笔者认为合作学习是为了完成共同任务而进行的相互学习。在这个过程中，学生们可以一起构建和分享知识，另一方面，他们可以在教室外随时随地利用媒体和互联网继续学习。他们不仅可以自己阅读，还可以评估小组成员的阅读情况。在这一过程中，学生对知识的关注和评价的范围越来越大，学生的焦虑感也会降低。例如，学生在发表意见之前将进行小组讨论。他们的焦虑和错误会因为交换意见而减少。在这个过程中，他们得到及时的反馈和错误的纠正。合作学习还能增强学生的自信心。每个学生的价值观由小组结果反映出来。
Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Background of the Research
The intensive multimodal reading teaching answers the call of the times.
Halliday (1978) proposed that human beings exchange information in a variety of ways, and language is just one of them. Language includes written and spoken language. In oral communication, the communicator can convey the meaning through tone, intonation, speed of speech and various body languages. In addition to oral language, written language is equipped with complementary tools like images and charts to express meaning. Meanwhile, with the development of science and technology, the Internet has become the main source of information, and the transmission of information is no longer presented in language. Thus, Language is no longer the only means of communication in modern written discourse. Multiple sources like newspapers, magazines, advertisements, posters, storybooks, textbooks, encyclopedias, brochures and computer interfaces facilitate our interaction with each other in a multimodal manner (Hu, 2007). The multimodal nature of modern discourse is gaining prominence, and it is said that multimodality is the basic feature of modern discourse. Because of the simplicity of language as the only mode, it can neither bring readers visual enjoyment, nor convey rich meaning, which means the multimodal discourse is a requirement of modern people.
With the increasingly abundant means of expressing the meaning of discourse in social activities, the traditional means of expressing meaning mainly through language has been gradually replaced by the combination of various media. Multimodality embodies the normal state of social practice, and becomes an inherent feature of present social and cultural system. How is meaning generated in multi-media social activities and multi-modal cultural systems has become a new topic in contemporary research.
..................................
1.2 Purpose of the Research
First, this study attempts to find out the current situation of junior two students’ reading anxiety, and investigate whether intensive multimodal reading teaching is helpful in dealing with students’ reading anxiety. If intensive multimodal reading teaching can alleviate students’ reading anxiety, the author will further explore the types of reading anxiety that can be reduced by this teaching mode.
Second, the purpose of this study is to awaken junior-high-school English teachers’ awareness of the importance of multimodal reading teaching, especially that of the teachers in rural areas. In this process, it provides theoretical guidance for English teachers to effectively integrate teaching resources, and explores the methods of effective English reading teaching in junior high school in minority rural areas.
So far, the study of foreign language learning anxiety and multimodal teaching respectively has made great achievements. There are also many strategies to solve foreign language reading anxiety. However, there is little attention to alleviate reading anxiety through multimodal reading teaching. Reading is an important way for students to obtain information, and reading anxiety is one of the important factors affecting reading effect. Applying intensive multimodal reading teaching to junior two students not only provides a reference for English teachers to alleviate students’ reading anxiety, but also offers a domestic case in the following two areas: multimodal English reading teaching and reading anxiety.
................................
Chapter Two Literature Review
2.1 Theoretical Framework
2.1.1 Multimodal Discourse Analysis (MDA)
“Multimodal discourse refers to the use of hearing, vision, touch and other feelings, through language, image, sound, action and other means and symbolic resources in communication” (Zhang, 2009). Multimodal discourse was not taken seriously until the study of modern linguistics emerged. Then scholars began to study it as an auxiliary expression system of language, but not as a mode of meaning expression. In recent years, with the emergence of multimodal discourse, as an independent frontier academic field, its importance has been widely recognized.
Multimodal discourse analysis theory is mainly based on Halliday’ system-functional linguistics. Most of the meaning of discourse is reflected by non-verbal factors in communication, such as accompanying language features (loudness, tone, intonation, sound speed, etc.), physical features (gestures, body, facial expressions, movements, etc.), and non-physical features (PPT equipment, network, etc.). In this case, communication is no longer carried out with one sense, but with two or more senses at the same time. For example, PPT teaching is carried out with vision and hearing at the same time. The discourse produced in this form of communication is multimodal discourse. In a word, multimodal discourse is a phenomenon that uses senses (hearing, vision, touch, etc.), language, image, sound, action and other means and symbolic resources to communicate.
Since the American linguist Harris put forward the research direction of discourse analysis in the early 1950s, it has attracted the attention of scholars all over the world. One of the earliest researchers in multimodal discourse analysis was the R. Barthes. He, in his paper Rhetoric of the Images, discussed the interaction between image and language in the meaning of expression. However, it was not until the 1990s that multimodal discourse analysis really developed. The study of multimodal discourse from the perspective of systemic functional linguistics was initiated by Kress and Leeuven (2001).
Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Background of the Research
The intensive multimodal reading teaching answers the call of the times.
Halliday (1978) proposed that human beings exchange information in a variety of ways, and language is just one of them. Language includes written and spoken language. In oral communication, the communicator can convey the meaning through tone, intonation, speed of speech and various body languages. In addition to oral language, written language is equipped with complementary tools like images and charts to express meaning. Meanwhile, with the development of science and technology, the Internet has become the main source of information, and the transmission of information is no longer presented in language. Thus, Language is no longer the only means of communication in modern written discourse. Multiple sources like newspapers, magazines, advertisements, posters, storybooks, textbooks, encyclopedias, brochures and computer interfaces facilitate our interaction with each other in a multimodal manner (Hu, 2007). The multimodal nature of modern discourse is gaining prominence, and it is said that multimodality is the basic feature of modern discourse. Because of the simplicity of language as the only mode, it can neither bring readers visual enjoyment, nor convey rich meaning, which means the multimodal discourse is a requirement of modern people.
With the increasingly abundant means of expressing the meaning of discourse in social activities, the traditional means of expressing meaning mainly through language has been gradually replaced by the combination of various media. Multimodality embodies the normal state of social practice, and becomes an inherent feature of present social and cultural system. How is meaning generated in multi-media social activities and multi-modal cultural systems has become a new topic in contemporary research.
..................................
1.2 Purpose of the Research
First, this study attempts to find out the current situation of junior two students’ reading anxiety, and investigate whether intensive multimodal reading teaching is helpful in dealing with students’ reading anxiety. If intensive multimodal reading teaching can alleviate students’ reading anxiety, the author will further explore the types of reading anxiety that can be reduced by this teaching mode.
Second, the purpose of this study is to awaken junior-high-school English teachers’ awareness of the importance of multimodal reading teaching, especially that of the teachers in rural areas. In this process, it provides theoretical guidance for English teachers to effectively integrate teaching resources, and explores the methods of effective English reading teaching in junior high school in minority rural areas.
So far, the study of foreign language learning anxiety and multimodal teaching respectively has made great achievements. There are also many strategies to solve foreign language reading anxiety. However, there is little attention to alleviate reading anxiety through multimodal reading teaching. Reading is an important way for students to obtain information, and reading anxiety is one of the important factors affecting reading effect. Applying intensive multimodal reading teaching to junior two students not only provides a reference for English teachers to alleviate students’ reading anxiety, but also offers a domestic case in the following two areas: multimodal English reading teaching and reading anxiety.
................................
Chapter Two Literature Review
2.1 Theoretical Framework
2.1.1 Multimodal Discourse Analysis (MDA)
“Multimodal discourse refers to the use of hearing, vision, touch and other feelings, through language, image, sound, action and other means and symbolic resources in communication” (Zhang, 2009). Multimodal discourse was not taken seriously until the study of modern linguistics emerged. Then scholars began to study it as an auxiliary expression system of language, but not as a mode of meaning expression. In recent years, with the emergence of multimodal discourse, as an independent frontier academic field, its importance has been widely recognized.
Multimodal discourse analysis theory is mainly based on Halliday’ system-functional linguistics. Most of the meaning of discourse is reflected by non-verbal factors in communication, such as accompanying language features (loudness, tone, intonation, sound speed, etc.), physical features (gestures, body, facial expressions, movements, etc.), and non-physical features (PPT equipment, network, etc.). In this case, communication is no longer carried out with one sense, but with two or more senses at the same time. For example, PPT teaching is carried out with vision and hearing at the same time. The discourse produced in this form of communication is multimodal discourse. In a word, multimodal discourse is a phenomenon that uses senses (hearing, vision, touch, etc.), language, image, sound, action and other means and symbolic resources to communicate.
Since the American linguist Harris put forward the research direction of discourse analysis in the early 1950s, it has attracted the attention of scholars all over the world. One of the earliest researchers in multimodal discourse analysis was the R. Barthes. He, in his paper Rhetoric of the Images, discussed the interaction between image and language in the meaning of expression. However, it was not until the 1990s that multimodal discourse analysis really developed. The study of multimodal discourse from the perspective of systemic functional linguistics was initiated by Kress and Leeuven (2001).
Figure 1 Krashen’s Hypothesis of Affective Filter
.................................
2.2 Foreign Language Reading Anxiety
The development of humanism and Krashen’s second language acquisition theory is accompanied with the growing attention to the impact of affective factors on students’ second language learning input. With the deepening of the study of second language acquisition from the perspective of cognition, people are increasingly aware of the importance of affective factors in second language acquisition. Therefore, the influence of emotion on language learning cannot be ignored. Anxiety, as a major affective factor is worth studying (Arnold, 2005). The anxiety of foreign language classroom is different from that of other subjects. Foreign language classes are especially prone to anxiety and are prevalent in foreign language classes.
2.2.1 Definitions of Related Terms
Anxiety
Many foreign researchers have given us different definitions of anxiety. Horwit (1986) claimed that “anxiety is a subjective feeling of tension, botheration. Chinese scholars also given us the definition”. Zhang (1994) defined anxiety as an uneasiness of the mood because of the individual cannot achieve a certain purpose. Wang and Wan (2001) hold the same view, that is, anxiety is an emotional state of fear, because individuals are unable to achieve their goals or overcome the threat of obstacles, which frustrates their self-esteem and self-confidence, or increases their sense of failure and guilt.
Foreign Language Anxiety
As the main affective factor (Arnold, 2005) in language learning, foreign researches on foreign language anxiety have made many achievements. Since the 1980s, the study of language learning anxiety has made a great breakthrough. The concept of foreign language anxiety was first put forward by Horwitz (1986). He explained that “foreign language anxiety is a unique and complex synthesis of self-awareness, beliefs, emotions, and behaviors associated with language learning process in the classroom”. And then he divided second language classroom anxiety into test anxiety, communication apprehension and fear of negative evaluation. Test anxiety is defined as the tendency to look at insufficient results in the process of investigation with fear (Sarason, 1978). Communication apprehension refers to anxiety characterized by fear or worry when communicating with others, which is a shy reaction (Horwitz, et al., 1986). Negative evaluation anxiety is an anxiety caused by learners’ fear of receiving negative evaluation. A few years later, MacIntyre and Gardner (1991) enriched Horwitz’s opinion. They pointed out that anxiety is one of the most important factors affecting individual differences in foreign language learning. They divided foreign language learning anxiety into input anxiety, processing anxiety and output anxiety from the stage of foreign language anxiety. The input stage refers to the initial experience of the learner at a specific time with a specific stimulus, and the input is related to the initial representation of the memory entry. The processing stage involves the cognitive operation of the subject such as the organization, storage and assimilation of the material. The output involves the output of previously learned materials.
.....................................
2.2 Foreign Language Reading Anxiety
The development of humanism and Krashen’s second language acquisition theory is accompanied with the growing attention to the impact of affective factors on students’ second language learning input. With the deepening of the study of second language acquisition from the perspective of cognition, people are increasingly aware of the importance of affective factors in second language acquisition. Therefore, the influence of emotion on language learning cannot be ignored. Anxiety, as a major affective factor is worth studying (Arnold, 2005). The anxiety of foreign language classroom is different from that of other subjects. Foreign language classes are especially prone to anxiety and are prevalent in foreign language classes.
2.2.1 Definitions of Related Terms
Anxiety
Many foreign researchers have given us different definitions of anxiety. Horwit (1986) claimed that “anxiety is a subjective feeling of tension, botheration. Chinese scholars also given us the definition”. Zhang (1994) defined anxiety as an uneasiness of the mood because of the individual cannot achieve a certain purpose. Wang and Wan (2001) hold the same view, that is, anxiety is an emotional state of fear, because individuals are unable to achieve their goals or overcome the threat of obstacles, which frustrates their self-esteem and self-confidence, or increases their sense of failure and guilt.
Foreign Language Anxiety
As the main affective factor (Arnold, 2005) in language learning, foreign researches on foreign language anxiety have made many achievements. Since the 1980s, the study of language learning anxiety has made a great breakthrough. The concept of foreign language anxiety was first put forward by Horwitz (1986). He explained that “foreign language anxiety is a unique and complex synthesis of self-awareness, beliefs, emotions, and behaviors associated with language learning process in the classroom”. And then he divided second language classroom anxiety into test anxiety, communication apprehension and fear of negative evaluation. Test anxiety is defined as the tendency to look at insufficient results in the process of investigation with fear (Sarason, 1978). Communication apprehension refers to anxiety characterized by fear or worry when communicating with others, which is a shy reaction (Horwitz, et al., 1986). Negative evaluation anxiety is an anxiety caused by learners’ fear of receiving negative evaluation. A few years later, MacIntyre and Gardner (1991) enriched Horwitz’s opinion. They pointed out that anxiety is one of the most important factors affecting individual differences in foreign language learning. They divided foreign language learning anxiety into input anxiety, processing anxiety and output anxiety from the stage of foreign language anxiety. The input stage refers to the initial experience of the learner at a specific time with a specific stimulus, and the input is related to the initial representation of the memory entry. The processing stage involves the cognitive operation of the subject such as the organization, storage and assimilation of the material. The output involves the output of previously learned materials.
.....................................
Chapter Three Methodology ........................................ 33
3.1 Research Questions .................................................. 33
3.2 Research Participants ............................................ 33
3.3 Research Instruments ................................... 36
Chapter Four Research Results and Discussion .............................. 60
4.1 The Current Situation of English Reading Anxiety in Junior Two Students ..................... 60
4.1.1 Descriptive Statistical Analysis of Reading Anxiety in Junior Two Students ........ 60
4.1.2 Analysis on Gender Differences of English Reading Anxiety .................................. 62
Chapter Five Conclusion ..................................... 70
5.1 Main findings ......................................... 70
5.2 Pedagogical Implication of This Research ............................................... 71
5.3 Limitation and Recommendation for Future Study ..................................... 7
Chapter Four Research Results and Discussion
4.1 The Current Situation of English Reading Anxiety in Junior Two Students
4.1.1 Descriptive Statistical Analysis of Reading Anxiety in Junior Two Students
Table 13 Descriptive Statistics on the Five Factors of Reading Anxiety
.................................
Chapter Five Conclusion
5.1 Main findings
First, students in junior two are suffering from an above average level of English reading anxiety. The five factors of English reading anxiety rank from high to low is: “affective factor”, “text understanding”, “cultural background”, “learning method and habit”, and “teaching mode”. It illustrates that student are most likely to vulnerable to the anxiety caused by “affective factor” in the process of reading, and then to be affected by “text understanding”. Next, students be affected by the anxiety caused by “cultural background” and “learning method and habit”, which are relatively less than the first two kind of anxieties (“affective factor”, “text understanding”). Reading anxiety caused by “teaching mode” is relatively small.
Second, there is significant difference in reading anxiety between boys and girls among junior two students. Boys are more likely than girls to experience reading anxiety. From the five factors influencing reading anxiety, significant differences are found between boys and girls in terms of “text understanding”, “learning method and habit” and “teaching mode”. However, there is no significant difference in the two factors “affective factor” and “cultural background” between boys and girls.
Third, through intensive multimodal reading teaching, the reading anxiety level of the experimental class students decrease, and the number of students with reading anxiety also reduce significantly. What we need to be noticed is that students’ reading anxiety on the four factors (“text understanding”, “cultural background”, “affective factor” and “teaching mode”) are significantly reduced (p=0.000<0.05), but there is no significant difference in the factor of “learning method and habit” (p=0.258>0.05). While the level of reading anxiety and the number of students with reading anxiety in the control class is unchanged. In short, intensive multimodal reading teaching mode can relieve students’ reading anxiety. Specifically, intensive multimodal reading teaching mode can alleviate the reading anxiety caused by “text understanding”, “cultural background “, “affective factor” and “teaching mode”. However, there is no significant effect on reading anxiety caused by “learning method and habit”.
reference(omitted)