高等教育跨領域「全球英語議題」課程之教學設計及實踐

(1)

教育部教學實踐研究計畫成果報告

(封面)

Project Report for MOE Teaching Practice Research Program (Cover Page)

計畫編號/Project Number：PED107082

學門分類/Division：教育

執行期間/Funding Period：107/08/01~108/07/30

(計畫名稱/Title of the Project):高等教育跨領域「全球英語議題」課程之教學設

計及實踐

(配合課程名稱/Course Name):

全球英語議題

計畫主持人(Principal Investigator)：鄒文莉共同主持人(Co-Principal Investigator)：陳慧琴

執行機構及系所(Institution/Department/Program)：國立成功大學外文系

(2)

高等教育跨領域「全球英語議題」課程之教學設計及實踐

一. 報告內文

1. 研究動機與目的(Research Motive and Purpose)

請描述所選擇研究議題的問題挑戰與背景、教學實務現場遇到之挑戰以及該議題的重要性與影響力。

「英語為全球通用語」(English as a lingua franca, ELF) 為當今全球化社會的一個重要現象。ELF 的主要精神在於讓英語為非母語(non-native)的使用者(如亞洲、歐洲等)擁有建立其英語使用方式的權力，不再受限於傳統教學英式或美式英文的單一標準。Widdowson (1994)首先提出英語的所有權(ownership)並主張沒有一個國家或民族可以宣稱擁有英語的所有權。之後 David Crystal 於 1997 年提出「英語為全球語」（English as a global language）的概念並預測以英語為外語的人口將很快超過英語為第一語言的人數。接下來 Jennifer Jenkins (2000) 提出 ELF 的現象並提出此通用語的核心語音理論以及相關的教學實踐，讓非母語使用者可以掌握英語交流的基本能力。David Graddol 在其《English Next》(2006)一書中也提出「全球英語（Global English）」的概念，指出英語學習及教學將因為現今非英語系國家—尤其是中國及西班牙語—的經濟崛起而呈現新的面貌，並預測此全球英語趨勢將對於全球經貿、文化、國家政策以及語言教育帶來非常重要的影響。無庸置疑，英語在國際政治、經貿、旅遊等領域已經占據主要地位。英語在全球教育更是重要媒介，許多先進的知識發表和專業社群討論都使用英語，讓英語儼然成為參與國際交流的「通行證」。因此越來越多的國家更重視英語教育，或甚至將英語納入官方語言。在全球教育現場，歐盟全力推動多種語言及跨文化認知及交流，讓「學科內容與語言整合學習」(Content and Language

(3)

(4)

(5)

(3)「拼圖式」教學法及合作學習 「拼圖式」教學法的主要概念在於透過人際互動及同儕學習，培養學生對同學的責任心，同時提升主動學習能力例如批判思考、解決問題、溝通討論等重要學習技能(Aronson, 1971)。此教學法的初衷在於解決族群衝突，研究顯示，此教學法的成效不只明顯降低跨族群學童間的敵意憤怒，更能有效提升學習成效，因此「拼圖式」教學法的相關技巧已經廣泛地被運用在全球的教學情境中(Aronson & Patnoe, 1997)。在台灣，相關研究報告也指出「拼圖式」教學法適用於各學習階段包括國小、國高中、大學等，適用的學科包括人文社會、數學、資訊、科學領域、線上多媒體教學等 (Chang, 2004; Huang, Huang, & Hsieh, 2008; 石兆蓮， 2002; 林至彥，2007; 簡妙娟，2000)。「拼圖式」教學法的主要設計在於透過學生的原屬小組(home groups)及專家小組(expert groups)的組員間彼此合作，共同研究和分享學習內容而成。也就是說，原屬小組中的組員透過分工各負責一部分的學習資訊，在各組中負責同一任務的成員組成專家小組，透過討論、研究、交流，再回到各自小組內，將獲得的資訊傳授給其他原屬小組成員。在過去數十年間，學者為了更進一步提升此教學法的成效，提出多項修正建議，包括在步驟中加入其他要素例如個別小考、考前合作複習、教師回饋、小組表揚等(Slavin, 1980, 1995;簡妙娟，2000)。作為一種合作學習法，「拼圖式」討論包含分工型合作學習(cooperative learning)、共事型合作學習(collaborative)和同儕互動(interaction)等三項要素。 Oxford(1997)認為這三種類型的互動均為學習不可或缺的要素。在「拼圖式」討論過程中，原屬小組的組員透過分工及訊息傳授進行學習，專家小組的成員則針對共同的目標，共同進行研究討論，建構解決方法。因此「拼圖式」教學法對於學習者的心理成長而言，除了培養同理心、降低對立衝突，更有其鼓勵學習者參與學習社群的貢獻。在當今多元化的社會中，「拼圖式」合作學習訓練有效培養

大學生進入全球化社會所需的團隊能力(Chang, 2004; Huang, Huang, & Hsieh, 2008; Ke, 2011, 2012)。

(4)教學實踐行動

(6)

3. 研究方法(Research Methodology) (1) 研究說明(請具體說明教學或課程設計，如：係針對整體課程、單元主題、 教學方法、作業設計或評量策略…等不同研究主題所進行的具體設計。) A. 整體課程目標本課程的目標在於探討英語如何晉升成為當今語言學習及文化教育的重要媒介，以及此現象對於英語學習的影響，並透過拼圖式課室討論及跨文化溝通實踐學生全球競合力的培養。學生將獲得跨文化溝通及英語為通用語言學習的理論基礎，透過反思評估自己的跨文化經驗，進一步了解英語語文化之教學應用。學生也將有機會與國外大學的學生，透過視訊及線上討論進行跨文化議題的討論。詳細課程大綱內容請見附件一。 B. 單元主題本課程單元主題包括:英語為全球通用語、語言與文化、跨文化溝通與文化認知、語言與跨文化教育等議題。閱讀教材如下: 跨文化溝通與文化認知閱讀教材如下:

 Baker, Will. 2015. Intercultural communication and ELF. In Culture and identity through English as a lingua franca: Rethinking concepts and goals in intercultural communication, 15-44. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

 Brown, Steven, Brenda Hayashi & Kikue Yamamoto. 2012. Japan/Anglo-American cross-cultural communication. In Christina Bratt Paulston, Scott F. Kiesling & Elizabeth S. Rangel (eds.), The handbook of intercultural discourse and communication, 252-271. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

 Ishikawa, Tomokazu. (September) 2017. Japanese university students’ attitudes towards their English and the possibility of ELF awareness. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 6(2).

 Pennycook, Alastair. 2007. Language flows, language mixes. In Global Englishes and transcultural flows, 116-139. London: Routledge.

文化衝擊、國族刻板印象、台灣研究生在多元文化課室中的課堂餐與及主體建構、英語為國際語教學及文化在亞洲英語學習情境所扮演的角色等議題。閱讀教材如下:

 Oxenden, C., Latham-koenig, C., Byrne, T., Culture Shock, American English File 3, Oxford UP, ISBN:978-0-19-477448-2

 Oxenden, C., Latham-koenig, C., Byrne, T., Culture Shock, National

Stereotypes: Truth or Myth? American English File (1st_{ed). Oxford UP, 2009} ISBN:978-0-19-477464-2

(7)

participation and identity construction in linguistically and culturally diverse graduate classrooms. Institute of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan

 McKay, S. (2004). Teaching English as an International Language: The Role of Culture in Asian Contexts. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 1 (1), 1-22.

 The Year of the Dog by Grace Lin  I Like, I Don't Like by Anna Baccelliere

英語為全球通用語、語言與文化觀看教材如下:  How did English evolve? - Kate Gardoqui

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIzFz9T5rhI  Varieties of English from Across the World

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEMMtKjYx_w  The English Language & World Englishes

http://slideplayer.com/slide/3593955/  World Englishes Jennifer Jenkins

http://slideplayer.com/slide/3377858/  World Englishes Lesson 3

http://slideplayer.com/slide/6304108/

 Where did English come from? - Claire Bowern https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEaSxhcns7Y  Does grammar matter? - Andreea S. Calude

(8)

原屬小組上傳 600 字的心得報告  學生個人期末心得報告，探討語言及文化如何影響自我認知、評估跨文化認知及學習經驗 E. 評量策略主動課堂參與 (30%)  學生必須積極參與小組及課堂討論  學生沒有正當理由而缺席三分之一以上的課程，成績以不及格計算  學生遲到或早退 20 分鐘以上算缺席拼圖式討論 (30%) 本學期將安排三次拼圖式討論，學生在上課前必須完成閱讀作業，每次討論後，將在同一次上課中進行跨國視訊會議及課後的線上討論。小組書面報告及小組簡報 (40%) 拼圖式討論反思報告 (20%)  每位同學在拼圖式討論課後需要完成 600 字的反思報告，共三次。報告內容必須比較兩校學生溝通方式的差異，分析層面不拘但是必須與上課討論議題相關。報告須於截止時間內上傳 Moodle 教學平台。小組簡報 Group presentation (20%)  四人一組，每組學生準備 5 分鐘的播客(podcast)或微電影報告。內容須聚焦於學生自身的跨文化溝通經驗的反思，並以跨文化認知的概念進行自我評估。簡報之相關講義可以上傳到教學平台。影片需於截止日期前上傳 Moodle 教學平台。 (2) 研究步驟說明 A. 研究對象 本研究的研究對象為選修本課程的國立成功大學學生(以大學部學生為主，但開放研究生選修)，包括本地學生及國際生。學生來自不同專業領域，國際生大多數是非英文母語人士，ELF 為課堂語言。修課人數 32 位。

With Chulalongkong University in Thailand  32 undergraduates, 8 non-English majors  4 international students

 Countries: Taiwan, South America 1, South Korea 1, Malaysia 1, Indonesia 1.

B. 研究問題

(9)

職場溝通(鄒文莉、陳慧琴、蔡美玲、高實玫，2016)。簡言之，他們缺乏全球競爭力。因此本課程將包括兩大學習目標: 1)台灣大學生及在台灣就學的國際學生如何透過「拼圖式」合作學習進行跨文化認知及溝通學習，累積跨領域及跨文化團隊合作的經驗，2)在教學實踐方面，本課程學生如何和國外大學生進行跨文化溝通，進而探索語言和文化如何影響自我認知。 C. 研究工具 研究者以本身所任教課程的台灣大學生及在台就學的國際學生為對象，進行 ELF 及跨文化溝通教學的研究。研究工具包括教師教學日誌、學生反思報告以及學生問卷調查。學生問卷調查如附件二。 D.實施程序  第一至三週，學生將閱讀 ELF 現象及跨文化溝通等議題的相關研究，可以蒐集課室觀察記錄、教師教學日誌的研究資料。  第 4、9、12 週學生進行 3 次「拼圖式討論」(jigsaw discussion)活動。學生每 4 位一組，閱讀教材將分成四份，透過合作學習，使用 ELF 進行討論、發表及分享。此合作學習教學法能有效提升學生的學習成就和提高學生學習動機(Aronson, 1971)，可以蒐集學生反思報告的研究資料。  上述討論結束後，於第 5、10、13 週學生與國外學生進行至少 30 分鐘的線上交流，之後再返回課堂進行 90 分鐘的原屬小組反思討論，可以蒐集學生反思報告的研究資料。  學期末課程結束時，研究者將分析學生報告、進行學生訪談，了解學生是否這門課有助於跨文化認知及溝通能力的提升。可以蒐集教師訪談、學生問卷調查等資料。 E.資料處理與分析本研究採用 Excel 和分析軟體 SPSS 進行量表信度與因素資料統計分析。研究者將根據課室觀察及深度訪談中浮現的主題建構分類表。

4. 教學暨研究成果(Teaching and Research Outcomes) (1) 教學過程與成果

每週進度或教學大綱 (附件一)

學生課程期末影片成果 https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Qy-7b0tbF2pc6f6s71IIZslcZZUCOjFk

(10)

(11)

(12)

誤解，現在我可以自然地與印尼學生交流。  現在當我和外國人交談時，我會考慮他們的文化背景，這樣我就不會有誤會。  我變得更加積極地理解並關注其他文化。例如，當我需要與外國人交談時，我可能會首先搜索他/她的文化背景，以便調整我的對應方式，避免冒犯。  我現在不會對任何文化產生任何偏見，我也理解我們應該尊重他人的多重身份。  現在我會更有耐心地與重口音的人交談並嘗試理解他們。前後測資料分析[u2]

Q2 I know and am aware of the transcultural characteristics of the diverse ethnic groups.

Total students Pre 27 Post 30 Pre Post strongly agree 6 10 22% 33% agree 20 18 74% 60% strongly disagree 1 2 4% 7%

Q3. I gather and am eager for information about different cultural standards and norms.

Total students Pre 27 Post 30 Pre Post strongly agree 6 10 30% 23% agree 20 18 67% 70% strongly disagree 1 2 4% 7%

Q4. I am realistic when a misunderstanding has happened for cultural reasons and make an apology.

Total students Pre 27 Post 30 Pre Post

strongly agree 10 10 37% 33% agree 16 18 59% 60% strongly disagree 1 2 4% 7%

Q5. I am capable of interpreting communication taking into account the cultural differences and the way of manifesting these.

strongly agree 7 7 26% 23%

agree 19 21 70% 70%

strongly disagree 1 2 4% 7%

(13)

with.

strongly agree 10 11 37% 37% agree 16 17 59% 57% strongly disagree 1 2 4% 7%

Q7. When working with foreign students, I tried to understand differences in our and their behaviors, values, attitudes, and styles.

Total students Pre 27

Not in post survey Pre Not in post survey strongly agree 14 52% agree 12 44% strongly disagree 1 4%

Q8. When working with foreign students, I tried to adapt my behavior to communicate appropriately. total Pre 27 Not in post survey Pre Not in post survey strongly agree 12 44% agree 14 52% strongly disagree 1 4%

Q9. Student benefited most from the following activities (1=最有幫助的課堂活動；2=第 2 有幫助的，以此類推) 總人數=30 認為最有幫助的學生人數認為第2 有幫助的學生人數認為第3 有幫助的學生人數 Class discussion 8 3 3 最多學生認為課堂討論最有幫助 Skype with Thai

students 5 3 2 很多學生認為與泰國學生的視訊討論最有幫助 Lecture / ppt / video clips 5 0 1 很多學生認為授課內容最有幫助 Jigsaw 3 6 4 Video conference with Thai students

3 7 3 部分學生認為與泰國學生在課

餘時間的視訊討論也有幫助

(14)

Presentation 2 0 7 部分學生認為期末簡報有幫助

Group work 2 7 6 部分學生認為團隊任務有幫助

二. 參考文獻(References)

Aronson, E. (1971). History of the Jigsaw Classroom. Retrived from The Jigsaw Classroom: http://www.jigsaw.org/history.htm

Aronson, E. & Patnoe, S. (1997). The jigsaw classroom: Building cooperation in the classroom. NY: Longman.

Brown, K. (1995). World Englishes: To teach or not to teach. World Englishes, 14, 233-245.

Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243-262. doi: 10.1093/applin/ amt011 Chang, C.-K. (2004). Constructing a streaming video-based learning forum for

collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(3), 245-263.

Cogo, A. (2009). Accommodating difference in ELF conversations: A study of pragmatic strategies. In Mauranen, A. and Ranta E. (eds.) English as a Lingua Franca: Studies and Findings (pp. 254-273). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.

Cogo, A. 2012, ELF and superdiversity. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1-2, 287-313.

Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge University Press.

Dearden, J. (2015). English as a medium of instruction: A growing global phenomenon. Oxford: British Council.

Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishment of normality. On “lingua franca” English and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 237– 259.

Hansen, K. (1997). British English and international English: Two debate terms. In E. W. Schneider (Ed.), English around the World (pp. 59-69). Amsterdam/

Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

(15)

Huang, Y.-M., Huang, T.-C., & Hsieh, M.-Y. (2008). Using annotation services in a ubiquitous Jigsaw cooperative learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 3-15.

Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ke, I. (2011). NNS-NNS online intercultural communication: A sustainable practice to teach global English and develop intercultural communicative competence. Journal of Applied English, 4(1), 33-45.

Ke, I. (2012). English as a lingua franca (ELF) in international communication: Findings from ELF online projects and implications for ELT in Taiwan. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 9(2), 63-93.

Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). World Englishes: Implications for international communication and English language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Mauranen, A. (2007). English as a lingua franca: Speakers not learners [PowerPoint Slides]. https://www.academia.edu/1858131/English_as_lingua_franca_an_ unknown_language

Mauranen, A. 2012, Exploring ELF, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, R. (1997). Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and interaction: Three communicative strands in the language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 443-456.

Slavin, R. (1980). Student team learning: A manual for teachers. In S. Sharan, P. Hare, C. D. Webb, & R. Hertz-Lazarowitz (Eds.), Cooperation in education (pp. 82-135). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press.

Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Tsou. W. & Chen, F. (2014), EFL and ELF college students’ perceptions toward Englishes. Journal of English as a Lingua France (JELF), 3(2), 361-384.

Widdowson, H. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 377-89. 石兆蓮（2002）。合作學習對兒童溝通表達能力影響之實驗研究。國立臺灣師範

大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。

(16)

(17)

三. 附件

附件一、課程大綱

Issues in Global English 全球英語議題

Thursday 12:10～15:00 修齊大樓 26406 Instructor: 鄒文莉 Wenli Tsou

Course Objectives

The aim of this course is to explore the rise of English to its current dominant status, especially on English education.

Course Description

Students will have the opportunity to have a theoretical understanding of transcultural communication with reflections and evaluations of their own transcultural experiences as well as udnerstanding towards language pedagogical applications. For this semester, they will also have the opportunity to interact with students studying related courses at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, Thailand through video and online discussions.

Course Requirements Active participation (30%)

 Students should be ready to participate fully in small group and class discussions.

 Students with absences exceeding 1/3 of the classes without a legitimate excuse will fail the course.

 It should be noted that arriving late or leaving early 20 minutes or more is considered an absence.

Jigsaw discussions (30%)

Students are also responsible for the material assigned for three jigsaw discussions. Each jigsaw discussion will be followed by in-class video conferencing and pre/post-class online discussions.

Group reports and presentation (40%)

 Jigsaw reflective reports (20%)

As an in-class writing assignment, you are asked to write a very brief report (600 words) at the end of the three jigsaw discussions. You are free to reflect on anything related to what has been covered in the discussions but you need to compare the discussion between the two

(18)

 Group presentation

As a group of four, students will prepare a 5-minute Podcast/microfilm presentation. Its focus should be on reflections and evaluations of some of their own transcultural communication experiences or on the application in language or cultural education. Students need to discuss the relevance of the notion of transcultural awareness to the evaluations. Class handouts/ppt can be prepared or uploaded to NCKU moodle as needed. The video needs to be uploaded onto moodle before 6/21.

Textbook

No textbook

(Articles and book sections for discussions will be uploaded to Moodle)

Reference Book

Baker, Will. 2015. Culture and identity through English as a lingua franca: Rethinking concepts and goals in intercultural communication. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Process for Video Conferences (3/28, 4/18, 4/25) Jigsaw discussion (Group of four: Students A to D)

Students will explain what they have learned to the other group members. Tainan and Bangkok

 Video conference: cultural exchange preparation 12:30-14:00 (Tainan)

14:00-15:00 (Tainan)/13:00-14:00 (Bangkok)

 Online Group discussions (at least once in each of the following periods)

March 14-21 April 15-19 April 20-25

Jigsaw discussion 1

Student A: Analyze the author’s personal ‘anecdote’ in the introductory section (pp.15-16)

Baker, Will. 2015. Intercultural communication and ELF. In Culture and identity through English as a lingua franca: Rethinking concepts and goals in intercultural communication, 15-44. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Student B: Analyze Vignettes 1 and 2 (pp.253-254)

Student C: Analyze Vignettes 3 and 5 (pp.258-259, 263-264)

Brown, Steven, Brenda Hayashi & Kikue Yamamoto. 2012. Japan/Anglo-American cross-cultural communication. In Christina Bratt Paulston, Scott F. Kiesling & Elizabeth S. Rangel (eds.), The handbook of intercultural discourse and

communication, 252-271. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Student D: Analyze Extract 2 (p.15)

(19)

of ELF awareness. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 6(2).

Student A: Analyze lyric excerpts from Rip Slyme’s Tokyo Classic , DJ Tonk’s Move On and Zeebra’s The Rhyme Animal (pp.126-127)

Pennycook, Alastair. 2007. Language flows, language mixes. In Global Englishes and transcultural flows, 116-139. London: Routledge.

Student B: Analyse Excerpt 1.4 (pp.14-15)

Pennycook, Alastair & Emi Otsuji. 2015. Morning markets and metrolingual multitasking. In Metrolingualism:

Language in the city, 1-23. London: Routledge. Student C: Analyse Excerpts 3.5 and 3.6 (pp.60-61)

Pennycook, Alastair & Emi Otsuji. 2015. Mobility, rhythms and the city. In Metrolingualism: Language in the city, 45-66. London: Routledge.

Student D: Analyse Excerpt 4.11 (pp.78-79)

Pennycook, Alastair & Emi Otsuji. 2015. Kitchen talk and spatial repertoires. In Metrolingualism: Language in the city, 67-88. London: Routledge.

Student A: Analyze Examples 5 and 6 (p.45)

Baker, Will. 2011. Culture and identity through ELF in Asia: Fact of Fiction? In Alessia Cogo, Alasdair Archibald & Jennifer Jenkins (eds.), Latest Trends in ELF Research, 35-52. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.

Student B: Analyze Extract 7.13 (p.227)

Baker, Will. 2015. Putting it into practice: A study of a course in ELF and ICA for language learners in Thailand. In

Culture and identity through English as a lingua franca: Rethinking concepts and goals in intercultural communication,

203-231. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Student C: Analyze Narrative (pp.98-99)

Javier, Eljee. 2010. The foreignness of native speaking teachers of colour. In David Nunan & Julie Choi (eds.),

Language and culture: Reflective narratives and the emergence of identity, 97-102. London: Routledge. Student D: Analyze Example (4) (pp.80-81)

Zhu, Hua. 2015. Negotiation as the way of engagement in intercultural and lingua franca communication: Frames of reference and Interculturality. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 4(1). 63-90.

Course Schedule

Week 1 (2/21): Introduction Syllabus Week 2 (2/28): No class Holiday Week 3 (3/7):

Unit 1: English as a lingua franca (ELF)

Stereotype presentation

Week 4 (3/14):

Unit 2: Culture & language

(20)

Week 5 (3/21) : Jigsaw discussion 1 In-class discussion Week 6 (3/28): Video conference 1

Week 7 (4/4): No class Holiday

Week 8 (4/11): Unit 3: Identity Identity assignment

Week 9 (4/18): Jigsaw discussion 2 Video conference 2 (Jigsaw 1 reflective report due)

Week 10 (4/25): Jigsaw discussion 3 Video conference 3(Jigsaw 2 reflective report due)

Week 11 (5/2):

Unit 4: Transcultural awareness

Guest Speaker :Will Backer

Week 12 (5/9) :

Unit 5: Transcultural communication

Jigsaw 3 reflective report due

Week 13 (5/16): Guest Speaker

Week 14 (5/23) : Unit 6: We are the world My country presentation Week 15 (5/30): Project Project preparation Week 16 (6/6): Group presentation Group 1~5 presentations Week 17 (6/13): Group presentation Group 6~10 presentations Week 18 (6/17~21): Final Exam week Group presentation video due

Related Video Clips:

1. How did English evolve? - Kate Gardoqui

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIzFz9T5rhI

2. 30 Varieties of English from Across the World

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEMMtKjYx_w

3. The English Language & World Englishes (check ppt version)

4. World Englishes Jennifer Jenkins

5. World Englishes Lesson 3

6. Where did English come from? - Claire Bowern

(21)

附件二、課程問卷 Dear students:

Thank you for participating in this course. The following survey was developed to better understand your perspectives and needs for this new course. The survey items were compiled by Prof. Wenli Tsou, National Cheng Kung University (NCKU). The survey contains 13 questions regarding your experiences in the courses. It will take no more than 10 minutes to complete.

To help protect your confidentiality, this anonymous survey will be analyzed collectively, and will only be used for academic and research purposes. Please note that the university has no commercial interest related to this study. If you have questions regarding the results of the survey, or if you would like to receive a copy of the final report, please contact Prof. Wenli Tsou. (Phone: +886-6-275-7575 ext. 52223, Email: wtsou@mail.ncku.eud.tw)

Please check the related boxes.

1. I gain the following knowledge in this course. □ ELF □ Culture Identity

□ Transcultural communication □ Culture and language

□ language and culture teaching

2. I know and am aware of the transcultural characteristics of the diverse ethnic groups. Strong Disagree___ Disagree___ Agree___ Strongly Agree____

3. I gather and am eager for information about different cultural standards and norms. Strong Disagree___ Disagree___ Agree___ Strongly Agree____

4. I am realistic when a misunderstanding has happened for cultural reasons and make an apology. Strong Disagree___ Disagree___ Agree___ Strongly Agree____

5. I am capable of interpreting communication taking into account the cultural differences and the way of manifesting these.

Strong Disagree___ Disagree___ Agree___ Strongly Agree____

(22)

7. I benefit the most from the following activities (Multiple choices are allowed but please assign numbers according to the importance. Number 1 being the most beneficial)

□ Lecture (PPT, video clips) □Article Reading □ Class discussion □ Video conferencing □ Jigsaw discussion □ Presentation □ SKYP discussion with Thai partner

□ Group work (discussion, homework)

8. From this course, I learned to deal with different ways of perceiving, expressing, interacting, and behaving.

9. From this course, I learned to suspend judgment and appreciate the complexities of communicating and interacting transculturally.

10. As a result of this course, I developed new transcultural relationships with classmates. Strong Disagree___ Disagree___ Agree___ Strongly Agree____

11. As a result of working with foreign students, I am more familiar with their culture. Strong Disagree___ Disagree___ Agree___ Strongly Agree____

12. When working with foreign students, I tried to understand differences in our and their behaviors, values, attitudes, and styles.

13. When working with foreign students, I tried to adapt my behavior to communicate appropriately.

14. I think that I’ve changed as a person since the start of this course? In other words, I feel my identity has changed since taking this course. Strong Disagree___ Disagree___ Agree___ Strongly Agree____

(23)

______________________________________________________________

16. Have your attitudes and behavior towards communicating with other people in transcultural communication changed? Give some specific examples.