导　　师： 谭智;王蕴峰

学科专业： 040102

授予学位： 硕士

作　　者： ;

机构地区： 广东外语外贸大学

摘　　要： 如今，我们渐渐意识到高等职业院校学生在学习英语时，提升职业知识及技能和提高英语水平同等重要。因此，怎样让二者都得到提升，已成为很多教材编写者的首要考虑因素。根据Hutchinson及Water的需求分析框架，职业知识和技能可以看作是学习者的目标需求，英语水平可以看作是学习者的学习需求。在广州城市职业学院及广州其它几个高等职业院校使用的英语教材《高级职业英语-读写教程》，其编纂的出发点就是同时满足学生的学习需求及目标需求。作为在广州城市职业学院实习的一名英语教师，作者将探讨教材编写者是否已经同时满足了英语学习者的学习需求及目标需求以及是如何满足这些需求的。基于Hutchinson及Water的需求分析框架以及Mc Donough及Shaw的教材评估模型，作者将会解决以下三个研究问题： /(1/)广州城市职业学院的老师和学生的学习需求和目标需求是什么？ /(2/)《高级职业英语-读写教程》在多大程度上满足了学生的学习需求和目标需求？ /(3/)《高级职业英语-读写教程》是如何满足学生的学习需求和目标需求的？定性和定量的研究方法将会被运用到本研究中。120份学生问卷和16份教师问卷将会分别发放给广州城市职业学院的学生和老师。来自问卷的数据将会用于解决第一和第二个研究问题。为解决第三个研究问题，作者将会建立两个小型的语料库并进行可读性系数的计算。 经过定性和定量的研究研究分析，其研究结果如下： /(1/)大部分学生已经很好地意识到他们学习英语的目的是同时提升英语水平和职业知识和技能。在进入到专业英语学习之前，他们认为有必要学习《高级职业英语-读写教程》。教师认为教程的学习对学习者以后的工作有益，但益处不够大。另外，有趣的事情是大部分学生最喜欢的学习方式是“老师讲解”，而老师认为学生最喜欢的学习方式是“小组学习”。在后面进行的关于练习活动形式的研究中发现，教材260个练习活动中只有7个涉及合作学习，其余全为学生单人练习活动。因此，鲜有的合作学习活动可能导致了学生习惯了教师讲解的学习方式。 /(2/)依据Hutchinson和Water的需求分析框架以及McDonough和Shaw的评估模式，《高级职业英语-读写教程》在满足学生学习需求很多方面做得很好。然而，教程存在一个明显的缺点：话题，编排，文体及练习活动方面缺少趣味性和吸引力。另外，易读性测试显示教程第二册的单元难度梯度设计不合理。 /(3/)教程也很好地满足的学生的目标需求。自建语料库数据显示，除了冠词“a”“the”，连词“and”和介词“to”以外，人称代词“you”及“your”在课文中出现的频率最大。经过进一步的分析得出，包含有you的句子其目的可以分为三类:给出职场建议，假设职场情境，呈现职场行为后果。而跟随在代词“your”后面的词语都与职场相关。另外，祈使句以较高的频率分布在整个教程中。祈使句能引起学生的学习注意并告知学习者在其未来的职场中能做什么和不能做什么，但在另外一方面却导致了学生和老师的抱怨:他们在问卷的开放式问答部分提到学习课文就像是学习产品说明书。换一句话说，教材编纂者忽视了语言本身的趣味性。 总的来说，教程编写者确实试图同时满足学生的学习需求和目标需求。但在满足目标需求的时候，在某种程度上牺牲了学生的学习需求：学习兴趣。作者期望在编写高等职业院校的英语教材时，教材编纂者能注意到学习需求和目标需求之间的平衡性。 Nowadays, we have gradually realized that for vocational college students,improving students’ career knowledge and skills are as important as enhancing theirEnglish language proficiency when they are learning English course. Thus, how toachieve that recognition has become many textbook compilers’ top consideration.According to Hutchinson and Water’s needs analysis framework, career knowledgeand skills can be considered as target needs while English language proficiency canbe seen as learning needs. The set of textbooks Advanced Career English-Readingand Writing, which is being used in Guangzhou City Polytechnic College and othervocational colleges in Guangzhou city, claims to have tried their best to meet students’target needs and learning needs at the same time. As an intern English teacher inGuangzhou City Polytechnic College, the author intends to examine whether textbookcompilers have carried out the above claim and how they have carried out that claim. Based on Hutchinson and Waters’ needs analysis framework and McDonoughand Shaw’ evaluation model, the author will try to solve the three research questions: /(1/) What are the target needs and learning needs as perceived by the learners andteachers in Guangzhou City Polytechnic College? /(2/) Does the set of textbooks Advanced Career English-Reading and Writing meet theneeds of the teachers and learners? /(3/) How does Advanced Career English-Reading and Writing meet the target needsand learning needs in detail? Qualitative research method and quantitative method will be combined in thisstudy. The questionnaires for students are distributed to120students and thequestionnaires for teachers are delivered to16teachers in Guangzhou CityPolytechnic College. The data from the questionnaires aim to answer the first tworesearch questions. To answer the third research question, two mini self-buildingcorpora are built and Flesh Readability test is carried out. After the qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis, this thesis gets the results and findings as follows: First, most students can well perceive their English course learning purposes: toimprove their language ability as well as enhance their career knowledge and skills.They think it is necessary for them to learn Advanced Career English-Reading andWriting before they start their specialized English course learning. The teachers thinkthat the textbooks evaluated will be to some extent beneficial to students’ future work,but not too much. Besides, it is very interesting that most students say that “teacherpresentation” is their favorite way of learning, while teachers think that their preferredway is “group work”. The subsequent study shows that there are only7cooperativeexercise activities out of260. The rare opportunities for cooperative learning mighthave confined students in “teacher presentation” way. Second, the textbooks evaluated do well in meeting students’ learning needsaccording to Hutchinson/&Water’s needs analysis and McDonough and Shaw’sevaluation model. However, one prominent demerit stands out: the textbooks are lackof interestedness in several aspects, say, topic, arrangement, text style and exerciseactivities. Besides, it is detected that volume2does not do well in graduation ofdifficulty from one unit to the next. Third, the textbooks evaluated also do well in meeting learners’ target needs.Data of self-building corpora show that except for determiners “a” and “the”,conjunction “and” and preposition “to”, pronouns “you” and “your” are the mostfrequently used words in reading texts. After a further examination, it turns out thatthree purposes are served by the sentences containing “you”: to offer businesssuggestions, to suppose a business situation and to provide possible outcomes inbusiness. Almost all the words following “your” are business-related. What’s more,imperative sentences are frequently plotted throughout the whole texts, which canarouse learners’ attention and warn learners to do something or not to do something intheir future career, but has also incurred some complaints from the teachers andstudents. In the open-ended questions of the questionnaires, they say that learning thetexts seem like learning instructions of products. In other words, the compilers haveignored the interestedness in the language itself. It can be concluded that textbook compilers indeed have made their every effortto meet students’ learning needs and target needs, but to some extent they havesacrificed students’ learning interest or learning needs in pursuit of target needs. It ishoped that the other compilers will pay attention to this point when they are compilinga set of English textbooks for vocational college students.

关 键 词： 需求分析 评估模式 语料 教材评估

分 类 号： [H319.3]

领　　域： [语言文字]