پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,243 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,879 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,525,153 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 90,296,544 |
بررسی عقاید و رفتار اساتید زبان و اساتید دروس تخصصی در تهیه و تدوین مطالب درسی زبان تخصصی رشته‌های دانشگاه‌های علوم پزشکی در ایران: بررسی در سطح ملی | ||
| پژوهشهای زبانشناختی در زبانهای خارجی | ||
| مقاله 8، دوره 8، شماره 1، فروردین 1397، صفحه 167-186 اصل مقاله (250.33 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی(عادی) | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jflr.2018.243982.412 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| رضا طاهرخانی* | ||
| گروه زبان انگلیسی, دانشکده علوم انسانی, دانشگاه بوعلی سینا, همدان, ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| تهیه و تدوین مطالب درسی مرحله‌ای مهم در برنامۀ آموزشی زبان تخصصی می‌باشد. به همین دلیل، نیاز مبرم به بررسی توانایی‌های استادان زبان تخصصی در این زمینه حس می‌شود. این نیاز به‌ویژه در ایران که دو گروه از استادان – استادان زبان و استادان دروس تخصصی - زبان تخصصی را تدریس می‌کنند، بیشتر احساس می‌شود. به همین منظور، این تحقیق ملی تفاوت‌ها و شباهت‌های تفکرات و رفتارهای این دو گروه در تهیه و تدوین مطالب درسی، در دانشگاه‌های علوم پزشکی ایران را بررسی کرده است. ابزارها شامل پرسشنامه، مصاحبه، مشاهده، و یادداشت‌برداری بود. ۱۲۸ استاد زبان و ۱۹۰ استاد دروس تخصصی از تمام دانشگاه‌های کشور در این تحقیق شرکت کردند. نتایج پرسشنامه تفاوتی را بین دو گروه نشان نداد. اما، طبق نتایج مصاحبه‌ها و مشاهدات، تفاوت‌های بسیاری بین دوگروه یافت شد. این نتایج پیامدهای مهمی را برای جامعه استادان زبان تخصصی دارد و نیاز به تغییر کتاب‌های فعلی را برجسته می‌کند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| زبان تخصصی؛ اساتید زبان؛ اساتید دروس تخصصی؛ افکار استاد؛ تهیه و تدوین مطالب درسی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Investigating the Cognitions and Practices of Iranian Language Teachers’ and Content Teachers’ Materials Preparation in EAP Courses at Medical Sciences Universities: A Nationwide Study | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Reza Taherkhani | ||
| Department of English Language, Faculty of Humanities, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan,Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Materials preparation is an important stage in EAP curriculum. Therefore, there is a pressing need to explore EAP teachers’ materials preparation abilities, especially in Iran, where EAP courses are taught by two groups of teachers; that is, language teachers and content teachers. Therefore, this nationwide study explored the similarities and differences between the cognitions and practices of the two groups of EAP teachers concerning their materials preparation abilities, at medical sciences universities across Iran. Instruments included questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, observations and field notes. A representative sample of 128 language teachers and 190 content teachers from all medical sciences universities participated in the study. The results of the questionnaire indicated that there were no differences between language teachers and content teachers; however, the interviews and the observations revealed substantial differences between the two groups. The findings present some implications for the EAP community and a need to renew the current materials. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| EAP, language teachers, content teachers, teacher cognition (TC), materials preparation | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Alexander, O. (2012). Exploring teacher beliefs in teaching EAP at low proficiency levels. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2),99-111.
Atai, M. R. (2002a). ESAP curriculum planning in Iran: An incoherent educational experience. Special Issue of the Journal of Persian Literature and Human Sciences of Tehran Teacher Training University, 1, 17-34.
Atai, M. R. (2002b). Iranian EAP programs in practice: A study of key methodological aspects. Sheikhbahaee Research Bulletin, 1(2), 1-15.
Atai, M. R. (2006). EAP teacher education: Searching for an effective model integrating content and language teachers’ schemes. Proceedings of PAAL Conference, 23-41.Kangwong National University, Chuncheon, Korea.
Atai, M. R., & Fatahi-Majd, M. (2014). Exploring the practices and cognitions of Iranian ELT instructors and subject teachers in teaching EAP reading comprehension. English for Specific Purposes, 33(4), 27-38.
Atai, M. R., & Tahririan, M. H. (2003). Assessment of the Status of ESP in the Current Iranian Higher Educational System. Proceedings of the 14th European Symposium on Language for Special Purposes: Communication, culture, and knowledge. University of Surrey, Guilford, UK.
Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16 (Series B), 296-298.
Bernard, R. & Zemach, D. (2005). Materials for Specific Purposes. In B. Tomlinson (Eds.), Developing Materials for Language Teaching. (pp. 306-324). London: Continuum.
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81-109.
Borg, S. (2006). Teacher Cognition and Language Education: Research and Practice. London: Continuum.
Brookhart, S. M., & Freeman, D. J. (1992). Characteristics of entering teacher candidates. Review of Educational Research, 62(1), 37-60.
Charles, M. (2013). English for Academic Purposes. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes,(pp. 136-153). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boston: Wiley-Blackwell.
Crookes, G., & Arakaki, L. (1999). Teaching idea resources and work conditions in an ESL program. TESOL Journal, 8(1),15-19.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration, and Processing. London: Routledge.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Development in English for Specific Purposes: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Farhady, H., Sajadi Hezaveh, F., & Hedayati, H. (2010). Reflections on Foreign Language Education in Iran. TESL-EJ, 13(4).
Farrell, T. S. C., & Ives, J. (2015). Exploring teacher beliefs and classroom practices through reflective practice: A case study. Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 594-610.
Freeman, D. (2002). The hidden side of the work: Teacher knowledge and learning to teach. A perspective from North American educational research on teacher education in English language teaching. Language Teaching, 35(1), 1-13.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2014). Teaching reading for academic purposes. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. (4th ed., pp. 189-205). Boston: National Geographic Learning.
Gray, J. (2000). The ELT coursebook as cultural artifact: How teachers censor and adapt. ELT Journal, 54(3), 274-283.
Harmer, J. (2001). Coursebooks: A human, cultural and linguistic disaster? Modern English Teacher, 10(3), 5-10.
Harwood, N. (2005). What do we want EAP teaching materials for? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(2), 149-161.
Hatch, E., & Lazaraton, A. (1991). The Research Manual: Design & Statistics for Applied Linguistics. New York: Newbury Jouse Publishers.
Hutchinson, H., & Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A learning-centered approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 315-328.
Hyland, K. (2006). English for Academic Purposes. London: Routledge.
Johnson, K. E. (2006). The Sociocultural Turn and Its Challenges for Second Language Teacher Education. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1),235-257.
Jordan, R. (1997). English for Academic Purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaiser, H. (1970). A second generation Little Jiffy. Psychometrika, 35, 401-415.
Kaiser, H. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.
Krejcie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W., (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
Kubanyiova, M., & Feryok, A. (2015). Language Teacher Cognition in Applied Linguistics Research: Revisiting the Territory, Redrawing the Boundaries, Reclaiming the Relevance. The Modern Language Journal, 99(3), 435-449.
Mazdayasna, G., & Tahririan, M. H. (2008). Developing a profile of the ESP needs of Iranian students: The case of students of nursing and midwifery. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(4), 277-289.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ Beliefs and Educational Research: Cleaning Up a Messy Construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS Survival Manual (5th ed.). New York: Open University Press.
Richards, J. C. (1993). Beyond the text book: The role of commercial materials in language teaching. RELC Journal, 24(1), 1-14.
Robinson, P. C. (1991). ESP Today: A practitioner’s guide. New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
Smit, U., & Dafouz, E. (2012). Integrating content and language in higher education: An introduction to English-medium policies, conceptual issues and research practices across Europe. AILA Review, 25(1), 1-12.
Swales, J. M. (1980). ESP: The textbook problem. The ESP Journal, 1(1), 11-23.
Woods, D. (1996). Teacher Cognition in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 341 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 618 |
||