英國環境專業碩dissertation代寫

 提綱范文
Investigation and Discussion on Environment and Water Quality of Lakes

Chapter I Introduction

Chapter II Overview on Environment Quality of Lake Area

2.1 Nature geology and Exploitation

2.2 Overview on Hydrology, meteorology and geology

2.3 Conditions of Water Quality before Neighborhood` Exploitation

2.4 Causes of Lake`s Eutrophication

2.5 Investigation on Sources of Pollution around the Lake

Chapter III  Analysis on Water Quality of Lake

3.1 Selection of Indicators for Monitoring Water Quality

3.2 Methods of Water Samples and Distribution of Sampling Points

3.3 Quality Monitoring Results and Analysis of Lakes

3.4 Summary

Chapter IV Discussion on Technology of Water Quality

4.1 Basic Idea on Technology of Water Quality

4.2 Determination of Management Objectives on Water Quality

4.3 How to Keep Water Quality and Related Programs

4.4 Summary

Chapter V  Conclusion

——
英國金融碩士dissertation代寫

提綱格式范文二
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION: ............................................................................................................................ 3
2. PHILOSOPHY OF THE PROCESS APPROACH IN TEACHING ENGLISH WRITING: ........ 4
3. SALIENT FEATURES OF PROCESS APPROACH: .................................................................... 6
4. PROCESS APPROACH AND THE ROLE OF TEACHERS: ....................................................... 7
4.1 Generating Ideas ........................................................................................................................ 8
4.2 Focusing .................................................................................................................................... 8
4.3 Structuring ................................................................................................................................ 8
4.4 Drafting ..................................................................................................................................... 9
4.5 Evaluating ................................................................................................................................. 9
4.6 Re-viewing ................................................................................................................................ 9
5. IMPLICATION OF PROCESS APPROACH ON THE CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT: ...... 10
5.1 Implications on course content: .................................................................................................... 10
5.2 Implications on Class room Assignments: .................................................................................... 10
5.3 Implication on feedback mechanism: ........................................................................................... 11#p#分頁標題#e#
5.4 Implications related to teacher-student involvement and evaluation: .......................................... 12
5.5 Implications related to L1 and L2 writers: .................................................................................... 13
6. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................... 14
7. REFERENCES: ............................................................................................................................... 15
3 TEACHING
1. INTRODUCTION:
There has been a reasonable gradual shift in the approach of teaching writing in the
classroom from product approach – comprising grammar-translation, controlled-to-free,
paragraph pattern, grammar syntax organization approaches (mostly prevalent till early
1970’s) to communicative approach (mid 1970’s), process (late 1970’s - Early 1980’s),
English for Academic Purposes (Mid 1980’s) and Genre Approach (1990’s). However, there
are array of opinions, arguments and concerns over the fact that which style works best with
the students in developing their ability to express their ideas with freedom and at the same
time with correct composition and coherence. All these approaches focuses at different aspect
of English writing and requires relevant changes in the role of teachers and students, their
involvement in the class room, nature of exercises and in the feedback method. However,
they provide an English Language Trainer a flexibility to implement one or a combination of
more than one approach (James, 1993) considering the time, purpose, need, cultural milieu
and academic level of students and their proficiency in the English Language.
This piece of writing will not delve into different approaches of teaching writing in
the class room but is intended to explore the process approach of teaching writing, its
implications on the teaching methodology and class room management and possible ways
through which teachers might respond to assure that both the need of learners/students and
the objective of the course is met.
4 TEACHING
2. PHILOSOPHY OF THE PROCESS APPROACH IN TEACHING ENGLISH
WRITING:
The underline philosophy of the process approach is to provide students/learners the
ability to learn the processes that leads to the acceptable finished text or product together with
a degree of freedom of expression based on their own fluency of language. The quote
“process cannot be inferred from the product, any more than wheat can be inferred from
bread” (Murray, 1982:18) aptly describes the importance of this approach while teaching
English writing in the classroom. Before discussing the process approach further, a brief
account of the research that guided the attention of teachers on the process of writing would#p#分頁標題#e#
be relevant here. The main influence on the development of process approach was the work
of two cognitive psychologists Flower and Hayes, who proposed a writing model based on
their research on L1 writers (Flower and Hayes, 1981) that became the basic tool for the
further research on the process of writing and is widely used since then by researchers.
However, the writing model of Flower and Hayes was found incompatible considering the
writers as skilled and unskilled (Raimes, 1985) and thus led to the development of another L1
writing model that emphasizes on the two types of writing styles - knowledge-telling (writing
style of 12 year old) and knowledge-transforming (synthesis and interpretation of knowledge)
and hence follow different writing processes (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1985). The other
significant research that influenced the development of process approach was the work of
Grabe and Kaplan (1996) who suggested other dimensions to research such as education,
cognitive side of writing, discourse analysis and the rhetorical study (led to genre approach).
The process approach is more to develop a cyclical and recursive style of writing
which involves continuously and simultaneously the pre-writing (planning), writing and rewriting
processes (Smith, 1982: 104). The proponents of teaching writing with greater
5 TEACHING
emphasis on the ‘writing as the process’ Escholz (1980), White (1988) and Jordon (1997)
indicate towards the drawbacks of ‘product approach’ such as model-based learning that
fosters the sense of imitation in students with little scope for students to actually learn the
processes involved in obtaining the acceptable final product as the main reasons behind the
emergence of this approach (Escholz, 1980:24).
The process approach provides ample opportunities to students to make their own
choices related to the direction of their writing by series of classroom discussions, tasks,
drafting and re-drafting their writings and with the formative feedback provided by teachers.
The approach also enables students to make improvements in their own composition (Jordan,
1997: 168) unlike in the product approach which leaves the task of correcting and
improvement to the teachers. As this approach puts more emphasis on the purpose, the
audience and the writer’s process it involves significant brainstorming to put together the
thoughts and ideas, drafting and re-drafting and an increased focus on both the content and
the language simultaneously encouraging students to devote time to writing and provide peer
feedback.
The two critical component of the process approach to writing are awareness and
intervention (Susser, 1994). However, before discussing the importance of these two
components in the process pedagogy it is exceedingly important to understand the difference#p#分頁標題#e#
between the ‘writing process’ and ‘process writing’ which are often confused by stakeholders
(students, teachers, school and institutions and authorities). In the words of Susser, ‘writing
process’ is nothing but the writing or composing, however ‘process writing’ is the processbased
teaching techniques (Susser, 1994: 32-34). Now let us discuss the two important
components out of which the Awareness means that the students should be made aware that
writing is a process, each type of writing requires different processes and these processes are
not merely giving words to the ideas but they comprise the judgment of format or genre, a
6 TEACHING
thorough consideration of audience and use of appropriate vocabulary. Intervention, on the
other hand, is considered as the integral part of process approach which emphasizes the role
of teachers as facilitators who help students at different stages of the writing process through
classroom exercises and activities (Susser, 1994:35). These two components are
complimentary to each other and help in achievement of the objective of teaching process.
3. SALIENT FEATURES OF PROCESS APPROACH:
In order to devise a strategy of teaching writing in the classroom a thorough
understanding of the focus points of process strategy is a pre-requisite. Hence, the salient
features of the process approach are listed below (Hairston, 1982) with an aim to provide a
kind of ‘to-do-list’ for teachers - who plan to use this approach of teaching - to help them
ensure that they cover these areas during the planning of their classroom methodology. These
features are taken from the process writing framework provided by Hairston (1982).
? The process approach dramatically changes the role of teachers from an ‘Instructor’ -
who correct the writers text, imposes on them their own writing style, instruct student
to follow guidelines and model form of writing; to a ‘Facilitator’ who guides the
writing process with intervention at various stages providing students direction leaving
onus of correcting and improvement of text on them.
? The process approach emphasizes on learning of the ways to explore ideas and content
in a particular context.
? The main basis of the approach is the various linguistic and specific researches done on
composing process of writing. It also takes ideas from other fields for example
cognitive psychology.
7 TEACHING
? The assignments used in the class extensively cover the purpose of writing, audience
and the occasions.
? Assessment judges the compatibility of produced text keeping in mind the writers’
intentions and readers needs.
? It takes in to accounts the more realistic recursive/cyclic nature of writing process
instead of looking at it as a linear process and uses a variety of writing models and#p#分頁標題#e#
processes that are expressive and expository in nature.
? It considers writing as a creative activity that can be described, analyzed and taught
effectively in the classroom using right methodology. Also, iterates that the teachers,
who are writers, can be more effective in teaching writing to students.
? It views writing as a learning, developing and communication skill.
4. PROCESS APPROACH AND THE ROLE OF TEACHERS:
The pre-dominant use of teaching writing in the classroom focusing on the product
approach over so many years has resulted in teachers being predisposed to using class
exercises such as sentence completion, syntax correction and making logical connections
while teaching writing. However, during the process teachers are heavily involved in the
correction and improvement of student’s composition themselves and in a sense impose their
writing style on students. On the contrary, in the process approach the role of teachers
become more like a facilitator where they encourage students to do improvement or
correction of the composition on their own by providing them formative feedback. The role
of teachers starts with the very fact that they have to bring writing as a classroom activity
instead of leaving it on students as homework. The process approach is built around the
8 TEACHING
cyclic model of writing proposed by White and Arndt (1991), hence, it will be useful to
describe the role of teachers for each component of writing process postulated by cyclic
model such as Generating Ideas, Focusing, Structuring, Drafting, Evaluating and Re-viewing.
4.1 Generating Ideas - It is the most important component as it sets the tone for the
writing process. Teachers are supposed to initiate the thinking process of writers and help
them through motivating them and providing guidance, direction, clues, situations,
images, and food for thought throughout the activity.
4.2 Focusing - The setting up of central theme to start writing about is the very critical
and perhaps the foundation of writing process. As students brainstorm and gather ideas
they struggle to collaborate these ideas to derive a central theme for further action. The
intervention of teachers is greatly required in helping student focus on the purpose of
writing i.e. theme. Certain activities described in the cyclic model (White and Arndt,
1991:44) such as fast writing and loop writing can be used to enhance the results during
this stage.
4.3 Structuring – It is an on-going process not a one-stage process and basically deals
with the channelization of ideas in a way that make sense and appeal to the reader and
most importantly can convey the subject matter in a logical way. For example deciding on
the introduction, conclusion and presentation of information. The role of teacher in this
stage is to provide necessary guidance and support in defining a clear structure for#p#分頁標題#e#
writing, however, only direction should be given letting student learn it by doing it. The
main activities that are suggested for this process are experimenting with arrangement,
identification of organizing principal and its effect on text by studying text (White and
Arndt, 1991:78).
9 TEACHING
4.4 Drafting - This is the stage at which student produces his/her first draft and the role
of teachers here is to make student aware of different styles of opening and closing a text,
a piece of writing or a paragraph and encouraging them to make their writing appealing
and interesting to read. Teachers may also do one outline of the task just to show the
students an expert way of doing that. The different activities suggested here are exercises
aimed at individual and group compositions with extensive intervention from teachers
(White and Arndt, 1991:78).
4.5 Evaluating – Often at this stage, teachers’ dictating approach defeats the very
motive of the process approach as they start correcting the text produced by students
discouraging the idea of self-evaluation. Teachers have to ensure that students themselves
are the only evaluators of their work. This is the basic development which in broader
perspective will help students life-long. Also, teachers have to be very careful the way
they give feedback to students, considering their cultural backgrounds – Collective and
Individualistic Cultures (Hofstede, 1980) - as they tend to take teachers’ suggestions as
instructions and may follow them religiously. Peer feedback can be exercised here and
more precisely use of peer feedback from L1 to L2 writers and vice versa would be
fruitful in encouraging students to self-evaluate their work through analysis (White and
Arndt, 1991:78).
4.6 Reviewing
– This is more like a habit which should be inculcated in the students to
have a final re-view of their writing which helps in spotting gaps in the final product such
as any correction required or induction of new ideas or further re-arrangement of ideas to
make it more coherent. The role of teacher here is to make students aware of the
importance and essence of re-viewing. The basic activities suggested at this stage are
checking coherence and logical progressing of the text, its division and assessment of its
impact on readers (White and Arndt, 1991:136).
10 TEACHING
5. IMPLICATION OF PROCESS APPROACH ON THE CLASSROOM
MANAGEMENT:
Teachers taking a shift from the product approach to the process approach must be
aware of the practical implications it will have on the management of classroom while
teaching. In the words of Wason “it would be wrong to suppose that there is one best way to
understand how people write” (Wason, 1981a:340). This precisely indicate that teachers
cannot really find a suitable way of teaching that caters to the need of group of learners who#p#分頁標題#e#
have different needs and hence required to pay attention on one-to-one basis, which in a sense
is more demanding. Given the characteristics of the process approach it demands a whole
new approach to teaching writing. The implications of process approach are mentioned below
under various subheads -
5.1 Implications on course content: The course content continues to focus on the
basic teaching about the language, however, there is some change required in the content and
delivery considering L1 and L2 writers. For L2 writers, more emphasis should be on the
vocabulary and they should also be made to read and brainstorm extensively during the
course as it is imperative to perform writing task whereas for L1 writers the emphasis should
be more on grammar and sentence construction. On the whole, the basic idea of the course
structure should be to provide enough opportunities for learners to write with personal
involvement.
5.2 Implications on Class room Assignments: Students often perceive the classroom
exercises as compulsion and mere a way of getting good grades that makes them be less
involved personally. In such situations ability of teachers to convince writers the wider
perspective of assignment, which is not the evaluation for grades but the improvement and to
build a foundation for future writing tasks is the key. This would also help writers to be more
11 TEACHING
committed and involved in the effective writing which would further make them to think
about their private conception of their writing task (Galbraith, 1981). The best idea that could
be utilized here is the provision of autonomy to students in choosing their own topics which
would result in students having greater idea of audience and purpose, however, teachers may
choose to set direction in terms of type of writing and methods of choosing a topic. Further, It
would help teachers in determining the ‘skilled’ and ‘unskilled‘ writers and in choosing ways
to deal with their individual needs. For instance, skilled writers consider purpose and
audience while writing and write ‘reader-based prose’ from the beginning whereas unskilled
writers do not consider purpose and audience while writing and need assignments challenging
them to think about these elements in order to produce good product. Also, unskilled writers
initially write ‘writer-based prose’ but after the guidance and as they develop, shift to ‘readerbased
prose’ mode later on (Flower, 1979).
The list of processes such as discussion, brainstorming, taking notes, fastwriting,
rough draft, preliminary self evaluation, structuring text, first draft, peer evaluation,
conference, second draft, self-evaluation/editing, finished draft, final response to draft (White
and Arndt, 1991:7) involved in the production of a decent piece of writing provides ample#p#分頁標題#e#
scope to decide on the activities to be chosen during the classroom teaching. Some techniques
that can be used in the pedagogy are brainstorming, cubing (in which students ask themselves
a flurry of question about any topic), wet-ink writing (student write for ten minutes and then
pick up the idea from the text and then write about that idea again and so on), role playing
and the idea of ‘writing-centres’ (Ronesi, 1995) among others.
5.3 Implication on feedback mechanism: The process approach requires more
participation from the students as it considers writing as an activity and encourages peer
feedback and thereby the process requires relative changes in the classroom setting. The
12 TEACHING
success of process pedagogy depends heavily on feedback mechanism as it provides
necessary guidance to students that comprise mainly teacher-student feedback and peer
feedback. Teachers have to balance their feedback keeping in view that neither they dictate
the writing process by providing feedback in the form of guidelines - as students then
religiously follow that and stop thinking, nor they should provide less feedback so as to make
it useless (Zamel, 1985). However, unfortunately, researchers found in most cases the
feedback given to student are in the form of guidelines. Hence, it is appropriate to mention
and advise the idea of process-feedback as proposed by White and Arndt (1991) which
advocates provision of feedback in the form of suggestions and not instructions, should
provide hints only not the complete solution (to encourage self-evaluation) and should be
given on both the good things and on improvement areas. Also teachers should act as readers
not as language experts or possibly just like fellow students and not instructors while
responding to the text. Keeping the peer feedback in the view, teachers need to group the
native English speaking students and students with English as a second language together to
have more comprehensive and valuable peer feedback. The underline idea here is to make L2
writers learn from the L1 writer’s development on the cultural aspects that would help them
in contextual writings.
5.4 Implications related to teacherstudent
involvement and evaluation: The
process approach encourages students towards creative writing and to take up writing as a
problem solving activity (Flower and Hayes, 1980a). But this could lead to a kind of problem
for teachers related to the selection of right kind of problems to be worked on in the class
room with an aim to improve student’s linguistic capabilities as well as provide them freedom
to experiment with vocabulary. This situation underlines the importance of involvement of
both student and teacher in the process of learning during the course. As the process of
teaching involved a lot of activities such as drafting and re-drafting for a number of times, it#p#分頁標題#e#
13 TEACHING
is important to keep in mind that students may lose motivation which can only be overcome
through creating ways to involve students in the process constantly.
The other area of concern in the process approach which has far reaching implications
on classroom management is Evaluation. Evaluation on the face of it looks difficult to handle
in the process approach as it produces a lot of text during the course. Further, the approach to
evaluation also poses a degree of challenge in this pedagogy. In the words of Hairston, the
written text should be evaluated by teachers based on parameters of fulfillment of writer’s
intentions and the audience need which results in the difficulty for evaluators as to how can
they know the writer’s intentions? The other difficulty is the determining as what is to be
evaluated, the process or the product and this results in a challenging situation for teachers as
to who should be rated high the one who make a lot of changes to the text during the redrafting
or the one who makes less changes during the writing process and produced quality
text. It would be worth mentioning here the two contradictory arguments on this issue. Beach
(1976) in his writings advocated ‘extensive revisers’ as better writers than the ‘non revisers’;
on the contrary Dieterich (1976:302) opines that there seems no logic in proclaiming that
revising contains ‘inherent worth’.
5.5 Implications related to L1 and L2 writers: It makes logical sense that adoption
of process approach has different implications for L1 and L2 learners considering their level
of proficiency and individual needs. Hence, necessary changes to the classroom approaches
should be made to make it more suitable to L1 and L2 writers. We know that there are
marked similarities in L1 and L2 writers for example in composition process, however, same
approach of teaching would not work and hence require careful planning and execution of
teaching (Fulcher, 1997: 16-18). Various researches done in this area ( Zamel (1983), Arndt
(1987), Cumming (1989), Hall (1990)) comparing L1 and L2 writers have revealed that
14 TEACHING
transporting teaching techniques from L1 to L2 is extremely forbidden and teachers should
avoid forcing one writing technique on all students neglecting the differences among them.
6. CONCLUSION
The process approach has been acknowledged as a suitable approach for teaching writing
in the classroom as far as the needs and development of students are concerned, however, the
way teachers respond to the pedagogy is crucial. The features, useful activities and its
implications of the process approach discussed in the paper only serve as a limited guide to
teachers and majority of onus and judgment lies in the hands of teachers and their
effectiveness determines the end result. Teachers need to pay attention to the evaluation#p#分頁標題#e#
process and should exercise a balance while evaluating both processes and finished product
as often they may find themselves in a difficult situation of judging product more than the
process or may neglect product completely while focusing mainly on processes. Similarly,
teachers’ intervention in guiding students at different stages of the process is very critical to
make approach work efficiently.
15 TEACHING
7. REFERENCES:
Arndt, V. (1987), Six writers in search of texts: A protocol-based study of L1 and L2 writing,
ELT Journal, 41/4: 257-266
Beach, R (1976), Self-Evaluation Strategies of Extensive Revisers and Non-revisers College
Composition and Communication, 27/2: 160-164
Bereiter, C and Scardamalia, M. (1987), The Psychology of Written Language, Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cumming, A. (1989) Writing Expertise and Second-Language Proficiency, Language
Learning, 39/1: 81-135
Dieterich, D. (1976), Teaching About Doublespeak, National Council of Teachers of
English, Urbana, Il
Escholz, P. A. (1980). The prose models approach: using products in the process. In
T. R. Donovan and B. W. McClelland (eds.) Eight Approaches to Teaching
Composition. Urbana, Il: National Council of Teachers of English.
Flower, L. S. and J. R. Hayes (1981), A cognitive process theory of writing. College
Composition and Communication, 32/4, 365-387.
Flower, L.S. (1979), Writer -Based Prose: A Cognitive Basis for Problems in Writing,
College English, 41: 19-37
Flower, L. S. and J. R. Hayes (1980a), The Cognition of discovery: defining a rhetorical
problem, College Composition and Communication, 31/1: 21-32
Fulcher, G (1997) Assessing writing, In Fulcher, G. (ed.), writing in the English Language
Classroom, Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall ELT / The British Council: 91-107
Grabe, W. and Kaplan, R.B. (1996) Theory and Practice of Writing, London: Longman
Galbraith, D (1981), The effect of conflicting goals on writing: a case study, Visible
Language XIV/4 : 364 - 75
Hairston, M. (1982), The Winds of Change: Thomas Kuhn and the Revolution in the
Teaching of Writing, College Composition and Communication, 33/1: 76-88
Hall, C (1990), Managing the complexity of revising across languages, TESOL Quarterly,
24/1, 43-60
Horowitz, D. (1986), Process, not product: less than meets the eye, TESOL Quarterly,
20/4:783 -797
Hofstede, G. (2001), Culture’s Consequences: comparing values, behaviours, institutions
and organizations across nations, 2nd Ed, UK: Sage,
16 TEACHING
Jordan, R. R. (1997). What’s in a name? English for Specific Purposes, 16/1
James, K. (1993). Helping students to achieve success in the information structuring
of their academic essays. In G. M. Blue (ed.). Language, Learning and Success:
Studying through English. Developments in ELT. Hemel Hempstead: Phoenix ELT.#p#分頁標題#e#
Murrey, D.M. (1982), Learning by Teaching: Selected articles on writing and teaching,
Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Boynton/Cook
Raimes, A. (1983), Techniques in Teaching Writing, New York : OUP
Raimes, A. (1985), What Unskilled ESL Students Do as they Write: A Classroom Study of
Composing, TESOL Quarterly, 19/2: 229-258
Ronesi, L (1995), Meeting In The Writing Center: The Field Of ESL, Teaching English as a
Second or Foreign Language (TESL), 1/3
Susser, B. (1994) Process approaches in ESL/EFL instruction, Journal of Second Language
Writing, 3/1: 31-47
Smith, F. (1982). Writing and the Writer. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Wason, P.C. (1981b) Conformity and commitment in writing, Visible Language XIV/4 : 351
- 63
White, R. V. (1988). Academic writing: process and product. In P. C. Robinson. (ed.)
Academic Writing: process and product. ELT Documents 129.
While, R and Arndt, V. (1991). Process Writing. Harlow, UK: Longman
Zamel, V. (1985), Responding to student writing, TESOL Quarterly, 19/1, 79-101
Zamel, V. (1993), Questing academic discourse, College ESL 3: 28-39