英语论文网

2004, & Hoyt, 2009).
..........

Chapter Three Theoretical Framework............ 16
3.1 Krashen’s Input Hypothesis............16
3.2 Swain’s Output Hypothesis....16
3.3 Information Processing Theory...... 18
Chapter Four Research Methodology.......21
4.1 Research Questions.......21
4.2 Subjects.......21
4.3 Instruments...........22
4.4 Teaching Materials........23
4.5 Procedures of Experiment......24
4.6 Teaching Procedures of Controlled Class.........29
4.7 Data Collection.... 30
Chapter Five Results and Discussion........31
5.1 Analysis of the Pre-test and Post-test in EC and CC..........31
5.2 Analysis Scores of Content, Organization, Vocabulary, Language Use and Mechanics......... 34
5.3 Results of the Questionnaire...........38
5.4 Discussion............39

Chapter Five Results and Discussion

The thesis aimed at checking whether the text-retelling training is effective on junior high schoolEnglish writing teaching in Tibetan region and whether this teaching method could improve students’writing achievement. Meanwhile, which aspects were improved more significant so as to testify the effectsof text-retelling in English teaching. And the students’ attitudes towards text-retelling training. To answerthe questions proposed above, the researcher collected and analyzed three parts of data in the wholeexperiment, including the data from pre-test, post-test and questionnaire.

5.1 Analysis of the Pre-test and Post-test in EC and CC

In the pre-test, the total score is 100 points to examine whether the writing ability of all the subjectswere at the same learning level. Appendix X showed the scores of the pre-test in experimental class andcontrolled class. So an independent sample test was first employed by the researcher to compare the scoresof the two classes. The results listed as follows:From the above tables, on the one hand, it shows that the mean score of CC in pre-test is 60.83, whichis almost the same as that of EC (60.91). The mean difference is only 0.08 between EC and CC, which canbe omitted. On the other hand, the standard deviation is 22.155 in CC which is quite close to the standarddeviation 23.090 in EC, too. However, the statistics of SD showed that students’ writing competence in thesame class was quite different. This phenomenon was very obvious in the two classes. The researcherfound that there were almost 20% students couldn’t complete the writings by themselves. Some of themjust listed the given information without any logic. They only got the lowest scores in each part. What’ smore, there were 3 students got 0 in CC and 4 students in EC. Some of them just wrote the title, and otherscopied some sentences from the reading comprehension for finishing the task. For these kinds of writing,the author gave 0 point. As the table 5.2 shown, the significant difference (sig.) of Levene’s Test forEquality of Variances is 0.925 (>0.05), which demonstrating the two classes assumed equal variances inthe pre-test. Meanwhile, in the T-test for Equality of Means, t=-0.0170.05. So it is easily to conclude that there are no obvious differences between meanscores and two classes are the same level of the writing ability. Besides, the lower limit and the upper limitof 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference 本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。