Chapter One Literature Review
1.1 Overview of Teaching Models
“At first, when people create or find a new model of learning or teaching that worksfor some purpose, they’re so thrilled they try to use it for everything. Our job is toprovide some order for finding out what each model can do and building categories tofolks to find the tools they need.” (Joyce, 1985)With the improvement of higher education system and the reform of teaching models,the cultivation of creative talents has become the focus of the teaching reform inuniversities. The teaching syllabus for English learners requires that new teachingmedia, such as computers, the Internet and multimedia should be fully employed. Anurgent issue for educators is which kinds of English teaching models should beadopted, and would be the most suitable for universities in China.Developing teaching models is the recent innovation in teaching. An importantpurpose of discussing models of teaching is to assist the teacher to have a wide rangeof approaches for creating a proper interactive environment for learning. Intelligentuse of these approaches enables the teacher to adopt him to the learning needs of thestudents.
1.2 Theoretical Basis of Teaching Models
Language teaching has a long and intriguing history. For over a century, there havebeen many methods and approaches applied in language teaching models. It can bealso stated that teaching models are methods of teaching or underlying philosophiesthat guide teaching methods. Experienced teachers know hot to combine differentteaching models and teaching methods depending on different types of students. Socio-cultural models draw on the energy of the group and capitalize both oncommon cause and the potential that comes from differing points of views andorientations. The core objective is to help students learn to work together to identifyand solve problems of either academic or social nature. Increasing ability in grouporganization, problem identification, clarification of values and development of socialskills are developed as a part of the inquiry. Problems and values are the focus, andthe material is mastered in relation to them. Many of the social models can be used toapproach almost any academic subject or matter.
Chapter Two Research Methodology
2.1 Selection of Research Methodology
Kirk and Miller (1986) suggest a qualitative research model in which observation andmeasurement of the data collected is interpreted, evaluated and analyzed in order toproduce understanding. This study attempts to discuss English foreign languageteaching (ELT) in China and Finland in such a manner as to produce or contribute toan understanding of the two settings. Understanding will be defined as grasping thenature, significance and explanation of the topic in addition to showing a sympatheticand tolerant view toward the two educational cultures. Questionnaire is used in this study as one of the main data collection methods due toits easy applicability and adoptability. The questionnaire of this study is designed onlyfor students. The questionnaire for students consists of multiple-choice questions. Thequestions are designed to expose the differences in teaching models and teachingenvironments applied in the two universities. For specifics, see Appendix I. Participant observation is often described as occurring at four levels (Nunan,1992).They are complete participant, participant as observer, observer as participant andcomplete observation. Complete participant is a concealed role where the researcherquietly becomes a member of the group under the study. Participant as an observer issomewhat open about his purpose. Observers as a participant is “publicly known” andperhaps publicly sponsored. Complete observer is completely open and may userecording equipment to document activities. The writer’s role in the conductedobservation was complete participant.
2.2 Subject Selection
The subjects who took part in the experiments are divided into two parts：students andteachers. Students are those from Jilin University, and international students and localFinnish students who are studying in bo Akademi University, Finland; teachersconsist of Chinese English teachers of Jilin University and Finnish English teachers of bo Akademi University. English is learned as the second language for all thestudents. All the participants are non-English major students from Jilin University. All 49students selected for the study are all first year students without exception. The agesof the 6 English teachers selected for the study range from 32 to 59 years. All thestudents are Chinese native speakers who learn English as second language. Someteachers have been to abroad as researchers before. All the foreign subjects selected for the research are from bo Akademi University.The group comprised of 12 exchange students from non-native English speakingcountries and 7 Finnish local students who study English as second language. Inaddition, there are 6 teachers, who teach English in Finland, involved in the study.As far as the teachers are concerned, three of them are native speakers of English, andthere are native Finnish-speakers.
Chapter Three Results of the Research ......26
3.1 Analysis of Questionnaires ...........26
3.2 Analysis of Interviews ......28
3.3 Analysis of Teaching Models........29
3.4 Analysis of Teaching Environments .........30
3.5Analysis of Teachers’and Students’Roles .....32
3.6 Comparative Analysis and Interpretation of the Result....34
Limitations of the Research ..........40
Recommendations for Further Research ........41
Chapter Three Results of the Research
3.1 Analysis of Questionnaires
The writer of the thesis analyzes the results of Questionnaire I, which was given out to49 students at Jilin University and 19 students at bo Akademi University, in Table 3and Table 4. Table 3 shows the results from questions 1 – 7 and Table 4 the results fromquestions 8 and 9.Questions 1 – 4 discover the emphasis of teaching and the teaching methods that areused in the two universities. Results from the questions prove that teaching at JilinUniversity is mostly teacher-centered, and teachers often control the classroomactivities. At bo Akademi University ， on the contrary, teaching is mostlystudent-centered and the classroom activities are often led by the students. boAkademi University’s students practice more group and pair-discussions and interactmore with the teacher and other students. Jilin University’s students lack classroomactivities that practice their communicational skills while bo Akademi University’sstudents get enough oral exercise. Teachers at Jilin University use teaching aidequipment less often than teachers at bo Akademi University.
The aim of this research is to conduct a comparative analysis on the different Englishteaching models applied in Jilin University in China, and bo Akademi University inFinland. Based on the data analysis, the major findings of the study can besummarized in the following points:First, as mentioned before, the differences of teaching models applied in the twodifferent countries, are rooted in the cultural backgrounds, the teaching environmentsand in the educational system of the countries. These backgrounds cannot be changedeasily or quickly. More flexibility in choosing of teaching materials, teaching modelsand teaching technologies can actually improve the teaching quality and teachingresults. What comes to differences, the use of teaching models at Jilin Universityseems to be less flexible than at bo Akademi University. Teachers at bo AkademiUniversity are used to and have more freedom in applying and mixing differentteaching models than the teachers at Jilin University and the teaching models used at bo Akademi University are more student-centered compared to the teaching modelsused at Jilin University. The similarities between the teaching models used at JilinUniversity and at bo Akademi University are related to the using of various teachingmodels instead of one fixed model.