政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/149069

政大典藏 > College of Liberal Arts > Doctor`s / Master`s Program in Teaching Chinese as a Second Language > Theses > Item 140.119/149069

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/149069

Title:	教師提問程序與功能研究 —— 以美國中高級華語討論課為例 Research on Teacher Questioning Procedures and Functions: A Case Study of Intermediate and Advanced Chinese Discussion Classes in the United States.
Authors:	汪艾蓁 Wang, Ai-Chen
Contributors:	杜容玥汪艾蓁 Wang, Ai-Chen
Keywords:	中高級華語討論課教師提問提問程序提問功能會話分析 Advanced-level Chinese Discussion Classes Teacher Question in Second Language Learning Teacher Questioning Procedure Teacher Question Function Conversation Analysis
Date:	2023
Issue Date:	2024-01-02 15:38:36 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	教師提問作為二語教學中的重要一環，一直是研究的關注熱點。特別是對以聽說帶動讀寫的語言教學來說，教師提問更是引發並持續課堂互動的關鍵(靳洪剛，2018)。二語課堂的教學環節得以順利推進必須仰賴教師提問的引導與搭配，教師提問並非是無意義的隨機提問，而是具有一定教學目標與教學功能的問題形式，教師透過含有目標詞彙或句式的提問表述導入教學內容，在情境中示範語言形式的使用規則，為學習者提供正確且可理解的輸入。同時，刺激學習者作答，為學習者創造語言輸出的機會。教師提問相關研究不僅應該探討個別提問的內在構成，也應該擴展觀察範圍，從程序步驟、教學板塊等整體性的視角作為研究的切入點，因為在教學現場中，提問從不獨立存在，而是環環相扣、前後呼應的，教師的提問難點不只存在於單一提問的內部設計，也可能是源於多個提問間的排列組合不合適，因此，了解提問程序在教學中的作用與角色同樣重要。本研究聚焦於提問行為進行時的整體安排與功能，透過會話分析，對中高級華語討論課中教師提問的設計脈絡加以分析，與靳洪剛(2018)提出的「教學的明線」進行對比，進而歸納總結出兼具教學成效與操作性的提問程序四部曲「暖身、鋪墊、應用、上升」以及程序四部曲中經常使用的提問類型與設計。同时，本研究也進一步整理出提問程序四部曲在中高級華語課堂中的兩個建議應用原則:「暖身程序省略與否」、「鋪墊與上升皆不可省」。本研究對教師提問的程序進行分析、發現與總結，揭示了教師提問的不同程序環節和各個程序在討論課中扮演的角色與功能，將抽象的提問脈絡具體化成可操作的提問程序。 Teacher questioning has always been a focal point of research in second language instruction, especially in language teaching that prioritizes listening and speaking to promote reading and writing (Jin Honggang, 2018). The smooth progression of instructional segments in second language classrooms relies on the guidance and coordination provided by teacher questioning. Teacher questioning is not random or meaningless; it takes the form of questions with specific teaching goals and instructional functions. Through questions containing target vocabulary or sentence structures, teachers can introduce instructional content, demonstrate language form usage rules within a context, and provide learners with correct and understandable input. Simultaneously, it stimulates learners to respond and creates opportunities for language output. Research related to teacher questioning should not only explore the internal structure of individual questions but should also expand the scope of observation, taking a holistic perspective on the procedural steps and teaching blocks. This is because in the teaching environment, questioning does not exist in isolation but is interrelated and interconnected. The challenges of teacher questioning may not only stem from the design of individual questions but also from the inappropriate combination of multiple questions. Therefore, understanding the role and significance of questioning procedures in teaching is equally important. This study focuses on the overall arrangement and functions of questioning behaviors during instructional moments. Through conversation analysis, it analyzes the design context of teacher questioning in advanced-level Chinese discussion classes and compares it to Jin Honggang's concept of the 'Communicative Functions of the Teacher’s Questions.' Consequently, it summarizes an effective and practical four-step questioning procedure, 'Warm-Up, Build-Up, Application, and Elevation,' as well as common question types and designs used within these four steps. Additionally, the study outlines two application principles of the four-step questioning procedure in advanced-level Chinese classes: the consideration of whether to omit the warm-up step and the necessity of including both the introduction and elevation steps. This research provides a thorough analysis, discovery, and synthesis of questioning procedures in language teaching, revealing the roles and functions of various stages within the teaching context. It transforms the abstract context of questioning into an actionable questioning procedure.
Reference:	中文文獻朱永平（2010）。明知故問：相關式提問技巧—對外漢語教學之「普林斯頓模式」探討之二。國際漢語教育，第4期，42-49。佟樂泉（1997）。對外漢語教學中的幾個語言學習問題。語言文字應用，第1期，9-10。宋如瑜（2013）。會話分析下的華語教師課堂語言研究。國立臺北教育大學語文集刊，第24期，頁39-90。宋如瑜（2015）。華語教師課堂意解說行為探索。中原華語文學報，16，109-136。宋如瑜（2015）。華語教師課堂解說行為探索。中原華語文學報，第16期，109-136。宋如瑜（2019）。華語教師課堂意義協商策略研究。中原華語文學報，18，75-104。宋如瑜（2019）。華語教師課堂意義協商策略研究。中原華語文學報，第18-19期，頁75-104。宋如瑜（2020）。華語教師課堂話語發展。台北：正中書局。沈文潔（2020）。支持深度學習的課堂對話研究——以中美初中數學課為例。未出版碩士論文。華東師範大學教育部國際與比較教育研究所。金兵（2005）。提問技巧的設計和功效。生物學教學報，第30卷，14-15。林郁阡（2016）。華語線上互動新手教師提問研究。未出版碩士論文。國立台灣師範大學華語文教學研究所。原冰霄（2017）。初中語文課堂教學追問誤區、成因及對策研究。未出版碩士論文。河南師範大學教育系。徐興慧（2016）。追問在中學數學課堂教學中的運用現狀研究。未出版碩士論文。重慶師範大學教育系。梁淑媛、莊宇慧、吳淑芳（2012）。內容分析技巧在護理質性資料之初步應用。護理雜誌，5，84-90。許漢成（2004）。內容分析：概念類型與方法。俄語語言文學研究，1，91-98。陳亮光（2008）。利用多媒體融入華語文教學提升教師提問技巧之研究。中原華語文學報，2，49-67。陳純音（2008）。從語言輸入到語言輸出：以華語為第二語言提問的個案研究。華語文教學研究，5，133-154。陳曉雪（2016）。新手漢語教師課堂追問研究。未出版碩士論文。華東師範大學語言學與應用語言學系。陳曉楓（2016）。改善華語教學師資生提問技巧之行動研究。未出版碩士論文。國立臺北教育大學華語文教學研究所。黃俐瑋（2018）。遠距華語文化口語課程新手教師提問策略之研究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文，未出版。靳洪剛（2017）。有效輸出在第二語言習得與教學中的作用。世界漢語教學，4，510-541。靳洪剛（2018）。提問互動法：語言課堂教師的理論建構。國際漢語教育，1，1-14。靳洪剛（2018）。提問互動法緒論：語言課堂教師提問的實施程序、策略及應用技巧。臺灣華語教學研究，16，3-20。蔡宜妮、王萸芳、白樂桑、邱力璟、徐淑瑛、陳立元、陳純音、陶紅印、彭妮絲、曾妙芬、張莉萍、劉力嘉、劉德馨、謝妙玲、嚴翼相（2020）。華語文教學的多元視野與跨界思考。新北：聯經出版社。潘曉琳（2010）。英語教師提問模式的調查與分析。北京理工大學學報社會科學版，12，4，135-138。英文文獻 Ahmad Ameri-Golestan & Marzieh Nezakat-Alhossaini（2012）. The application of syntactic priming in second language research. Journal of language teaching and research, 10, 898-903. Bloom, B. S. （1968）. Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1-12. Brown, D.（2001）. Cognitive science concepts and technology teacher education. The Journal of Technology Studies, 27（1）, 33-42. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. AppliedLinguistics, 1, 1-47. Carrol. .J (966). The contributions o fpsvchological theory and educational research to teaching o f foreign languages. In A. Valdman (Ed.). Trends language teaching. N e w York: McGraw-Hill. Crookes, G., & Chaudron, C.（2001）. Guidelines for language classroom instruction. Teaching English as a second or foreign language（29-42）. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. David E. Meyer & Roger W. Schvaneveldt（1971）. Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of experimental psychology, 90(2), 227-234. Long, M. H., & Sato, C. J. （1983）. Classroom foreigners talk discourse: forms and functions of teachers' questions. Classroom-oriented research on second language acquisition. p. 268-85. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Description:	碩士國立政治大學華語文教學碩博士學位學程 108161002
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108161002
Data Type:	thesis
Appears in Collections:	[Doctor`s / Master`s Program in Teaching Chinese as a Second Language] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
100201.pdf		47933Kb	Adobe PDF	0	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...