTianLieandTongShasha.Theygivealotduringthewholeprocessofmythesiswriting.Ithankthesubjectsofthisstudy,itistheircooperationandsupportthathelpmetocompletethedatacollectionofmythesis.Finally,Iwanttothankmyfamily,itistheirsupportandunderstandingthatIcanwholeheartedlytocompletethegraduationthesis!Iwillmakemoreeffortstostudyandwork,toreturnallthepeoplewhohavehelpedme.-64- PublicationsPublications[1]杨艳对高中英语课堂提问策略的分析[J].长春教育学院学报，2015(1):146.-65-
此文档下载收益归作者所有
