Comparative Study Of Classroom Language Behaviors For Pre-service And Expert Teachers In High School Mathematics Classes

With the constant deepening of the mathematics curriculum reform in our country,the curriculum concept of student-development-based has gradually accepted by more and more people.The concept is coincide with the idea that the classroom teaching should put students in the main status,let the knowledge learning process become a process of interaction between teachers and students and process of common development.As teachers' classroom teaching language behaviors guide the interaction activities between teachers and students and determine the discourse power of students in classes.Therefore,teacher's classroom language behaviors are facing enormous challenges and there are new request for the pre-service teacher training either under the requirements of student-development-based curriculum concept.But now the research about the formation of pre-service teachers' classroom language behaviors are less,so the seek of differences in classroom language behavior between pre-service mathematics teachers and expert teachers should be done so as to offer suggestions for the formation of pre-service teachers' classroom language behaviors.It is also a problem that pre-service teacher training must face and solve.The research adopts case study method and comparative research method,and it has selected three expert teachers and three pre-service teachers in the corresponding school from level one first class school,level one second class school and level one third class school in Y province as its targets to classroom observation,and has collected the data of eighteen classes from observation objects,which includes high school math concept classes,theory lectures and exercise classes.Besides the research adopts Flanders interaction analysis system(FIAS)to code and quantize teachers and students' language in these eighteen classes and be supplemented by transcripts of the classroom recording at the same time.The research has made a comparative study between expert teachers and pre-service teachers in three types of classes from four different angles,such as language structure in classes,features in raising questions or speech,teaching styles and features in emotional atmosphere.The main conclusions of the research are as follows: first,in terms of the language structure in classes,the ratio of expert teachers' language in class(46.29%-76.76%)is lower than the ratio of pre-service teachers' language(48.67%-83.58%),and the ratio of students' language in expert teachers' class(16.33% 32.08%)is higher than that in pre-service teachers'(9.90%-21.21%).It shows that students are more active in expert teachers' class,but students are less active in pre-service teachers' class,the pre-service teachers take over most of the time in class.Second,in terms of features in raising questions or speech,both the pre-service and expert teachers are good at using questions to guide students to learn,and the pre-service teachers' classroom questioning volume(6.64%-45.63%)is overall higher than that of expert teachers'(8.94%-44.94%).But the quality and skill of raising questions are weaker,the expert teachers can put forward more open-ended questions and guide students to learn.Besides,the ratio of taking the initiative to speak in class in expert teachers' class(22.75%-63.22%)is higher than that in pre-service teachers'(2.54%-36.14%),students are more able to actively express their views;Third,in the aspect of teaching styles,the indirect effect of expert teachers' class(0.26-1.15)is higher than that of pre-service teachers'(0.08-0.68),and expert teachers are better in giving positive influence on students,but the influence of pre-service teachers' class is simple;Fourth,in the aspect of emotional atmosphere,the expert teachers' classes represent more actively integrating parts of teachers and students(1%-5.16%)than that of pre-service teachers'(0-1.9%),and pre-service teachers are lack of experience in the classroom management,there is less emotional communication between teachers and students.According to the above conclusions in the comparison of pre-service teachers and expert teachers' classroom language behaviors,the research puts forward the following advice to promote classroom language interaction ability of pre-service teachers: first,the concept of students-based in class should be established,giving students opportunities and time to express their opinions and improving the classroom language structure;Second,enriching the knowledge of classroom questioning and promoting the efficiency of class speech,Third,learning psychology knowledge should be taken seriously and try to optimize classroom language,forming a teaching language style beneficial to students' growth;Fourth,being good at communicating with students,establishing a good relationship between teachers and students,improving the class emotional atmosphere.In addition,for the pre-service teacher training,schools can begin with curriculum setting and teaching methods so as to cultivate pre-service teachers' ability in classroom language behaviors.The innovation of the research lies in: for the first time it has done a comparative study in pre-service teachers and expert teachers' classroom language behaviors,the topic of this research is new;the research has made comparative studies in pre-service teachers and expert teachers' classroom language behaviors from different types of classes,such as concept,theory and exercise class,adopting Flanders interaction analysis tools and being supplemented by teachers and students' classroom language dynamic characteristic curve and the teaching recording to help analyze the features of language behaviors between teachers and students in class,all of these will make the research' conclusion more reliable;the research offers suggestions for pre-service teacher training from the comparative angle between pre-service teachers and expert teachers;the conclusion of the research is new.The shortcoming of this research lies in: the data collection of the samples is restricted.Although the research has considered students' situation as far as possible,but it may also have the possibility that the collected data has some specificity;the analysis of the data is tough,it has tried to be objective,but it may be not comprehensive.