重生之血眸问鼎,泉州公交查询,马蜂窝三国杀
The two responses (名字为2和3的pdf）to the Lasagabaster and Sierra reading （名字为1的pdf） give very different kinds of feedback. Why do you think the feedback is so different?
Somers和Surmont（2012），Ting（2011）对Lasagabaster和Sierra（2010）的研究给出了非常不同的反馈，其原因可能在于以下三个方面。
首先，他们有不同的研究目标。 Somers和Surmont（2012）主要讨论了CLIL方法和浸入式方法在世界上的应用。虽然Ting（2011）主要探讨了CLIL方法在科学领域的应用，因此他基于确认Somers和Surmont（2012）所分析的内容，进一步指出CLIL方法应该具有以下特征：它应该以学习者为中心，内容驱动，识字导向。
其次，两者有不同的研究对象。 Somers和Surmont（2012）吸收了来自西班牙巴斯克地区的学生，加拿大法语区的学生，以及在比利时使用德语和法语的学生，在荷兰使用弗里斯兰语的学生等作为研究对象。 Ting（2011）将接受英语科学教育的意大利和非洲学生作为研究对象。
最后，两者的时间维度是不同的。 Somers和Surmont（2012）的研究涉及语言教育的初级和高级阶段。然而，丁（2011）主要关注科学教育的教学方法问题。
pdf1
Somers and Surmont (2012), Ting (2011) gave very different kinds of feedback to Lasagabaster and Sierra’s (2010) research, the reasons for this may lie in the following three aspects.
First, they have different research aims. Somers and Surmont (2012) mainly discussed the application of CLIL approach and immersion approach in the world. Though Ting (2011) mainly explored the application of CLIL approach in the scientific area, thus he was based on confirming what Somers and Surmont (2012) analyzed to further point out that CLIL approach should have the following characteristics: it should be learner centred, content driven, and literacy directed.
Second, the two have different research objects. Somers and Surmont (2012) took students from the Basque region of Spain, students in the French-speaking region of Canada, as well as students using German and French in Belgium, students using Frisian in the Netherlands, etc., as research objects. Ting (2011) took Italian and African students who received English science education as the research objects.
Finally, the time dimensions of the two are different. Somers and Surmont’s (2012) research involved the primary and advanced stages of language education. However, Ting (2011) mainly focused on the issue of teaching methods of science education.
|
