《新視野大學(xué)英語》的評析

《新視野大學(xué)英語》的評析

摘耍大學(xué)英語教科書作為教學(xué)內(nèi)容的載體在我國高校大學(xué)英語教學(xué)中起著重要的作用。今年來,各地書店里教材琳瑯滿目。然而,每套教材均有其優(yōu)點和缺點。事實上,如何選擇ー套適合學(xué)生使用的教材變成了擺在教學(xué)主管部門和大學(xué)英語教師面前的問題。這種情況也成了本項研究的動因。教育部推薦了多部英語教材,新視野大學(xué)英語》為其中之一。毫無疑問，該教材在專家眼里是部好教材。我校以之作為課堂教學(xué)中的骨干教材已有兩年多的時間。本文試圖對《新視野大學(xué)英語》作一全面審視,目的在于分析出ー些參考意見。作為ー一篇研究教材的論文,本為定位在對教材的分析評價上,以期滿足當(dāng)務(wù)如何充分使用本教材的迫切需要。本文共分五章,每章內(nèi)容扼要敘述如下:第一章為文章的介紹部分。首先討論了研究的背景,然后是教材評估的意義和標準,接下來介紹了兩個國外的評估模式。通過第一章的介紹，對教材評估能達到概念上的整體把握，為其后的展開做了鋪墊。第二章著重介紹與教材評估相關(guān)的語言學(xué)習(xí)理論。其中包括語言學(xué)理論和教材的關(guān)系以及各種教學(xué)大綱與教材的關(guān)系。第三章是開始對《新視野大學(xué)英語》進行分析。文章先從客觀的角度分析了這套教材的組成部分,內(nèi)容選擇和編排。再主觀評價了教材的出色之處和不足。在這一章里，文章還重點分析了聽,說,讀,寫四項技能在教材中的體現(xiàn)程度。第四章是文章的重要部分。除了對教材的客觀和主觀分析評價外,教材的學(xué)習(xí)者的意見也是評價教材是否合適的重要標準。作者設(shè)計了調(diào)查問卷以測試學(xué)生對《新視野大學(xué)英語》的滿意度,并根據(jù)調(diào)查結(jié)果總結(jié)了這套教材最受學(xué)生歡迎的地方和梢有欠缺的地方。第五章是結(jié)論部分。文章總結(jié)了《新視野大學(xué)英語》的優(yōu)點和不足,這套教材的不足之處在于首先這套教材對閱讀技能的培養(yǎng)カ度過大而相對忽略了其他的三種技能。交流オ是英語學(xué)習(xí)的主要目的,所以教材應(yīng)該著重培養(yǎng)學(xué)生的說話能力而非僅僅強調(diào)信息的提供。其次CD光盤和網(wǎng)絡(luò)教程都沒有得到充分的使用。再次,這套教材沒有對語法規(guī)則和翻譯技能的系統(tǒng)較少,這一定程度上會導(dǎo)致學(xué)生應(yīng)對考試時的失敗。最后,作者對如何有效使用這套教材提出了一些建議。關(guān)鍵詞:教材分析評價新視野大學(xué)英語AnAnalysisandevaluationofNewHorizonCollegeEnglishAbstractCollegeEnglishcoursebooks,asavehicle,playanimportantroleintheinstructionofCollegeEnglishintheinstitutionsofhigherlearninginourcountry.Inrecentyears,alargeassortmentofsuchbooksisavailableinbookstoreseverywhere.However,eachseriesoftextbookshasitsmeritsanddemerits.Asitis,howtofindtheonebestsuitableforthestudentshasbecomeaproblemthattheadministrativeofficesinchargeofstudiesandtheCollegeEnglishteachersareconfrontedwith.Thissituationhasalsoinspiredthemotivationofthisresearch.TheMinistryofEducationoftheStateCouncilhasrecommendedseveralteachingmaterialsfortheinstructionofCollegeEnglishandoneofthemisNewHorizonCollegeEnglish,whichisbeyondanydoubtsagoodtextbookintheeyesoftheexperts.Thistextbookiswhatcanbecalledthemainstayteachingmaterialsusedinclassroomteachinginouruniversityforovertwoyears.ThisdissertationisintendedforathoroughstudyofthetextbookNewHorizonCollegeEnglishsoastofindoutsomecommentsonitforreference.Asaresearchpaper,itisorientedtotheanalysisandevaluationofthetextbooktosatisfytheurgentneedofhowtoutilizeittothebestadvantage.Thisdissertationisdividedintofivechaptersandthemaingist〇feachchapterreadsasfollows:Chapteroneistheintroductionofthethesis.Firstittalksaboutthebackgroundoftheresearch,andthenintroducesthesignificanceandthecriterionsofthetextbookevaluation.Twoevaluationmodelsarebeingintroducedinchapterone.Theintroductionmakesapreparationforthewholethesis.Chaptertwotalksaboutsomelanguagelearningtheorieswhichrelatestothetextbookevaluation.Itincludestherelationshipbetweenlinguistictheoriesandtextbook&therelationshipbetweenteachingsyllabusandtextbook.ChapterthreebeginstomakeananalysisonNewHorizonCollegeEnglish.Firstly,theauthoranalyzesthecomponents,contentselectionsandarrangementfromanobjectivepointofview,andthenassessesthetextbook'smeritsandshortcomingssubjectively.Alsothethesistalksviaboutthereflectionoffourskills:reading,writing,listening,andspeakinginthistextbook.Chapterfourisanimportantpartofthethesis.Besidestheanalysisandevaluationfromobjectiveandsubjectivepointofview,theusers'ideaisthekeypointtoevaluatethetextbook.Theauthordesignsaquestionnairetotestwhethertheusersaresatisfiedtothetextbook.Accordingtotheresult,theauthorsummarizesthemostpopularpartsofthetextbookandsomeissueswhicharenotadmittedbythestudents.Chapterfiveisconclusion.OnceagainthethesissummarizesthemeritsandshortcomingsofNewhorizoncollegeEnglish.First,itpaystoomuchattentiononreadingwhileotherthreeskillsareneglectedrelatively.SincecommunicationisthemainpurposeoflearningEnglish,thetextbookwritershouldemphasizeonspeakingskilltrainingbutnotonlyoninformationprovision.Second,theprovisionofCDandonlinecoursearenotintherealusage.Third,thereisnosystematicintroductionofgrammarrulesandtranslationskillsinthetextbook,whichwillcausethestudents'failureintheexaminationtosomedegree.SomesuggestionsaremadetomaketheusageofNewhorizoncollegeEnglishmoreeffectively.Keywords:analysis;evaluation;textbook;NewHorizonCollegeEnglishVil論文獨創(chuàng)性聲明本人鄭重聲明:所提交的學(xué)位論文是本人在導(dǎo)師的指導(dǎo)下進行的研究工作及取得的成果。除文中已經(jīng)注明引用的內(nèi)容外,本論文不含其他個人或其他機構(gòu)已經(jīng)發(fā)表或撰寫過的研究成果。對本文的研究作出重要貢獻的個人和集體,均已在文中以明確方式標明。本人承擔(dān)本聲明的法律責(zé)任。研究生簽名: 日期:論文使用授權(quán)聲明本人完全了解廣西師范大學(xué)有關(guān)保留、使用學(xué)位論文的規(guī)定。廣西師范大學(xué)、中國科學(xué)技術(shù)信息研究所、清華大學(xué)論文合作部,有權(quán)保留本人所送交學(xué)位論文的復(fù)印件和電子文檔,可以采用影印、縮印或其他復(fù)制手段保存論文。本人電子文檔的內(nèi)容和紙質(zhì)論文的內(nèi)容相一致。除在保密期內(nèi)的保密論文外,允許論文被查閱和借閱，可以公布（包括刊登）論文的全部或部分內(nèi)容。論文的公布（包括刊登）授權(quán)廣西師范大學(xué)學(xué)位辦辦理。日期:日期:日期:日期:ChapterIIntroductionBackgroundRecentyearsanever-growingemphasishasbeenlaidoncollegeEnglishinstructionandlearningbuttheteachingeffectisfarfromwhatisexpectedof.Therearemanyfactorsthathavecausedthisproblem.Thefirstoneistheincreasingenrollmentofthecollegestudentswhichcausedtheratioofstudentsandteachersrisetoanumberthatisdetrimentaltotheteachingeffect.Asthereportin2002showsthattheratioofteacherandstudentsincollegeteachingis1:130.Theperformanceofstudentsisfarbelowtherequirementsunderthisratioofteacherresources.Theyarelackofcommunicativecompetenceandmaynotmeettherequirementofthesocietyandtheemployers.Inordertosolvethisproblem,theEducationMinistryofChinaimplementsateachingreformandpublisheditsnewCollegeEnglishCurriculumRequirementForTrialImplementationin2004.Itspurposeisthattheteachingreforminthecurriculumwillresultinanimprovementtheirabilityinreading,writingandspeakingskillsinEnglish.Bydevelopingthestudent'sabilitytocomprehendandusethespokenEnglish,theywillfinditmucheasiertocommunicateorally,fortheywillsubstantiallyincreasedtheirexposuretothenativespeakersintheirfuturecareeralongwiththeinevitablesituationofever-growingglobalization.Thefundamentalimportanceofspokenlanguageasthebasisforcommunicativecompetenceisnowfullyacknowledged.In2004,ZhangYaoxue,GeneralDirectoroftheHigherEducationDepartmentoftheMinistryofEducationpointsoutthattheemphasisontheprimaryofspokenlanguagecoupledwiththeongoinginstructioninwrittenEnglishwillraisetheleveloftheircommunicativecapacityandleadthemtowardagreaterfacilityinwritingandtranslatingcompetence.Thisnewrequirementswillserveasaguidelineforteachingnon-EnglishmajorstudentsinChinaandaimtocultivatetheirall-roundabilities,especiallyincaseoflisteningandspeaking.TextbooksforcollegeEnglisharemodifiedtomeetthenewcurriculumrequirement.Alotoftextbooksareavailableonthemarket.SuchasNewEnglishCourse(TsinghuaUniversityPress,1989),CollegeExperiencingEnglish(HigherEducationPress,2002),NewCollegeEnglish(ForeignlanguageTeachingandResearchPress,1999),NewHorizonCollegeEnglish(ForeignlanguageTeachingandResearchPress,2002).Itisdifficultfortheteacherstochoosethebestonefortheparticularstudents.Teachingmaterialsshouldbechosenaccordingtothestudent'sEnglishproficiency,andcandrawoutmostofthestudents'talenttoalargeextent.Thatistosay,thoughthetextbookcannotfitforeverysinglestudent,itcanberighttothestudentsinthemajority.ThesignificanceoftheevaluationTherearesomanyreasonsformaterialsevaluationactivities.First,teachingmaterialsisthefoundationofteachingactivitieswhilegoodmaterialisprerequisiteforagoodteachingresult.Second,asthedeepeningofreformationofprimaryeducationinhighschool,thereformationandreplacementofcollegeEnglishteachingmaterialsbecomeinevitable.AccordingtoCunningsworth(1984,1995)andHutchinson,&Water(1987),theselectionoftextbooksisamajorandfrequentreasonforevaluation.Anotherreasonistomakeeffectiveuseofthetextbookalreadyinuse,inotherwords,toidentifyparticularstrengthsandweaknessofthematerial,sothatoptimumusecanbemadeoftheirstrongpoints,whiletheirweakerareascanbestrengthenedthroughadaptationorbysubstitutingmaterialfromotherbooks.Inaddition,coursebookanalysisandevaluationisusefulinteacherdevelopmentandhelpsteacherstogaingoodandusefulinsightsintothenatureofthematerials,henceimprovetheirteachingperformance.Nunangivesadviceonwhatappearstobethemostcommonreasonforcoursebookevaluation:uwhenselectingcommercialmaterialsitisimportanttomatchthematerialswiththegoalsandobjectivesoftheprogramme,andtoensurethattheyareconsistentwithone'sbeliefsaboutthenatureoflanguageandlearning,aswellaswithone'slearners'attitudes,beliefandpreferences."(Nunan1991:209)Thisdissertationattemptstomakeananalysisandevaluationofintendingtodiscoveritsmeritsanddemerits.TheaimofthisstudyistoutilizethetextbooktothebestadvantagebothonthepartoftheCollegeEnglishteachersandonthepartofthestudentsattheinstitutionsofhigherlearninginthewesternregionofChina.Whenitcomestotheuseofanytextbook,inclusiveofNewHorizonCollegeEnglish,thedemandingjobfortheteachersofCollegeEnglishtodoistoidentifywhataretheweakpointsofthestudentsandwhattheyneedinthestudyofEnglishinordertoadjusttheclassroomteachingofthetextbooktotheactualstateofthestudents.Thatiswhyitisasignificantresearchworkinmakingananalysisandevaluationofatextbookthathasbeenputtouse.ThecriterionsoftheevaluationDifferentteachershavedifferentideasaboutwhatagoodtextbookshouldinclude,butgenerallyspeaking,goodtextbooksoftencontainlivelyandinterestingmaterial;theyprovideasensibleprogressionoflanguageitems,clearlyshowingwhathastobelearntandinsomecasessummarizingwhathasbeenstudiedsothatstudentscanrevisegrammaticalandfunctionalpointsthattheyhavebeenconcentratingon.Textbookscanbesystematicabouttheamountvocabularypresentedtothestudentandallowstudentstostudyontheirownoutsidetheclass.Goodtextbooksalsorelievetheteacherfromthepressureofhavingtothinkoforiginalmaterialforeveryclass.Evenjudgedbythesamecriterion,thesamecoursebookcouldbe"good"inonecontext,butnotinanother.Forinstance,thepresenceofculturalelementscouldbewelcomedinasituationwheretheteacherfeltthattheywereacentralvehicleforlearningEnglish;ontheotherhand,theycouldbeseenasirrelevantandevenoffensiveinotherteachingsituations.(Sheldon,1998).Teachersareconsumers,justlikestudentsoreducationaladministrators.Allthesegroups,ofcourse,canhavepotentiallydifferentnotionsofwhatagoodtextbookshouldbe.ThereisarangeofcoursebookevaluationchecklistintheELTliterature.AccordingtoSheldon(1988):Variouswritershavesuggestedwaysofhelpingteachersinparticulartobemoresophisticatedintheirevaluativeapproach,bypositing'checklists'basedonsupposedlygeneralizablecriteria.Sheldon(1988:237)suggests'ELTbooksarefrequentlyseenaspoorcompromisesbetweenwhatiseducationallydesirableontheonehandandfinanciallyviableontheother,'Therearenumerousfactorstoconsiderwhenchoosingmaterialsforaclassandacompromisemustbereachedasitisalmostimpossibletofindaproductthatsatisfiesallofthesecriteriainoneneatlyboundpackage.Thesamemaybesaidofevaluativemodels.Sheldonstates'Itisclearthatcoursebookassessmentisfundamentallyasubjective,ruleofthumbactivityandthatnoneatformula,grid,orsystemwilleverprovideadefinitiveyardstick.'(Sheldon1988:245)Therearealotofmodelsandframeworksforassessingtextbooks.However,everyteacherhasdifferentrequirementtoconsider,somemayconsiderthetextbook'slanguagefocus,andsomemayconsideritscultivatingofcommunicativecompetence.Accordingtosomeexperts'idea,Isummarizesomeofthecriterionsthatareimportantinmyopinion.Thetextbookshouldbecompiledaccordingtotheteachingsyllabus.Thetextbookpackageshouldconsistofastudent'sbook,ateacher'sbook,workbooks,activitybooksandcassettes.Thetextbookshoulddealsadequatelywithfourskillsandtakethelevelandoverallaimsintoaccount.Thematerialsshouldbeattherightlevelforthestudents,nottocomplicatedandnottoosimple.Thetextbookshouldsetitsmaterialsinsocialandculturalcontextsthatarecomprehensibletothelearners.Thematerialsthetextbookchoosesshouldbeauthentic.Thematerialsshouldbeinterestingandsuitablefortheagegroupofthestudents.Thetextbookshouldbesuitableforindividuallearning.Thestudents9centerroleshouldbeassuredbythetextbook.Thetextbookshouldmakesurethatstudentscanobtainlanguagefocusandgrammarpointsafterlearning.TwoevaluationmodelsHutchinsonandWaters'modelHutchinsonandWaters(1987:96)pointout:'Evaluationisamatterofjudgingthefitnessofsomethingforaparticularpurpose.Givenacertainneed,andinthelightoftheresourcesavailable,whichoutofanumberofpossibilitiescanrepresentthebestsolution?Evaluationis,then,concernedwithrelativemerit.Thereisnoabsolutegoodorbad——onlydegreesoffitnessfortherequiredpurpose."HutchinsonandWaters(1987:97)dividetheevaluationprocessintofourmajorsteps:DefiningcriteriaSubjectiveanalysisObjectiveanalysisMatchingHutchinsonandWaters(1987:99)presenttheirownchecklistofcriteriaforobjectiveandsubjectiveanalysis,whichisnotanexhaustivelist,andisbasedonthefollowingfiveaspects:audience,aims,content,methodology,andothercriteria.Theauthorwillrefertotheirchecklistlaterwhenmakingtheevaluationcriteriaforthisthesis.McDonoughandC.Shaw'smodelMcDonoughandC.Shaw(2003)definetheevaluationintothreeprocesses:theexternalevaluation,theinternalevaluationandoverallevaluation.DuringtheexternalevaluationstageMcDonoughandC.Showexaminetheclaimsmadeforthematerialsbytheauthor/publisherwithrespectto:theintendedaudience,theproficiencylevel,thecontextandpresentationoflanguageitems,whetherthematerialsarethecoreorsupplementary,theroleandavailabilityofateachers'book,theinclusionofavocabularylist/index,thetableofcontents,theuseofvisualsandpresentation,andtheculturalspecificityofthematerials,theprovisionofaudio/videomaterialandinclusionoftests.Theysuggestaftercompletingthisexternalevaluation,andhavingfundsandapotentialgroupoflearnersinmind,evaluatorscanarriveatadecisionastothematerials'appropriatenessforadoption/selectionpurpose.Iftheevaluationshowsthematerialstobepotentiallyappropriateandworthyofamoredetailedinspectionthenteacherswillcontinuewiththeirinternalormoredetailedevaluation.Ifnot,thenevaluatorscan'exit'atthisstageandstarttoevaluateothermaterials.Intheinternalevaluationstagetheyhaveadvisedthatevaluatorsneedtofollowthefollowingcriteria:thetreatmentandpresentationoftheskills,thesequencingandgradingofthematerialsthetypeofreading,listening,speakingandwritingmaterialscontainedinthematerials,appropriatenessoftestsandexercises,self-studyprovisionandteacher-learner'balance'inuseofthematerials.Afterthecompletionofbothexternalandinternalevaluation,theyadviseevaluatorstomakeanoverallassessmentastothesuitabilityofthematerialsbyconsideringthefollowingparameters:TheusabilityfactorHowfarcouldthematerialsbeintegratedintoaparticularsyllabusas'core'orsupplementary?Forexample,wemayneedtoselectmaterialsthatsuitaparticularsyllabusorsetofobjectivesthatwehavetoworkto.Thematerialsmayormaynotbeabletodothis.ThegeneralizabilityfactorIstherearestricteduseof'core'featuresthatmakethematerialsmoregenerallyuseful?Itmaybethatnotallthematerialswillbeusefulforagivenindividualorgroupbutsomepartsmightbe.Thisfactorcaninturnleadustoconsider.TheadaptabilityfactorCanpartsbeadded/extracted/usedinanothercontext/modifiedforlocalcircumstances?Theremaybesomeverygoodqualitiesinthematerialsbut,forexample,wemayjudgethelisteningmaterialorthereadingpassagestobeunsuitableandinneedofmodification.Ifwethinkthatadaptationisfeasiblewemaychoosetodothis.TheflexibilityfactorHowrigidisthesequencingandgrading?Canthematerialsbeenteredatdifferentpoints/usedindifferentways?Insomecasesmaterialsthatarenotsosteeplygradedofferameasureofflexibilitythatpermitsthemtobeintegrated.HutchinsonandWaters'modeldemandsthattheevaluatorshouldbethecoursedesignerorthecourseteacherwhoisveryfamiliarwiththecoursewherethetextbookisused.WhileMcDonoughandC.Shaw'smodelissuitableforbothexternalevaluatorandinternalevaluatoranditdividestheevaluationprocessintothreestages,whichismorescientificandlogical.ChapterIILanguageLearningTheoryTheviewofthenatureoflanguageandlanguagelearningplayanimportantroleindesigningateachingsyllabusandtextbook.Inturn,thesyllabus,textbooksandtheteachingmethodswill,toalargeextent,reflecttheviewstothenatureoflanguageandlanguagelearninguponwhichtheyarewrittenandestablished(Hutchinson,1987).Theresearchoflearningcontributestothematerialsindifferentways.Acontemporarydefinitionoflearningisacquiringorgettingknowledgeofasubjectoraskillbystudy,experience,orinstruction(Richardsetal,1986:).LinguistictheoryBehaviorismBehaviorism,whicharoseinAmericanasanewapproachtopsychologyintheearlydecadesofthetwentiethcentury,attemptstoexplainalllearningintermsofconditionsorhabitformation.Theprocessofdevelopingconditionsiscalledconditioning.ARussianPavlov'sexperimentondogsisthebest-knownexampleoftheconditioningprocess.Hetaughtdogstosalivatewhentheyheardthebellringing.Accordingtothebehaviorists,suchasJohnWatsonandB.F.Skinerlearningaquestionofhabitformation,andlanguagetheteachingisregardedastheshapingofhabit.Toshapeabehavior,languagematerialswillbreakitdownintosmallparts,andpresenteachoneatatime,untileventuallythewholecomplexbehaviorisbuiltup.Studentsareinvolvedinchorusofsentencepatternsinresponsetoastimulus,inordertoformcorrectlanguagehabit.Atanystep,studentsareawareofwhatstagetheyareon.BehaviorismhasalottodowiththedevelopmentofAudio-lingualTeachingApproachwhicharoseduringtheSecondWorldWar.Thelimitationsofbehavioristmaterialsareobvious:Itsviewoflanguagelearningfocusesonlyonwhatcanbedirectlyobservedandmeasuredbehavior(i.e.stimulus:"eat”;response:t4Ilikeeating"),ratherthanwhatgoesoninthe“blackbox"ofthelearner'smind;itonlytakesformoflanguageintoconsideration,whileneglectinginteractionofmeaning;andthedrillprocessisrathermechanicalanddiscouraging.2.1.2CognitivismIncontrasttobehaviorism,cognitivepsychologyis,AsE.Gagne(1985)said,"thescientificstudyofmentalevents".Gestalt'spsychology,Piaget'sdevelopmentalpsychologyandAusubel'stheoryofmeaningfullearningrepresentthemainschoolsofcognitivelearningtheory.Accordingtocognitivists,"thebrainisnotapassiveconsumerofinformation.Itactivelyselects,attends,organizes,perceives,encodes,stores,andretrievesinformation"(Wittrock,1978).Insimpleterms,welearnbythinkingaboutandtryingtomakesenseofwhatwesee,feel,andhear.6Thestudyofcognitivism,especiallythestudyoflearningstrategies,suchasmemorystrategiesandmeta-cognitioncontributestothedevelopmentofcognitive-basedmaterials.Practicallytheyhaveprovidedmuchusefulinformationforself-regulatedlearning.Inthecognitive-basedlanguageteaching,studentsaresupposedtotakeanactivepartinthelearningprocess.Theteacher5sroleisnotonlytoimpartknowledgeoflanguageanddodrills,butalsotohelpstudentsdeveloplearningstrategiesandthinkingability.Thelearnerscanusethestrategiestolearnnewmaterials,monitortheprogresstheymake.TherecameCognitiveApproach,inwhichthelearnerisseenasanactiveparticipantinthelearningprocess,whocanusevariousmentalstrategiesinordertosortoutthesystemofthelanguagetobelearned.However,helpfulastheapproachis,itplaceslittleornoemphasisuponthewaysinwhichindividualsseektobringasenseofpersonalmeaningtotheirworld(Williams&Burden,1997).Tosomedegree,people'saffectiveaspectsareneglectedincognitivetheory.2.1.3HumanismHumanisticpsychologyemergedin1960sinAmerica,whichisconcernedwiththeuniqueness,theindividualityandthehumanityofeachindividualHumanisticpsychologyopposestheviewofbehaviorismandcognitivism,sayingthatpeoplearenotlearningmachine,buttheylearnashumanbeings.Learning,particularlythelearningofalanguageisanemotionalexperience.ThemostwellknownproponentsofHumanismareErikErikson,AbrahamMaslowandCarlRogers.CarlRogers(1969),thefounderofcounselingpsychology,emphasizethefourAspectsofeducation:“wholeperson"educationMeaningfullearningGoodteacher-studentrelationshipLearner-centeredteachingmodel:Variouslanguage-teachingapproachesemploythehumanisticprinciples,suchasSuggestopaedia,theSilentWay,TotalPhysicalResponse,NaturalApproachandCommunityLanguageLearning.Andtherewerematerialsfbrtheapproaches,which,asawhole,emphasizetheimportanceofindividual'sthoughts,feelingsandemotionsattheforefrontofallhumandevelopment.Theseareaspectsofthelearningprocessthatareoftenunjustlyneglected.“Humanisticapproachesprovideuswithpowerfuleducationmessagesregardingwhole-personinvolvementinlearning".(Williams&Burden,1997)2.1.4ConstructivismConstructivism,ayoungertheoryoflearninginpsychologicaleducation,isthefurtherdevelopmentofcognitivism.Anditalsohascloselinkswithsomemajorelementsofhumanism.ItoriginallyderivesfromthethoughtsofsomecognitivistsasDewey,PiagetandBruner,anddevelopsasaresultoftheinfluenceofVygotsky'sideas.Constructivistsassumethatlearnersconstructtheirownknowledgeonthebasisofinteractionwiththeirenvironment.AsD.J.Cunningham(1991)said,learningisaprocessofbuildingupstructureofexperiences.Learnersdonottransferknowledgefromtheexternalworldintotheirmemories;rather,theycreateinteractionsoftheworldbasedupontheirpastexperienceandtheinteractionsintheworld.Fourhypothesizesareattheheartofconstructivistviewofleaning:KnowledgeisphysicallyconstructedbylearnerswhoareinvolvedinactiveleaningKnowledgeissymbolicallyconstructedbylearnerswhoaremakingtheirownrepresentationsofactionKnowledgeissociallyconstructedbylearnerswhoconveytheirmeaningtoothersKnowledgeistheoreticallyconstructedbylearnerswhotrytoexplainthingstheydon'tcompletelyunderstand.Constructivistmaterialspromotethelearningincontextual,interactiveway;encourageearnerstoexploretheknowledgewiththeirunderstanding.Theymakeashapecontrasttobehavioristmaterials.2.2SyllabusandmaterialsAccordingtoHutchinson(1986)syllabusplaysisanimplicitstatementofviewsonthenatureoflanguageandlearning.Itisthecriteriafortheselection,orderingandadaptationofmaterials.Itisthedeterminerforthedesignofmethodology.Asyllabuscanbebroadlydefinedasaspecificationoftheworktobecoveredoveraperiodoftime,withastartingpointandafinalgoal(Cunningsworth,1995).Wehavetwokindsofsyllabushere.Nationalsyllabusistheofficialdocumentissuedbythenationaleducationaldepartment.Itusuallydescribestheoveralldescriptionandrequirementofthelanguageteaching,suchasitsnature,teachingobjective,teachingmodels,andrequiredknowledge,skills.Anationalsyllabusprovidesimportantguidanceformaterialsdevelopmentandteaching.Theothertypeofsyllabusiscalledlanguage-teachingsyllabus,inwhichthelanguagecontentwillbeorderedinsomeway,accordingtounderlyingprinciplesoflanguageandlanguagelearning.Thefocusofthesyllabusiswhatistaughtandinwhatorderitistaught.Becauselanguageissuchacomplexentity,itneedstobebrokendownintomanageableunitsandgradedinalogicalway.Whenmaterialswritersareproducingteachingmaterials,theyarefollowingordesigningasyllabusaswell.Weneedtoknowtheselanguage-teachingsyllabuseswellinordertofindoutwhatisimplicitinmaterialsforlanguagelearning,whichwillhelpustoselectandevaluatematerialssuitabletoourteachingandlearningsituation.GrammaticalsyllabusInaGrammaticalsyllabus,orastructuralsyllabus,languagematerialsareselectedandgradedaccordingtocomplexity,usefulnessandlearnability