RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기

    중학교 영어 수업 형태별 교사발화 책략 분석 = (An) Analysis of Teacher Talk Strategies in Korean Middle School English Classes

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T12233498

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Since the 1995 implementation of the English Program in Korea(EPIK), three common types of middle school English classes could be distinguished by the teacher namely: the native English teacher(NET), the Korean English teacher(KET) and the combined native/Korean teaching team or co-teachers(COT). For the purpose of this study, 15 videotaped English classes were reviewed and the subsequent data were organized into three categories: discourse strategy, question strategy and motivation orientation of language teaching(MOLT) strategy. Utilizing a comparative analysis approach to study the use of teacher talk strategies in each of the three types of classes, the purpose of this study is to investigate: 1) whether there were any significant differences in the differing teacher talk strategies among the identified three common class types and, 2) whether there existed any significant relationships among these strategies within a given class type. The findings of this study are as follows:
    Firstly, in each type of class, the discourse strategy subcategories of describing activity procedure and command were most frequently utilized. Of significance, is the more frequent use of the subcategories of socializing and borrowing the mother tongue in the COT class, which is expected given the nature of this type of teaching.
    Secondly, within the question strategy, the knowledge question type which is used to elicit learned responses was most frequently used in all three types of class. However, it was utilized most frequently in COT followed by NET and KET, respectively. Overall, there was no significant difference noted in any of the seven identified question strategies.
    Thirdly, in each of the class types, MOLT strategies were present with NET most notably followed by COT and KET. Within the MOLT subcategory of teacher discourse, scaffolding was the most frequently used strategy by all teachers. The most significant difference among the classes was the frequency of use in NET of teacher discourse which includes social chat and promoting integrative/instrumental values as well as the aforementioned scaffolding.
    Finally, each class type exhibited strong relationships between the subcategories of the differing teacher talk strategies. Particularly in the NET class, more subcategories within each strategy showed a positive relation with one or the other two strategies. This finding suggests the affect of a given strategy on the other two.
    The results of this study contribute to dispelling the widely held belief that the NET class is a superior or more interactive class as compared to the KET or the COT class. It is evident that in each class type the strategies utilized by teachers is largely similar. The NET class stands out only with respect to the frequency of certain subcategories of teacher talk strategies which lead to a more motivational classroom environment.
    From a result of these findings, Korean English teachers would benefit from examining the best features of the teacher talk strategies of the NET classes and attempt to incorporate these features into their own teaching. Furthermore, teacher training programs should place more emphasis on development of teacher talk strategies and provide substantial opportunities to practice such strategies. Such an approach may lead to more active student participation and as a result a more interactive communicative class. Further studies are needed to compensate for the limitations of the present study. A more intensive study incorporating a larger number of classes being observed may result in further findings that will lead to improving and enhancing the ability of Korean English teachers to successfully and more frequently incorporate teacher talk strategies in the English classroom.
    번역하기

    Since the 1995 implementation of the English Program in Korea(EPIK), three common types of middle school English classes could be distinguished by the teacher namely: the native English teacher(NET), the Korean English teacher(KET) and the combined na...

    Since the 1995 implementation of the English Program in Korea(EPIK), three common types of middle school English classes could be distinguished by the teacher namely: the native English teacher(NET), the Korean English teacher(KET) and the combined native/Korean teaching team or co-teachers(COT). For the purpose of this study, 15 videotaped English classes were reviewed and the subsequent data were organized into three categories: discourse strategy, question strategy and motivation orientation of language teaching(MOLT) strategy. Utilizing a comparative analysis approach to study the use of teacher talk strategies in each of the three types of classes, the purpose of this study is to investigate: 1) whether there were any significant differences in the differing teacher talk strategies among the identified three common class types and, 2) whether there existed any significant relationships among these strategies within a given class type. The findings of this study are as follows:
    Firstly, in each type of class, the discourse strategy subcategories of describing activity procedure and command were most frequently utilized. Of significance, is the more frequent use of the subcategories of socializing and borrowing the mother tongue in the COT class, which is expected given the nature of this type of teaching.
    Secondly, within the question strategy, the knowledge question type which is used to elicit learned responses was most frequently used in all three types of class. However, it was utilized most frequently in COT followed by NET and KET, respectively. Overall, there was no significant difference noted in any of the seven identified question strategies.
    Thirdly, in each of the class types, MOLT strategies were present with NET most notably followed by COT and KET. Within the MOLT subcategory of teacher discourse, scaffolding was the most frequently used strategy by all teachers. The most significant difference among the classes was the frequency of use in NET of teacher discourse which includes social chat and promoting integrative/instrumental values as well as the aforementioned scaffolding.
    Finally, each class type exhibited strong relationships between the subcategories of the differing teacher talk strategies. Particularly in the NET class, more subcategories within each strategy showed a positive relation with one or the other two strategies. This finding suggests the affect of a given strategy on the other two.
    The results of this study contribute to dispelling the widely held belief that the NET class is a superior or more interactive class as compared to the KET or the COT class. It is evident that in each class type the strategies utilized by teachers is largely similar. The NET class stands out only with respect to the frequency of certain subcategories of teacher talk strategies which lead to a more motivational classroom environment.
    From a result of these findings, Korean English teachers would benefit from examining the best features of the teacher talk strategies of the NET classes and attempt to incorporate these features into their own teaching. Furthermore, teacher training programs should place more emphasis on development of teacher talk strategies and provide substantial opportunities to practice such strategies. Such an approach may lead to more active student participation and as a result a more interactive communicative class. Further studies are needed to compensate for the limitations of the present study. A more intensive study incorporating a larger number of classes being observed may result in further findings that will lead to improving and enhancing the ability of Korean English teachers to successfully and more frequently incorporate teacher talk strategies in the English classroom.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • Ⅰ. 서 론 1
    • 1.1. 연구의 필요성 1
    • 1.2. 연구의 목적 및 연구 문제 3
    • 1.3. 연구 범위 및 용어 정의 4
    • Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 6
    • Ⅰ. 서 론 1
    • 1.1. 연구의 필요성 1
    • 1.2. 연구의 목적 및 연구 문제 3
    • 1.3. 연구 범위 및 용어 정의 4
    • Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 6
    • 2.1. 담화분석 6
    • 2.2. 교실담화 8
    • 2.3. 교사발화 11
    • 2.3.1. 교수 담화책략 12
    • 2.3.2. 발문책략 14
    • 2.3.3. 동기유발책략 17
    • 2.4. 선행연구 21
    • 2.4.1. 교사발화에 관한 연구 21
    • 2.4.2. 발문책략에 관한 연구 26
    • 2.4.3 동기유발책략에 관한 선행연구 30
    • Ⅲ. 연구 방법 34
    • 3.1. 연구 대상 및 절차 34
    • 3.2. 실험의 설계 36
    • 3.2.1. 교수 담화책략 분류 기준 36
    • 3.2.2. 발문책략 분류 기준 38
    • 3.2.3. 동기유발책략 분류 기준 41
    • 3.3. 자료 수집 및 분석 41
    • Ⅳ. 연구 결과 및 논의 43
    • 4.1. 교사발화의 양과 횟수 43
    • 4.2. 수업 형태별 교수 담화책략 사용 비교 46
    • 4.2.1. 전체 교사의 교수 담화책략별 발화유형 46
    • 4.2.2. 원어민교사 수업의 교수 담화책략별 발화유형 48
    • 4.2.3. 한국인교사 수업의 교수 담화책략별 발화유형 50
    • 4.2.4. 협동수업의 교수 담화책략별 발화유형 51
    • 4.2.5. 수업 형태에 따른 교수 담화책략의 차이 53
    • 4.3. 수업 형태별 발문책략 사용 비교 55
    • 4.3.1. 전체 교사의 발문책략 55
    • 4.3.2. 원어민교사 수업의 발문책략 58
    • 4.3.3. 한국인교사 수업의 발문책략 59
    • 4.3.4. 협동수업의 발문책략 60
    • 4.3.5. 수업 형태에 따른 발문책략의 차이 61
    • 4.4. 수업 형태별 동기유발책략 사용 비교 64
    • 4.4.1. 전체 교사의 동기유발책략 64
    • 4.4.2. 원어민교사 수업의 동기유발책략 66
    • 4.4.3. 한국인교사 수업의 동기유발책략 68
    • 4.4.4. 협동수업의 동기유발책략 69
    • 4.4.5. 수업 형태에 따른 동기유발책략의 차이 70
    • 4.5. 책략 간 상관관계 73
    • 4.5.1. 교수 담화책략과 발문책략 사이의 상관관계 73
    • 4.5.2. 교수 담화책략과 동기유발책략 사이의 상관관계 78
    • 4.5.3. 발문책략과 동기유발책략 사이의 상관관계 86
    • Ⅴ. 결론 및 제언 94
    • 5.1. 결론 94
    • 5.2. 제언 96
    • 참 고 문 헌 99
    • 부 록 107
    • 영 문 초 록 127
    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1. Pragmatics, Levinson, Stephen C, Cambridge Univ. Press, , 1983

    2. Teach English, Doff, , 1988

    3. Discourse analysis, Stubbs, , 1983

    4. Replies and responses, Goffman, , 1976

    5. Logic and conversation, Grice, H. P., , 1975

    6. Secondlanguageclassrooms, ChaudronCraig, Second language classrooms, , 1988

    7. The good language learner, Naiman, N, Multilingual Matters, , 1996

    8. Analyzing teaching behavior, Flanders, Ned A, Addison-Wesley, Analyzing teaching behavior, , 1970

    9. How to do things with words, Austin, J. L, Clarendon Press, , 1976

    10. T-unit을 통한 E-mail 분석, 전정찬, , 2000

    1. Pragmatics, Levinson, Stephen C, Cambridge Univ. Press, , 1983

    2. Teach English, Doff, , 1988

    3. Discourse analysis, Stubbs, , 1983

    4. Replies and responses, Goffman, , 1976

    5. Logic and conversation, Grice, H. P., , 1975

    6. Secondlanguageclassrooms, ChaudronCraig, Second language classrooms, , 1988

    7. The good language learner, Naiman, N, Multilingual Matters, , 1996

    8. Analyzing teaching behavior, Flanders, Ned A, Addison-Wesley, Analyzing teaching behavior, , 1970

    9. How to do things with words, Austin, J. L, Clarendon Press, , 1976

    10. T-unit을 통한 E-mail 분석, 전정찬, , 2000

    11. Teachers research teacher talk, Thornbury, , 1996

    12. A Handbook of classroom English, Hughes, Glyn S, Oxford University Press, , 1981

    13. Training teachers to askquestions, Thompson, , 1997

    14. Language in the secondary classroom, Barnes, , 1969

    15. Oral language for today's classroom, Staab, Claire, Pippin pub. LTD., , 1992

    16. 영어 교실에서의 교사발화, 서천수, 김미래, , 2004

    17. Motivation learn language proficiency, Lukmani, , 1972

    18. Observation in the language classroom, Allwright, , 1988

    19. Research methods in language learning, Nunan David, Cambridge University Press, , 2004

    20. When does teacher talk work as input?, Wong-Fillmore, , 1985

    21. Teacher talk and the classroom context, Cullen, , 1998

    22. The Classroom and the Language Learner, Van Lier, The classroom and the language learner, , 1988

    23. Communication in the language classroom, Lynch, Tony, 1949, Oxford University Press, , 1996

    24. Principles in foreign language teaching, Apelt, , 1981

    25. The applied linguistics of teacher talk, Frey, , 1988

    26. The study of second language acquisition, Ellis, Rod, Oxford University Press, The study of second language acquisition, , 1994

    27. Explorations in the functions of language, Halliday, M. A. K, Elsevier North-Holland, Explorations in the functions of language, , 1977

    28. 초등영어 전담교사 교실영어 분석, 박광노, 한국외국어교육학회, , 2005

    29. Communicative language teaching: Making it work, Nunan, , 1987

    30. 발문을 활용한 상호작용적 언어교수, 김기영, , 1998

    31. 초등영어수업의 교수 언어 사용분석, 김영민, 한국영어교육학회, , 2002

    32. 팀티칭에서 일어나는 상호작용 분석, 이영미, 서강대학교 교육대학원, , 2007

    33. 초등 한국인교사 교실영어 비교 연구, 이승복, , 2005

    34. Intercultural communication and co-teaching issues, Austin, , 2007

    35. Factors affecting the efficiency of second language, Hewson, , 1982

    36. Teacher talk in the classroom: Native and foreigner, Richard-Amato, , 1984

    37. Principles of language learning and leaching (4th ed.), Brown, , 2000

    38. Some thoughts in the notion of "communication strategy, Tarone, "Some thoughts in the notion of ""communication strategy", , 1981

    39. Learning lessons : social organization in the classroom, Mehan, Hugh, Harvard University Press, Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom, , 1979

    40. An introduction to discourse analysis : theory and method, Gee, James Paul, Routledge, An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method, , 1999

    41. The classroom interaction of outstanding foreign teachers, Moskowitz, , 1976

    42. Lang uag e T eaching M ethodology: A textbook for teachers, Nunan, Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers, , 1995

    43. Classroom discourse : the language of teaching and learning, Cazden, Courtney B, Heinemann, Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning, , 1988

    44. Negotiated interaction in target language classroom discourse, Boulima, Jamila, J. Benjamins, , 1999

    45. Teacher talk revisited: Issues, findings and future firections, 성귀복, "Teacher talk revisited: Issues, , 2006

    46. The effects of referential question on ESL classroom discourse, Brock, , 1986

    47. Variables of classroom achievement in second language learning, Bialystok, Fr?lich, , 1978

    48. 성공적인 한국 영어학습자의 동기에 관한 연구, 김슬기, 계명대학교 교육대학원, , 2008

    49. 중고등학교 원어민 보조교사들의 발화 비교 분석, 이지은, , 2009

    50. 중등학교 한국인교사발화 (teacher talk)에 관한 연구, 노상호, , 2001

    51. 초등영어수업의 상호작용에 나타난 교사 발문 분석, 이경훈, , 2004

    52. Teaching by principles : an interactive approach to language pedagogy, Brown, H. Douglas, Prentice Hall Regents, Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy, , 1994

    53. A Case Study of Teacher Talk Types in Korean Elementary EFL Classrooms, 박정아, 숙명여자대학교 TESOL 대학원, , 2007

    54. Natural order in children's use of second language learning strategies, Chesterfield, , 1985

    55. Problems and solutions in the classification of compensatory strategies, Paulisse, , 1987

    56. 한국어 학습 동기 형성을 위한 교수 전략에 대한 연구, 해경연, 이화여자대학교 국제대학원, , 2009

    57. Toward an Analysis of Discourse: the English Used by Teachers and Pupils, Coulthard, Sinclair, , 1975

    58. Discourse and context in language teaching : a guide for language teachers, Celce-Murcia, Marianne, Cambridge University,, , 2000

    59. From product to process: Introspective methods in second language research, Faerch, Kasper, , 1987

    60. 교사의 영어 사용 비율에 따른 초등영어 수업의 효과 연구, 박은실, 박기화, 영남영어교육학회, "영어교육연구, , 2002

    61. Classroom foreigner talk discourse: Forms and functions of teacher's questions, Sato, Long, , 1983

    62. 영어 학습자의 동기 유발과 영어 성취도간의 상관관계 연구, 백일현, , 2001

    63. The quality of language input as revealed in teacher talks and classroom activities, Kim, , 2007

    64. A study of four Korean third grade EFL classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Lim, , 2002

    65. Teacher question sequence in ESL writing conferences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Koshik, , 1999

    66. 초등영어수업에서의 교사와 학생 간 상호작용의 유형에 관한 연구, 박광노, , 2005

    67. Promoting active learning and classroom interaction through effective questioning strategies, Kinsella, , 1991

    68. Focus on the language classroom : an introduction to classroom research for language teachers, Allwright, Dick, Cambridge University Press, , 1991

    69. Uses of Japanese (L1) in the English classroom: Introducing the functional-translation method, Weschler, , 1997

    70. 영어 학습에 대한 동기와 동기 상실: 연구초등학생과 중학생을 대상으로, 서은우, 영어학습에 대한 동기와 동기상실: 연구초등학생과 중학생을 대상으로, , 2008

    71. Classroom second language development : A study of classroom interaction and language acquisition, Ellis, Rod, Pergamon, , 1984

    72. COLT -- Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching Observation Scheme : coding conventions and applications, Spada, Nina Margaret, National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, , 1995

    73. 원어민 보조교사와의 협동수업이 초등영어 학습자의 동기 및 정의적 특성에 미치는 영향, 이수진, 대구교육대학교 교육대학원, 석사학위논문 대구교육대학교 교육대학원, , 2007

    74. 사회문화적 관점에서 본 교사와 학생간의 EFL 교실 상호작용:원어민과 비원어민 교사 비교연구, 박부남, , 2005

    75. Motivating language learners: Aclassroom-oriented investigation of the effects of motivational strategieson student motivation, D?rnyei, Guilloteaux, , 2008

    76. Second language acquisition: A social psychological approach: Final Report. Ontario Ministry of Education. Grant-in-aid to Education, Bramwell, Gardner, Kirby, Smythe, , 1974

    77. 외국어 교육에서 상호작용 활성화를 위한 교수자 담화 전략 : 제도권 밖의 초보 프랑스어 학습자를 중심으로, 김경랑, , 2004

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼