LLにおける自己評価への検討
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
One of the most specific characteristics of Language Laboratory, especially of what we call Full Laboratory, is found in its use for comparison drills. Listen-Repeat-Compare type is most widely used for recorded materials for LL education. This is also known as Four-Phase-Drill, in which students are to listen to the model statements, repeat them, compare them with their own repeated statements, and make necessary corrections. This type of Four-Phase-Drill is based upon the assumption that the students are able to correct and evaluate their own drills by comparing them with the model. The result of the questionnaires made in July, 1971, shows that out of 150 freshmen majoring in English Literature at our university 86 per cent of them say that they can recognize their mistakes by comparison and 57 per cent of them say that they can correct those mistakes for themselves. We can, however, hardly believe their statement, because we often find by monitoring in LL that some of the mistakes that should be noticed are not corrected but repeated again and again. We have, therefore, recognized that there is a difference between students' own evaluation and that of ours. The purpose of our study is to clarify students' own evaluation in connection with Pre-Lab Instruction. The reason why we have taken up this problem in connection with Pre-Lab-Instruction is found in this that two major types of lessons used in LL are classroom type and library type, and the difference between the two is based on whether it has Pre-Lab Instruction or not. Subjects: 103 freshmen majoring English Literature. 72 per cent of them say that they are very much interested in practical (conversational) English. Experimental Lessons: Four classes are prepared assorted by Pre-Lab Instruction and monitoring. Class A has neither Pre-Lab Instru4ction nor monitoring. Class B has both of them. Class C has only monitoring and Class D has only Pre-Lab Instruction. Class B and D get 35 minutes' oral Pre-Lab Instruction before LL drills that last for 20 minutes. Test: Students were to repeat ten short model sentences taken from new part of "Adventures in English", an English teaching movie. This test was given to all the four classes before and after LL comparison drills. This test has been recorded and evaluated by two instructors. Their average marks are used for making the following tables. Table 1 shows the result of the test of significance of a mean difference between the average marks of Pre-Test and Post-Test given to the 20 students who have had no Pre-Lab Instruction. Table 2 and 3 show respectively the compared data of the average marks of Pre-Test and Post-Test given to those students who have had Pre-Lab Instruction and those who have had no Pre-Lab Instruction. Table 4 shows the result of Analysis of Variance. Conclusion: 1. Those students who have had no Pre-Lab Instruction apparently make progress by LL comparison drills in their ability of speaking English. Their total marks, however, are much lower than those of the students who have had Pre-Lab Instruction. 2. Whether or not a student makes progress in speaking English by means of LL drills has nothing to do with his present ability of reading or writing English.
- 外国語教育メディア学会の論文
- 1973-03-31