國立臺灣師範大學博碩士論文全文系統

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	呂敏慧 Marina Minhui Leu
論文名稱：	現行高職英文教材之選用：教師及學生意見之調查 The Use and Evaluation of Teaching Materials for Vocational High Schools in Taiwan
指導教授：	施玉惠 Shih, Yu-Hwei 林茂松 Lin, Mao-Song
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	英語學系 Department of English
論文出版年：	2004
畢業學年度：	92
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	155
中文關鍵詞：	高職英文教學、教材評估、教材使用、教學方法、教師信念、授課時數、學生意見、學生程度
英文關鍵詞：	teaching materials, textbook selection, textbook evaluation, textbook adaptation, teaching approach, teachers' belief, instructional time constraint, students' proficiency
論文種類：	學術論文
相關次數：	點閱：310 下載：40
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

論文摘要
本研究旨在調查現行高職教材（包含課本、週邊輔助教材、補充教材）之選用情形。研究工具包括一份教師問卷、一份學生問卷、以及一份教師訪談稿。研究者採隨機取樣，於九十二學年度上學期結束前，針對全台灣九十所公私立高職之教師以及學生發出問卷，於下學期開學初收回問卷。有效問卷包含57所高職之354名英文教師，以及其中18所高職之1147名學生。另外，本研究亦深入訪談其中十名教師。調查結果先採描述統計，分別報告教師、學生對教材選擇的意見、使用的情形、以及對現行高職教材的評估。調查結果亦採卡方考驗，檢測教師意見與授課時數、教學年資之相關，以及學生意見與其英文程度之相關。
研究結果顯示：
（一）整體而言，高職英文教師對教材之選用大多符合高職學生對教材之期待；
（二）教師對教材之使用仍然有「考試領導教學」之傾向，例如：教師經常刪減「考試不考的」課本單元，加強「考試會考的」單元，且補充「考試會考的」教材；
（三）學生對教材選用大多有「實用取向」之期待，例如：多數學生希望加強會話及聽力。
（四）教師選用英語廣播雜誌作為補充教材之情形與授課時數有顯著相關；
（五）教師對課本各單元之刪減或加強、週邊輔助教材以及補充教材之使用情形均與教學年資有顯著相關。
（六）學生對課本各單元刪減或加強、週邊輔助教材以及補充教材之期待均與自評之英文程度有顯著相關。
根據研究結果，本文亦提出對現行高職英文教學之建議，例如：教材內容應實用有趣、師資培訓及在職進修應包含多種教學方法之示範、每週英文授課時數至少需五小時、技職院校入學考試命題應含會話及聽力等。

This study aims to investigate the current use of English teaching materials in Taiwan. Participants include 354 vocational high school teachers (ten of them were interviewed) and 1147 students. Two questionnaire surveys plus interviews were conducted to investigate vocational high school teachers’ and students’ perspectives and use of their English teaching/learning materials. Two Chi-square analyses were conducted to test the correlation between teachers’ use of teaching materials and the two variables (the amount of instructional time and the amount of teaching experience). Another was conducted to test the correlation between students’ use of learning materials and their self-reported English proficiency level.
In textbook selection, teacher participants share most of the considerations with student participants. They all emphasize contents and activities, accompanying materials, difficulty level, interest level, and the themes and text types of reading passages. When it comes to the selection of reading passages, they are all concerned with the practicability, interest level, informativeness, and educational function. Touching stories, humorous tales, and everyday English are their favorites. However, teachers’ adaptation of textbooks does not always correspond to students’ expectations. For example, students expected teachers to enhance the conversation and listening sections, but these two sections were often skipped by teachers. Over half of the students did not dislike CLT activities whereas half of the teachers seldom used CLT activities in class. The number one reason why teachers often skip specific sections in the textbook is instructional time constraints.
The amount of instructional time also correlates significantly with teachers’ evaluation of the textbook and use of supplementary materials. Teachers with less instructional time said that the difficulty level of the textbook being used was beyond their students’ proficiency level. On the other hand, teachers with more instructional time taught more lessons in a textbook and were more likely to use broadcast magazines. The second variable is the amount of teaching experience, which is found to correlate with teachers’ adaptation of the textbook. The less experienced teachers seem to put more emphasis on language use than language knowledge. They tended to enhance the conversation sections and use CLT activities. On the contrary, the more experienced teachers are more likely to emphasize students’ performance in EEFTC.
Students’ self-reported proficiency correlates with their perspectives of their textbooks. The more proficient students are more concerned with grammar learning. They expected their teachers to pay attention to the design of the grammar section when selecting a textbook. They urged that the sections on sentence patterns and grammar be enhanced. They asked for supplementary materials on grammar. They also demanded textbook writers to improve the design of grammar sections.
It is also found that most of the teacher participants adopted the traditional grammar-translation approach. Sixty-five percent of the teachers enhanced the grammar sections. They translated the text word by word, and asked students to memorize grammar rules. Overall, English language teaching in vocational high schools in Taiwan is largely examination-oriented. On the one hand, teachers often skip the sections of textbooks that are excluded from EEFTC. On the other hand, they use supplementary materials, EEFTC practice tests in particular, to raise students’ competitiveness in EEFTC.
Both teachers and students regard the workload and difficulty level of textbook being used as being a little beyond students' proficiency. Most of the teachers could only teach six lessons in a semester. Moreover, teacher participants and students believed that the textbooks contributed in some degree to developing students’ basic language skills. It seems that not all of the teaching objectives listed in the Curriculum Standards are attainable for VHS teachers and students who use the textbooks investigated in the present study.
When asked for suggestions for improving English language teaching in vocational high schools and raising VHS students’ English proficiency, both teachers and student participants listed an increase of instructional time as the top priority. The teacher participants demanded five hours a week, while students demanded four. Other suggestions include tracking students according to their proficiency level and adopting appropriate materials, improving teaching materials, and changing teaching methods. Also, teachers and students maintained that an ideal textbook should contain practical and interesting contents.
At last, the limitations of the study are pointed out. The implications of the study for VHS teachers, material writers, teacher educators, the policy makers, and the researchers are suggested.

Abstract (English) …………………………………………………………… iv
Acknowledgements …………………………………… v
Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………. v
List of Tables …………………………………………………………………… xii
List of Figures ………………………………………………………………… xvi
I   Introduction ……………………………………………… 1
1.1 Background of the Study ………………………… 1
1.1.1 The English education in vocational high schools in Taiwan 1
1.1.2 ELT Reform in Taiwan ………………………………… 2
1.2 Motivation of the Research …………………………… 4
1.3 Research Questions ……………………………………… 7
1.4 Significance of the Study ……………………………… 8
II   Literature Review ……………………………………… 10
    2.1 The Role of Textbooks ………………………………11
2.1.1 The need for textbooks ……………………………… 12
         2.1.1.1 For the benefit of teachers ………… 12
       2.1.1.2 For the benefit of students …………… 13
    2.2 The Selection and Evaluation of Textbooks …  14
       2.2.1 Selection of textbooks……………………… 15
2.2.2 Evaluation of textbooks……………………………   17
       2.2.2.1 Learner factors …………………………...
       2.2.2.2 Teacher factors ………………... 2121
          2.2.2.3 Task factors …………………………… 22
2.3 The Adaptation of Textbooks …………………………… 22
       2.3.1 Need for adaptation ……………………………23
       2.3.2 Dimensions of research on textbook use … 25
       2.3.3 Forms of textbook adaptation ……………… 25
          2.3.3.1 Use of communicative-language teaching activities 26
       2.3.3.2 Use of supplementary materials ………… 30
    2.4 Variables Correlated with Textbook Use ........ 31
       2.4.1 Teachers’ teaching experience ………………32
       2.4.2 Amount of instructional time …………………33
     2.4.3 Students’ English proficiency………………… 34
2.4.4 Teachers’ interaction with students ……………… 36
2.5 Summary .. …………………………………………………… 37
III  Research Methods …………………………………………… 39
3.1 Pilot Test …………………………………………………… 39
    3.2 Participants …………………………………………… 41
       3.2.1 Teacher participants responding to the questionnaire …41
       3.2.2 Teacher participants interviewed .....…… 42
       3.2.3 Student participants responding to the questionnaire  43
    3.3 Data Collection Procedures …………………… … 44
    3.4 Instruments ………………………………………… 45
       3.4.1 Questionnaire for teachers ………………… 45
       3.4.2 Questionnaire for students……………………46
       3.4.3 Interview questions for teachers……………47
       3.4.4 Summary ……………………………………………47
    3.5 Data Analysis ………………………………………… 48
IV  Findings ………………………………………………………51
    4.1 Teachers’ Perspectives on the Selection, Use, and Evaluation of Textbooks ………………………………………51
4.1.1 Textbook selection ………………………………………51
4.1.1.1 Results of the questionnaire ………………………51
4.1.1.2 Comments from interviews ……………………………54
4.1.2 Textbook use ………………………………………………56
      4.1.2.1 Use of the accompanying materials ………………56
         4.1.2.2 Adaptation of lesson sections ………………57
           4.1.2.2.1 Sections to be enhanced …………………57
           4.1.2.2.2 Sections skipped ……………………………59
           4.1.2.2.3 CLT activities ………………………………62
           4.1.2.2.4 Modification of textbooks ………………63
       4.1.3 Textbook evaluation …………………………………64
         4.1.3.1 Workload and difficulty level ………………65
         4.1.3.2 Contribution to the achievement of teaching objectives ................................................68
    4.2 Students’ Perspectives on the Selection, Use, and Evaluation of Textbooks ……………………………………………70
4.2.1 Textbook selection ……………………………………………70
4.2.2 Textbook use ………………………………………… 73
      4.2.2.1 Use of the accompanying materials …………73
         4.2.2.2 Use of lesson sections ……………………………74
           4.2.2.2.1 Sections to be enhanced …………………74
           4.2.2.2.2 Sections skipped by teachers …………75
           4.2.2.2.3 CLT activities ……………………………75
       4.2.3 Textbook evaluation …………………………………76
         4.2.3.1 Workload and the difficulty level ………76
         4.2.3.2 Contribution to the achievement of learning objectives ……76
 4.3 Use of Supplementary Materials …………………… 79
    4.3.1 Teachers’ perspectives and use ………………………79
      4.3.1.1 Results of the questionnaire …………… 79
      4.3.1.2 Comments from interviews ………………………81
    4.3.2 Students’ perspectives and use………………………83
 4.4 Textbook Users’ Suggestions ……………………………………85
    4.4.1 Teachers’ suggestions ……………………………………85
      4.4.1.1 Suggestions for improving textbooks ………………85
      4.4.1.2 Suggestions for improving students’ English proficiency …87
    4.4.2 Students’ suggestions …………………………. 88
      4.4.2.1 Suggestions for improving textbooks ……………88
      4.4.2.2 Suggestions for improving students’ English proficiency ….. 89
 4.5 Variables Correlated with Teachers’ Decision-making ……90
    4.5.1 Variable 1: amount of instructional time ………90
      4.5.1.1 Amount of instructional time and the workload of the textbook …………………………………………………… 91
      4.5.1.2 Amount of instructional time and the use of teaching materials …………………………………………… 93
        4.5.1.2.1 Amount of instructional time and the deletion of lesson sections …………………………………………… 93
        4.5.1.2.2 Amount of instructional time and the use of CLT activities ………………………………………………… 94
        4.5.1.2.3 Amount of instructional time and the use of supplementary materials ………………………………………95
      4.5.1.3 Amount of instructional time and teachers’ suggestions for improving students’ English proficiency ………………………96
    4.5.2 Variable 2: amount of teaching experience … 97
      4.5.2.1 Amount of teaching experience and the use of teaching materials ………………………………………………07
      4.5.2.2 Amount of teaching experience and teachers’ suggestions for improving students’ English proficiency ………………………99
    4.5.3 Summary ……………………………………………… 100
 4.6 Variable Correlated with Students’ Perspectives: Students’ Self-reported English Proficiency ………… 101
    4.6.1 Students’ proficiency and their textbook use………101
    4.6.2 Students’ proficiency and their textbook evaluation ……………103
    4.6.3 Students’ proficiency and the use of supplementary materials 105
       4.6.3.1 Results of the questionnaire ………………105
       4.6.3.2 Comments from interviews ………………………107
    4.6.4 Students’ proficiency and their suggestions for improving their English proficiency …………………… 108
V  Discussion and Conclusion ………………………………………109
5.1 Discussion…………………………………………………… 109
   5.1.1 Teachers’ perspectives and use of teaching materials ………… 109
     5.1.1.1 Primary considerations in textbook selection 109
     5.1.1.2 Textbook adaptation ………………………110
     5.1.1.3 Use of accompanying materials …………………113
     5.1.1.4 Textbook evaluation …………………………………115
     5.1.1.5 Selection and use of supplementary materials 116
   5.1.2 Variables correlated with teachers’ decision-making ……………118
       5.1.2.1 Instructional time and use of teaching materials ……………118
     5.1.2.2 Teaching experience and use of teaching materials ………… 121
     5.1.3 Students’ perspectives and use of learning materials …122
       5.1.3.1 Primary expectations of teaching materials ………………122
       5.1.3.2 Language activities ………………123
       5.1.3.3 Textbook evaluation ………………………………123
       5.1.3.4 Perspectives and use of supplementary materials …………124
     5.1.4 Students’ English proficiency and use of learning materials ……124
     5.1.5 Comparisons between teachers’ and students’ perspectives and use of teaching/learning materials …………126
     5.1.6 Teachers’ and students’ suggestions for improving their teaching/learning context and materials ………………129
  5.2 Conclusion ……………………………………………………130
    5.3 Limitations of the Study …………………………………133
    5.4 Implications of the Study …………………………………134
       5.4.1 Implications for VHS teachers ……………………134
       5.4.2 Implications for material writers ………………136
       5.4.3 Implications for teacher educators ………………137
       5.4.4 Implications for policy makers ………………138
       5.4.5 Implication for future research …………………139
References ……………………………………………………………………… 140
       English works ………………………………………………140
       Chinese works ……………………………………………145
Appendices ……………………………………………………… 146
Appendix A Questionnaire for teachers …………………………146
Appendix B Questionnaire for students …………………………150
Appendix C Interview questions for teachers ………………153
Appendix D Teachers’ suggestions for improving English textbooks …………154
Appendix E Students’ suggestions for improving English textbooks …………155
                                

References
English Works
Abraham, N. and Belanger, J. (2001). Technical and professional communications in secondary schools: Barriers created by teachers’ beliefs and attitudes. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 449 537)
Allwright, R. L. (1981). What do we want teaching materials for? ELT Journal 36(1), 5-19.
Anderson, J. (1993). Is a communicative approach practical for teaching English in China? Pros and cons. System 21, 471-480.
Barnard, R. and Randall, M. (1995). Evaluating course materials: A contrastive study in textbook trialling. System 23(3), 337-346.
Bartlett, L. 1990. Teacher development through reflective teaching. In J. C. Richards and D. Nunan (eds.), Second language teacher education. (pp. 202-214). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Berg, B. L. (1989). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Berliner, D. C. (1987). Ways of thinking about students and classrooms by more and less experienced teachers. In J. Calderhead (ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking. (pp. 60-83). London: Cassell.
Breen, M. and Candlin, C. (1987). Which materials? A consumer’s and designer’s guide. In L. Sheldon (ed.), ELT textbooks and materials: Problems in evaluation and development. London: Modern English Publications.
Brindley, G. (1984). Needs analysis and objective setting in the adult migrant education program. Australia: AMES.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Longman.
Burnaby, B. and Sun, Y. (1989). Chinese teachers’ views of western language teaching: Context informs paradigm. TESOL Quarterly 30, 591-598.
Burns, A. (1992). Teacher beliefs and their influence on classroom practice. Prospect 7(3), 56-66.
Byrd, P. (1995). Writing and publishing textbooks. In P. Byrd (ed.), Material writers’ guide. (pp. 3-9). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Calderhead, J. (1987). Exploring teachers’ thinking. London: Cassell.
Chen, C-T. (2002). Textbook selection for senior high school students in greater Taipei area. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Chen, M-H. (1986). An evaluation of two sets of English textbooks for industrial vocational high school students. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Cheng, L-Y. (2002). The backwash effect on classroom teaching of changes in public examinations. In S. J. Savignon (ed.), Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher education. (pp. 91-111). New Haven: Yale University Press.
Clark, C. M. and Peterson, P. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. Wittrock (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, 3rd ed. (pp. 255-296). New York: Macmillan.
Clarke, D. F. (1989). Materials adaptation: Why leave it all to the teacher? ELT Journal 43 (2), 133-141.
Cummings, A. (1989). Student teachers’ conceptions of curriculum: Towards an understanding of language teacher development. TESL Canada Journal 7(1), 33-51.
Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Oxford: Heinmann.
Dornyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Dudley-Evans, T. and St. John, M. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ehrman, M. E. (1996). Understanding second language learning difficulties. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Ellis, R. (1992). The study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT Journal 51(1), 36-42.
Fetsko, W. J. (1992). Approaching textbook selection systematically. In J. G. Herlihy (ed.), The textbook controversy: Issues, aspects, and perspectives. (pp. 129-135). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.
Fogerty, J. L., Wang, M. C., and Creek, R. (1983). A descriptive study of experienced and novice teachers’ interactive thoughts and actions. Journal of Educational Research 77, 22-32.
Fullan, M. G. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer Press.
Gary, P. D. (1992). Consumers of textbooks: Concerns from the classroom. In J. G. Herlihy (ed.), The textbook controversy: Issues, aspects, and perspectives. (pp.137-145). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.
Grant, N. (1987). Making the most of your textbook. New York: Longman.
Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching. New York: Longman.
Helgesen, M. (2003). Adapting and supplementing textbooks to include language planning. Selected papers from the twelfth international symposium on English teaching. (pp. 56-64). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., LTD.
Huang, S-H. (1998). Senior high school students’ EFL learning beliefs: A site study. Selected papers from the seventh international symposium on English teaching. (pp. 477-485). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., LTD.
Huang, S-H and Huang, S-F. (2000). Implementing the communicative approach in junior high school classes: Teaching reflection. Selected papers from the ninth international symposium on English teaching. (pp. 359-366). Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., LTD.
Hutchinson, T. (1982). The communicative approach: A question of materials or attitudes? System 10(2), 135-143.
Hutchinson, T. (1988). Materials and the system: What role do materials play? Paper presented to RELC Conference. Singapore.
Hutchinson, T. and Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal 48(4), 315-329.
Johnson, K. E. (1992). The instructional decisions of pre-service English as a second language teachers: New directions for teacher preparation programs. In J. Flowerdew, M. Brock, and S. Hsia (eds.), Perspectives on second language teacher education. (pp. 115-134). Hong Kong: City Polytechnic of Hong Kong.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lazzar, G. (1993). Literature and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Li, D. (1998). “It’s always more difficult than you plan and imagine”: Teachers’ perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in South Korea. TESOL Quarterly 32(4), 677-703.
Li, H-C. (2003). Predictive evaluation, use, and retrospective evaluation of an EFL textbook by junior high school teachers: A case study in Taipei. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Liao, C-C. (1999). The study of textbook and teaching methods usage by secondary school English teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis. Tainan: National Chen Kung University.
Liao, M-C. (2002). EEFTC English tests: Renovations and viewpoints of vocational high school students and English teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Liao, W-W. (2002). Senior high school English teachers’ belief towards communicative language teaching and their classroom practice. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Lin, H-J. (2002). Teachers’ beliefs and practice of communicative language teaching: A case study of a junior high school English teacher. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Littlejohn, A. (1998). The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan horse. In B. Tomlinson (ed.), Materials development in language teaching. (pp. 190-216). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Livingston, C. and Borke, H. (1989). Expert-novice differences in teaching: A cognitive analysis and implications. Journal of Teacher Education 40(4), 36-42.
Markee, N. (1997). Managing curricular innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nien, Y-S. (2002). Teacher beliefs and their influence on classroom practice: A case study of a senior high school English teacher. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Nitsche, C. G. (1992). A teacher and his students examine textbooks. In J. G. Herlihy (ed.), The textbook controversy: Issues, aspects, and perspectives. (pp. 113-120). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.
Nunan, D. (1993). From learning-centeredness to learner-centeredness. Applied Language Learning 4, 1-18.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: einle & Heinle.
Richards, J. C. (1993). Beyond the textbook: The role of commercial materials in language teaching. RELC Journal 24(1), 1-14.
Richards, J. C. (1996). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms. New York : Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. (1998). Beyond training. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. and Lockhart, C. (1996). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., Ho, B., and Giblin, K. (1992). Learning how to teach: A study of EFL teachers in pre-service training. Department of English research report No. 19. Hong Kong: City Polytechnic of Hong Kong.
Richards, J. C., Tung, P., and Ng, P. (1992). The culture of the English language teacher: A Hong Kong example. RELC Journal 23(1), 81-103.
Sato, K. (2002). Practical understandings of communicative language teaching and teacher development. In S. J. Savignon (ed.), Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher education. (pp. 41-81). New Haven: Yale University Press.
Sato, K. and Kleinsasser, R. C. (1999). Communicative language teaching (CLT): Practical understandings. The Modern Language Journal 83, 494-517.
Savignon, S. J. (1997). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Savignon, S. J. and Wang, C-C. (2003). Communicative language teaching in EFL contexts: Learner attitudes and perceptions. IRAL 41(3), 223-249.
Schulz, R. A. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students’ and teachers’ views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annuals 29, 333-364.
Shannon, P. (1987). Commercial reading materials: A technological ideology, and the deskilling of teachers. The Elementary School Journal 87(3), 307-329.
Shavelson, R. J. and Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions and behavior. Review of Educational Research 51(14), 455-498.
Sheldon, L. E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal 42(4), 237-246.
Skierso, A. (1991). Textbook selection and evaluation. In M. Celce-Murcia (ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Studolsky, S. (1989). Is teaching really by the book? In P. W. Jackson and S. Haroutunian-Gordon (eds.), From socrates to software: The teacher as text and the text as teacher. (pp. 159-184). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Su, Y-H. (1997). Needs survey and evaluation scheme for industrial vocational high school English textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis. Taipei: National Chengchi University.
Thuleen, N. (1996). The grammar-translation method. Download, 6/12/2002 [on-line]. Available: http://members.cts.com/crash/n/nthuleen/papers/720report.html.
Ulichny, P. (1996). What’s in a methodology? In D. Freeman and J. C. Richards (eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching. (pp. 178-196). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wallace, M. J. (1991). Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, C-C. (2002). Innovative teaching in EFL contexts: The case of Taiwan. In S. J. Savignon (ed.), Communicative language teaching in translation: Contexts and concerns in teacher education. (pp. 131-153). New Haven: Yale University Press.
Williams, D. (1983). Developing criteria for textbook evaluation. ELT Journal 37(3), 251-261.
Woods, D. (1991). Teachers’ interpretations of second language teaching curricula. RELC Journal 22(2), 1-18.
Woodward, A. (1993). Introduction: Learning from textbooks. In B. K. Britton, A. Woodward, and M. Binkley (eds.), Learning from textbooks: Theory and practice. New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Chinese Works
Chou, C-T. (1998). 周中天。（民87）。國中英語新教材試用一年回顧。敦煌英語教學雜誌第19期。頁6-8。台北：敦煌。
Hong, C-S. (1995). 洪銓修。（民84）。高級工商職業學校英文教師對英語文教育之觀點之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
Huang, T-L. (1990). 黃自來。（民79）。高級職業學校英文教學研究。輯於黃自來著英語教學新象。頁285-304。台北：文鶴。
Jiang, W-S. (1994). 江文雄。（民83）。臺灣地區公私立高級職業學校師生對一般科目教學之意見調查研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
Lin, C-W. (1990). 林昭武（民79）。技職教育：被忽視的主流。頁96-103。天下雜誌。台北：天下。
Lin, M-S. (1995). 林茂松。（民84）。中華民國技職教育體系與普通教育體系英語文教學比較研究（I）：高中高職篇。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
Lin, M-S. (1996). 林茂松。（民85）。中華民國高中高職英文教學現況比較研究。中華民國第五屆英語文教學研討會論文選集。頁59-79。台北：文鶴。
Tzeng, J-J. (1999). 曾建肇。（民88）。國小英語教材篩選與自編：以台南市為例。跨世紀國小英語教學研討會論文集。頁1-20。
Shih, Y-H. (2000). 施玉惠。（民89）。國小英語教材之評審——資格審vs.選用審。國立台灣師範大學英語系。
Shih, Y-H. (2004). 施玉惠。（民93）。英文教師對教材評審英有之態度。國立台灣師範大學英語系。
Shih, Y-H, and Lin, M-S. (1996). 施玉惠、林茂松。（民85）。我國高職英文課程與教材評估。
Shih, Y-H, et al. (1999). 施玉惠、林茂松、周碩貴、洪銓修。（民88）。跨世紀技職體系一貫課程規劃︰技職院校外語教育改進規劃期末報告。教育部技術及職業教育司委託國立台灣師範大學研究。
Shih, Y-H, et al. 2000. 施玉惠、林茂松、黃崇術、葉健芬。（民89）。四技二專英文考試對高職英文教學之影響。第九屆中華民國英語文教學國際研討會論文集。頁586-596。台北：文鶴。
Yeh, H-N. (2003). 葉錫南。（民92）。學生能力差異的因應方式。國立台灣師範大學英語系。
Yin, T-F. (1999). 殷彩鳳。（民88）。教材選對效果加倍：談選用英語教材的基本原則。敦煌英語教學雜誌第21期。頁15-17。台北：敦煌。

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文