对《新视野大学英语》评析

《新视野大学英语》的评析姓名：曾荣专业：课程与教学论

导师：柏敬泽方向：英语教学论

年级：2004级摘要大学英语教科书作为教学内容的载体在我国高校大学英语教学中起着重要的作用。今年来，各地书店里教材琳琅满目。然而，每套教材均有其优点和缺点。事实上，如何选择一套适合学生使用的教材变成了摆在教学主管部门和大学英语教师面前的问题。这种情况也成了本项研究的动因。教育部推荐了多部英语教材，新视野大学英语》为其中之一。毫无疑问，该教材在专家眼里是部好教材。我校以之作为课堂教学中的骨干教材已有两年多的时间。本文试图对《新视野大学英语》作一全面审视，目的在于分析出一些参考意见。作为一篇研究教材的论文，本为定位在对教材的分析评价上，以期满足当务如何充分使用本教材的迫切需要。本文共分五章，每章内容扼要叙述如下：第一章为文章的介绍部分。首先讨论了研究的背景，然后是教材评估的意义和标准，接下来介绍了两个国外的评估模式。通过第一章的介绍，对教材评估能达到概念上的整体把握，为其后的展开做了铺垫。第二章着重介绍与教材评估相关的语言学习理论。其中包括语言学理论和教材的关系以及各种教学大纲与教材的关系。第三章是开始对《新视野大学英语》进行分析。文章先从客观的角度分析了这套教材的组成部分，内容选择和编排。再主观评价了教材的出色之处和不足。在这一章里，文章还重点分析了听，说，读，写四项技能在教材中的体现程度。第四章是文章的重要部分。除了对教材的客观和主观分析评价外，教材的学习者的意见也是评价教材是否合适的重要标准。作者设计了调查问卷以测试学生对《新视野大学英语》的满意度，并根据调查结果总结了这套教材最受学生欢迎的地方和稍有欠缺的地方。第五章是结论部分。文章总结了《新视野大学英语》的优点和不足，这套教材的不足之处在于首先这套教材对阅读技能的培养力度过大而相对忽略了其他的三种技能。交流才是英语学习的主要目的，所以教材应该着重培养学生的说话能力而非仅仅强调信息的提供。其次CD光盘和网络教程都没有得到充分的使用。再次，这套教材没有对语法规则和翻译技能的系统较少，这一定程度上会导致学生应对考试时的失败。最后，作者对如iv《《何有效使用这套教材提出了一些建议。关键词：教材

分析

评价

新视野大学英语vAnAnalysisandevaluationofNewHorizonCollegeEnglishPostgraduate:ZengRong

supervisor:BaiJingze

Grade:2004AbstractCollegeEnglishcoursebooks,asavehicle,playanimportantroleintheinstructionofCollegeEnglishintheinstitutionsofhigherlearninginourcountry.Inrecentyears,alargeassortmentofsuchbooksisavailableinbookstoreseverywhere.However,eachseriesoftextbookshasitsmeritsanddemerits.Asitis,howtofindtheonebestsuitableforthestudentshasbecomeaproblemthattheadministrativeofficesinchargeofstudiesandtheCollegeEnglishteachersareconfrontedwith.Thissituationhasalsoinspiredthemotivationofthisresearch.TheMinistryofEducationoftheStateCouncilhasrecommendedseveralteachingmaterialsfortheinstructionofCollegeEnglishandoneofthemisNewHorizonCollegeEnglish,whichisbeyondanydoubtsagoodtextbookintheeyesoftheexperts.Thistextbookiswhatcanbecalledthemainstayteachingmaterialsusedinclassroomteachinginouruniversityforovertwoyears.ThisdissertationisintendedforathoroughstudyofthetextbookNewHorizonCollegeEnglishsoastofindoutsomecommentsonitforreference.Asaresearchpaper,itisorientedtotheanalysisandevaluationofthetextbooktosatisfytheurgentneedofhowtoutilizeittothebestadvantage.Thisdissertationisdividedintofivechaptersandthemaingistofeachchapterreadsasfollows: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;

NewHorizonCollegeEnglishvii论文独创性声明本人郑重声明：所提交的学位论文是本人在导师的指导下进行的研究工作及取得的成果。除文中已经注明引用的内容外，本论文不含其他个人或其他机构已经发表或撰写过的研究成果。对本文的研究作出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文中以明确方式标明。本人承担本声明的法律责任。研究生签名：

日期：论文使用授权声明本人完全了解广西师范大学有关保留、使用学位论文的规定。广西师范大学、中国科学技术信息研究所、清华大学论文合作部，有权保留本人所送交学位论文的复印件和电子文档，可以采用影印、缩印或其他复制手段保存论文。本人电子文档的内容和纸质论文的内容相一致。除在保密期内的保密论文外，允许论文被查阅和借阅，可以公布（包括刊登）论文的全部或部分内容。论文的公布（包括刊登）授权广西师范大学学位办办理。研究生签名：

日期：导

师签名：

日期：ChapterⅠIntroduction1.1BackgroundRecentyearsanever-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.11.2ThesignificanceoftheevaluationTherearesomanyreasonsformaterialsevaluationactivities.First,teachingmaterialsisthefoundationofteachingactivitieswhilegoodmaterialisprerequisiteforagoodteachingresult.Second,asthedeepeningofreformationofprimaryeducationinhighschool,thereformationandreplacementofcollegeEnglishteachingmaterialsbecomeinevitable.AccordingtoCunningsworth(1984,1995)andHutchinson,&Water(1987),theselectionoftextbooksisamajorandfrequentreasonforevaluation.Anotherreasonistomakeeffectiveuseofthetextbookalreadyinuse,inotherwords,toidentifyparticularstrengthsandweaknessofthematerial,sothatoptimumusecanbemadeoftheirstrongpoints,whiletheirweakerareascanbestrengthenedthroughadaptationorbysubstitutingmaterialfromotherbooks.Inaddition,coursebookanalysisandevaluationisusefulinteacherdevelopmentandhelpsteacherstogaingoodandusefulinsightsintothenatureofthematerials,henceimprovetheirteachingperformance.Nunangivesadviceonwhatappearstobethemostcommonreasonforcoursebookevaluation:“whenselectingcommercialmaterialsitisimportanttomatchthematerialswiththegoalsandobjectivesoftheprogramme,andtoensurethattheyareconsistentwithone’sbeliefsaboutthenatureoflanguageandlearning,aswellaswithone’slearners’attitudes,beliefandpreferences.”(Nunan1991:209)Thisdissertationattemptstomakeananalysisandevaluationofintendingtodiscoveritsmeritsanddemerits.TheaimofthisstudyistoutilizethetextbooktothebestadvantagebothonthepartoftheCollegeEnglishteachersandonthepartofthestudentsattheinstitutionsofhigherlearninginthewesternregionofChina.Whenitcomestotheuseofanytextbook,inclusiveofNewHorizonCollegeEnglish,thedemandingjobfortheteachersofCollegeEnglishtodoistoidentifywhataretheweakpointsofthestudentsandwhattheyneedinthestudyofEnglishinordertoadjusttheclassroomteachingofthetextbooktotheactualstateofthestudents.Thatiswhyitisasignificantresearchworkinmakingananalysisandevaluationofatextbookthathasbeenputtouse.1.3ThecriterionsoftheevaluationDifferentteachershavedifferentideasaboutwhatagoodtextbookshouldinclude,butgenerallyspeaking,goodtextbooksoftencontainlivelyandinterestingmaterial;theyprovideasensibleprogressionoflanguageitems,clearlyshowingwhathastobelearntandinsomecasessummarizingwhathasbeenstudiedsothatstudentscanrevisegrammaticalandfunctionalpointsthattheyhavebeenconcentratingon.Textbookscanbesystematicabouttheamountvocabularypresentedtothestudentandallowstudentstostudyontheirownoutsidetheclass.Goodtextbooksalsorelievetheteacherfromthepressureofhavingtothinkoforiginalmaterialfor2everyclass.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.Thestudents’centerroleshouldbeassuredbythetextbook.3Thetextbookshouldmakesurethatstudentscanobtainlanguagefocusandgrammarpointsafterlearning.1.4Twoevaluationmodels1.4.1HutchinsonandWaters’modelHutchinsonandWaters(1987:96)pointout:‘Evaluationisamatterofjudgingthefitnessofsomethingforaparticularpurpose.Givenacertainneed,andinthelightoftheresourcesavailable,whichoutofanumberofpossibilitiescanrepresentthebestsolution?Evaluationis,then,concernedwithrelativemerit.Thereisnoabsolutegoodorbad----onlydegreesoffitnessfortherequiredpurpose.”HutchinsonandWaters(1987:97)dividetheevaluationprocessintofourmajorsteps:1)2)3)4)

DefiningcriteriaSubjectiveanalysisObjectiveanalysisMatchingHutchinsonandWaters(1987:99)presenttheirownchecklistofcriteriaforobjectiveandsubjectiveanalysis,whichisnotanexhaustivelist,andisbasedonthefollowingfiveaspects:audience,aims,content,methodology,andothercriteria.Theauthorwillrefertotheirchecklistlaterwhenmakingtheevaluationcriteriaforthisthesis.1.4.2

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,4appropriatenessoftestsandexercises,self-studyprovisionandteacher-learner‘balance’inuseofthematerials.Afterthecompletionofbothexternalandinternalevaluation,theyadviseevaluatorstomakeanoverallassessmentastothesuitabilityofthematerialsbyconsideringthefollowingparameters:1)TheusabilityfactorHowfarcouldthematerialsbeintegratedintoaparticularsyllabusas‘core’orsupplementary?Forexample,wemayneedtoselectmaterialsthatsuitaparticularsyllabusorsetofobjectivesthatwehavetoworkto.Thematerialsmayormaynotbeabletodothis.2)ThegeneralizabilityfactorIstherearestricteduseof‘core’featuresthatmakethematerialsmoregenerallyuseful?Itmaybethatnotallthematerialswillbeusefulforagivenindividualorgroupbutsomepartsmightbe.Thisfactorcaninturnleadustoconsider.3)TheadaptabilityfactorCanpartsbeadded/extracted/usedinanothercontext/modifiedforlocalcircumstances?Theremaybesomeverygoodqualitiesinthematerialsbut,forexample,wemayjudgethelisteningmaterialorthereadingpassagestobeunsuitableandinneedofmodification.Ifwethinkthatadaptationisfeasiblewemaychoosetodothis.4)TheflexibilityfactorHowrigidisthesequencingandgrading?Canthematerialsbeenteredatdifferentpoints/usedindifferentways?Insomecasesmaterialsthatarenotsosteeplygradedofferameasureofflexibilitythatpermitsthemtobeintegrated.HutchinsonandWaters’modeldemandsthattheevaluatorshouldbethecoursedesignerorthecourseteacherwhoisveryfamiliarwiththecoursewherethetextbookisused.WhileMcDonoughandC.Shaw’smodelissuitableforbothexternalevaluatorandinternalevaluatoranditdividestheevaluationprocessintothreestages,whichismorescientificandlogical.5ChapterⅡLanguageLearningTheoryTheviewofthenatureoflanguageandlanguagelearningplayanimportantroleindesigningateachingsyllabusandtextbook.Inturn,thesyllabus,textbooksandtheteachingmethodswill,toalargeextent,reflecttheviewstothenatureoflanguageandlanguagelearninguponwhichtheyarewrittenandestablished(Hutchinson,1987).Theresearchoflearningcontributestothematerialsindifferentways.

Acontemporarydefinitionoflearningisacquiringorgettingknowledgeofasubjectoraskillbystudy,experience,orinstruction(Richardsetal,1986:).2.1Linguistictheory2.1.1BehaviorismBehaviorism,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:“Ilikeeating”),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.Theteacher’sroleisnotonlytoimpartknowledgeoflanguageanddodrills,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:1.“wholeperson”education2.Meaningfullearning3.Goodteacher-studentrelationship4.Learner-centeredteachingmodel:Variouslanguage-teachingapproachesemploythehumanisticprinciples,suchasSuggestopaedia,theSilentWay,TotalPhysicalResponse,NaturalApproachandCommunityLanguageLearning.Andtherewerematerialsfortheapproaches,which,asawhole,emphasizetheimportanceofindividual’sthoughts,feelingsandemotionsattheforefrontofallhumandevelopment.Theseareaspectsofthelearningprocessthatareoftenunjustlyneglected.“Humanisticapproachesprovideuswithpowerfuleducationmessagesregardingwhole-personinvolvementinlearning”.(Williams&Burden,1997)2.1.4ConstructivismConstructivism,ayoungertheoryoflearninginpsychologicaleducation,isthefurther7developmentofcognitivism.Anditalsohascloselinkswithsomemajorelementsofhumanism.ItoriginallyderivesfromthethoughtsofsomecognitivistsasDewey,PiagetandBruner,anddevelopsasaresultoftheinfluenceofVygotsky’sideas.Constructivistsassumethatlearnersconstructtheirownknowledgeonthebasisofinteractionwiththeirenvironment.AsD.J.Cunningham(1991)said,learningisaprocessofbuildingupstructureofexperiences.Learnersdonottransferknowledgefromtheexternalworldintotheirmemories;rather,theycreateinteractionsoftheworldbasedupontheirpastexperienceandtheinteractionsintheworld.Fourhypothesizesareattheheartofconstructivistviewofleaning:1.Knowledgeisphysicallyconstructedbylearnerswhoareinvolvedinactiveleaning2.Knowledgeissymbolicallyconstructedbylearnerswhoaremakingtheirownrepresentationsofaction3.Knowledgeissociallyconstructedbylearnerswhoconveytheirmeaningtoothers4.Knowledgeistheoreticallyconstructedbylearnerswhotrytoexplainthingstheydon’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-teachingsyllabuseswellinordertofindout8whatisimplicitinmaterialsforlanguagelearning,whichwillhelpustoselectandevaluatematerialssuitabletoourteachingandlearningsituation.2.2.1GrammaticalsyllabusInaGrammaticalsyllabus,orastructuralsyllabus,languagematerialsareselectedandgradedaccordingtocomplexity,usefulnessandlearnabilityofgrammaticalitems.Forexample,thepastperfectcontinuoustenseisoftenlearnedafterthepresentperfecttense,foritisconsideredtobemorecomplexinstructure.Seetheexampleofthegrammaticalsyllabus:ThisandthatMy,youPresenttenseSimplepasttenseSimplefuturetensePresentperfecttenseBasedonStructuralLinguisticstheoryoflanguageandBehavioristandCognitivelearningtheory,grammaticalsyllabushavebeenfrequentlyassociatedwithAudiolingualism,cognitivemethodoflanguage,Grammar-translationmethods,andseveralinnovativemethodssuchastheSilentWay(Krahnke,1987).Audio-lingualmethodsuseabehavioristlearningmodeltoinstillstructuralknowledgeandbehaviorinlearners.Somecognitiveresearchersassumedthatlanguageisbestlearnedthroughconsciousknowledgeoftheformofthelanguageandtherules.Grammar-translationmethodspresentthegrammaticalformsandpatternsofthelanguageexplicitly,andthencallforthestudentstopracticeandapplytheknowledgeintranslatingfromhisorhernativelanguagetothetargetlanguage.Grammaticalsyllabusisthemostfamiliartypeofallsyllabuses,butithasbeencriticizedformanyyearsaftertheriseofcommunicativeApproach.Firstly,manystudentsdowellingrammar-basedtest,buttheycan’tdemonstratethe