基础教育英语教师教学能力及其发展研究
|
摘要
本研究以“结构性教师能力理论”、“教师能力三维度理论”及“基准性-鉴别性的二维教师胜任力理论”三大理论体系作为基本理论框架，利用文献研究法、案例研究法、访谈研究法及对比分析法对设定的问题展开研究。从基本理论依据、现有研究成果及优质教学实录与优秀教师案例中析出基础教育英语教师教学能力的构成，再对取得这些能力所要经历的现实途径进行详细论述，建构了在目前情况下基础教育英语教师教学能力发展的基本模式。最后，对教师教学能力的评价进行了论述，从而获得英语教师教学能力发展的有力保障，为教师和教学管理者提供参考。
基础教育英语教师教学能力及其发展既具有一般教师教学能力的共性，但其特殊性却是值得我们全面、深入地研究的，只有通过更具体的研究获得的成果才会有更具体的借鉴意义。教师的教学能力是教师各种能力中的一部分，而又是教师从业条件的核心。能力以知识和技能为基础，但又不同于知识和技能。“能力是个体心理特征，知识和技能都是能力的基本要素，缺乏必要的知识和技能，相应的能力也就不存在了。”（胡淑珍，2000）教师的教学能力是一般能力与特殊能力的结合，一般能力指教师的智力，特殊能力指教师在从事具体学科教学活动中所表现出来的能力。基础教育英语教师教学能力的特征不应在本质上有别于一般教师教学能力特征，即也应为科学性和艺术性的统一。但由于学科的特殊性，尤其是教学内容方面的差别，基础教育英语教师教学能力会呈现出特有的特征。单就教学能力的艺术性而言，一名教师的基本功在很大程度上取决于其语言基本功，而英语教师的教学内容又恰恰是语言，语言本身又极富艺术色彩，怎样在教学中将这一富有艺术性的教学内容通过语言本身，较有艺术感染力地教给学生，这要求语言教师必须具备比其它学科教师更好的语言艺术素养。所以艺术性在英语语言教师教学能力的特征中体现得更为鲜明。
研究英语教师教学能力发展的前提是厘清目前我国基础教育英语教师应具备哪些教学能力。回答这一问题必须要用科学的方法进行解决。首先，现有的研究成果中，虽主要是关于不分学科所有教师的教学能力，但鉴于教学的共性，可借鉴的价值当然不可忽视。其次，美国学者借用“好的教学”及“有效教学”得出教师教学能力的标准是值得利用的方法。这正是本研究中选取相关优质课堂教学视频进行分析和选择优秀教师进行问卷调查，从而析出基础教育英语教师教学能力结构所依据的重要方法。
通过对优秀英语教师课堂教学视频进行解构式分析后发现，基础教育英语教师教学能力除有一般教师教学能力的共性外，还表现出显著的学科教学的特殊性。首先，英语教师英语学科的基本功不仅是其发展教学能力的学科基础和前提，且在教师教学行动中成了教学能力的直接体现，如教师的英语语言基本功及课堂讲授能力等。因为教师职业素养中口头表达是核心，这恰恰与英语教师的学科基本功相关。因此，英语教师学科基本功应成为其教学能力不可分割的组成部分。其次，与别的学科不同的是，由于英语是一门国际通用语，英语作为外语或第二语言教学的理论和相关研究成果十分丰富，英语教师除了要了解教育学、心理学、教育测量与教育技术基本理论外，要想在教学方面与国际同行同步，使自己真正具备英语教学的能力，必须要学习和熟悉英语作为外语或第二语言教学的理论与相关研究成果，丰富自己对英语教学各方面的认知，为科学发展教学能力打下坚实基础。第三，英语课堂教学的操作，尤其是基础教育英语教学，与其它学科教学也有很大差别。英语学习者在完成一项具体任务中使用所学语言会大大增强学习效果，这就要求英语教师要设计大量的训练任务并在课堂上进行有效组织和操作，这无疑比单纯讲授提高了教学难度。第四，英语学科教学与其它学科相比在教学研究上也有着特殊要求，英语教师的教学研究能力直接影响其教学能力的发展，是其教学能力的一个重要部分，对英语教师来说，无教研难成名师。因此，英语教师必须大量研读外语或第二语言教学方面丰富的研究成果，对教学进行认真研究，使教研在教学能力发展上发挥重要作用。
利用已设问卷与自述问卷结合的方法对四名优秀中学英语教师进行调查的结果显示，由于已设问卷建立在充分研读文献和教学视频分析的基础上，对基础教育英语教师教学能力覆盖全面，设项细化，被调查教师在自述问卷中对教学能力的补充非常有限。通过综合分析和归纳，本研究总结出了基础教育英语教师教学能力基本构成，共分七大部分，即英语学科知识和技能、教学认知能力、教学设计能力、教学操作能力、教学评价能力、教学研究能力及教学智慧。每类别中细分为不同的能力要素，共计76项。这一能力构成可供英语教师在发展自身的教学能力以及教学管理者对教师的教学进行评价时进行参考。
清楚了教师教学能力的构成，研究教师的教学能力发展才成为可能。基础教育英语教师教学能力发展是一项分阶段、系统性的工程，应分为职前教育和职后培训，职后培训又分为他主培训和自主发展。本文指出了目前基础教育英语教师职前培养过程中存在的明显制约教师在教学启蒙阶段教学意识形成与教学能力发展的突出问题，对高师英语专业（一些高师院校英语专业除设置师范方向，还设置了其它方向，本文仅指师范或教师教育方向）培养方案课程设置中事关教师教学能力发展的教育类课程体系进行了重建，对教育类课程总量及课程内容进行了具体设计。提出了学时数为520（占总学时20%），包含16门必修课的课程设置建议。另外，本文强调，师资教育教学机构与部门管理者素质水平、外语教育学学科地位、高专业化的教师教育师资队伍、师范生扎实的学科基本功及基于学生未来职业的实践性课程教学等方面的改革与提高都是影响教师职前培养质量的重要因素。
相关研究和本研究所作的问卷调查结果显示，目前英语教师的教学能力主要在入职后形成，这一方面反映了职后培训和提高的重要性，同时也暴露了职前教育存在的问题。本文以对中学教师的调查为依据，指出了目前英语教师职后培训的种种诟病，分析了其存在的原因并提出了相关改进建议。对目前实施的国家培训计划工程进行了分析，指出了这一即时实施的重要培训计划的重要意义，另外还阐述了大力发展教育硕士项目的必要性和重要作用。教师教学能力发展工程中还有一项十分重要的内容，即教师教学能力的自主发展，自主发展主要在入职后，但应着手于大学教育阶段，从大学教育开始，教师就应开始规划未来职业，入职前的基础若没打好，入职后的自主发展必然受到影响。自主发展首先要在教育教学观念与思想上使自己走在时代前列；要十分重视教学研究对教学能力发展的作用；以研究为基础养成良好的、常态化的教学反思习惯；在教学中要善于向他人学习，注重团队合作，谋求共同发展；最后，教学创新是教师在发展教学能力过程中永无止境的追求，也是教师教学智慧的反映，没有创新的教学必将失去发展的活力。
怎样衡量英语教师教学能力的发展水平靠的是对教师教学所作的合理评价，教学评价既是从管理角度对教师业绩进行考核的需要，更是教师教学能力发展自身的需求。因为客观合理的评价是对教师教学能力发展状况的真实反馈，也是对教师职业成效的认可或警示。任何缺乏监督和级评的能力都很难得到健康发展。本文提出借鉴美国“教师档案袋”评价方法，建立常规性的教师教学评价机制，定期对教师的教学进行检查和评价，对教师教学能力的发展起到监督和促进作用。
This research was carried out on the basis of the three theories–“structured teachers’teaching abilities”,“three dimensions of teachers’ teaching abilities” and“norm-differentiation referenced two-dimensional teachers’competency”and was operatedwith use of documentary research method, case study method, interview method and thecomparative research method. A relatively systematic and complete composition of theEnglish teachers’teaching abilities in foundational education was educed from the relevantexisting research results, specific cases of good teaching videos and excellent teachers anda basic development mode of the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundationaleducation was introduced through illustration of the route for the English teachers todevelop their teaching abilities. The research also discusses the evaluation of the Englishteachers’teaching abilities for the purpose of guaranteeing the development of the Englishteachers’teaching abilities and as reference for teaching management.
Even though the English teachers’teaching abilities and their development infoundational education have a lot in common with the teachers in general, the particularitydeserves our more complete and deeper research and only more specific research couldyield more concrete significance of reference. Teachers’teaching abilities is a part ofteachers’abilities in general but they form the core in the conditions for a teacher to takeup the occupation of teaching. Abilities are developed based on knowledge and skills butthey are different from knowledge and skills.“The ability is an individual’s psychologicalpeculiarity but knowledge and skills are the basic elements of the ability. Withoutnecessary knowledge and skills the relevant abilities would be impossible to exist.”(HuShuzhen,2000) A teacher’s teaching abilities are a combination of his common abilitiesand particular abilities with the former referring to his common intelligence and the latterhis particular abilities for the specific teaching activities of particular subjects. Thecharacteristics of the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundational education shouldnot essentially be different from those of teachers in general, i.e., the combination of bothscientificity and artistry. However, the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundationaleducation may appear with peculiar characteristics because of the peculiarity of the specialsubject and teaching contents. A teacher’s basic teaching competence is mainly determinedby his language competence and what the language teacher teaches is just the languageitself. Since language itself is rich in artistry, as to how to teach the learners this particularsubject with artistic appeal requires the English language teachers to own better artisticquality. So there is more artistry in the characteristics of the English language teachers’ teaching abilities in foundational education.
The precondition of doing research on the development of the English teachers’teaching abilities is that there should be a clear composition of the teachers’teachingabilities. To settle this problem requires a scientific approach. Firstly, even though thepresent researches concerning teachers’teaching abilities are about the teaching abilities ingeneral, the reference value for research in English teachers’teaching abilities cannot beneglected owing to the common characteristics. Secondly, the method of establishing thecriteria of the teachers’teaching abilities based on “good teaching” and “effectiveteaching”used by the American researchers is one worthy of application. This is the mostimportant method used in this research in which a clear composition of the Englishteachers’teaching abilities is educed through analysis of good classroom teaching videosand investigation of excellent English teachers.
Through a deconstructive analysis of the effective classroom teaching videos wefound that in addition to the common characteristics of the teachers’teaching abilities ingeneral, the characteristics of the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundationaleducation showed particular disciplinary features. Firstly, the teachers’English languagecompetence is not only a disciplinary basis and a precondition for developing theirteaching abilities, it is also directly reflected in their teaching actions, such as the teachers’language performance and the classroom instruction. The verbal expressing ability is thecore in the teachers’professional quality and it just depends on the teachers’Englishdisciplinary competence, thus the teachers’English language competence is supposed to bean inseparable part of the teaching abilities. Second, different from the teaching of othersubjects and owing to the status of English as an international language, theories andresearch findings in the teaching of English as foreign or second language are plentiful. Inorder to keep pace with the international fellows in the same profession and makethemselves really competent in English teaching, besides getting enough knowledge inpedagogy, psychology, educational measurement and education technology, the Englishteachers in China have to learn and obtain sufficient knowledge about TEFL/TESL, enrichthemselves with different aspects in the theoretic knowledge of English language teachingand lay a solid foundation for scientifically developing their teaching abilities. Third,classroom teaching, especially that in foundational education, is quite distinct from theteaching of other subjects. It has been proved that practice in which the target language isactually used to accomplish specific tasks by the learners can make the learning muchmore effective. This gives the English teachers particular requirement that they have todeliberately design different types of tasks and put them into effective practice in classroom, which without any doubt is much more difficult than instruction only. Fourth,compared with the teaching of other subjects, the teaching of English has its own specialrequirement. The English teachers’ research ability has direct influence upon thedevelopment of the teaching abilities and takes an important part. It’s hard for a person tobecome a master teacher provided he does little research in teaching. Therefore, theEnglish teachers must comprehensively absorb the research results in TEFL/TESLand takea serious research in the teaching of English, thus making an important contribution to thedevelopment of their teaching abilities.
In this dissertation a combined approach of both researcher-designed questionnaireand a respondent-provided open questionnaire is applied and four deliberately-chosenmodel senior high school English teachers received the survey. The survey showed thatowing to the complete coverage and highly specified items of the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundational education, which is based on sufficient study of therelevant research results and careful analysis of good teaching videos, supplemented abilityitems provided by the teachers investigated are quite limited. Through comprehensiveanalysis and generalization, the composition of the English teachers’teaching abilities infoundational education comes out, which consists of seven parts (types): disciplinaryknowledge and skills of English Language and Literature, knowledge concerning teaching,teaching design, teaching operation, teaching evaluation, teaching research and teachingwisdom. In each part there are different ability items and there are seventy-six ability itemsin all. This ability composition can be used as a reference frame by the English teachers fordeveloping their teaching abilities and by teacher administrators for assessing the teachers’teaching abilities.
It becomes possible for us to carry out study on development of the teachers’teachingabilities since we have got the composition of the abilities in hand. The development of theEnglish teachers’teaching abilities is a systematic and phased project which is comprisedof pre-service cultivation and in-service training with the latter falling into dependentdevelopment and independent development. The highlighted problems restraining thestudents in their enlightening stage from forming teaching consciousness and developingbasic teaching abilities in pre-service cultivation are exposed and a new composition of thecourses concerning education and English language teaching in the curriculum for theEnglish majors in teacher education in colleges or universities is suggested (Besidesteacher education some initiations also set up other sub-fields for the English majors, butthe specialty of English in teachers colleges or universities in this dissertation only refers tothe sub-field of teacher education.). The total class hour and specific courses are also provided. The suggested class hour is520(accounting for20%of the total) and16specificcompulsory courses for teacher education are presented. It is emphasized that theadministrators’quality of related departments of teacher education, the disciplinaryposition of Foreign Language Pedagogy, highly professional faculty team of teachereducation, solid foundation of English Language and Literature of the English majors inteachers colleges or universities and innovation of profession-orientated teaching ofpractical curriculum are the most important factors contributing to the pre-servicecultivation quality.
Relevant researches and the survey results of this research indicate that at present theEnglish teachers’teaching abilities are mainly developed during the in-service stage. Thisfact not only reflects the significance of up-grading the in-service training, but also exposesproblems in pre-service cultivation. Based on random and focused survey on high schoolEnglish teachers, we pointed out the various problems in the in-service training for theEnglish teachers in foundational education, analyzed the causes of the problems andprovided suggestions of solution. We also introduced and analyzed the National TrainingProject which is currently under implementation and emphasized the importance of itsimplementation. Besides, the necessity and significance of striving to develop the programof Master of Education is also elaborated. In the in-service development of the Englishteachers’ teaching abilities, in addition to the dependent professional training, theindependent or autonomous development is also an extremely important part. Theautonomous development of the teaching abilities is mainly implemented in the in-serviceperiod, but it must be scheduled during the university education period. Without anappropriate planning and preparation for the future profession during the universityeducation period, autonomous ability development in the in-service phase will inevitablyencounter much more difficulties and problems. As for the implementation of autonomousability development, the English teachers in foundational education must first of allrenovate from time to time their thoughts and ideas of education and English languageteaching, and then attach quite enough importance to the effects of teaching research uponthe development of their teaching abilities, form a habit of teaching reflection based onresearch, lay emphasis on team cooperation for common development, and endlesslypursue creative and novel ideas in English language teaching and education.
The measurement of the development level of the teachers’teaching abilities isconducted based on the evaluation of the teachers’actual teaching. Conducting evaluationof the teachers’teaching is not only a need for measuring the teachers’teaching effects andachievements from the perspective of administration, it is also the need for developing teaching abilities from the respect of the teachers. An objective evaluation of the teachers’teaching abilities is the feedback of the development status and also the recognition andcaution of the teachers’professional achievements. The development of the teachers’teaching abilities cannot be carried out healthily without appropriate supervision andevaluation. In this research we proposed that we should establish a regular evaluationmechanism to supervise and evaluate the teachers’teaching abilities in foundationaleducation through using the evaluation method of “Teacher Portfolio”practiced among theteachers in the United States so that the development of the teachers’teaching abilities canbe reasonably supervised and promoted.
基础教育英语教师教学能力及其发展既具有一般教师教学能力的共性，但其特殊性却是值得我们全面、深入地研究的，只有通过更具体的研究获得的成果才会有更具体的借鉴意义。教师的教学能力是教师各种能力中的一部分，而又是教师从业条件的核心。能力以知识和技能为基础，但又不同于知识和技能。“能力是个体心理特征，知识和技能都是能力的基本要素，缺乏必要的知识和技能，相应的能力也就不存在了。”（胡淑珍，2000）教师的教学能力是一般能力与特殊能力的结合，一般能力指教师的智力，特殊能力指教师在从事具体学科教学活动中所表现出来的能力。基础教育英语教师教学能力的特征不应在本质上有别于一般教师教学能力特征，即也应为科学性和艺术性的统一。但由于学科的特殊性，尤其是教学内容方面的差别，基础教育英语教师教学能力会呈现出特有的特征。单就教学能力的艺术性而言，一名教师的基本功在很大程度上取决于其语言基本功，而英语教师的教学内容又恰恰是语言，语言本身又极富艺术色彩，怎样在教学中将这一富有艺术性的教学内容通过语言本身，较有艺术感染力地教给学生，这要求语言教师必须具备比其它学科教师更好的语言艺术素养。所以艺术性在英语语言教师教学能力的特征中体现得更为鲜明。
研究英语教师教学能力发展的前提是厘清目前我国基础教育英语教师应具备哪些教学能力。回答这一问题必须要用科学的方法进行解决。首先，现有的研究成果中，虽主要是关于不分学科所有教师的教学能力，但鉴于教学的共性，可借鉴的价值当然不可忽视。其次，美国学者借用“好的教学”及“有效教学”得出教师教学能力的标准是值得利用的方法。这正是本研究中选取相关优质课堂教学视频进行分析和选择优秀教师进行问卷调查，从而析出基础教育英语教师教学能力结构所依据的重要方法。
通过对优秀英语教师课堂教学视频进行解构式分析后发现，基础教育英语教师教学能力除有一般教师教学能力的共性外，还表现出显著的学科教学的特殊性。首先，英语教师英语学科的基本功不仅是其发展教学能力的学科基础和前提，且在教师教学行动中成了教学能力的直接体现，如教师的英语语言基本功及课堂讲授能力等。因为教师职业素养中口头表达是核心，这恰恰与英语教师的学科基本功相关。因此，英语教师学科基本功应成为其教学能力不可分割的组成部分。其次，与别的学科不同的是，由于英语是一门国际通用语，英语作为外语或第二语言教学的理论和相关研究成果十分丰富，英语教师除了要了解教育学、心理学、教育测量与教育技术基本理论外，要想在教学方面与国际同行同步，使自己真正具备英语教学的能力，必须要学习和熟悉英语作为外语或第二语言教学的理论与相关研究成果，丰富自己对英语教学各方面的认知，为科学发展教学能力打下坚实基础。第三，英语课堂教学的操作，尤其是基础教育英语教学，与其它学科教学也有很大差别。英语学习者在完成一项具体任务中使用所学语言会大大增强学习效果，这就要求英语教师要设计大量的训练任务并在课堂上进行有效组织和操作，这无疑比单纯讲授提高了教学难度。第四，英语学科教学与其它学科相比在教学研究上也有着特殊要求，英语教师的教学研究能力直接影响其教学能力的发展，是其教学能力的一个重要部分，对英语教师来说，无教研难成名师。因此，英语教师必须大量研读外语或第二语言教学方面丰富的研究成果，对教学进行认真研究，使教研在教学能力发展上发挥重要作用。
利用已设问卷与自述问卷结合的方法对四名优秀中学英语教师进行调查的结果显示，由于已设问卷建立在充分研读文献和教学视频分析的基础上，对基础教育英语教师教学能力覆盖全面，设项细化，被调查教师在自述问卷中对教学能力的补充非常有限。通过综合分析和归纳，本研究总结出了基础教育英语教师教学能力基本构成，共分七大部分，即英语学科知识和技能、教学认知能力、教学设计能力、教学操作能力、教学评价能力、教学研究能力及教学智慧。每类别中细分为不同的能力要素，共计76项。这一能力构成可供英语教师在发展自身的教学能力以及教学管理者对教师的教学进行评价时进行参考。
清楚了教师教学能力的构成，研究教师的教学能力发展才成为可能。基础教育英语教师教学能力发展是一项分阶段、系统性的工程，应分为职前教育和职后培训，职后培训又分为他主培训和自主发展。本文指出了目前基础教育英语教师职前培养过程中存在的明显制约教师在教学启蒙阶段教学意识形成与教学能力发展的突出问题，对高师英语专业（一些高师院校英语专业除设置师范方向，还设置了其它方向，本文仅指师范或教师教育方向）培养方案课程设置中事关教师教学能力发展的教育类课程体系进行了重建，对教育类课程总量及课程内容进行了具体设计。提出了学时数为520（占总学时20%），包含16门必修课的课程设置建议。另外，本文强调，师资教育教学机构与部门管理者素质水平、外语教育学学科地位、高专业化的教师教育师资队伍、师范生扎实的学科基本功及基于学生未来职业的实践性课程教学等方面的改革与提高都是影响教师职前培养质量的重要因素。
相关研究和本研究所作的问卷调查结果显示，目前英语教师的教学能力主要在入职后形成，这一方面反映了职后培训和提高的重要性，同时也暴露了职前教育存在的问题。本文以对中学教师的调查为依据，指出了目前英语教师职后培训的种种诟病，分析了其存在的原因并提出了相关改进建议。对目前实施的国家培训计划工程进行了分析，指出了这一即时实施的重要培训计划的重要意义，另外还阐述了大力发展教育硕士项目的必要性和重要作用。教师教学能力发展工程中还有一项十分重要的内容，即教师教学能力的自主发展，自主发展主要在入职后，但应着手于大学教育阶段，从大学教育开始，教师就应开始规划未来职业，入职前的基础若没打好，入职后的自主发展必然受到影响。自主发展首先要在教育教学观念与思想上使自己走在时代前列；要十分重视教学研究对教学能力发展的作用；以研究为基础养成良好的、常态化的教学反思习惯；在教学中要善于向他人学习，注重团队合作，谋求共同发展；最后，教学创新是教师在发展教学能力过程中永无止境的追求，也是教师教学智慧的反映，没有创新的教学必将失去发展的活力。
怎样衡量英语教师教学能力的发展水平靠的是对教师教学所作的合理评价，教学评价既是从管理角度对教师业绩进行考核的需要，更是教师教学能力发展自身的需求。因为客观合理的评价是对教师教学能力发展状况的真实反馈，也是对教师职业成效的认可或警示。任何缺乏监督和级评的能力都很难得到健康发展。本文提出借鉴美国“教师档案袋”评价方法，建立常规性的教师教学评价机制，定期对教师的教学进行检查和评价，对教师教学能力的发展起到监督和促进作用。
This research was carried out on the basis of the three theories–“structured teachers’teaching abilities”,“three dimensions of teachers’ teaching abilities” and“norm-differentiation referenced two-dimensional teachers’competency”and was operatedwith use of documentary research method, case study method, interview method and thecomparative research method. A relatively systematic and complete composition of theEnglish teachers’teaching abilities in foundational education was educed from the relevantexisting research results, specific cases of good teaching videos and excellent teachers anda basic development mode of the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundationaleducation was introduced through illustration of the route for the English teachers todevelop their teaching abilities. The research also discusses the evaluation of the Englishteachers’teaching abilities for the purpose of guaranteeing the development of the Englishteachers’teaching abilities and as reference for teaching management.
Even though the English teachers’teaching abilities and their development infoundational education have a lot in common with the teachers in general, the particularitydeserves our more complete and deeper research and only more specific research couldyield more concrete significance of reference. Teachers’teaching abilities is a part ofteachers’abilities in general but they form the core in the conditions for a teacher to takeup the occupation of teaching. Abilities are developed based on knowledge and skills butthey are different from knowledge and skills.“The ability is an individual’s psychologicalpeculiarity but knowledge and skills are the basic elements of the ability. Withoutnecessary knowledge and skills the relevant abilities would be impossible to exist.”(HuShuzhen,2000) A teacher’s teaching abilities are a combination of his common abilitiesand particular abilities with the former referring to his common intelligence and the latterhis particular abilities for the specific teaching activities of particular subjects. Thecharacteristics of the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundational education shouldnot essentially be different from those of teachers in general, i.e., the combination of bothscientificity and artistry. However, the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundationaleducation may appear with peculiar characteristics because of the peculiarity of the specialsubject and teaching contents. A teacher’s basic teaching competence is mainly determinedby his language competence and what the language teacher teaches is just the languageitself. Since language itself is rich in artistry, as to how to teach the learners this particularsubject with artistic appeal requires the English language teachers to own better artisticquality. So there is more artistry in the characteristics of the English language teachers’ teaching abilities in foundational education.
The precondition of doing research on the development of the English teachers’teaching abilities is that there should be a clear composition of the teachers’teachingabilities. To settle this problem requires a scientific approach. Firstly, even though thepresent researches concerning teachers’teaching abilities are about the teaching abilities ingeneral, the reference value for research in English teachers’teaching abilities cannot beneglected owing to the common characteristics. Secondly, the method of establishing thecriteria of the teachers’teaching abilities based on “good teaching” and “effectiveteaching”used by the American researchers is one worthy of application. This is the mostimportant method used in this research in which a clear composition of the Englishteachers’teaching abilities is educed through analysis of good classroom teaching videosand investigation of excellent English teachers.
Through a deconstructive analysis of the effective classroom teaching videos wefound that in addition to the common characteristics of the teachers’teaching abilities ingeneral, the characteristics of the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundationaleducation showed particular disciplinary features. Firstly, the teachers’English languagecompetence is not only a disciplinary basis and a precondition for developing theirteaching abilities, it is also directly reflected in their teaching actions, such as the teachers’language performance and the classroom instruction. The verbal expressing ability is thecore in the teachers’professional quality and it just depends on the teachers’Englishdisciplinary competence, thus the teachers’English language competence is supposed to bean inseparable part of the teaching abilities. Second, different from the teaching of othersubjects and owing to the status of English as an international language, theories andresearch findings in the teaching of English as foreign or second language are plentiful. Inorder to keep pace with the international fellows in the same profession and makethemselves really competent in English teaching, besides getting enough knowledge inpedagogy, psychology, educational measurement and education technology, the Englishteachers in China have to learn and obtain sufficient knowledge about TEFL/TESL, enrichthemselves with different aspects in the theoretic knowledge of English language teachingand lay a solid foundation for scientifically developing their teaching abilities. Third,classroom teaching, especially that in foundational education, is quite distinct from theteaching of other subjects. It has been proved that practice in which the target language isactually used to accomplish specific tasks by the learners can make the learning muchmore effective. This gives the English teachers particular requirement that they have todeliberately design different types of tasks and put them into effective practice in classroom, which without any doubt is much more difficult than instruction only. Fourth,compared with the teaching of other subjects, the teaching of English has its own specialrequirement. The English teachers’ research ability has direct influence upon thedevelopment of the teaching abilities and takes an important part. It’s hard for a person tobecome a master teacher provided he does little research in teaching. Therefore, theEnglish teachers must comprehensively absorb the research results in TEFL/TESLand takea serious research in the teaching of English, thus making an important contribution to thedevelopment of their teaching abilities.
In this dissertation a combined approach of both researcher-designed questionnaireand a respondent-provided open questionnaire is applied and four deliberately-chosenmodel senior high school English teachers received the survey. The survey showed thatowing to the complete coverage and highly specified items of the English teachers’teaching abilities in foundational education, which is based on sufficient study of therelevant research results and careful analysis of good teaching videos, supplemented abilityitems provided by the teachers investigated are quite limited. Through comprehensiveanalysis and generalization, the composition of the English teachers’teaching abilities infoundational education comes out, which consists of seven parts (types): disciplinaryknowledge and skills of English Language and Literature, knowledge concerning teaching,teaching design, teaching operation, teaching evaluation, teaching research and teachingwisdom. In each part there are different ability items and there are seventy-six ability itemsin all. This ability composition can be used as a reference frame by the English teachers fordeveloping their teaching abilities and by teacher administrators for assessing the teachers’teaching abilities.
It becomes possible for us to carry out study on development of the teachers’teachingabilities since we have got the composition of the abilities in hand. The development of theEnglish teachers’teaching abilities is a systematic and phased project which is comprisedof pre-service cultivation and in-service training with the latter falling into dependentdevelopment and independent development. The highlighted problems restraining thestudents in their enlightening stage from forming teaching consciousness and developingbasic teaching abilities in pre-service cultivation are exposed and a new composition of thecourses concerning education and English language teaching in the curriculum for theEnglish majors in teacher education in colleges or universities is suggested (Besidesteacher education some initiations also set up other sub-fields for the English majors, butthe specialty of English in teachers colleges or universities in this dissertation only refers tothe sub-field of teacher education.). The total class hour and specific courses are also provided. The suggested class hour is520(accounting for20%of the total) and16specificcompulsory courses for teacher education are presented. It is emphasized that theadministrators’quality of related departments of teacher education, the disciplinaryposition of Foreign Language Pedagogy, highly professional faculty team of teachereducation, solid foundation of English Language and Literature of the English majors inteachers colleges or universities and innovation of profession-orientated teaching ofpractical curriculum are the most important factors contributing to the pre-servicecultivation quality.
Relevant researches and the survey results of this research indicate that at present theEnglish teachers’teaching abilities are mainly developed during the in-service stage. Thisfact not only reflects the significance of up-grading the in-service training, but also exposesproblems in pre-service cultivation. Based on random and focused survey on high schoolEnglish teachers, we pointed out the various problems in the in-service training for theEnglish teachers in foundational education, analyzed the causes of the problems andprovided suggestions of solution. We also introduced and analyzed the National TrainingProject which is currently under implementation and emphasized the importance of itsimplementation. Besides, the necessity and significance of striving to develop the programof Master of Education is also elaborated. In the in-service development of the Englishteachers’ teaching abilities, in addition to the dependent professional training, theindependent or autonomous development is also an extremely important part. Theautonomous development of the teaching abilities is mainly implemented in the in-serviceperiod, but it must be scheduled during the university education period. Without anappropriate planning and preparation for the future profession during the universityeducation period, autonomous ability development in the in-service phase will inevitablyencounter much more difficulties and problems. As for the implementation of autonomousability development, the English teachers in foundational education must first of allrenovate from time to time their thoughts and ideas of education and English languageteaching, and then attach quite enough importance to the effects of teaching research uponthe development of their teaching abilities, form a habit of teaching reflection based onresearch, lay emphasis on team cooperation for common development, and endlesslypursue creative and novel ideas in English language teaching and education.
The measurement of the development level of the teachers’teaching abilities isconducted based on the evaluation of the teachers’actual teaching. Conducting evaluationof the teachers’teaching is not only a need for measuring the teachers’teaching effects andachievements from the perspective of administration, it is also the need for developing teaching abilities from the respect of the teachers. An objective evaluation of the teachers’teaching abilities is the feedback of the development status and also the recognition andcaution of the teachers’professional achievements. The development of the teachers’teaching abilities cannot be carried out healthily without appropriate supervision andevaluation. In this research we proposed that we should establish a regular evaluationmechanism to supervise and evaluate the teachers’teaching abilities in foundationaleducation through using the evaluation method of “Teacher Portfolio”practiced among theteachers in the United States so that the development of the teachers’teaching abilities canbe reasonably supervised and promoted.
引文
Allright, Exploratory practice: Rethinking practitioner research in language teaching [J].Language Teaching Research,2003,(2).
Car, W. and S. Kemmis. Becoming Critical [M]. Lewes: Falmer Press,1986.
Conchran-Smith, M.&Lytle, S. Relationships of knowledge and practice; Teacher learningin communities [A]. In A. Iran-Nejar and P. D. Pearson (Eds.). Review of Research inEducation (24)[C]. Washington, D. C.: AERA,1999.
Connelly, F. M. and D. J. Clandinin. Stories of experience and narrative inquiry [J].Educational Researcher,1990,(5).
Crandall, J. Language teacher education [J]. Annual Review of Appliedlinguistics,2000,(20).
Freeman, D. Teacher training, development, and decision making: A model of teaching andrelated strategies for language teacher education [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1989,(1).
Fullan, M&Hargreaves, A. Teacher Development and Educational Change [M]. FalmerPress,1992.
Gu, P. Understanding EFL Teachers as Learners: Case Studies.[M]. Beijing, ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press,2009.
Hargreaves, A.&Fullan, M. Understanding teacher development [M]. London: Cassell;New York, N. Y.: Teachers College Press,1992.
Hornberger, N. Educational linguistics as a field: a view from Penn’s program on theoccasion of its25thanniversary [J]. Working papers in Educational Linguistics,2001.
Hoylc, E&Megarry, J. World Yearbook of Education1980: Professional Development ofTeachers [M]. Kogan Press,1980.
Manning, R. C. The Teacher Evaluation Handbook: Step-by-Step Techniques&Forms forImproving Instruction [M]. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall,1988.
Noddings, N.&Enright, S. The promise of open education [J]. Theory into practice,1993,(3).
Polanyi, M. The Study of Man [M]. London: Routledge&Kegan Paul,1957.
Posner, G. J. Field Experience: Method of Reflective Teaching. New York: Longman,1989.
Richards, J. C.&Nunan, D. Second Language Teacher Education [C]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1990.
Richards, J. C. Beyond Training [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1998.
Sch n, D. A. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action [M]. London:Temple,1983.
Sch n, D. Educating the reflective practitioner [R]. Paper presented in1987meeting of theAmerican Education Research Association, Washington, D. C.,1987a.
Sch n, D. Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for Teaching andLearning in the Professions [M]. San Francisco: Jossey Bass,1987b.
Simpson, R. H. Teach Self-Evaluation [M]. New York: Macmillan (The PsychologicalFoundation of Education Series),1966.
Smith, D.&Hatton, N. Reflection in Teacher Education: a Study in Progress [J]. EducationResearch and Perspectives,1993,(1).
Travers, R. M. W. The Teacher as a Performing Artist [Z]. The Education Digest,1980,(Jan.).
Wenger, E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998.
Williams, M.&Burden R.L. Psychology for Language Teachers [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press，1997.
Wu, Z. Pre-service English Language Teacher Education in China—BA/TEFLCurriculum Studies [R]. BNU Centenary International Conference on English TeacherEducation and Development,2002.
安徽教育学院课题组.安徽省部分中学教师继续教育需求调查报告[J].安徽教育学院学报（哲学社会科学版）,1999,(1).
巴顿,柯林斯.成长记录袋评价（中译本）[M].中国轻工业出版社,2005.
陈安福.教育管理心理学[M].福州:福建教育出版社,1988.
陈荷荣.师范院校英语专业呼唤自己的教学大纲[J].高等师范教育研究,2000,(1).
陈力,苗青.论中小学英语教师的基础素养[J].基础教育外语教学研究,2007,(4).
陈录生等.新编心理学[M].北京师范大学出版社,1995.
陈琦,刘儒德.教育心理学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997.
戴炜栋,王雪梅.建构具有中国特色的外语教育体系[J].外语界,2006,(4).
段晖.安徽省中小学英语教师现状问卷调查报告[A].载于吴欣,杨晓青.中国中小学英语教师现状调查与分析[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2008.
郭宏.论教师教学能力的发展与提高[J].河北师范大学学报,1994,(增刊).
郭玉仙.建立教师成长档案袋,促进教师专业发展[J].山西档案,2009,(增刊).
顾冷沅,王洁.教师在教育行动中成长[J].课程教材教法,2003,(1).
顾明远,檀传宝.中国教育发展报告——变革中的教师与教师教育[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2004.
管培俊.关于教师教育改革发展的十个观点[J].基础教育外语教学研究,2004,(3).
桂诗春.应用语言学[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1998.
桂诗春.20世纪应用语言学评述[J].外语教学与研究,2000,(1).
韩刚.课程与人——职前英语教师的成长[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2008.
韩刚.英语教师学科教学知识的建构[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2011.
何雪利.职前教师教学基本能力培养方案的设计研究[D].硕士学位论文.金华:浙江师范大学,2007.
胡惠闵.指向教师专业发展的学校管理改革——上海市打虎山路第一小个案研究[D].博士学位论文.上海:华东师范大学,2003.
胡庆芳.教师成长档案袋的国际背景与实践操作[J].上海教育科研,2005.
胡淑珍等.教学技能[M].长沙:湖南师范大学出版社,2000.
康锦堂.教学能力结构及测评[M].厦门:厦门大学出版社,1991.
雷彥兴,刘桂雪.档案袋评价的电子化构架及开发策略[J].电化教育研究,2003,(10).
李建辉.试论高师学生教学能力的形成及其培养[J].漳州师范学院学报（哲学社会科学版）,2001,(1).
李娜,乔贵春.行动学习在教师教学能力培训中的策略研究[J].软件导刊·教育技术,2010,(6).
李其龙,陈永明.教师教育课程的国际比较[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2002.
李正栓,郝惠珍.中国语境下英语教师教育与发展研究[M].保定:河北大学出版社,2009.
林凯华,孙曼丽.美国优秀外语教师档案袋评价及其启示[J].教育测量与评价（理论版）,2011,(4).
林雯.档案袋在我国的研究及应用现状分析[J].开放教育研究,2005,(4).
刘万春.信息技术环境下教育对教师教学能力的要求[J].经济师,2005,(11).
陆国志.高师学科教学论中“教学论”的弱化及扭转对策[J].课程·教材·教法,2006,(6).
陆正荣,张小红.观课议课——问题诊断与解决[M].长春:东北师范大学出版社,2010.
罗树华,李洪珍.教师能力学（修订版）[M].济南:山东教育出版社,2000.
吕国光.教师信念及其影响因素研究[D].博士学位论文.兰州:西北师范大学,2003.
吕纪增,张予英.高校教师教学能力分析.[J].河南教育学院学报（哲学社会科学版）,2002,(3).
马晓雄.关于师范教育向教师教育转型的几点思考[J].高等师范教育研究,2003,(4).
梅德明,何星,吴赟.大中小学英语教学现状调查[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2004.
孟庆廷.教师教学能力的自我完美之我见[J].甘肃教育学院学报(自然科学版),2002,(3).
孟育群.现代教师的教育能力结构[J].现代中小学教育,1990,(3).
聂美玲.中国高等师范课程设置的沿革和特点[J].南京师范专科学校学报,1999,(1).
彭小虎.高等师范课程比较与我国师范课程体系的建构[J].高等师范教育研究,2000,(5).
皮连生.教学设计[C].北京:高等教育出版社,2000.
任训学.中学教师教学能力的调查报告[J].湖北大学学报（哲学社会科学版）,2000,(2).
申继亮,辛涛.论教师教学监控能力提高的方法和途径田[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),1998,(l).
申继亮,王凯荣.论教师的教学能力[J].北京师范大学学报（人文社会科学版）,2000,(1).
宋雈.校本教师发展与教师专业学习社群的建构[A].载于周南照,赵丽,任友群.教师教育改革与教师专业发展:国际视野与本土实践[C].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
苏国芬.反思——提高教师教学能力的重要措施[J].贵州教育,2004,(6).
孙建华.高等师范英语专业教育模式改革探讨[J].焦作工学院学报（社会科学版）,2004,(5).
孙亚玲.课堂教学有效性标准研究[D].博士学位论文.上海:华东师范大学,2004.
唐玉光.教师专业发展的研究[J].外国教育资料,1999,(6).
王邦佐,陆文龙.中学优秀教师的成长与高师教改之探索[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1994.
王东升.教师宣言:你为什么要当教师[N].中国教育报,2008年11月17日,第3版.
王建磐.中国教师教育:现状、问题与趋势[A].载于周南照,赵丽,任友群.教师教育改革与教师专业发展:国际视野与本土实践[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
王克勤,盖立春,马建峰.高师“学科教学论”课程内容重构之研究[J].课程·教材·教法,2008,(1).
王少良.高校教师教学能力的多维结构[J].沈阳师范大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(1).
王铁军.科学发展观与中小学教育[M].南京:南京师范大学出版社,2005.
王宪平,课程改革视野下教师教学能力发展研究[D].博士学位论文.上海:华东师范大学,2006.
王宪平,唐玉光.课程改革视野下的教师教学能力结构[J].集美大学学报,2006,(1).
王雪梅.新课程改革背景下高校与中学英语教师教育的契合[J].外语界,2006,(5).
沃建中,申继亮,林崇德.提高教师课堂教学能力方法的实验研究[J].心理科学,1996,(3).
吴宗杰,黄爱凤等.外语课程与教师发展——RICH教育视野[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社;北京:人民教育出版社,2005.
武尊民.英语教师职业教育:大学本科英语教育专业课程发展个案研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2011.
夏纪梅.外语教学的学科属性探究——“语言教育学”论引发的思考[J].语言教学与研究.1999,(4).
肖刚.高校教师教学能力发展的新思路[J].集美大学教育学报,2001,(1).
肖丽萍.国内外教师专业发展研究述评[J].中国教育学刊,2002,(5).
辛广勤.大学英语是不是一门学科?——大学英语学科属性的宏观思考及其他[J].外语界,2006,(4).
徐芬,赵德成.成长记忆袋的基本原理与应用[M].西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2002,(6).
徐玲.青年教师教学能力影响因素与培训模式创新[J].现代教育科学,2009,(2).
徐翁宇,宋渭澄,刘宗和.语言学:21世纪展望[M].西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2000.
徐晓东.学习文件夹评价法的理论与方法[J].现代教育技术,2002,(2).
杨光岐.新课程背景下的高师课程教学改革[J].当代教育论坛,2004,(10).
杨国旗.外语教师教育的新视点:外语教育语言学[J].大学时代下半月,2006,(8).
杨启亮.高等师范教育发展中的学科教学论[J].南京师大学报(社会科学版),2000,(2).
杨文华.论师范生的教学能力培养[J].贵州教育学院学报(社会科学版),1996,(2).
叶澜.教师发展研究的理论思考与实践探索[A].载于周南照,赵丽,任友群.教师教育改革与教师专业发展:国际视野与本土实践[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
叶奕乾等.普通心理学[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2000.
余承海,姚本先.论高校教师的教学能力结构及其优化[J].高等农业教育,2005,(12).
俞理明,袁平华.应用语言学还是教育语言学?——对二语习得学科研究属性的思考[J].现代外语,2004,(3).
曾建湘,石银华.二十一世纪中学英语教师教学能力的培养[J].邵阳师专学报,1998,(3).
曾拓,李黎.教师教学能力研究综述[J].绍兴文理学院学报,2003,(1).
张波.论教师的教学能力[J].锦州师范学院学报,2002,(2).
张波.教师教学能力的培养途径和方法[J].教育理论与实践,2008,(12).
张敬邻.话说教学模仿[J].中学语文教学,2000,(6).
张俊霞.校本培训:中学英语教师专业发展的重要途径[J].丽水学院学报,2008,(4).
张晓冬.我国教师发展研究十年:范式转换的视角[J].上饶师范学院学报,2009,(5).
张学民,申继亮,林崇德.中小学教师教学反思对教学能力的促进[J].外国教育研究,2009,(9).
张艳玲.合作学习与英语教师的专业成长[J].教育与职业,2009,(15).
张玉华.语言教育学漫谈[J].解放军外语学院学报,1998,(5).
张志明.当前高校青年教师教学能力现状及提高策略[J].邢台学院学报,2010,(3).
赵昌木.论教师成长[J].高等师范教育研究,2002,(3).
赵风云.英语师范生学科教学能力发展研究[D].博士学位论文.上海:上海外国语大学,2010.
赵九松.教师教学档案袋功能分析[J].广西教育学院学报,2007,(1).
郑其恭,李冠乾.教师的能力结构[M].广州:广东教育出版社,1993.
钟启泉,我国“教师教育”制度设计的问题[A],载于周南照,赵丽,任友群.教师教育改革与教师专业发展:国际视野与本土实践[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
周剑辉,周跃良.教师教学能力协作式行动学习训练模式的构建[J].宁波大学学报（教育科学版）,2008,(3).
周启加.英语专业与学科名称“正名“刍议[J].淮北煤师院学报,2007,(6).
周启加.英语学科教师教育改革新议[J].教育研究,2008,(7).
周燕.高校英语教师发展需求调查与研究[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(3).
周燕.中国高校英语教师发展模式研究[J].外语教学理论与实践,2008,(3).
朱旭东.教师专业发展理论研究[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2011.
Cambridge Dictionary Online.2011:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/portfolio_1?q=portfolioMerriam Webster Dictionary.2011: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/portfolio
百度百科.2011: http://baike.baidu.com/view/8497.htm
21世纪大英汉词典(收录于有道词典).2011:
http://dict.youdao.com/search?q=portfolio&ue=utf8&keyfrom=dict.index#q%3Dportfolio%26ue%3Dutf8%26keyfrom%3Ddict.index汉典.2011: http://www.zdic.net/cd/ci/8/ZdicE7Zdic9FZdicA5289905.htm
教育部.国家中长期教育改革和发展纲要(2010-2020)[EB/OL].2010,
中国政府网: http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2010-07/29/content_1667143.htm教育部.教育部关于大力推进教师教育课程改革的意见[EB/OL].2011,
教育部网: http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/s3702/201110/xxgk_125722.html中国国际广播电台(CRI).咱中国人英语水平是这样?（有声）[EB/OL].
新沪江英语网: http://www.hjenglish.com/new/p158143.中国社科院.社科院报告称中国国家竞争力上升至全球第17名[EB/OL].2010,
中国网: http://www.china.com.cn/news/txt/2010-10/25/content_21190582.htm.曹刚阳.“浙派名师”义务教育英语经典课堂教学第三届观摩活动暨浙、宁、沪长三
角英语课堂教学展示案例[CD].杭州:杭州师范学院继续教育教学,2006.
丁莤.第六届全国中学（高中）英语教学观摩案例[CD].北京:中国多媒体教学学报.2006.
邓小平.邓小平文选（第二卷）[M].北京:人民出版社,1983.
李克强.李克强出席香港大学百年校庆用英语发表演讲[EB/OL].2011,
人民网: http://tv.people.com.cn/GB/14645/15454348.html.李岚清.关于外语教学改革的讲话[N].文汇报,1996年9月3日.
胡锦涛.在庆祝清华大学建校100周年大会上的讲话[EB/OL].2011,
中国政府网: http://www.gov.cn/ldhd/2011-04/24/content_1851436.htm.胡锦涛.在庆祝中国共产党成立90周年大会上的讲话[EB/OL].2011,
中国政府网: http://www.gov.cn/ldhd/2011-07/01/content_1897720.htm.温家宝.在国家科技领导小组会议上的讲话[EB/OL].2009,
中国政府网: http://www.gov.cn/ldhd/2009-01/04/content_1194983.htm.
Car, W. and S. Kemmis. Becoming Critical [M]. Lewes: Falmer Press,1986.
Conchran-Smith, M.&Lytle, S. Relationships of knowledge and practice; Teacher learningin communities [A]. In A. Iran-Nejar and P. D. Pearson (Eds.). Review of Research inEducation (24)[C]. Washington, D. C.: AERA,1999.
Connelly, F. M. and D. J. Clandinin. Stories of experience and narrative inquiry [J].Educational Researcher,1990,(5).
Crandall, J. Language teacher education [J]. Annual Review of Appliedlinguistics,2000,(20).
Freeman, D. Teacher training, development, and decision making: A model of teaching andrelated strategies for language teacher education [J]. TESOL Quarterly,1989,(1).
Fullan, M&Hargreaves, A. Teacher Development and Educational Change [M]. FalmerPress,1992.
Gu, P. Understanding EFL Teachers as Learners: Case Studies.[M]. Beijing, ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press,2009.
Hargreaves, A.&Fullan, M. Understanding teacher development [M]. London: Cassell;New York, N. Y.: Teachers College Press,1992.
Hornberger, N. Educational linguistics as a field: a view from Penn’s program on theoccasion of its25thanniversary [J]. Working papers in Educational Linguistics,2001.
Hoylc, E&Megarry, J. World Yearbook of Education1980: Professional Development ofTeachers [M]. Kogan Press,1980.
Manning, R. C. The Teacher Evaluation Handbook: Step-by-Step Techniques&Forms forImproving Instruction [M]. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall,1988.
Noddings, N.&Enright, S. The promise of open education [J]. Theory into practice,1993,(3).
Polanyi, M. The Study of Man [M]. London: Routledge&Kegan Paul,1957.
Posner, G. J. Field Experience: Method of Reflective Teaching. New York: Longman,1989.
Richards, J. C.&Nunan, D. Second Language Teacher Education [C]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1990.
Richards, J. C. Beyond Training [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1998.
Sch n, D. A. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action [M]. London:Temple,1983.
Sch n, D. Educating the reflective practitioner [R]. Paper presented in1987meeting of theAmerican Education Research Association, Washington, D. C.,1987a.
Sch n, D. Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for Teaching andLearning in the Professions [M]. San Francisco: Jossey Bass,1987b.
Simpson, R. H. Teach Self-Evaluation [M]. New York: Macmillan (The PsychologicalFoundation of Education Series),1966.
Smith, D.&Hatton, N. Reflection in Teacher Education: a Study in Progress [J]. EducationResearch and Perspectives,1993,(1).
Travers, R. M. W. The Teacher as a Performing Artist [Z]. The Education Digest,1980,(Jan.).
Wenger, E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1998.
Williams, M.&Burden R.L. Psychology for Language Teachers [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press，1997.
Wu, Z. Pre-service English Language Teacher Education in China—BA/TEFLCurriculum Studies [R]. BNU Centenary International Conference on English TeacherEducation and Development,2002.
安徽教育学院课题组.安徽省部分中学教师继续教育需求调查报告[J].安徽教育学院学报（哲学社会科学版）,1999,(1).
巴顿,柯林斯.成长记录袋评价（中译本）[M].中国轻工业出版社,2005.
陈安福.教育管理心理学[M].福州:福建教育出版社,1988.
陈荷荣.师范院校英语专业呼唤自己的教学大纲[J].高等师范教育研究,2000,(1).
陈力,苗青.论中小学英语教师的基础素养[J].基础教育外语教学研究,2007,(4).
陈录生等.新编心理学[M].北京师范大学出版社,1995.
陈琦,刘儒德.教育心理学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997.
戴炜栋,王雪梅.建构具有中国特色的外语教育体系[J].外语界,2006,(4).
段晖.安徽省中小学英语教师现状问卷调查报告[A].载于吴欣,杨晓青.中国中小学英语教师现状调查与分析[M].北京:人民教育出版社,2008.
郭宏.论教师教学能力的发展与提高[J].河北师范大学学报,1994,(增刊).
郭玉仙.建立教师成长档案袋,促进教师专业发展[J].山西档案,2009,(增刊).
顾冷沅,王洁.教师在教育行动中成长[J].课程教材教法,2003,(1).
顾明远,檀传宝.中国教育发展报告——变革中的教师与教师教育[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2004.
管培俊.关于教师教育改革发展的十个观点[J].基础教育外语教学研究,2004,(3).
桂诗春.应用语言学[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1998.
桂诗春.20世纪应用语言学评述[J].外语教学与研究,2000,(1).
韩刚.课程与人——职前英语教师的成长[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2008.
韩刚.英语教师学科教学知识的建构[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2011.
何雪利.职前教师教学基本能力培养方案的设计研究[D].硕士学位论文.金华:浙江师范大学,2007.
胡惠闵.指向教师专业发展的学校管理改革——上海市打虎山路第一小个案研究[D].博士学位论文.上海:华东师范大学,2003.
胡庆芳.教师成长档案袋的国际背景与实践操作[J].上海教育科研,2005.
胡淑珍等.教学技能[M].长沙:湖南师范大学出版社,2000.
康锦堂.教学能力结构及测评[M].厦门:厦门大学出版社,1991.
雷彥兴,刘桂雪.档案袋评价的电子化构架及开发策略[J].电化教育研究,2003,(10).
李建辉.试论高师学生教学能力的形成及其培养[J].漳州师范学院学报（哲学社会科学版）,2001,(1).
李娜,乔贵春.行动学习在教师教学能力培训中的策略研究[J].软件导刊·教育技术,2010,(6).
李其龙,陈永明.教师教育课程的国际比较[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2002.
李正栓,郝惠珍.中国语境下英语教师教育与发展研究[M].保定:河北大学出版社,2009.
林凯华,孙曼丽.美国优秀外语教师档案袋评价及其启示[J].教育测量与评价（理论版）,2011,(4).
林雯.档案袋在我国的研究及应用现状分析[J].开放教育研究,2005,(4).
刘万春.信息技术环境下教育对教师教学能力的要求[J].经济师,2005,(11).
陆国志.高师学科教学论中“教学论”的弱化及扭转对策[J].课程·教材·教法,2006,(6).
陆正荣,张小红.观课议课——问题诊断与解决[M].长春:东北师范大学出版社,2010.
罗树华,李洪珍.教师能力学（修订版）[M].济南:山东教育出版社,2000.
吕国光.教师信念及其影响因素研究[D].博士学位论文.兰州:西北师范大学,2003.
吕纪增,张予英.高校教师教学能力分析.[J].河南教育学院学报（哲学社会科学版）,2002,(3).
马晓雄.关于师范教育向教师教育转型的几点思考[J].高等师范教育研究,2003,(4).
梅德明,何星,吴赟.大中小学英语教学现状调查[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2004.
孟庆廷.教师教学能力的自我完美之我见[J].甘肃教育学院学报(自然科学版),2002,(3).
孟育群.现代教师的教育能力结构[J].现代中小学教育,1990,(3).
聂美玲.中国高等师范课程设置的沿革和特点[J].南京师范专科学校学报,1999,(1).
彭小虎.高等师范课程比较与我国师范课程体系的建构[J].高等师范教育研究,2000,(5).
皮连生.教学设计[C].北京:高等教育出版社,2000.
任训学.中学教师教学能力的调查报告[J].湖北大学学报（哲学社会科学版）,2000,(2).
申继亮,辛涛.论教师教学监控能力提高的方法和途径田[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),1998,(l).
申继亮,王凯荣.论教师的教学能力[J].北京师范大学学报（人文社会科学版）,2000,(1).
宋雈.校本教师发展与教师专业学习社群的建构[A].载于周南照,赵丽,任友群.教师教育改革与教师专业发展:国际视野与本土实践[C].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
苏国芬.反思——提高教师教学能力的重要措施[J].贵州教育,2004,(6).
孙建华.高等师范英语专业教育模式改革探讨[J].焦作工学院学报（社会科学版）,2004,(5).
孙亚玲.课堂教学有效性标准研究[D].博士学位论文.上海:华东师范大学,2004.
唐玉光.教师专业发展的研究[J].外国教育资料,1999,(6).
王邦佐,陆文龙.中学优秀教师的成长与高师教改之探索[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1994.
王东升.教师宣言:你为什么要当教师[N].中国教育报,2008年11月17日,第3版.
王建磐.中国教师教育:现状、问题与趋势[A].载于周南照,赵丽,任友群.教师教育改革与教师专业发展:国际视野与本土实践[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
王克勤,盖立春,马建峰.高师“学科教学论”课程内容重构之研究[J].课程·教材·教法,2008,(1).
王少良.高校教师教学能力的多维结构[J].沈阳师范大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(1).
王铁军.科学发展观与中小学教育[M].南京:南京师范大学出版社,2005.
王宪平,课程改革视野下教师教学能力发展研究[D].博士学位论文.上海:华东师范大学,2006.
王宪平,唐玉光.课程改革视野下的教师教学能力结构[J].集美大学学报,2006,(1).
王雪梅.新课程改革背景下高校与中学英语教师教育的契合[J].外语界,2006,(5).
沃建中,申继亮,林崇德.提高教师课堂教学能力方法的实验研究[J].心理科学,1996,(3).
吴宗杰,黄爱凤等.外语课程与教师发展——RICH教育视野[M].合肥:安徽教育出版社;北京:人民教育出版社,2005.
武尊民.英语教师职业教育:大学本科英语教育专业课程发展个案研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2011.
夏纪梅.外语教学的学科属性探究——“语言教育学”论引发的思考[J].语言教学与研究.1999,(4).
肖刚.高校教师教学能力发展的新思路[J].集美大学教育学报,2001,(1).
肖丽萍.国内外教师专业发展研究述评[J].中国教育学刊,2002,(5).
辛广勤.大学英语是不是一门学科?——大学英语学科属性的宏观思考及其他[J].外语界,2006,(4).
徐芬,赵德成.成长记忆袋的基本原理与应用[M].西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2002,(6).
徐玲.青年教师教学能力影响因素与培训模式创新[J].现代教育科学,2009,(2).
徐翁宇,宋渭澄,刘宗和.语言学:21世纪展望[M].西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2000.
徐晓东.学习文件夹评价法的理论与方法[J].现代教育技术,2002,(2).
杨光岐.新课程背景下的高师课程教学改革[J].当代教育论坛,2004,(10).
杨国旗.外语教师教育的新视点:外语教育语言学[J].大学时代下半月,2006,(8).
杨启亮.高等师范教育发展中的学科教学论[J].南京师大学报(社会科学版),2000,(2).
杨文华.论师范生的教学能力培养[J].贵州教育学院学报(社会科学版),1996,(2).
叶澜.教师发展研究的理论思考与实践探索[A].载于周南照,赵丽,任友群.教师教育改革与教师专业发展:国际视野与本土实践[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
叶奕乾等.普通心理学[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2000.
余承海,姚本先.论高校教师的教学能力结构及其优化[J].高等农业教育,2005,(12).
俞理明,袁平华.应用语言学还是教育语言学?——对二语习得学科研究属性的思考[J].现代外语,2004,(3).
曾建湘,石银华.二十一世纪中学英语教师教学能力的培养[J].邵阳师专学报,1998,(3).
曾拓,李黎.教师教学能力研究综述[J].绍兴文理学院学报,2003,(1).
张波.论教师的教学能力[J].锦州师范学院学报,2002,(2).
张波.教师教学能力的培养途径和方法[J].教育理论与实践,2008,(12).
张敬邻.话说教学模仿[J].中学语文教学,2000,(6).
张俊霞.校本培训:中学英语教师专业发展的重要途径[J].丽水学院学报,2008,(4).
张晓冬.我国教师发展研究十年:范式转换的视角[J].上饶师范学院学报,2009,(5).
张学民,申继亮,林崇德.中小学教师教学反思对教学能力的促进[J].外国教育研究,2009,(9).
张艳玲.合作学习与英语教师的专业成长[J].教育与职业,2009,(15).
张玉华.语言教育学漫谈[J].解放军外语学院学报,1998,(5).
张志明.当前高校青年教师教学能力现状及提高策略[J].邢台学院学报,2010,(3).
赵昌木.论教师成长[J].高等师范教育研究,2002,(3).
赵风云.英语师范生学科教学能力发展研究[D].博士学位论文.上海:上海外国语大学,2010.
赵九松.教师教学档案袋功能分析[J].广西教育学院学报,2007,(1).
郑其恭,李冠乾.教师的能力结构[M].广州:广东教育出版社,1993.
钟启泉,我国“教师教育”制度设计的问题[A],载于周南照,赵丽,任友群.教师教育改革与教师专业发展:国际视野与本土实践[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2007.
周剑辉,周跃良.教师教学能力协作式行动学习训练模式的构建[J].宁波大学学报（教育科学版）,2008,(3).
周启加.英语专业与学科名称“正名“刍议[J].淮北煤师院学报,2007,(6).
周启加.英语学科教师教育改革新议[J].教育研究,2008,(7).
周燕.高校英语教师发展需求调查与研究[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(3).
周燕.中国高校英语教师发展模式研究[J].外语教学理论与实践,2008,(3).
朱旭东.教师专业发展理论研究[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2011.
Cambridge Dictionary Online.2011:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/portfolio_1?q=portfolioMerriam Webster Dictionary.2011: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/portfolio
百度百科.2011: http://baike.baidu.com/view/8497.htm
21世纪大英汉词典(收录于有道词典).2011:
http://dict.youdao.com/search?q=portfolio&ue=utf8&keyfrom=dict.index#q%3Dportfolio%26ue%3Dutf8%26keyfrom%3Ddict.index汉典.2011: http://www.zdic.net/cd/ci/8/ZdicE7Zdic9FZdicA5289905.htm
教育部.国家中长期教育改革和发展纲要(2010-2020)[EB/OL].2010,
中国政府网: http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2010-07/29/content_1667143.htm教育部.教育部关于大力推进教师教育课程改革的意见[EB/OL].2011,
教育部网: http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/s3702/201110/xxgk_125722.html中国国际广播电台(CRI).咱中国人英语水平是这样?（有声）[EB/OL].
新沪江英语网: http://www.hjenglish.com/new/p158143.中国社科院.社科院报告称中国国家竞争力上升至全球第17名[EB/OL].2010,
中国网: http://www.china.com.cn/news/txt/2010-10/25/content_21190582.htm.曹刚阳.“浙派名师”义务教育英语经典课堂教学第三届观摩活动暨浙、宁、沪长三
角英语课堂教学展示案例[CD].杭州:杭州师范学院继续教育教学,2006.
丁莤.第六届全国中学（高中）英语教学观摩案例[CD].北京:中国多媒体教学学报.2006.
邓小平.邓小平文选（第二卷）[M].北京:人民出版社,1983.
李克强.李克强出席香港大学百年校庆用英语发表演讲[EB/OL].2011,
人民网: http://tv.people.com.cn/GB/14645/15454348.html.李岚清.关于外语教学改革的讲话[N].文汇报,1996年9月3日.
胡锦涛.在庆祝清华大学建校100周年大会上的讲话[EB/OL].2011,
中国政府网: http://www.gov.cn/ldhd/2011-04/24/content_1851436.htm.胡锦涛.在庆祝中国共产党成立90周年大会上的讲话[EB/OL].2011,
中国政府网: http://www.gov.cn/ldhd/2011-07/01/content_1897720.htm.温家宝.在国家科技领导小组会议上的讲话[EB/OL].2009,
中国政府网: http://www.gov.cn/ldhd/2009-01/04/content_1194983.htm.