Compare and contrast essay - English Mediated Instruction and Code-switching

목차

없음

본문내용

The Communicative Approach has been discussed and supported by researchers, so using the target language in the language teaching profession has become popular. Teaching English in English (TEE) was used in order to stabilize public education during the 2009 revised curriculum period propelled by the Lee government in Korea. However, there should be an examination of whether learning and teaching in English is effective in EFL classrooms. Two types of English teaching will be introduced in this paper.
English as a Medium of Instruction means teaching content solely in English. Besides teachers, students should also use English when communicating with their classmates in EMI. On the other hand, code-switching means teaching content using both L1 and English. EMI and code-switching are compared and contrasted according to the standards of educational effectiveness, students’ emotion, and classroom design.

참고자료

· Aljoundi, E. K. (2013). The strengths and weaknesses of code switching and bilingualism in the language classroom. doi:10.13140/RG.2.1.5051.1762
· Cook, V. (2001). Using the First Language in the Classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3), 402-423. doi:10.3138/cmlr.57.3.402
· Duff, P. A., & Polio, C. G. (1990). How Much Foreign Language Is There in the Foreign Language Classroom? The Modern Language Journal, 74(2), 154. doi:10.2307/328119
· Galloway, N., Kriukow, J., & Numajiri, T. (2017). Internationalisation, higher education and the growing demand for English: An investigation into the English medium of instruction (EMI) movement in China and Japan. ELT Research Papers. Retrieved December 8, 2018, from https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/internationalisation-higher-education-growing-demand-english-investigation-english-medium.
· Kim, S. (2008). Five Years of Teaching English Through English: Responses from Teachers and Prospects for Learners. Retrieved from http://kate.bada.cc/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/kate_63_1_3.pdf
· Liebscher, G., & Dailey-Ocain, J. (2005). Learner Code-Switching in the Content-Based Foreign Language Classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 60(4), 501-525. doi:10.3138/cmlr.60.4.501
· Long, M. (1981). Input, interaction, and second-language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379, 259-278.
· Miles, R. (2004). Evaluating the Use of L1 in The English Language Classroom. Retrieved from https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-artslaw/cels/essays/matefltesldissertations/Milesdiss.pdf.
· Rolin-Ianziti, J., & Brownlie, S. (2002). Teacher Use of Learners Native Language in the Foreign Language Classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(3), 402-426. doi:10.3138/cmlr.58.3.402
· Schweer, W., Jr. (1999). Using L1 in the L2 classroom. Retrieved from https://jalt-publications.org/files/pdf-article/36.4_art1.pdf
· Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
· Tang, J. (2002). Using L1 in the English Classroom. Retrieved from http://www.geocities.ws/mhdrba/pdf/language.pdf