survey sample paper.docx
- 文档编号:29090120
- 上传时间:2023-07-20
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:14
- 大小:25.28KB
survey sample paper.docx
《survey sample paper.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《survey sample paper.docx(14页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
surveysamplepaper
Abstract:
ChineseEFLLearners’ClassLectureNotetaking
andAchievementTestPerformances
Abstract:
Lecturenotetakingisanimportantstrategyinlanguagelearning.Variousresearcheshaveidentifieditsthreefunctionsinacademiclearning;encoding,externalstorageandgenerativefunctions.ThispaperreviewstheseresearchesandreportstheresultofaquestionnaireinvestigationconductedbytheauthortotestifytheexternalstorageandgenerativefunctionsforEFLstudentsincollegeEnglishIntensiveReadingclassrooms.
Keywords:
lecturenotetaking;encodingfunction;externalstoragefunction;generativefunction;generativeprocessing.
中文文摘:
大学英语课堂笔记与英语学习成绩
摘要:
本文以86名大学一年级本科生为实验对象,采用问卷调查的形式,对大学英语精读课课堂笔记的方式与课后复习笔记的频率进行了调查,并对其与学生单元词汇测试成绩之间的关系用t检验,单向方差分析与相关性检验进行了分析。
结果表明课堂笔记记录方式对词汇记忆无影响,而复习频率与词汇记忆成绩之间呈负相关。
关键词:
课堂笔记,编码功能,外在存贮功能,生成功能,生成式加工。
ChineseEFLLearners’ClassLectureNotetaking
andAchievementTestPerformances
1.Introduction
1.1.Background
Lecturenotetakinghaslongattractedtheattentionoflearningstrategyresearchers.Itisgenerallydefinedasacognitivelearningstrategyachievedspecificallythroughwritingdownkeywordsorconceptsinabbreviatedverbal,graphic,ornumericalformwhilelisteningorreading.(O’Malley,&Chamot1990)Overdecades,anumberofstudieshavebeenconductedtoinvestigateitsroleinacademiclearning.WiththeeffortsmadebyDiVestaandGray(1972)andotherresearchers,itsthreefunctionshavebeenidentifiedandgenerallyaccepted:
encodingfunction;externalstoragefunction;andgenerativefunction.
Theencodingfunctionsuggeststhatnotetakingisaprocessinwhichthelearnerencodestheknowledgeorinformationhe/shereceivesduringthelecture,soastofacilitatelearning.Itisusuallymeasuredbycomparingtherecalltestperformanceofstudentswholistenandrecordnotesandthatofthosewhoonlylistentoalecturebutdonottakenotes.
Theexternalstoragefunctionsuggeststhatthereviewingofnotesstoredinawrittenformfacilitateslearners'performanceonrecalltests.Onemeasurementistocomparetheperformanceofstudentswhorecordandreviewtheirnoteswiththosewhorecordnotesbutdon'treviewthem.Among32studiesreportedbyHartley(1983)andKiewra(1985,1987),24foundthatstudentswhoreviewednoteshadahigherachievementtestperformancethanthosenotpermittedtoreview,8otherstudiesreportednodifferencebetweenreviewersandnon-reviewers,andnostudyindicatedthatreviewingwasdysfunctional.KiewraandDubois(1991)alsofoundthatstudentswhotookandreviewednotesoutperformedthosewhotooknotesbutdidn'treviewthemonbothcuedrecallandsynthesistests.KnightandMcKelvie's(1986)researchalsosupportedtheexternalstoragefunction.
Thegenerativefunctionsuggeststhatnotetakingencouragesnotetakerstoactivelygeneraterelationsamongthepartsofthelearningmaterialorbetweenthepresentlearningmaterialandtheirpriorknowledge.Oneproofisthatnotetakers'performanceonfar-transfertestswassuperiortothatofnon-notetakersamonglowpriorknowledgestudents(becausehighpriorknowledgestudentswerebelievedtogenerallyconnectlearningmaterialtotheirpriorknowledge).SharagerandMayer(1989)foundthatnote-takersperformedbetterthannon-notetakersonrecallandtransfertestsforstudentswithlowpriorknowledgeofthelecturetopic.Anotherproofisthatnoteswithmorecharacteristicsofgenerativeprocessingproduceinlearnersbetterlearningresultswhetherbyreviewingorrecordingthem.(Kiewra,&Dubois1988;Sharager,&Mayer1989)Examplesofgenerativeprocessinginclude"students'developmentofsummaries,graphs,tables,analogies,examples,andconclusions",whileexamplesofnon-generativeprocessingare"maintenancerehearsal,copying,orsimplyreadingalready-generatedmaterial".(Kiewra,&DuBois1991)KiewraandDubois(1988)providedthreedifferentformsofstudynotesforstudents'reviewing:
acompletetext,alinearoutline,andamatrix-formnote.Theirexperimentshowedthattheoutlineandmatrixnotesgenerallyproducedintheirreviewershigherrecallperformancesthantextnotes,andthematrixnotereviewershadhighertransfertestperformancesthantextnotereviewers.In1991,KiewraandDuboisreassuredthat"itisthereviewofnotes---iftimepermits---thatfacilitatesgenerativeprocessing"inlearners.RischandKiewra(1990)foundmatrix-structurenotesprovedeffectiveforconceptlearningandappearedtobeeffectiveforcrosstopicalrecallifstudentsusedthematrixforbothrecordingandreviewings.
Inforeignlanguageclassrooms,notetakingisalsoanimportantlearningstrategy.(O'Malley,&Chamot1990)Arethesefunctionsofnotetakingofsignificancetolanguagelearners'performanceonachievementtestswhentheyarealsorequiredtorecallwhattheyhavelearnedinlanguageclasses?
1.2.Hypotheses
Thisresearch,therefore,isintendedtoexaminetherelevanceofgenerativeandexternalstoragefunctionsofnotetakingtoChineseEFLlearners'achievementtestperformances.Thetwohypothesesofthisresearchare:
1.Learnerswhoseownnotesdemonstratemorecharacteristicsofgenerativeprocessinghavebetterperformancesonthesetests.Ifthishypothesisissupported,generativefunctionofnotetakingdoescontributetoEFLlearnerslearning.
2.Learners'note-reviewingfrequencyispositivelycorrelatedwiththeirtestperformances.Ifthishypothesisissupported,EFLlearnersdobenefitfromtheexternalstoragefunctionofnotetaking.
2.Method
2.1.Participants
Oursubjectswere86first-yearcollegestudentsfrom4intactEnglishclassesattheresearcher'scollege.Theywereagedbetween17and20(withoneexceptionofonesubjectwhowasonly15).Thesubjectswereenrolledin4differentmajorsandwereassignedtotheirpresentEnglishclassesaccordingtotheirperformancesonaplacementEnglishtest2weeksaftertheirenrollmentincollege.TheyhadallstartedtotakethecollegeEnglishcoursethreemonthsbeforethisresearch.
2.2.Instruments
Thefirstinstrumentistwounitquizzesonfirst-yearstudents.Thequizzesalltaketheformofanobjectivevocabularytest.Wordsandexpressionswerealreadyprovidedonthetestpaperaschoices.Studentswererequiredtochooseoneofthemtocompletegivensentences.Eachsubject'smeanscoreonthesetwoquizzeswasusedasanindicatorofstudents'achievementtestperformance.
Thesecondinstrumentisa5-itemquestionnaireinquiringaboutEFLlearners'notetakingmodes.(SeeAppendix1)Question1wasintendedtofindouttheratioofstudentswhotooknotesagainstthosewhodidn't.Questions2to4addressednote-takerswhilenon-note-takerswereonlyrequiredtoanswerQuestion5.Questions2,and3wereusedtofindoutthegenerativeprocessingdemonstratedinEnglishlearners'notes.Question2wasmeanttofindoutwhatlecturecontentlearnerstookdownintheirnotes:
(A)familiar;(B)strange;(C)recognizable,(D)familiarandrecognizable;(E)recognizableandstrange;(F)familiarandstrange;or(G)allwords,phrasesandsentencepatterns.ChoicesB,C,andEwereassumedtodemonstratemoregenerativeprocessingthanchoicesA,D,F,andG.Question3investigatedtheorganizationoflearners'notes:
followingthelecturesequence(A,B,C),orselforganized(D,E,F);andtheformtheirnotestook:
verbatimnotes(A,D),paraphrasednotes(B,E),orbothparaphrasednotesandverbatimnotes(C,F).ItwasassumedthatchoicesA,B,CinvolvedmoregenerativeprocessingthanchoicesD,E,F,choicesB,EinvolvedmoregenerativeprocessingthanchoicesC,F,andchoicesC,FmoregenerativethanchoicesA,D.Question4"Howoftendoyoureviewyournotes?
"wasusedtofindoutlearners'reviewingfrequencyonafive-pointLickertScale.Question5askednon-note-takerswhytheydidn'ttakenotesintheEnglishIntensiveReadingclass.
3.Results
3.1.Findings
Amongthe86subjects,82reportedthattheytooknotesinIntensiveReadingclasswhile4reportedno.TheirresponsestothequestionnaireareshowninTable1ofAppendix2.
Finding1:
T-testsandanANOVAtestshowsthatthefirsthypothesisisnotsupported:
nostatisticallysignificantdifferenceisfoundbetweentheperformanceofstudentswhosenotesdemonstratemoregenerativeprocessingandthatofothergroups,namely:
A.Anindependentt-testshowsthattheperformancesofstudentswhotookdownlecturecontentwithmoregenerativeprocessing,i.e.recognizable,strangeorbothrecognizableandstrangewords,phrasesandsentencepatterns,didnotdiffersignificantlyfromthatofotherstudents.ThestatisticalresultisshowninTable2:
Table2:
T-testresultofperformancesfordifferentnotecontentgroups
t-testforEqualityofMeans
95%ConfidenceIntervaloftheDifference
t
df
Sig.
(2-tailed)
MeanDifference
Std.ErrorDifference
Lower
Upper
Testscores
Equalvariancesnotassumed
-0.90
11.30
0.39
-2.96
3.30
-10.19
4.27
B.Anindependentt-testagainsuggeststhatstudentswhoorganizednotesintheirownwaydidnothaveperformancessignificantlydifferentfromthosewhotookdownnotesbyfollowingthelecturesequence.(SeeTable3below)
Table3.T-testresultofperformancesfordifferentnoteorganizationgroups
t-testforEqualityofMeans
90%ConfidenceIntervaloftheDifference
t
df
Sig.
(2-tailed)
MeanDifference
Std.ErrorDifference
Lower
Upper
Testscores
Equalvariancesnotassumed
0.70
56.16
0.49
1.22
1.74
-1.69
4.13
C.AnANOVAtestshowsthatthereisnosignificantdifferenceintheperformancesamongstudentswhotookonlyverbatimnotes,thosewhotookbo
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- survey sample paper