英语论文网

3. Research Design………17
3.1Research Questions……… 17
3.2 Subjects……… 17
3.3 Instruments……… 17
3.3.1 The Pre-test and Post-tests………18
3.3.2 Questionnaire……… 18
3.3.3 Interview……… 18
3.4 Research Procedures ………19
3.4.1 The Preparation Stage……… 19
4. Data Collection and Analysis……… 25
4.1 Data Collection and Analysis of the Pre-test………25
4.2 Data Collection and Analysis of the Post-test ……… 27
4.3 Comparison of the Pre-test and the Post-test in the Experimental Class………29
4.4 Comparison of the Pre-test and the Post-test in the Control Class………30
4.5 Data Collection and Analysis of the Questionnaire………31
4.6 Data Collection and Analysis of the Interview………33
4.7 Answers to the Research Question……… 35
4.8 Pedagogical Implications of the Thesis………37
5. Conclusion……… 41
5.1 Major Findings of the Thesis………41
5.2 Limitations of the Thesis……… 42
5.3 Suggestions for Further Researches……….43

4. Data Collection and Analysis

4.1 Data Collection and Analysis of the Pre-test
In order to check whether the two selected class can be taken as the control class andthe experimental class to take part in the experiment, it must be ensured that there was noobvious difference between the two classes before the experiment. So a pre-test wasconducted and the writing scores of the two classes in the pre-test got analyzed inIndependent Samples T-test. With the SPSS 19.0., the results were analyzed and listed asfollows:In Table 4-1, it can be seen that the mean score of the experimental class is 24.841 andthe mean score of the experimental class is 22.738. The mean difference between theexperimental class and the control class is about 2.103 in the pre-test. The values of StandardDeviation in the experimental class and control class are respectively：6.015 and 9.536, whichshows the score distributions in the two classes are different. The score distribution of thecontrol class is more decentralized.

………..

Conclusion

The major findings of the thesis are mainly based on the above data analysis anddiscussion, which contains the following aspects:Scaffolding instruction can be more effective than the traditional writing teachingmethod in improving the students’ writing abilities in some writing aspects. The teachingeffect of scaffolding instruction in writing is more obvious in the aspects of “communicativequality”, “argumentation”, “organization” and “linguistic appropriacy” in the experimentalclass than in the control class,. As for the “linguistic accuracy”, there is no obvious differencebetween the control class and the experimental class. In the experimental class, scaffoldinginstruction can better contribute to improving students’ original writing abilities in “totalscore”, “communicative quality”, “organization”, “linguistic accuracy” and “linguisticappropriacy” than in “argumentation”.
…………
Reference (omitted)