Educational Experimental Research Design: Investigating the Effect of “PAD + Microlectures” EAP Teaching Model on Chinese Undergraduates’ Critical Thinking Development
top of page
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
crossref
doi
open access

Published: 13 October 2018

Educational Experimental Research Design: Investigating the Effect of “PAD + Microlectures” EAP Teaching Model on Chinese Undergraduates’ Critical Thinking Development

Lisha Liu

Southern University of Science and Technology, China

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf

doi

10.31014/aior.1993.01.01.10

​

​

Abstract

This paper presents an educational, experimental research design, aiming at examining the effect of "PAD + microlectures" EAP teaching model on Chinese undergraduates' critical thinking development. It mainly analyzes this experiment from four aspects: research question and hypotheses, difficulties in key term definitions and selection of measuring instruments, potential risks of the design, as well as the challenge of ethics. Such a methodological analysis shows that educational experiments should follow the disciplines of objectivity, feasibility, maneuverability, effectiveness, and innovation.

References

  1. Campbell, D. & Stanley, J., (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.

  2. Chen, A., Wang. Y. & Jiang, J., (2015). Current problems and countermeasures of microlecture development, Modern Educational Technology, 25(10), pp. 67-72.

  3. Cohen, L., Manion L. & Morrison, K., (2007). Research methods in education. 6th ed. London: Routledge.

  4. Cresswell, J., (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications.

  5. Dai, Z., (1986). Psychological and educational measurement. Shanghai: Huadong Normal University Press.

  6. Dewey, J., (1909). How we think. Boston: D.C.Heath and Co.

  7. Fisher, A., (2001). Critical thinking: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  8. Fraenkel, R. J. & Wallen, E.N., (1990). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

  9. Glass, V. G., (1978). Integrating findings: the meta-analysis of research. Review of Research in Education. 5, pp. 351-379.

  10. Gorard, S., (2001). Quantitative methods in educational research. London: Continuum.

  11. He, F., (2005). To foster college students' criticize thinking. Journal of Education Institute of Taiyuan University, 23(3), pp. 75-77.

  12. Liu, H. & Jin, L. (2012). An empirical research on the correlation between English debate and Chinese undergraduates’ critical thinking development. In Gong. Y. (Eds.), Oral English teaching and critical thinking development (pp. 101-112). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

  13. Luo, Q. & Yang X., (2001). Revision for CCTDI (Chinese version). Psychological Development and Education, 3, pp. 47-51.

  14. Paul, R & Elder, L., (2006). The miniature guide to the art of asking essential questions. Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

  15. Phillips, R. C. et al., (2004). The California critical thinking instruments for benchmarking, program assessment, and directing curricular change. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 68(4), pp. 1-8.

  16. Sun, Y., (2011). Focusing on developing English-majored undergraduates’ critical thinking: deepening the teaching reform. Foreign Languages in China, 8(3), pp. 49-58.

  17. The National University Teacher Network Training Center, (2014). Research Report on Microlectures at Chinese universities. Beijing: Chinese Ministry of Education.

  18. Wang, X., (2001). Educational statistics. Shanghai: Huadong Normal University Press.

  19. Wei, C., (2016). The application of PAD + microlectures model in college English teaching, Language Research Journal, 3, pp.92-93, 113.

  20. Yao, L., (2001). Research on enhancing college students' critical thinking abroad. Higher Education of Sciences, 5, pp.18-21.

  21. Zhao, H., (2016). An Investigation into PAD College English class, Education Forum, 13, pp.1-2.

  22. Zhang, X., (2017). PAD Class: The New Wisdom of Education in China. Beijing: Science Publishing House.

  23. Zhang, Y., (2016). Advantages and challenges of microlecture-assisted English PAD class. Language, Art and PE Research, 168(11), pp.347, 349.

bottom of page