【网学提醒】：本文主要为网上学习者提供建构主义理论在职业学院英语口语课堂教学中的应用，希望对需要建构主义理论在职业学院英语口语课堂教学中的应用网友有所帮助，学习一下吧!
资料包括： 论文(142页44463字)
说明：摘要：本研究是把建构主义理论应用到职业学院英语口语课堂教学中的实证研究， 旨在尝试为职业学院英语口语教学寻求新的有效方法。本研究在文献综述的基础上提出了以建构主义理论为基础的大学英语口语课堂教学的框架。然后，选取了两组学生作为被试对象，进行了为期一个学期的实验。实验组采用建构主义英语口语课堂教学而控制组则用传统的口语教学，并对两组分别进行了口语能力的前测和后测。实验后，独立样本T 检验和配对样本T检验（P<0.05）分别表明一学期后实验组学生英语口语成绩明显高于控制组，并且与学期初相比有明显进步，但控制组学生的口语水平却没有显著提高。本研究结合问卷调查、课堂实录和采访等形式，经过讨论最后得出如下结论：建构主义英语口语课堂教学能够提高职业学院学生学习英语的兴趣和信心，并有利于学生的课堂交流互动和协作，进而促进学生的批判性思维、创造性思维、意义建构和语言产出能力的发展。
关键词：建构主义理论；英语口语课堂教学；意义建构；互动协作；批判性思维
Abstract ：The present research is an empirical study of the application of constructivist theory in vocational college oral English classroom teaching in an attempt to explore a new oral English teaching method for vocational college. The researcher proposed a constructivist-based college oral English classroom teaching framework based on the literature review. Then, a semester-long empirical experiment was conducted in two groups, one of which served as the experimental group where the constructivist-based oral English classroom teaching was put into practice, and another of which served as the control group that was instructed with the traditional teaching method.
The pre-test and post-test on oral English proficiency were employed in both groups. The results of independent and paired-samples T-test (p<0.05) respectively revealed that after one semester’s oral English classroom teaching, the experimental group students’ oral English not only significantly exceeded that of the control group but also made their own significant progress compared with the beginning of the semester. However, the control group did not make much progress. Then a discussion is made based on the statistical data derived from the experiment and the data collected from questionnaires, classroom observations and interviews. Finally a conclusion is drawn: constructivist-based oral English classroom teaching can promote vocational college students’ interest and confidence in English learning and is supportive for students’ communicative interaction and collaboration, thereby facilitating critical thinking, creative thinking, meaning construction and language production.
Key words: Constructivist theory; oral English classroom teaching; meaning construction; interactive collaboration; critical thinking
Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Rationales for the present research
Vocational college education, as an important component of higher education, is more and more popular. Particularly, the vocational college English teaching has enjoyed its flourish in recent years since the college-level practical English talents are badly needed with the rapid development of China. In order to standardize the HVTE (Higher Vocational-technical Education) English teaching all over China, the Ministry of Education issued the Basic Requirements for HVTE English Course in 2000. According to this Basic Requirements, HVTE English Course aims to develop in students the practical use of English as the Requirements state:
Language is a tool for communication; the ultimate goal of language teaching is to develop students’ ability to communicate in the language through both speaking and writing. [the researcher’s translation]
(Ministry of Education, 2000: Basic Requirements)
目录：Abstract in ChineseI
AbstractII
Table of ContentsIII
List of Figures and TablesV
Chapter One Introduction1
1.1 Rationales for the present research1
1.2 Aims of the present research5
1.3 Methodology of the present research6
1.4 Organization of the thesis6
Chapter Two Literature Review7
2.1 Constructivism7
2.1.1 Interpretation of Constructivism7
2.1.2 Philosophical basis of Constructivism8
2.1.3 Psychological basis of Constructivism12
2.2 Constructivist perspectives on theory of TEFL16
2.2.1 Criticisms of Behaviourism16
2.2.2 Development of Cognitive theory17
2.2.3 Role of Input and Output20
2.2.4 Coherence with Interactionists Position21
2.3 Relevant studies on application of Constructivism23
Chapter Three A Proposed Constructivist Framework of TEFL27
3.1 Guiding principles from Constructivism for TEFL27
3.1.1 Constructivist views on learners27
3.1.2 Constructivist views on teachers28
3.1.3 Constructivist views on tasks32
3.1.4 Constructivist views on contexts35
3.2 A design of the Proposed Framework of TEFL38
3.3 A sample lesson45
Chapter Four Empirical Study of the Proposed Framework49
4.1 Research design49
4.1.1 Participants49
4.1.2 Instruments49
4.1.3 Data collection52
4.2 Findings55
4.2.1 Spoken English tests55
4.2.2 Questionnaires61
4.2.3 Classroom observations69
4.2.4 Interviews72
Chapter Five Discussion74
5.1 Students’ interest and confidence74
5.2 Students’ real classroom participation77
5.3 Learner’s critical, creative thinking and interlanguage development81
5.4 Learner’s meaning construction and language production86
5.5 Students’ oral English achievement89
Chapter Six Conclusion and Implications92
6.1 Major findings of the research92
6.2 Major contributions of the research98
6.3 Limitations and further studies100
Acknowledgements102
Appendices103
Appendix I Spoken English tests103
Appendix II Questionnaires for vocational college students108
Appendix III Rating scale of the CET-SET111
Appendix IV Data of students’ spoken English tests113
Appendix V Data of the questionnaires119
Bibliography121
Publications130
List of Figures and Tables
Figure 2. 1 Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs (1968,1970)10
Figure 2. 2 A general model of information processing (Carroll, 2000 p. 47)18
Figure 3. 1 Theme-centered interaction (Legutke & Thomas, 1991)35
Figure 3. 2 A social constructivist model of the teaching-learning process38
Figure 3. 3 A developed constructivist model of teaching39
Figure 3. 4 A proposed framework of constructivist-based oral English classroom teaching40
Table 4. 1 Independent T-test of scores in oral English proficiency pre-test (global scores)55
Table 4. 2 Independent T-test of scores in oral English proficiency post-test (global scores)56
Table 4. 3 Paired-samples T-test of scores in oral English proficiency pre- and post- tests (global scores)56
Table 4. 4 Independent T-test of scores in oral English proficiency pre-test (Accuracy & Range)57
Table 4. 5 Independent T-test of scores in oral English proficiency post-test (Accuracy & Range)57
Table 4. 6 Paired-samples T-test of scores in oral English proficiency pre- and post- tests (Accuracy & Range)57
Table 4. 7 Independent T-test of scores in oral English proficiency pre-test (Size and Discourse)58
Table 4. 8 Independent T-test of scores in oral English proficiency post-test (Size and Discourse)58
Table 4. 9 Paired-samples T-test of scores in oral English proficiency pre- and post- tests (Size and Discourse)59
Table 4. 10 Independent T-test of scores in oral proficiency pre-test (Flexibility & Appropriacy)59
Table 4. 11 Independent T-test of scores in oral proficiency post-test (Flexibility & Appropriacy)60
Table 4. 12 Paired-samples T-test of scores in oral English proficiency pre- and post- tests (Flexibility & Appropriacy)60
Table 4. 13 Results from the pre-questionnaire61
Table 4. 14 Students’ perspectives on their current conditions in oral English (Q1-Q6)62
Table 4. 15 Students’ perspectives on their participation (involvement) in oral English classroom teaching class (Q7-Q14)64
Table 4. 16 Students’ perspectives on their participation (involvement) in oral English classroom teaching class (Q15-Q23)64
Table 4. 17 Students’ perspectives on their participation (involvement) in oral English classroom teaching class (Q24-Q34)65
Table 4. 18 Students’ perspectives on the effect of current oral English classroom teaching (Q35-Q36)66
Table 4. 19 Students’ perspectives on the effect of current oral English classroom teaching (Q37-Q39)67
Table 4. 20 Students’ perspectives on the effect of current oral English classroom teaching (Q40-Q42)67
Table 4. 21 Students’ perspectives on the effect of current oral English classroom teaching (Q43-Q46)68
Table 4. 22 Students’ perspectives on the effect of current oral English classroom teaching (Q47-Q49)69
参考文献：Allwright, R. 2002. “Language learning through communication practice”. In C. J. Brumfit, & K. Johnson (eds.), The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching (167-182). Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Anderson, 1997. Schema Theory. [on-line] Available: http:// web.syr.edu/~jlbirkla/kb/c_ theory.html.
Andre, T. 1997. “Selected microinstructional methods to facilitate knowledge construction: implications for instructional design”. In R. D. Tennyson, F. Schott, N. Seel, & S. Dijkstra (eds.), Instructional Design: International Perspective: Theory, Research, and Models (243-267). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ausubel, D. P. 1960. “The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material”. In David P. Ausubel (eds.), Readings in School Learning (99-107). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.
Ausubel, D. P. 1968. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Ausubel, D. P., J. D. Novak, & H. Hanesian 1978. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Beatty, K. & D. Nunan 2004. “Computer-mediated collaborative learning”. System 32, 165-183.
Benson, P. and P. Volley 1997. Atonomy and Independence in Language Learning. London: Longman.
Breen, M. P. & A. Littlejohn (eds.) 2002. Classroom Decision-Making. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Cambridge University Press.
Brookfield, S. D. 1987. Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Explore Alternative Ways of Thinking and Acting. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brooks, M. & J. Brooks 1995. In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Brophy, J. (eds.) 2002. Advances in Research on Teaching: Social Constructivist Teaching. New York: Elsevier Science.
Brown, H. D. 2001a. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Pearson Education Limited.
Brown, H. D. 2001b. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to English Pedagogy. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Pearson Education Limited.
Candlin, C. 1987. “Towards task-based language learning”. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (eds.), Language Learning Tasks (5-22). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Carroll, D. W. 2000. Psychology of Language (3rd ed.). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Chermack, T. J. & L. van der Merwe 2003. “The role of constructivist learning in scenario planning”. Futures 35, 445-460.
Chuang, S. C. & C. C. Tsai 2005. “Preferences toward the constructivist internet-based learning environments among high school students in Taiwan”. Computers in Human Behavior 21, 255-272.
Clark, R. E. & S. B. Blake 1997. “Designing training for novel problem-solving transfer”. In R. D. Tennyson, F. Schott, N. Seel, & S. Dijkstra (eds.), Instructional Design: International Perspective: Theory, Research, and Models (183-214). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cooper, P. A. 1993. “Paradigm shifts in designed instruction: from behaviorism to cognitivism to constructivism”. Educational Technology 33 (2), 12-19.
Cunningsworth, A. 2002. Choosing Your Coursebook. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Macmillan Heinemann.
Dantas-Whitney, M. 2002. “Critical reflection in the second language classroom through audiotaped journals”. System 30, 543-555.
Davies, P. & E. Pearse 2002. Success in English Teaching. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
De Jager, B., G. J. Reezigt, & B. P. M. Creemers 2002. “The effects of teacher training on new instructional behaviour in reading comprehension”. Teaching and Teacher Education 18, 831-842.
Dewey, J. 1938. Experience and Education. New York: MacMillan.
Dubin, F. & E. Olshtain 2002. Course Design. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. 1999. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Ericksen, S. 1984. The Essence of Good Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Erikson, E. H. 1963. Childhood and Society. New York: Norton.
Eskey, D. 1997. “Syllabus design in content-based instruction”. In M. A. Snow & D. M. Brinton (eds.), The Content-based Classroom: Perspectives on Integrating Language and Content (132-141). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Fosnot, C. T. 1996. Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Freeman, D. L. & J. C. Richards 2002. Teacher Learning in Language Teaching. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, D. L. & M. H. Long 2000. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Pearson Education Limited.
Gagnon, G. W. & M. Collay 2000. Constructivist Learning Design. [on-line]. Available:http://www.prainbow.com/cld/cldp.html
Gardner, D. & L. Miller 2002. Establishing Self-Access From Theory to Practice. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Cambridge University Press.
Ginsburg, H. & S. Opper 1979. Piaget’s Theory of Intellectual Development (2nd ed). Englewoo Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Hedge, T. 2002. Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Henson, K. T. & B. F. Eller 2005. Educational Psychology for Effective Teaching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Thomson Learning.
Hogan, K. & M. Pressley 1997. “Becoming a scaffolder of student learning for human beings”. Teachers College Record 95, Winter 93 (2), 211-222.
Holt-Reynolds, D. 2000. “What does the teacher do? Constructivist pedagogies and prospective teachers’ beliefs about the role of a teacher”. Teaching and Teacher Education 16, 21-32
Hughes, R. 2005. Teaching and Researching Speaking. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Pearson Education Limited.
Johnson, K. & H. Johnson 2001. Encylopedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics: A Handbook for Language Teaching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Johnson, K. 2002. An Introduction to Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Pearson Education Limited.
Jonassen, D. H. 1990. “Thinking technology: toward a constructivist view of instructional design”. Educational Technology 30 (9), 32-34.
Jonassen, D. H. 1991. “Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm”? Educational Technology Research and Development 39 (3), 5-14.
Kant, L. 1787. Critique of Pure Reason.[on-line] Available: http://www.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/ philosophy/kant/cpr.
Kramsch, C. 1999. Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Krashen, S. D. 1985. The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. Harlow: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. 2002. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. California: Pergamon Press Inc.
Legutke, M. R. & H. Thomas 1991. Process and Experience in the Language Classroom. Harlow: Longman.
Lightbown, P. M. & N. Spada 2002. How Languages are Learned. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Littlewood, W. 2000a. Communicative Language Teaching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Cambridge University Press.
Littlewood, W. 2000b. Foreign and Second Language Learning. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Cambridge University Press.
Long, M. H. 1985. “A role for instruction in second language acquisition: task-based language training”. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (eds.), Modelling and Assessing Second Language Acquisition (77-100). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Maslow, A. H. 1968. Toward a Psychology of Being (2nd ed.). New York: Van Nostrand.
Maslow, A. H. 1970. Motivation and Personality (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
Matthews, M. R. 1994. Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science. New York: Routledge.
Meighan, R. & J. Meighan 1990. “Alternative roles for learners with particular reference to learners as democratic explorers in teacher education courses”. The School Field 1 (1), 61-77
Mitchell, R. & F. Myles 2002. Second Language Learning Theories. London: Arnold, a member of the Hodder Headline Group.
Nobuyoshi, J. & R. Ellis 1993. “Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition”. ELT Journal 47, 203-210.
Nunan, D. 1989. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. 1993. “Task-based Syllabus Design: selecting, grading and sequencing tasks”. In G. Crookes & S. M. Gass (eds.), Tasks in a Pedagogical Context (55-68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Nunan, D. 2001. Second Language Teaching and Learning. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Thomson Learning.
Ormrod, 2004. Schema Theory. [on-line] Available: http://web.syr.edu/~jlbirkla/kb /c_theory.html
Pear, J. J. & D. E. Crone-Todd 2002. “A social constructivist approach to computer-mediated instruction”. Computers & Education 38, 221-231.
Piaget, J. & B. Inhelder 1969. The Psychology of the Child. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget, J. 1970. Structuralism. New York: Basic Books.
Posner, G. J., K. A. Strike, P. W. Hewson, & W. A. Gertzog 1982. “Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change”. Science Education 66, 211-227.
Prabhu, N.S. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Preskill, H., B. Zuckerman, & A. D. Matthews 2003. “An exploratory study of process use: findings and implications for future research”. American Journal of Evaluation 24(4), 423-442.
Richards, J. C. 2002. The Language Teaching Matrix. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., P. John & P. Heidi 2002. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. & Longman.
Rivers, W. M. (eds.) 1983. Communication Naturally in a Second Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rogers, C. R. 1969. Freedom to Learn. Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill.
Rovai, A. P. 2004. “A constructivist approach to online college learning”. Internet and Higher Education 7, 79-93.
Safra, J. E., et al. 2002. Encyclopedia Britannica 2002. London: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc.
Salmon, P. 1988. Psychology for Teachers: an Alternative Approach. London: Hutchinson
Schunk, D. H. 2000. Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Scrivener, J. 2002. Learning Teaching: A Guidebook for English Language Teachers. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Macmillan Heinemann.
Shultz, T. & D. Mareschal 1997. “Rethinking innateness, learning, and constructivism: connectionist perspectives on development”. Cognitive Development 12, 563-586.
Skehan, P. 1999. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Skehan, P. 2002. “Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction”. In J. Willis & D. Willis (eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (17-30). Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Macmillan Heinemann English Language Teaching.
Spolsky, B. 2000. Conditions for Second Language Learning. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Stein, N. L. & T. Trabasso 1982. “Children’s understanding of stories: A basis for moral judgment and dilemma resolution”. In C. J. Brainerd & M. Pressley (eds.), Verbal Processes in Children: Progress in Cognitive Development Research (161-188). New York: Springer-Verlag. [on-line] Available: http://www.indiana.edu/~p540alex/ unit4.html
Swain, M. & S. Lapkin 1995. “Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: a step towards second language learning”. Applied Linguistics 16, 371 -391.
Swain, M. 1985. “Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development”. In S. Gass & C. Madden (eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition (235-256). New York: Newbury House.
Swain, M. 1995. “Three functions of output in second language learning” .In G. Cook & B. Seidelhofer (eds.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honor of H. G. Widdowson (125 -144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tarone, E. & G. Yule 2000. Focus on the Language Learner. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Tenenbaum, G., S. Naidu, O. Jegede, & J. Austin 2001. “Constructivist pedagogy in conventional on campus and distance learning practice: an exploratory investigation”. Learning and Instruction 11, 87-111.
Torney-Purta, J. 1991. “Schema theory and cognitive psychology: Implications for social studies”. Theory and Research in Social Education 19 (2), 189-210.
Tynjala, P. 1999. “Towards expert knowledge? A comparison between a constructivist and a traditional learning environment in the university”. International Journal of Educational Research 31, 357-442.
Valcke, M. 2002. “Cognitive load: updating the theory?” Learning and Instruction 12, 147-154.
von Glasersfeld, E. 1995. Radical Constructivism. London: Falmer.
von Glasersfeld, E. 1998. Radical Constructivist and Teaching. [on-line] Available:http:// www.umass.edu/ srri/von Glasersfeld/onlinePaper/htm/Geneva
Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. 1999. Teaching Language as Communication. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Oxford University Press.
Williams, M. & R. L. Burden 2000. Psychology for Language Teachers: a Social Constructivist Approach. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Cambridge University Press.
Willis, J. & D. Willis (eds.) 2002. Challenge and Change in Language Teaching. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press & Macmillan Heinemann English Language Teaching.
Willis, J. 1996. A Framework for Task-based Learning. London: Longman.
Wilson, B. G. (eds.) 1996. Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Wubbels, T. 1992. “Taking account of student teachers’ preconceptions”. Teaching and Teacher Education 8, 137-149.
Yakimovicz, A. D. & K. L. Murphy 1995. “Constructivism and collaboration on the internet: case study of a graduate class”. Computer & Education 24(3), 203-209.
Young, R. A. & A. Collin 2004. “Introduction: Constructivism and Social Constructionism in the career field”. Journal of Vocational Behavior 64, 373-388.
陈莉, 2003, 社会建构主义与外语教学, 《四川外语学院学报》, 第6期， 143-145页。
陈舜孟、楼敏盛、Trish, 2002, 对高职高专学生英语口语教学的思考, 《金华职业技术学院学报》, 第4期, 113-115页。
成晓光, 2005, 社会建构主义的语言哲学基础, 《外 语 与 外 语 教 学》, 第1期， 3-8页。
程煜， 2005， 高职学校学生英语口语现状分析及对策, 《江西青年职业学院学报》,第4期， 64-65页。
崔景贵， 2003, 建构主义教育观述评, 《当代教育科学》, 第1期， 9-11页。
董卫、付黎旭， 2004， 对建构主义指导下的大学英语多媒体网络课堂的调查， 《外语界》， 第 2 期， 8-13页。
范琳、张其云， 2003， 建构主义教学理论与英语教学改革的契合， 《外语与外语教学》， 第4期， 28-32页。
何冰艳， 2004， 从建构主义角度审视大学英语教学， 《天津外国语学院学报》 第6期，68-72页。
贾磊, 2004， 用建构主义理论指导报刊选读课教学， 《山东外语教学》， 第 3 期，23-25页。
教育部高等教育司， 2000， 《高职高专教育英语课程教学基本要求》(试行)， 北京: 高等教育出版社。
李光梅， 2002， 建构主义理论在多媒体综合英语教学中的运用， 《四川外语学院学报》， 第3期，159-160页。
李雁， 2005， 高职英语教学中口语交际能力的培养， 《陕西省行政学院陕西省经济管理干部学院学报》， 第4期，92-94页。
刘艳林, 2006， 高职高专学生英语听、说能力状况的调查及分析， 《河北广播电视大学学报》， 第1期， 71-72页。
全国大学英语四、六级考试研究小组， 2004， 《大学英语四六级口语考点》， 北京：化学工业出版社。
任志娟， 2005， 建构主义与英语教学改革， 《基础教育外语教学研究》， 第7期，16-18页。
孙瑞梅, 2003， 专业英语精读教学与建构主义学习理论， 《外语电化教学》，第94期， 53-56页。
谭碧云、许平珍， 2006， 高职高专英语口语教学的现状分析及方法探讨， 《职业教育研究》， 第4期， 126-127页。
唐恩莉， 2006， 高职院校英语口语教学改革探析， 《教改研究》， 第5期， 187-188页。
唐丽萍， 2006， 《批评性跨文化阅读的主体间评价研究》， 北京： 北京大学出版社。
王 楠、王 星， 2003， 试论社会建构主义理论指导下的英语教学设计， 《天津外国语学院学报》， 第6期， 47-51页。
王希宝， 2005， 建构主义英语教学反思， 《东华理工学院学报（社会科学版）》，第3期，289-292页。
王湘玲、宁春岩， 2003， 从传统教学观到建构主义教学观--两种教学观指导下的英语教学对比研究， 《外 语 与 外 语 教 学》， 第6期， 29-31页。
温彭年、贾国英， 2002， 建构主义理论与教学改革--建构主义学习理论综述， 《教育理论与实践》， 第5期， 17-22页。
徐菁， 2005， 建构主义指导下的英语精读课堂教学， 《外语教育与研究》， 第 2 期， 120-122页。
许海兰、刘燕， 2004， 社会建构主义理论对外语教学改革的指导意义， 《郑州牧业工程高等专科学校学报》， 第2期，142-143页。
张海榕， 2003， 建构主义教学理论与大学外语教学， 《天津外国语学院学报》，第1期， 54-57页。
Publications
张建庄，2002，互动式英语教学与素质教育， 《教育教学论坛》，石家庄：河北教育出版社, 第186-193页。
张建庄，2003， 如何组织英语互动课堂， 《英语周报》， 第49期， 第8版。
张建庄, （独著）2003， 《高中英语考点》， 保定： 河北大学出版社。
张建庄，（主编）2004， 《高三英语复习指导与测试》， 大连：大连出版社。
张建庄，（主编）2005， 《高一英语新教材课堂同步》， 石家庄：河北教育出版社。
张建庄，（主编）2006， 《英语标准学案》， 北京：（志鸿教育集团）学苑出版社。
张建庄，（主编）2007， 《基础英语语法》， 保定：河北大学出版社。
张建庄，2007，The role of output in college English intensive reading classroom teaching. 《河北石家庄外语翻译职业学院学报》， 第2期， 第6-11页。
