| Abstract: | Interview and questionnaire data from previous studies have suggested that English-medium instruction (EMI) has enhanced students’ English proficiency but hindered content learning in non-English-speaking countries. This study seeks to verify these arguments using test-based evidence. Study participants were students enrolled voluntarily in either a Chinese/L1-medium instruction (CMI) or an EMI section of an engineering course. Data were collected from pre- and post-assessments of English language proficiency and the course midterm and final exams. Statistical analyses showed that both sections had significant gains in English listening but losses in reading. The EMI section significantly outperformed the CMI section in the listening and reading tests. However, no significant differences were found between the two sections in the English-written midterm and final exams. When controlling for reading, the EMI section had midterm scores significantly lower than the CMI section but slightly higher for the final exam. This study may justify the CMI and EMI parallel-instruction model, that is, offering CMI and EMI sections of the same course from which students can choose. It is hoped that this model will lead to smaller EMI sections with higher English proficiency, eventually leading to content learning outcomes equal to CMI sections.
以問卷及訪談為資料蒐集工具的研究顯示,非英語系國家採用英語授課可增進學生英語能力,但有礙學科知識學習。本研究以測驗來驗證此論點,藉由某門工程科目實施一班中文,一班英語(授課),比較兩班學生的英語能力前,後測分數,以及學科期中,期末考成績。統計分析顯示兩班均呈現英語聽力進步但閱讀退步的狀況,且英語班的聽,讀能力皆顯著優於中文班。兩班學科考試均以英語出題,成績無顯著差異;惟若將兩班英語閱讀能力差異之因素納入考量,進一步檢視學科學習結果,則英語班的期中考成績顯著較低,期末考後來居上而微高於中文班。本研究結果支持一班中文,一班英語的授課模式,學生自由選班,將形成量小質均的英語班,且最終學到的專業知識不遜於中文班。 |
