梁平

【Abstract】Language itself is dynamic， so is language learning. And college English teaching should be a process of interaction. In this essay， a survey has been done to launch a probe into the interaction in college English teaching， the problems existed and the reasons behind.

【Key words】survey； interaction； college English teaching

1. Two Questionnaires

Interaction can be seen as a dynamic process in which different factors interact with each other. In practice， college English teaching lacks interaction. But language itself is dynamic， so is language learning. Therefore， foreign language teaching and learning should be conducted through an interactive process.

In order to find out the current situation in this aspect in college English teaching， a survey was conducted among non-English majors and graduates.

Questionnaire 1

1. In class， the teacher speaks English ______.

A. more Chinese than English

B. more English than Chinese

2. You have ______ chances to learn English or American cultures in English class.

A. many B. not many C. few

3. In class， you learn English mainly from ______.

A. practicing it B. listening to the teacher

4. When explaining difficult problems， the teacher often ______.

A. tries to make it easy by using simple examples

B. just explain the knowledge itself

5. Objectively speaking， the most serious problem of your English is that you are ______.

A. good at written English and grammar exams， but not good at oral communication

B. good at oral communication， but not good at Written English or grammar exams

C. good at neither written English or grammar exams nor oral communication

6. In your English class， will you ask the teacher questions initiatively？

A. often B. sometimes C. seldom

7. There is ______ communication between the students and the teacher in your class.

A. much B. occasional C. little D. enough

8. Is there any contact between you and the teacher off class？

A. much B. occasionally C. seldom

9. Do you wish to have more communication with your English teacher？

A. Yes. B. No.

10. In class， the teacher ______ offer you chances to do group work with your classmates.

A. often B. sometimes C. seldom

11. In your English study， there is ______ interaction between you and your classmates.

A. much B. not much C. occasional D. little

12. Do you think interaction with other students is very helpful to the improvement of English？

A. Yes. B. Theres not much help. C. No.

Questionnaire 2

1. Do you often need to use English in your current job？

A. Often B. Sometimes. C. Seldom

2. ______ time was spent in English study when your are in college.

A. Most （more than a half of the overall study time）

B. Much （more than a quarter of the overall study time）

C. Not much

D. A little

3. The English you learned in college is of ______ use for your current job.

A. much B. some C. little D. no

4. Now do you still think it is necessary to improve your English？

A. Yes. B. Not much. D. No.

5. Have you ever taken any English training class after graduation from college？

A. Yes. B. No.

In the survey， there are altogether two questionnaires. The first one is made among 100 non-English-majors undergraduates. The second one is made among 50 graduates who have graduated from college in the last five years with CET-4 or CET-6 certificates. Moreover， for most of them， their current work is closely related to their major in college.

In questionnaire one， there are altogether 12 questions. Q1 is about the language used in college English class. Q2 is about the interaction between culture and language. Q3 concerns the interaction between language learning and using. Q4 is concerned with the interaction of new knowledge and the students existing knowledge. Q5 is about the students mastery of different language skills. Qs6-9 are concerned with the interaction of teacher and students. Qs10-12 are about the interaction among students.

In questionnaire two， the five questions are all relate to the practical use of college English in the graduates current work.

2. Results and Analysis

2.1 Results

In questionnaire one， for Q1， 76% of the students show that their teachers speak more Chinese than English in class. For Q2， 56% think there are not many chances to learn English or American cultures in English class， and 16% think the chances are few. For Q3， most of the students （97%） learn English mainly from listening to the teacher. The answers （93%） of Q4 indicate that when explaining difficult problems， most teachers just explain the knowledge itself， few of them would try to make it easier for the students to understand. The result of Q5 is interesting： 41% of them think they are good at written English and grammar exams， but not good at oral communication， 32% of them are good at oral communication， but not good at written English and grammar exams， another 27% think they are not good at either of the abilities. The results of Q6 show that just a small number of students （28%） would ask questions in class. For Q7， a majority of them （84%） think the communication with their teachers in the class is just occasional. As to the contact with teachers off class （Q8）， most （86%） of the students think there is little communication. And most of them （96%） wish to have more communication with their English teachers （Q9）. For Q10， 77% of them admit they are seldom provided with chances to do group work with other classmates， and 81% think there is little interaction among students in class （Q11）. But most of the students （86%） agree that the interaction with classmates will be very helpful to improve their English （Q12）.

In questionnaire two， most of the graduates （80%） often use English in their work （Q1）. For a majority of them （74%）， much time （more than a quarter of the overall study time） was spent on English study when they were in college （Q2）. However， shockingly enough， 59% of them think the English learned in college is of little use to their current jobs （Q3）. The results of Q4 and Q5 show that now most of them （83%） still think it is very necessary to improve their English， and many of them （42%） have taken English training classes.

The results of the two questionnaires reflect some problems of the current college English teaching. We can see that there are distinctive problems in the interaction between the English learned in college and what the students need for their jobs， as well as the interaction between the teacher and students， and the interaction among students. In addition， attention has not been paid to the interaction between new knowledge and students old knowledge. The interaction between language and culture is still not adequate. And the students mastery of different language abilities is not even.

2.2 Analysis of the Reasons

As what can be seen from the results above， there are serious problems in college English teaching. So it is necessary to find out the causes of such problems. Actually， the reasons can be explored from several perspectives： the content design of college English textbooks， the teaching methods adopted， and teaching management.

2.2.1 Problem of the Content Design of College English

According to the Syllabus of College English Teaching （Revised Edition）， college English teaching should be conducted in two stages： the fundamental stage （the first two years）， and the enhancing and practical stage （the last two years）. Whats more， it is stated that at the second stage， SBE （Subject-Based English） should be taught. However， most colleges just focus their English teaching on general English. According to a survey made by Zhang Ling and Hu Jinhuan of Henan University， 58% of the current colleges have not implemented SBE teaching， and English courses are mainly about general English teaching.

However， it is also the fact that English courses in middle schools and primary schools also focus on a general introduction of grammar and structure of English. That is why the English courses at these two stages are called “basic English”. Whats more， since much of the basic structures and grammar points have been introduced in high school English， English courses in college and high school in fact overlap a lot. But the present college English is still mainly about the study of the language itself， which leads to an interesting situation： the students have kept learning basic English from primary school to college. To make the problem worse， almost all the way， their study is exam-oriented. Therefore， to most students， English is merely a school subject used for passing examinations， not a tool for real communication Thus， the role of English has been lowered from a useful tool for ones whole life to a ladder for better achievement in exams. So when they graduate from college and start work， they find their English still poor. Though have passed CET-4 or CET-6 tests， but they still cannot use the language to discuss technical problems with foreign colleges or do presentations.

There are many reasons accounting for such a situation of SBE in our country. A major one is the lack of professional personnel who are proficient in both English and other fields. Now， although many specialists are advocating its development， it does require time and effort to achieve an overall improvement of the SBE teaching.

2.2.2 Problems in Teaching Methods

In addition to content design， there is also something to be criticized in college English teaching methods. Generally speaking， there are three problems.

（1） A traditional teaching method is still adopted. Now， in college English classes， many teachers still follow such a simple procedure as what was adopted many years ago： reviewing the knowledge studied in the last class， teaching the new words and language point， and checking the answers to exercises. Almost all the time， the teacher is the controller of the class and the only speaker， while the students are just listening to him passively. In general， there are several reasons to explain such a problem. First， it is the influence of Chinas traditional ideas. In Chinas traditional culture， the teacher is the center and controller of the class， with absolute power， while the students are just expected to obey whatever the teacher tells them. Therefore， the students needs are not considered. Until now， such ideas still have influence on college English teaching. On one hand， some teachers still regard teaching as a job of passing on knowledge and answering their questions. On the other hand， in the eyes of some students， learning is just listening to the teacher in class. They have got used to accepting what the teacher has said. Second， the examination of CET-4 or CET-6 can partly account for the teacher-centered and grammar-centered method. In many universities， a high passing rate of the two examinations is regarded as the goal of college English teaching. So the teachers have to use a examination-oriented teaching method， force-feed the students with language points and exercises， and sacrificed the time for the training of language competence. The result is that many English classes have become dull， which leads to the students antipathy to English study.

（2） Communicative Approach has not been correctly understood or implemented In CET classes， some teachers are trying to use Communicative Approach， but it has been misinterpreted to some extent. In general， there are two misunderstandings， which has led to improper implementation of it：

1） Communication is the goal， so grammar is not emphasized. I think this kind of opinion may come from the communicative and cognitive principle： mistakes are allowed. It is true that Communicative Approach does not emphasize language accuracy as strictly as what G-T Method does， but that does not mean accuracy is not important. As what has been mentioned above， the lack of accuracy is easy to lead to misunderstandings or puzzles in communication. Actually， Communicative Approach stresses much on grammar. When Hymes （1972） put forward the concept of “communicative competence”， he also said it is based on linguistic competence. Canale and Swain （1983）， later developed communicative competence into four aspects： grammatical competence， sociolinguistic competence， discourse competence， and strategic competence. Other specialists such as Littlewood and Widdowson did not neglect the role of grammar either. The three principles—grammatical principle， communicative principle， and cultural principle are always advocated by Communicative Approach. The difference is that it insists that grammar should be learned through the use of language. However， at present， some teachers and students have overemphasized the last two principles and overlooked the grammatical principle. Especially some teachers who think that as long as the students can express themselves， grammatical mistakes can be neglected. So in most cases， they just skip the mistakes instead of reminding the students to correct them. There are also some teachers who simply interpret Communicative Approach as playing games， role play， or free talk， and neglect grammar study. As a result， there are some students whose English is pretty “fluent”， but hard to understand.

2） Speaking is the goal， reading and writing are not emphasized. It is true that the syllabus lays much stress on the development of students listening and speaking skills， but this has been put forward as a way to avoid the influence of G-T Method， which is just the emphasis on the practical use of English. We cannot simply interpret it as that speaking and listening skills are more important than reading and writing skills. Twenty years ago， when Communicative Approach was introduced into China， most learners were poor in oral and listening abilities. Since the new approach emphasizes communicative competence， it soon became a solution of the so called “mute English”. But now， a lot of people regard communicative competence as “oral ability”. Some teachers or policy makers also have such misunderstandings. They believe the most important thing is to let the students speak. So in many schools， English listening and speaking are paid much attention to， while reading and writing are ignored. However， such an idea has never been found in the principles of Communicative Approach. On the contrary， it advocates that the four kinds of skills should be improved simultaneously. Whats more， communicative competence is the reflection of a comprehensive quality， which should not be superficially equaled to oral ability. In 2003， “the conference on reform of college English teaching” was held in Nanjing. In the conference， the specialists of English teaching shared the common understanding that reading is an important way to learn a foreign language. In language learning， the four types of skills are closely connected with each other， and good reading and writing ability is the foundation of oral skill as well as an indication of good education. Moreover， to most of the college students， their main purpose of learning English is not to chat with foreigners， but to get more information for their major study. And writing is also an inevitable approach to communication. If the students still cannot write an English report when they start to work after graduation， it will be a big failure of college English teaching.

（3） Cognitive Approach has not been promoted in college English teaching. Although a lot of articles on Cognitive Approach have been published to demonstrate its advantages， little has been done to promote it in real teaching. In a large degree， Cognitive Approach has combined most of the advantages of the previous teaching approaches， and is considered as the most promising one at present. But since it has just gained popularity， the study of it has just started， and a lot of problems need further exploration in its application. In recent years， as cognitive theories are attracting increasing attention， Cognitive Approach has also become popular in the area of foreign language teaching. But most people just discuss it， and few of them implement it in practice. The reason may lie in the fact that it is a more complicated approach and so requires the teachers to make much further analysis of both the language and the students psychology.

2.2.3 Problems of the Management of Teaching

At last， the problems of teaching management cannot be ignored. Although they do not have direct connections with teaching itself， they can seriously affect teaching.

（1） The size of English classes is too large. Sufficient student-teacher interaction and student-student interaction require a small class. But owing to the rapidly increasing number of college students， there are usually more than 50 students in a college English class. In that case， it is very hard for teachers to pay enough attention to every student， to say nothing of talking to them one by one. The students also have little chance to speak in class. On the other hand， even if the students are active， since there are so many of them， the class will still be hard to control.

（2） There are two obvious problems in college English curriculum design. Firstly， students do not have enough English classes each term. In many colleges， there are only three English classes for each student in a week. As we just mentioned， there are also too many students in one class. So the average class time that each student has for English study is rather limited. Secondly， three classes are usually put together in the curriculum schedule. As a result， students can only concentrate on the first two classes and get tried in the last one.

（3） There are not enough qualified textbooks for college English. Although lots of textbooks are published， not many of them are creative enough in promoting teaching efficiency. Instead， some of them are just compiled by following the old model： from texts to exercises， which is a typical reflection of grammar-centered and teacher-centered teaching approach. Whats more， in order to cut down expenses， some textbooks are just compiled within a very short time， which may lead to poor quality of the textbooks.

3. Conclusion

From the results of the second questionnaire， we can see the English that students learned in college has not played an effective role in their future work. Many graduates still have to attend English training classes after graduation. It is obvious that the major cause of this problem is the divorce between college English teaching and the students needs. For SBE， since it still has a lot of problems in its implementation， further exploration of its teaching is expected. And it is also my wish that its current problems will be solved soon. Here， Id like to suggest that college English courses should take into consideration the students major study from the very beginning （here is called major-related English）， by which to promote the interaction of language learning in class room and its using in real communication.

Major-related English knowledge can be increased with the process of teaching. For example， in the first two semesters， the teacher can just introduce some vocabulary related to the students major study， and some simple structures in which such words are often used. Later， with the growth of the students major knowledge， more complicated content can be added. Whats more， some class activities such as simulations or role plays may be adopted to practice their use.

It must be indicated that the main content of study here is not the English language itself， nor the study of major knowledge through English， but the English courses in which the usages of some basic major knowledge （mainly basic and frequently used vocabulary and structures） are involved. So the teachers do not need to know much of the major knowledge. Usually， a short-term training will make them become competent for the job.

In such a way， the students will get familiar with the practical use of their major knowledge in English through college English study， by which the interaction of English learning and its practical using in their future work is thus promoted.

References：

[1]Brown，H.D.Principles of Language Learning and Teaching[M].Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2002.

[2]Jack C.Richards & Theodore S.Rodgers.Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching[M].Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.2000.

[3]王寅.认知语言学[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社.2007.

[4]左焕琪.外语教育展望[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社.2002.