英语论文哪里有？本论文为教材编写者、教师和学生、考试开发者提出建设性教学启示，以便进行教材选取与编写和实施针对于阅读困难来源的教学。
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Research Background
In the rapidly developing information age,English,as an international linguafranca,is a crucial media tool for global political debate and trade relations,theglobal dissemination of information and technology,and the interchange of resourcesand education(Cheng,2002).In China,the classroom is the main setting for studentsto contact English,and textbooks are the primary materials for English classroominstruction.Textbooks are printed educational and instructional materials composedof rich texts,with perceptual and cognitive capabilities appropriate to the knowledgelevel and age of students,compiled according to the basic principles of educationalprograms,and transferring the knowledge they contain to students(Çiftçi,Çeçen&Melanlıoğlu,2007).Textbooks act as both a medium and the main method ofinstruction for both teachers and students.Therefore,the study of textbooks hasessential theoretical and practical significance.
Reading texts make up the bulk of English textbooks and are a centralcomponent of them.Teachers often use reading texts as a medium for impartinglanguage knowledge to students,such as vocabulary,syntax,discourse,etc.Theirmastery is closely tied to how well students learn and succeed on English languagetests.Just reading texts at the students’present reading level will significantlyadvance their learning.Hence,selecting reading texts with appropriate difficulty inEnglish textbooks is significant.
Chapter 3 Theoretical Framework
3.1 Zone of Proximal Development
In the 1930s,Vygotsky proposed Zone of Proximal Development.He thinksthere are two categories of students’development level:one is their actualdevelopment level,that is,the ability to solve problems independently;The other istheir potential development level,or the level of growth they could achieve withadult or more experienced peers’direction.The difference between the two is Zoneof Proximal Development(Vygotsky,1978).
On the one hand,the language input that students are exposed to must beslightly higher than their current level.They can improve their ability,but won’texceed their potential ability(Lan,2010).For textbook input,the reading textsshould fall into the middle of the difficulty spectrum and not be either overlychallenging or too simple(Vygotsky,1978).In this way,students can benefit fromchallenging texts.
On the other hand,when learning a language,the guidance of a teacher or amore capable classmate is also crucial.Because the goal of teaching is to narrow thedisparity between the actual development level and the potential development levelwith these helps,the potential development level can be turned into the actualdevelopment level(Wang,2000).Therefore,it is a great challenge for teachers tomaximize the role of textbooks and build scaffolding with the aid of textbooks inorder to help students build a learning framework.
Chapter 5 Results and Discussion
5.1 Text Analysis
For the overall analysis of text difficulty,this study collects and discusses thedata of three indices in the module of Readability.For a more detailed analysis oftext difficulty,it collects and analyzes the data of eight indices in the module of TextEasability Principal Components obtained by Coh-Metrix 3.0.
5.1.1 Overall Analysis of Text Difficulty
The Readability module in Coh-Metrix 3.0 comprises three formulas:FleschReading Ease;Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level;Coh-Metrix L2 Readability Formula.They have their emphasis,but they all apply to a wide range and have high reliability.The corresponding formula data obtained by Coh-Metrix 3.0 more directly reflectthe difficulty level of NSE(2019).
5.1.1.1 Flesch Reading Ease
Each unit of the seven textbooks contains two reading texts.Taking them as awhole,Coh-Metrix 3.0 is used to get their Flesch Reading Ease Score(RES).Then,the mean RES of units and textbooks as well as the standard deviation(SD)oftextbooks are obtained through Microsoft Excel(see Table 5-1).The higher the RESis,the lower the text difficulty is.
5.2 Text Comparison Between NSE and NMET
The normality test of SPSS is performed on the data of the three indices foroverall text difficulty and eight indices for detailed text difficulty of NSE(2019)andNMET represented by Paper 1 of the New National College Entrance Examinationbased on Coh-Metrix 3.0.As a result,the data of overall text difficulty are normallydistributed,which is subjected to an independent sample T-test,and the final resultsare presented in Table 5-14.Moreover,the data of the five indices of syntacticsimplicity,deep cohesion,verb cohesion,narrativity and word concreteness fordetailed analysis of text difficulty show normal distribution,so they are subjected toan independent sample T-test(see Table 5-15).However,the data of the remainingthree indices,namely,referential cohesion,connectivity and temporality,are not normally distributed.Therefore,the non-parametric test is conducted to determinewhether there is a significant difference between textbooks and examinations(seeTable 5-18).Those results explain the inadequacy and rationality of the textdifficulty of NSE(2019)from the perspective of preparation for the college entranceexamination.
Chapter 6 Conclusion
6.1 Major Findings
This study researches the text difficulty of NSE(2019),a senior high schoolEnglish textbook series.According to the results and discussions in Chapter 5,themain findings are as follows:
(1)The overall text difficulty of the 84 reading texts in NSE(2019)isappropriate,which meets the reading level of senior high school students.In addition,the Input Hypothesis and Zone of Proximal Development believe that studentsshould be given materials that are just a little bit above their current level.However,students’learning is gradual and orderly.If the learning difficulty suddenly increasesexcessively,and students don’t have enough knowledge reserves to digest newknowledge,it would cause learning difficulties(Shu,1996).Therefore,for individualtexts of elective compulsory textbooks that greatly exceed students’currentacceptance ability,replacement or modification is necessary.What’s more,the textdifficulty among the seven textbooks is gradually improved.And the reading textsequence among units of each textbook is inappropriate,which doesn’t follow therule of steady improvement.
(2)The overall text difficulty of reading texts in NSE(2019)is consistent withthat in NMET.The more detailed analysis of text difficulty shows that there is nosignificant difference between NSE(2019)and NMET in syntactic simplicity,referential cohesion,deep cohesion,verb cohesion,connectivity and temporality.However,the word concreteness of NSE(2019)is significantly lower than that ofNMET.The narrativity of NSE(2019)is significantly higher than that of NMET.Itmeans that the textbooks contain more specific words and colloquial expressions,while NMET contains more abstract words.Besides,although the textbooks offer abroad range of topics and genres,the examples of applied writing involved are fewerthan those in NMET,which is not conducive to preparing for the examination.
reference(omitted)
