iLMS知識社群(Sites)師生部落格(Blogs)朝陽首頁(Homepage)TronClass教學平台Login
碩士論文計畫英文口試訓練--應外所 York
by 徐碧霙 2009-05-31 20:37:06, Reply(12), Views(1261)

 

 

口試前愛的小叮嚀:

1.     多花點時間解釋 experimental design

2.     務必提供 questionnaire(s)

3.     解釋 sample items of the questionnaires

4.     詳細解說研究步驟 (procedures)

 

 

 

 

Criteria:

 

1.      Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

 

 

 

 

2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

 

 

 

 

 

3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

 

 

 

4.      Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.      Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.      Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

          - conciseness and clarity of the presentation

          - correct language

          - quality of the slides

          - answering of the questions

          - use of time

 

 

 

 

 Questions:

____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Comments/Suggestions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reply(12)

 

Thesis Proposal Defense Oral Examination Rehearsal Evaluation Form

 

Date: June 1, 2009

Presenter: York Chi

Thesis Topic: The Effect of Ability Grouping on Students’ Reading Strategy Use and Reading Comprehension in the EFL Classroom

Evaluator: Jenny Chen

 

Criteria:

 

1.      Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

        I am certain that this research could contribute to this area of knowledge. The presenter successfully pointed out the importance of reading skill and the need for further investigation into ability grouping.

 

2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

        Yes, the additional explanations for the slides and the competence in answering questions demonstrated the presenter’s familiarity in the field.

 

3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

        Although the “fuzzi theory” is a bit questionable, the overall methods seem to be adequate.

 

4.      Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

        The overall design seems alright, but the presenter needs to include more information about how the lessons will be carried out and the content of the reading instruction.

 

5.      Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

        The proposed statistical procedures, independent t-test, Pearson correlation, and Cronbach’s alpha, should be sufficient to provide valid interpretation of the data.

 

6.      Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

conciseness and clarity of the presentation

-  great explanations for slide 13

-  clear information of questionnaires on slides 19 and 20

-  clear research procedures

correct language

-  minor grammar error on slides (two grouping conditions, any differences)

quality of the slides

-   clean ppt background

-   nice figure on slide 13

answering of the questions

-   excellent!

use of time

-   great use of time

 

 

Questions:

1.    On slide 17, is one semester period for the formal study? How long is your pilot study?

2.    Do the participants have to fill out both questionnaires at the same time?

 

___________________________________________________________________________________

 

Comments/Suggestions

-  proper eye-contact

-  great highlights of important details

-  should include the “fuzzi theory” to clarify how the ability grouping will be done

-  should remove the listening performance test since only reading is focused in your study

-  perhaps you can rephrase the questionnaire a little to make it easier for the participants to comprehend (ex. “從不是真實的或大多不是真實的”)

 

 

1. Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

Certainly, this is an interesting topic. The presenter clearly point out the gaps of this research area.

 

2. Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

Sure! Presenter shows a significant literature of cooperative learning, heterogeneous and homogeneous groups.

 

3. Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

I think yes!

 

4. Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

Overall, the design seems ok to process. However, it still needs more detail information how you gonna exam the whole reading process.

 

5. Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

 Yes, three analyses will be conduct in his research. However, I think use another test such as ANOVA, factor analysis or regression analysis will be more professional and adequate to provide valid interpretation.

 

6. Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

 

- conciseness and clarity of the presentation

Excellent ppt design and well organized for the procedure

- correct language

Smooth

- quality of the slides

Clear explanation in slide 13,18-20

- answering of the questions

Well answering response

- use of time

Good!

 

Questions:

1. What kind of materials will you apply in class in order to achieve student’s reading ability?

2. Will you be an observer or teacher/inter in your research?

Comments/Suggestions

- Providing more detail for audience to what activities

do students do in class. 

- Please show the time of test when doing the exam.

- Giving the citation in slide 14.

 

Criteria:

1. Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

The researcher does not show the significant contribution of the study.

2. Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

Yes, York explains the relevant literature in details.

3. Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

The way of dividing groups should be explained.

4. Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

It would be better to reconsider the instrument. For example, is it suitable to use basic level of GEPT as the instrument?

5. Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

Yes.

6. Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

  - conciseness and clarity of the presentation

He gives fluent presentation.

  - correct language

Great!

  - quality of the slides

He shows clear charts and tables.

  - answering of the questions

Good responses.

  - use of time

Great.

Questions:

1.      There are only 60 participants in your formal study; do you think the number of the participants is enough for recruit the data? There might be several invalid questionnaires from the participants.

2.      What are the criteria for choosing GEPT as the instrument for testing reading ability? Is it possible to adopt TOEIC as the instrument? (Reading test of TOEIC is about 100 questions)

3.      Can you explain

Comments/Suggestions

Well-organized presentation.

Concise explanations.

1.      Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

Yes. At the beginning of this presentation, York indicated that most of instructors and researchers focused on the abilities of listening and speaking, but ignored reading skill. He pointed out the gap for conducting his study.

 

2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

Yes. York explained the definitions of the variables of his research very well.

 

3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

Yes. York showed the groups, participants, age numbers of participants and period of this research.

 

4.      Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

I think that the process of this research is suitable for the topic.

5.      Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

He will use the software of SPSS version 13.0 fro windows, and the tools for analyzing are independent T test, Pearson Correlation, and Cronbachs’ alpha.

 

6.      Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

        - conciseness and clarity of the presentation: well-organized PPT

        - correct language: fluently

        - quality of the slides: slides #4, 5, and 6 are clear to understand

        - answering of the questions: he is familiar to his own research

        - use of time: only 1:30 left

 Questions:

The participants of this research are the undergraduates of NTIT. How do you choose your participants?

Comments/Suggestions

1.      In my opinions, some of your literature views were a little bit old. I thought he could look for latest data for this research.

2.      York had eye contacts and gestures while presenting which made him looked confident.

1.      Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

It’s an interesting topic. The presenter clearly point out the gaps of this research area (page 3). And explain the difference between Homogeneous and Heterogeneous.

2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

Yes. But some of the literature review is too old (page 12,15,16), the researcher should update the information.

3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

The researcher should explain what “fuzzy theory” is.

4.  Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

   The researcher should explain more about the research design. (the reliability of the questionnaire, the background of the participants, the information about the questionnaire)

5.  Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

   The researcher uses independent T test to examine the difference on group, gender, and achiever to students’ performance and strategy; Pearson Correlation to examine the relationship between strategy and motivation; Cronbach’s alpha to examine the reliability of the two questionnaires.

6. Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

       

- conciseness and clarity of the presentation

Clear.

- correct language

Good.

- quality of the slides

Slide7,8,9,17,18,19,

20,21,22,23 is clear

- answering of the questions

Good

- use of time

Good

 


Questions:

1. On slide 3 you mentioned most of the teachers focus on training student’s listening and speaking ability, do you have any evidence to support this?

 

Comments/Suggestions

 

-         Show confidence

-         Very clear pronunciation

-         Update your literature

-          

 

 

 

1.      Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

I think it would be a contribution to this area. Ability grouping has been always a popular issue. Moreover, the presenter in this study is more focus on the reading. I think it is quite interesting and has a need to be explored.

 

2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

Overall, He provides reasonable purpose of study and literature review, and he is very familiar with the literature. However, he forgot to mention fuzzy~~~ which is important in his study.

 

3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

There is a little problem with using GEPT as the measurement of students’ ability. The presenter didn’t provide a reasonable reason why he will use GEPT. Especially the researcher use basic level GEPT test for the undergraduates, it might not be adequate to test their ability.

 

4.      Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

The researcher will separate two groups of participants. I think the design will provide valid data for his study.

 

5.      Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

I think it is okay.

 

6.      Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

conciseness and clarity of the presentation

Very fluent

correct language

Good

quality of the slides

Clear to understand

answering of the questions

Good

use of time

Good ( only 1:30 left)

 

Questions:

Why your questionnaire was divided into two copies? Is that means you got two questionnaires to ask the students to fill up?

 

Comments/Suggestions

In York’s presentation, he showed confidence, fluency, and his PPT was clear. I think York is a good presenter.

York’ Final

Comments and Questions:

 

1.      Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

It seems like there should still be some more deep concerns like in which stage of the participants’ learning. The stage of learning would affect which one is the center of the classroom.

2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

The ideas of this study are surely well presented; however, in slide 18, the listening skill was not mentioned in the literature review, it is still included in one of the items of the instrument.

3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

Based the research questions of the study, the answer is yes.

4.      Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

The answer is the same as mentioned in the above question 4.

5.      Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

Not really. It seems like it needs the descriptive statistical analysis, doesn’t it?

6.      Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

Good timing and lots of confidence were shown in your presentation.

Besides, the instructional opening words always impress the audience a lot, so thoughtfully and such a gentle presenter.

Also, in slides 13 and 18, they are well organized and smoothly flow is shown.

Professional without doubt.

 Questions:

1.    In slide 3, it was mentioned orally that reading is often ignored mostly.
A doubt aroused based on it is
who said that.
Could you give me some clue?

___________________________________________________________________________________

Comments/Suggestions

1.    The fuzzy theory that was explained in this study should be given more detailes and more proofs of using this theory.

1. Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

 

 Yes, you mentioned the research questions to indicate how importance the research is!!!! Good for you!!!!!

 

 2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

 

 Yes, I would like to say you are familiar with the literature review since you mentioned a lof of features of the cooperative learning.

 

 3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

 

Yes, because the instrument included placement and two questionnaires.

 

4.      Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

Yes!!!!

5.      Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

 

Yes, you applied the independent t-test, peason correlation and croonbach alpha to the research.

 

concisegoness and clarity of the presentation

Good

- correct language

Good.

- quality of the slides

             Good

- answering of the questions

Good

- use of time

Good

 

Questions and Comments: You showed your confidence and you looked nice.

Q: What is metacognitive ability in slide 6?

To Jenny:

 

     It took about one semester for the pilot study. Also, the participants do not have to fill out both questionnaires at the same time. In the third week, I gave them the SILL questionnaires and in the following week, I gave them the motivation questionnaire.

 

 

To Irene:

   

1. I use a reading textbook which is related to the filed of business. During the class period, students are divided into two groups. For the group activities, there are six important parts for students to do during the class period. 1. Survey. 2 Questions 3 Read 4 Review 5 Recite 6 Reflect

 

2. I am not a teacher in this study. In fact, I am just an observer in the classroom. By observing the class and giving the questionnaires, I hope that I can get the answer that I want.

 

 

To Patty:

    

1     In my opinion, I think 60 people are enough for the formal study since I have only one class and the focus on this research is actually on “grouping” condition; therefore, I think it is ok for this study.

2    In fact, it is hard for me to apply TOEIC into this study. Since the participants are from night school, there English levels are not as good as day school students. Also, their pre-test scores were pretty low. Therefore, I think the TOEIC test might be too hard for them.

 

 

To Jeffery:

     In fact, I have no special criteria for me to choose my participants. I conduct this study by using a class from my advisor. However, I think this class is suitable for this study. Due to the reason that they are not only freshmen but also they are not English major students. I believe by applying these students as participants in this study, the result will be more objective and valuable.

 

 

To Stan

         Yes, I have two questionnaires to ask the students to fill up.

 

 

 

To Lynn:

     Metacognitive awareness/knowledge refer to the declarative knowledge of one’s own cognitive resource, of the demands for different reading purposes, of his/her own reading ability, and of the conditions in which a strategy is practiced (Carrell, 1989). We can define metacognitive awareness/knowledge as readers’ perceptions of reading confidence, reading effectiveness, reading difficulties, and remedial strategies in general reading tasks.

To Paulinna and Andrew:

In current field of English education in Taiwan, many people state that reading is too difficult for students who have just entered school or who were the beginners of learning a foreign language (Shi, Zhou, Chen, & Zhu, 1998). Due to these reasons, many primary school English teachers tend to underestimate the role of reading in the process of English learning. Also, the reading instructions for most junior and senior high schools are focus on intensive reading but not extensive reading. Therefore, I think the importance of reading ability seems to be ignored by many teachers in Taiwan.

Dear York,

Here is my response for you~^^~

Criteria:

1.      Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

Yes, I think the proposed research problem will be a significant contribution to English teaching field. As the purposes of the study, it tries to investigate the effect of ability grouping on students’ reading achievement. Also, it investigates whether ability grouping drew out significant differences on students’ reading strategy use and learning motivation in an EFL cooperating classroom.

2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

In the detailed literature review, you introduced cooperative learning clearly to support heterogeneous and homogeneous ability grouping.

3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

It will be better if you offered the timing and period of the research instrument.

4.      Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

You made the good research procedures for audience understanding this research. However, how to make these two groups may be identified more.

5.      Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

Well, if you could claim your research for data analysis, it will be better for us to suggest it is good enough or not.

6.      Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

        - conciseness and clarity of the presentationThe clear presentation with confidence is great

        - correct languageYes

        - quality of the slidesThe PPT is quiet good and clear

        - answering of the questionsGood

        - use of timeExcellent (1’45” left)

 

 Questions:

There are three research questions, how will you use data analysis for these 3 questions?

 

Comments/Suggestions

Your research is quite practical, and you really did a good job for your presentation. Excellent!^^

To Dear York,

1.   Will the proposed research problem, if successfully carried out, be a significant contribution to this area of knowledge, deserving of an M.S. degree?

The researcher did point out the importance of the research on slide 3 and identify the current problem on slide 4 also he pointed out the gap in slide 5 and 6.

2.      Does the presentation give reasonable evidence that the student is familiar with significant literature in his/her field?

 Yes, in slide 11-16, the researcher shows that evidence; however, the date is kind of old.

3.      Are the proposed methods adequate to provide valid experimental data?

I do not see the validity and reliability in this research.

4.      Will the proposed experimental design provide valid data applicable to the proposed research problem?

In slide 18, it’s not enough. It’s better to provide the validity and reliability of your instruments.

5.      Are the proposed statistical procedures adequate to provide valid interpretation of experimental data?

 It seems yes, but I want to know that why use T-test? To test the difference and then?

6.      Is the oral presentation clear and professional?

conciseness and clarity

of the presentation

Can do better if knows more on your research field

correct language

Yes!

quality of the slides

Ok

answering of the questions

Part of your answering are not sure so far.

use of time

 1.5 minutes left

 

 Questions:

1.     I know the SILL questionnaire; in your research you’d better to tell the audience that background of this questionnaire.  However, the questionnaire is that you use the original one or the revised one?

2.    As teacher Teresa has mentioned that is also my question: Is that appropriate for the college students to use this instrument with basic level of GEPT? But, as you have mentioned in class that you say that your participants are from night school students. And I totally think the basic level is ok for them. How do you think?

__________________________________________________________________________________

Comments/Suggestions

The content is very organized, I can understand it. I also like your ppt background. However, here are some suggestions for you:

1.     If you tie, you will look different. 

2.     Smile when doing the presentation

3.     Eye contact is necessary

4.     More intonation will be better

5.     If you involved in your speech not just talk, your presentation will add be more vivid

6.     Do not press the desk because that will make you look unprofessional.

7.     Too old citation on slide 15 and 16

8.     No citation on slide 14

9.     Good chart on slide 13

10.  It’s better to get more information on your methodology part.

 

Reply