آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 43 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 1,253 |
| تعداد مقالات | 15,411 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 51,248,455 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 14,255,857 |
Goals, Dimensions, and Design of Program Investigation | ||
| Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning | ||
| دوره 9، شماره 20، بهمن 2017، صفحه 75-91 اصل مقاله (345.4 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research Paper | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Mohammad Zohrabi* 1؛ Leila Dobakhti2 | ||
| 1The University of Tabriz | ||
| 2Assistant Professor of TEFL, Tabriz Islamic Art University | ||
| چکیده | ||
| If we are keen to boost the process of language learning, we need to study every aspect and component of our course. To this end, we carry out an investigation in which every detail of the course is put under microscope. Assessment of a course is an attempt in which different type of information is gathered systematically in order to study the working of a language instruction program. Certainly, program evaluation might be carried out for fulfilling different goals and purposes. Therefore, an evaluator should clarify the audience and the objectives of conducting program evaluation from the very beginning in order to obtain some adequate results. Different researchers have presented different proposals for the specific time of collecting data, type of data, and procedures of gathering data. Consequently, an evaluator should be familiar with the different dimensions of program evaluation. Also, some researchers treat program evaluation as a neat product, i. e. merely consisting of learners’ end of instruction scores. Yet, others consider program evaluation as a process. At this juncture, the important issue is the selection of an appropriate design for the implementation of the actual process of the evaluation. It is suggested that the illuminative model is rather a proper design for program evaluation because of its different advantages. This article attempts to shed some light on the dimensions, goals, and design of the course study. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| course study؛ dimensions؛ illuminative model | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Afros, E. & Schryer, C. F. (2009). The genre of syllabus in higher education. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 224-233.
Akst, G. & Hecht, M. (1980). Program evaluation. In A. S. Trillin, (Ed.), Teaching basic skills in college (pp. 261-310). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Alderson, J. C. (1996). Guidelines for the evaluation of language education. In J. C. Alderson & A. Beretta (Eds.), Evaluating second language education (pp. 274–304). Cambridge: CUP.
Alderson, J. C. & Scott, M. (1996). Insiders, outsiders and participatory evaluation. In J. C. Alderson & A. Beretta (Eds.), Evaluating second language education (pp. 25–60). Cambridge: CUP.
Berreta, A. (1996). Evaluation of language education: An overview. In J. C. Alderson & A. Beretta (Eds.), Evaluating second language education (pp. 5–24). Cambridge: CUP.
Blaxter, L., Hughes, C. & Tight, M. (2006). How to research. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Brown, J. D. (1989). Language program evaluation: A synthesis of existing possibilities. In R. K. Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 222–241). Cambridge: CUP.
Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Boston, Mass.: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Burns, R. (2000). Introduction to research methods. London: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Second ed. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dudley-Evans, T. & St John, M. J. (2000). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge: CUP.
Elley, W. B. (1989). Tailoring the evaluation to fit the context. In R. K. Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 270–285). Cambridge: CUP.
Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge: CUP.
Lynch, B. K. (1996b). Language program evaluation: Theory and practice. Cambridge: CUP.
Murphy, D. F. (1985). Evaluation in language teaching: Assessment, accountability and awareness. In J. C. Alderson (Ed.), Evaluation (pp. 1–17). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Nunan, D. (1999). Research methods in language learning. Eighth printing. Cambridge: CUP.
Parlett, M. & Hamilton, D. (1976). Evaluation as illumination: A new approach to the study of innovatory programs. In G. V. Glass (Ed.), Evaluation studies (pp. 140–157). Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Ramsay, W. & Clark, E. E. (1990). New ideas for effective school improvement: Vision, social capitol evaluation. Hampshire: The Falmer Press.
Richards, J. C. (1984). Language curriculum development. RELC Journal, 15(1), 1–14.
Richards, J.C. & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Third ed. London: Longman.
Robinson, P. C. (1991). ESP today: A practitioner’s guide. New York: Prentice Hall.
Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler, R. M. Gagne & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (pp. 39-83). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Sharp, A. (1990). Staff/Student participation in course evaluation: A procedure for improving course design. ELT Journal, 44(2), 132-137.
Slimani, A. (1996). Evaluation of classroom interaction. In J. C. Alderson & A. Beretta (Eds.), Evaluating second language education (pp. 197–220). Cambridge: CUP.
Tyler, R. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. New York: Harcourt Brace. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 30 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 27 |
||