英语论文网

necessary. Step 7 The teacher sets a writing task for homework, which is to write ten sentences about their plans using the subjunctive. If there is enough time, the teacher can invite some students to read out their sentences to the whole class. The class discuss it and the teacher makes any necessary changes. Comments: Here in this example, the teacher tries to offer good chances for the students to practice English. The teacher maintains focus on the meanings that he and the students are jointly constructing, while at the same time nudging students to pay some attention to the form of "I would do if ..." The structure gets thoroughly manipulated, and, at the same time, the conversation achieves a more natural symmetry. So we can see that this kind of approach can improve both accuracy and fluency of production because practice makes perfect. The advantages of an inductive approach are as follows: First, it is attractive. Students are more actively involved in the learning process, rather than being simply passive recipients, so they are likely to be more attentive and more motivated, which is especially suitable for little kids who are very active. Second, it is meaningful. Rules that learners discover for themselves may be more likely to fit their existing mental structures than rules they have been presented with. This in turn will make the rules more meaningful, memorable, and serviceable. Third, it is memorable. The mental effort involved ensures a greater degree of cognitive depth which, again, ensures greater memorability. Fourth, working things out for themselves prepares students for greater self-reliance and is therefore conducive to learner autonomy. The disadvantages of an inductive approach include: First, misleading. The time and energy spent in working out rules may mislead students into believing that rules are the objective of language learning, rather than a means. Second, time-consuming. The time taken to work out a rule may be at the expense of time spent in putting the rule to some sort of productive practice. Moreover, it can place heavy demands on teachers in planning a lesson. Third, inaccurate. Students may hypothesize the wrong rule, or their version of the rule may be either too broad or too narrow in its application: this is especially a danger where there is no overt testing of their hypotheses, either through practical examples, or by eliciting an explicit statement of the rule. Fourth, complicated. An inductive approach frustrates students who, by dint of their personal learning style or their past learning experience (or both), would prefer simply to be told rules. So from the above analysis, we can find that each approach has its own advantages and disadvantages. In order to testify which one is more suitable with our Chinese pupils, we made an experiment in which there are two groups. One is the experimental team; the other is the Reference team. Each team has 20 students, who were 11-12 years old and were of similar English levels. I first taught the reference team 襜e going to do?in the deductive approach. After the class, I gave them a small test. I gave them 15 multiple-choice questions, among which 5 is related with the structure of 襜e going to do?and found that 85% of the students can grasp the structure and could do the exercises correctly. Most of the students could also explain why they did the exercise in this or th