Effects of a KWL Plus Model of Meta-Cognitive Translation Instruction and Internet-Based Language Laboratory on Non-English-Majored Undergraduates’ Translation Skills
Education Journal
Volume 6, Issue 2, March 2017, Pages: 100-105
Received: Jan. 14, 2017; Accepted: Jan. 24, 2017; Published: Mar. 28, 2017
Views 2176      Downloads 132
Author
Yougen Lou, School of Foreign Studies, Yangtze University, Jingzhou City, China
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
This paper reviewed a one-term experiment on integrating internet-based language laboratory (IBLL) in teaching translation skills with the know-want-learn (KWL) plus model to 132 first-year non-English-majored undergraduate students from Yangtze University as subjects. Subjects in this study consisted of 66 non-English-majored undergraduates in the control group (CG) and 66 non-English-majored undergraduates in the treatment group (TG). The results showed that 1) compared with a teacher-dominated approach for CG, the internet-based language laboratory with KWL plus model of meta-cognitive translation strategy instruction for TG did a better job in enhancing students’ translation skills; 2) there were significant differences between males in CG and TG, and females in CG and EG; 3) students in TG held the positive response for the combined translation teaching method.
Keywords
Non-English-Majored Undergraduates, Translation Skills, KWL Plus Model, IBLL
To cite this article
Yougen Lou, Effects of a KWL Plus Model of Meta-Cognitive Translation Instruction and Internet-Based Language Laboratory on Non-English-Majored Undergraduates’ Translation Skills, Education Journal. Vol. 6, No. 2, 2017, pp. 100-105. doi: 10.11648/j.edu.20170602.15
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Carr, E. & Ogle, D. 1987. KWL Plus: A strategy for comprehension and summarization. Journal of Reading, 30 (7), 626-631.
[2]
Ogle, D. 1986. KWL: A teaching model that develops active reading in expository text. The Reading Instructor, 39 (6), 564-570.
[3]
Bos, C. S. & Vaughn, S. 2002. Strategies for Teaching Students with Learning and Behavior Problems. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
[4]
Strangman, N. & Hall, T. 2009. Background knowledge. Retrieved July 10, 2010 from http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac//ncac_backknowledge.html
[5]
Conner, J. 2006. Advanced study of the teaching of secondary school reading. Retrieved July 10, 2010 from http://www.indiana.edu/~l517/KWL.htm.
[6]
Ogle, D. 1992. KWL in action: Secondary instructors find applications that work. In E. K. Dishner et al. (eds.), Reading in Content Areas: Improving Classroom Instruction, 453-494. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/ Hunt.
[7]
Lou. Y. G. & Xu. P. 2016. Improving Reading Performance for Non-English-Majored Undergraduate Students: Combining a Know-Want-Learn Plus Model of Meta-Cognitive Reading Strategy Instruction and Internet-Based Language Laboratory Support. Creative Education, 7 (2): 325-332.
[8]
Bryan. J. 1998. K-W-W-L: Questioning the known. The Reading Teacher, 51 (7): 618-620.
[9]
Sasson, D. 2008. Use K-W-L technique in reading lessons: Strategic thought process for engaging students before they read. Retrieved July 30, 2009 from http://newteachersupport.suite101. com/article.cfm
[10]
Bailey, D. W. 2002. KWL-plus. Unpublished manuscript, Johns Hopkins University, School of
[11]
Professional Studies in Business and Education, Baltimore.
[12]
Bader, C. 2007. KWL plus reading strategy. Retrieved May 5, 2009 from http://hercules.gcsu.edu/~cbader/5210SPED/kwl.htm
[13]
Lou. Y. G. Wu. L. S, Liu. H. L & Chen. L. Y. 2016. Improving Non-English-Majored College Students’ Writing Skills: Combining a Know-Want-Learn Plus Model of Meta-Cognitive Writing Strategy Instruction and Internet-Based Language Laboratory Support. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 4: 37-44.
[14]
Graham, S. & Harris, K. R. (2000) The Role of Self-Regulation and Transcription Skills in Writing and Writing Development. Educational Psychologist, 35, 3-12.
[15]
Zimmerman, B. J. & Risemberg, R. (1997) Becoming a Self-Regulated Writer: A Social Cognitive Perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 73-101.
[16]
Flavell, J. H. (1976) Metacognitive Aspects of Problem Solving. In: Resnick, L. B., Ed., The Nature of Intelligence, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, 231-235.
[17]
Anderson, N. J. (2002) The Role of Meta-Cognition in Second Language Teaching and Learning. ERIC Digest (Vol. April 2002), Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington DC.
[18]
Rubin, J. (2001) Language Learner Self-Management. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 11, 25-37.
[19]
Wenden, A. L. (2000) Learner Development in language learning. Applied Linguistics, 23, 32-55.
[20]
OMalley, J. M. & Chamot, A. U. (1990) Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[21]
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzares, G., Kupper, L. & Russo, R. P. (1985) Learning Strategies Used by Beginning and Intermediates ESL Students. Language Learning, 35, 21-46.
[22]
Carr, S. C. & Thompson, B. 1996. The effects of prior knowledge and schema activation strategies on the inferential reading comprehension of children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19, 48-61.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186