变被动听课者为主动学习者

【摘要】本文主要研究建構主义理论并将其运用于大学英语教学的实践之中。中国传统的英语课堂实际是受结构主义语言学和行为主义心理学主导，专注于知识和技能的灌输，学生无法灵活运用语言。这种传统教学模式主要是教师讲，学生听、记笔记，实际上是知识传播型的（transmissional）。但是，经过多年学习与努力，收效甚微，学生依然无法掌握英语学习的窍门。

笔者就自己在南开大学英语教学、科研实践中发现，这主要是因为同学们缺乏对课堂的参与 （participation）。根据美国教育改革先驱杜威的理论，“认知的过程不是一个旁观者能完成的，而必须由参加者建构而成”。

因此，哲学家维果茨基（Vygotsky）的社会认知建构主义理论比较具有实践意义。利用这一理论，可以把学生从被动听课者变为英语课堂上主动学习者和参加者。

本文主要研究了下面几个方面：课堂互动模式、原汁原味的语料、合作式学习和学习者自治、把知识传播型（transmissional）课堂变为革新型（transformative）课堂。

【关键词】建构主义  合作式学习  学习者自治  大学英语教学法

【Abstract】This paper mainly discusses the topic of putting the theory of Constructivism into the practice of college English teaching in China. In the Chinese college English classroom， the traditional English teaching methods based on Structural linguistics and behavioristic psychology focusing on transmission of knowledge and skills cant meet todays students needs anymore.

These traditional teaching methods are transmissional （teachers transmitting knowledge and skills to students）. However， after years of fret over the English subject， students still cannot grasp the knack for English. To this author， that was mainly due to lack of participation from the students in the English class because according to the American educational reformer John Dewey， “Knowing is not done by an outside spectator but is instead constructed by a participant” （Oxford， P.42）.

Therefore the more practical theory of social-cognitive constructivism by the philosopher Vygotsky is more pertinent and effective in transforming students from passive receivers to be active learners and participants in the English class.

This paper focuses on four aspects of a Constructive class： Mode of Classroom Interaction; Authentic Material; Cooperative Learning/ Learner Autonomy and From Transmissional to Transformative.

【Key Words】Constructivism; Cooperative Learning; Learner Autonomy; College English teaching Pedagogies

【基金项目】中央高校建设世界一流大学（学科）和特色发展引导专项基金，项目编号： 96176308。

【中图分类号】G642.41 【文献标识码】A 【文章编号】2095-3089（2020）08-0103-03

Introduction

Constructivism views students as the participating builders of a class as the teacher. This is in contrast with Gagnes theory of instruction which views the teacher as the transmitter of knowledge while students are passive receivers.

In the class guided by Gagnes theory of instruction， students lack initiative， the class is boring without or with minimal interaction between the teacher and the students; while a constructive class is more vivid and lively， involving students as active participants of the class and preferably， even creators of knowledge.

In the Chinese college English classroom， the traditional English teaching methods based on Structural linguistics and behavioristic psychology focusing on transmission of knowledge and skills cant meet todays students needs anymore.

These traditional teaching methods are transmissional （teachers transmitting knowledge and skills to students）. However， after years of fret over the English subject， students still cannot grasp the knack for English. To this author， that was mainly due to lack of participation from the students in the English class because according to the American educational reformer John Dewey， “Knowing is not done by an outside spectator but is instead constructed by a participant” （Oxford， P.42）.

Therefore the more practical theory of social-cognitive constructivism by the philosopher Vygotsky is more pertinent and effective in transforming students from passive receivers to be active learners and participants in the English class.

Vygotskys social-cognitive contructivism advocates that learning is “through interaction with others.” and “For Vygotsky， the teacher acts as a facilitator or guide.” （Oxford， 43） not the instiller or transmitter of knowledge or skills.

This paper tries to discuss the constructivism theory and put it into practice in the specific college English teaching context at Nankai University， China.

According to author Jere Confrey，“The philosophical approach that argues most vigorously for an active view of the learner is constructivism：

A theory that seems to be a powerful source for an alternative to direct instruction is that of constructivism （Confrey， 1983，1985; Kelly，1955; von  Glasersfeld， 1974，1983， this monograph）. Put in to simple terms， constructivism can be described as essentially a theory about the limits of human knowledge， a belief that all knowledge is necessarily a product of our own cognitive acts. We can have no direct or unmediated knowledge of any external or objective reality. We construct our understanding through our experiences， and the character of our experience is influenced profoundly by our cognitive lenses. To a constructivist， his circularity is both acceptable and unavoidable. Ones picture of the world is not， however， static; our conceptions can and do change. The essential fact that we are engaged in living implies that things change. By coordinating a variety of constructions from sensory inputs to meditative reflections， we adapt and adjust to the changes and we initiate others. （p.109）

Moreover， Rebecca Oxfords ideas about Constructivism is equally enlightening：

For most social constructivists， the emphasis is on the process （rather than just finished projects） in activity-based learning situations with meaningful purposes （Rogoff，1994）. （Oxford， P.44） … For example， constructivists accepting the novice-to- expert paradigm implied that experts no longer need consciousness to conduct their routinized， automatic teaching behaviors， （Oxford， P.58）.

This paper suggests putting Constructivism theory into the teaching practices in our college English classrooms so that transformative English lessons can make the English class more vivid and interesting. Students will be more active and become self motivated participants of the class and achieve learner autonomy.

The following aspects of a Constructive class will be discussed： Mode of Classroom Interaction， Authentic Material， Cooperative Learning and Learner Autonomy， and From Transmissional to Transformative.

I. Mode of Classroom Interaction

The teacher is the focus of a traditional English classroom just as summed up in “Analysis of Classroom Interaction through Communication Behaviors” by authors Lewis and Newell：

In the typical classroom there is a teacher and an  assortment of children. The teacher spends a good deal of her time explaining things to the children， talking to them， showing them pictures and objects， and going through demonstrations， all with the apparent objective of getting them to understand what she is saying or doing…In formal educational settings， the teacher？蒺s major communication role is that of sender of information， while the student？蒺s major communication role is that of receiver of information.（p. 321）.

While a constructive classroom is nothing like the above. The students must take the center stage and become active learners with autonomy and initiative and even creator of knowledge to construct a meaningful， purposeful， lively and fruitful lesson. Apart from teacher-students interaction（mainly through scaffolding）， interaction among students themselves should be the major mode of communication in a constructive class.

For example， when teaching students about greetings and introductions in English， the teacher in a transmissional classroom may just let the students learn with drills and skills， reading sentence patterns and doing some exercises in the textbook. However， a constructive class must put students at the center of class and involve them in participation as much as possible.

[2]Confrey， Jere. Chapter 8： What Constructivism Implies for Teaching. In Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Monograph， Vol. 4， Constructivist Views on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics （1990）， pp. 107-122 and pp.195-210.

[3]Duckworth， Allison Hardin，“Cooperative learning： Attitudes， perceptions， and achievement in a traditional， online， and hybrid instructional setting”（2010）. Ph.D Dissertation. University of Southern Mississippi.

[4]Hoffman， Bruce.“Cooperative learning， character education， conflict resolution among English graders， their teaching intervention with bullying and their experiences with cyber， physical， and relational bullying”（2010）.  Ph.D Dissertation.  Dowling College： Brookhaven， New York.

[5]Lewis， W. W. and John M. Newell. Analysis of Classroom Interaction through Communication Behaviors. In The Journal of Experimental Education， Vol. 30， No. 4 （Jun.， 1962）， pp. 321-322.

[6]Meyers， Steve. Using Transformative Pedagogy When Teaching Online. In College Teaching Vol.56， No.4. （2008）， pp.219-224.

[7]Oxford， Rebecca L.（1997）.  Constructivism： Shape-Shifting， Substance， and Teacher Education Applications. In Peabody Journal of Education， Vol. 72， No. 1， Teachers and Teacher Education in the United States： Perspectives from Members of the Japanese-United States Teacher Education Consortium （1997）， pp. 35-66.

[8]Rovinton， Steve. “Defining Authentic Learning”.  Online Article. HYPERLINK “http：//authenticlearning.weebly.com/”  Retrieved Jan. 26， 2019.

作者簡介：

胡阶娜，南开大学外文系英语语言文学学士，英美文学硕士。新加坡南洋理工大学国立教育学院研究生项目主修应用语言学和英语教学法。现任南开大学公英教学部副教授。2013年春季学期赴台湾明道大学担客座副教授。