抛锚式教学设计

[53] 刘琼.网络模式下的抛锚式教学在大学英语视听说课堂上的应用[J].佳木斯教育学 院学报,2010(2).

[54] 马利娟.中职英语抛锚式教学的思考与实践[J].教育探索，2009（12）.

[55] 汤月明.英语课堂“自主学习”教学模式探讨---建构主义理论的实际应用[J].文教资 料,2006(6).

[56] 王文静.贾斯珀系列概览---建构主义教学模式案例研究[J].全球教育展览,2001(01). [57] 温梅, 王瑞云. 基于高职应用写作的抛锚式教学模式研究[J]. 河北科技师范学院学 报(社会科学版）, 2005(4).

[58] 徐斌艳.抛锚式教学模式在数学教学中的应用[J].教育发展研究, 2001(8). [59] 徐丽华 . 抛锚式教学模式在大学英语精读教学中的应用 [J]. 西安邮电学院学 报,2009(11).

[60] 杨晓娟.基于建构主义学习理论的教学过程设计模式[D].济南:山东师范大学,2000. [61] 郑琴,刘蓉.抛锚式教学模式在大学英语精读教学中的应用研究[J].吉林省教育学院 学报,2009(10).

1.2 研究目的

本研究尝试着将基于建构主义理论下的抛锚式教学模式具体地运用到对外汉 语听力课堂教学中，并验证其效果，为对外汉语听力教学提供更多的可操作的模 式。笔者以自身所教授的泰国法政大学大二学生赴重庆大学 2011 暑期强化培训班 为例，采用教案分析，将建构主义理论中的其中一种较成熟的教学模式，即抛锚 式教学模式，运用到笔者所教授的一堂听力课中，笔者会在教学过程中严格按照 教学模式所申明的教学步骤操作，并论证其效果。 1.3 研究意义

本研究具有一定的现实意义。对外汉语听力教学研究是一直是热点问题，本 文将建构主义理论下的抛锚式教学模式与对外汉语听力教学相结合，研究听力教 学中面临的实际问题，为今后的其它相关研究提供佐证，以期提高广大将汉语作 为第二语言的学习者的汉语听力水平。本研究还有较大的实践意义，本研究为学 校开展对外汉语听力教学改革提供一定的借鉴，本研究结合研究者自身的教学实 践，探讨对外汉语听力教学的具体措施与教学策略，为对外汉语听力课堂的教学 者和学习者提供参考

2.3 建构主义理论下的抛锚式教学模式

“建构主义理论”作为教学方面的主流，在各科的教学中都得到了广泛的运用,特别是在数学和科学这两门学科。“建构主义理论”可以追溯到皮亚杰的“孩童思维发展理论”（转引自 Ormrod，2004）。自 1980 年代以来，尽管认知心理学已经取代了行为主义心理学在教学中处于主导地位,然而“建构主义理论”却并没有对教学产生很大的影响。近年来,电脑和互联网多媒体的技术发展迅速,有了这些先进的技术，教师们更愿意为学习者创造基于“建构主义理论”的学习环境，到此，建构主义理论才越来越被广泛应用。建构主义教育理念植根于认知建构论和社会建构论。前者是建立在皮亚杰的观点之上的(Lefrancois, 2004),后者通常被认为是建立在维果斯基的观点之上的。建构主义作为一种教育和学习的方法，已经从心理学和信息处理理论的基础上得到了发展，近年来日益整合语言学、人类学和社会学等形成了自己特有的观点(Lefrancois, 2004)。即建构主义已形成了自己特有的知识观、学习观和教育观。建构主义者认为,“知识不是被动地接受，而是被认知的主体所建立的”(vonGlasersfeld,1995)。他们将知识定义为“暂时性的,发展的,以社会和文化作为媒介的,因而是无目标的”(von Glasersfeld,1995)。知识不是对现实世界的准确论证;它是通过学生与世界之间的关系创造的。知识被看作是动态的,随着经验不断变化的，并且，在本质上是主观

的、临时的。同时，建构主义者认为, “学习是一种基于已有知识的积极地建构的过程”。学习需要产生新的想法，而不是机械地积累事实。有意义的学习是通过重新思考旧的概念，在与我们的旧观点冲突的情形下，最终对新的概念产生了新的结论。由于学生不是知识的被动接受者,教师也不能向学生传递知识, 因此从建构主义理论来看，“教学应该是一个促进学生构建知识的过程”(von Glasersfeld,1995：56)。

基于建构主义理论，产生了多种教学模式，如支架式教学模式、抛锚式教学模式，和随即通达式教学模式。本文重点使用的是抛锚式教学模式。 2.3.1 抛锚式教学法 ①抛锚式教学的特点

抛锚式教学模式的核心在于，学习者如果想获得知识，必须亲自发现、处理和转化复杂的知识信息。学习被视为不断地检查与旧规则对立的新信息,当旧的规则不再起作用时，修改旧的规则，形成新规则。因而，在课堂上向学生提出好的问题成为教师最重要的工作之一。在抛锚式教学模式的课堂上,教师和学生都认为知识不像惰性信息的记忆,但作为一个动态的、不断变化的观点我们生活的这个世界里,能够成功地伸展和探索这一观点（刘颖灿，2007）。刘颖灿对传统课堂与抛锚式教学模式课堂进行了对比，见表 2.1.

②抛锚式教学模式的教学步骤

抛锚式教学强调教学情境的重要性，将教学内容镶嵌某个现实的人类生活事件或问题情境中，让学生在真实的，或者是至少类似于真实的情境中亲身体验、生成学习，并自主地探究事件、解决问题、建构意义。（陈宁，2005）这种教学不仅有利于激发学生的学习兴趣和积极性，更重要的是有助于学生掌握真正实用的知识。让学生直接面对并尝试解决问题。被选出来的事件或问题称为“锚”，而确定问题的教学环节被形象地称为“抛锚”，所选择的事件或问题必须与教学内容紧密相关。一旦问题、事件或者是任务被确定下来，整个教学内容和教学进程随之也就确定下来，就像对应的锚可以将一艘大轮船固定住一样。在“抛锚”之后，教师需要完成的任务包括:向学生提供解决该问题的帮助和指导;尽可能让学生发挥自主学习能力;组织学生开展合作学习;与学生一起对教学效果进行评价。由于抛锚式教学 强调创设真实情境，主张教学要以真实的事例或问题为基础，因此也被称为“情境性教学”、“实例式教学”或“基于问题的教学”。抛锚式教学由这样几个环节组成（刘洋，钟志贤，2005）：1）创设情境 －－使学习能在和现实情况基本一致或相似的情境中发生。 2）确定问题－－在上述情境下，选择出与当前学习主题密切相关的真实性事件或问题作为学习的中心内容。选出的事件或问题就是“锚”，这一环节的作用就是“抛锚”。 3）自主学习－－不是由教师直接告诉学生应当如何去解决面临的问题，而是由教师向学生提供解决该问题的有关线索，并特别注意发展学生的“自主学习”能力。

4）协作学习－－讨论、交流，通过不同观点的交锋，补充、修正、加深每个学生对当前问题的理解。

5）效果评价－－由于抛锚式教学的学习过程就是解决问题的过程，由该过程可以直接反映出学生的学习效果。因此对这种教学效果的评价不需要进行独立于教学过程的专门测验，只需在学习过程中随时观察并记录学生的表现即可。

（很好的参考）3 研究方法

本文采用定量的研究方法。主要用在学生成绩进行分析和总结。 3.1 研究问题

本研究尝试着将基于建构主义理论下的抛锚式教学模式具体地运用到对外汉 语听力课堂教学中，并验证其效果，为对外汉语听力教学提供更多的可操作的模 式。本项研究包括的问题：

在对外汉语听力课堂教学中，抛锚式教学模式是否能有效帮助外国学生完成汉语听力的学习？ 3.2 研究对象

本研究对象是来重庆大学国际教育交流学院进行暑期项目交流的泰国法政大学学生，即泰国法政大学大二学生赴重庆大学暑期强化短训班，共计 37 人，由于人数较多，短训班随机分为两个班，短训一班（实验班）17 人，短训二班（对照班）20 人。本人被分派负责教授的是短训一班的听力课，并采用抛锚式教学模式进行听力教学，短训二班的听力课，是由本人的同事所教授，她采用的是传统教学模式进行听力教学的。对照班和实验班的学生的汉语为均中级水平。他们中的绝大多数学生都是华裔，祖辈大部分来自广东、福建等地。这 37 名来华学习汉语的泰国学生的汉语背景为泰国法政大学中文专业本科二年级汉语专业，学生学习汉语的时间为 3—6 年。 3.3 研究设计

本研究主要以《汉语听力速成》（中级篇）第二课——《吃的学问》中的课文一，即介绍“中国茶”的短篇听力文章为例，具体阐释在教学实践过程中是如何遵循该模式的具体实施步骤的。表 3.1 为实验班的基本情况介绍。

基于建构主义理论，将抛锚式教学模式运用于本研究的听力教学设计中，表 3.2.为教案样课，本人将通过教案详细展示在教学实践过程中是如何遵循并且实施该模式的具体实施步骤的

3.3.1 步骤一：创设情境

能畅所欲言，他们对教师的问题对答如流，此时，与教师交流的话轮大幅提高，不仅如此，他们还能自如地在听力课堂外的社会大课堂，与中国人大胆地交流。说是建立在听的基础之上的，学生敢说，会说，说得恰当准确必然说明了他们已经听懂并且正确理解了对方的 讲话内容。故而，笔者由此可以得出结论，学生的听力水平得到了提高。本人在实际教学过程中采用了“抛锚式”教学模式，对提高学生汉语听力水平起到了一定的作用。具体表现为：学生在做听力理解时，不再纠结于个别词汇和语法，而是能够做到弃小部分，而抓整体，从文章的核心主题层面上来把握听力材料。综合上述测试的统计结果，学生在经历了培训前、中、后期三段不同时期的测试后，成绩有了明显的提高。具体详见表 4.1。 表 4.1 培训前中后期测试学生成绩对比表

由表 4.1 不难看出，将实验班和对照班两个班培训后较之于培训前学生的听力水平都有了提高，但是实验班的学生成绩提高得比较明显，无论是在最高分，最低分还是平均分的提高上，实验班较之于对照班都有明显的优势。 5.2 “抛锚式教学模式”的实施步骤改进与完善

笔者在教授来自泰国法政大学大二的学生的长达一个半月的暑期强化班中的对外汉语听力课过程中，在不断与学生的磨合以及自我改进中，笔者形成了适合学生学习的听力教学方法。首先在教授词汇时，最好是（侧重于）采取情景教学的方法，而且必须是最贴合学生实际情况或者学生最感兴趣的话题教学，譬如，笔者在教授”尴尬”这个词时，在 PPT上放了一张图片，图片的内容大致是一位女明星上台领奖时，不慎摔倒了，她的脸上露出了尴尬的笑容。通过老师对图片的简单讲解，学生迅速地了解了尴尬这个词的意思，这比直接介绍词典里尴尬的意思给学生的印象要深很多。但是，由于笔者课时有限，为了控制课程时间，笔者在教授词汇时，都是自己设置的情境，让学生自己理解，并没有给很多时间让学生举一反三的时间。其次，教师要及时巩固练习学生已掌握的内容，并且复习方式要轻松活泼有趣，比如，看出现很多已学过的词汇的电影，听中文歌曲说歌词，等等。（这些都是以轻松活泼的情景让学生融入所学内容的方法）在教学过程中，学生认为平时的课堂模式相对枯燥，如若教师可以通过更加轻松活泼地方式帮助学生复习已经学过的知识，会更受学生亲睐，学生学习的积极性也会有所提高。

另一篇文章

前言

4.1研究方法:

(1)文献法 在查阅文献的基础上，了解国内外建构主义抛锚式教学发展现状，构建适合中专学生的抛锚式化学教学模式。(2)实验法 中专化学建构主义抛锚式教学对学生化学学习和发展的影响研究，主要采用实验法。通过对我校一年级同一层次的园林10级1班(对比班)和林业10级3班(实验班)一个学期的教学，在实验班实施抛锚式教学模式，对比班实施传统教学模式，比较实验班和对比班学生的学习水平、学习倾向、学习能力发展情况 4.2实验的基本过程和主要步骤 4.3教学实践过程 4.2.1被试确定

研究对象为齐齐哈尔林业学校不同专业一年级八个班中的两个班，其中林业1的班为实验班，入校人数33人，园林101班为对照班，入校人数31人，由于入校学生为初中毕业生或初中未毕业的学生，有些学生未接触过化学，所以没有对他们的入学成绩进行比较，而是运用问卷调查的方法对他们的学习基础和学习兴趣进行比较。调查结果统计后列于表1。

4.2.3抛锚式教学实验研究材料

a.自编中专化学校本教材b.实验班和对照班学生前测问卷c.自编2010年下学期学生课堂学习总内容和总时间一记录表 4.2.4数据的处理方法

实验班和对照班的历次考试成绩及同质性检验，采用分析统计软件Excel进行t检 验和Z检验处理。 4.3教学实践过程

我对校本教材化学的教学内容进行了全面梳理，重点选取了“物质的量”及“离子 反应”二个教学内容进行了“抛锚式”教学法的尝试。 4.3.1“物质的量”的“抛锚式”教学法教学实践过程 教学题目:物质的量 教学重点:1.物质的量的概念

另外一篇论文：However, in traditional teaching, the class is still teacher-centered, the students

have little chance for expressing ideas and lack of interest in writing and they do not know how to write.It leads to the students’ writing competence is poor, and they can not do effective written communication.In order to change this present situation, motivate students’ learning interest andimprove the writing ability, anchored instruction is introduced into English writing class bythe author. The anchored instruction model is based on the theory of constructivism. Itemphasizes on situating the learning in realistic problems, to make students have learningneeds. Then they learn autonomously and collaborate with group members to solve theproblem. It can innovate on the traditional teacher-centered teaching model and it can help toset up the student-centered teaching model which lays stress on acquiring the directexperience, on solving the problems, on developing students’ initiatives and the practicalability. The anchored instruction is consistent with the New English Curriculum Standard(2005).Anchored instruction is developed by the Cognition & Technology Group at Vanderbilt(CTGV) under the leadership of John Bransford. The application of anchored instruction hasbeen to elementary language arts and mathematics skills. But the research on the applicationof anchored instruction hasn’t been widely carried out, especially in English writing in seniorhigh school. The present paper is intended to show that the application of anchoredinstruction has a positive effect on English writing. The author intends to testify the following hypothesis:

Is the model of anchored instruction superior to the traditional model in students’writing performance?

Can this model help students’ to promote cooperative learning?

The period of the study lasts one semester: from September, 2010 to January, 2011. Theexperiment was carried out in class 65 (experimental class) and class 66(control class) ofYongnian Senior High School---a rural school. The anchored instruction was implemented inexperimental class, which the traditional model was implemented in control class. First, theresearcher conducted a pre-test to show the students’ writing ability in two classes is parallel,then collected the information of the students’ English writing situation by carrying outpre-questionnaire. Second, the researcher implemented the anchored instruction in theexperimental class. Third, the researcher testified the effect of the anchored instruction byanalyzing the post test scores, and the results show that the anchored instruction is superior tothe traditional model, it can create a relaxed and interactive learning atmosphere, arouse

thewriting interest, form the positive attitude to English writing, help students learnautonomously, enhance the confidence in writing, promote their collaborative abilities andimprove their writing abilities.

2.3 Theoretical Basis: Constructivism

Constructivism is a learning theory that has its foundations in psychology, philosophy aswell as anthropology (Brookes & Brooks, 1993). The basic premise of the learning theory isthat the knowledge is not transmitted from the external world to memories of individuals. It isconstructed by an individual through her or his interactions with the environment. Hence, thelearner is an active information processor, and she or he tends to interpret the world in her orhis way with the support of her or his exiting knowledge. (Williams & Burden, 2003).Constructivism has many schools. As Tynjala put it, “In recent literature, at least thefollowing branches of constructivist thought can be found: radical or cognitive constructivism;social constructivism; the socio-cultural approach; symbolic interactionism; and socialconstructionism.” These branches are common in that knowledge is constructed byindividuals to social communities. These branches differ in the emphases---either theindividual factor or the social factor plays a more important role than the other during thelearning process. And in this thesis mainly introduce two of them which are closely related tothis study. They are cognitive constructivism and social constructivism. 2.3.1 Cognitive Constructivism

The theory of constructivism’s formalization is generally attributed to Swisspsychologist Jean Piaget (1896-1980) whose works are grounded of cognitive constructivism.He articulated mechanisms by which knowledge is internalized by learners.Piaget’s stage theory of cognitive constructivism describes everyone’s developmentexperiences four successive stages of development: sensorimotor, preoperational, concreteoperational, formal operational. He suggests that learning is the process of the balance ofexisting schema and new experience. He argues that an individual constructs new knowledgefrom their experience, through the process of accommodation or assimilation. Whenassimilating, individuals incorporate the new experience into the existing framework withoutchanging it. On the contrary, when individuals’ experiences contradict their internalknowledge, they may change their understanding of the experiences to fit their internalknowledge. That is to say, accommodation is the process of reframing individual’s mentalrepresentation of the external world to fit new experiences. An individual arrivesequilibration with the external world through assimilation and accommodation: whenindividuals assimilate the new information without changing existing knowledge, they are ina state of equilibration; when the individual’s existing knowledge can not incorporate the new information, the equilibration is violated. At this moment, the process of reframing theirinternal representations is the process of seeking for the new equilibration. The cognitivestructure of an individual constructs, enlarge and develop through the process of assimilationand accommodation.Piaget’s works has always focused on the learning process’s constructive nature. Heargued that an individual is involved in constructing their personal knowledge from theexperiences from birth. During this process, individuals assimilate new knowledge to theexisting framework and to modify the existing to accommodate new experience. Therefore,the individual is the center in the learning theory.Thus, according to Piaget, the teacher is a facilitator by providing information and

guiding students to explore and interact with the surroundings, so that the students can discover and construct knowledge. His theory provides the cognitive basis of development of constructivism.

2.3.2 Social Constructivism

Social constructivism focuses on collaborative nature of learners learning in the socialcontext, arguing that knowledge is mutually built and constructed (Santrok, 2004). LevisVygotsky, a Soviet psychologist, has formed foundation of social constructivism. Heintroduces culture and social factor of learning into constructivism. He emphasizes theinfluence of culture and social context for learning.Vygotsky argues that children construct knowledge through social interaction. It issocial learning that leads to the cognitive development. “Zone of proximal development” (ZPD) is Vygotsky’s contribution to social constructivism. It refers to the gap between theactual development level and the potential development level (Vygotsky, 1978:86). “Zone ofproximal development” (ZPD) is Vygotsky’s term for the range of tasks that a child cancomplete independently, and those complete with the guidance or assistance of adults ormore-skilled peers. The lower limit of ZPD is the level of skill reached by the childindependently. The upper limit is the level of development that the child can reach with theassistance of a capable instructor. The ZPD describes the child’s cognitive skills that are inprocess of maturing and can be accomplished with the assistance of a more-skilled person.Scaffolding is a concept closely related to the idea of ZPD.The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is the distance between what has known andwhat can be known. Vygotsky suggests that learning occurs in this zone. The students cansolve the problems beyond the actual development level under the guide of teachers anddiscussion and cooperation with classmates. Social interactions between students orstudent-teacher can make students’ cognitive development. 2.4 Constructivist Views on Learning Intervention 2.4.1 Constructivist Views on Learners

Social constructivism holds that every learner is a unique individual. He or she has hisore her different backgrounds and unique needs. Every learner is also multidimensional andcomplex. The social constructivism not only admits the complexity and the uniqueness of thelearners, but also views them as the indispensable part in learning process to encourage,utilize and reward them. (Wertsch 1997).The constructivism encourages learners to arrive at their viewpoints of the truth influenced by their backgrounds, their culture or embedded knowledge. Every learner frombirth influenced by a particular culture, such as language, family culture and so on. And thesewill influence throughout the learner’s whole life. The importance of learner’s socialinteraction with other human beings of society is also stressed. The learner acquires newinformation or knowledge and learns to use it with the interaction with people around them.The learner develops his or her thinking competences by interacting with their peers, parents,society and physical world. From this, social constructivist holds that the culture andbackground of a learner are important in the process of learning, and this unique backgroundand culture are also helpful to shape the learners’ viewpoints and helps the learners explore,create, and attain knowledge in the process of learning.Furthermore, the nature of a learner also concerns the learning motivation. VonGlasersfeld argued that sustaining motivation for learning depends on learners’ confidence intheir potential for learning. The competence or belief of the learner in potential for

solvingproblems is derived from the firsthand experience of solving problems formerly, and it ismore powerful than the external motivation or acknowledgment (Prawat and Floden, 1994).By experiencing the completion of solving problems successfully, the learner gainsconfidence and has motivation to engage in more challenging tasks. 2.4.2 Constructivist Views on Instructors

According to constructivism, instructors should adapt to role of facilitators, not teachers(Bauersfeld, 1995). When giving a lecture, a facilitator helps learners to get into their ownunderstanding. In the traditional class, learners play passive role and according toconstructivism approach, learners play active role in the learning process. Thus the emphasisconverts from instructor and content to the learner (Gamoran, Secada, & Marrett, 1998). Thisdistinct change of the role shows that the facilitator needs to show a different set of skills thanthe teacher (Brownstein 2001). The teachers just tell, while the role of facilitators ask;teachers teach from the front, facilitators support from the back; teachers give answersaccording to the school curriculum, facilitators provide guidelines and create learningenvironment for learners to arrive at their own conclusions; teachers mostly give amonologue, facilitators are dialogue with learners in continuous (Rhodes and Bellamy, 1999). The learning atmosphere designed should also support and challenge learners’ thinking(Di Vesta, 1987). It is advocated to give learners ownership of problem and solution process,but the case is that not any activity or every solution is adequate. The finial goal is to supportlearners become effective thinkers. It can be attained by multiple roles, such as coach orconsultant. 2.4.3 Constructivist Views on Learning

Constructivism is a learning theory, the advocates of the approach argue that learning isthe active and social process in which the learners construct new ideas and knowledge basedon learners’ current experience.Learning, as a social activity, can not isolate from the connection with the others aroundlearners, such as their teachers, peers, family members and strangers next to them. In thetraditional, the learner always is isolated from social interactions, and learns by one-on-one. In contrast, constructivists admit the learning is a social process involving interaction andconversation with other people. Learning also is considered as an active process, duringwhich learners participate in learning activities to get experience and construct knowledge.Besides that, learning should be contextual. It is impossible to isolate the knowledgefrom the realistic life. Learners learn in relationship to what they believe, what else theyknow, their prejudices and fears. It is the consequence of the thought that learning is socialand active.

During the learning process, motivation is a key element. Only learners know ‘thereason why’, they will involve in applying the knowledge that they learned. Therefore,motivation not only helps learners to learn, it is also the essential of learning.Learning is a constructive and active process. The learner perceives the externalinformation actively and constructs the meaning with their existing cognitive structures. Thatis to say, the learner’s existing cognitive structures get reconstruct. According to Piaget,knowledge is constructed when learner interacts with the surroundings around them in ameaningful way. Authentic activity and realistic situation make the learner interest toconstruct new knowledge. That is to say, learning is authentic and contextual. 2.4.4 Constructivist Views on Teaching

Concerning instruction, the teacher should encourage their students to explore bythemselves. Teachers and students should interact with each other by engaging in activedialogues. The teacher’s task is to present knowledge to be learned by a format suitable tolearners’ current condition of understanding. And the curriculum should be well organized inspiral way, so that, students can build new knowledge on what students have learned.Constructivism holds there is never any one right way for teaching. About consideringwhat constructivist approach provides to a teacher, Von Glasersfeld asserts: “Constructivismcan not tell a teacher new things to do, but it may suggest why certain attitudes andprocedures are counter-productive, and it may point out opportunities for teachers to use theirown spontaneous imagination.” Chapter Three The Research Design

Since the last chapter has shown the anchored instruction, this section will implementthe anchored instruction in the real classroom. This chapter will present the whole process of the experiment.

3.1 Research Purposes

The main purpose of the empirical research is to answer the following questions:Is the model of anchored instruction superior to the traditional model in students’writing performance?In a word, the empirical study is to prove the effectiveness of anchored instruction instudents’ English writing,

3.2 The Implementation of Anchored Instruction 3.2.1 Duration

This empirical study was conducted from September, 2010 to January, 2011. To bespecific, it last 18 weeks. The subjects in experimental class attended the writing class onceevery two weeks, spending one and a half hour in class learning. They are required to learnby themselves or in groups, while traditional model applied in the control class. 3.2.2 The Subjects

The subjects are from two classes in Grade one in senior high school---Yongnian ShiyanSenior High School---a rural high school. These two classes are parallel in Englishproficiency, and it is shown in the later data collection and data analysis. Class 65 was chosenas the experimental class, and Class 66 was the control class. There were 70 students in Class65 with 29 boys and 41 girls, and 68 students in Class 66 with 30 boys and 38 girls. Most ofthem are 16-18 years old. As freshstudents in senior middle school, they are curious aboutthe new life and determined to work hard.

3.2.3 Teaching Material

The two classes use the same textbook which is published by the People’ EducationPress---New Senior English for China Student’s Book 1 and Book 2. 3.2.4 The Instruments

The instruments involving the empirical study are writing tests Thepre-test is to examine the subjects’ writing performance before the experiment, and to checkwhether the subjects in two classes are in parallel in English writing performance. Thepost-test is to explore whether the subjects in experimental class make differences from thosein control class. 3.2.5 Study Stages

The experiment was conducted from September, 2010 to January, 2011. This study involved in three stages. Stage one:

Choose one class as the experimental class. The class was representative of Grade2010 the fresh students in Yongnian Shiyan Senior High School.Give a pre-test to examine the subjects’ writing performance before the experiment,and to check whether the subjects in two classes are in parallel in English writingperformance.

Stage two:The experiment was carried out. The anchored instruction is used in experimental class, while the control class still in traditional model.

Stage three:Give a post-test to the subjects to explore whether the subjects’ writing competence in experimental class makes differences from those in control class. （很好的参考）3.3 Techniques of Anchored Instruction

Based on constructivism theory, the application of anchored instruction in writinginvolves five phases in present study: creating the authentic situation; making anchors;students’ autonomous learning; students’ collaborative learning; teacher’s response. Creating Authentic Situation

Anchored instruction lays stress on placing learning in a meaningful context. Learninglanguage can not isolate from the realistic situation. Language isolating from life is inert andthe meaning of language expressing fails to transfer. In writing class, the context plays a roleof helping learners to write in the target language to express ideas in life. The learningcontextualized provides a learner with the realistic role that serves to consolidate the processof learning. Learners in realistic environment can actively take part in the learning activitiesand have high interests in writing. In class, teachers can utilize the textbook, stories, pictures,photos, the internet resources and multimedia to create the situation. Anchoring

In anchored instruction, the activity of teaching and learning is designed around ananchor which maybe a story or situation which includes issue or problems to be solved and isinteresting for learners. The CTGV regarded anchors as macro-contexts for subsequentinstruction and learning, and explained the goal of the design of anchors “was to createinteresting, realistic contexts that encouraged the active construction of knowledge bylearners. Our anchors were stories rather than lectures and were designed to be explored bystudents and teachers.” The anchoring always refers to as the bonding of content within therealistic context. Anchored modules usually embed the information needed or hint as scaffolding, it makes the problem easier to solve. In writing class, providing an anchor withembedded information makes the writing process easier. Students’ Autonomous Learning

In anchored instruction, learners are considered as active meaning constructors, and they can learn autonomously. During the process of writing, students are required to get thenecessary relevant information and take notes from the anchors provided. After thepreparation, they decide the writing content around the topic with the relevant informationfrom the anchors, utilize them to finish their writing independently. In the draft, the studentsshould be sure to express their ideas clearly to the reader, neglecting the language forms. Andthe students were told the draft can be

rough, just put their mind down to paper quickly. Andthey should leave blank lines or margin for readers to response. And the teacher provideshints or information when the students need. After finishing draft, the students are asked to re-read their draft to evaluate and revisethe drafts, try their best to correct the errors of words, expressions, grammars and structures.Maybe they still have questions in expression and about some detailed information. Next,they will solve the questions in groups.

Students’ Collaborative LearningIn anchored instruction, creating the environment of collaborative learning is one ofgoals of it. In writing class, under the collaborative atmosphere, the students work in groupsto discuss the topics, share opinions, give suggestions, solve problems and help each other.Thus, the interaction between learners is an important factor influencing on the knowledgeconstruction. Collaborative learning can help students view the topic from multipleperspectives, arouse their writing interests, and enhance their writing confidence. This partmainly includes group discussion and peer-evaluation.

When studying in group, the students show their written paper and discuss theirambiguity in writing with others in group. The group member makes suggestions to eachother. In this stage, the students’ role is shifted, from a writer to a reader. The experience hastwo good points. First, students give support to other members. Second, students can learnfrom others: the good points, expressions and structures, also, it can develop the sense ofreader for them.When evaluation, the students as a reader examines the writing in terms of thoughtsexpressed and the usage of language, offering opinions by pointing out what are good pointsand what still confuse to readers.Then, they make suggestions and evaluation for thewriting’s improvement.The students revise their written paper again by getting feedback from members ingroup. They should decide whether the feedback from others is valuable and make a change. Teachers’ Response

In anchored instruction, the teacher, as a facilitator or a guider, helps students realize that language is a communication tool to express and transfer knowledge. When making response to the students’ writing, the teacher should focus on the good expressions and points to praise students, and give mentions to typical errors, not all. The teacher also should make response with questions. Asking questions helps the students to express thoughts more clearly. It indicates the teacher is not authority but facilitator, helping students learning easier. The teacher’s encouraging or useful response can arouse students’ learning interest, motivate them and enhance confidence in the process of writing. 3.4 A Sample Lesson

Teaching Material: New Senior English for China Student’s Book 1

Teaching Content: Unit 1 Friendship (writing part)Teaching Time: September 8th, 2010. Teaching Objectives: 1) to improve students’ writing performance;2) to improve students’ problem solving abilities;3) to cultivate students’ consciousness of autonomous learning; 4) to develop students’ collaborative learning.

Teaching Procedure:

Step One: Warming Up

T: Good morning, class. In this unit, we have learned friendship between Anne and her diary.

I think everybody here has your own good friend. Who can tell me the importance of the friendship?

S1: My best friend often helps me with my studies.S2: We always play basketball together. T: Ok, well done. Now I will show you some pictures on the screen. Look at them carefully. Then tell me what the pictures express and your ideas about them.

Ss: The pictures show about the importance of friends.T: Friends are important for us. But not everyone is good at making friends. How to makefriends with others is also important. Today, it is our topic. Supposing you received a letterfrom a pen pal named Xiao Dong. I will show the letter on the screen. Step Two: Pre-writing

During the process, the teacher asks the students to identify the problem Xiao Dong hasand take notes about the necessary information they need by themselves for a minute or two.T: Today, we are going to write some advice for Xiao Dong. Do you know how to write aproposal letter? Now have a discussion on it in groups.After discussion, the teacher asks some students to answer the question.Ss: First, presenting the problem; second, proposing solutions; third, conclusion.Step Three: While-writingDraftingAfter the preparation, students begin to write the draft. In the draft, students should besure the problem Xiao Dong faces and what advice they want to give, then express ideasclearly. It can be rough, just put their ideas down to paper.Students’ Advice Samples:Self-evaluationAfter finishing the draft, students are asked to re-read their draft and try their best toevaluate and correct the errors.

Discussion and Peer-evaluationThen students study in groups. In groups, students present their writing to each other anddiscuss their ambiguity during the writing process. Members of group make suggestions toeach other. The role of the student is shifted, from a writer to a reader. And they need toevaluate peers’ writing and help them to correct the errors, try their best to help the peers’writing improvement.RevisionAccording to the feedback from members of group, the students revise their writtenpaper again. Following is the revision from one of the students:Step Four: Post-WritingAfter revision, the teacher asks some students to make presentation in front of the class,

and gives positive comment on the structure and the ideas expressed by students. The teacher should focus on the good expressions and points to praise students, and pay attention totypical errors. The teacher also makes response with questions. Asking questions helps thestudents to express thoughts more clearly. It suggests that the teacher is facilitator notauthority. The teacher’s encouraging or useful response can arouse students’ learning interest,motivate them and enhance confidence in the process of writing. The teacher encouragesstudents to find more solutions to the problem after class. And the teacher assigns writing aletter to pen pals or friends as homework. It can enhance students’ writing abilities and also isa process of self-improvement.Students’ Reflection

After writing class, some students were asked about the effect of the class, and most ofthem thought this class was a success. What those students said was concluded. (1) The learning atmosphere is relaxed;

(2) Working in group benefits everyone and fills in blanks between each other; (3) Peer evaluation is helpful for writing improvement;(4) Listening to peers is valuable;

(5) They participated in the discussion actively and were willing to present their ideas; (6) Group work and discussion is helpful for problem solving.

The students’ reflection shows that anchored instruction has been applied effectively inthis class and is popular with students. Teacher’s Reflection

On the whole, the writing class is successful. In this English writing class, studentsparticipated in the learning actively. In group work, they discussed, expressed ideas andhelped each other. Working together aroused the learning enthusiasm of the students.Discussion was helpful for finishing their writing from identifying the problem to solving theproblem. At the stage of peer evaluation, the students shifted their role as writers to readers.This change made them have a better understanding of the content of writing and know whatthe reader really needed.

However, there were some defects in this class. Some low level students depended ongroup members excessively. They did nothing, and high level students did the most work.And during the process of discussion, some students used native language to expressthemselves, the teacher had to remind them and asked them to speak in English. Chapter Four Analysis and Discussion 4.1 Data Collection

This experiment was carried out from September, 2010 to January, 2011. Data resourcesinclude pre-test, after the experiment. As follows is thedetailed information of data collection. The experiment involved three stages:

At the stage one, Pre-test was given to examine the subjects’ writing performance beforethe experiment, and to check whether the subjects in two classes are in parallel in Englishwriting performance. The subjects in two classes took in the pre-test on September 2, 2010.All the papers are collected and graded. And both total scores and writing scores in theexperimental class and the control class were collected and made comparison. Then thepre-questionnaire was delivered on September 3, 2010. The questionnaire before theexperiment is to collect the general information of the subjects: the factors influencing theirwriting; their opinions about English writing teaching; their strategies about English writing;

their evaluation about their English writing; the condition of cooperation in English study. All the subjects were involved in it. And all of them made response earnestly. All thequestionnaires are collected.Then, the experiment was carried out. The anchored instruction model was applied inthe experimental class and the traditional model in the control class.At stage three, the post-test was carried out in the two classes to explore whether thesubjects in experimental class make differences from those in control class. Like pre-test,both total scores and writing scores are collected. After the post-test, the subjects were askedto answer the post-questionnaire. The post-questionnaire is to get the feedback from thesubjects about the anchored instruction and to explore whether this model is helpful to theirEnglish writing. 4.2 Data Analysis

4.2.1 Analysis of Scores of the Pre-test

The pre-test was conducted on September 2, 2010. After the military training for freshstudents, the school organized an examination for them. The test paper is provided by theschool. The test papers were collected and graded by the teachers in grade one. And forwriting part, at least three

English teachers graded one paper. Now the results of the pre-testare shown in Table 1. The total score of the paper is 150 points. ( The scores of students inpre-test are shown in Appendix I.)

From this table, it shows that the mean score of these two classes before experiment arevery close. The mean score of control class is 0.7 points higher than the experimental class.The highest score in experimental class is four points higher than the control class, but thelowest score in experimental class is two points lower than the control class. The pass numberof students in this examination is the same. And the pass percentage of two classes is close toeach other. It shows that these two classes are parallel classes.The present study focuses on students’ writing competence. Following shows the resultsof students’ writing competence. The writing score is 30 points.

The mean points in this examination of two classes are 15.64 and 15.47, the control class0.17 points higher than the experimental class. There is no distinct difference between thetwo classes. And the highest score is the same. The lowest score only 1 point between thesetwo classes. Table 2 shows the students’ writing competence in two classes is parallel. 4.2.2 Analysis of Scores of the Post-test

The final examination was carried out on January 22, 2011. All the test papers arecollected and graded. And the post-test is graded by English teachers of grade two. The scoreof writing part in

one paper is graded by at least two teachers. ( The scores of students inpost-test are shown in Appendix II. )Table 3: Analysis of the total score in post-test

For the table 3, it shows that the scores of the students in the experimental class areapparently higher than the control class. The pass number of students in experimental class ismore than the control class by 7. And the pass percentage in experimental class is 8.75%higher than the control class. It shows the students in experimental class made great progressthrough this experiment. That is to say, the students’ comprehensive competence inexperimental class has been improved from this angle.

Through comparison the writing scores between these two classes in post-test, table 4shows all the data of experimental class is apparently higher than the control class. The meanscore in the experimental class is 3.04 points than the control class. The highest score inexperimental class and control class are 28 and 25. The lowest score in experimental classand control class are 12 and 9. The excellent number in experimental class is more thancontrol class by 10 people, and the excellent percentage is 13.87% higher than the controlclass. It shows the anchored instruction is effective in the experimental class.

Through table 5, the result of the experiment is apparent. The post-test scores of studentsin experimental class are distinct from the pre-test. The mean score in the post-test is 3.6points than the pre-test. The highest score in pre-test and post-test are 25 and 28. The lowestscore in pre-test and post-test are 7 and 12. The excellent number in post-test is more than thepre-test by 10 people, and the excellent percentage is 14.29% higher than the control class.From table 4 and 5, there is a significance difference between the control class andexperimental class, the experimental class in pre-test and post-test. That is to say, the result ofthe application of the anchored instruction model in experimental class is prominent. It showsthe anchored instruction is effective and practical.

4.3 Comparison Between the Anchored Model and Traditional Model 4.3.1 The Role of the Teacher

In traditional classroom, the teacher always plays an authority role in the class whocontrols all the class activities. In writing class, the teacher spends much time telling his orher students how to write the essay around the given topic and how to get more points in theexamination. Next, the students write and hand in within the limited time. The teacher beginsto spend much time red-inking the mistakes, like grammar mistake and vocabulary mistake.Then, the teacher hands out their writing papers. If the teacher gives the scores, the studentsglance the score, put it into desk. That is all about writing training. If the teacher does notgive the scores out, the students throw the writing paper into the desk straightly. The writingclass can not be effective. This point is like parents, who do everything for their children untilthe children master skills or have abilities to live independently from the moment the babiesare born. The teacher does everything to try to provide students master the skills. But thewriting class has little efficiency.

While in the class of anchored instruction model, the teacher acts as a facilitator. As afacilitator, the teacher asks questions to give the students clues not tell them how to do,provides guidelines not gives answers and creates the environment for students to arouse thestudents’ interests to explore. A facilitator is always in continuous dialogue with his or herstudents (Rhodes and Bellamy, 1999). The teacher needs to create a relaxed and interactivelearning atmosphere and guides the students to learn autonomously, to cooperate with othersand discuss with each other.

4.3.2 The Role of the Student

According to traditional classroom, the students just listen to the teacher, taking notesand practicing the newly learned useful expressions. In writing class, the students also write agiven topic within the limited time by using the skills which offered in the textbook thenwaiting the teachers’ response to the writing papers. They are passive; they feel the writingclass is monotonous, and gradually lose interest in it.In the anchored instruction model class, they face the realistic issues in their daily lifeand need to do a lot of work to collect the related information to solve it. They overcome thedifficulties by themselves and learn autonomous. In class, they need to discuss in group andcommunicate with others about the issue. Then, they present their draft in the group andrevise it by peers’ evaluation. They learn from each other, work together and fill in blanks foreach other. In this model class, it is a real students-centered or learners-centered class.There are many differences between the anchored instruction model and traditionalmodel. The following table shows them.

Chapter Five Conclusion

The previous chapters have shown and the results of the experiment anddiscussion show that the application of anchored instruction is superior to the traditionalmodel and this instruction has positive effect on the subjects. The instruction shifts fromteacher-centered to student-centered in classroom. Students participate in learning andcollaborate with classmates for learning actively. And the anchored instruction promotes thelearning consciousness of students, thus, students make progress. In this Chapter, the authordescribes major findings about the experiment and implication, discusses the limitation andfurther suggestion for continued research. 5.1 Major Findings

Through the data analysis in chapter 4, the study shows the anchored instruction modelis more effective in improving the students’ writing competence than traditional model. Thereare three major areas the author has found the application of anchored instruction: 5.1.1 Creating a Relaxed and Interactive Learning Atmosphere

The anchored instruction model is significance in creating a relaxed and interactivelearning atmosphere. In the experimental class, the teacher acts as a facilitator, organizing thecontextualized lessons for students and promoting opportunities for communication. Thestudents are active in the learning process，and they are interested in the situated questions. The teacher and the students are involved in learning process from each other equally. Thelearning environment is designed to support, and challenge the students’ thinking. And togive the students ownership of the solution process is necessary. The teacher providesreference and creates an environment for the students to arrive at their own conclusions.Under this relaxed and interactive environment the students will be an effective thinker, andthe teacher is a consultant or coach.

5.1.4 Promoting Students’ Collaborative Learning Abilities

Collaborative learning is an important segment in anchored instruction. It means a smallgroup of learners work together to accomplish shared goals. During the process, learners helpeach other, discuss and collaborate with each other to solve problems, and assess peers andfill in blanks in each other’s comprehension. A group is a team. Everyone of the team isresponsible not only for learning what has taught but also for helping other team members tounderstand. Moreover, the learners have opportunities and time to try out their answers witheach other and they can receive feedback from others in the group before being asked to showtheir contributions to the whole class. The students in a group are not afraid of being laughedby team members when they make mistakes. The relationship of the group or team membersis interdependent. Peers support and mutual help replace the competition. The learningatmosphere is harmonious. It also enhances the learners’ self-confidence. And from theanalysis of the post-questionnaire, 90% of the subjects have a strong will to study in a group. 5.2 Implications

These findings of this study may give some hints on teaching English writing in thesenior high school. According to the teaching experiences, following are some pedagogicalimplications: To create a realistic situation

Learning a language needs a realistic situation. Only using it in the daily life, thestudents can master the language well. In English writing class, writing topics should berelated to the students’ daily life. Students use writing to express their own ideas and

communication with others.

To help students be autonomous learners

In anchored instruction, the writing class should be student-centered or learner-centered.The teacher should guide the students to complete their learning tasks by asking helpfulquestions not giving answers. The students needs to know their essays not for the teacher tocorrect, they are for others to read. Through the essays, they express their thought andcommunicate with others, and they will master the language well. To enhance the students self-confidence

As a non-native speaker, writing is difficult for them. They are afraid of writing.Therefore, helping students to enhance their confidence is significance. If the students haveconfidence to write, writing is so easy. Follows list some suggestions for teachers: Do notred-ink every mistake if the mistakes do not affect readers’ understanding; Focus on what thestudents convey not the correct forms; Pay attention to good points and sentences; Exhibit thegood written product. To give positive assessment for every student as far as possible

Although it is impossible for the teacher to pay attention to every student, the teachershould give proper assessment to his each student. For students, the teacher’s assessment isencouraging. It can be an incentive for students to make progress. 5.3 Limitations and Suggestions

Although the empirical study has yielded some achievements in English writing, the study inevitably has limitations.First, this experiment lasted one semester. With relatively short time for the study andauthor’s limited teaching experience, the results may not be prominent. From the point, theauthor advises to carry out a longer term experiment.Second, this experiment was carried out in two large size of class. Most students canfollow the teacher’s instruction, and a few students can not follow the teacher’s instruction. Itprevents this experiment from getting more good results.Third, the subjects in this experiment are all from grade one in senior high school. Theexperiment should be done with large different samples from various grades and schools totest whether this model is effective.Through the results of the experiment, it can be inferred that the anchored instructionhas a positive effect on students’ learning. But the study also leaves a lot to be continuedresearch. And it is need more researches to explore the practical applications of anchoredinstruction.

[45] 陈桂芳 . 建构主义的抛锚式教学策略在课堂教学中的应用 [J]. 教育理论与实践,2005(6).

[46] 陈青,乌美娜.从抛锚式教学看情境学习对教学及教学设计的启示[J].中国电化教育,1999(4).

[47] 程晓堂,郑敏.英语学习策略[M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社. 2002:3. [48] 胡壮麟.语言学教程.北京大学出版社,2001.

[49] 何克抗.建构主义的教学模式教学方法与教学设计[J].北京示范大学学报(社会科学版),1997,(5).

The instructional design principles underlying the anchored instruction are:

(1) Anchored instruction aims to solve the real problems. It stresses the utility ofknowledge. In this situation, the students know the necessity of learning the newknowledge. Thus, they will study automatically and independently.(2) In anchored instruction, the students are the center in the learning procedure.They try to identify the anchor, set up their own goals, and explore the solutions to theproblem on their own.(3) The teacher’s influence decreases in anchored instruction, but it doesn’t meanthe teacher is not important any more. In fact, such kind of instruction requires moreto the instructor. The teacher should act as guide, resource provider, time controller,facilitator, etc. The learners accomplish the knowledge construction under theguidance of the teacher.

2.1.4 Procedures of Anchored Instruction

In 1998, on the basis of the studies about anchored instruction both at home andabroad, Gao Wen and Chen Haiyan summarized the anchored instruction model. Theydid further researches on the objectives, the instructional principles and the methodsof applying anchored instruction. They also put forward five procedures of anchoredinstruction:

1) Situation creation: the instructor tries to create a macro-situation similar to thereal situation. 2) Problem identification: the instructor should point out a question for thestudents to solve. The selected problem plays the role as the “anchor”, and it is thelearning center. The students do their best to solve the problem under themacro-situation. Thus the teaching objectives will be obtained in the process ofproblem-solving.

3) Independent learning: the following stage will be finished by the studentswithout being told what to do and how to do. If they meet some difficulties, theteacher will provide some clues to guide them to the correct direction. In this way, thelearners’ autonomous learning ability can improve gradually.

4) Collaborative learning: after independent learning, the students communicatewith each other to share their ideas, to express their understanding of the text, and toshow their solution to` the problem. Argument, supplement and revision will occur inthis process. Through cooperating with each other, the students will have a betterunderstanding of what they are learning.

5) Evaluation: As anchored instruction requires the students to solve the realproblems, the learning process is the process of solving problems. Thus the students’learning achievements can be assessed in the learning process. 3.3.2 The PETS-3 Test Papers

The papers of Public English Test System 3 (PETS-3) ( Appendix II, III ) will be usedas the instrument to investigate the students’ English proficiency. Furthermore, thechanges in their English achievements after the experiment can also be reflected bythe paper. First, the author uses the PETS-3 test paper (the PETS 3 test paper in Dec.2010) before the experiment to assess the students’ English proficiency level in thepre-test. And then the author employs another PETS-3 test paper (the PETS-3 test paperin June, 2011) at the end of the semester to compare the changes of the students’English proficiency between the pre-test and the post-test. The full scores of thePETS-3 test paper is 100 points, and the paper is made up of five types of questions,including listening comprehension (20%), vocabulary and structure (20%), reading comprehension (30%), translation (20%) and writing (10%). The examinations ofPublic English Test System 3 is an official test which is of high validity. It is popularin higher vocational colleges, and the questions of the paper are appropriate to thevocational college students’ English capacity, so the test paper can reflect the students’true English proficiency. To ensure the reliability of the data, the test conditionsincluding the time, places, environment, equipments are all the same for theexperimental class and the control class. 3.3.3 SPSS V 17.0

SPSS V17.0 is employed in this thesis to analyze the data of FLCAS andfinal test collected in pre-test as well as post-test. SPSS (Statistical Product andService Solutions) is a comprehensive statistical analysis and data managementsystem. It is the earliest statistical analysis software and is widely applied to the fieldsof natural science, technological science, social science, etc. With the continuousdevelopment and improvement, SPSS is highly commended for its accuracy,flexibility and convenience. 3.4 Research Design

The present research adopts an empirical study. Anchored instruction wasapplied in the experimental class, while the control class instruction still remained tobe the traditional teaching method. The whole instructional experiment processconsists of three stages: pre-test, implementation of the experiment and post-test. The experiment was conducted in the second semester of their freshmen year. It totallylasted sixteen weeks, from February 2012 to June 2012. 3.4.1 Pre-test

The first stage of the experiment is to survey the students’ foreign languageanxiety level in English classroom via FLCAS, and to investigate their Englishproficiency by means of PETS-3 test paper. Some relevant data will be collected inthe form of the questionnaires and the PETS-3 test papers.

3.4.2 Implementation of the Experiment

3.4.2.1 Experimental Class — Anchored Instruction

Teaching material: New Horizon English Course ( Reading and Writing ) Teaching content：Unit 5 Parents’ LoveTeaching time: April 5th, 2012 Teaching procedures:

Procedure One:

1) Situation creation: This part is the initial stage of the anchored instruction. Inorder to achieve the teaching goal, the teacher often uses videos, pictures, or tell somestories to create a macro-situation. By these means, the students will be guided intothe circumstances similar to the real situations.The teaching material is New Horizon English Course ( Reading and Writing ). It consists of ten units, and each unit has two texts. The content of the two passages isabout the same theme. Since the theme has been identified, the instructor will createthe situation around the theme.Take unit 5 for example. The fifth unit of the teaching material is composed oftwo passages : Text A is Father Dearest, and Text B is My Mother and I. The twopassages tell us something about parents’ love. First, the teacher showed them threevideos. The videos were produced by America, China and Thailand separately. All ofthem had something to do with the relationship between parents and their children.The video time lasted about fifteen minutes. After watching them, nearly all thestudents were deeply impressed by the movie. Some girls were even moved to cry.Through the observation the author knew that the students had been guided into the situation which was created by the teacher.

2) Problem identification: The instructor should poses a question for the studentsto solve. The selected question plays the role as the “anchor”, and it is the learningcenter. The students do their best to solve the problem under the macro-situation. Thusthe teaching objectives will be obtained in the process of problem-solving.Then we come to the second stage：Problem identification. The teacher showedthem some moving pictures. These pictures helped to narrow down the theme, makingthem know the theme is about the parents’ love. Under such circumstance, onequestion was put forward: telling us something about your father or mother, includingtheir appearance, their character and one thing that impresses you most.

3) Independent learning: The following stage will be finished by the studentswithout being told what to do and how to do. If they meet some difficulties, theteacher will provide some clues to guide them to the correct direction. In this way ,the learners’ autonomous learning ability can improve gradually.Since the problem had been identified, the teacher gave the students some time tofinish the assignments. To describe their parents and the thing their parents did forthem, the students had to master some relevant words and phrases. Such kind ofquestions made the students think over the problem by reviewing their ownexperience. They were situated in a familiar environment. This way can arouse theirinterests, and stimulate them to learn the words and phrases actively.This stage is called independent learning. It is mainly finished by the learnersindependently. They can refer the words and grammars at the back of the text, or turnto the dictionary for help. As their English proficiency is limited, the teacher shouldprovide assistance for them appropriately. The instructional assistance ought to stay inthe zone of proximal development. The teaching procedure will be adjusted on thebasis of the learners’ cognitive ability observed by the teacher. This stage lasted about20 minutes. Of course, they made some mistakes in the statement. Then I redressedtheir mistakes and explained some grammars in the text. Through independentlearning, the students had accumulated many new words and phrases related to thetheme, and learned some new grammars. They had been equipped with the ability totransfer from the actual development level to the potential development level.

4) Collaborative learning: After independent learning, they had already had anoverview of the text. Then in the next step, collaborative learning began. I divided the37 students into 7 groups. Each group contained 5 or 6 members. They are assignedthe task of summarizing the text. The students communicated with each other to sharetheir ideas, to express their understandings of the text, and to show their solutions tothe problem. Argument, supplements and revisions would occur in this process. Bycooperating with each other, the students had a better understanding of what theywere learning.

5) Evaluation: Evaluation is the output stage. The English output is made up of two forms: oral output and written form. As anchored instruction requires the students to solve the real problems, the learning process is the procedure of solving problems.The oral output can be assessed in the course of the instruction through theirpresentation of the question. As for the writing task, it would be evaluated by meansof English proficiency test via PETS-3 test paper. 3.4.2.2 Control Class — Traditional Teaching method

Class two is still taught with the traditional teaching method. Reading the newwords, translating the text, teaching the grammar, and explaining the exercises werethe common procedures. The students in the control class were not given much timeand opportunities to participate in the classroom activity. What they did in the class was passively listening to the instructor.

抛锚式教学模式的基本程序(l)创设问题情境，创设能引导学生主动参与的问题情境，促使学生原有的知识与必须掌握的新知之间发生激烈的冲突，激发学生强烈的问题意识和求知欲，是探究性学习的第一步。只有产生问题意识，学生才会激发起求知的欲望，才能努力开发创造性思维和探究知识的热情。模拟、再现历史是运用抛锚主义思想指导学科教学改革的典范，它的理论意义不限于历史学科教学本身，它对于我们重新认识教学过程的一般问题，如教学过程中师生的角色、学生与学生的关系，知识与智力目标统一实现的问题，知识的广度与深度之间的关系，以及全体学生素质的提高与因材施教的关系等，都提供了一定的启示。(2)确定问题并提出假设，“问题”是教学的心脏，有了问题，学生才有探究的欲望，有了问题，学生才有探究的目标。确定问题是解决问题的起点，也是动力.引发学生积极探究，有利于他们思维的发展。课堂教学的核心是发展学生的思维，(3)自主探究与集体讨论相结合，共同参与问题的解决.自主探究是本模式的核心环节，是让学生根据自己的体验，用自己的思维方式采用独立探究或小组合作的方法，搜集相关资料，自由地，开放地去探究，去发现，去创造有关的知识。(4)活动的反思与知识迁移，通过反思与总结，学生的认识水平和能力得到提高，为今后的学习和活动提供了经验和教训，学会用理解、归纳、综合、分析以及评价等历史思维方式来解决问题，知识的迁移能力也大大提高. 3．2 建构主义的教学设计

教学设计是依据对学习需求的分析，提出解决问题的最佳方案，使教学效果达到最 优化的系统决策过程．由此可见，教学设计其实就是一个分析教学问题、设计解决方案、 检验方案有效性并做出相应修改直至最优化的过程．一般认为，教学设计可划分为：教 学系统设计、课程教学设计、课堂教学设计、教学媒体设计．本文讨论的是课堂教学设 计．一般认为，课堂教学设计指教师在教学工作开始之前，根据现代教育理论的基本观 点，依据教学目的和要求，通过对课堂教学过程中各主要要素（内容、学生）的分析， 确定合适的教学起点，形成有序流程，以指导课堂教学工作的有效实施．课堂教学设计 主要有以下几个环节：教学目标分析，这是课堂教学设计的开始；教学分析，包括教学

任务分析、学习任务分析；教学效果的测定和评价的设计，这是课堂教学设计的反馈途 径．进行教学设计的主要功能是将知识从学术形态转化为教育形态3．2．2 建构主义理论下数学课堂教学设计的原则

（1）要充分体现教学过程中学生的主体地位, 强调以学生为中心，各种教学因素， 包括教师只是作为一种广义的学习环境支持学习者的自主学习；

（2）要促使学生学会学习，在教学过程中使学生逐步从“学会”向“会学”转变； （3）以问题为核心驱动学习，注重培养学生创造性、发展性的思维能力，鼓励学生 多角度、多方向、新颖独特地提出问题和解决问题；

（4）强调协作学习的重要性，要求学习环境能够支持协作学习；

（5）重视课堂内外的结合，努力把课堂延伸到课外，变被动接受为主动探索； （6）强调非量化的整体评价，反对过分细化的标准参照评价． 3．2．3 建构主义理论下数学课堂教学设计的基本模式 （1）教学目标分析

进行教学目标分析，以确定课堂所要学知识的“主题”（即与基本概念、基本原理或 基本方法有关的知识内容）．在传统课堂教学设计中，教学目标是高于一切的，它既是教 学过程的出发点，又是教学过程的归宿．通过教学目标的分析可以确定教学内容和教学 内容的安排次序；教学目标也是检查教学效果和进行评估的依据．而在以学生为中心的 课堂教学设计中，由于强调学生是认知主体、是意义的主动建构者，所以把学生对知识 的意义建构作为学习过程的最终目的．在这样的课堂教学设计中往往不是从分析教学目 标开始，而是从创设有利学生意义建构的情境开始，甚至存在一种偏向，认为建构主义 学习环境下没有必要进行教学目标分析．这种看法是片面的．因为“意义建构”是指对 当前要学习的内容进行建构，而当前所要学的内容总是由一些知识点组成的：如基本概 念、基本原理或一般性知识．必须在进行教学目标分析基础上选出当前所学知识的基本 概念、基本原理、基本方法和基本过程作为当前所学知识主题，然后再围绕这个主题让 学生进行意义建构．课堂教学目标确定之后，教学语言的组织、问题的设计、例题的选 择以及习题的配制等都应该围绕教学目标而进行，做到重点突出、难点分散．对于同一 知识点，在不同课型中，目标则可能不同．如数学新授课目标在于建构某种新知识，而 复习课教学目标则是在学生掌握知识基础上向深度和广度发展，以培养学生能力，即在 层次上有不同要求． （2）教学任务分析

教学任务分析是体现教师教学基本功的重要环节，也是数学课堂教学设计的重要内 容．教学任务分析主要包括：第一，分析教学内容的地位和作用．教学任务总是以一定 的教材为依据，而数学教材总是按照一定的逻辑顺序编排的，各部分的知识相互关联， 我们必须学习和掌握教学大纲，了解教学要求，认真钻研，弄清教材内容在整个教材体 系中的地位和作用，包括和已学内容的联系，对后续知识产生的影响．第二，分析教学 任务所蕴含的数学思想．第三，分析教材内容的合理性．第四，挖掘教学内容的生活背 景．第五，分析教学任务的类型．在实际的课堂教学中，我们知道，有些知识点只需要 记忆，有些知识点需要理解，有些知识点侧重于应用．在教学任务分析的基础上，结合学生实际情况（如年龄，原有知识经验）从而确定教学任务目标． （3）学习任务分析 ①确定预期状态

这主要是指通过课堂教学设计，期望学习个体达到学科的知识能力水平情感态度的

变化等，而这种信息主要来源于教学目标、教学任务的分析和对学生年龄、年级、原有 知识经验等情况的分析． ②测量或估量学生的原有知识经验

对于数学课堂教学设计而言，测量学生的原有知识水平主要指测量学生已经具备的 与学习新知识内容有关的知识或经验或下位技能，如有关概念、性质、公式等，通过测 量可以把握学生在课堂教学工作实施前已具有的知识技能或经验，还缺乏哪些相关知识， 这可以为数学课堂教学设计提供合适的教学起点，避免课堂教学活动的盲目性．因为教 学起点过高，会使课堂教学活动脱离大多数学生的实际水平；确定过低，会浪费精力和 时间．确定合适的教学起点就是使课堂教学活动开始于学生的“现有发展区”． ③学生的活动方式的确定

学生的活动应该以实现目标为根本目的；而学生活动方式的确定其实涵盖了一系列 的设计内容，如教学策略、教学材料、形成性评估及总结性评估等的设计．如果说，前 面的教学目标、教学任务的分析、学生原有知识经验情况的分析是准备的话，则这一切 准备工作都是为这个本体部分而做的．在学生的活动方式的确定过程中，贯穿了设计如 何提出问题，发现学习内容的过程，设计知识如何产生的过程，方法、规律的探索发现 过程．活动围绕着问题而展开，问题也可以在活动中产生．当然，学生活动方式的确定， 还包括教师对学生学习组织形式（如全班学习、小组讨论、搭档讨论等），时间分配等的 设计． （4）情境创设

建构主义学习理论认为，数学学习总是与一定的知识经验背景，“情境”相联系的．利 用生动、直观的情境可以有效地激发联想，唤醒长期记忆中有关的知识、经验或表象， 从而使学习者能利用自己原有知识结构中的有关知识与经验去同化当前的新知识；如果 原有知识与经验不能同化新知识，则引起顺应过程，即对原有认知结构进行改造、重组．总之，应通过“同化”与“顺应”才能达到对新知识意义的建构，同化和顺应离不开原有 认知结构中的知识、经验与表象，情境创设则为激活这些知识经验与表象提供了有利条 件．对数学课堂教学设计而言，情境的创设要求有丰富的资源，如体现概念的本质属性 或多种外部表征，变式运用或反例运用等，从而有助于对数学知识的意义建构，对于数 学情境的创设，可以从以下几个方面入手：第一，运用现实生活背景诱发学习情境．即 以实际问题为背景材料，从实际出发，通过抽象、概括的数学化过程建构数学知识．第 二，运用错误的直觉定势创设情境．即创设一种诱导情境，让学生上当受骗，产生错误 直觉，而错误形式正好为探索性思维过程提供材料，也是深化学生认识，培养思维深刻 性的有效方法．第三，运用多媒体演示创设情境．多媒体的运用为学生创设了良好的学 习环境，将教学内容由“静态”变为“动态”，由“单调”变为“丰富”．通过多媒体的 摸拟，在视、听等多种感观交互作用的共同体验下，促使学生的认识从现象到本质，由 感情认识上升到理性认识．

（5）自主学习设计建构主义理论下的数学课堂教学设计是以学为中心进行的设计．由此，自主学习的设计成为课堂教学设计的核心内容，学生的自主学习主要表现为“自主活动”与“智力参与”．“自主活动”主要指数学教学实践活动，而“智力参与”主要偏重于数学思维活动，因此课堂教学设计的自主学习设计主要围绕学生的“自主活动”和“智力参与”而设计．

（6）教学效果的测定和评价

课堂教学设计的结果通常是教学方案，要评价课堂教学设计得好与次，将教学方案

付诸实施，投入教学是不可缺少的．最强有说服力的评价来源于它的教学效果，而教学 效果就是通过教师在课堂教学工作实施后学生的学习效果来进行测定和评价的．在建构 主义教育理论指导下，数学学习强调学习的过程，强调学生对知识的主动建构并获得感 悟和体验，从而决定了对学生学习效果评价的多元化特点．这种评价的多元化主要指： 第一，评价内容的多元化．传统评价内容是只看学生掌握学科知识的情况，看最终测验 结果．换句话说，是把那些能够量化的因素作为评价对象，而忽视了教育中那些不可测 量的重要方面，学生在学习过程中有很多因素是无法量化的，如学习的抱负、态度及体 验等；学生的原有知识经验是最重要的，而它的不可测量性，恰恰是传统评价内容所忽 视的．因此，现如今不仅强调对直接结果的评价，还重视学生多种能力与品质的评价， 不仅重视对学生认知技能、情感、态度的评价，还重视对元认知能力的测量和评价，即 指考察学生自己对于知识策略方面掌握情况的能力．第二，评价主体的多元化．以往教 师似乎是天经地义的评价的主体，这种单一评价主体，只对学生的学习成绩进行评价， 不能从不同侧面给学生提供较完整的评价，其实教学活动是一种双主体活动，教师是教 学主体，学生是学习主体，在尊重教师评价的同时，必须重视学生的自我评价和自我改 进，使评价成为学生学会实践和反思、发现自我、欣赏别人的过程．同时，家长、其他 同学也可以参与对学生的评价．第三，评价形式的多元化．单一的评价形式对于建构主 义理念下的数学学习是不适应的，只有多种评价形式才能充分发挥评价的导向作用和诊 断、激励功能．由此，学生一学期下来的学习效果可采用由期末的纸笔测验结合平时成 绩来进行综合评定，平时成绩可以通过观察学生平时学习状态、学习效果、学习能力等 进行评估．

：统的历史教学模式存在许多弊端

自新中国成立以来，中学历史教学己经过多次改革，并不断发展，在促进社会进步 和人才培养等方面做出很大的贡献.但在知识经济迅猛发展的今天，历史教学却没有跟 上时代发展的步伐，传统教学模式的种种弊端不断显现，严重阻碍着学科的发展和人刁‘ 的培养。传统的历史教学模式主要存在着以下弊端与不足: 1.重知识掌握轻能力培养

研究表明知识的掌握是发展能力的基础，脱离了知识的学习和技能、技巧的形成，能力便成为无源之水，无法得到很好的发展;但知识的掌握同样也离不开能力的发展。在传统的历史教学模式下，大多数教师所做的就是把书本上现成的知识告诉学生，让学生通过死记硬背的方法去获取考试的高分，而忽视对学生的分析、综合、理解、概括等探究问题的能力培养，学历史变成了背历史。而探究性与创造性是一对因果关系，没有探究就没有创造。据调查，美国的学生从小学就开始自己独立进行探索和研究，重视对探究意识和能力的培养:而中国的学生正好相反，从小就习惯了接受现成的知识，养成循规蹈矩的习惯，不敢越雷池一步。这两种方法培养出来的人才是截然不同的:美国学生的基础知识虽然掌握的不如我们的学生扎实，但他们的创造性和实践能力却大大超过中国学生，使得我们“赢得了起点，却输掉了终点”。 2.重教轻学

教学过程应是以学生为主体的教师和学生的互动过程。在传统的历史教学中，强调以教师、教材为中心，教学过程实际成为教授过程，学生的主体地位只是停留在口头而没有落到实处。许多历史教师在课堂教学中仍然采用“题海战”和“满堂灌”等老方法，不能随着形势的变化更新教育思想，教学中死记硬背的现象比比皆是，学生主要是通过被动接受的方

法来学习，而不是通过积极主动的探究去获取知识、发展能力。许多教师信奉“权威式教育”，认为教学内容和教师的科学性、权威性不容质疑，也就不允许学生提出反对意见，加上注重唯一正确答案的聚合式思维，严重束缚了学生的创造力.在探究学习中，学生自主研究，主体地位得到充分体现，学习过程真正成为学生自己探索新知、发展能力、培养情感态度和价值观的过程。 3.重结果轻过程

教学应该是一种知、情、意、行的协调统一过程，为了实现这一目标，教学方法的选择和运用就显得极为重要。但是由于应试教育的影响，在传统的历史教学中，大多数教师通常的教法是照本宣科，将现成的结论传授给学生，至于这种结论是怎么得出的、需要运用何种史学方法和史学观念等则很少教给学生，更谈不上知、情、意、行的统一了。因此，学生并不能很好理解历史结论形成的过程，以及如何运用所学的知识，学生掌握的只是“死知识”，无法做到学以致用，更无法很好地培养情感态度和价值观，导致历史这门重要的人文学科不能发挥它应有的现实意义，既阻碍了学生的历史思维能力的发展，也不利于学生健康人格的发展。

4.重智力因素，轻非智力因素

教学中注重发展学生的智力具有重要的意义，因为智力是各种认识活动的一个重要基础，对学生的学习和发展起着重要作用.但是，智力只是为人的发展提供了可能性，并不能决定一个人的能力和未来，也不能决定学生的学习成绩，而非智力因素对于人的发展也起着重要作用。非智力因素指一个人的动机、兴趣、情感、意志、性格等心理成分，是推动和引导个体采取决定并行动的内在力量，对学习起着推动、影响和调节作用。动机明确的学生一般有高度的学习自觉性，学生的情感、意志特征对学习的作用也很明显.非智力因素与智力因素共同决定着学习的成功，但传统的教学活动片面强调促进学生的智力，却忽视了非智力因素的培养，造成许多学生的学习动机不是出于对学习内容本身的兴趣，也缺乏积极向上的进取心，所以学生丧失了创造的动力，不想通过新角度、新方法来分析和解决问题。 5.重被动接受学习，轻主动探究学习、发现学习

在接受学习中，学习的内容主要以结论的形式传授给学生，学生通过内化，使知识纳入己有的知识结构;而在探究性学习和发现学习中，学习不是将现成的知识传授给学生，而是在学生内化之前，由他们自己去探究、去发现这些内容口接受学习是学生学习历史必不可少的学习方式，它可以使学生在相对较短的时间内掌握丰富的历史知识。这些浩如烟海的知识宝库，是经过人类长期的探索与研究才‘积累下来的，如果都让学生自己去探究，去重复知识发现、发展的过程，那是绝对不可能的。而且，通过接受学习，学生掌握的知识可以达到系统化。所以，接受学习有其无可代替的优越性。但接受学习是从书本中获取现成的知识，掌握的是间接经验，无法很好地培养学生的探究意识、创造精神。因此，接受学习与发现学习必须结合使用，二者相辅相成，缺一不可。传统的教学模式却忽视了这一点，过于强调接受学习，强调“满堂灌”，使得学生成为被动接受知识的容器。由于传统教学模式的这些弊端，无法很好地培养学生的主体性与探究性，使得许多学生在面对实际问题时无所适从，高分低能的现象比比皆是，这既不利于人才的培养，也会最终阻碍社会的进步和发展。所以，传统的教学模式已经到了非改不可的地步。传统的教学方法如下表所示:

抛锚模式的组成程序如图所示:

(三)抛锚式教学模式的基本程序 (1)创设问题情境

创设能引导学生主动参与的问题情境，促使学生原有的知识与必须掌握的新知识之间发生激烈的冲突，激发学生强烈的问题意识和求知欲，是探究性学习的第一步。只有产生问题意识，学生才会激发起求知的欲望，才能努力开发创造性思维和探究知识的热，清。在历史教学中，通过历史情境的再现，可促进学生有效地掌握历史知识，尤其在学习惊心动魄的战争场面、波澜壮阔的历史改革、扣人心弦的热点问题和气势辉煌的经济建设时，再现历史情境就显得更加重要。创设问题情境的方法很多，既可以通过教师生动的描述，也可以通过多媒体展示，再现当时的时代背景和状况，还可以借助实物、模型、图片等多种手段。这对于教师的要求较高，应具备比较高明的语言表达能力、行为表演能力、媒体操作能力和实物演示能力，而且要善于激发学生的情感，使学生受到震撼，真正有身临其境的感觉，从而把课程内容转化为探究的主题，自觉地站在历史的角度去分析、探究历史现象.一般说来，设置历史情景的方法有以下三种:A用形象的语言、实物创设问题情境。激发学生兴趣，引起联想，启示对问题理解、追求探索。即利用各种历史文物、图片、文字资料、录像、电影或多媒体给学生展示某些重大事件的背景材料和场而，使其获得丰富的感性材料。在教学中国古代史B利用故事、漫画等手段来设喻创设问题情境。例如C运用直观教具或多媒体手段巧现“历史情境”。案例1。(2)确定问题并提出假设“问题”是教学的心脏，有了问题，学生才有探究的欲望，有了问题，学生才有探究的目标。确定问题是解决问题的起点，也是动力.问题的提出者可以是教师，也可以由学生自己提问，但最好是由教师创设问题情境，让学生自己发现问题并质疑，因为这样的问题更贴近学生的思维实际，更引发学生积极探究，有利于他们思维的发展。课堂教学的核心是发展学生的思维，而思维的发展有一定的规律.设疑导学，要求教师要善于审时度势，抓住契机，可根据具体情况，缘机而变。设置情境的时机要寻找最佳点。一是把握时机，如在上课一开始设疑，可吸引学生的注意力;在学生注意力逐渐分散时设疑，可使注意力回升;在一节课结束或学习完一个单元后设疑，可布下悬念，承上启下，形成以后的高潮。二是把握适当的点，情境应设在学生容易迷惑、混淆、不懂的地

方或教学的重点和难点处，使学生在积极的思考探索中理解知识、把握重点、突破难点。 所以，创设问题情境之后，教师要鼓励学生不迷信书本知识和权威的论点，积极思

考，敢于质疑和提问。学生提出的问题可以与书本知识一致，也可以有冲突，但能够唤 起学生进一步探究的好奇心。刚开始时，学生提出的问题可能比较幼稚，需要通过师生 的合作，共同“审题”，分析出问题的背景、条件、目标和探究的方向，在符合学生“最 近发展区”的基础上，明确目标。提出问题的目的不仅要使学生再现己有的知识， 而且要激发他们的思考，因此，问题确定之后，教师作为指导者，应开动学生的发散性 思维，通过独立思考与讨论交流，找出问题的关键和核心，鼓励他们在己有知识经验的 基础上，提出假设，构思问题解决方案，并决定解决问题的行动计划.要注意难易适度， 不能过难或过易“问题情境”的创设绝不是简单意义上的“是不是”、“对不对”、 “好不好”的一问到底的做法，创设的问题情境应富有启发性和挑战性，教师设计的问 题必须从学生的实际情况出发，注重学生年龄特征、知识水平和接受能力。课堂设疑如 果偏难或过易，都不会激起学生的思维火花，往往造成“启而不发”的尴尬局面，或使 学生产生“不屑一顾”的情绪。叶圣陶先生说，好的提问，“必令学生运其才智，勤其 练习，领悟之源广开。”教师应在符合教学目的要求的情况下，深入学生实际，了解其 知识水平，提出难易适度的问题，使学生能运用己有的知识只要肯“跳一跳就能够摘到 果子”。所设问题既要有一定难度，又不能超过学生现有的认知水平。同时要考虑到大 多数学生的认知水平，应面向全体学生，切忌专为少数人设置，只有这样，学生的思维 才最活跃，主动参与教学的积极性最高。使全体学生都能完成对所学知识的“再创造”。 (3)自主探究与集体讨论相结合，共同参与问题的解决

自主探究是本模式的核心环节，是让学生根据自己的体验，用自己的思维方式采用 独立探究或小组合作的方法，搜集相关资料，自由地，开放地去探究，去发现，去创造 有关的知识。教学的最终目的不是向学生奉献知识，而是引导学生去探究、发现真理， 培养历史思维能力。当学生不能单纯靠己有知识和习惯去解决问题，而要进一步思考和 探索，处于想说出、想表达而又不能即“愤”、“徘”的状态时，教师再去启发、点拨、 诱导，这样才能真正开启学生思维的门扉，促进其智能的发展。因此，当学生有了求知 的要求后，不能用生硬灌输代替学生独立思考，而应积极地启发诱导。填鸭说教，拔苗 助一长或者“抱着走”，只能损害学生的学习主动性和求异性思维的形成。教师设置问题 情境以后，如果过多指导则会伤害学生的主动性，失去自由思考的余地，妨碍学生自己 的探索和得出结论。但采取放任的态度让学生随意思考，学生则可能偏离前进的方向或 走一些曲折的道路。正当的指导则应让学生有发现和探索的余地。通过教师的引导或暗 示让学生思考，让他们自己发现问题的答案。它要求教师的“说”要诱导学生的“想”; 教师说的“点”要带动学生想的“面”:要求教师千方百计地引导学生走上思考的大道， 发挥引路、搭桥、开窍、点拨的作用。当问题提出后，教师要用启发的方法，来帮助学 生分析问题，使学生认清问题的所在。问题确定之后，要鼓励学生根据他们的学识，运 用推理和观察的方法，去探索解决问题的途径，继续不断地提出可能解决问题的办法(又 称假设)。学生提出假设之后，要用批判的态度，来考核这些假设。若发现假设与事实 不符，即放弃，再考核另一个假设。经过这样仔细的考验，直至获得一个完美的假设为 止。

学生教师则为学生的探究提供必要的条件，如提供相应的资料，明确研究方向，在 学生遇到困难是给予适当的支持和指导。教师的指导一定要把握好“度”，既不要不闻 不问、放任自流，也不能干涉过多、越姐代泡，要给学生以空间，注重学生自主学习能 力的培养:同时还应关注学生的个别差异，因为在对问题的理解上，不同的个体存在一 定的差异，这是由学生己有的知识经验和思维方式决定的，教师要努力满足不同学生的

需要，指导他们找到解决问题的关键，变“授人以鱼”为“授之以渔”。只有这样，学 生才能学会用类似史学家的研究方法，独立自主地进行探究。

学生得出自己的理解和观点之后，教师应组织师生互动交流，展开讨论，共同参与 问题的解决。讨论不应是教师问、学生答、教师再问、学生再答这种简单机械的形式， 而应鼓励学生积极加入讨论的行列，各抒己见，敢于发表自己的观点。教师要善于发现 学生发言中的闪光点，引导他们作出更准确、全面的回答，当讨论陷于僵局或错误的方 向时，教师要给予修正、补充或引导。只有这样，才能激发学生的自信心和共同解决问 题的热情，使探究活动越来越深入，最终得出客观、公正的答案。这种经历会使学生认 识到学习历史是一个从感知历史到不断积累历史知识，再到逐渐加深对历史和现实的理 解过程:同时也是主动参与、学会学习的过程。 (4)活动的反思与知识迁移

问题解决了，但活动不能就此结束，因为学习不仅要使学生掌握知识，还要促进学 生的发展，因此，活动之后的反思是必不可少的。反思有助于学生检查自己是否达到了 探究目标，并认识到自己的水平与能力。反思的内容包括:自己对活动和集体所做的贡 献、探究观点和方法的成功与不足之处、在活动中自己的知识和能力有哪些增加、对自 己有什么启示等多方面。通过反思与总结，学生的认识水平和能力得到提高，为今后的 学习和活动提供了经验和教训，学会用理解、归纳、综合、分析以及评价等历史思维方 式来解决问题，知识的迁移能力也大大提高，做到“一理通，百理明’ (四)抛锚式教学设计的课堂实例和实验研究 1抛锚式教学设计课堂实例

1《游历大都》创设情景:.情境描述本节内容是.分析探究

教师运用多媒体列表把不同.学习运用.问题讨论With the development of times, great changes have taken place in the connotation of theEnglish curriculum: from stressing the disciplinary content to emphasizing learners' experience and practice. However, rethinking the present Englishteaching reality in high school in our country, we find some problems in it. The exam-oriented education prevails; the teaching situation is lacked; the learningstrategies are old and decayed; intercultural communication ability is weak, etc.It is an urgent task for the present English teaching to foster English qualifiedpersonnel with innovative consciousness and practicing ability. In order to help solve the problems that exist in the English teaching reality in high school atpresent, this thesis grasps a kind of brand-new education idea --- the constructivism instruction theory and attempts to apply four comparatively typical constructivism instruction models: the scaffolding instruction model, the anchored instruction model, the random access instruction model and the cognitive apprenticeship instruction model to the senior English listening teaching, spoken teaching, reading teaching and writing teaching. The theme of this thesis is to apply constructivism instruction models to senior English teaching. Because this is still original at home, there must bedrawbacks in it. But it is just the ingenuity of this thesis. The author will go onwith the further study on the drawbacks of this thesis in the future.本论文主题是将建构主义教学模式应用于高中英语教学，国内研究较少，因而缺陷难免，这也正是本论文的创新之处。本论文不足之处将留给笔者今后做进一步研究。

四、建构主义教学模式在高中英语不同课型教学中的应用

前面讲到，运用建构主义教学模式，不是生搬硬套该教学模式，而是得其要领，

领悟建构主义的“建构”思想精髓，充分发挥双方的主动性，创造性地、“建构”性地运用建构主义教学模式。 （一）基本要求 1.创设情境

情境，是指用英语语言形式进行听、说、读、写、交流信息的社会环境。任何有意义的语言交际活动都是在特定的情境中实现的。因此，克鲁姆指出：“成功的外语课堂教学应在课内创造更多的情境，让学生有机会运用自己学到的语言材料。”[2]情境作用于人的感官能使人产生交际的动机和使用英语进行交际的心智活动。情境决定语言表达的意义，语言也是 情境的反映。没有情境，就没有语言的意义，所以英语交际活动离不开语言的情境。心理学的研究表明，新奇的刺激容易引起人的注意，唤起人的兴趣。因此，新课初始，教学情境的创设一定要新颖，尽量使学生获得新的感受，以便更好地激发学生观察情境和描绘情境的热情，激发、保持、提高学生的学习兴趣，使学生更加积极主动地参与到教学活动中来。英语教学要从激发情感开始，其目的是变“逼”为“导”，变“苦学”为“乐学”，把求

知变成学生最大的内在需要。因此，教学首先应该创设与当前学习主题相关的情境，通过教学内容、教学环境、教学语言的情境化，激发学生潜在的认识兴趣和求知欲，让学生进入积极的学习情感状态，形成强烈的达标意向，提取有关知识、经验激发学生的联想和自主建构的欲望。如为了学会句型“Is it watching TV too much bad or good for your health?”铃声响后，教师一边捂着面包，满脸痛苦的样子，走向讲台自言自语道：“Is eating too much bad or goodfor my health? I think it is bad.”然后提出“What is good or bad for your health?”四人一组的讨论开始了，很快答案就产生了： a. Doing morning exercises is good for your health. b. Keeping the classroom clean is good for your health. c. Watching TV too much is bad for your eyes.

2.在合作学习过程中培养学生自主建构知识的能力

在处理课文中该单元所牵涉的知识点时，教师可以组织学生进行讨论，引导学生将他们 以前的知识点联系起来，从而帮助学生实现对新知识的建构。如在讲授 with 复合结构这一重要知识点时，教师可以先向学生描述这样两个句子： 3.效果评价

建构主义学习环境中的评价应该基于动态的、持续的、不断呈现的学习过程以及学习者 的进步、教师所采取的教学策略和所创设的学习环境。建构主义教学评价的目的在于更好地根据学习者的需要定制教学，该教学应能根据需要和情况的变化不断地修改和提炼自己的策略，以便使学习者通过建构性的学习，朝着专家的方向，获得持续的进步。[1] 以上是建构主义教学模式的基本要求。我们可以就不同的英语课型教学创造性地应用不同的建构主义教学模式。

（二）建构主义教学模式在不同课型中的教学操作程序 1.支架式教学模式在英语听力教学中的应用

英语听、说、读、写四项语言技能中，“听”是一种语言输入，是“说”的前提，只有听懂对方语言，并从交流语言的文化背景去理解，才会有真正的语言交流活动。所以“听”不

是消极地接受信息，而是根据自己具有的语言知识（包括语音、语义和语法等方面），通过自己听的素质的潜能，从语言交流中获得信息的一种积极的活动。传统英语听力教学的操作程序是：学生预习材料，明确听的任务——教师播放录音或录象——学生答题——核对答案。该操作程序典型弊端是学生被动地接受信息、测试题型单一化、学生易出现胡乱猜测的情况、答案的唯一性，极大地抑制了学生的主动性。支架式教学模式突出教学情境，注重教师有效地“搭建支架”和及时“淡出支架”，强调教师有效地组织学生自主协作学习，引导学生由现有发展水平向“最近发展区”发展。这就要求听力教学由易到难，听力练习形式多样化，如采取标题探索（title exploration）、概述选择（summary choice）、排序（sequencing）、听与画（listening picture）、远距离听写（distantdictation）等多种形式。 下面以 Senior English for China Book1B Unit 15 的听力课为例。 （1）进入情境

教师一边走进教室，一边摸着口袋，待走近讲台，然后装作神情沮丧地告诉同学们： “Boys and girls, I will tell you bad news. I found my mobile phone missing. My wife gave me as a birthday present last year. It was much too important for me. Now I have lost it. What shall I do?I rang a call a moment ago. Then I left it on my desk. When I returned, I found it lost. Someonemust have stolen it.”学生听到这个消息，就会提出很多的办法。如写遗失启事、马上寻找，也有人会说去报

那么就可以很自然地导入该听力课的主题：ALost Necklace （2）搭建支架，引导探索

教师可以用画图软件将教材中的项链图展示在屏幕上，突出各项链的不同特征以引起学 生足够的注意。教师接着说：There are 5 necklaces in the picture. Please describe them in details, including the sizes andcolors of the pearls and diamonds.

给学生几分钟的时间，让他们自主建构对这五条项链的描述。学生接着会踊跃发言，如： S1: The diamond of the first necklace is long and light green. The color and size of the pearlsare yellow and round.S2: The diamond of the sec

T: You are watching the necklaces very carefully. You are excellent. Would you like to knowwhich necklace on earth has the woman lost?T: OK. Now please listen to the tape carefully, and then you will know which necklace the

woman has lost.（教师放录音，学生仔细寻求所需信息，进行验证，然后建构正确答案，知道该妇女丢了什么样的项链，从而完成该课第一道题。） （3）独立探索

T: Imagine you have lost a gold watch. After you have told him something about it, what else will the police ask you?S1: Of course, he will ask me what my name is.S2: The police will ask me my telephone number and where I live so that we can get in touchwith me in time. S3: The police

T: Good! You are really an excellent secretary. When the police and the woman are having a talk, please write down the information. S: OK!

（教师放录音，学生根据刚才情境建构起来的新知识，马上会积极投入到记录员的角色

中去，记录这位妇女与警察谈话的主要信息，包括其丢失项链的地点、时间及其姓名、地址、电话号码等，从而也就完成该课的第二道题。） （4）合作学习

教师可以把全班同学分成若干组，每组三至四人，一至两人扮演警察，一人扮演失主，一人扮演记录员，然后模拟失主报警的情境。如：Loser: comrade, I lost something important.Police: What did you lost?L: I lost a luxurious（豪华的）bicycle. It is worth 1,200 yuan.P: Would you like to describe your lost bicycle?

L: It is FEIGE Brand. It i在这样的合作学习过程中，不仅锻炼了“记录员”的听力能力（尽管他所获得的不是地道的英语），也培养了“警察”和“失主”的口语表达能力。而传统的英语听力教学以会考或高考的题型进行训练，使整个教学缺乏一种活力，学生消极被动地接受信息，其主动性没有得到充分的发挥。培养学生的听力理解能力和口语表达能力是紧密联系在一起的，让学生游离于口语表达之外，而以题型进行机械的训练，会使得英语听力教学缺乏生机。长期以往，势必导致学生合作学习精神的缺失。 （5）效果评价

T: I am glad to see some students behave very actively. They are willing to show themselves before others. In the modern society, I think, we need this kind of courage. But there are still few silent students. They neither talk nor write down the information, I hope these students talk more, listen more and develop more. Only in this way, can you improve your listening comprehension ability. And I sincerely hope all of you succeed. OK?S: OK.T: Class is over. Thanks. 2.抛锚式教学模式在英语口语教学中的应用

过去很长时间，由于高考对非报考英语专业学生的口语测试不作要求，因此英语口语教学在英语教学中被忽略了。而对报考英语专业的学生的口语训练也仅仅拘泥于这样一种模式：教师讲授某一句型的适用场合——教师示范——学生操练句型——学生自由会话。在这样一种操作程序下，学生较容易陷入一种机械模仿的境地，学生可能会出现一些合乎语法但 不合乎交际习惯的句子，甚至还会出现套用汉语的现象。如“开窗”说成“open the window”， 从而把“开灯”说成“open the lamp”。在建构主义教学理念下，对于英语教学中的口语教学，教师要给学生创设一个宽松、活泼的环境，以此唤起学生积极的情感和思维，创设情境式的口语教学。教师应该引导学生置身差异文化背景下的情境，帮助学生在口语练习过程中实现对 Language points 的建构，而不应该把口语教学理解成鹦鹉学舌般的机械模仿与重复。下面以 Senior English for China Book1B Unit 15 the Necklace 中的 Speaking 为例，谈谈抛锚式教学在英语口语教学中的应用。（1）创设情境，激发口语练习的动机 T：Imagine that you are alone outside at night. When you hear a terrible sound, what is your feeling?S1: Yes, you must feel terrible.S2: I will not feel terrible because I am brave. T: So great you are! You may not feel terrible if you are brave enough.

T: (showing the following picture: a boy is smiling) Can he be very sad?S3: No, he can’t. T: Do you know what feeling he has?S4: Yes, I do. He is happy.T: You are right. He must be very happy.（2）进行两段简短对话后，师生很自然地说出下列三个句子：a. You must feel terrible. b. You may not feel terrible if you are brave enough.c. —— Can he be very sad?—— No, he can’t.（教师可以将以上三个句子板书在黑板上或用 POWERPOINT 将其展示在屏幕上，并将must、may、may not、can、can’t 以下划线或不同颜色的字体标出唤起学生的注意。） T: Do you know the usage of must, may and can?

S:（学生因为已经知道情态动词的用法）Yes, we do.T: But today it is different. Would you like to know it?S: Yes.T: Now please listen to the following dialogue and try to catch the meaning of must, mayand can.教师播放事先准备好的录音：

Woman: Today is my birthday.Man: Of course, I know it. And I have prepared a birthday gift for you.W: Oh, really? I am so glad to hear that. What is it?M: Guess it, please.W: May it be very expensive?M: No, it may not. I can’t afford an expensive gift.W: Can it be a birthday 学生通过以上对话所蕴涵的情境，也就初步了解了 must、may、can 表推测的用法，从而确定了该口语教学的话题和教学目标。 （3）自主学习

教师提供不同的语言材料和语境帮助学生自主建构 must、may、can 表“推测”这一语言点的理解。如教师可以就表示 happy、sad、rude、sleepy 等不同表情的画面向学生提问：a. Can he be very happy?b. Can he be very sad?c. Why is he so angry?d. What feeling do you think he has?水平较高的学生则可能会在教师的引导下较为熟练地运用 must、may、can 来表示

“推测”，教师同时将 must、may、can 表示“推测”的用法小结呈现在屏幕上：

通过以上信息的呈现，印证了学生对该用法的自主建构，从而加深对该语言点的理解。 （4）合作学习

T: Imagine that 4 classmates find a box in their dormitory. The box is very large, and strange noises are coming from it. I’ll ask 4students to create a short play to guess what on earth is inside the box.S1: (thinkingly) The box is very large but it is rather light. The thing inside it must be verylight, too.S2: Can it be a book?S3: No, it can’t. Because it sounds strange noises when we move the box.T: Thanks for your excellent performances.

（5）效果评价T: We have watched the 4 classmates’ perfect performances. I’m very glad that you havebasically mastered the new usage of must may and can. Congratulations! 五、结束语

如前所述，建构主义教学模式的主要内涵是指以学生为中心，在整个教学过程中由教师起组织者、指导者、帮助者和促进者的作用，利用情境、协作、会话等学习环境要素充分发挥学生的主动性、积极性和首创精神，最终达到使学生有效地实现对当前所学知识的意义

建构。建构主义教学模式的核心内容是自主建构，同时也强调了师生关系民主化、教学的情境性及教学的交互性。建构主义教学模式的应用给高中英语课程改革提供了一个全新的视角，在应用建构主义教学模式的过程中，应该注意以下一些问题，建构主义教学模式注重对学生进行发展性评价，当然并非一味的肯定。虽然建构主义倡导学生自主“建构”，但当学生“建构”起“欣赏白骨精屡败屡战的勇气”的念头时，[1]教师应坚决加以否定，应用建构主义教学模式对教师的要求较高。教师除了具备有系统的教育教学理论和所教学科的知识体系外，还应具备一定的课程整合能力，掌握现代教育教学技术，如超文本技术、POWERPOINT 等；教学有法，但无定法，贵在得法。我们在高中英语教学应用建构主义教学模式的过程中，并非机械套用，关键是要把握其“建构”的思想精髓，力图体现一种新型的教学观，为解决现行高中英语教学中存在的诸多问题提供一些参考。 60.高文，王海燕.抛锚式教学（一）[J].外国教育资料. 1998，（8）.

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/vyuo.html