探讨纽西兰小学英语课程.doc

探討紐西蘭小學英語課程：探討紐西蘭小學英語課程： 如何幫助台灣小學生學習英語？如何幫助台灣小學生學習英語？ 一般而言，各階段的英語教育裡，兒童英語是最需要在教材及教法上仔細 考量，然而研究資料顯示，雖然近幾年台北小學生自三年級開始幾乎都已在學 校上英語課，然而全國性的教學大綱指引卻仍覆諸闕如。這篇論文首先介紹紐 西蘭小學英語教學的課程設計原則，然後蒐集整理筆者走訪奧克蘭四所小學七 個班級的英語課程，觀察其所使用教材及教法的一些經驗心得。最後筆者藉由 其他地區實行小學教英語的經驗，向台灣負責小學英語課程設計人仕提出一些 實質建議，希望在課程設計上能夠與其他課程結合，使學習英語不只是一門學 科，在學生略有基礎時，可以利用英語來學習其他諸如唱遊、電腦等科目，讓 英語的學習能更生動活潑，以嘉惠莘莘學子。 關鍵字：教學大綱、課程設計、小學英語教學 A Study on Primary ELT in New Zealand: What Is A Good Primary Practice in Taiwan? Abstract The learning of English by younger children affects content and methods more than with other age groups. However, research findings on primary ELT (English Language Teaching) in Taiwan claim there is a lack of a well-designed national curriculum despite the fact that English is taught as a foreign language in almost all primary schools in Taipei, beginning in the third year. This paper first describes and discusses the curriculum design of the primary ELT in New Zealand. Then, the writers experiences of observing 7 primary ELT classes in Auckland are documented, which particularly address the materials and methods employed in the classroom. Finally, the paper concludes with a number of practical suggestions for curriculum planners of primary ELT in Taiwan. Key Words: Primary ELT (English Language Teaching), national curriculum, methods and 2 materials A Study on Primary ELT in New Zealand: What Is A Good Primary Practice in Taiwan? 1. Introduction The teaching of English to primary school children has been raised as a strong issue in Taiwan over the last decade. Tsao(曹素香,1993) indicates in her study that 71.7% of the school children in the metropolitan Taipei area have learned or are taking English classes outside of school . In view of this compelling demand for English education among young learners, the Ministry of Education promulgated their policy for English teaching at primary school level. In December 1997, it was officially announced that effective from the academic year of 1999, all 11 and 12- year-olds would receive English education throughout the country(陳秋蘭,廖美玲, 1998). In compliance with the new policy, almost half of the 2561 primary schools in Taiwan launched experimental English-teaching programs in various forms in the academic year of 1997 (戴維揚,1998). The Taipei Education Bureau even took this one step further by implementing English teaching to 3rd graders across the board in Taipei in the academic year of 1998. (陳淳麗,1998) A review of recent research findings on primary ELT in Taiwan shows that most of them are convinced of the benefits of early learning of a foreign language. Rather than questioning policy on the issue, they put a strong case for identifying problems of implementation and seeking solutions to them. One of the problems often brought up is the lack of a well-designed curriculum as well as teaching materials. Shih (石素 錦,1998) points out that the lack of medium-range and long-range curricula, syllabuses and teaching guides as well as the selection and editing of teaching materials are some of the difficulties the schools are facing now. Yu (余光雄,1998) claims that there is a discrepancy in the curriculum design among schools and he is 3 concerned about the continuity of the learning and teaching from primary to secondary level. Dai (戴維揚，1998) further indicates that as the Ministry of Education fails to set up the objectives for primary ELT, school administrators, parents and teachers are forced to come up with their curricula and activities on a trial and error basis (learning it by doing it). Chen and Liao (陳秋蘭，廖美玲1998) suggest that the education bureau set up teaching objectives as well as curriculum standards by soliciting ideas from all concerned . These research papers all voice that a new pedagogy suited to the needs of children is one the profession urgently needs to address. It is clear that the knowledge of theories of child development and studies of the kinds of classroom conditions which promote language learning will contribute to a good educational practice in the teaching of English to young children. In addition, reflection and sharing of ideas from the primary ELT practices in other countries would also provide some educationally attractive solutions. As the writer of this paper was granted leave from Soochow University to conduct study in New Zealand during the 1998 academic year, she decided to find out about the implementation of ESOL (English to Speakers of Other Languages) programs in New Zealand primary schools in a number of ways. This paper first introduces the principles of English curriculum design in New Zealand, which is an English-speaking country with large populations of developing bilingual children. However, as Brewster (1991a) points out, the New Zealand primary practice has been to a certain extent influenced by the British model, it would be wise also to discuss briefly the British primary practice. Then the writer set out to sit in 7 primary ELT classes in different parts of Auckland and these observations are documented with emphasis on materials and methods employed. Examples are given to show how the curriculum design is embodied in real classroom situations. It is hoped that this research can provide information for policy development for a good educational practice in teaching young children English in Taiwan. 4 2. Primary Practices in the teaching of English The Department of Education and Science in Britain documented the following features of good primary practice in the teaching of English in 1989. Brumfit (1991b) argues these features can be taken into consideration for second language work. Brewster (1991a) further claims although these features are intended for teaching English in Britain, they would be acceptable for many EFL (English as a Foreign Language) teachers. 1. Using language to make, receive and communicate meaning, in purposeful contexts. 2. An apprenticeship approach to acquiring written and oral language, in which the adult represents the success the child seeks and yet offers endless help. 3. Maximum encouragement and support whilst errors are mastered; the appreciation that mistakes are necessary to learning. 4. Working on tasks which the children have chosen and which they direct for themselves. 5. Employing a variety of forms with a clear awareness of audience. 6. Working with teachers who are themselves involved in the processes-albeit with special expertise - as talkers, listeners, readers and writers. 7. Reading literature for enjoyment, responding to it critically and using that reading for learning. Brewster (1991a develop an understanding of the grammar and conventions of English; develop an understanding of how language varies according to the user, audience, and purposes; respond personally to and think critically about a range of texts, including literary texts; use language skills to identify information needs, and find, use, and communicate information;. (English in the New Zealand Curriculum, p. 9) All New Zealand schools must ensure that the following characteristics of learning and teaching in English are embodied in their programs. Language programs should be learner-centered. Language development is fostered by an environment which encourages creativity and experimentation. Language development is fostered by an environment which provides challenges and high expectations for students. Language learning is dynamic and progressive. Language learning requires interaction and active participation. Language is best developed when students understand and control the learning processes. 6 Language is best developed through an integrated approach to learning. Language and knowledge about language develop principally through use. Assessment involves evaluation of students in the process of learning. (English in the New Zealand curriculum, pp. 10-12) The English in the New Zealand Curriculum also provides a detailed curriculum for each of the 8 levels with specific achievement objectives, teaching and learning examples as well as assessment listed for each of the three strands, oral language (listening and speaking), written language (reading and writing), and visual language (viewing and presenting). As indicated in the New Zealand Curriculum Framework (Ministry of Education, 1993), Ministry of Education gives direction to the curriculum in New Zealand schools and schools are allowed to exercise their own discretion. Further, local school boards may offer innovative or experimental programs that differ from the standard programs mandated by the Ministry of Education. 3. Observations of Primary Classrooms in New Zealand In recent years the number of students from non-English-speaking backgrounds (NESB) in New Zealand schools has increased to a great extent. As of July 1, 1996, statistics from Ministry of Education indicate there were 57,903 NESB students in primary and secondary schools throughout the country, which is ten percent more than in 1995. 1 As principals set out in the New Zealand Curriculum Framework (Ministry of Education, 1993), the curriculum should provide all students with equal educational opportunities by responding to their individual needs. In coping with the needs of the large number of NESB students, schools and teachers are placed under great pressure. However, there is little formally documented material about what schools in New Zealand do for their NESB students- the sorts of programs and learning environments they provide for them. Generally speaking, new entrant NESB students 1 See Kennedy simply to focus on one to the exclusion of the other would provide only a limited view of the language. She stresses that explicit teaching of language should be integrated into content-based learning activities. 4.2 Whether there is a need for a standardized curriculum There has been some debate as to whether a set curriculum is necessary. Mckay (1992) points out several advantages to having a curriculum. One is the continuity involved. Broughton & others (1980) identifies continuity has always been a problem 18 for the foreign language programs in elementary schools. They claim that for this reason “French in British primary schools has proved disappointing, and that the English teaching in French primary schools has been discouraged.“(p. 172) The second advantage, according to Mckay, is “the objectives can provide a framework within which staff members can work together to design activities and tasks.“ (p.88) As Mckay describes, while teaching at a Korean university, Balhorn and Schneider (1987) suffered greatly from a lack of curriculum objectives. However, Nunan (1988) also points out potential disadvantages of a standardized curriculum. After the government department designs a curriculum, then there is very little teachers could do but to implement the curriculum. Another disadvantage is it often specifies what is to be learned, but not how it is to be learned. Since most teachers feel they have very little freedom to modify the syllabus, they follow the topics to be covered rigidly and aim to cover the required portion rather than to find the needs of their students. When the writer discussed the issue of a set curriculum with the teachers observed, most of them agreed it is important for the Ministry of Education to specify curriculum guidelines. As the English in the New Zealand Curriculum provides a detailed curriculum for each of the 8 levels with specific achievement objectives, teaching and learning examples as well as assessment, teachers can follow the guidelines in designing their course work. However, seeing the discrepancy between the stated and implemented curriculum among many schools, Ms. Gray holds a strong opinion. She suggests that standard core textbooks be employed so that teachers are required to cover certain topics and skills and students can use the textbooks to preview or review the lessons. 4.3 Curriculum implementation Even with a well-designed curriculum, there may still be problems with its implementation. First, curriculum innovation is often initiated from the education department in many countries. Nunan (1988) notes curriculum planners have tended to focus on the planned and assessed curriculum rather than the implemented 19 curriculum. Once the curriculum design is completed, very little effort is put into the work of field test and teachers are rarely given the opportunity to learn how to implement the curriculum. Even when teachers find that more objectives are included than they can feasibly cover, all they can do is just strive to cover everything. The successful implementation of a curriculum also requires a good deal of support from the Ministry of Education in terms of classroom materials and teacher training. Mckay (1992) explains how the Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sports is working to improve the quality of textbooks and their distribution in the Philippines. She describes, “the Ministry distributes outlines called Minimum Learning Competencies which specify what should be included in textbooks. These competencies are then sent to the Instructional Material Corporation which organizes a competition in the writing of textbooks (Silbayan, 1985). Under the current system, there is competitive adoption of textbooks from various sources, including commercially produced texts and an in-service teacher training program which shows teachers how to use the textbooks. (Otanes 1988)“ She finally comments, “The inclusion of a teacher training component increases the chances that teachers will not just cover the curriculum but seek to meet the particular needs of their students within its general framework.“ (p. 100 & 101) 4.4 Factors affecting syllabus design at primary level Pantaleoni (1991) lists the following factors which should be carefully examined while selecting an L2 syllabus at primary level in Italy. The end-goals of the course as pre-determined by school authorities (see Ministerial Program 1985). The pupils demographic/biographical conditions, that is their social and linguistic background, which can vary considerably depending on social class and geographical area (north/south, country/town, big city/small town, districts within the same metropolitan area and so on). The pupils cognitive development at the point at which the foreign language is introduced (whether from the first, second or third year onwards). 20 The number of pupils per class, the frequency and duration of classroom periods, the time of day at which the periods fall. The feasibility of interdisciplinary, cross-curricular work (depending on the schools working atmosphere, the teachers willingness to cooperate and act as a team). The availability and use of audio-visual materials, aids and facilities. The educational triangle, that is parent/teacher/child relationships and environmental constraints. The foreign language teacher who is to make it all possible, whether a specialist teacher wedged into the school context or an L1 primary teacher sensitized to L2 competence and methodologies through specially designed courses. (Syllabusing at primary level: the Italian perspective, p. 303) 4.5 Suggestions for primary English curriculum planners in Taiwan In Taiwan, English is not one of the principal languages in the community, and it is often learned as a foreign language. Although the new policy for English teaching at primary school level is being implemented, English has not yet been officially taught at many primary schools. A large number of children have been sent to private language schools to learn English. A brief review of the teaching practices in these schools will provide valuable information for primary English curriculum planners. In childrens English schools, lessons often come in two 50-minute periods twice a week. There are usually 15 to 20 students in one class, and teachers often use commercial courses. Most teachers try to cover the assigned materials rather than to teach effectively at the level of capability of the students. Although there has been a growing awareness of the importance of using the communicative approach for language teaching and learning, some teachers still prefer the traditional structural way of teaching. They see communication as a kind of extended free-practice stage for practicing particular language items. The focus is often on the form of the language rather then on meaning. As a result, teachers often spend a lot of class time instructing and correcting students. The practice of pair or 21 group work is seldom observed. There is little recognition of individual differences in students abilities and learning styles. All the students in the same class are given the same kind and amount of homework and assessed in the same framework. Furthermore, this kind of childrens English class has always been in isolation from the rest of students learning experiences in regular schools. The English syllabus becomes the total field of learning and the focus is often restricted to the items within it. This has involved children in an artificial approach to language learning. For example, children are often introduced to the following dialog for greeting each other. A: How are you today? B: Im fine. Thank you, and you? A: Im fine. Thanks. Menezes of Brazil points out that “books for children present some dialogs which are too formal to children“, and wonders whether “children are introduced to other people the same way as adults“ and respond “nice to meet you, Sue!“ (see TESLK-12 list posting, May 6, 1999) Another interesting example from Tongue (1991) is “Siu Leng is younger than her mother, which is an authentic quotation from a primary school textbook which is still in use.“ (p.109) If children are expected to learn English, they have to be provided with far more interesting materials, which truly reflect the childrens use of language. Garvie (1991) draws from his own experience