國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION
This chapter presents three sections in regard to the pedagogical implications of the study, the limitation of the study, and the suggestions for the future studies.
Pedagogical Implication of the Study
Based on the findings derived from this study, some pedagogical implications are provided to EFL teachers, other related educators, and textbook publishers.
Firstly, EFL teachers can apply theme-based instruction to elementary English classes to improve learners‟ oral communicative competence, and to arouse learners‟
learning attitudes and motivation toward English learning. The findings in the present study indicated that TBI can be considered an effective method to help learners acquire oral communicative competence due to its natural learning
environment and meaningful conceptual framework. Meanwhile, it also contributed greatly to cultivating learners‟ positive attitudes and motivation towards learning English.
Secondly, in providing training programs for teachers, the related educators may take the notions and concepts of the theme-based instruction into consideration.
Since the application of TBI helped children improve oral communicative competence significantly better than the traditional oral instruction, and aroused learners‟ positive learning attitudes and higher motivation towards English learning, educators in this field may probe deeply into the theoretical and methodological areas of the TBI, and construct and implement pedagogical and practical training programs as well.
Although the government provided guidelines for the textbook publishing firms and had specialists evaluate the textbooks before publication, the majority of
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
teachers interviewed in the related studies reported that the contents of the textbooks were “rather mechanical and repetitive with very few communicative activities” (e.g.
Crawfor, 2001, p.12). Subject to the guidelines of the Ministry of Education, most of the school English teachers worked tightly to the topic-based textbooks chosen from limited and similar versions. The contents of the textbook were estimated to account for seventy percentage of the class time; however, the mechanical and repetitive discourse of the textbook can not arouse learners‟ interests and fails to help children produce real communication for the lack of individualization that can meet each child‟s diverse interests and needs (Crawfor, 2001). As displayed in this study, TBI may offer textbook writers new perspectives on designing innovative versions which may focus more on the negotiation of meaning, real interpersonal communication, creative use of language forms, and meaningful learning contents.
Limitation of the Study
Although this study has provided a useful teaching model for the English language learning in the EFL elementary setting, there are some limitations for the present study. First, this research merely involved 94 students in an elementary school located in the central Taiwan, and accordingly, the findings cannot be generalized to all the elementary school students. Besides, there were only four themes constrained to the course book used in the present study. The future studies may explore a wider variety of themes which may meet learners‟ interest and needs.
Moreover, the present study only focused on learners‟ oral communicative competence. Theme-based instruction may also have positive effects on other language skills.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Suggestions for the Future Research
The present study provided the relevant researchers and teachers a teaching model in demonstrating a theme-based oral instruction for helping learners to foster their communication competence as well as arousing learners‟ positive learning attitudes and motivation towards English learning. Nevertheless, the study also provides some suggestions for the future research.
First, the present study only explores learners‟ oral communicative competence;
future studies are recommended to investigate the effects of TBI on other language skills, such as writing, reading, and listening. Further, the researchers are also suggested to probe into the effects of TBI on learners‟ vocabulary learning, communicative competence strategies or cooperative learning.
Secondly, although the findings of this study indicated the positive influence of TBI on learners‟ learning attitudes and motivation towards English learning;
however, the statistical results could not fully illustrate the whole process of learners‟ attitudes and motivation changes toward TBI or learning English.
Qualitative studies regarding the influence of TBI on learners‟ learning behavior changes or other affective changes are suggested to be further implemented. In particular, classroom observation can be included to delve into what aspects of attitudes and motivation resulted in learners‟ successful learning experiences.
In the present study, the main themes were restrained to the textbook for practical reasons since both EG and CG learners have to take monthly exams.
Consequently, the researcher applied the main themes in the textbook to the present study. However, as Cameron (2008) suggested, the optimal situation for the
implementation of theme-based instruction mainly focused on involving learners‟
interest and needs. The future studies are recommended to conduct theme selection
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
based on learners‟ interests and needs.
Finally, the subjects of the study were from one elementary school in the central Taiwan. It is suggested that future studies can take regional variables into consideration by enlarging the sample size, including participants from different elementary schools in different areas of Taiwan.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
REFERENCES
Anderson, R. C. (1977). The notion of schemata and the educational enterprise:
General discussion of the conference. In Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J. &
Montague, W. E. (Eds). Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge (pp.
415-431). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Armbruster, B. (1996). Schema theory and the design of content-area textbook.
Educational Psychologist, 21, 253-276.
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Berry, C. F., & Mindes, G. (1993). Planning a Theme-Based Curriculum: Goals, Themes, Activities, and Planning Guides for 4’s and 5’s. Glenview, IL:
Goodyear.
Bowler, B., & Parminter (2002). Mixed-level teaching: Tiered tasks and bias tasks. In Richards, J.C., & Renandya, W. A. (Eds) Methodology in Language Teaching (pp.
59-63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-Based Second Language Instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (4th ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (2nd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Bruner, J. S. (1983). Child's Talk: Learning to Use Language. New York: Norton.
Bruner, J. S. (1985). Models of the learner. Educational Researcher, 14(6), 5-8.
Cadavid, C. (2003). Teaching English in primary school through a spiral thematic
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
curriculum. Ikkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura, 8(14), 81-97.
Cameron, L. (2008). Teaching Languages to Young Learners (10th ed.). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Can, S. (2009). An Investigation of the Effectiveness of Theme-Based Syllabus on the Motivation of Freshman Students at Atilim University. Unpublished master‟s thesis, Atilim University, Atilim, Turkey.
Canal, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Carreira, M. J. (2006). Motivation for learning English as a foreign language in Japanese elementary schools. The Japan Association for Language Teaching Journal, 28(2), 135-158.
Chang, W. Z. (2006). English language education in Taiwan: A comprehensive survey.
National Taiwan Normal University. 1-17. Retrieved from August 13, 2009 from http://publish.lihpao.com/Education/2006/10/17/0101/.
Chen, C. Y. (2004). A Study of English Learning Attitudes of Elementary School Students in Taichung City. Unpublished master‟s thesis, National Taichung University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Chung, M. C. (2004). Effects of Three Theme-based Projects on English Learning for a CMC Group and a Non-CMC Group in Junior High School in Taiwan.
Unpublished master‟s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Cooper, J. D. (1993). Literacy: Helping Children Construct Meaning (2ed.). Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Coyle, D. (2008). CLIL–A pedagogical approach from the European perspective. In Van D. N., & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds), Encyclopedia Language and Education:
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Second and Foreign Language Education (2nd ed.), (pp. 97-111). New York:
Springer Science + Business Media LLC.
Crawford, J, (2001). Teacher perceptions of the primary English language program in Taiwan: From the outside looking in. Applied Linguistic Association of Australia Annual Conference, Canberra University. 12-24.
Davies, S. (2003). Content based instruction in EFL contexts. The Internet TESL Journal, 9(2). Retrieved from July 13, 2010 from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Davies-CBI.html
De Bot, K. (1996). The psycholinguistics of the output hypothesis. Language Learning, 46, 529-555.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and Researching Motivation. Longman: Pearson Education Limited.
Douglas, M. O. (1996). A theme-based approach: curriculum design for teaching an advanced course of Japanese as a foreign language. Japanese Language Lecture, University of California, Los Angeles, U.S.A.
Doye, P. & Hurrell, A. (1997). Foreign Language Education in Primary Schools.
Council of Europe Press.
Duenas, M. (2004). The whats, whys, hows and whos of content-based instruction in second/foreign language education. International Journal of English Studies, 4(1), 73-96.
Dupuy, B. C. (2000). Content-based instruction: Can it help ease the transition from beginning to advanced foreign language classes? Foreign Language Annals, 33(2), 205-222.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth, TX:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Enright, D. S., & McCloskey, M. L. (1988). Integrating English. Reading, MA:
Newbury House Publishers.
Ernst, G. & Richard, K. (1995). Teacher preparation: Using videotapes in a teaching practicum. FLES News, 8(2), 5-6.
European Commission (2005). European Language Policy and CLIL. Retrieved from August 08, 2009 from http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/education_culture
Finch, A. E. (2001). The non-threatening learning environment. The Korea TESOL Journal, 4(1), 133-158.
Fisher, B. (1991). Joyful Learning: A Whole Language Kindergarten. Portsmouth.
N.H.: Heinemann.
Fleurquin, F (2003). Development of a standardized test for young EFL learners.
Spaan Fellow Working Papers in Second or Foreign Language Assessment, 1, 1-23.
Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (2006). Teaching language through content themes:
Viewing our world as a global village. In Young, T. A., & Hadaway, N. L. (Eds.).
Supporting the Literacy Development of English Learners: Increasing Success in All Classrooms (pp. 61–78). Newark, Del.: International Reading Association.
Gardner, H. (1991). The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think and How Schools Should Teach. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1992). A student‟s contributions to second language acquisition. Part 1: Cognitive variables. Language Teaching, 25, 211-220.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Government Information Office (GIO) (2002). Challenge 2008: The six-year National
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Development Plan. Retrieved from July, 21, 2009 from
http://www.gio.gov.tw/taiwan-website/4-oa/20020521/2002052101.html.
Graddol, D. (2006). English Next. London: British Council.
Heibert, E. H. (1994). Becoming literate through authentic tasks: Evidence and adaptations. In Ruddell, R., & Ruddell, M. R. (Eds.), Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (pp. 391-413). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A Learner-Centred Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hymes, D. (1967). On Communicative Competence. Unpublished mamuscript, University of Pennsylvania.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In Pride J. B., & Holmes J.
(Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings. Baltimore: Penguin.
Jarvinen, H. M. (2005). Language learning in content-based instruction. In Housen, A., & Pierrard, M. (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp. 433-456). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.
KG.
Juez, M. (2006), Linking Language and Content: ESL Instruction through Legal Topics. Retrieve from August, 20, 2009 from
www.unizar.es/aelfe2006/ALEFE06/2.%20didactics/46.pdf.
Kim, Y. (2008). The effects of integrated language-based instruction in Elementary ESL learning. The Modern Language Journal, 92(30), 431-451.
Kiziltan, N., & Ersanli, C. (2007). The contributions of theme-based CBI to Turkish young learners‟ language development in English. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(1), 133-148.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Krahnke, K. (1987). Approaches to Syllabus Design for Foreign Language Teaching.
Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.
Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1984). Immersion: Why it works and what it has taught us. Language and Society, 12, 61-64.
Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. New York and London: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. (2003). Explorations in Language Acquisition and Language Use: The Taipei Lectures. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Krogh, S. (1990). The Integrated Early Childhood Curriculum. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.
Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 31-42.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situate Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, E. (2007). How to learn English? Retrieved from Common Ware Magazine (No.
20070615) on May, 2, 2010 from
http://www.cw.com.tw/article/index.jsp?id=3070.
Lee, Y. C. (2008). A Case Study of Developing Model of English Oral Proficiency Test for Pupils in Kinmen District. Unpublished master‟s thesis, National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
Liruso, S. M., & Debat, E. V. (2003). Giving oral instructions to EFL young learners.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Encuentro Revista de Investigacion e Innovacion en la Clase de Idiomas, 13(14), 138-147.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C., & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of Language Acquisition: Vol. 2. Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York:
Academic Press.
Marsh, D. (2008). Language awareness and CLIL. In Cenoz, J., & Hornberger, N. H.
(Eds). Encyclopedia of Language and Education: Knowledge about Language (2nd ed.), 6, (pp. 233-246). New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC.
Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Oxford, UK: Macmillan Publishers Limited.
Mumford, D. (2000). Planning a Theme Based Unit. Toronto, Canada: Pacific Edge Publishing Ltd.
Nakamura, Y. (1996). Assessment of English speaking ability. Journal of Humantities and Natural Science, 102, 25-53.
Nakamura, Y. (2005). The effects of awareness-raising training on oral communication strategy use. The Modern Language Journal, 89(1), 76-91.
Naughton, D. (2006). Cooperative strategy aining and oral interaction: Enhancing small group communication in the language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 90(2), 169-184.
Nikolov, M. (1999). Why do you learn English? Because the teacher is short: A study of Hungarian children‟s foreign language learning motivation. Language Teaching Research, 3, 33-56.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3 ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Osman, S. F., Ahmad, E. A., & Jusoff, K.(2009). Nurturing writing proficiency through theme-based lnstruction. Computer and Information Science, 2(3), 140-146.
Peregoy, S. F., & Boyle, O. F. (1997). Reading, Writing & Learning in ESL. New York: Longman.
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The Psychology of the Child. New York: Basic Books.
Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., & Morgenthaler, L. (1989). Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 63–90.
Richards J. C., & Rodgers T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Savignon, S. J. (1983). Comunicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Practice.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Seefeldt, C., & Galper, A. (1998). Continuing Issues in Early Childhood Education.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Seo, E. M. (1998). Thematic language instruction for children. Studies in Languge, 14, 111-125.
Slavin, R.E. (1995). Cooperative Learning. (2nd ed.). Bosotn, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Stoller, F. L. , & Grabe, W. (1997). A six-T's approach to content-based instruction.
In Snow, M. A., & Brinton, D. M. (Eds.), The Content-Based Classroom:
Perspectives on Integrating Language and Content, (pp. 78-94). NewYork:
Longman.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Stoller, F. (2004). Content-based instruction: perspectives on curriculum planning.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 261-283.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some rules of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. M. & Madden, C. G.
(Eds.). Input and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA:
Newbury House.
Trim, J. L. M. (1997). Preface. In Doye, P., & Hurrell, A. (Eds.), Foreign Language Education in Primary Schools (age 5/6 to 10/11), (pp. 5). Council of Europe Press.
Tuula, M. S. (2007). Pupils‟ attitudes towards foreign-language learning and the development of literacy skills in bilingual education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 226-235.
Varonis, E., & Gass, S. M. (1985). Miscommunication in native/non-native conversation. Language in Society,14, 327–343.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wachs, S. (1996). Leaving the room: an introduction to theme-based oral English.
Retrieved from The Internet TESL Journal, 2(1) on January 11, 2011 from http://iteslj.org/
Wesche, M. B., & Skehan, P. (2002). Communicative, task-based, and content-based language instruction. In Kaplan, R. B. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics, (pp. 207–228). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, J. (2005). Ethical issues in the testing of young learners. Research Notes, 22, 6-7. (This is an extract from Research Notes, published quarterly by University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations, available on-line from www.CambridgeESOL.org).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Wu, S. M. (1996). Content-based ESL at high school level: A case study. Prospect, 11(1), 18-36.
Wu, S. (2007). Effects of group composition in collaborative learning of EFL writing.
In Stephanidis, C. (Ed.), Universal HCI. Retrieved from April 18, 2009, from http://www. springerlink.com/index/335330p1107l4657.pdf
Yang, C. C. (2009). Theme-based teaching in an English course for primary ESL students in Hong Kong. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 6(2), 161-176.
Zheng, D. L. (2008). Krashen‟s input hypothesis and English classroom teaching.
US-China Foreign Language, 6(9), 53-56.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Appendix A
English Oral Proficiency Test
Item Item Content Picture
Q1
Hello! I‟m Eva.
What‟s your name?
How are you today?
(Greeting! No picture!)
Theme 1: School Subjects
Q2 What do you see in the picture?
Q3 What time is your PE class?
Q4 What‟s your favorite subject?
Q5
Why do you like it so much?
(Talk about the subject teacher or the class.)
Theme 2: People Who Help Us
Q6 I have a brother. Do you have any brothers or sisters?
Q7 My mother is a housewife.
How about your mother? What does she do?
Q8 What does your father do?
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Q9 What do you want to be when you grow up?
Theme 3: Fruit Salad
Q10 Look at the fruit salad.
You can see many fruits. What do you like?
Q11 Let‟s make some fruit salad.
What do we need?
$100 $60
$40 $50
Q12 How much are the pears?
Theme 4: Go Shopping Q13 Look at the picture.
What are they doing?
Q14 There is a flea market.
Let‟s have a look!
Do you like to buy things at the flea market?
$220 $79
$35
$56 $48
Q15 Look at the book bag.
How much is it?
Q16 What would you like to buy at the flea market?
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
English Oral Proficiency Test Scoring Criteria (Lee, 2008)
Level Scores Descriptions
Level 4 4
Use sufficient vocabulary to descript the topic and express grammatically. Adequate level of details and creativity.
Clear, natural pronunciation. Can vary intonation and stress for emphasis. Can express fluently and spontaneously with a smooth flow of language.
Level 3 3
Sentences can be understood though with some grammatical mistakes. Response to the topic; may lack some details or creativity. Clear pronunciation and intonation. Does not make errors that cause misunderstanding. Can express fluently with few noticeably long pauses.
Level 2 2
Incomplete responses; lacks some important information.
Pronunciation and intonation are often inaccurate, but can be understood Can make him/herself understood in very short utterances, even though pauses, false starts, and reformulation are very evident.
Level 1 1
Provide little utterance to the topic. Using isolated words or sentence fragments make comprehension quite difficult.
Pronunciation is not clear enough to recognize the utterances. Much pausing to search for expressions to articulate less familiar words.
‧
(Chinese Version Questionnaire)
No._______
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
17.我樂意做英語作業，因為對我的學習有幫助。...□ □ □ □ 18.上英語課總是讓我感到焦慮。...□ □ □ □ 19.上英語課時當我在全班面前回答或表達，我會緊張。...□ □ □ □ 20.學習英語可以讓我多了解其他國家的文化。...□ □ □ □ 21.當我的英語變得流利時，對我的將來是有幫助的。...□ □ □ □ 22.學習英語可以應用在我將來的生活上。...□ □ □ □ 23.目前我很少用到英語，所以不想學。...□ □ □ □ 24.我現在學習英語是希望將來能進入高中或大學就讀。...□ □ □ □ 25.現在學習英語是為了將來的工作。...□ □ □ □
‧
國立 政 治 大 學