一项基于建构主义的BBS辅助英语写作教学的案例研究
|
摘要
行为主义,认知主义和建构主义是学习理论的三种主要哲学框架。建构主义教育学家格拉赛费尔德认为建构主义是源于哲学,心理学和控制论的知识理论。建构主义是由认知主义发展而来且与行为主义相对的理论,它是一个关于人们如何学习的理论。在为建构主义做出贡献的学者中间,皮亚杰和维果茨基是两位最伟大的贡献者。
建构主义以学习者为中心,它的关注点是知识的建构,而非知识的再现。它假定知识是学习者思想的客观解释,而且这种解释是在学习者不断发现并进行思想斗争中得到最好的发展。根据建构主义理念,人们通过经历事件和反思经历,构建自己对世界的理解和认识。乔治曾评论:在过去10年里,建构主义学习已经成为一种重要的教学方法。基于建构主义学习的性质和原则,如下教学设计被提出:建立以学习者为中心的教学,营造真实的学习环境,强调合作学习并改变教师的角色。
美国学者扎迈勒认为写作是一个“探索自己的思想,从写作行为中了解自己的想法究竟为何”的过程。写作是一种产出性的语言技能,但通常在听、说、读、写四项语言技能的学习中,它排在最后(布鲁克斯和格伦迪,1998年)。在英语写作过程中,学习者需要使用隐性和显性两种知识。英语写作是一个复杂的过程,也是中国学生非常难以掌握的技能。传统上,大学英语教师都是采用成果教学法,并且这种教学方法几乎为中国的高校英语教学所通用。如今,一个引起英语教师及专家极大关注的问题是传统教学方法在提高大学生
英语写作水平方面的低效性,该问题已经通过各种调查和研究得到了突显。随着计算机技术的飞速发展,在教学中使用电脑的可能性也成倍增加。计算机辅助语言学习已被广泛应用于语言教学和学习。当前,随着网络的发展,计算机辅助语言学习已发展成为网络辅助语言学习,这为英语学习者提供了真正的交流沟通环境和社会交往机会。BBS辅助英语写作教学源于网络辅助语言学习的理念,它体现了建构主义理念与网络辅助英语写作学习的融合与统一。2004年教育部制定颁发的《大学英语课程教学要求》强调了网络技术在大学英语教学中的使用,这为进行BBS辅助大学英语写作的尝试性教学提供了宏观的背景条件。
在这种背景下,笔者进行了以建构主义为基础,以学习者为中心的CNJACK BBS辅助英语写作教学的实践研究,希望该实验能够结合传统教学与网络辅助语言学习教学的优势,最大限度地发挥高校英语写作教学的指导作用,并为英语教师和学习者提供一个全新的进行英语写作教学与学习的视角。该项研究的目的是研究和探索使用这种全新的网络辅助语言学习的教学模式进行英语写作教学的可行性和有效性。
根据以往的研究,丰富的信息输入和大量的信息输出对进行第二语言学习和掌握第二语言写作是同样重要的。此外,学习英语写作也包括要掌握各种体裁的写作。出于这种考虑,在CNJACK BBS辅助英语写作教学实验中,笔者建构了英语写作模块,英语写作教学模块和英语阅读教学模块,以期全面培养和发展学生的英语写作能力和英语综合应用能力。
参加该实验的75名学生来自山东交通学院的两个平行班,他们被随机地分为两组:实验组(061班,36名学生)和对照组(062班,39名学生)。根据英语写作的过程教学法,写作过程可分为几个循环的过程:写前准备,多稿写作,修改,编辑等。关于该研究的资料收集,定性数据是通过对实验参与者进行后测,课程结束后进行问卷调查,课程结束后进行访谈以及实验中进行在线观测记录等方式收集。该实验采用定性评价的方式来评估教学实验的效果:首先,用SPSS V13.0软件分析来比较实验组和对照组的后测结果;其次,在实验组进行课后问卷调查分析,以期查明全新的BBS辅助英语语言学习教学模式的有效性;再次,对实验组学生课后访谈的记录进行总结、分析和归纳;最后,对指导教师收集的在线观测记录进行分析。
经过12个周的尝试性教学实验,实验数据的分析表明这种基于建构主义的,由BBS辅助的,有足够信息输入、信息输出和多种互动的教学是一种非常有效的英语写作教学方法。它不仅极大地提高了学生的英语写作能力,而且在培养学生的综合应用能力和促进其自主及协作学习方面效果也非常显著。
该文从多个角度全面讨论了BBS辅助英语语言学习模式的优势:学术优势方面,教学方法方面,教师角色方面,同伴参与方面,心理效应和技术性能方面等。虽然BBS辅助英语写作教学的优势是显而易见的,但目前的研究还存在一些局限。此外,教师和学生在这种全新的网络辅助语言学习教学模式中所面临的挑战,也作为一个问题在文中提出并进行了讨论。
在论文的最后一章,笔者分析了BBS辅助英语写作教学模式对英语教学的影响;进行了对所作研究的反思;提出了对教师、学生和进一步研究的建议。笔者希望,该教学实验可以展现一个如何将BBS技术应用于英语写作教学的范例,并希望该研究结果可以启发更多的教育工作者进行更深入的研究。
Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism are the three main categories of philosophical frameworks under which learning theories fall. Constructivism is a theory of knowledge with roots in philosophy, psychology, and cybernetics. It is improved from Cognitivism and opposite to Behaviorism, it is basically a theory about how people learn. Among the contributors to Constructivism, Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky are two greatest ones.
Constructivism is learner-centered, and the focus of it is on knowledge construction, not knowledge reproduction. It assumes that knowledge is an objective interpretation of ideas and that such interpretations are best developed through the learner discovering and struggling with ideas. According to Constructivism, people construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. Constructivist learning has emerged as a prominent approach to teaching during the past decade (George, M. 1994). Based on the nature and constructivist learning principles, the proposed teaching designs are: establishing learner-centered instruction, creating authentic learning environment, emphasizing cooperative learning and changing the roles of teacher.
Writing is a process of“exploring one’s thoughts and learning from the act of writing itself what thoughts are”. (Zamel, 1982) Writing is a productive skill of the language, which usually comes at the end of the four language skills—reading, listening, speaking, and writing (Brookes and Grundy, 1998). In the process of EFL writing, writers need to utilize both implicit knowledge and explicit knowledge. English writing is a complex process and a difficult skill for Chinese students to master. Traditionally, Product Approach was adopted by the college teachers to instruct EFL writing almost throughout the Chinese colleges. Nowadays, a big concern of English teachers and experts is the low efficiency of traditional instruction method in improving English writing proficiency of Chinese college students, which has been highlighted through various surveys and researches.
With the rapid development of computer technologies, the possibilities for the use of computers in education have multiplied. CALL has been widely applied in language teaching and learning. Nowadays, with the Web’s development, CALL has developed into WELL, which offers learners real communication environment and social interaction opportunity. BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction originated from the WELL concept and it embodies the integration of Constructivism with WELL concept in EFL writing instruction. College English Curriculum Requirements (Ministry of Education, 2004), which emphasizes the utilization of the Web technology in college English education, provides the macro-context for making a tentative BBS-assisted college EFL writing instruction experiment.
In this context, a Constructivism-based learner-centered CNJACK BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction study was conducted by the author, hoping to combine the benefits of traditional and WELL instruction, maximize the instructive effect of college EFL writing education, and provide both English instructors and learners with a new perspective in English writing teaching and learning. The goal of the study is to research and explore the availability and effectiveness of the new WELL model of EFL writing instruction.
According to the previous study, rich input and copious output are equally important for L2 learning and mastering L2 writing. Besides, learning to write in English also involves mastering the write of various genres. In this consideration, EFL Writing Module, EFL Writing Instruction Module and EFL Reading Instruction Module were set up on CNJACK BBS. It is hoped to thoroughly cultivate and develop students’EFL writing ability and EFL comprehensive application capability.
The participants of the experiment were 75 students from two parallel classes of Shandong Jiaotong University, who were divided into two groups—the experimental group (class 061 with 36 students) and the controlled group (class 062 with 39 students) at random. According to the Process Approach of EFL writing instruction, CNJACK BBS writing procedures were divided into several recursive processes: prewriting, multidraft writing, revision, edition etc. As to the data collection of the research, qualitative data were collected through the post-test of participants, the post-course questionnaires, the post-course interviews and the online observations. Qualitative assessment was adopted to assess the experimental effectiveness: first, SPSS V13.0 comparison of the post-test results from the experimental group and the controlled group; second, the post-course questionnaires analysis with the aim of identifying the effectiveness of the new WELL model; third, the summary, analysis and induction of the record in the post-course interviews with the participants; fourth, the record analysis of the instructor’s online observation.
After the 12 weeks’tentative experimental instruction, data analysis of the experiment shows that the Constructivism-based and BBS-assisted instruction with adequate input, output and multi-interaction is a very effective approach to EFL writing instruction. It is significantly effective not only in improving students’writing competence but also in developing learners’comprehensive capabilities and advancing their collaborative learning.
The benefits of BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction are fully discussed through different perspectives in the thesis: academic superiority, teaching approach, changed roles of instructor, peer participation, psychological benefits and technological functions etc. Though the superiority of BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction is obvious, there are also some limitations of the current research. Besides, the challenges faced by the teachers and the students in the new WELL instruction model are also proposed and discussed as a problem in the thesis.
In the final chapter of the thesis, implications of BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction model for EFL instruction, reflection of the present study and the recommendations for instructors, learners and further researches are carefully drawn, analyzed and proposed. Hopefully, the teaching practice will demonstrate a specific example of how the BBS technology can be employed to conduct EFL writing instruction and the findings of the research will be enlightening to the further research of more educational practitioners.
建构主义以学习者为中心,它的关注点是知识的建构,而非知识的再现。它假定知识是学习者思想的客观解释,而且这种解释是在学习者不断发现并进行思想斗争中得到最好的发展。根据建构主义理念,人们通过经历事件和反思经历,构建自己对世界的理解和认识。乔治曾评论:在过去10年里,建构主义学习已经成为一种重要的教学方法。基于建构主义学习的性质和原则,如下教学设计被提出:建立以学习者为中心的教学,营造真实的学习环境,强调合作学习并改变教师的角色。
美国学者扎迈勒认为写作是一个“探索自己的思想,从写作行为中了解自己的想法究竟为何”的过程。写作是一种产出性的语言技能,但通常在听、说、读、写四项语言技能的学习中,它排在最后(布鲁克斯和格伦迪,1998年)。在英语写作过程中,学习者需要使用隐性和显性两种知识。英语写作是一个复杂的过程,也是中国学生非常难以掌握的技能。传统上,大学英语教师都是采用成果教学法,并且这种教学方法几乎为中国的高校英语教学所通用。如今,一个引起英语教师及专家极大关注的问题是传统教学方法在提高大学生
英语写作水平方面的低效性,该问题已经通过各种调查和研究得到了突显。随着计算机技术的飞速发展,在教学中使用电脑的可能性也成倍增加。计算机辅助语言学习已被广泛应用于语言教学和学习。当前,随着网络的发展,计算机辅助语言学习已发展成为网络辅助语言学习,这为英语学习者提供了真正的交流沟通环境和社会交往机会。BBS辅助英语写作教学源于网络辅助语言学习的理念,它体现了建构主义理念与网络辅助英语写作学习的融合与统一。2004年教育部制定颁发的《大学英语课程教学要求》强调了网络技术在大学英语教学中的使用,这为进行BBS辅助大学英语写作的尝试性教学提供了宏观的背景条件。
在这种背景下,笔者进行了以建构主义为基础,以学习者为中心的CNJACK BBS辅助英语写作教学的实践研究,希望该实验能够结合传统教学与网络辅助语言学习教学的优势,最大限度地发挥高校英语写作教学的指导作用,并为英语教师和学习者提供一个全新的进行英语写作教学与学习的视角。该项研究的目的是研究和探索使用这种全新的网络辅助语言学习的教学模式进行英语写作教学的可行性和有效性。
根据以往的研究,丰富的信息输入和大量的信息输出对进行第二语言学习和掌握第二语言写作是同样重要的。此外,学习英语写作也包括要掌握各种体裁的写作。出于这种考虑,在CNJACK BBS辅助英语写作教学实验中,笔者建构了英语写作模块,英语写作教学模块和英语阅读教学模块,以期全面培养和发展学生的英语写作能力和英语综合应用能力。
参加该实验的75名学生来自山东交通学院的两个平行班,他们被随机地分为两组:实验组(061班,36名学生)和对照组(062班,39名学生)。根据英语写作的过程教学法,写作过程可分为几个循环的过程:写前准备,多稿写作,修改,编辑等。关于该研究的资料收集,定性数据是通过对实验参与者进行后测,课程结束后进行问卷调查,课程结束后进行访谈以及实验中进行在线观测记录等方式收集。该实验采用定性评价的方式来评估教学实验的效果:首先,用SPSS V13.0软件分析来比较实验组和对照组的后测结果;其次,在实验组进行课后问卷调查分析,以期查明全新的BBS辅助英语语言学习教学模式的有效性;再次,对实验组学生课后访谈的记录进行总结、分析和归纳;最后,对指导教师收集的在线观测记录进行分析。
经过12个周的尝试性教学实验,实验数据的分析表明这种基于建构主义的,由BBS辅助的,有足够信息输入、信息输出和多种互动的教学是一种非常有效的英语写作教学方法。它不仅极大地提高了学生的英语写作能力,而且在培养学生的综合应用能力和促进其自主及协作学习方面效果也非常显著。
该文从多个角度全面讨论了BBS辅助英语语言学习模式的优势:学术优势方面,教学方法方面,教师角色方面,同伴参与方面,心理效应和技术性能方面等。虽然BBS辅助英语写作教学的优势是显而易见的,但目前的研究还存在一些局限。此外,教师和学生在这种全新的网络辅助语言学习教学模式中所面临的挑战,也作为一个问题在文中提出并进行了讨论。
在论文的最后一章,笔者分析了BBS辅助英语写作教学模式对英语教学的影响;进行了对所作研究的反思;提出了对教师、学生和进一步研究的建议。笔者希望,该教学实验可以展现一个如何将BBS技术应用于英语写作教学的范例,并希望该研究结果可以启发更多的教育工作者进行更深入的研究。
Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism are the three main categories of philosophical frameworks under which learning theories fall. Constructivism is a theory of knowledge with roots in philosophy, psychology, and cybernetics. It is improved from Cognitivism and opposite to Behaviorism, it is basically a theory about how people learn. Among the contributors to Constructivism, Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky are two greatest ones.
Constructivism is learner-centered, and the focus of it is on knowledge construction, not knowledge reproduction. It assumes that knowledge is an objective interpretation of ideas and that such interpretations are best developed through the learner discovering and struggling with ideas. According to Constructivism, people construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. Constructivist learning has emerged as a prominent approach to teaching during the past decade (George, M. 1994). Based on the nature and constructivist learning principles, the proposed teaching designs are: establishing learner-centered instruction, creating authentic learning environment, emphasizing cooperative learning and changing the roles of teacher.
Writing is a process of“exploring one’s thoughts and learning from the act of writing itself what thoughts are”. (Zamel, 1982) Writing is a productive skill of the language, which usually comes at the end of the four language skills—reading, listening, speaking, and writing (Brookes and Grundy, 1998). In the process of EFL writing, writers need to utilize both implicit knowledge and explicit knowledge. English writing is a complex process and a difficult skill for Chinese students to master. Traditionally, Product Approach was adopted by the college teachers to instruct EFL writing almost throughout the Chinese colleges. Nowadays, a big concern of English teachers and experts is the low efficiency of traditional instruction method in improving English writing proficiency of Chinese college students, which has been highlighted through various surveys and researches.
With the rapid development of computer technologies, the possibilities for the use of computers in education have multiplied. CALL has been widely applied in language teaching and learning. Nowadays, with the Web’s development, CALL has developed into WELL, which offers learners real communication environment and social interaction opportunity. BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction originated from the WELL concept and it embodies the integration of Constructivism with WELL concept in EFL writing instruction. College English Curriculum Requirements (Ministry of Education, 2004), which emphasizes the utilization of the Web technology in college English education, provides the macro-context for making a tentative BBS-assisted college EFL writing instruction experiment.
In this context, a Constructivism-based learner-centered CNJACK BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction study was conducted by the author, hoping to combine the benefits of traditional and WELL instruction, maximize the instructive effect of college EFL writing education, and provide both English instructors and learners with a new perspective in English writing teaching and learning. The goal of the study is to research and explore the availability and effectiveness of the new WELL model of EFL writing instruction.
According to the previous study, rich input and copious output are equally important for L2 learning and mastering L2 writing. Besides, learning to write in English also involves mastering the write of various genres. In this consideration, EFL Writing Module, EFL Writing Instruction Module and EFL Reading Instruction Module were set up on CNJACK BBS. It is hoped to thoroughly cultivate and develop students’EFL writing ability and EFL comprehensive application capability.
The participants of the experiment were 75 students from two parallel classes of Shandong Jiaotong University, who were divided into two groups—the experimental group (class 061 with 36 students) and the controlled group (class 062 with 39 students) at random. According to the Process Approach of EFL writing instruction, CNJACK BBS writing procedures were divided into several recursive processes: prewriting, multidraft writing, revision, edition etc. As to the data collection of the research, qualitative data were collected through the post-test of participants, the post-course questionnaires, the post-course interviews and the online observations. Qualitative assessment was adopted to assess the experimental effectiveness: first, SPSS V13.0 comparison of the post-test results from the experimental group and the controlled group; second, the post-course questionnaires analysis with the aim of identifying the effectiveness of the new WELL model; third, the summary, analysis and induction of the record in the post-course interviews with the participants; fourth, the record analysis of the instructor’s online observation.
After the 12 weeks’tentative experimental instruction, data analysis of the experiment shows that the Constructivism-based and BBS-assisted instruction with adequate input, output and multi-interaction is a very effective approach to EFL writing instruction. It is significantly effective not only in improving students’writing competence but also in developing learners’comprehensive capabilities and advancing their collaborative learning.
The benefits of BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction are fully discussed through different perspectives in the thesis: academic superiority, teaching approach, changed roles of instructor, peer participation, psychological benefits and technological functions etc. Though the superiority of BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction is obvious, there are also some limitations of the current research. Besides, the challenges faced by the teachers and the students in the new WELL instruction model are also proposed and discussed as a problem in the thesis.
In the final chapter of the thesis, implications of BBS-assisted EFL writing instruction model for EFL instruction, reflection of the present study and the recommendations for instructors, learners and further researches are carefully drawn, analyzed and proposed. Hopefully, the teaching practice will demonstrate a specific example of how the BBS technology can be employed to conduct EFL writing instruction and the findings of the research will be enlightening to the further research of more educational practitioners.
引文
Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K. & Pellelier, R. 1995. Cognitive tutors: Lesson Learned. [J]. The Journal of Learning Sciences, (4).
Audrey, G. 1998. Constructivist Teaching and Learning. http://www.ssta.sk.ca/research/instruction/97-07.htm
Black, P. J. & Wiliam, D. 1998. Assessment and Classroom Learning. [J]. Assessment in Eduction, 5(1): 7-71.
Bolter, J. D. 1992. Literature in the Electronic Writing Space. In M. C. Tuman (Ed.), Literacy Online: the Promise (and Peril) of Reading and Writing with Computers. [M]. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 19-42.
Braine, G. and Yorozu, M. 1998. Local Area Network (LAN) Computers in ESL and EFL Writing Classess: Promises and Realities. [J]. JALT Journal, 20(2):47-59.
Brookes, A. and Grundy, P. 1998. Begin to Write. [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bruner, J. S. 1966. Toward a Theory of Instruction. [M].Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Carr, C. S. & Carr, A. M. 2000. Instructional Design in Distance Education (IDDE): A Web-based Performance Support System for Educators and Designers. [J]. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1(4): 317-325.
Caulk, N. 1994. Comparing Teacher and Student Responses to Written Work. [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1):181-7.
Chambliss, J. J. (Ed.) 1996. Philosophy of Education: an Encyclopedia. [M]. New York: Garland.
Chapelle, C. 2000. Is Netwok-based Learning CALL? [A]. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.) Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice. [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 204-228.
Crandall, J. 1998. Collaborate and Cooperate: Teacher Education for Integrating Language and Content Instruction. [J]. English Teaching Forum, (1).
David H. Jonassen, Kyle L. Peck, Brent G. Wilson. 1999. Learning with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective. Publisher: Prentice Hall.http://www.mendeley.com/research/learning-with-technology-a-constructivist-perspective/
Du, H. 2002. An Investigation of College English Teaching in Four Universities in China. [J]. International Education Journal, 3(2):71-84. http://iej.cjb.net
Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. 1996. Constructivism: Implications for the Design and
Delivery of Instruction. [A]. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. [M]. New York: Simon Schuster Macmillan.
Ely, P. 1984. Bring the Lab Back to Life. [M].Oxford: Pergamon. Flower, L. and Hayes, J. 1981. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. [J]. College Composition and Communication, 32:365-87.
Fosnot, C. T. 1996. Constructivism: A Psychological Theory of Learning. [A]. In Fosnot, T. (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice. [M]. New York: Teachers College Press, 8-33.
Gagnon, G. & Collay, M. 2001. Designing for Learning: Six Elements in Constructivist Classrooms. [M]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
George, M. 1994. Oral Discussion and Achievement in Cooperative Learning Groups. [J]. ELT Journal, (3).
Gere, A. 1987. Writing Groups: History, Theory, and Implications. [M].Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Gibson, C. C. 1998. Distance Learners in Higher Education: Institutional Responses for Quality Outcomes. [M]. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing. Glaserfeld, E. 1994. Constructivism in Education. [A]. In T. Husen & N. Postlewaite (Eds.),
International Encyclopedia in Education. [M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Godwin Jones, B. 2003. Emerging Technologies. [J]. Language Learning and Technology, 7(2): 12-16.
Gould, J. S. 1996. A constructivist Perspective on Teaching and Learning in the Language Arts. [A]. In Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice. [M]. New York: Teachers College Press, 92-102.
Granger, D. & Benke, M. 1998. Supporting Learners at a Distance From Inquiry Through Completion. [A]. In Gibson, C. C. (Ed.). Distance Learners in Higher Education: Institutional
Responses for Quality Outcomes. [M]. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing, 127-138. Gu Yueguo. 2005. An Ecological Model of E-learning in a Chinese Context: Critical Reflections of Five Years’Practice of E-learning Management in the BIOE. [J].Studies in Continuing Education, 27(1).
Hattie, J. A. 1987. Identifying the Salient Facets of a Model of Student Learning: A Synthesis of Meta-analyses. [J]. International Journal of Educational Research, 11: 187-212. Henriques, L. 1999. Constructivist Teaching and Learning. http://www.educ.uvic.ca/depts/snsc/temporary/constrct.html
Hu, Z. L. 2004. Individualization, Collaboration, Modularization, and Hypertextualization in College English Teaching. [J]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 36(5): 345-350. Hyland, F. 2000. ESL Writers and Feedback: Giving More Autonomy to Learners. [J]. Language Teaching Research, 4(1): 33-54.
Jackson, R. H. 2006. Issues and Resources for Web-based Learning. Web-based Learning Resources Library. http://www.knowledgeability.biz/weblearning/
Jensen, R. 1993. The Technology of the Future is Already Here. [J].Academe, 8(13). Jessica Williams. 2007. Teaching Writing in Second and Foreign Language Classrooms. [M]. Beijing: World Publishing Corporation.
Jonassen, D., Peck, K. & Wilson, B., 1999. Learning with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective, Ed., Prentice Hall.
http://www.mendeley.com/research/learning-with-technology-a-constructivist-perspective/ Ken Beatty. 2005. Leaching and Researching Computer-assisted Language Learning. [M].
Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. Ken Hyland. 2005. Teaching and Researching Writing. [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Kern, R. & Warschauer, M. 2000. Introduction: Theory and Practice of Network-based language Teaching. [A]. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.) Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice. [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-19. Kim Foreman. 2004. Principles of Constructivism.
http://online.sfsu.edu/~foreman/itec800/finalprojects/eitankaplan/pages/principles.htm Krashen S. 1985. The Input Hypothesis:Issues and Implications. [M]. London: Longman.
Kroll, L. RM & LaBosky, V. K. 1996. Practicing What We Preach: Constructivism in a Teacher Education Program. [J]. Action in Teacher Education, 18(2).
Levy, M. 1997. Computer-assisted Language Learning. [M]. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. Mayer R.E. 1999. Designing Instruction for Constructivist Learning. [A]. In Reigeluth, C. M.
(Ed.) Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. [M]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2:141-160.
Mei, D. M. et al. 2004. A Survey on Current K-12 and College English Teaching in China. [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Mendoca, C. and Johnson, K. 1994. Peer Review Negotiations: Revision Activities in ESL Writing Instruction. [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4): 745-68.
Ministry of Education. 2004. College English Curriculum Requirements (for Trial Implementation). [M]. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press.
Nunan, D. (Ed.) 1992. Collaborative Language Learning and Teaching. [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nystrand, M. and Brandt, D. 1989. Response to Writing as a Context for Learning to Write. [A]. In C. Anson (Ed.), Writing and Response. [M]. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Opp-Beckman, L. 1999. Classroom Practice: Authentic Audience on the Internet. [A]. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, Practice, and Critical Issues. [M]. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.
Oxford, R. 1995. Linking Theories of Learning with Intelligent Computer-assisted Language Learning (ICALL). [A]. In Holland, V. M., Kaplan, J. D. and Sams, M. R. Intelligent Language Tutors: Theory Shaping Technology. [M]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 359.
Paul Davies & Eric Pearse. 2002. Success in English Teaching [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Pennington, M. C. 1993. A Critical Examination of Word-processing Effects in Relation to L2 Writers. [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2: 227-55.
Pennington, M. C. 1996. The Computer and the Non-native Writer: a Natural Partnership. [M]. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Pennington, M. C. 1996. The Power of the Computer in Language Education. [A].In Pennington,
M. (Ed.), The Power of CALL. [M]. Houston, TX: Athelstan Publishers, 1-14. Pica, T. 1987. Second Language Acquisition, Interaction and the Classroom. [J]. Applied Linguistics, 8: 3-21.
Prawat, R. S. & Folden, R. E. 1994. Philosophical Perspectives on Constructivist Views of Learning. [J]. Educational Psychology, 29: 37-48.
Raimes, A. 1983. Techniques in Teaching Writing. [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Raimes, A. 1987. Language Proficiency, Writing Ability and Composing Strategies. [J]. Language Learning, 37:439-68.
Sadler, D. R. 1989. Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems. [J]. Instructional Science, 18: 119-144.
SearchWebService.com. 2000. Web-based Training. http://searchwebservices.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid26_gci332239,00.html
Schwienhorst, K. 2002. Evaluating Tandem Language Learning in the MOO: Discourse Repair Strategies in a Bilingual Internet Project. [J]. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(2): 135-145.
Sikes P. J. 1992. Imposed Change and the Experienced Teachers. [A]. In M. Fullan & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teachers Development and Educational Change. [M]. London: Routledge.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M. & Zvacek, S. 2000. Teaching and Learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education. [M]. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Skinner, B. F. 1954. The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching. [J]. Harvard Educational Review, 24(2): 86-97.
Skinner, B. F. 1957. Verbal Learning. [M]. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Skinner, B. F. 1968. The Technology of Teaching. [M]. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Slavin. R. 1994. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research & Practice (2nd Ed). [M]. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Smith, A. 1986. Strategies for Individualizing Instruction Across the Disciplines for the Culturally Diverse Learner, in Thinking Across the Disciplines. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Society for Individualized Instruction. Atlanta, GA.
Smith, G. 1991. Computers and Human Language. [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. 1985. Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development. [A]. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition. [M]. Newbury House.
VanPatten, B. (1994). Evaluating the Role of Consciousness in Second Language Acquisition: Terms, Linguistic Features & Research Methodology. [J]. AILA Review, 11: 27-36.
Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and Language. [M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 93.
Wang Wei, Liu Xiangdong. 2009. Digital and Networked Foreign Language Learning and Teaching—Selected Papers from the 2006 International Symposium on Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Ward, J. 2004. Blog Assisted Language Learning (BALL): Push Button Publishing for the Pupils. [J]. TEFL Web Journal, 3 (1).
Warschauer, M. 1997. Computer-mediated Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice. [J]. The Modern Language Journal, 81 (41): 470-481.
Warschauer, M. 2002. A Developmental Perspective on Technology in Language Education. [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 36(3): 453-475.
Wesley Jr, M. T. and Franks, M. E. 1994. The Virtual Classroom and Vertically Integrated Technology Training for Education: New Paradigms for Telecommunications Technology Training of School, Personnel. The Mid-South Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Nashville, TN: ERIC.
William H. Roberts & Gregoire Turgeon. 2000. About Language: A Reader for Writers. [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Williams, N. 1998. Educational Multimedia: Where’s the Interaction. [A]. In Montreith, M. (Ed.),
IT for Learning Enhancement. [M]. Heereweg, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger; 153-70. Willis, B. 1994. Distance Education: Strategies and Tools. [M]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
Xu Bin & Guo Hongmei. 2009. The Research Paper: A Guide to Computer-Aided Research. [M].
Jinan: Shandong Education Press. Zamel, V. 1982. Writing: the Process of Discovering Meaning. [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 16(7).
托亚,孙立新. 2003.“社会建构主义及其对外语教学的指导意义”. [J].外语界. (5).
张伟远. 2005.“现代远程教育与亚洲教育变革”. [J].中国远程教育.(7/上)71-75.
张正东,黄泰铨. 1999.英语教学法双语教程. [M].北京:科学出版社.
Oxford Advanced Learner’s English–Chinese Dictionary (the 6th edition). 2008. Beijing: The Commercial Press and Oxford University Press.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. 2004. Beijing: The Commercial Press and Longman.
Modern Chinese Standardization Dictionary. 2004. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Encyclopedia Britannica Volume 11. 1964. Chicago: R. R. Donnelley & Sons Co.
Audrey, G. 1998. Constructivist Teaching and Learning. http://www.ssta.sk.ca/research/instruction/97-07.htm
Black, P. J. & Wiliam, D. 1998. Assessment and Classroom Learning. [J]. Assessment in Eduction, 5(1): 7-71.
Bolter, J. D. 1992. Literature in the Electronic Writing Space. In M. C. Tuman (Ed.), Literacy Online: the Promise (and Peril) of Reading and Writing with Computers. [M]. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 19-42.
Braine, G. and Yorozu, M. 1998. Local Area Network (LAN) Computers in ESL and EFL Writing Classess: Promises and Realities. [J]. JALT Journal, 20(2):47-59.
Brookes, A. and Grundy, P. 1998. Begin to Write. [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bruner, J. S. 1966. Toward a Theory of Instruction. [M].Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Carr, C. S. & Carr, A. M. 2000. Instructional Design in Distance Education (IDDE): A Web-based Performance Support System for Educators and Designers. [J]. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1(4): 317-325.
Caulk, N. 1994. Comparing Teacher and Student Responses to Written Work. [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1):181-7.
Chambliss, J. J. (Ed.) 1996. Philosophy of Education: an Encyclopedia. [M]. New York: Garland.
Chapelle, C. 2000. Is Netwok-based Learning CALL? [A]. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.) Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice. [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 204-228.
Crandall, J. 1998. Collaborate and Cooperate: Teacher Education for Integrating Language and Content Instruction. [J]. English Teaching Forum, (1).
David H. Jonassen, Kyle L. Peck, Brent G. Wilson. 1999. Learning with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective. Publisher: Prentice Hall.http://www.mendeley.com/research/learning-with-technology-a-constructivist-perspective/
Du, H. 2002. An Investigation of College English Teaching in Four Universities in China. [J]. International Education Journal, 3(2):71-84. http://iej.cjb.net
Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. 1996. Constructivism: Implications for the Design and
Delivery of Instruction. [A]. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. [M]. New York: Simon Schuster Macmillan.
Ely, P. 1984. Bring the Lab Back to Life. [M].Oxford: Pergamon. Flower, L. and Hayes, J. 1981. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. [J]. College Composition and Communication, 32:365-87.
Fosnot, C. T. 1996. Constructivism: A Psychological Theory of Learning. [A]. In Fosnot, T. (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice. [M]. New York: Teachers College Press, 8-33.
Gagnon, G. & Collay, M. 2001. Designing for Learning: Six Elements in Constructivist Classrooms. [M]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
George, M. 1994. Oral Discussion and Achievement in Cooperative Learning Groups. [J]. ELT Journal, (3).
Gere, A. 1987. Writing Groups: History, Theory, and Implications. [M].Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Gibson, C. C. 1998. Distance Learners in Higher Education: Institutional Responses for Quality Outcomes. [M]. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing. Glaserfeld, E. 1994. Constructivism in Education. [A]. In T. Husen & N. Postlewaite (Eds.),
International Encyclopedia in Education. [M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Godwin Jones, B. 2003. Emerging Technologies. [J]. Language Learning and Technology, 7(2): 12-16.
Gould, J. S. 1996. A constructivist Perspective on Teaching and Learning in the Language Arts. [A]. In Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice. [M]. New York: Teachers College Press, 92-102.
Granger, D. & Benke, M. 1998. Supporting Learners at a Distance From Inquiry Through Completion. [A]. In Gibson, C. C. (Ed.). Distance Learners in Higher Education: Institutional
Responses for Quality Outcomes. [M]. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing, 127-138. Gu Yueguo. 2005. An Ecological Model of E-learning in a Chinese Context: Critical Reflections of Five Years’Practice of E-learning Management in the BIOE. [J].Studies in Continuing Education, 27(1).
Hattie, J. A. 1987. Identifying the Salient Facets of a Model of Student Learning: A Synthesis of Meta-analyses. [J]. International Journal of Educational Research, 11: 187-212. Henriques, L. 1999. Constructivist Teaching and Learning. http://www.educ.uvic.ca/depts/snsc/temporary/constrct.html
Hu, Z. L. 2004. Individualization, Collaboration, Modularization, and Hypertextualization in College English Teaching. [J]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 36(5): 345-350. Hyland, F. 2000. ESL Writers and Feedback: Giving More Autonomy to Learners. [J]. Language Teaching Research, 4(1): 33-54.
Jackson, R. H. 2006. Issues and Resources for Web-based Learning. Web-based Learning Resources Library. http://www.knowledgeability.biz/weblearning/
Jensen, R. 1993. The Technology of the Future is Already Here. [J].Academe, 8(13). Jessica Williams. 2007. Teaching Writing in Second and Foreign Language Classrooms. [M]. Beijing: World Publishing Corporation.
Jonassen, D., Peck, K. & Wilson, B., 1999. Learning with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective, Ed., Prentice Hall.
http://www.mendeley.com/research/learning-with-technology-a-constructivist-perspective/ Ken Beatty. 2005. Leaching and Researching Computer-assisted Language Learning. [M].
Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. Ken Hyland. 2005. Teaching and Researching Writing. [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Kern, R. & Warschauer, M. 2000. Introduction: Theory and Practice of Network-based language Teaching. [A]. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.) Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice. [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-19. Kim Foreman. 2004. Principles of Constructivism.
http://online.sfsu.edu/~foreman/itec800/finalprojects/eitankaplan/pages/principles.htm Krashen S. 1985. The Input Hypothesis:Issues and Implications. [M]. London: Longman.
Kroll, L. RM & LaBosky, V. K. 1996. Practicing What We Preach: Constructivism in a Teacher Education Program. [J]. Action in Teacher Education, 18(2).
Levy, M. 1997. Computer-assisted Language Learning. [M]. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press. Mayer R.E. 1999. Designing Instruction for Constructivist Learning. [A]. In Reigeluth, C. M.
(Ed.) Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory. [M]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2:141-160.
Mei, D. M. et al. 2004. A Survey on Current K-12 and College English Teaching in China. [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Mendoca, C. and Johnson, K. 1994. Peer Review Negotiations: Revision Activities in ESL Writing Instruction. [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 28(4): 745-68.
Ministry of Education. 2004. College English Curriculum Requirements (for Trial Implementation). [M]. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press.
Nunan, D. (Ed.) 1992. Collaborative Language Learning and Teaching. [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nystrand, M. and Brandt, D. 1989. Response to Writing as a Context for Learning to Write. [A]. In C. Anson (Ed.), Writing and Response. [M]. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Opp-Beckman, L. 1999. Classroom Practice: Authentic Audience on the Internet. [A]. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, Practice, and Critical Issues. [M]. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.
Oxford, R. 1995. Linking Theories of Learning with Intelligent Computer-assisted Language Learning (ICALL). [A]. In Holland, V. M., Kaplan, J. D. and Sams, M. R. Intelligent Language Tutors: Theory Shaping Technology. [M]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 359.
Paul Davies & Eric Pearse. 2002. Success in English Teaching [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Pennington, M. C. 1993. A Critical Examination of Word-processing Effects in Relation to L2 Writers. [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2: 227-55.
Pennington, M. C. 1996. The Computer and the Non-native Writer: a Natural Partnership. [M]. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Pennington, M. C. 1996. The Power of the Computer in Language Education. [A].In Pennington,
M. (Ed.), The Power of CALL. [M]. Houston, TX: Athelstan Publishers, 1-14. Pica, T. 1987. Second Language Acquisition, Interaction and the Classroom. [J]. Applied Linguistics, 8: 3-21.
Prawat, R. S. & Folden, R. E. 1994. Philosophical Perspectives on Constructivist Views of Learning. [J]. Educational Psychology, 29: 37-48.
Raimes, A. 1983. Techniques in Teaching Writing. [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Raimes, A. 1987. Language Proficiency, Writing Ability and Composing Strategies. [J]. Language Learning, 37:439-68.
Sadler, D. R. 1989. Formative Assessment and the Design of Instructional Systems. [J]. Instructional Science, 18: 119-144.
SearchWebService.com. 2000. Web-based Training. http://searchwebservices.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid26_gci332239,00.html
Schwienhorst, K. 2002. Evaluating Tandem Language Learning in the MOO: Discourse Repair Strategies in a Bilingual Internet Project. [J]. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(2): 135-145.
Sikes P. J. 1992. Imposed Change and the Experienced Teachers. [A]. In M. Fullan & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teachers Development and Educational Change. [M]. London: Routledge.
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M. & Zvacek, S. 2000. Teaching and Learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education. [M]. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Skinner, B. F. 1954. The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching. [J]. Harvard Educational Review, 24(2): 86-97.
Skinner, B. F. 1957. Verbal Learning. [M]. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Skinner, B. F. 1968. The Technology of Teaching. [M]. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Slavin. R. 1994. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research & Practice (2nd Ed). [M]. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Smith, A. 1986. Strategies for Individualizing Instruction Across the Disciplines for the Culturally Diverse Learner, in Thinking Across the Disciplines. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Society for Individualized Instruction. Atlanta, GA.
Smith, G. 1991. Computers and Human Language. [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. 1985. Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development. [A]. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition. [M]. Newbury House.
VanPatten, B. (1994). Evaluating the Role of Consciousness in Second Language Acquisition: Terms, Linguistic Features & Research Methodology. [J]. AILA Review, 11: 27-36.
Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and Language. [M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 93.
Wang Wei, Liu Xiangdong. 2009. Digital and Networked Foreign Language Learning and Teaching—Selected Papers from the 2006 International Symposium on Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Ward, J. 2004. Blog Assisted Language Learning (BALL): Push Button Publishing for the Pupils. [J]. TEFL Web Journal, 3 (1).
Warschauer, M. 1997. Computer-mediated Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice. [J]. The Modern Language Journal, 81 (41): 470-481.
Warschauer, M. 2002. A Developmental Perspective on Technology in Language Education. [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 36(3): 453-475.
Wesley Jr, M. T. and Franks, M. E. 1994. The Virtual Classroom and Vertically Integrated Technology Training for Education: New Paradigms for Telecommunications Technology Training of School, Personnel. The Mid-South Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Nashville, TN: ERIC.
William H. Roberts & Gregoire Turgeon. 2000. About Language: A Reader for Writers. [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Williams, N. 1998. Educational Multimedia: Where’s the Interaction. [A]. In Montreith, M. (Ed.),
IT for Learning Enhancement. [M]. Heereweg, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger; 153-70. Willis, B. 1994. Distance Education: Strategies and Tools. [M]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
Xu Bin & Guo Hongmei. 2009. The Research Paper: A Guide to Computer-Aided Research. [M].
Jinan: Shandong Education Press. Zamel, V. 1982. Writing: the Process of Discovering Meaning. [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 16(7).
托亚,孙立新. 2003.“社会建构主义及其对外语教学的指导意义”. [J].外语界. (5).
张伟远. 2005.“现代远程教育与亚洲教育变革”. [J].中国远程教育.(7/上)71-75.
张正东,黄泰铨. 1999.英语教学法双语教程. [M].北京:科学出版社.
Oxford Advanced Learner’s English–Chinese Dictionary (the 6th edition). 2008. Beijing: The Commercial Press and Oxford University Press.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. 2004. Beijing: The Commercial Press and Longman.
Modern Chinese Standardization Dictionary. 2004. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Encyclopedia Britannica Volume 11. 1964. Chicago: R. R. Donnelley & Sons Co.