任务型和3p教学法在初中英语语法教学中融合的实证研究 80页

分类号：H05单位代码：10719学号：12052001密级：论文题目：任务型和3P教学法在初中英语语法教学中融合的实证研究论文作者：余波指导教师、职称：白海瑜副教授学科、专业名称：课程与教学论（英语)提交论文日期：二〇一五年六月 ANEMPIRICALSTUDYOFTHEINTEGRATIONOFTASK-BASEDAND3PMETHODSINJUNIORENGLISHGRAMMARTEACHINGYuBoAThesisSubmittedtotheSchoolofForeignLanguagesInPartialFulfillmentoftheRequirementsfortheDegreeofMasterofEducationinEnglishCurriculumandTeachingMethodologyYANANUNIVERSITYJUNE,2015 创新性声明本人声明所呈交的论文是我个人在导师指导下进行的研究工作及取得的研究成果。尽我所知，除了文中特别加以标注和致谢中所罗列的内容以外，论文中不包含其他人已经发表或撰写过的研究成果；也不包含为获得延安大学或其它教育机构的学位或证书而使用过的材料。与我一同工作的同志对本研究所做的任何贡献均已在论文中做了明确的说明并表示谢意。申请学位论文与资料若有不实之处，本人承担一切相关责任。本人签名：日期：关于论文使用授权的说明本人完全了解延安大学有关保留和使用学位论文的规定，即：研究生在校攻读学位期间论文工作的知识产权单位属延安大学。本人保证毕业离校后，发表论文或使用论文工作成果时署名单位仍然为延安大学。学校有权保留送交论文的复印件，允许查阅和借阅论文；学校可以公布论文的全部或部分内容，可以允许采用影印、缩印或其它复制手段保存论文。（保密的论文在解密后遵守此规定）本学位论文属于保密在年解密后适用本授权书。本人签名：日期：导师签名：日期： 任务型和3P教学法在初中英语语法教学中融合的实证研究课程与教学论（英语）专业研究生余波指导教师白海瑜副教授摘要：语法教学在初中英语教学领域，一直是一个饱受争议的话题。“老师怎么教，学生怎么学”，多年来许多学者围绕着初中英语语法学与教的话题都进行过自己的研究。长期以来，初中英语语法教学中“费时低效”的问题更是令人深思。任务型教学法和3P教学法作为广泛应用的教学方法，有着各自的优点和缺点。随着《全日制义务教育普通初级中学英语课程标准》的实施，任务型教学模式是目前我国外语教学改革的热点。3P教学法，作为传统教学法的代表仍然在许多学校沿用，被许多老师追捧。本文以两种教学方法为基础，尝试着将任务型教学法和3P教学法进行融合，主要将任务型教学法中的任务设计和实施引入到3P教学模式中，以3P教学模式为框架引导学生完成各阶段的任务。在为期十四周的时间里，笔者对安徽省六安市裕安中学七年级的学生进行了调查并应用新的教学模式进行了实验，旨在调查初中英语语法课堂中将任务型教学法与3P教学法相结合的可行性。具体地，将回答如下两个问题：1）任务型和3P教学法的融合是否能促进学生语法知识的掌握，也就是说这种融合是否能促进学生学业成绩的提高？2)任务型和3P教学法的融合能否促进学生对语法学习观念和态度的改变，提高学生学习语法的积极性。笔者采用实证研究的方法，通过问卷调查、实验组和控制组测试以及访谈了解学生的语法学习状况，包括其学习成绩，学习态度，学习策略。笔者选择了110名学生作为实验的对象，将所有的学生分为两组：实验组和对照组。实验将持续十四周，第一周实施前测，旨在证明两组学生在英语能力方面差别不大。从第二周到第十三周，所有的学生将接受十二个单元的教学，每个单元持续一周。i 此后，他们将进行为期一周的复习并进行后测。在整个实验过程中，实验组将被施以任务法和3P法的融合教学，而对照组的学生将被施以传统3P教学。所有的数据都来源两个组学生的真实情况。实验组在前后测实验中平均得分分别为72.7和80.1，对照组在前后测实验中平均得分分别为72.3和73.6。实验组经过十四周实验，在学业成绩上取得明显进步，而对照组却没有明显改观。同时，笔者在实验之后，对两组学生进行了问卷调查，问卷采用五级量表的形式，实验组和对照组的平均得分分别为86.2和63.1，由此看出，实验组对语法学习的态度和观念也发生明显转变。通过本实证研究，作者最终得出结论：任务型和3P的融合教学法在初中英语语法教学中具有可行性，因为它不仅能够促进学生学业成绩的提高，而且能促进学生对语法学习态度和观念的转变，有助于其改善学习策略，刺激语法学习的积极性。关键词：初中语法教学；任务型教学法；3P教学法；融合教学法ii AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingAbstractGrammar,asateachingissue,hasbeenunderhotdebateinjuniorEnglishteachingareaforalongtime.“Howtoteachgrammarbyteacherandhowtolearngrammarbystudent?”Manyscholarsconductedtheirownresearchcenteredonsuchtopiclike“teachingandlearning”.“Timeconsumingandlowefficiency”isthemainproblem,whichexistsinjuniorEnglishgrammarteaching.Astwowidelyusedteachingmethods,Task-basedLanguageTeachingand3Pmethodhavetheirownmeritsanddemerits.WiththeimplementofnewEnglishcurriculuminjuniormiddleschool,themodelofTBLTisthehotissueofcurrentteachingreforminourcountry.Atthesametime,3Pmodel,astherepresentativeoftraditionalteachingmethod,isstillwidelyusedinjuniormiddleschoolandacceptedbymanyteachers.BasedonbothTBLTand3Pmethods,thisthesistriestointegratedthem.Itmainlyaimsatbringingthedesignandperformanceoftaskin3Pmodel,guidingstudentstoperformdifferenttaskundertheframeworkof3Pmodel.Duringthefourteenweeksofexperiment,theauthordothesurveyandperformtheintegratedteachingmodelinYu’anMiddleSchoolinLu’an,AnHuiProvince.ItaimsattestifythefeasibilityoftheintegrationofTBLTand3Pmethod.Specifically,itaimsatansweringtwoquestions:1)Istheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmethodsmoreeffectiveinenhancingstudents’masteryofgrammarknowledge?Thatistosay,cantheexperimentgroupachievehigherscoresthanthecontrolledgroupintheposttest?2)ComparedWiththeTBLTand3Pmethod,istheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmodelsbetteratstimulatingstudents’grammarlearningenthusiasmandinducingtheircooperationwiththeirclassmatesinjuniormiddleschool?Theauthorusestheempiricalstudymethod,triestogetclearthebasicsituationofstudents’grammarlearningbyquestionnaire,pre-test,post-testandinterview.Theiii authorselectedthe110studentsassubjects,anddividedallthestudentsintotwoclasses:experimentalclassandcontrastclass.Theexperimentwillcostfourteenweeks.Thefirstweekistoconductapre-test,aimingattestifyingtheinsignificanceofthetwogroups.Fromthesecondtothirteenthweek,allthestudentswillacceptatwelve-unitteaching,eachofwhichwilllastaweek.Afterthat,theywillbegivenaboutoneweektoreviewalltheknowledgethattheyhavelearned,andthenmakeapost-test.Duringthisperiod,theexperimentalclasswillbegiventheintegrationofTBLTand3PMethod,whilethecontrastclasswillbeappliedthetraditionalmethodtotheirteaching.Allthetestingcontentshavesomethingtodowiththegrammarteaching,includingthepre-testandpost-test.Allthedataarederivedfromtherealsituationofthetwostudentsgroups.Theaveragescoresofpre-testandpost-testfortheexperimentalgroupare72.7and80.1,whiletheaveragescoresofpre-testandpost-testforthecontrolledgroupare72.3and73.6.Theexperimentalgroupmakesadramaticalprogress,thecontrolledgroupimproveslittle.Aftertheexperiment,theauthorconductapost-questionnaire,five-pointLikertscalewillbeusedtomeasurethescalefrom5(stronglyagree)and1(stronglydisagree).Theaveragescoresofexperimentalgroupandcontrolledgroupare86.2and63.1respectively.Theattitude,strategyandconceptofexperimentalgrouptowardsgrammarlearninghavechangedalot.Bythisempiricalstudy,theauthorwillgetaconclusion:thereexiststhefeasibilityofintegratingTBLTand3Pmethods.Itwillnotonlyimprovetheacademicscores,butalsochangestudents’attitudetowardsgrammar,adjusttheirlearningstrategyandstimulatetheirlearningenthusiasm.Graduate:YuBo(MajorEnglishCurriculumandTeachingMethodology)Directedby:AssociateProf.BaiHaiyuKeywords:Juniorgrammarteaching;Task-basedmethod;3Pmethod;theIntegrationTeachingmethod.iv ContentsChapterOneIntroduction.................................................................................................11.1ResearchBackground....................................................................................................11.1.1TheBasicSituationofGrammarTeachinginJuniorMiddleSchool.................11.1.2ApplicationofTask-basedand3PModelsinJuniorEnglishTeaching................21.1.3PossibilityandNecessityoftheIntegrationofBothModels.............................31.2SignificanceoftheThesis..............................................................................................41.3StructureoftheThesis...................................................................................................4ChapterTwoLiteratureReview.......................................................................................62.13PMethod......................................................................................................................62.1.1Introductionofthe3Pmethod..........................................................................62.1.2Studieson3Pmethod..........................................................................................72.2Task-basedLanguageTeaching.....................................................................................82.2.1DefinitionandComponentsofTask.................................................................82.2.2DefinitionandModelsofGrammar................................................................102.2.3StudiesAbroad..................................................................................................122.2.4StudiesatHome................................................................................................132.3AComparisonofTBTLand3Pmethod.....................................................................152.4StudiesonGrammarTeaching.....................................................................................162.4.1TheIntroductionofGrammarandGrammarTeaching..................................162.4.2ApplicationofTBLTinGrammarTeaching...................................................182.4.3Applicationofthe3PmethodinGrammarTeaching........................................192.4.4Summary...........................................................................................................20ChapterTwoTheoreticalFoundation............................................................................213.1EclecticismandtheEclecticMethod...........................................................................213.1.1OriginationoftheEclecticMethod.................................................................21vi 3.1.2DevelopmentoftheEclecticMethod.............................................................233.1.3PrinciplesoftheEclecticMethod.....................................................................253.2TheTheoryofCommunicativeApproach...................................................................263.2.1CommunicativeCompetence............................................................................273.2.2TheStrongVersionandWeakVersionofCommunicativeApproach..............27Chapter4ResearchMethodology..................................................................................294.1ResearchQuestions......................................................................................................294.2ResearchSubjects........................................................................................................294.3TeachingMaterial........................................................................................................304.4Instrument....................................................................................................................324.4.1Tests..................................................................................................................324.4.2Questionnaire....................................................................................................324.4.3Interview...........................................................................................................334.5TeachingSamplesfortheExperimentalClassandControlClasses............................334.5.1TeachingSamplesfortheExperimentalClassusingtheIntegratedModel.....334.5.1.1BriefDescriptionoftheprocedure........................................................344.5.1.2ImplementationoftheIntegrationModelandTeachingDemonstration....................................................................................................................344.5.2TeachingSamplesfortheControlClassUsing3PMethod..............................374.6DataCollection............................................................................................................40Chapter5ResultsAndDiscussion..................................................................................415.1Results..........................................................................................................................415.1.1Pre-testResult...................................................................................................415.1.2ResultofthePost-test.......................................................................................425.1.3ResultofthePre-questionnaire.........................................................................425.1.4ResultsofthePost-Questionnaire.....................................................................455.2Analysis........................................................................................................................465.2.1AnalysisofthePre-test’sData..........................................................................465.2.2AnalysisofthePost-test’sData.........................................................................47vii 5.2.3ComparisonabouttheDataBetweenPre-testandPost-test.............................485.2.4AnalysisofInformationObtainedfromPre-questionnaire...............................505.2.5ComparisonoftheResultofPost-questionnairebetweentheExperimentalClassandControlClasses...........................................................................525.2.6AnalysisofInformationObtainedfromInterviewfortheExperimentalClass...................................................................................................................................52Chapter6Conclusions.....................................................................................................556.1ResearchFindings........................................................................................................556.2ImplicationsoftheStudy.............................................................................................576.3SuggestionsforFurtherStudy.....................................................................................58Bibliography.....................................................................................................................60Appendix...........................................................................................................................63Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................67ListofPublications..........................................................................................................68viii ListofFiguresandTablesintheThesisListofFiguresintheThesisFigure2.1TheFrameConstructiontoAnalyzeCommunicativeTasks............................10Figure2.2Willis’smodelforTask-basedInstruction........................................................11Figure3.1TheTwo-DimensionalModelofTypesofLanguageTeachingActivities.......26ListofTablesintheThesisTable1.1StructureoftheThesis.........................................................................................5Table4.1DetailInformationofExperimentSubject.........................................................30Table4.2GeneralDescriptionoftheTeachingMaterial...................................................31Table4.3GrammarContentofEachUnit.........................................................................31Table5.1Pre-testResultsofTwoClasses.........................................................................41Table5.2Post-testResultsofTwoClasses........................................................................42Table5.3QuestionsofthePre-questionnaire....................................................................42Table5.4ResultsofthePre-questionnaire........................................................................43Table5.5QuestionofthePost-questionnaire....................................................................45Table5.6RelationshipofOptionandScore......................................................................45Table5.7ResultsofthePost-questionnaire.......................................................................46Table5.8TheResultofthePre-test...................................................................................46Table5.9TheResultsofPost-test......................................................................................47Table5.10ResultsofPre-testandPost-testofExperimentalClass..................................48Table5.11ResultsofPre-testandPost-testofControlClass............................................49ix ListofAbbreviationsTBLT:taskbasedlanguageteaching3P:presentationpracticeandproductionCLT:communicationlanguageteachingCC:controlledclassEC:experimentalclassx AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingChapterOneIntroduction1.1ResearchBackground1.1.1TheBasicSituationofGrammarTeachinginJuniorMiddleSchoolWiththedevelopmentofChineseeconomicandimprovementofpeople’slivingstandard,whetherwecanusetheEnglishasacommunicativetoolisseenasanimportantabilityofapplyingforagoodjob.Thus,manyschoolspaygreatattentiontotheirEnglishteachingandpractice,atthesametimedifferentsortsofEnglishtextbooksarepublishedandmanyorientedsocialtrainingoriginationsaresettedupinordertoimprovestudents’ability.WiththeMinistryofEducationcarryingoutthenewreformofEnglishteaching,themethodthatisusedtoteachtheschoolchildrenhasmadealotofdramaticchanges.Underthisenvironment,Englishteachingisnolongeralwayscenteredaroundtheteacher,itturnstopaymoreattentiontohowtoimprovestudents’abilitytocatchupwiththedevelopmentofthetimes.Therefore,Englishteachingstaysawayfromthetraditionalteachingmethod.Insteadmanyschoolteachershaverealizedtheimportanceofadjustmentofteachingmethods.GrammarteachingisanimportantpartofEnglishteaching.Nowadays,moreandmoreeducatorsthinkthatinordertolearnEnglishwell,twobasicabilitiesarenecessarytomaster.Oneisvocabulary,theotherisgrammar.Consideringthatgrammarcontainsalotofprinciplesandmanyregulations,andsomefixedrules,thustomasterthegrammaroftencostsalongtime.Andasallweknow,ifwecan’tlearnthegrammarwell,wemaynotexpressourideasfreelyandaccurately,thatistosaywehaven’tmastertheEnglishadequately.Thus,itisofgreatimportanceforschoolstudentstostudytheknowledgeofgrammar,especiallytomakeanduseaccuratephraseandsentences,etc.Whatismore,theywillrealizetheimportanceofthegrammarteaching,feelthenecessaryandurgentneedtomaterthegrammarknowledgewell.Inmanyjuniormiddleschools,thegrammarisalwaystaughtbytheirteachersinthewayofrecitingtheregulationsofgrammarconstantly,theresultisthatsomestudentswho-1- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachinghaveagoodmemorycanlearngrammarwell,butmanyotherstudentscan’tmastergrammarrules,theycan’texpressthemselvesfreely.Whatismore,underthestressofentranceexam,manyteacherswillconsideritismoreimportantforstudentstogetanidealscore,ratherthanhowtousethegrammarknowledgetoimprovestudents’communicativeability.Thus,theboringEnglishteachingmethodandtediousexerciseisfillingwiththewholeclass,theresultofwhichisthatmanystudentsfeelnothinginterestingintheirlearning,andevenleadstogiveupEnglishgrammarlearning.1.1.2ApplicationofTask-basedand3PModelsinJuniorEnglishTeachingTheintroductionofthenewEnglishtextbookforjuniormiddleschoolhasagreateffectonEnglishteaching,especiallyinEnglishteachingmethods.wecanfindoutthisphenomenonbycomparingthenewtextbookwiththetraditionalone,thenewtextbookpaymoreattentiontothecultivationofability,apopularteachingmethodisadvocatedinthesenewbooks.ThatistheTasked-basedLanguageTeaching(TBLT)method,whichiscenteredaroundthebasicpsychologicalneedstoimprovestudents’ability.AlthoughTBLTcanchangethecurrentsituationofEnglishteaching,enhancestudents’interestsandparticipation,theEnglishteachermusthaveagoodlanguageknowledge,otherwisetheteachingactivitycan’tbecarriedoutinthewholeclass.Adiscussioniscarriedoutintheacademicfield,somescholarsandteachersthinkitisnecessarytointroducethismethodtoimprovetheEnglishteaching,whileothersopposethisnewmethod,theyarereluctanttochangetheirteachingmethodsfortworeasons.Oneisthattheyworryaboutthestudentscan’tacceptthenewteachingmethod,theotheristheyhavealotofpreparationworktodo.Iftheyadoptthenewmethod,alotoftimewillbecostedinpreparingtheirteaching.The3Pmethodisatraditionalmethod,thismethodcentersaroundthefollowingstages:presentation,practiceandproduction.ThismethodofEnglishteachinghasbeenusedinjuniorEnglishclassroomformanyyears.Becauseourcountrypaymoreattentiontopeople’sacademicqualification,thusalotofteacherswouldcarryonthisteachingmethod,paymoreattentiontohowtoenhancethestudents’scoresinexamratherthanenhancetheirabilitytousetheirgrammarinrealsituation,thepurposeofwhichistoprovethattheirteachingiseffectiveinexam.Whatismore,undertheexaminationorientededucation,ithasbeenacceptedassuitableformiddleschoolEnglishteaching.First,the-2- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingsocietyjudgesapersonwhetherhavesomeabilityornotwillalwaysjudgeonhiseducationbackground.Second,manyfamiliesalwaysthinkstudents’maintaskinschoolistogetahighscore.Thus,astudents’talentorabilityisalwaysjudgedbytheirscoresinexamination.Therefore,studentswhogethighscorecanalwaysbeseenastalented,insteadthestudentscan’thaveagoodperformanceinexamswillberegardasfoolishstudents.Althoughsometeachershaverealizedtheshortageofitandseekforotherwaystocarryouttheirteaching,buttheyarenotpositiveabouttheperformanceofstudents.Inaword,bothTBLTand3Pmethodshavetheirmeritsanddemerits.Thisconclusionhasbeenprovedbymanyscholarsandschoolteachers,bothintheoryandpractice.Sowecandrawaconclusion:anyoftwoteachingmethodscanimprovethesituationofjuniorEnglishteachingjusttosomedegreesandaspects,togetamoreeffectivesolutiontothisproblem,wecantrytoconductanexperimentontheintegrationofbothtwomethods.1.1.3PossibilityandNecessityoftheIntegrationofBothModelsThereisnobestteachingmethodforallstudentsfromdifferentlearningbackground.TBLTand3PmethodsareallfamiliartobothteachersandstudentsinChina,theirapplicationhasbeenexperiencedbythemformanyyears.Withtheunderstandingofnatureandcharacteristicsofbothmethod,itispossibleforteacherstointegratethem.Theintegrationofbothmethodcanhelptokeeptheirmeritsandovercometheirdemerit,thatistosay,itmaybeusefulforimprovingstudents’bothcommunicativeabilityandtheirtestscores.Mostimportantly,thetheoreticalfoundationabouteclecticismandtheeclecticmethodandsomerelevantresearchcontributetoguidingtheintegration.Sowecanconcludewehavepracticalandtheoreticalconditionstomakeanexperimentontheintegration.Thecurrentsituationofgrammarteachingdemandsthenecessityoftheintegration.TBLTiswidelyusedinpronunciationandvocabulary,butwhenitcomestothegrammarteaching,mostteachersliketochoosethetraditional3Pmethod.TheoutcomeofEnglishteachingandlearningisnotsatisfied,theinadequategrammarknowledgeofstudentsrestrictstheimprovingoftheiroverallEnglishability.Itisnecessarytoconsidertochangethecurrentteachingmethod,sotheintegrationofTBLTand3Pmethodsnaturallyisapossiblechoice.Inordertotestifytheeffectivenessoftheintegration,tohelpthestudentspass-3- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingexaminationsbutnotignorethedevelopmentoftheircommunicativeability,theauthorconductedanempiricalstudyonthefeasibilityofintegrating3PmodelswithTBLTinjuniorEnglishteaching.1.2SignificanceoftheThesisAsallweknow,thetraditional3PmodelhasbeenalwayswidelyappliedinjuniorEnglishteaching;however,inrecentyears,ithasbeencriticizedbymanypeoplebecauseitemphasizeslanguageformbutignorelanguageuse.TBLTisastudents-centeredmethod,whichprovidesthestudentswithalotofopportunitiestouselanguagemeaningfully;however,TBLToriginatedfromwesterncountries,itstargetlearnersarethosewholearnEnglishasasasecondlanguage,itisnotcompletelyapplicabletoEnglishteachinginChina.TheaimoftheempiricalstudyistohelptheEnglishteacherstotestifythefeasibilityoftheintegrationofTBLTand3PmethodsinjuniorEnglishgrammarteaching.ThisempiricalstudywillhelpEnglishteacherstotestifythefeasibilityoftheintegrationofTBLTand3PmethodsinjuniorEnglishgrammarteaching.It’shopedthattheresultsofthisthesiscanhelpushaveabettertheoreticalunderstandingaboutTBLTand3Pmethods.Ithelpsustobetterabsorbnewteachingmethodabroadandimproveourtraditionmethod,tomakeitmoresuitableforourownlanguagelearningenvironment.Practically,thisthesiswantstofindthefeasibilityoftheintegration,enlargethemeritofbothmethods,provideEnglishteacherswithamoreeffectiveteachingway.Ithopestohelpstudentsenhancetheirmasteryofgrammarknowledge;stimulatestudents’grammarlearningenthusiasmandinducetheircooperationwiththeirclassmates.Thatistosay,thisthesistriestofindamoreappropriateteachingmethodforbothEnglishteachersandlearners.1.3StructureoftheThesisThispaperisdividedinto6chapters.Chapter1isintroduction,mainlytalkabouttheresearchbackgroundandsignificanceofthethesis,andthestructureofthethesis.-4- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingChapter2isliteraturereview,elaboratesthecontentthatisrelatedwithTask-basedLanguageTeaching,includingdefinitionandcomponentsoftask,definitionandmodelsofTBLT,studiesabroadandstudiesathome.Thendiscussesthe3Pmethod,makesacomparisonbetweenTBLTand3Pmethodsandstudiesonrelatedgrammarteaching.Chapter3presentsthetheoreticalbasisadoptedbythepaper:eclecticismandtheeclecticmethod,thetheoryofcommunicativeapproach.Chapter4ismainlyabouttheresearchmethodology,proposesthequestion,subjectsofthestudy,teachingmaterials,thewholeproceduresoftheexperimentandthedatathatiscollectedfromtheexperiment.Chapter5isresultsandanalysis,mainlydescribesthedifferencesbetweentwogroupstudents,whichisconcludedbythedifferentperformanceintheexperiment.Chapter6isconclusion,sumsupthewholepaperandgivessuggestionsforfurtherstudy.-5- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingChapterTwoLiteratureReview2.13PMethod2.1.1Introductionofthe3PmethodManyChineseteachersareveryfamiliarwithtraditional3Pmethod,thethreetypicalstagesofwhichis:presentation,practiceandproduction.The3PmethodderivesfromthecommunicativelanguageteachingandsecondlanguageacquisitiontheoriesofKrashen(1981).LinguisticsHowatt(1984)proposedtheconceptoftwoversionsofCommunicativeLanguageTeaching(CLT):theweakversionandthestrongversion.Theweakversion,like3Pmethod,focusingonthesignificanceofprovidingstudentswithmorechancestopracticeandusethetargetlanguage,endeavorstointegratereallifeactivitiesintothecourseoflanguageteaching.Atthepresentationphrase,theteacherpresentsthenewlanguageitemsplannedbefore,suchasnewwords,phrasesandsentenceswithtypicalgrammaticalstructures.Theteacherexplainsandencouragesalot,wishingtoariselearners’learningenthusiasm.Whenitgoestothepracticephrase,theclassstartstomovefromthepracticeunderteachers’controltothepracticeunderteachers’guidanceandexploitationofthewholetextsifnecessary.Theteachersgivelearnersopportunitiesofusingthetargetlanguage,doingmechanicaldrills,dialogue,exercise,etc,controllingtheframeworkofthelanguageused.Thenatthelastphraseofproduction,thelearnersareencouragedtousewhattheyhavestudiedandpracticedtodocommunicativeactivities,theyshouldpayattentiontothemeaningoflanguageitselfratherthantheaccurateuseofthelanguageforms.Theteachermotivateslearnerstoperformfreetasks,learnersbuildtheirownknowledgeonrealcomprehensionandexperienceandobtainafeelingoffulfillment.Someadvantagesof3Pmethodarethatfirstlyitisclearandeasytoconductbytheteachers;secondly,itiseasytoevaluateasthereareoftencleargoalstobeobtained;thirdly,-6- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingthereisabeliefthatlearningwithafocusonrulescanbeautomatizedthroughpracticeas“asetofhabits”.Adisadvantageof3Pmethodisthatstudentswillnotautomaticallyacquirethelanguageandusetheminreallife,ifonlyrulesareintroducedandmechanicalexercisesareemphasized.Theteachersshouldtrytocreatemeaningfulcontextandencouragestudentstousetheminmeaningfulcommunication.2.1.2Studieson3PmethodYangHuajing(1999)analyzedthethreestagesof3Pmethodindetailandadvocatedherownsuggestion.Atthepresentationstage,theteachershouldprovideproperinput,thisinputshouldbecomprehensibleandinteresting.Studentswerethecenterofstudyratherthanteachers.Studentscanjointheactivityinitiatively;cultivatingabilitywastheteachingaimratherthanknowledgeimparting.Theteacherguidedstudentstomovefromsentencetothewholecontext.Atthepracticestage,agreatdealof“pattern”exercisewasthefocus,studentsdidthedrillundercontextframework.Attheproductionstage,thefocuswastheoutputoflanguageandtheformingofability.Yangexemplifiedfourkindsofactivitiesinthisstage:pairwork,studentsworkedinpairsinandoutsideclassroomtodofreetalk;groupdiscussion,theteachergaveeverygrouptopicsontime,guidedthemtodiscussandreport;competitionofgivingaspeech,thecompetitioncouldbeheldtwiceasemester,itcouldenrichlearningenvironmentandgavestudentschancestoexercise;thelastwasanargument,intheargument,studentswerenolongerthepassivereceiverbutactiveconstructor,theirlanguage,thoughtandcommunicationcouldbepromoted.LongDonglin(2009)analyzedtheapplicationof3Pmethodinlargeclassanditspotentialproblems.Firstly,theapplicationof3Pmethodinlargeclassdemandedthechangingofteachers’role.Theteachershouldexplaintheaimofactivitycarefully,makethepairorgroupmembersclearlyknowtheirrole;arrangethetaskofeverypairorgroup;controlandsupervisetheprocessofactivity;fairlyjudgeandsummarizethebehaviorofstudents.Secondly,teachersshouldpayattentiontothepotentialproblemsinlargeclass.Theywereasfollows:theconflictionoftheratioofteachertalkingtimeandstudentstalkingtime,theteachershouldensureallmembersofclasshavechancestocommunicate;thedifficultyofthearrangementofpairorgroupwork;andtheevaluationofstudents’behavior.Liuli(2012)reviewedthehistoricaldevelopmentof3Pmethodandsummarizedfour-7- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingmeritsofit.CommunicativeLanguageTeaching(CLT)datedfrom1970swasthesolidfoundationof3Pmethod.CLTemphasizedtherelationshipofformandcommunication;itsweakform3PmethodemphasizedtolearnEnglishlanguageformfirstly;thentocommunicate.Andthe“learning-acquisition”theoryofKrashensuppliedatheoreticalfoundationfor“teaching”and“learning”in3Pmethod.Asforthemeritsof3Pmethod,firstly,itdidnotneglectthelearningoflanguagerulesinbigclass;secondly,activitiesin3Pmethodweresuitableforlearners’ability,age,motivationandstudyaim;thirdly,itwaseasyfortheteacher,hecoulddesigntheactivitiesin3Pmethodaccordingtothelessontype,thenumberofstudents,teachingaimandcontent;fourthly,3Pmethodcateredforthecurrentevaluationsystem.Currently,examinationwasstillthemainwaytoevaluatetheoutcomeofteachingandlearning;3Pmethodwasusefultoimprovestudents’score.LiNa(2013)discussedthebasicstageof3Pmethodanditsextension.Firstly,sheanalyzedthethreebasicstagesin3Pmethod:thepresentationstagewasaimingatconveyinginformationandintroducinglanguageform;thepracticestagewasstructuredoutput;theproductionstagewascommunicativeoutput.Sothemainactivityofthethreestagesrespectivelywas“engage,study,activate”.Keepingthenatureof3Pmodel,itcouldbeextendedintoPPPEEmodel,thatwaspreparation,presentation,practice,evaluationandextension.Inpreparationstage,theteachershowedstudentslanguagebackground,askedstudentstobrainstormwhattheyweregoingtolearn;inpresentationstage,theteachershowedstudentslanguagepictures,tapesorvideos,letstudentspayattentiontopicandnewgrammarpointsinvolved;atthepracticestage,studentsmadetheirowndialoguebasedontheinformationobtainedfromtheprevioustwostages;attheevaluationstage,studentsreportedandcomparedtheirowndialoguesandteachers’example,analyzedthedifferencesandsimilarities;attheextensionstage,studentsmadetheirowndialoguefromcontrolledsituationtorealsituation.2.2Task-basedLanguageTeaching2.2.1DefinitionandComponentsofTaskAsforTBLT,thefirstandmostimportantthingistogiveacleardefinitionof“task”.Onlythisproblemissolvedcanwehaveabetterunderstandingofthistypicalteachingmethod.LinguisticsprofessorLongdefineditfromthehumanandsocietyperspective:-8- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingThedesignedactionthatbelongstoakindofworkthatpursuescertainaimsorrewardscanbecalledtask.Underthesituation,thefollowingthingscanberegardedastasks:decoratingahouse,paintingsomepictures,buyingsomenewclothes,bookingsomeairtickets,callingataxi,readingsomebooks,writingletters,makingatelephonecall,goingtothelibrary,assistingatroubledstranger,findingsomethingthatislost,makingaappointmentwithstrangersorgoingtotheclassandsoon.(Long,1985:89)ThedefinitiongivenbyLongwasverywidewithinvolvementoftasksindailylife,whichemphasizestheconceptof“learningbydoing”.FrenchlanguagescholarandprofessorBreendefineditinthefollowingway:whateverlearningeffortsofthestructurallanguagewithaspecialaim,suitablecontent,andaspecificworkingprocessaswellasaseriesofresultsmadeforthepersonswhoconductedthetask.Therefore,itisassumedthattaskreferstoaseriesofworkingplanswhichaimtopromotelanguagelearningintermsoftheactivitiesfromeasierandsimpleronestothemoreintricateandprolixones,forexample,problemsolvingingroups,imitatingofsomebehaviorsandmakingdecisions.(Breen,1987:25)Apparently,Breendefineditfromapedagogicalperspective,itwashelpfultolanguagelearnerandinstructorinclassroom.TheprofessorofuniversityNunandefineditasfollows:Theteachingtaskrelatestotheclassroomactivityinwhichincludestheinvolvementoflearnerinput,process,output,orinteractioninthelearnedlanguageandletstudyactivityfocusontheproperuseofthegrammaticalrules.thus,studentsareabletoexpressthemselvesandduringtheprocedureteacherspaytheirattentiontotheconveyofthemeaninginsteadofthefocusofthesimpleforms.ThedefinitionofNunanfocusedonthecommunicativelanguageuse,duringwhichtheusers’attentionispaidonexpressingmeaningratherthanmechanicallymanipulating-9- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingforms.NunandevotedallherlivestoworkingonTBLT,shenotonlyprovidedadefinitionoftaskbutalsogaveaframeworkforanalyzingthecomponentsoftasks,whichweremadeupofsixparts,including“goals,input,activities,teacher’srole,learner’srole,andsettings”.Fig.2-1Theframeconstructiontoanalyzecommunicativetasks(Nunan,1988)Fromthechart,wecanconcludethat“goals”weremadetodesignpedagogicaltasksbyteachers,whowantedtoelicitanarrayofcommonresults(communicative,affective,orcognitive)fromstudents.Therelationsof“goals”and“tasks”arenotalwaysunique,butasataskcontainsmorethanonesubtasksatthesametimethatmayprobablypushlearnerstogainquiteafewgoals.“Input”referstothedatawhichconstitutedthestartingpointofthetask.Activitypaidattentiontotherolesthateachpartplayedintheimplementofthetask,andsettingwasthesocialsituationinwhichthetaskwasimplemented.2.2.2DefinitionandModelsofTBLTTask-basedLanguageTeachingisactuallytheextensionofCommunicativeLanguageTeaching.Itpresentsthesharedviewsfromhowlanguageshallbelearnedasfurtheraspossibletotheactualusageoflanguageinreality.Nevertheless,ithasemphasizedtheessentialrolesofthecombinationoftheformfocusedteachingwithcommunicationfocusedteaching.ManylinguisticstriedtogiveacleardefinitionofTBLT;however,untilnowanauthoritativedefinitionhasnotbeenformed.JaneWillis(1996)showedsuchviews.Intheactivities,thelearnersusedthetargetlanguagetocommunicatesothattheycangettheeffectiveoutcomes.Othersupportsconsideredthatitisofgreatimportanceforthelanguagelearningtogettheinvolvementoftherealcommunicationbehaviorintheactivitiesinwhichtheuseoflanguageisto-10- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingperformmeaningfultasks.Thesewouldbehelpfultoenhancethelearningofstudents.WiththedifficultyfordefiningtheconceptofTBLT,linguisticsNunan(1991)turnedtostudythefeaturesofTBLTandhesummarizesthefeaturesasfollows:stressingtheprocedureoncommunicationwithinteractioninthelearnedlanguage,introducingtheauthentictextsintolearningtexts,offeringopportunitiesforstudentsandhelpthemtofocusonlanguageandlearningprocess,payingattentiontothepromotionofthestudents’ownexperiencesintermsoflearningandtryingtoreachtheaimofcombinglanguagelearningtheclassroomwiththelanguagelearninginreallifesituation.Generally,thereweretwomodelsofTBLTwidelyacceptedbyresearchers,onewasSkehan’s“pre-task,during-task,post-task”model;theotherwasWillis’smodel,whichconsistedof“pre-task,taskcycleandlanguagefocus”,thelatterwasmorefrequentlyusedinEnglishteachingclassroominChina.Tab.2-2Willis’smodelfortask-basedinstructionPre-taskIntroductionofthetopicTaskcycleTaskPlanningReportLanguagefocusAnalysisPracticeInviewofWillis’smodel,duringpre-task,teachersshouldprovidelearnerswithcomprehensibleinput,sothatlearnerscanbeengagedinthetasksongoing,usefulwords,phrasesandclearguidancewerepresentedtothelearners.Thekeypointofthisstagewastosimulatelearners’backgroundschema.Thesecondstagewastaskcycle,whichwascomposedofthreesub-steps:task,planningandreport.For“task”step,teachersmadeafreeenvironment,encouragedstudentstobeactive.Studentsworkedinpairsorgroupstodothetask,mistakeswerepermittedhere.For“planning”step,studentsplanedtoreporthowtheydidthetask,what-11- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingtheirdiscoverywas.Teachersassistedtogivesomelanguageadvice.For“report”step,studentsreportedtheirworktothewholeclass,exchangedideas.Teachersmadesomecommentonstudents’behavior.Atthelaststage,teachersguidedstudentstoanalyzenewwords,phrasesandgrammarpatterns.Studentsdiscussedthecommonfeaturesofthesenewlanguageknowledge,didsimilartaskstheymeetwithdifferentpatterns.2.2.3StudiesAbroadPrabhuwasthefirstpersonwhoputTBLTintopractice.HedidthefamousBagaloreprojectfrom1979to1983.Prabhu(1992)proposedwhenstudentskeeptheirattentionfocusingonthetask,theymaybeabletolearnlanguagemoreeffectivelythanever.Thereweremanyproblemsexistingintheexperimentalresearch;however,itlieddownagoodandstablefoundationforTBLTmodel.DavidNunan,anothermajorcontributortotheresearchinTBLTsuggestedthat“ifstudentsstudyforcompletingspecifictasks,thentheymaybehaveastrulyaspossibleinreallife”(Nunan,1989),thiswasoneoftheessentialpartoftask-basedteaching.In1989,shestudiedthemodelfromthecommunicativeperspectiveandpublishedherfamousworkDesignTasksfortheCommunicativeClassroom.Inthisbook,shegaveadefinitionoftask,analyzedthesixcomponentsoftask.Moreover,shesummarizedfiveprinciplesforcompletingTBLT:1)stressinglearningoncommunicationbytheusingofthetargetlanguage;2)anstudyingbackgroundofauthentictextsinreallifeintothelearningtextintheclassroom;3)opportunitiesforstudentstofocusonboththetargetlanguageandthestudyingprocedureitself;4)theimprovementofthestudents’ownpersonalexperiencesinreallifeasanimportantfactortoclassroomlearning;5)strivingtorelatethelanguagelearningintheclassroomtothereallanguageinteractionandactivitiesinstudents’dailylife.TheresearchesdonebyWillis,SkehanandElisfurnishedTBLTforlearnersandteachers,andtheymadegreatcontributiontoTBLTbothintheoryandpractice.InhisfamousworkAFrameworkforTask-basedLearning,WillissupposedhisTBLTmodel:pre-task,taskcycleandlanguagefocus,andthisbookwonhimtheBenWarranInteractionalAtlasPrize.Thetraditional3PmodelwasreservedinWillis’smodel.Intraditional3Pmodels,tasksinthelastproductionstagewasakindofextendedactivitiesto-12- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachinggaintheconsolidationofgrammaticalstructure,languagefunctionandvocabulary.However,Willis(1998)suggestedthatstudents’learningstartedwiththecompletionofthetaskactivities.Withthetaskfinished,teachersaskedlearnerstofocusonthelanguagethattheylearnedinthetask-basedlearningactivities,atthesametime,madecorrespondingchangesandcorrectionsinrespecttothelanguageusage.Skehan(1996)summarizedfivecharacteristicsoftask:1)themeaningusedwasbasic;2)realworldactivitieswerecomparable;3)somecommunicativeproblemstosolve;4)taskaccomplishmentwasprior;5)theassessmentoftaskwiththeoutcomeasthebasis,andhisthreemodelswerealsowidelyused.2.2.4StudiesatHomeBasedontheliteratureaboutTBLTathome,theresearchonitcanbedividedintotwostages.Thefirststageismainlyaboutbringinginforeignrelevantoutcomeandtheoreticalresearch,itfocusesonthegeneralintroductionaboutTBLT.AlongwiththeproposingandlaunchoftheNewEnglishCurriculumStandardputforwardbytheEducationalMinistryofGovernment,thesecondstageoftheresearchofTBLTbegins.Itmovesfromtheoreticalresearchtopracticaluse,TBLTiswidelyappliedintothepracticalteachingoflistening,speaking,readingandwriting.TheresearchinthefirststageathomemainlyfocusedonthediscussionaboutTBLT’sgeneralconcept.NiuChangsongandZhuJidong(2002)analyzedthebalanceoflanguagemeaninganditsforminTBLT.Thetaskshouldcenteronmeaningandbeconnectedwiththerealworld,theoutcomeoftaskcanbeusedasthestandardofevaluation.Thedifficultyleveloflanguageformshouldbebasedontheleveloflanguage,cognition,andtheburdenofcommunication.LuZiwen(2002)proposedthatteachersshoulddesignreallifetaskinclass;theaimofclassroominstructionwastopreparerelevantknowledgeandskillforfinishingthetask.Thediversityofability,informationandcultureunderstandingamongstudentsshouldbetakenintotheconsiderationoftaskdesigning.GongYafuandLuoShaoxi(2003)studiedTBLTfromtheperspectiveofcurriculumandconstructionaltheories.Theyheldthatwiththeclearandspecificcurriculumaim,studentswerenolongerthepassivelearnerdoingaftertheteachers,butconstructedtheirownknowledgeinitiativelyandbecamethehostofautonomousstudy.Theyemphasized-13- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingtheapplicationofTBLTneededabundantlanguageinput,authenticuseoflanguageandtheinnermotivationofthelearners.FangWenli(2003)probedintothefeasibilityoftheapplicationTBLTfromthecognitiveandpsychicalperspective,andthepossibleproblempotentiallyexisting.HepointedoutthatthekeyofTBLTwaslearner-centeredandpeople-oriented,knowledgewasconstructedintheinteractionbetweenlearnersandteachers.TanXiuguiandQiZhenhai(2004)analyzedtheproblememergingwhenusingTBLTandre-studiedthedefinitionoftaskandTBLT.TheypointedoutthatthetheoreticalfoundationofTBLTliedonthetheoryofsecondlanguageacquisition.Inordertosystematicallyandorderlyperformthetask,theteachersshouldhaveadeepunderstandingofthesyllabusandtextbook.YuanLingling(2006)supposedthatthedifficultpointofTBLTwasthedesigningandperformingoftask.Forteachers,theyshoulddesignspecificclassroomtaskaccordingtothestudyaimandrealworldthatwerecontinuouslychanging.ShuDingfang(2006)gavethepopularconceptthatlanguagestudyequaledthecombinationofclassroomstudyandoutsideclassroomstudy.Classroomstudypreparedforoutsideclassroomstudy,outsideclassroomstudyextendedandcontributedtoclassroomstudy.Thecontentandwaysofoutsideclassroomstudyliedonthedemandingofcommunication.AndTBLTwasmoresuitableforcommunicationthantraditionalapproach,soitwasmoresuitableforthecombinationofclassroomandoutsideclassroomstudy.WiththeimplementofNewEnglishCurriculumStandard,languagecommunicativeabilitybecamethemostimportantaimofEnglishteaching,theresearchofthepracticaluseofTBLTinlistening,speaking,readingandwritingbecamepopular.ZhengQiuqiu(2003)treatedtheclassroomreadingteachingmodelwiththetask-basedreadingactivityasthebodyoflearningtask.Students’activitywasputinthecenterandteacherwasjustanassistant,themainpointwastheinteractivereadingtask.Thismodelhelpedteacherssufficientlyobservestudents’behaviorandtimelyadjustthetask,soiteffectivelypromotedtheclassroomtaskteaching.HuMeiyun(2007)pointedoutthattask-basedspeakingclassandtheinteractiveclassroomcommunicationsufficientlyenrichedtheoralfeelingofstudent.Studentslearnedhowtoexpressbycommunication,soteachersshoulddesignthespeakingtaskthatwasconnectedwithstudents’reallife.Interactivebehaviorshouldbeembodiedinoraltask.-14- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingFengZhijing(2011)suggestedtoputTBLTintothelisteningpracticeofalllevelsoflearners,itwaspossibletomakealisteningmodelbasedonauthenticlisteningsituationandmaterial.Thismodelcanhelpchangethecurrentlisteningteachingsituationthatwasmainlyaboutlisteningtothetapeandcheckingtheanswer.ChenAilongandTanQuanquan(2012)comparedTBLTwritingteachingwithtraditionalwritingteaching,thedistinctionmainlyliedonthefollowingstages.Forpre-writingstage,teacherscanreinforcetheguidanceforstudents;forwhile-writingstage,studentscanworkinpairsorgroupstoexchangeideasandthenreporttothewholeclass;forpost-writing,teacherscanguidestudentstosummarizeandconcludethewritingskill.Allinall,theresearchofTBLTinChinahadgainedanoutstandingoutcome,itgreatlycontributedtotherealpracticeofEnglishteaching.ThetheoreticalandpracticalresearchofTBLTinChinawasadvancingintoafurtherstage.2.3AComparisonofTBTLand3PmethodsWillis(1996)comparedthedifferentfeaturesofTBLTand3Pmethodfromtwopointsofview.Onepointistoexplorethemethodlearnersutilizeandexperienceofusingthelanguageleaned.Theotherpointofviewtheprocessandthesituationtheylearned.ThepatternsthatlearnersuseandexperiencelanguageinTBLTisdifferentfromthosein3Pmethodtosomeextent.TasksinTBLTaregenuinelyfreeoflanguagecontrol,provideagenuineneedtouselanguagetocommunicate,learnersrelyontheirownlinguisticresources.TBLTallowsstudentsfreeexchangesofideas,summarizingtheirownachievement.Thelearningprocedureencourageslearnerstothinkoftheappropriateuseofthetargetlanguageandtheaccurateuseoflanguageform,notjustasingleproducingasimpleform.TBLTsuppliesstudentsatruedesiretopaygreateffortsforaccuracyandfluencycauselearnershavetofinishthetasks.The3PmethodisdifferentfromTBLTinthat:thelattercansupplethegrammarteachingwithareallifecontextevenforsomeformfocusedactivities.However,the3Pmethodisnotabletoprovidesuchacontext.Moreover,listeningandreading,themosttwoimportantpartsofTBLT,areabletoprovideanrealandvividexposuretothenaturallanguage.Thetwopartsaremorevariedthantheonlyexamplesthatmadeuptoexpressasimplelanguagefocusunderthe3Pmothed.However,underthe3Pmethod,theinstructorsdecidethelanguageinfixedformsthatstudentswillbepresented.Moreover,underthe-15- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingTBLTmothed,studentsareabletoconsultaboutanyitemsofthelanguagetheyhavepaidattentiontobythemselves.Lastbutnotleast,underthe3Pmethod,itemphasizesthelanguagetovaryfromaccuracytofluency,whileundertheTBLTmethod,itemphasizesthelanguagetovaryfromfluencytoaccuracy.2.4StudiesonGrammarTeaching2.4.1TheIntroductionofGrammarandGrammarTeachingInregardstothedefinitionofgrammar,differentlinguisticsdefineditfromdifferentpointofviews.Lyons(1971)definedthegrammaras“acollectionofthedescriptiverulesoflanguagewhichelaboratesthetargetlanguagefromword,phrasestosentences”.Brown(1994)definesthegrammarasfollows“aseriesofprinciplesdominatingthecustomaryarrangementandconnectionofwordsinthesentence”.NewWorldDictionarycompiledbyWebster(1968)definedgrammarinthefollowingway“thestudyoflanguagethathandlestheformsandstructureofwords(morphology),andthephrasesandsentencesareinconventionalarrangement(syntax),anditalsohavesomethingtodowithlanguagesound(phonology);usuallydifferentfromthestudyofwordmeanings(semantics,seismology)”.Thisdefinitionanalyzedgrammarfromwordleveltosentencelevelandtogetherwithlanguagesound.TheLongmanDictionaryofContemporaryEnglish(1995)definedgrammaras“thestudyandpracticeoftherulesthearrangementobeyedinthechangeofwordformsandthecombinationofwordsintosentences”.Themostimportantpartofthisdefinitionwasthefixedgrammaticalrulesandtherealuseofthetargetlanguage.Linguistics’attitudetowardsthenatureofgrammarcanbejudgedfromtheirownconceptandunderstandingofgrammar.Languageasatransmissiontoolofinformationandculture,asavehicleofcommunicationwasnotonlyastaticphenomenonofsocietybutalsoadynamicsocialbehavior.Itwasacombinationofform,meaningandusage.AppliedlinguisticsLarsen-Freemandefinedtheconceptofgrammarfromthefollowingpointofview.Inconsiderationofgrammarasahigherstageoflanguagephenomenon,Larsen-Freemanregardedthattherewerethreerelatedaspectsofgrammar:form,meaninganduse.Herdefinitionwasinanattempttomakethethreedifferentaspectsoflinguisticswhichwerecommonlyinseparationintegrated,thesethreeaspectswere:-16- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingsyntax(thestudyofform),semantics(thestudyofmeaning)andpragmatics(thestudyofuse).Inthisway,itsharedagreatdealofsimilaritieswiththemodelofsystemicfunctionallinguisticswhichhadbeenfoundedbyHoliday.Hedefinesgrammarasfollows:thestudyofthewaysinwhichsyntax(form),semantics(meaning)andpragmatics(use)functiontogethertoenableindividualstocommunicatethroughlanguage(GeorgeYale:2002).Theissueofwhethergrammarshouldbetaughtinclassroomisstillinconfliction;however,manylinguisticsareinfavorofgrammarteaching,suchasYalden,DavidNunan,etc.Yalden(1983)heldtheviewthatlanguagecompetencereferredtotheabilitytouselanguagestructureandgrammar.Therewouldbenocommunicationifonehadnolanguagecompetence.Therefore,grammarteachingplayedaveryimportantroleinlanguageteachinginmiddleschool.Murcia(1991)heldtheviewthatwithouttheformalguidanceofgrammar,studentswereunabletoacquiresystematicalgrammarknowledgethatwouldleadtotheir“plateaureaction”,whichmeanedthattheycan’tmakefurtherdevelopmentafterreachingacertainlanguagelevel.Spada(1997:15)carriedoutaresearchbyobservingdifferentclasses.Hefoundthatstudentsfromtheclasswheretheteacheremphasizedgrammaticalformsandtheaccuracyoflanguageformscouldusethelanguageinamuchmoreaccuratewaythanotherstudents.DavidNunan(2001)pointedoutthataneffectivelanguagecommunicationwasacombinationoffunctionalunderstandingandproperform,formandfunctionshouldbeunifiedwiththecombinationoflingualcontextandnon-lingualcontextlanguageteaching.Despitetheargumentaboutthenecessityofgrammarteaching,someagreementshadbeenreachedinEnglishlanguageteachingareabyresearchersandscholars,theywere:1)whenweusedalanguagetoconveymeaning,weshouldalsofocusonconsciousknowledge;2)formalgrammarinstructiondidhavegoodeffectsonafurtherdevelopmentofstudents’languageslevel;3)grammarwasthepremisefortheattainmentofhighaccuracyinlanguagecommunication.TherearetwomainmethodsexistinginEnglishgrammarteaching:theinductivemethodandthedeductivemethod.Theinductivemethodisamethodthatlearnersarenottaughtgrammaticalrulesdirectlybutarelefttoinduceordiscoverrulesfromtheirexperienceofusingthelanguage.Thedeductivemethodisamethodthatlearnersaretaughtgrammaticalrulesdirectlyandgivenspecificinformationaboutthelanguage.-17- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingStern(1992:150)statesthattheaimofinductivemethodistoencouragelearnerstoinduceanddiscovertherulesandprinciplesforthemselvesfromtheirownviewing,ratherthanbeingtolddirectlywhattherulewas.Thismethodemphasizesusinglanguageinpresumedoractualsituationratherthanteachingtheisolatedgrammaticalrulesinclassroom.Eachofthetwomethodshasitsmeritsanddemerits.Theinductivemethodcanprovidestudentswithmorelanguageinput,cultivatestudents’languagefeelings,stimulatethemtoparticipate.Butitisachallengeforteachers,theyshouldhaveahigherlevelofcommunication.Thedeductivemethodcansolvetime,therulesareeasilyacceptedbystudentsandeasilytaughtbytheteacher.Sothesuitablewayistoutilizethetwomethodstogether,theyarenecessarilylinked,andcomplementary.Forexample,theteachercanusetheinductivemethodforeasiergrammar,usethedeductivemethodformoredifficultgrammar.2.4.2ApplicationofTBLTinGrammarTeachingWiththeproposalandcarryingoutoftheNewNationalEnglishCurriculum,aneweditionofjuniorEnglishtextbookispublished.Inthissetoftextbooks,grammarbecomesanindispensablepartofteachingandlearning,languagepatternsarefocusedthroughcommunicativepractice.Thegrammarshouldbespecificandexplicitandclear-cut,itpaygreatattentiontotherealusingandapplicationofgrammarinacommunicativetextandauthenticlifesituation,inorderforthelearnerscouldgraspandusegrammarrulesofthelanguagewhentheyareintherealusingpractice.Focusingonform,atask-basedgrammarteachinghasaspecialimplicationinChina,becauseitcanbringcommunicativetasksintothetraditionallanguageclassroom,enhancethecurrentlanguageteachingreformandimprovethecomprehensivelanguagecompetenceofthestudents.Task-basedgrammarteachingwhichis“communicative”inbasiclevelforspecificandexplicitgrammaticalinstructionsisbetterthanbothtraditionalclassroomteachingandimmersionprograms.Studentscanacquirelanguageabilitywhentheyareactivelyengagedinandatthesametimemakeeffortstocommunicateintargetlanguage.Iflearnersareengagedinthetaskswhichcanpushthemdirectlytofaceandovercometheircommunicativeweakness,thentheiracquisitionwillbeextendedtothemaximization.Inthetask-basedgrammarteaching,theteachersaredemandedtomakeafreeand-18- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingfriendlyatmosphereunderwhichcooperativelearningcanbefulfilledsothatlearnerscouldbeabletoperformdifferentkindsoftasks,soasfortheirownimprovementevaluationandalsoincludesthepresentationoftheirownviews,meaningandideas.Itisveryimportantandalsotheteachers’responsibilitytoprovideanappropriatesettingforthestudentstohelpthemcompletetheirtaskseffectively,aslearners’performanceinthesettedenvironmentcanhelptheteachersfindlearners’realabilitiesaswellastheirauthenticperformance.Themosteffectivemethodtotrainstudentstomakeclearofthegrammarrulesandgrammarknowledgeistocreateareallanguageusingsituation.Underthiskindofsituation,therewillbenofixedandvaguegrammarrulessothatlearnersareabletogetfamiliarwithandgraspthekeypointofgrammaticalknowledgeeasilyinthisrelaxingatmosphere;inthissituationlearnersareallowedtomakemistakes,andteachersmaynotneedtocorrectthemimmediately.ThemeritsofTBLTinEnglishgrammarteaching,basedonitsproponents,permitsthetrainedstudentstousewhatevertargetlanguagetheywouldliketo,whichenablesitgetclosertoanaturalusingatmosphere.Soitisbeneficialforimprovingstudents’communicativeability.Onepotentialdangerofthismethodingrammarteachingisthatitneglectstheaccuracyofgrammar.Thoughstudentscanexpressthemselvesfreely,theycannotgiveapreciseexpression,resultinginmanymistakes.Soitisnottotallyproperforimprovingstudentstestscores.2.4.3Applicationofthe3PmethodinGrammarTeachingIntheapplicationofthe3Pmethodingrammarteaching,studentsmainlystudyalistofgrammarrulesinordertousethemtoensurethepreciseexpression.Theteacherusuallyfirstintroducesanewgrammaticaliteminacontext,theitemsareexplainedbytheteachercarefully.Thenitfocusessomecontrolledpractice,suchasdrilling,repetition,dialoguereading,teachersreducetheirtalkingandmakethebestuseofpairandgroupwork,studentsusuallypracticethefixedgrammarrulesandforms.Attheproductionstage,studentsareguidedfromcontrolledpracticetofreepractice,theymovetoproducethelanguageinamoremeaningfulway,suchasaroleplay,adrama,aninterview,etc.Ifstudentsknowtherulesofgrammarandpracticethefixedrulesenough,theycanspeakandwritewellinEnglish.Thismethodisveryusefulforstudents’academicwork-19- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingandforpassingwrittenexams,butitislessusefulforstudentstousethemineverydaylife.Although,the3Pmethodhasreceivedcriticism,studentswhoareaccustomedtothismethodstillagreeit.Forexample,ChinesestudentsgenerallyshowgreatinterestinlanguagestructuresandlinguisticdetailswhentheyarelearningEnglish.Inaword,the3Pmethodisbeneficialforimprovingstudents’testscores,butitfailstoprovidestudentswithafreeenvironmentandimprovetheirrealcommunicativeability.2.4.4SummaryTosumup,.Task-basedLanguageTeachingisactuallytheextensionofCommunicativeLanguageTeachinganditpresentsthesharedviewsfromhowlanguageshallbelearnedasfurtheraspossibletotheactualusageoflanguageinreality.Brieflyspeaking,itisusefultoimprovestudentscommunicativeability,butneglectsstudents’testscores.The3PmethodistheweakversionofCommunicativeLanguageTeaching,theteacherspreparewhatstudentsneedtolearnfirstly,andthentrainthemtounderstandtherules,soastomakeafewermistakes.Byusingthemethod,studentscangetahigherscoresoftheirEnglishtests,buttheyusuallylackthecommunicativeability.AsmanyChinesestudentscomplain,theyhavebeenlearningEnglishforsomanyyears,theycannotuseEnglishtoexpressthemselves.InEnglishgrammarteaching,3Pmodeliswidelyusedformanyyears,“87%ofteachersinChina’smiddleschoolsusethetraditionalmethodinthelate1980”(ZuoH,1990).Itisveryfamiliartoteachersandstudents,butintheeraofseeingEnglishasacommunicativetool,thismethodisnotverysuitable.TBLTisarelativelynewteachingmethodingrammarteachingthatisimportedabroadinthe1990s.Itbecomespopular,astheNationalEnglishCurriculumadvocates“theimplementationoftask-basedEnglishteachingandcultivatingthestudents’integratedlanguageability”intheyearof2001.Asatraditionalteachingmethod,the3Pmethodemphasizesthetestscoresandneglectstudents’communicativeability;asanewmethod,TBLTpaysattentiontocultivatestudents’communicativeability,butitislower-efficienttoimprovetheirtestscores.Soitispossibleandnecessarytotrytointegratethetwomethodsingrammarteaching,astheauthorconcerns,itismeaningful.-20- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingChapterThreeTheoreticalFoundation3.1EclecticismandtheEclecticMethod3.1.1OriginationoftheEclecticMethodAsthefamoussayinggoes“thereismethodologyininstruction;however,thereisnotafixedteachingmethodinpedagogy.”Therenotexistsafixedteachingmethodthatisproperforallteachingareasandallkindsofdifferentteachersandstudents.Undervariousteachingcircumstance,weshouldtakedifferentteachingmethodsintoconsideration,becauseeverymethodhasitsspecificbackground,meritandweakness.Stickingtoafixedteachingmethodmayleadtotheboringandinactiveoutcome.Therefore,theterm“eclecticism”or“eclecticmethod”becomemoreandmorepopular.Thatistosay,asalanguageteacher,wecanhaveatrytocomparedifferentteachingmethodsoriginatedathomeandabroad,thenconsidertointegratedifferentmethodsandfindabalanceamongthem.Eclecticismistheprincipleorpracticeofchoosingorinvolvingobjects,ideasandbeliefsfrommanydifferentsources,thatistosay,makingdecisionsonthebasisofwhatseemsbestinsteadoffollowingsomesingledoctrineorstyle.EclecticismwasputdownfirstbyagroupofancientGreekandRomanphilosophersbutthesephilosophershadnorealsystemandmerelyselectedfromexistingbelief.AccordingtoWebster’sNewWorldDictionary,eclecticismmeansacompositionofmaterialgatheredfromvarioussystems,doctrinesorsources.“Eclecticism”inlanguageteachingrootedinphilosophy,itimplicatesthatthecompromiseamongdifferentextremes,theblendingofthemeritsandadvantagesofdifferentteachingmethods,theadaptionunderdifferentlearningcircumstance.FrenchphilosopherVietorCousinwasthefirstmasterwhoproposedtheoriesabouteclecticisminmodernage.AccordingtoVietorCousin,thoughalotofphilosophershaddiscusseddifferentkindsofthephilosophicaltruthbefore,sothemainworkinthefutureistoscreen-21- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingtruthalreadyexistedfromdifferentphilosophicalsystems.TwoFrenchmenA.PinlochGermanandGilgenbroughteclecticismintopracticalEnglishteachingin1920s,theymixeddirectmethodandgrammar-translationmethodtogether.“Eclecticmethod”wasfirstlyproposedinamemorandumofamiddleschoolteachersassociationinEnglandin1929.Gauntlett(1957:30)defineditasfollows:theeclecticapproachmethodwasacompromisemethod,andwasderivedfrom“eklegin”topickoutortochooseout,itwasatypicalmethodthatcanmaketheadvantageofagreatdealofdifferentmethodsortechniquesratherthanutilizingasingletechniques.River(1981:55)proposedthateclecticmethodhelpedlanguageteachers“makeabsorptionofthebesttechniquesofallthewell-knownlanguageteachingmethodsintotheirclassroomproceduresandthenusetheminappropriatesituation”.Theeclecticmethodwasnotjustasimplepracticeorbehaviorbutapracticeorbehaviorimbuedwithmeritsandadvantageofallotherdifferentpracticesandbehaviorsanditcouldbeabletotakeadvantageoftheotherpractices’experience(Gauntlette,1998).Theschoolofrationalismarguedthatlanguageasalanguagesystemismadeupofseveraldifferentsubsystems,suchaspronunciation,vocabularyandgrammar,itsawlanguagelearningasaprocessinwhichactivelanguageuseandlearning,especiallygrammaticallanguagelearningwasfocused.Theschoolofempiricismsawlanguageasalinguisticsystembutalsoasameanstodothings,tolearnalanguagealsoasmeanstolearnhowtodothings.Thetheoryofeclecticmethodintegratesboththeschoolofrationalismandtheschoolofempiricism.Itemphasizedboththemeaningoflanguageanditsform,theactualusingoflanguageandgrammaticalrules,fluencyandaccuracy,thecommunicativecompetenceandlinguisticcompetence,etc.Basically,therearethreerelatedpartsoftheeclecticmethodinlanguageteaching,theyareteachingsyllabus,teachingcontentandteachingmethod.L.A.Hill(1967,115)wrote,“Apurecontextofgradedsyllabuswouldconsidertheproblemfromdistinctviews,i.e.Theviewthatthepupilsaretobetaughttorespondtoacompromisebetweenstructuralandcontextualsyllabus”.Brumfitsupportedasyllabuswithgrammaticalityasbasisandinthissyllabus,notions,functionsandcommunicativeactivitiesweregrouped.Theintegratedteachingsyllabusshouldbetheresultofthecombinationoflinguistictheoryandpedagogicalpractice,itwasnotsimplyaimportofforeigninstructionsystem.Itshouldobviouslyembodythecharacteristicsofourcountry’sreality,andalsoabsorbthe-22- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingadvantageofothersyllabus.Itshouldfocusonthecultivationofcommunicationabilityandthemasteryoflanguageknowledge.Theformerwastheaim,thelatterwasthewaytofulfilltheaim.Fromthepointofteachingmethod,theintegratedsyllabusshouldbethecombinationofstructuralsyllabusandfunctionalsyllabus;fromthepointofteachingcontent,itshouldbethecombinationofgrammaticalsyllabusandmeaningsyllabus.Theintegratedsyllabusdecidedtheintegratedcontent.Generallyspeaking,structuralismemphasizedteachinglanguageforms,functionalismemphasizedteachinglanguagefunctionsandmeaningfulmaterials.Theintegratedcontentemphasizedtheteachinglanguagestructures,functionsanduseanditwasundertheguideoftheintegratedsyllabus.Thetextbookcompiledinrecentyearspaidabalancedattentiontolistening,speaking,readingandwriting.Itdidnotsimplycopyandimitatethelatestteachingmethodologyorabandonthetraditionalteaching.Itwasanintegrationofdifferentteachingmethods,anintegrationofstructureandfunction.ManymethodologistsandlanguageteachersenjoythesamebeliefsthatthecompromiseamongdifferentmethodscouldbetheexcellentpolicyinEnglishlanguageteaching.AninvestigationoflanguageteachinginAmericanshowedthatmostteachersfavoredtousetheeclecticwayasthiswaywasamixtureofallmethods.Accordingtothereport,8%reliedonthedirectmethod,78%ofthemstucktotheeclecticmethod,merely3%ofthemwerefondofusingothermethodsinseparation.3.1.2DevelopmentoftheEclecticMethodInourcountry,traditionalteachingmethodsuchasthethe3Pmethodisnotthemosteffectivemethodtoimprovelearners’languageability,forexamplestudents’communicativeability;theexoticmethodlikecommunicativelanguageteaching,whichisrootedinexoticatmosphereinwhichEnglishisuseasasecondlanguage,isnottotallyproperforourEnglishlearningenvironment.Underthissituationtheimportingoftheeclecticmethodacceptwarmwelcome,ChineseEnglisheducatorshouldnoticethatitisnotallround.Somescholarsarguethatitcannotbetreatedasanapproach,butasawaytoimprovetheapproach.MoreChinesescholarponderoveritanddoexperimentsinordertoactuallychangethecurrentsituationofEnglishteachinginChina.FanChangrong(1999)analyzedthepracticeofeclecticmethodinourcountryfromthreeaspects.Thefirstaspectwasteachingsyllabus,theteachingsyllabuspayattentionto-23- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingbothbasiclanguageability,communicativeabilityandbasiclanguageknowledge,itemphasizedonenlargingstudents’knowledge,enhancingtheirsensitivetocrossculturalawareness.Thesecondaspectwasteachingmaterial,mainlyabouttextbook.Thetextbookstookdifferentlearningandteachingbackgroundintoconsideration,paidattentiontotheaccuracyandfluencyoflanguageability,putstudentsinthecenteroflearningandnotneglecttheguidingroleoftheteacher.Thelastisteachingmethod,itgavestudentsmorefreedomofautonomouslearningandchanceofclassroomparticipation,encouragedstudentstojointheactivitiesindifferentways.WangYan(2001)pointedoutthatthecurrentlanguageteachingwasthecombinationoftheschoolsofrationalismandempiricism,wasthecombinationofboththedeductiveandinductivemethod.Therewasnotafixedprincipleeclecticmethod;however,theteachingresearchandpracticeguidedustojudgethefeasibilityofeclecticmethodinthespecificpracticalteachingsituation.WangBinbinandHuangZhongxi(2003)probedintotheproblemofeclecticmethodresearch.Firstly,wehadnotpaidenoughattentiontotheresearchofeclecticmethodbefore,thequantityofthethesiswasrelativelysmall;secondly,theresearcheswerenotsystematicalandfurther,thereweresomethesisscatteringinsomearticles,withnoauthoritativemonographpublished,somescholarsheldneglectiveattitudetowardsthismethod,mostexperimentsoftheeclecticmethodswerejustabouttheintegrationofcommunicativelanguageteachingandtraditionalteachingapproach;lastly,theeclecticmethodwasstilljustembodiedinthesyllabusdesigningandtextbookwritten,theassessmentsystemwasstillmainlyaboutlanguagepoint,notthelearningandteachingprocedure.LiWanhongandChenJitang(2008)analyzedtheevidenceforusingtheeclecticmethodfromtwoperspectives,thatwerelearnerdiversityandtheirlearningenvironmentdiversity.Learners’studyingaimsandstrategiesweredifferent,theirlearningexperienceandabilitywerevaried,theyhadvariouscognitiveandaffectivestyle;moreover,conditionsrestrictedthequalityofforeignlanguageteaching,sothechoosingofteachingmethodshouldcatertothesedifferentconditionsofEnglishlearningindifferentareasandschools.LiWei,YangXiaohong(2009)criticizedthesingleapplicationofjustoneteachingmethod,likegrammar-translationmethod,audio-lingualmethodandcommunicativelanguageteaching.Thentheyprobedintothefeasibilityoftheeclecticmethod,andthe-24- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingfourstagesofitsusage.Thefirststageaimedatlayingstudents’basiclanguagefoundation;thesecondstageaimedatcultivatingstudents’speakingandwritingability;thethirdstageaimedatlanguageconsolidationandchecking;thelaststageaimedatcultivatingstudents’overallability.LiBaofang(2009)discussedontheenlightenmentofeclecticismmethodforforeignlanguageteaching.Firstly,foreignlanguageshouldbeflexibleandeffective,everyteachingmethodhaditsbackgroundandshouldbetreatedfromadevelopmentalpoint;secondly,foreignlanguageteachingshouldbehuman-centered,thewholeteachingprocessshouldembodytherespectfulforperson;languageteachingmethodsshouldabsorbtheadvantageofforeigners’andremedytheshortcomingofourselves;atlast,wewouldformourownteachingstyleandsystemgradually.TongXiaohui(2013)summarizedthenewtrendfortheeclecticmethod,thatwasprincipledintegration.Thereexistedatrendinlanguageteaching,manyteachersoftenmadeexperimentsonnewteachingmethod,andatthesametimegaveupthetraditionalmethod.Theconceptsofprincipledintegrationwasaboutchoosingthemethodthatwassuitableforteachers,studentsandsituation.Everymethodhaditsadvantage,weshouldadopttheoptimizedmethod.Theconcept“integration”ratherthan“eclectic”wasenlighteningtoourforeignlanguageteaching.3.1.3PrinciplesoftheEclecticMethodEclecticismisnotsimplyto“takethebestformofahotch-potchofmethodologiesanddumptherest”.Eclecticismmustbeprincipled.Mellow(2000)used“principledeclecticism”tore-examtheidealcoherent,pluralisticapproachtolanguageteachingwhichcontainsanseriesofdifferentlanguagelearningactivities.Mellow(2002)alsohadproposedasetofprinciples,heconsideredhisfirsttypeofprinciple“onethatcategorizeslearningactivitiesaccordingtotheirproperties”,namelyTwo-dimensionalModel;hissecondtype“onethatdeterminedtheselectionandsequencingoflearningactivities”,namely,theCenteringPrinciple.AccordingtoMellow(2002),someactivities,intermsoftheviewsonlanguage,largelyassumedlanguageasastructuralsystemcomposedofforms;whileotheractivitiestooklanguageasasystemforconveyingmeaning.Inrespectofassumptionsonlanguage-25- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachinglearning,activitiespresumedthatlanguagelearningwasaprocessofactiveconstructionbythelearning;incontrast,otheractivitiespresupposedthatlanguagelearningwasaprocessofgrowth.Thus,activitiescouldbecategorizedintoformal-construction,functional-construction,formal-growthandfunctional-growthtypesofactivities.Fig.3-1TheTwo-DimensionalModelofTypesofLanguageTeachingActivitiesTheintersectionofthequadrantswasbothformandfunctionintermsoflanguage,andbothconstruction(similartothetermof“learning”byKrashen)andgrowth(similartothetermof“acquisition”byKrashen)intermsoflanguagelearning.Theconfluenceofformandfunctionwascalled“signs”.Withincommunicativeevents,theobjectofcontextualizedattentioncouldbeform,functionorsigns.ThecenterofTwo-DimensionalModelwasconceptualizedasContextualizedAttentiontoSigns(CAS).Itoccurredwhenlearnersengagedinactivitiesthatledtosimultaneousattentiontobothformandfunction.CenteringPrinciplereflectedthehypothesisthatcontextualizedattentiontosignsmaybeespeciallyeffectiveforpromotingacquisition,i.e.acquisitionwasfacilitatedwhenlearnerattendedtoformsandfunctionswhileusinglanguageincontextsinwhichmeaningswerecommunicative.3.2TheTheoryofCommunicativeApproachSincethe1970s,withtheintroductionofthecommunicativeapproach,weChina’slanguageteachingphenomenongraduallybegantochangedramatically.Onelinguistics-26- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingnamelyHymesproposedthe“communicativecompetence”,andanotherfamouslinguisticsHowattdistinguishedthedifferencesbetweenthestrongandweakversionofthecommunicativeapproach.3.2.1CommunicativeCompetenceOnepossiblesolutiontoremedytheisolationofourclassroomlanguageteachingandthelanguageuseinreallifesituationistotrainlearners’communicativecompetence,anditmeansthatteachersnotonlyshouldpresenttheknowledgeaboutthelanguageitselfbutalsoteachtheskillofhowtousethetargetlanguageproperlyinagivensituation.Intheyearof1971,Hymesproposedthe“communicativecompetence”asthegoaloflanguageteaching,whichisaconceptagainstChomsky’stheoryofcompetence.Communicativecompetencereferstoone’sabilitytoreachcorrectandappropriatelanguageusetofulfillcommunicativegoals.Thedesirableresultofthelanguagelearningprocessistheabilitytocommunicatecompetentlyratherthanusethelanguageexactlyasthatanativespeakerdoes.Hedge(2000:46-55)discussedfivemaincomponentsofcommunicativecompetenceandthesearelinguisticcompetence,pragmaticcompetence,discoursecompetence,strategiccompetenceandfluency.Linguisticcompetencereferstotheknowledgeoflanguageitself,itsformandmeaning.Pragmaticcompetenceisconcernedwiththeappropriateuseoflanguageinasocialcontext.Discoursecompetencereferstoone’sabilitytocreatecoherentwrittentextorconversationandtheabilitytounderstandthem.Strategiccompetencereferstostrategiesoneemployswhenthereiscommunicativebreakdownduetolackofresources.Fluencymeansone’sabilitytoconnectseveryunitsofspeechtogetherwithouttensionorimproperslownessorexcessivehesitation.Communicativecompetenceimplicatestheunderstandingofboththelanguagecode,thatistheformoflanguageandtheauthenticuseofthecommunicativecontentandhowtoexpressitproperlyinarealspeakingorwritingtext.3.2.2TheStrongVersionandWeakVersionofCommunicativeApproach-27- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingHowatt(1984:279)proposedthatthereexistedtwodifferentversionsofthecommunicativeapproach,theyarethestrongversionandweakversion.Howattfurtherstatedthat:Theweakversionhasexperiencedmoreorlessstandardpracticeinthelastdecadeyears,anditemphasizestheimportanceofofferinglearnerschancestoreachcommunicativepurposeswiththeuseofEnglish,andquintessentiallyattemptstomakeintegrationofsuchactivitiesintoawiderprogramoflanguageteaching.Thestrongversionofcommunicativeteaching,however,considersthatlanguageisacquiredthroughcommunication,therefore,itisnotmerelyaquestionofactivatinganexistingandinnerknowledgeofthelanguage,butofstimulatingthedevelopmentofthelanguagesystemitself.IftheformercouldbedescribedaslearningtouseEnglish,thenthelatterentailsusingEnglishtolearnit.Thatistosay,theweakversionemphasizesthestandardpractice,aclearpurposeandcommonactivities;whereasthestrongversionemphasizesexperiencingtheuseoflanguage.Languageislearnedbyusing.Bothoftheversionsaimattosolvetheproblemofstudents’lackingabilitytousethelanguagepractically,solvetheproblemofbeingunabletounderstanditsuseinrealcommunication,eitherisspokenorwrittenwork.-28- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingChapterFourResearchMethodologyBasedontheliteraturereviewandtheoreticalfoundationoftheintegratedmethodstatedabove,wehaveanunderstandingaboutthegrammarteachingandrelevantteachingmethods.Inordertobetterimprovetheefficiencyofgrammarteachinginjuniormiddleschool,theauthorplanstoconductanempiricalstudyonthefeasibilityofintegratingtask-basedand3Pmethodsinajuniormiddleschool.Inthissection,theresearchquestions,researchsubjects,teachingmaterials,researchinstruments,arepresentedrespectively.4.1ResearchQuestionsThemainpurposeofthisempiricalstudyistofindwhethertheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmodelshasapositiveeffectivenessonimprovinggrammarteachinginjuniormiddleschoolbyabsorbingthemeritsofbothmodelsandabandoningthedemeritsofthem.Theauthorwantstofindanswerstothefollowingspecificquestionsthroughthestudy:1)Istheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmethodsmoreeffectiveinenhancingstudents’masteryofgrammarknowledge?Thatistosay,cantheexperimentclassachievehigherscoresthanthecontrolledclassintheposttest?2)Comparedwiththetraditional3Pmethod,istheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmodelsbetteratstimulatingstudents’grammarlearningenthusiasmandinducingtheircooperationwiththeirclassmatesinjuniormiddleschool?4.2ResearchSubjectsOnehundredandtenstudentsofGradeSevenfromYuAnJuniorMiddleSchoolinAnHuiprovincearechosenasthesubject.Theyarefromtwoclasses(classsixteenandclasstwenty-two)thatarebothtaughtbytheauthor.NearlyallofthestudentshavelearnedEnglishforfouryearsintheirprimaryschool,mostofthemare12-13yearsold.Butintheirprimaryschool,theyjustlearnedgrammaralittle,theirgrammarknowledgeareall-29- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingnothigh,sotheybasicallyhavethesameeducationalbackground.Whentheyareenrolledinthejuniormiddleschool,theytakepartintheplacementtest.AlltheclassesintheGradeSevenarearrangedparallelly,sotheoverallEnglishabilityofthetwoclassesarenearlyofthesamelevel,theyarerandomlynamedasexperimentclassandcontrolledclassinthisthesis.ClassSixteenistakenastheexperimentclasstaughtbythemodelthatintegratesTBLTand3Pmethods;Classtwenty-twotakenasthecontrolledclasstaughtonlybythetraditional3Pmethod.Thedurationofexperimentisafourteen-weekperiod.Duringthistime,thenumberofsubjectsstaysstable,neitherincreasesnordecreasesintheprocess.Inthefirstweek,afterthestudentsenrollthejuniormiddleschool,thereareapre-test,whichisdesignedbytheauthor,allofthecontentisaboutsimplegrammar,thequestiontypesarecommontypesaboutgrammar.TheyareusedtoidentifythattherearenosignificantdifferencesamongthetwoclassesintermsoftheirgrammarEnglishproficiency.Tab.4-1DetailInformationofExperimentSubjectGroupExperimentalgroupControlledgroupNumberofsubjects5555Genderofsubjects25males,20females23males,22femalesTeachingmethodIntegratedmethod3Pmethod(presentationpracticeproduction)Duration14weeks14weeks4.3TeachingMaterialsThesameteachingmaterial,thatiscompulsoryeducationcurriculumstandardtextbook(GoForIt)ofGradeSevenforautumnsemester,isadoptedinboththeexperimentalclassandcontrolledclass.ItwaspublishedbythePeople’sEducationPressandBritishThomsonpublishinggroupin2011.IntermsoftherequirementofnewNationalEnglishCurriculumStandard,thelatestrevisedtextbookisbasedonaspecialarrangementfortopic,functions,structures,targetlanguage,vocabulary,recycling,-30- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachinglearningstrategies.Tab.4-2GeneralDescriptionoftheTeachingMaterialNameoftextbookGoForItGradeGradeSevenfortheautumnsemesterStarterUnit1Goodmorning!StarterUnit2What’sthisinEnglishStarterUnit3WhatColorisit?Unit1Myname’sGina.Unit2Thisismysister.TopicofeachunitUnit3Isthisyourpencil?Unit4Where’smyschoolbag?Unit5Doyouhaveasoccerball?Unit6Doyoulikebananas?Unit7Howmucharethesesocks?Unit8Whenisyourbirthday?Unit9Canyouplaytheguitar?Tab.4-3GrammarContentofEachUnitStarterUnit1WritingofwordsStarterUnit2Theuseof“a,an,the,this,that”StarterUnit3“A,E,I,O,U”;capitalizationofthefirstwordofsentenceUnit1Personpronoun,theverb“be”Unit2Demonstrativepronoun,pluralformsUnit3Generalquestionwiththeverb“be”-31- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingUnit4Prepositionoflocality“on,in,under”Unit5GeneralintroductionofsimplepresenttenseUnit6CountablenounanduncountablenounUnit7BasenumberUnit8Ordinalnumeral;possessivecaseofnounUnit9ModalVerb“can”4.4Instruments4.4.1TestsTestconsistsofpretestandposttest.Pretestisdesignedwiththepurposeofobtainingtheinitialunderstandingofthesubjects’Englishproficiencybeforetheexperimentandmakingacomparisonwiththeresultofposttest.Thetestscoresarefromthetestthataredesignedandconductedbytheauthor.Thepretestpaperisdevelopedthesamewiththeposttestinquestiontypes,totalscore,andtestarrangement.Thepaperiskeptsecretbeforeused,sothetestscoresaremoreobjectiveandlesssubjecttopersonalbias.Thepost-testscoresoftheexperimentalgroupandcontrolledgrouparetakenfromthegrammartestattheendofthesemester,alsodevelopedbytheauthoraftertheauthorgivestheexperimentallessonsfor14weeks.Astoitsdesign,thepaperstructure,theexaminationarrangementaswellasthescoringofthepost-testareexactlythesamewiththoseofthepre-test.Accordingly,bycomparingthetestresultsoftheexperimentalgroupandcontrolledgroupintheexperiment,whethertheintegrationofTBLTand3PmethodsismorehelpfultoimprovejuniorEnglishgrammarteachingcanbeclearlyfound.4.4.2QuestionnaireTwoquestionnaireswillbeusedinthisstudy,includingprequestionnaireandpostquestionnaire.-32- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingTheprequestionnaireistoinvestigatethecurrentsituationofEnglishgrammarteachingandlearningofthestudentsthatjustenrollingintojuniormiddleschool.Thisprequestionnairewillbedistributedtosubjectsofallgroupsinatenminuterecess.Thequestionnairecomprisesthreepartincludingintroduction,thepersonalinformationandquestionitems.Intheintroductionpart,studentswillbetoldthatalloftheinformationcollectedwillbeconfidentialandwillbeanalyzedforresearchpurposes.Personalinformationisusedforgettingabasicinformationofthesubject.Thequestionitemsaredesignedforgettinginformationoftwoaspects:students’attitudetowardsgrammarlearningandtheirviewtowardsthecurrentgrammarteaching.Thepostquestionnaireistograbthesubjects’overallopinionabouttheircurrentgrammarlearningandteachers’currentgrammarteaching.Bycomparingtheanswersoftheexperimentalclassandcontrolledclasses,theeffectivenessoftheintegrationofTBLTand3Pmethodscanbefound.Five-pointLikertscalewillbeusedtomeasurethescalefrom5(stronglyagree)and1(stronglydisagree).Studentsareexpectedtochoosetheanswerthatbestcorrespondstotheiropinionsfromthegivenalternatives.4.4.3InterviewTogetfurtherinformationaboutstudents’currentattitudetowardsgrammarteachingandlearning,theauthordesignstheinterview,whichiscarriedoutimmediatelyafterpost-questionnaire.Inordertofindstudents’furtherinneridea,allthequestionsoftheinterviewaredesignedasopenquestions.Thestudentsfortheinterviewareninerepresentativesofeveryscoringsectionoftheexperimentalgroup.Beforethisinterview,theauthorinformsthattheinterviewisjustmadeforhelpingteachers’grammarinstruction,ithasnothingtodowiththeirperformanceevaluation.Soitisobjectiveandreliablefortheresultsoftheinterview.Inthisinterview,fivequestionswillbeasked.Withthestudents’agreement,alloftheiranswerswillbetaperecordedforfurtheranddetailedanalysis.-33- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeaching4.5TeachingSamplesfortheExperimentalClassandControlClasses4.5.1TeachingSamplesfortheExperimentalClassusingtheIntegratedModel4.5.1.1BriefDescriptionoftheprocedureAsstatedabove,mostteachersliketousethetraditional3Pmethod.Theydomainthetalkalltheclass,studentsreciteandfollowfromthebeginningtoend.Studentshavenofreedomtochoosewhattheycandoandhowtheydoit.Theoutcomeisteachercomplainsstudentscannotlearncarefullyandeffectively.Studentscannotcatchupwiththeteachers’pace,theyevencannotunderstandwhatteacherssay.However,boththeteachersandstudentsarefamiliarthe3Pmethod,itisnoteasytoabandonit.So,heretheauthorusesthemodelofthe3Pmethod,andbringinthetaskdesignoftask-basedmethod(whichisthemainfeatureofTBLT),soastochangestudents’attitudetowardsgrammar,aroseandstimulatetheirinterests.Thetaskisintegratedinallthreestages.Andthethreestageschangefrompresentation,practiceandproductiontopresentationwithcontrolledtask,practicewithsubstitutetask,productionwithwritingandspeakingtask.Thisstudybeginsatthefirstweekandendsatthefourteenthweekoftheautumnsemester.Atthebeginningofthefirstweek,apre-testshouldbetakenbysubjects,justtoinvestigatetheirabilityofEnglishapplication.Thenbothclasseswillbeperformedafourteen-weekteaching.Eventheexperimentaldurationisfourteenweek,thestudentswillonlyhaveonegrammarlessonperweek.Ittakesaboutaweektofinishteachingaunit.Andtheninthefourteenthweek,alltheknowledgelearnedinthetwelveunitswillbebrieflyreviewed.Attheendofthestudy,aposttestwillbetakenbyallthesubjects.4.5.1.2ImplementationoftheIntegrationModelandTeachingDemonstrationInordertodemonstratetheintegrationModelandTeachingisgoodforgrammar,theauthorcarriesoutanexperimentasfollows:First,theauthorfollowthelinerstepoftraditional3Pmodel“presentation,practice,production”,buttheauthorabsorbthetaskdesignofTBLT.Inthisway,theteacherandthestudentscanclearlyknowwhattheyaregoingtodo,andtheycanbetotallyengagedinthetaskperformedinthelesson.Thestudentsnotonlygetthegrammarknowledgetheyneedtolearn,butalsofeelnotboringaboutthelearningcontentandlearningprocedure.-34- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingTofurtherdemonstratetheprocedureoftheusingtheintegratedmethod,ateachingplanfortheexperimentalclassisshownbelow:Teachingplan1fortheexperimentalclassUnit9CanyouplaytheguitarThesecondperiod1.Teachingaims1)KnowledgeandskillMasterthesentences:-Canyouswim?-Yes,Ican./No,Ican’t.-Icannotswim.-Ican’tswim(cannot=can’t).Mastertheuseofmodalverb“can”2)ProcedureandmothedPresentationwithsubstitutetaskPracticewithcontrolledtaskProductionwithwritingandspeakingtaskAutonomousandcooperativeapproach3)Awareness,attitudeandvalueviewGuidethestudentstoworktogetheractively,helpeachother,learnfromeachother,andtrainthespiritsofteamwork.2.ImportantanddifficultpointMasterthekeysentencepatternsandexpressions.Mastertheuseofmodalverbcan.3.TeachingpreparationandtoolsAprojector,handouts4.TeachingprocedureStep1.Warm-up1)Greeting.T:Goodmorning,class.Ss:Goodmorning,teacher.T:Welcomebacktomyclass.2)Revision.-35- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingT:Let’sreadtheconversationin2dtogether.T:Let’scheckthehomework(asktwogroupsofstudentstoroleplaytheconversation)Step2.Presentationwithsubstitutetask1)Icanplaychess.(substitute“I”with“Emma”)Emmacanplaychess.Ican’tdoKungfu.(substitute“I”withEric)Ericcan’tdoKunfu.CanyousinganEnglishsong?(substitute“you”withJenny)CanJennysinganEnglishsong.Step3.Practicewithcontrolledtask1)ICanplaytheguitar.I__________playtheguitar.(changeintothenegativesentence)I_____playtheguitar.Answer:cannot;can’t2)Shecanplaytheviolin.She__________playtheviolin.(changeintothenegativesentence)She__________playtheviolin.Answer:cannot;can’t3)Icanplaysoccer.__________playsoccer?(changeintogeneralquestion)Answer:Canyou4)Hecanplayvolleyball.__________playvolleyball?(changeintogeneralquestion)Answer:CanheExplain:1)Whenthegeneralstatementsarechangedintogeneralquestion,directlyputtheword“can”atthebeginningofsentence,thefirstwordofprimarysentenceischangedintolowercase,thefirstpersonischangedintothesecondperson.2)Whenthegeneralstatementsarechangedintonegativesentences,directlyadd“not”aftercan,theabbreviationis“can’t”.Step4.ProductionwithwritingandspeakingtaskTask1:Writing1)Writewhatyoucandointwoorthreesentence.-36- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingIcansinganddance.Icanplaychess.AndIcanalsodrawwell.Writewhatyoucan’tdo.Ican’teatinclass.Ican’truninthehallways.Ican’tlistentomusicintheclassroom.Task2Speaking:workwithyourpartneraboutwhatyoucando.Student1:Whatcanyoudo?Andwhatcan’tyoudo?Student2:Icansinganddance.Ican’teatinclass.Student3:Jackcansinganddance,hecan’teatinclass.Teacher:CanJacksinganddance?Ss:Yes,hecan.T:CanJackeatinclass?Ss:No,hecan’t.Task3RoleplayMakeaconversationwithyourpartner,talkaboutwhatyoucandoornot.Thenroleplayinfrontoftheclass.Step5.SummaryInthisperiod,wehavefurtherlearnedtheuseofthemodalverb“can”anddonesomepracticetoconsolidateit.Moreover,wewriteandtalkaboutwhatwecanandcan’tdo.5.HomeworkWriteacompositionaboutwhatyourclassmatecandoandcan’tto,payingattentiontotheuseofmodalverb“can”.6.Afterclassreflection4.5.2TeachingSamplesfortheControlClassUsing3PMethodInthecontrolclass,theauthorusing3PMethod.“3P”MethodisamethodthatisderivedfromtheCommunicativeLanguageTeaching.Thebasicstagesof“3P”methodisdividedintothreestages:presentation,practice,production.Itiswellknownthat,eventhe3Pmethodisseenasoutofdate,itisstillwidelyusedintraditionalgrammarlesson.Theteacherissimpletofollowthethreestages.Nootherthingtheycando,nomattertosaythefreedomtothinkandcreateindependently.Teachersjustpresenttheresultsoflanguage,studentwillcarryoutagivenmodel，tomastertheaimoflanguage.-37- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingTofurtherintroducethe3Pmethodtheauthorusesinthecontrolclass,ateachingplanisshownbelow(theteachingmaterialanddurationisthesamewiththeexperimentalclass):Teachingplan2forthecontrolclassUnit9CanyouplaytheguitarThesecondperiod1.Teachingaims1)KnowledgeandskillMasterthesentences:-Canyouswim?-Yes,Ican./No,Ican’t.-Icannotswim.-Ican’tswim(cannot=can’t).Mastertheuseofmodalverb“can”2)ProcedureandmothedPresentation-practice-production2.ImportantanddifficultpointMasterthekeysentencepatternsandexpressions.Mastertheuseofmodalverbcan.3.TeachingpreparationandtoolsAprojector,handouts4.TeachingprocedureStep1.Warm-upGreeting.T:Goodmorning,class.Ss:Goodmorning,teacher.T:Welcomebacktomyclass.Revision.CheckthehomeworkofPeriodOne.Revisethenamesoftheclubstheyhavelearned.Askastudentstodotheactionsandasktheotherstudentstoguessthemeaning.Askstudentstoworkinpairstoaskandanswerthesequestions.Step2.PresentationGrammarFocus.-38- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingLeadstudentstoreadthesentencesintheboxonebyone,explaintheuseofmodalverb“can”.Showsomepicturesandasklikethis:Canyouplaychess?Canyouplaytheguitar?Canyousing?Canyouplayitwell?Explaintheuseof“can”Itisusedtoexpressone’sabilitytodosomething.Step3.Practice1)Whenthegeneralstatementsarechangedintogeneralquestion,directlyputtheword“can”atthebeginningofsentence,thefirstwordofprimarysentenceischangedintolowercase,thefirstpersonischangedintothesecondperson.Sentence1:Icanseeanorangeonthetable.Sentence2:Canyouseeanorangeonthetable?2)Whenthegeneralstatementsarechangedintonegativesentences,directlyadd“not”aftercan,theabbreviationis“can’t”Sentence3:Emmacanseethepenonthedesk.Sentence4:Emmacannotseethepenonthedesk.Sentence5:Hecanswim.Sentence6:Hecan’tswim.Step4.ProductionGivestudentsfourminutestochangethesentencespatterns,theninvitesomestudentstochecktheanswers.Answers:1.CanCindyplaytheviolin?2.CanEricplaybasketball.3.Emmacannotplaytheguitar.4.Gracecan’tplaysoccer.Step5.SummaryInthisperiod,wehavefurtherlearnedtheuseofthemodalverb“can”anddonesomepracticetoconsolidateit.5.Homework-39- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingFinishtheexerciseinthetextbookof“Activity3C”6.AfterclassreflectionThisisteachingplanisbasedonthesameteachingcontent,teachingmaterial,importantanddifficultpointswiththeplanofaboveintegratedteachingplan,butmainlydifferentintheteachingprocedure.4.6DataCollectionInthisresearch,apretest,posttest,prequestionnaire,postquestionnaireandafterwardinterviewarecarriedout.Allthedataoftheexperimentreflectsthestudents’Englishgrammarproficiency.Althoughthereareonlytwoclasses,totallyonehundredandtenstudents,onlyfourteenweeks.Allthestudentsreceivedifferentkindsofteachingmethod,theintegratedmethodand3Pmethod,thatisthedifference.Bycomparingthedatacollectedfrompretestandposttest,wecanfindthechangebroughtbytheuseofdifferentmethods.Thestatisticalnumberofsubjectnumber,meanscore,standarddeviation,T-valueandsoonwillbeanalyzedbythesoftwareofSPSS17.0.Moreover,theinformationobtainedfromthequestionnaireandinterviewmayhelpustoanalyzethechangeofstudents’grammarknowledgeandtheirattitudetowardsgrammarlearning.-40- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingChapterFiveResultsAndDiscussionInthissection,thestatisticalnumberofthepretestandtheposttest,theresultofprequestionnaireandpostquestionnairearepresented.Andthendiscussionsarecarriedoutherebasedontheseresults.5.1Results5.1.1Pre-testResultInthispart,firsttheauthorpresenttheresultsofpretest.Thetestisdesignedandconductedbytheauthor.Here,weuseSPSStoconductstatisticalinformationanalysis,inwhichT-testisapplied,andanalphaof0.5istakenasthesignificancevalue.Inordertoaccuratelycalculatethedifferenceofthetestresultsbetweentheexperimentclassandthecontrolclass,themeanvaluesofthetwoclassesarecompared.AndthroughtheimplementationoftheT-test,aT-valuewillcomeout.Soasplanned,allthestudentsfromthetwoclasses,theexperimentclassandthecontrolclasswillhaveatest,apre-test,whichisthetestbeforetheexperiment.Andtheresultsofthetestofthetwoclassesareshownrespectivelyinthetalebelow:Tab.5-1Pre-testResultsofTwoClassesClassNMSDT-valueControlclass5572.39.90.629ExperimentalClass5572.710.9Note:N:subjectnumber;M:meanscore;SD:standarddeviation;T-Value:T-valueisanindexobtainedthroughcomparingthetestresultsofthetwoclasses.-41- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingInTable5-1,T-valueis0.629(IT<1.98,a0.05).It’savalueofinsignificance.Itdemonstratesthatbeforeexperiment,thesetwoclasses,theexperimentclassandthecontrolclassareuponthesamelevelontheaspectofEnglishGrammar.AstheMvaluesandtheSDvaluesofthetwoclassesarequiteclose.Sothetwoclassescanbetakenasidealexperimentsubjects.5.1.2ResultofthePost-testAfterthepre-test,bothtwoclassesreceivedtrainingofthesamelength,butdifferentgrammarteaching.Theninordertoassesstheeffectofthetraining,alltheparticipantsofthetwoclasseshadapost-test.Theresultsofthepost-testareshowninthetablebelow:Tab.5-2Post-testResultsofTwoClassesClassNMSDT-valueControlclass5573.610.92.239ExperimentalClass5580.115.9WecanseeinTable5-2thatMvalueandSDvalueoftheexperimentclassare80.1and15.9respectively,andforthecontrolclass,theyare73.6and10.9respectively.AndtheT-valueis2.239(TI<1.98,0.05),whichindicatesthesignificantdifferencesbetweenthetwoclasses,andwecanseethattheexperimentclassistheonewhohasmademuchbetterprogress.5.1.3ResultofthePre-questionnaireInordertofindstudents’attitudetowardsgrammarteaching,apre-questionnaireisconducted.Totally,therearetwelvequestions,theyareshownbelow:Tab.5-3QuestionsofthePre-questionnaireNo.Question1WhatisyourmotivationoflearningEnglishgrammar?-42- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeaching2Whatisthefeelingwhenyouarelearninggrammar?3Whatisthereasonforyoutolearngrammarhard?4Whatcanyoudowhenyoumeetdifficulty?5WhatisthepercentageofgrammarlearninginyourEnglishteaching?6Whatdoyouthinkisthebestwaytoimproveyourgrammar?7Whatisthecommonwayforyourteachertoteachgrammar?8Whatdoyouthinkoftheclassroomatmosphereofgrammarlearning?9Howdoyoubehaviorinthegrammarclass?10Whatisthepercentageofgrammarinyourhomework?11WhatdoyouthinkoftheroleofgrammartohelpimproveEnglish?12Whatwaydoyouhopeyourteachertouseinthefollowingstudy?Thequestionnaireareattributedtoallstudentsofthetwoclass,theanswertimeistenminutes.Allquestionnairesarereturnedsmoothly.Theanswersforthetwelvequestionsareshownbelow,thestatisticisanalyzedbyproportion.Tab.5-4ResultsofthePre-questionnaireQuestion1A.copewithexamB.learninginterestC.improveEnglishD.regulationof35%16%22%curriculum27%Question2A.easy17%B.relativelyeasyC.relativelyD.difficult40%21%difficult22%Question3A.thecomplexofB.thetediousofC.notstudyD.theinfluenceofgrammarrule32%classroomteachingcarefully18%Chinese8%42%Question4-43- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingA.seekhelpforB.seekhelpforC.seekhelpforD.wait17%teacher36%classmates24%tutoringmaterial23%Question5A.below20%B.20%---30%C.30%---40%D.above40%30%40%16%14%Question6A.classroomB.helpofC.self-studyafterD.familyeducationteaching50%classmates16%class19%15%Question7A.explainandB.explainandC.mainlypracticeD.self-study12%remember35%exercise37%16%Question8A.active10%B.relativelyactiveC.relativelytediousD.tedious39%22%29%Question9A.listeningandB.mechanicalC.exercisebasedonD.writtenexerciseremember34%exercise31%life18%17%Question10A.large29%B.relativelylargeC.relativesmallD.small13%42%16%Question11A.useful19%B.relativelyusefulC.relativelyuselessD.useless15%27%29%Question12A.mainlyexplainB.mechanicalC.learninginlifeD.bytextbook9%6%exercise13%72%-44- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingThatisthedetailresultsofpre-questionnaire,itwillbediscussedinthefollowingpart.5.1.4ResultsofthePost-QuestionnaireThepost-questionnaireismadeupoftenquestions,itutilizesthefive-pointLikertscale.Foreveryquestions,therearefivechoices:1=totallydisagree;2=mostlydisagree;3=neutral;4=mostlyagree;5=totallyagree.Itisperformedattheendofexperiment.Itisusedtocomparetheanswerofbothclasses.Thequestionofthepost-questionnaireislistedbelow:Tab.5-5QuestionofthePost-questionnaireQuestionNo.Statement1IlikestudygrammarinEnglishclass.2Ifeelconfidenttolearngrammar.3Icanworkcarefullyandhardtolearngrammar.4Ifeelitisrelaxingtolearngrammarinclass.5Ithinkthegrammarlessonhassomethingtodowithmydailylife.6Iagreethegrammarlessoncanhelpusinduceandconsolidatethegrammarrule.7Icanjointheactivitywithmyclassmatesingrammarclass8Icanclearcatchthekeypointofgrammarlesson9Icanrealizemygoalforgrammarlearning.10Ifeelsatisfiedaboutgrammarteaching.Asstatedabove,everyquestionhasfivechoices.Fordifferentchoice,wecangetdifferentscores:ifthestudentchoose“1=totallydisagree”,theycangetzeroscores.Therelationshipofchoiceandscoreislistedbelow:-45- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingTab.5-6RelationshipofOptionandScoreOptionTotallyMostlyneutralMostlyTotallydisagreedisagreeagreeagreeScore01234Soifastudentchoose“mostlyagree”,hecangetthreescoreforthisquestion,thenhisscoreofthetenquestionwillbeaddeduptogether.Theresultsofpost-questionnaireforECandCCislistbelow:Tab.5-7ResultsofthePost-questionnaireNAveragescoreTotalscoreControlledclass5586.24741Experimentclass5563.134695.2Analysis5.2.1AnalysisofthePre-test’sDataInordertoshowthatthestudents’EnglishgrammarknowledgeoftheECandtheCCareinthesamelevel,thepre-testiscarriedout.Nowtheresultofthepre-testisanalyzedintheaspectsoftotalscores,averagescores,thenumberoftopstudentsandthenumberofstudentsindifferentscorelevels.ThedataisshowninTable5-7:-46- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingTab.5-8theResultofthePre-testClassTotalAverage100-9190-8180-7170-69Belowscoresscores(No.Of60(No.topOfnostudentspassed)students)Control397772.371219125ClassExperim399772.771120125entclassFromthedataofTable5-7,thestudents’EnglishproficiencyoftheECandtheCCissimilar.TheEChas3997totalscores,whiletheCChas3977totalscores.Thereareonly20scoresbetweenthem.TheaveragescoreoftheECis72.7anditis0.4higherthanthatoftheCC(72.3),whichcannottellanythingdifferent.Thenumbersofthetopstudentsaresimilartoeachotherindifferentscorescales.Thereisnotabigdifferenceofthestudents’Englishgrammarproficiencybetweenthesetwoclasses,afterall,thesetwoclassesarechosenfromthirtyclassestobetheECandtheCCandthestudentsofthetwoclassarearrangedparallellyattheverybeginningofjuniormiddleschool.5.2.2AnalysisofthePost-test’sDataAfterthetwelveunitsarelearned,areviewiscarriedout.Atlast,apost-testistakenbyallthesubjectsinordertoprovethatthestudents’EnglishgrammarproficiencyoftheECisimprovedgreaterthanthatoftheCC.Theresultsofpost-testareanalyzedinthetotalscores,averagescores,thenumberofthetopstudentsandnopassstudents.Thefullmarksofthistestare100scores,thequestiontype,testarrangementaredesignedcloselyandthe-47- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingstudentswhoget91scoresormorethan91scoresaretopstudents.ThedetailsoftheresultsareintheTable5-9.Tab.5-9theResultsofPost-testClassTotalAverage100-9190-8180-7170-69Belowscoresscores(No.Of60(No.topOfnostudentspassed)students)Control404873.67132195ClassExperim440680.19172342entclassBythecomparison,itisobviousthatmanystudents’grammarknowledgeisimprovedgreatly.TheaveragescoresofECclassishigherthanthatofCCclass.Bythetest,wefindthattheECgroupstudentshavebetterperformancethantheCCgroup.Itrevealsthatnewmethodcanimprovethestudents’grammar.Whatismore,wecanalsoconcludethattheteachingreformcanbeintroducedtoEnglishlearningarea.Withthereformofcurriculumandentranceexam,thesocietyproposesthehighstandardsforallthestudentsandteachers.Onlyinmoreflexibleway,canthestudentscatchupwiththesituationandgetamoresolidEnglishknowledge,soastoimprovetheirEnglishproficiency.Thus,teachersandstudentscantrythisnewteachingandlearningmethod.5.2.3ComparisonabouttheDataBetweenPre-testandPost-testIntheTable5-3,wecanaccuratelyseetheprogressestheexperimentclasshasmade-48- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingthroughcomparingtheresultsofthetwotests,thepost-testandthepre-test.Mvaluehasgoneupfrom72.7to80.1andtheSDvaluefrom10.9to15.9.Theyarereallyquitelargealeap.Tab.5-10ResultsofPre-testandPost-testofExperimentalClassClassNMSDT-valueExperimentalClass5572.710.92.549ExperimentalClass5580.115.9Note:N:subjectnumber;M:meanscore;SD:standarddeviation;T-Value:T-valueisanindexobtainedthroughcomparingtheresultsofthepre-testandpost-test.Inthetablebelow,Table4,wecanaccuratelyseethedifferencesthecontrolclasshasmadethroughcomparingtheresultsofthetwotests,thepost-testandthepre-test.Mvaluehasgoneupfrom72.3to73.6andtheSDvaluefrom9.9to10.9.Aftertraining,thecontrolclasshasimprovedabit,butit’snotasignificantchange.Tab.5-11ResultsofPre-testandPost-testofControlClassClassNMSDT-valueControlclass5572.39.91.039Controlclass5573.610.9Note:N:subjectnumber;M:meanscore;SD:standarddeviation;T-Value:T-valueisanindexobtainedthroughcomparingtheresultsofthepre-testandpost-test.Table5-3andTable5-4indicatethetwoclasseshavebothimproved.However,theT-valueofeachis2.549and1.039respectively,whichdemonstratesthatteachinggrammarintheframeworkoftheintegratedmethodismuchmoreeffectivethanteachinggrammarunderconventionalmethodof3P.Intheexperiment,theexperimentclassistaughtbytheintegrationoftasked-basedand3Pmethodwhilethecontrolclassistaughtintheconventional3Pmethod-49- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeaching(presentation,practiceandproduction).Andthetwomethodshavebroughtaboutdifferentresults.Andthroughresearch,wehavefoundthecauses.Intheexperimentalclass,whichistaughtundertheintegratedteachingmodeloftasked-basedand3Pmethod,studentsarethecenteroftheclass.Teachersareboththefacilitatorsandthecontroller.Studentsaredrivenbythetaskandcontrolledbythe3Pmodelandtheymakeeveryefforttocompletethetask,theclassisveryactiveanddynamic.Moreover,it’srathereasytofollowthefixedthreestage.Inthemeanwhile,everythinginthecontrolclassgoesontoosmoothly,forteacherscontroltheclassallthetime.Studentsjustfollowtheteacher,sotherearenoaccidents,everythingisinorder.Intheexperimentclass,thetaskiscarefullydesignedtoclosetostudents’lifeandalsoclosetothedemandofgrammarexam.Soeverystudenthassomethingtodo.Theyhavemuchtosayabouttheirownlife.Sotheycanspeakoutloudlyandexcitedly.Theyareself-motivated.Theclassisverylively.Inthecontrast,thecontrolclassisveryquiet,forthecontentsoftheclassarenotasinterestingastheexperimentclass,justonlyaimingatexam.Sostudentsarenotaroused,andfewerinteractionshavetakenplace.Fromthetestresults,wefoundthatgrammarscorehasbeendevelopedinthecontrolclass,butthecontrolclassdonotprogressrapid.Whileintheexperimentclass,becausetheteacheradoptstheintegratedmethod,studentsprogressmorerapid,wecanseeagreaterchangeoftheirscores.ThestatisticanalysishasshowntheintegratedmethodofTBLTand3Pissuperiorinteachinggrammarthantheconventional3Pmethod.Andinthesurveyweconductedaftertheexperiment,studentsalsoshowedmorewelcomeattitudestowardtask.Allofthesehaveprovedthehypothesesputforwardatthebeginningoftheexperiment.Theintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmethodaremoreeffectiveinenhancingstudents’masteryofgrammarknowledge,theexperimentgroupcanachievehigherscoresthanthecontrolledgroup.However,theexperimentresultscanbeaffectedbymanyfactors.Inthisexperiment,theteachersandstudentsareallfromthecityarea,thatistosaytheygoodeducationalbackground.Ifthisexperimentissetintheruralarea,teachersmaylacktheknowledgeandskilltointegratetwomethods.Besides,theteachingfacilitiesthestudentshaveaswellasthedifferenttasksgiventothestudents,thesefactors,theycallallbrightoutdifferentresults.Stilltherearemanyfactorswemighthavebeenunawareof.However,studentswelcomethenewteachingmethods,andtheydomakedifferences,sowehaveeveryreasontoexploreandmakeprogressintheintegratedteaching.-50- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeaching5.2.4AnalysisofInformationObtainedfromPre-questionnaireTheresultofpre-questionnairehasbeendiscussedintheabovepart,itispresentedbyproportion.Forstudents’motivationoflearninggrammar,35%ofstudentschooseto“coopwithexam”,27%ofstudentschoose“theregulationofcurriculum”.Fromthis,wecanseemanystudentdonotlearngrammarinitiatively,theyhavetolearnwithoutchoice,theydonothaveenoughmotivationtolearngrammar.Forthefeelingoflearninggrammar,manystudentssay“difficult”or“relativelydifficult”,soitisnotaneasythingforstudentstolearngrammar.Itaddstheburdenofstudents,theyfeelreluctanttolearngrammar.42%ofstudentschoose“thetediousofclassroomteaching”asthemainreasonoflearninggrammardifficult.Itenlightensusweshouldchangethesituationofourclassroomteaching.Itisofextremelyurgent.Whenstudentsmeetthedifficultyofgrammar,36%ofthemturntoteacherforhelp.Itstatesthatteacher’shelpisstilltheirmorewaytosolvetheirgrammarproblem.Onlywhenteacherschange,itispossibleforstudentstochangetheirgrammarlearningsituation.Thepercentageof30%ofstudents’grammarlearningtimeissmall.Soitispossibleandnecessarytoaddtheirgrammarlearningtime.ItisclearlythathalfofstudentsthinkthemosteffectivewaytoimproveEnglishgrammartoclassroomteaching.However,35%ofteachersteachgrammarby“explainingandremembering”,37%ofteachersteachgrammarby“explainingandexercising”.Whatismore,39%ofstudentsreporttheatmosphereofgrammarclassroomis“boringandtedious”.Soitisclearlythatweshouldchangethecurrentsituationofgrammarteaching.Itisnecessaryandofgreatimportance.Inclass,34%ofstudentsstudygrammarby“listeningremembering”,31%by“mechanicalexercise”.Afterclass,42%ofstudentsreflecttheloadoftheirhomeworkisheavy.Sostudentsfeelconfusedabouttheirowngrammarlearning.Theydonotknowhowtolearnit,justbyremembering,exercisingandhomework.Soteachersneedtogivestudentsmoreguidetolearngrammar.Forthelastquestion,72%ofstudentswanttolearngrammarbasedontheirownlifeinthefuture.Forthem,tolearngrammarinthiswayisinteresting,theoutcomeisalsoworthexpected.-51- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingTosumup,thecurrentsituationofgrammarteachingandlearningisnotsatisfied,itisurgenttochangeit.Moreover,teachingandlearninggrammarbasedonlifeisadirectiontostartthereform.Whatismore,theauthorfindthestudentsofECandCCnearlygivethesameanswerofpre-questionnaire.Itprovesthestudents’attitudetowardsgrammaroftwogrouphasgreatsimilaritiesbeforetheexperiment.5.2.5ComparisonoftheResultofPost-questionnairebetweentheExperimentalClassandControlClassesAsstatedabove,thepost-questionnaireismadeupoffive-pointlikertscale,soitcanbescored.Fortheexperimentclass,thetotalscoreis4741,theaveragescoreis86.2,whereasforthecontrolclass,thetotalscoreis3469,theaveragescoreis63.1.ECgetgreatlyhigherscoresthantheCC.Thepost-questionnaireisaboutstudents’attitudeandfeelingtowardsgrammarteaching.ItisnaturallytobeconcludedthatECgetmorerapidprogress.Theyhavehighermotivationwhentheyarelearninggrammar.Theyarewillinglytolearngrammar.Theyhavemoreenthusiasticandcanlearninitiatively.Thegrammarteachingbeginstohavesomethingtodowithstudents’dailylife,andtheyfeelrelaxedwhentheyarelearninggrammarinclass.Theycaneveninduceandconsolidatethegrammarrulesbythemselves.Theyarewillingtotakepartintheactivityingrammarclass.Itiseasyforthemtogetthekeypointsofgrammarlessonandmakeitclear.Itispossibleforthemtoachievetheaimoftheirgrammar.Allinall,studentsinECfeelsatisfiedaboutthegrammarteachingandlearning.Theirinnerideaaboutgrammarbegintochange.Theybegintoshowenthusiasmandfaith,begintoknowhowtolearngrammar,begintorealizetheirgrammargoal.5.2.6AnalysisofInformationObtainedfromInterviewfortheExperimentalClassAfterthepost-questionnaire,theauthorchoosefivestudentsfromECbytheirscoresegment.Therearefivesamequestionsforeverystudent.Theiranswersaretaperecordedsecretly.QuestionOne:Whatisthedifferenceofgrammarteachingbetweenbeforeandnow?-52- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingAnswer:Grammarwastaughtbythetextbookbefore,wehavemanythingstoreciteandmuchhomeworktodo.Alwaywedoalotbutachievelittle.Nowthegrammarisoftenrelatedwithourlife,wehavecanusethegrammartosaywhatwewanttosay.Itiseasyforustouseandrememberthegrammar.Fromthisanswer,wecanseethegrammarteachingreallychangeaftertheexperiment,evenstudentscannoticeit.Thegrammarteachingmovefromtextbookbasedtolifebased.QuestionTwo:Whatisthedifferenceofgrammarlearningbetweenbeforeandnow?Answer:Ilearnedgrammarmainlybyrecitingandexercising,butalwaysIforgetallthingswhenIamhavinganexam.NowIcaneasilyfindthegrammarrulesbycomparingthesentencewiththesamepatternandrule.Icanevenmakesentencesbymyself.IrecitelessbutIcangettherightanswerwhenIamhavinganexam.Fromthispoint,wecanfindthelearningstyleofstudentalsobegintochange.Theycaninduceandconsolidatethegrammarruletheylearn,theycanevenusethem,sotheycangethigherscoresintheexam.QuestionThree:Canyouadaptyourselftothischange?Doyouhaveanymaladjustment?Answer:Atfirst,Ifeelstrangeaboutthegrammarteachinginclass,Ihavenevergotsuchalesson,wenearlydonotneedthetextbook.Butsoon,Ifeelsecurity,becausebythisway,Icaneasilycatchthekeygrammarpointwithoutreciteit.Bythereinforcementofmakingsentence,Icanmakemyownsentencesbymyself.AndIamnottiredwhenlearninggrammar.Ilikethischange.Fromthestudents’answer,wefindatfirst,hehassomemaladjustment,butsoonheadjusttoit.Theyevenlikeit,itisuseful.QuestionFour:whatisthemeritsanddemeritsyouthinkofthegrammarclass?Answer:ThemeritisIenhancemygrammarknowledgesoastoimprovemyEnglishproficiency.IfeelitonlongerhardtolearnEnglish.However,Ihavenotnoticeanydemerits.Theauthorfindthestudents’scorereallyimprove,itiscoincidedwithstudents’word.Asforthedemerits,maybethestudentsisinexperiencedEnglishlearner,sotheycannoticethedemeritseasily.QuestionFive:whatisthedifficultywhenyouarelearninggrammar?Whathelpdoyouwanttoseekforyourteacher?Answer:Ifeelitisdifficulttoguesswhattheteacherwanttoteachinthenextclass,-53- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingsoIcan’tprepareitwithmytextbook.Iwantteacherscantellushowtoprepareforthenextgrammarlesson?Students’enthusiasmhasbeengreatlyimproved,theywanttopreparethenextlesson.Butbecausethelessonisnottotallytaughtbythetextbook,itisalittledifficultforthem.Sothisisonepointfortheintegratedmethodshouldpayattentionto.Withtheimprovementofstudents’Englishproficiency,theycanrelatethegrammarteacherswillteachwiththeirownlifeeasily.Bythisinterview,theauthorfindstudents’innerfeelingtowardstheintegratedmethodandgrammarteachingreallychangegreatly.Mostofthechangeisgratifying.Itmotivateustoexplorefurther.-54- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingChapterSixConclusionsThischapteristheconclusionpartofthewholethesis,whichincludesthemajorfindingsoftheresearch,aswellasthelimitationsandsuggestionsforfurtherstudy.6.1ResearchFindingsGenerallyspeaking,grammarasabasictoolformillionsofstudentsisalwaystaughtbythetraditional3Pmethod,whichresultstothemanyobstaclesinthegrammarteaching.Thus,mostteachersandstudentsfinditnecessarytochangethecurrentsituationofgrammarteachingsoastheycanuseEnglishwithpropergrammarknowledge.Consideringthissituation,theauthortrytointegratethetask-basedmethodandtraditional3Pmethod.WiththepurposeoftryingtodemonstratethepossibilitywhethertheintegratedmethodappliedtotheEnglishgrammarteachingcanimprovethestudents’grammarknowledge.Afterfourteenweeks’experiment,onthebasisofcomprehensiveanddetailedanalysisofthepreviouschapters,tworesearchquestionscanbeanswered.Forthefirstresearchquestion,istheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmethodsmoreeffectiveinenhancingstudents’masteryofgrammarknowledge?Thatistosay,cantheexperimentclassachievehigherscoresthanthecontrolledclassintheposttest?Itisclearthat,beforetheexperiment,theaveragescoreoftheexperimentalgroupandthecontrolgrouparerelatively72.7and72.3,thereisnosignificantdifferencebetweenthetwogroups.However,aftertheexperiment,theaveragescoresoftheexperimentgroupandthecontrolgrouparerelatively80.1and73.6.Theexperimentgroupmakesdramaticalprogressandthecontrolgroupimproveslittle.Forthepost-questionnaire,morestudentsofexperimentalgroupchoosethat,“Ifeelconfidenttostudygrammar”,“Ifeelitisrelaxingtolearngrammarinclass”,“Icanrealizemygoalforgrammarlearning”,“Ifeelsatisfiedaboutgrammarteaching”,etc.Five-pointLikertscalewillbeusedtomeasurethescalefrom5(stronglyagree)and1(stronglydisagree).Theaveragescoresoftheexperiment-55- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachinggroupandcontrolgroupare86.2and63.1.Fromthestudents’innersituationofexperimentgroup,itiscleartoseetheyfindconfidenttolearngrammar,theirmasteryofgrammarknowledgehasimproved.Fromtheresultsofexperiment,especiallythecomparisonbetweenpre-testandpost-test,theexperimentgroupmakesmorerapidprogressthanthecontrolgroup,theygethigherscores.Theintegratedteachingmethodisusefultoimprovethestudents’testscores,becauseofthis,moreandmorestudentshaveafaithinlearninggrammar,theyhavemoreinterestinlearningit.Allinall,theintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmethodsismoreeffectiveinenhancingstudents’masteryofgrammarknowledge.Forthesecondresearchquestion,comparedwiththetraditional3Pmethod,istheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmodelsbetteratstimulatingstudents’grammarlearningenthusiasmandinducingtheircooperationwiththeirclassmatesinjuniormiddleschool?Forthepre-questionnaire,theauthorfindsmoststudentsarereluctanttolearngrammar,theylearnitnotautonomously,alsotheirwaystolearngrammaris“timeconsumingandlowefficiency”.However,forthepost-questionnaire,morestudentsinexperimentgroupthanthecontrolgroupchoose“Icanworkcarefullyandhardtolearngrammar”,“Icanjointheactivitywithmyclassmatesingrammarclass”,“Icanrealizemygoalforgrammarlearning”,“Ifeelsatisficedaboutgrammarteaching”,etc.Theaveragescoresofexperimentgroupandcontrolgroupare86.2and63.1.Fromtheinterviewforexperimentgroupafterpost-test,theauthorgetmoreinformationabouttheirinnerideaandthoughtaboutgrammar.Moststudentsagreethatthereisgreatdifferenceofgrammarteachingandlearningbeforeandaftertheexperiment,studentscanadjustthemselvestothechange,theywelcomethischange,theyfeellessdifficulttolearngrammarandtheyarewillinglytoseekhelpfromtheirteachersandclassmates.Theintegrationoftask-basedand3PmethodsinjuniorEnglishgrammarteachingcanchangestudents’attitudetowardsgrammartosomeextent,especiallychangetheirbehaviorinclass,greatlyimprovetheirenthusiasm.Soitcanbeconcludedthat,comparedwiththetraditional3Pmethod,theintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmodelsisbetteratstimulatingstudents’grammarlearningenthusiasmandinducingtheircooperationwiththeirclassmatesinjuniormiddleschool.Besides,theintegrationcanhelpstudentschangethelearningstyleofstudents,getawayfromthetraditionallearningmodel,recitingandexercising.Thecenteroftheirlearninggrammarmovesfromtextbook-basedtolife-basedmode.-56- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingAllinall,theirinnerideaandthoughttowardsgrammarlearningandteachinghavechangedgreatly,andthischangemovestowardspositivepoint,towardsavirtuouscircle.Inoneword,theintegrationofTBLTand3PmethodisfeasibleforjuniorEnglishgrammarteaching,incanchangestudents’attitudetowardsgrammar,improvetheiracademicscoresandchangetheirlearningstyle.6.2ImplicationsoftheStudyThroughthisresearch,twoimportantproblemshavebeensolved.Wecanconcludeitasfollows:First,itprovestheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmethodsaremoreeffectiveinenhancingstudents’masteryofgrammarknowledge.Theexperimentalclassreallyachievehigherscoresthanthecontrolledclassintheposttest.Second,Comparedwiththetraditional3Pmethod,theintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmodelsarebetteratstimulatingstudents’grammarlearningenthusiasmandinducingstudents’cooperationwiththeirclassmatesinjuniormiddleschool.Theempiricalstudyrevealstheeffectivenessofintegratedteachingmethodingrammar.Andtheauthorwillproposesomepedagogicalsuggestionsforthepracticalimplementationoftheintegratedmethod.Throughtheexperiment,webelievethatstudentsmaybenefitalotfromintegratedmethod.Tasksandactivitiescanmaketheclassroomatmospheremuchmorerelaxing,whichmeansgrammarteachingcanoccurinamorenaturalandmeaningfulway.Thekeypointofintegratedmethodcanbesummarizedasfollows:1.Wecanconsidertofollowthebasicstagesof3Pmodels.Everyknowledgeneedtobepresented,practicedandproduced.Nomatterwhatmethodweuse,wecanfollowthetypicalthreestages.Itisaccordedwithhumancognitiverules.Andthethreestagesareeasilyacceptedbyboththeteachersandthestudents.2.Taskdesign,whichistheessenceofTBLT,canbeintegratedintothethreestages.Itisnotincompatibleforthetwomethods.Inthisway,wecanmakeourgrammarlessonmorevivid.Students’interestcanbestimulated,theycanlearngrammarwithclearaim,relaxingtaskdemand,notjusttorecitethegrammarruleandthecomplexgrammarsentencepatterns.3.Thetediousdemandsandhomeworkof3PmethodcanbeadaptedbyTBLT.The-57- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingexerciseandhomeworkof3Pmethodcanberelatedmorewithstudents’dailylife.Inthisway,studentscanreallyhavesomethingtosay,notjusttorecitethephrasesandsentencestheywillneveruse.Theycanhavealife-relatedaim.Theycanusewhattheylearn.4.Thetaskdesignshouldberestricted,notdesignedtodoanytaskwewant.Thetaskshouldbasedonthethreestages.Thecontentanddifficultydegreeshouldbearrangedproperlywiththethreestages.Differentstagecandesigndifferenttask,sothatstudentscanachievegrammarknowledgeandusethemgradually.Accordingtothelistedthingsabove,itiscanbeclearlyseentheimplicationwhenintegratingtask-basedand3PmethodsinjuniorEnglishgrammarteaching,especiallywhenthemethodisintroducedtorealclassteaching.ItisknowntoallthattheuseofTBLTrequirestheteachershavehigherEnglishproficiencyandskilltocontroltheclass.SotheintegrationmethoddemandsEnglishteacherstoimprovetheirEnglishlevelgreatlyanditisnotsuitableforsometeacherstojustborrowthemethodwithoutgivingseriousconsideration.Thoughtheexperiment,theauthorhasprovedthatteachinggrammarbytheintegrationteachinginstructionissuperiortoteachinggrammarbythetraditionalinstruction,itdoesnotmeanthattraditionalinstructionisbadforEnglishlearning.Forexample,teachinggrammarthroughtraditionalinstructionismoresuitablefornewEnglishteacher,itiseasiertocontroltheclass.JustasonelanguageprofessorWeiYonghongoncewrote:WeshouldfindanewwaytostudytheEnglishgrammar.AneclecticmethodwillmoresuitablefortheChinesecontext.Wecanconsidertoapplytheintegrationoftask-basedand3Pmethodstoourrealuse.Wecannotuseanyteachingmethodmechanically.Sotheintegrationoftask-basedand3PmethodsinEnglishgrammarteachingshouldbefeasiblefortherealteachingandlearningsituations.6.3SuggestionsforFurtherStudyNooneagreethatanyresearchisperfect.Thus,wealsofindthedisadvantageinthestudyinordertocarryoutfurtherresearch.First,thisresearchisconductedonjuniorgrammarteaching,notextendtomoreEnglishteachingandlearningareas.Sointhefuture,wecanconsidertoextendthisresearchtovocabulary,pronunciationteaching.Theexperimentsubjectcanincludesenior-58- AnEmpiricalStudyoftheIntegrationofTask-basedand3PMethodsinJuniorEnglishGrammarTeachingmiddleschoolstudents,collegestudents.Second,duringtheresearch,theexperimenttimeisnotenough.Becausestudentsinjuniormiddleschoolhavemanythingstolearn,soeveryweektheyjusthaveoneexperimentlesson.Itisnotenoughfortheauthortotestifyandexploremoreoutcomeoftheintegratedmethod.Last,thesubjectofthisresearchisjuniormiddleschoolstudent.TheyareinexperiencedEnglishlearner,theirviewstowardsEnglishlearningarenotmature.SotheycanfullytellthetruthoftheirEnglishlearningsituationduringtheinterview.Inthefurtherresearch,westillhavemanythingstodo,andtheintegratedmethodstillneedsustoexploredeep.-59- BibliographyBibliographyBrown,H.Douglas.PrinciplesofLanguageLearningandTeaching[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2002.Cook,V.SecondLanguageLearningandLanguageTeaching[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2000.Davies,P.&Pearse,E.SuccessinEnglishTeaching[M].Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress,2004.Ellis.R.TheStudyofSecondLanguageAcquisition.[M].Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress.2006.Ellis,R.SecondLanguageAcquisitionResearch:HowDoesIthelpLanguageTeachers?[J].AnInterviewWithRodEllisinELTJournal,1993(47).Harmer,J.HowtoTeachEnglish[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2006.Hedge,T.TeachingandLearningintheLanguageClassroom[M].Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress,2002.Herbet,W.S.&Shohamy,E.SecondLanguageResearchMethod[M].Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1989.Howatt,R.A.D.AHistoryofEnglishLanguageTeaching[M].Oxford:OxfordUp,1984.Hymes,D.H.OnCommunicativeCompetence[M].Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress,1997.Johnson,Keith.AnIntroductiontoForeignLanguageLearningandTeaching[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2002.Krashen,S.PrinciplesandPracticeinSecondLanguageAcquisition[M].NewYork:PergamonPress,1982.Larsen-Freeman,D.&Long,M.H.AnIntroductiontoSecondLanguageAcquisition[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2002.Littlewood,W.ForeignandSecondLanguageLearning.[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2000.Long,M.H.&Porter,P.A.Groupwork,inter-languagetalk,andsecondlanguageacquisition[J].TESOLQuarterly,1985(2):207-221.Nunan,D.SecondLanguageTeachingandLearning[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2001.-60- BibliographyOxford,R.LanguageLearningStrategies:WhatEveryTeacherShouldKnow[M].Rowley,Mass:NewburyHouse.1990.Richards,JackC.,andTheodreS.Rodgers.ApproachesandMethodsinLanguageTeaching[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2000.SternH.H.FundamentalConceptsofLanguageTeaching[M].Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress,1999.SkehanP.A.CognitiveApproachtoLanguageLearning[M].Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1998.SkehanP.A.AFrameworkfortheImplementationofTask-basedinstruction[J].AppliedLinguistics,1996(17):38-46.Tarone,E.&Yule,G.FocusontheLanguageLearner[M].Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress,1999.WatersM,WatersA.StudyTasksinEnglish[M].Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress,2005.WiddowsonHG.AspectsofLanguageTeaching[M].Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress,1999.Yalden,Janice.PrinciplesofCourseDesignforLanguageTeaching[M].Beijing:ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2000.YuleG.ExplainingEnglishGrammar[M].Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress,2005.Zao,H.InvestigationandAnalysisofChina’sSecondaryEnglishTeaching[M].Shanghai:EastChinaNormalUniversityPress,1990.陈军宏.中学基础阶段英语语法教学问题探讨[D].武汉:华中师范大学,2003.陈新河.交际教学法在初中英语课堂教学中的应用[D].导师：丁廷森.贵阳:贵州师范大学，2011.陈姗.应用WebQuest促进任务式研究生英语阅读教学[J].ChineseJournalofAppliedLinguistics,2011(3):57-64.陈思慧,交际法在中国大学英语教学中应用情况的调查与研究[D]导师:徐锦芳.武汉:华中科技大学,2006.崔刚.融合和创新:探索具有中国特色的外语教学理论体系[J].中国外语,2007(1).戴炜栋,任庆梅.语法教学的新视角:外显意识增强式任务模式[J].外语界,2006(1).董喆.基于3P和任务型教学法的折中教学模式在高中英语教学中的实证研究[D].北京:首都师范大学出版社,2013.樊长荣.外语教学中的折中主义[J].外语教学与研究,1995(2).方文礼.外语任务型教学法纵横谈[J].外语与外语教学,2003(9).丰玉芳,唐晓岩.任务型语言教学法在英语教学中的运用[J].外语与外语教学,2004(4).-61- Bibliography李芙蓉.任务型和3P融合教学法应用在高职英语应用文写作教学的实证研究[D].合肥:安徽大学,2013.龚亚夫,罗少茜.课程理论社会建构主义理论与任务型语言教学[J].课程.教材.教法,2003(1)49-53.胡美云.任务型大学英语口语教学探讨[J].昆明理工大学学报(社会科学版),2007(8):93-99.韩锦.3P教学模式与任务型教学模式的对比分析[J].长春理工大学学报（社会科学版）,2011(6).李宝芳.折中教学法及其对外语教学的启示[J].河北理工大学学报(社会科学版),2009(4):185-187.李娜.PPP语言教学模式再审视[J].教学研究,2013(3)41-44.李万红,陈吉棠.综合折中方法在外语教学中的具体应用[J].湖南农业大学学报,2008(6):126-128.刘丽.3P教学法的历史发展及其在英语教学中的地位[J].通化师范学院学报,2012(3):104-107.刘润清,胡壮麟.外语教学中的科研方法[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社，2000.刘莹.高中英语语法教学在交际途径教学中的应用[D].沈阳：辽宁师范大学,2012.刘威,杨晓红.折中主义教学法在英语专业教学中的具体运用[J].河北北方学院学报,2009(4):82-84.龙东林.在大班级使用PPP教学法中可能出现的一些问题以及解决方案[J].和田师范专科学校学报,2009(3):80-81.吕良环.外语课程与教学论[M].浙江:浙江教育出版社,2003.马志静.任务型语言教学理念在英语听力教学中的应用[J].天津师范大学学报(基础教育版),2011(2):41-44.牛长松,祝继东.任务的多样化及任务序列——论任务型教学中语言意义行式的平衡[J].中小学教材教学,2002(26):36-38.饶振辉.论兼收并容，折衷诸法的必要性和可行性[J].外语与外语教学,2000(8):24-27.孙鹏.任务型教学与PPP教学模式结合应用研究[J].教师教育研究,2007(5):43-46.孙楠,孙大为.CriticalThinkingofApplyingCLTinELTClassroomforEnglishTeachersinChina[J].科技信息（科学教研）,2008.邵鸿娟.任务型语言教学在英语口语教学中的应用研究[D].导师:王谋清.兰州:西北民族大学硕士论文,2011.束定芳,庄智象.现代外语教学——理论、实践与方法[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1996.束定芳.外语课堂教学新模式诌议[J].外语界,2006(4):21-29.-62- Bibliography施丽华.从PPP到TBL[M].科学出版社,2002.覃修梅,齐振海.任务及任务教学法的再认识[J].外语教学,2004(3):23-28.汪彬彬,黄中习.论外语教学法的折中主义[J].辽宁工学院学报,2003(4):54-55.王东娟.支架式教学在高中英语写作教学中的应用[D].导师：郝惠珍.石家庄:河北师范大学,2011.王蔷.英语教学法教程[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2007.王岩.折中主义的外语教学[J].外语界,2001(2):29-36.魏永红.任务型外语教学研究——认知心理学视角[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004.吴兰.任务型教学法在英语阅读教学中的运用[D].导师:秦苏钰.成都:四川师范大学,2007.徐晓慧.新课标下的初中语法教学探索[D].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.熊有生.任务型教学在初中英语写作中的运用[D].导师:唐熊英.南昌:江西师范大学,2006.严丽.任务型教学在高职高专英语教育中的应用[J].语文学刊(外语教育与教学),2009.杨华静.试论“PPP”教学法[J].陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),1999(2)61-62.杨小娟.外语教学法的继承与发展[J].课程.教材.教法,2004(11).姚丽丽.关于任务型教学法与PPP教学模式在大学英语教学中融合的实证性研究[D].太原:山西财经大学,2011.袁玲玲.论英语任务型教学及其任务设计[J].外国中小学教育,2006(11):41-46.张正东.语法教学再认识[J/OL].http://www.Tefl-China.net,2002.中华人民共和国教育部.义务教育英语课程标准(2011年版)[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2011.-63- AppendixAppendix1中学生英语语法学习调查问卷亲爱的同学：你好。首先感谢你能参与我的问卷调查。本调查旨在了解中学英语语法教学的现状和存在的问题。所有的问题均无对错之分，与你的成绩评定无关，请放心填写。你认真、客观的填写对于研究非常重要，谢谢合作。性别：__________年龄：__________何时开始学习英语：__________1.你学习英语语法的动机是_______。A.应付考试B.学习兴趣C.提高英语水平D.课程规定2.你在学习语法时的感受是_______。A.简单B.比较简单C.比较困难D.困难3.你认为造成语法学习困难的原因是_______。A.语法规则复杂B.教师教学枯燥C.主观不努力D.母语学习的干扰4.你在语法学习中遇到困难时会_______。A.请老师讲解B.向同学求助C.自己查阅辅导资料D.被动等待5.你每周花在语法学习上的时间占英语学习时间的比重为_______。A.20%以下B.20%~30%C.30%~40%D.40%以上6.你认为提高英语语法最有效的途径为_______。A.教师课堂讲授B.同伴辅导C.课后自学D.家教辅导班7.你的教师在以往的语法教学中最常用的教学模式为_______。A.教师一味讲解，学生记笔记B.教师讲解为主，学生操练为辅C.教师讲解为辅，学生操练为主D.学生自学为主8.你认为英语语法课堂氛围与其他英语课程相比_______。A.活跃B.比较活跃C.比较沉闷D.沉闷9.你一般在语法课上的表现是_______。A.听讲，做笔记B.机械口头操练C.联系生活的口头操练D.做书面练习10.你的语法作业占家庭作业的比重_______。A.多B.较多C.较少D.少11.你认为现在的语法教学对英语成绩提高的帮助_______。A.大B.较大C.较小D.小12.你希望今后教师在语法课堂教学中采取的模式是_______。A.教师讲授学生记笔记B.反复机械操练C.将语法融入有趣的生活情境D.结合课文内容讲解-64- AppendixAppendix2中学生英语语法学习调查问卷亲爱的同学：你好。首先感谢你能参与我的问卷调查。本调查旨在了解中学英语语法教学的现状和存在的问题。所有的问题均无对错之分，与你的成绩评定无关，请放心填写。你认真、客观的填写对于研究非常重要，谢谢合作。性别：__________年龄：__________班级：__________本问卷共十题，请在每题的数字中做出选择，圈出你所选的答案，答题规则如下：1=完全不符合2=大部分不符合3=部分不符合部分符合4=大部分符合5=完全符合1.我喜欢在英语课堂上学习语法。123452.我有信心把语法学好。123453.我认为我在学习语法时能够认真地完成任务。123454.我认为现在的语法课堂学习氛围宽松融洽。123455.我认为现在的语法课堂学习与日常生活有密切联系。123456.我认为现在的语法课堂教学有助于自己发现、巩固语法规则。123457.我愿意积极参加语法课堂学习中与大家合作互动的活动。123458.我能够在课堂上弄懂学习的语法项目。123459.我认为现在的语法学习总体上符合预期目标。1234510.我认为目前的语法教学令人满意。12345-65- AppendixAppendix3学生访谈1.你认为老师现在的课堂语法教学和以往有哪些不同？2.你认为自己现在的语法学习和以往有哪些不同？3.你是否能适应这些改变？有哪些不适应的地方？4.你认为现在的课堂语法教学有哪些优缺点？5.你的语法学习有哪些困难？需要老师提供哪些帮助？-66- AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgementsIntheoverallprocessofthisthesis’writhing,Iamgrantedinvaluableassistancefrommanyteachers,friends,classmatesandmyparents,Ideeplyappreciateandshowmysincerethankstoallofthem.Firstofall,thanksformydistinguishedsupervisor,MissBai.Itithergreatprofessionalknowledge,friendlymanner,attentivelyguidancethathelpmakeprogressduringthethreeyears.Withoutherguidanceandencouragement,Ican’tfinishmydissertation.Itisagreathonortomoveforwardwithmysupervisor.Besides,IreallyappreciategeneroushelpfromothersupervisorsandmyclassmatesfromYanAnUniversity.ProfessorLiShirong,GaoZhidonggivemealotofenlightenmentduringthethreeyears.MyclassmatesSongZongwei,TongShashaalwaysinspiremefromthebeginningtonow.Lastbutleast,Iwanttoexpressmyappreciationformyparents’selflesslove.Theirconcernandregardaccompanymeallthethreeyears.-67- PublicationsListofPublications[1]余波.英语语法课堂教学中3P教学的运用研究[J].湖北函授大学学报，2014.17.-68-