PartⅠ Introduction
This study explores the effect of process-oriented approach, compared with the product-oriented approach, on the writing quality presented in college science and engineering majors’ English writing by examining the science and engineering majors in three different writing proficiency levels at the same grade level. Based on the data collected from the pre-testexam and the post-test exam, the study first investigated the features and the differences of writing performances, mainly focus on the numbers of specific errors emerged, in the compositions written by undergraduates of science and engineering majors after they were taught by process approach and product approach respectively in a 18-weeks’ experiment, and then discussed and concluded the implications and limitations about the process approach presented in this research. Specifically, the study addressed the following questions: (1) Can the process approach improve the English writing competence of the Chinese college science and engineering majors? (2) Can the process approach improve the English writing competence of the Chinese college science and engineering majors more effectively than the product approach? (3) To what degree the process approach affect the English writing of the Chinese college science and engineering majors? Can the process approach benefit all the good, the mediated,and the poor student writers?
本探讨研讨面向过程的措施的效果，英语毕业论文，以产品为导向的措施相比，在大学科学和工程专业的学生英语写作的写作质量，英语毕业论文，通过检查科学与工程专业在三个不同的写作能力水平在同档次水平。基于预测试考试和测试后考试从收集到的数据，该探讨首先调查的书写表演的特点和异同，主要集中出现的特定错误的数字，在科学本科生作文工程专业学习后，他们被教导的过程措施和产品的措施，分别在18周的实验，然后讨论，并得出结论的过程本探讨中提出的措施的作用和限制。具体来说，该项探讨解决以下问题：（1）过程措施可以提高中国高校科学与工程专业的英语写作能力？ （2）过程措施可以提高英语写作能力的中国大学科学和工程专业的产品的做法更有效地比吗？ （3）在何种程度上作用过程措施中国高校科学与工程专业英语写作？过程措施可以惠及所有的好，介导的，和穷学生作家？
1.1 Background of the Study
The writing, as one of the most significant research fields of the Second LanguageAcquisition, has always been the focus of researchers and scholars. And since theimplementation of the National College English Test Band Four and Band Six, the writing hasalways been the weakness. Even if the students’ general English proficiency and test scores haveimproved distinctly, their English writing competence and scores suspended. For a 15 point fullmark’s composition, the average score could be less than 9 point which is lower than thepass-mark, and this is far from the expectation in the syllabus. All these led to the awareness ofthe problem of the traditional product approach among the researchers and scholars at 1960s.Despite the power of writing as a means of communication and expression, it has tended tobe a skill that students consider painful to acquire, but why? The answer may be that in thetraditional English language teaching has been interested in “what” should be taught rather thanin “how”. Teachers have focused their attention on the content of the language programs ratherthan on the way in which this content should be taught.
Traditionally, writing and teaching classroom practicing have been concerned with the final product. The criterion of this product-oriented approach is to see if this final product is readable,grammatically correct and if it follows some discourse conventions of organization andframework. It has been thought, as Zamel states, that the product approach “focuses on usage,structure and correct forms improves writing” (1982). In class, students are taught
|
