活动理论视角下的学术英语写作“四位一体”教学范式

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2017.03.010

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 基于活动理论视角的中介工具学习观来审视学术英语写作过程,认为活动理论可以更为动态地解释学术英语写作过程中的要素配置及其互动关系,满足“语言+学科”的教学目标,并在此基础上提出了学术英语写作“四位一体”的教学范式。同时,结合实例,讨论了该写作范式的实践可行性,认为该范式可以提升对写作教学要素配置的认知,为高校学术英语写作教学提供实践依据。

关键词: 学术英语写作, TAPE范式, 活动理论, 内容为依托

Abstract: From the perspective of activity theory, particularly through the lens of mediation on learning, this paper reexamines the various elements and their configuration of academic English writing. The present paper maintains that activity theory can better serve the pedagogical goal of “language + content”; and then proposes the “Four-as-one” pedagogical paradigm for academic English writing practice. Meanwhile, this paper discusses the feasibility of such paradigm with practical examples and maintains that this paradigm can offer pedagogical implications for college academic English writing pedagogy.

中图分类号:

H319

滕延江. 活动理论视角下的学术英语写作“四位一体”教学范式[J]. 当代外语研究, 2017, 17(03): 53-58.

TENG Yanjiang. A “Four-as-one” Pedagogical Paradigm for Academic English Writing: An Activity Theory Perspective[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2017, 17(03): 53-58.

参考文献

Bjork, L., G. Brauer, L. Rienecker & P. S. Jorgensen. 2003. Introduction [A]. In L.Bjork., G. Brauer., L. Rienecker & P. S. Jorgensen (eds.). Teaching Academic Writing in European Higher Education[C]. London: Kluwer Academic Publications. 1-16.
Burns, A. & C. Coffin. 2001. Analyzing English in a Global Context: A Reader [M]. New York: Routledge.
Canagarajah, S. 2014. EAP in Asia: Challenges and possibilities [A]. In Y. Li & T. Walker (eds.). English for Academic Purposes (EAP) in Asia[C]. New York: Sense Publishers. 93-102.
Cenoz, J. 2015. Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: The same or different?[J]. Language, Culture and Curriculum 28(1): 8-24.
Craig, J. L. 2013. Integrating Writing Strategies in EFL/ESL University Contexts [M]. New York: Routledge.
Dalton-Puffer, C. 2007. Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dalton-Puffer, C. 2011. Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles?[J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 31:182-204.
Duff, P. A. 2010. Language socialization into academic discourse communities [J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30:169-192.
Fujioka, M. 2014. L2 student-US professor interactions through disciplinary writing assignments: An activity theory perspective [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing 25: 40-58.
Engestrom, Y. 1987. Learning by Expanding: An Activity Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research [M]. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engestrom, Y. 2001. Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical Reconceptualization [J]. Journal of Education and Work 14 (1): 133-156.
Engestrom, Y. & V. Escalante. 1996. Mundane tool or object of affection? The rise and fall of the postal buddy[A]. In B. A. Nardi (ed.). Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-computer Interaction [C]. Cambridge: MIT Press. 325-373.
Hyland, K. 2015. Teaching and Researching Writing (Third Edition)[M]. New York: Routledge.
Kang, Y.S. & D. O. Pyun. 2013. Mediation strategies in L2 writing processes: A case study of two Korean language learners [J]. Language, Culture and Curriculum 26 (1): 52-67.
Lave, J. & E. Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leaver, B. L. & S. B. Stryker. 1989. Content‐based instruction for foreign language classrooms[J]. Foreign Language Annals 22(3): 269-275.
Lei, X. 2008. Exploring a sociocultural approach to writing strategy research: Mediated actions in writing activities[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing 17(4): 217-236.
Leont'ev, A. N. 1978. Activity, Consciousness, and Personality [M]. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
North, S. 2005. Different values, different skills? A comparison of essay writing by students from arts and science backgrounds[J]. Studies in Higher Education 30(5): 517-533.
Swales, J. 1990. Genre Analyses[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stoller, F. L. 2004. Content-based instruction: Perspectives on curriculum planning [J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 24: 261-283.
Vygotsky, L.S. 1978. Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Mental Processes [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wingate, U. 2012. Using academic literacies and genre-based models for academic writing instruction: A ‘literacy' journey [J]. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11(1): 26-37.
蔡基刚.2012. “学术英语”课程需求分析和教学方法研究[J]. 外语教学理论与实践 (2): 30-35.
教育部高等学校大学外语教学指导委员会. 2015. 大学英语教学指南(征求意见稿)[S].
龚嵘. 2015. 本科生学术英语素养课程的逆向设计[J]. 山东外语教学36(4): 48-55.
刘兵. 2010. 学术用途英语写作课程设计 [J]. 中国 ESP 研究(1): 136-143.
滕延江. 2016.“学术读写素养”范式与学术英语写作课程设计[J]. 当代外语研究 (1): 41-47.
熊丽君、殷猛. 2009. 论非英语专业学术英语写作课堂的构建 [J]. 外语教学(2): 50-56.
严明. 2014. 高校学术英语写作能力评价体系建构[J]. 外语学刊(6): 108-112.
叶洪. 2014. 新读写理论与外语写作任务设计[J]. 现代外语 37(4): 525-536.
于书林. 2013. 教师反馈与同伴反馈—社会文化活动理论视角下的差异与融合[J]. 现代外语36(1): 70-76.
于书林、I. Lee. 2013. 基于社会文化活动理论的二语写作同伴反馈系统模型构建[J]. 山东外语教学34(5): 24-29.

[1]	张荔. 学术英语写作课程设计与评估——基于留美中国学生的证据[J]. 当代外语研究, 2018, 18(03): 17-22.
[2]	滕延江, Peter De Costa. 学术英语写作与国际发表中的JARS要领与4C原则——Peter De Costa博士访谈[J]. 当代外语研究, 2017, 17(05): 48-53.
[3]	滕延江;. “学术读写素养”范式与学术英语写作课程设计[J]. 当代外语研究, 2016, 16(01): 41-47.
[4]	龚嵘. 大学学术英语写作教学的社会文化探究——学习者身份建构视角[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(06): 34-39.
[5]	龚嵘, 吴承钧. 研究型高校本科生EAP写作教学设计案例——关注大学教师教学设计能力的触发机制[J]. 当代外语研究, 2013, 13(08): 35-39.