Introduction There is a general consensus among language learning theorists,educational psycholo-gists,and language—teaching professionals that the learning of anything does not occur in avacuum.That is,successful l...Introduction There is a general consensus among language learning theorists,educational psycholo-gists,and language—teaching professionals that the learning of anything does not occur in avacuum.That is,successful language learning of whatever kind comes out only when what isto be learned can be meaningfully related to something that is already known.Learning,inother words,must take place within some kind of familiar context or framework——an ex-tension of the familiar to the unfamiliar,if you will.The natural question to raise,then,iswhat such"frameworks"——and ones familiar to the learner——we might identify for thelearning of second/foreign language grammar.In what way,we are entitled to ask,wouldgrammatical consciousness—raising fit into this roughly—drawn,very general picture of lan-展开更多
The caprice for the study came from an indigenous designed instructional board for teaching learners in nursery/primary schools (2 - 10 years) and the task whose overall topic is the reminiscence, retention of visuals...The caprice for the study came from an indigenous designed instructional board for teaching learners in nursery/primary schools (2 - 10 years) and the task whose overall topic is the reminiscence, retention of visuals aid use in the pedagogy. The study is to appraise the opinion of toddlers/teachers about the helpfulness of 3D-visuals (ergonomic board);the clarity of the intended functions of the 3D-visuals in the toddler’s lessons instruction and support from the producers in using them;and why visuals (conventional visual aids) in schoolroom instruction are misjudged/misinterpreted;their view about the functions in specific (conventional visuals) for the instruction pedagogy;and other sources of visuals provided other than the lesson’s instruction. Four nursery/primary schools participated in the study. Seventy-two (72) toddler’s/teachers participated in the study. The study examined using quantitative and qualitative approach for statistical analysis (using pie-chart and histogram). The findings suggested that the aspects of visuals items selected for comment and description are to some extent circumscribed by toddler’s learners’ linguistic resources. Understandably, the point made by researchers referred that visuals often fail to support learning as effectively as they might because they are not regarded as a full-fledged information mode that requires the same careful processing as verbal text, is borne out by the findings. Recommendation, the accountability is above all on producers of kid’s instructional materials: authors, editors, designers and illustrators of the materials. The implication of this is that toddlers’ instructional materials should, as in the case of illustrated books include both an overt explanation of the overall philosophy toward visuals and overview of their use.展开更多
文摘Introduction There is a general consensus among language learning theorists,educational psycholo-gists,and language—teaching professionals that the learning of anything does not occur in avacuum.That is,successful language learning of whatever kind comes out only when what isto be learned can be meaningfully related to something that is already known.Learning,inother words,must take place within some kind of familiar context or framework——an ex-tension of the familiar to the unfamiliar,if you will.The natural question to raise,then,iswhat such"frameworks"——and ones familiar to the learner——we might identify for thelearning of second/foreign language grammar.In what way,we are entitled to ask,wouldgrammatical consciousness—raising fit into this roughly—drawn,very general picture of lan-
文摘The caprice for the study came from an indigenous designed instructional board for teaching learners in nursery/primary schools (2 - 10 years) and the task whose overall topic is the reminiscence, retention of visuals aid use in the pedagogy. The study is to appraise the opinion of toddlers/teachers about the helpfulness of 3D-visuals (ergonomic board);the clarity of the intended functions of the 3D-visuals in the toddler’s lessons instruction and support from the producers in using them;and why visuals (conventional visual aids) in schoolroom instruction are misjudged/misinterpreted;their view about the functions in specific (conventional visuals) for the instruction pedagogy;and other sources of visuals provided other than the lesson’s instruction. Four nursery/primary schools participated in the study. Seventy-two (72) toddler’s/teachers participated in the study. The study examined using quantitative and qualitative approach for statistical analysis (using pie-chart and histogram). The findings suggested that the aspects of visuals items selected for comment and description are to some extent circumscribed by toddler’s learners’ linguistic resources. Understandably, the point made by researchers referred that visuals often fail to support learning as effectively as they might because they are not regarded as a full-fledged information mode that requires the same careful processing as verbal text, is borne out by the findings. Recommendation, the accountability is above all on producers of kid’s instructional materials: authors, editors, designers and illustrators of the materials. The implication of this is that toddlers’ instructional materials should, as in the case of illustrated books include both an overt explanation of the overall philosophy toward visuals and overview of their use.
