英语写作需要什么（共6篇）

“马儿快跑”通过精心收集，向本站投稿了6篇英语写作需要什么，以下是小编收集整理后的英语写作需要什么，仅供参考，希望对大家有所帮助。

篇1：英语写作需要什么

英语写作需要什么

英语语言的功底指对这门语言中各种语言知识的掌握和运用能力，其中包括用词的准确和精炼、修辞手段的自如运用、时态的准确运用以及语法和句法结构的熟练掌握等。写作中常出现的问题是用词欠准确，这主要是由于对词意和词在不同的语境中所产生的不同语意把握不好所致，而词汇量的贫乏也无疑是造成用词欠妥的一个重要因素。当然，掌握了一定词汇量而不懂得修辞知识的人仍不可能把文章写好。

除了语言功底，写作者还必须清楚写作的具体任务、写作的特殊性以及写作所需要的'各种技巧。写作是一种综合的智力活动，其作品是以思想为基础，以语言为工具而创造出来的艺术品。写作不仅需要丰富的想象力，还需要严谨的语言逻辑和独特的思想。否则，文章决不可能成为语言的佳作。

中国人用英语写作还面临一个思维方式的转变问题。不熟悉英语语言思维方式的人，无论有何等“高超”的写作技巧，都不可能创造出优美地道的英文作品。尤其是有很多学生在用英语写文章之前总习惯先用中文列出提纲，然后按照列出的中文提纲从事英语的写作。以这种方式写出的文章是可想而知的。

总之，思维方式的转变、对写作性质的深入了解、树立英语写作的正确意识是创造成功的英文作品的前提。

篇2：英语作文写作的需要背诵的部分

英语作文写作的需要背诵的部分

下面的材料旨在丰富学生在是非问题写作方面的思想和语言，考生在复习时可以先分类阅读这些篇章，然后尝试写相关方面的作文题。

对于素材中用黑体字的部分，特别建议你熟读，背诵，因为它们在语言和观点上都值得吸收。学习语言的.人应该明白，表达能力和思想深度都靠日积月累，潜移默化。从某种意义上说，提高英语写作能力无捷径可走，你必须大段背诵英语文章才能逐渐形成语感和用英语进行表达的能力。这一关，没有任何人能代替你过。

因此，建议你下点苦功夫，把背单词的精神拿出来背诵文章。何况，并不是要求你背了之后永远牢记在心：你可以这个星期背，下个星期忘。这没有关系，相信你的大脑具有神奇的能力。背了工具箱里的文章后，你会惊讶的发现：I can think in English now！

1.??????Proverbs

1.A graduation ceremony is an event where the commencement speaker tells thousands of students dressed in identical caps and gowns that individuality is the key to success.

2. The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one’s mind a pleasant place in which to spend one’s time.

3. Next in importance to freedom and justice is popular education, without which neither freedom nor justice can be permanently maintained.

4. The classroom--not the trench--is the frontier of freedom now and forevermore.

5. Education’s purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one.

6. It is the purpose of education to help us become autonomous, creative, inquiring people who have the will and intelligence to create our own destiny.

7. You see, real ongoing, lifelong education doesn’t answer questions; it provokes them.

8. People will pay more to be entertained than educated.

9.the most important function of education at any level is to develop the personality of the individual and the significance of his life to himself and to others. This is the basic architecture of a life; the rest is ornamentation and decoration of the structure.

10. The essence of our efforts to see that every child has a chance must be to assure each as equal opportunity, not to become equal, but to become different-to realize whatever unique potential of body, mind, and spirit he or she possesses.

11. A great teacher never strives to explain his vision-he simply invites you to stand beside him and see for yourself.

12.If you can read and don’, you are an illiterate by choice.

2. Damaging Research

A study by National Parent-Teacher Organization revealed that in the average American school, eighteen negatives are identified for every positive that is pointed out. The Wisconsin study revealed that when children enter the first grade, 80 percent of them feel pretty good themselves, but by the time they get to the sixth grade, only 10 percent of them have good self-images.

3. Education and Citizenship

An important aspect of education in the United States is the relationship between education and citizenship. Throughout its history this nation has emphasized public education as a means of transmitting democratic values, creating equality of opportunity, and preparing new generations of citizens to function in society.In addition, the schools have been expected to help shape society itself. During the 1950s, for example, efforts to combat racial segregation focused on the schools. Later, when the Soviet Union launched the first orbiting satellite, American schools and colleges came under intense pressure and were offered many incentives to improve their science and mathematics programs so that the nations would not fall behind the Soviet Union in scientific and technological capabilities.

Education is often viewed as a tool for solving social problems, especially social inequality. The schools, t is thought, can transform young people from vastly different backgrounds into competent, upwardly mobile adults. Yet these goals seem almost impossible to attain. In recent years, in fact, public education has been at the center of numerous controversies arising from the gap between the ideal and the reality. Part of the problem is that different groups in society have different have different expectations.Some feel that children should be taught basic job-related skills; still others believe education should not only prepare children to compete in society but also help them maintain their cultural identity (and, in the case of Hispanic children, their language).On the other hand, policymakers concerned with education emphasize the need to increase the level of student achievement and to improve parents in their children’s education.

Some reformers and critics have called attention to the need to link formal schooling with programs designed to address social problems. Sociologist Charles Moscos, for example, is a leader in the movement to expand programs like the Peace Corps, Vista, and Outward Bound into a system of voluntary national service. National service, as Moscos defines it, would entail “the full-time undertaking of public duties by young people whether as citizen soldiers or civilian servers-who are paid subsistence wages” and serve for at least one year. In return for this period of service, the volunteers would receive assistance in paying for college or other educational expenses.

Advocates of national service and school-to-work programs believe that education does not have to be confined to formal schooling. In devising strategies to provide opportunities for young people to serve their society, they emphasize the educational value of citizenship experiences gained outside the classroom. At this writing there is little indication that national service will become a new educational institution in the United States, although the concept is steadily gaining support among educators and social critics.

4. The Teacher’s Role

Given the undeniable importance of classroom experience, sociologists have done a considerable amount of research on what goes on in the classroom. Often they start from the premise that, along with the influence of peers, students’ experiences in the classroom are of central importance to their later development. One study examined the impact of a single first-grade teacher on her students’ subsequent adult status. The surprising results of this study have important implications. It is evident that good teachers can make a big difference in children’s lives, a fact that gives increased urgency to the need to improve the quality of primary-school teaching. The reforms carried out by educational leaders like James Comer suggest that when good teaching is combined with high levels of parental involvement the results can be even more dramatic.

Because the role of the teacher is to change the learner in some way, the teacher-student relationship is an important part of education. Sociologists have pointed out that this relationship is asymmetrical or unbalanced, with the teacher being in a position of authority and the student having little choice but to passively absorb the information provided by the teacher. In other words, in conventional classrooms there is little opportunity for the students to become actively involved in the learning process. On the other hand, students often develop strategies for undercutting the teacher’s authority: mentally withdrawing, interrupting, and the like. Hence, much current research assumes that students and teachers influence each other instead of assuming that the influence is always in a single direction.

5. Education Philosophy

For the past fifty years our schools have operated on the theories of John Dewey (1859-1953), an American educator and writer. Dewey believed hat the school’s job was to enhance the natural development of the growing child, rather than to pour information, for which the child had no context, into him or her. In the Dewey system, the child becomes the active agent in his own education, rather than a passive receptacle for facts.

Consequently, American schools are very enthusiastic about teaching “life skills” –logical thinking, analysis, creative problem--solving. The actual content of the lessons is secondary to the process, which is supposed to train the child to be able to handle whatever life may present, including all the unknowns of the future. Students and teachers both regard pure memorization as an uncreative and somewhat vulgar.

In addition to “life skills”, schools are assigned to solve the ever growing stoke of social problems. Racism, teenage pregnancy, alcoholism, drug use, reckless driving, and are just a few of the modern problems that have appeared on the school curriculum.

This all contributes to a high degree of social awareness in American youngsters.

6. Student Life

To the students, the most notable difference between elementary school and the higher levels is that in junior high they start “changing classes”. This means that rather than spending the day in one classroom, they switch classrooms to meet their different teachers. This gives them three or four minutes between classes in the hallways, where a great deal of the important social action of high school traditionally takes place. Students have lockers in these hallways, around which thy congregate.

Society in general does not take the business of studying very seriously. Schoolchildren have a great deal of free time, which they are encouraged to fill with extracurricular activities—sports, clubs, cheerleading, scouts—supposed to inculcate such qualities as leadership, sportsmanship, ability to organize, etc. those who don’t become engaged in such activities or have afterschool jobs have plenty of opportunity to “hang out”, listen to teenager music, and watch television.

Compared to other nations, American students do not have much homework. Studies also show that American parents have lower expectations for their children’s success in school than other nationalities do. (Historically, there has not been much correlation between American school success and success in later life.) “He’s just not a scholar”, the American parents might say, content that their son is on the swim team and doesn’t take drugs. (Some of the young do choose to study hard, for reason of their own, such as determining that the road to riches lies through Harvard Business School.)

What American schools do effectively teach is the competitive method. In innumerable ways children are pitted against each other—whether in classroom discussion, spelling bees, reading groups, or tests. Every classroom is expected to produce a scattering of A’s and F’s (teachers often grade A=excellent; B=good; C=average; D=poor; and F=failed). A teacher who gives all A’s looks too soft—so students are aware that they are competing for the limited number of top marks.

Foreign students sometimes don’t understand that copying from other people’s papers or from books is considered wrong and taken seriously. Here, it is important to show that you have done your own work and are displaying your own knowledge. It is more important than helping your friends to pass, whom we think do not deserve to pass unless they can provide their own answers. Group effort goes against the competitive grain, and American students do not study together as many Asians do. Many Asians in this country consider their group study habits a large contributor to their school success.

7. Adult Education

After complaining about many aspects of American life, a 40-year-old woman from Hong Kong concluded, “But where else could someone my age go back to school and get a degree in social work? Here you can change your whole life, start a new business, do what you really want to do.”

So at least to this person, school requirements weren’t inhibiting. And to millions of others, adult education is the path to a new career, or if not to a new career, to a new outlook. Schools generally encourage the older person who wants to start anew, and besides regular classes, schedule evening classes in special programs. Today there are so many people of retirement age in college that it is no longer remarkable.

8. Moral Relativism in American

Improving American education requires not doing new things but doing (and remembering) some good old things. At the time of our nation’s founding, Thomas Jefferson listed the requirements for a sound education in the Report of the Commissioners for the University of Virginia. In this landmark statement on American education, Jefferson wrote of the importance of education and writing, and of reading history, and geography. But he also emphasized the need “to instruct the mass of our citizens in these, their rights, interests, and duties, as men and citizens.” Jefferson believed education should aim at the improvement of both one’s “morals” and “faculties”. That has been the dominant view of the aims of American education for over two centuries. But a number of changes, most of them unsound, have diverted schools from these great pursuits. And the story of the loss of the school’s original moral mission explains a great deal.

Starting in the early seventies, “values clarification” programs started turning up in schools all over America. According to this philosophy, the schools were not to take part in their time-honored task of transmitting sound moral values; rather, they were to allow the child to “clarify” his own values (which adults, including parents, had no “rights” to criticize). The “values clarification” movement didn’t clarify values; it clarified wants and desires. This form of moral relativism said, in effect, that no set of values was right or wrong; everybody had an equal right to his own values; and all values were subjective, relative, and personal. This destructive view took hold with a vengeance.

In 1985 The York Times published an article quoting New York area educators, in slavish devotion to this new view, proclaiming, “They deliberately avoid trying to tell students what is ethically right and wrong.” The article told of one counseling session involving fifteen high school juniors and seniors. In the course of that session a student concluded that a fellow student had been foolish to return one thousand dollars she found in a purse at school. According to the article, when the youngsters asked the counselor’s opinion, “He told them he believed the girl had done the right thing, but that, of course, he would not try to force his values on them. ‘If I come from the position of what is wrong,’ he explained, ‘then I’m not their counselor.’”

Once upon a time, a counselor offered counselor, and he knew that an adult does not form character in the young by taking a stance of neutrality toward questions of right and wrong or by merely offering “choices” or “options”.

In response to the belief that adults and educators should teach children sound morals, one can expect from some quarters indignant objections (I’ve heard one version of it expressed countless times over the years): “Who are you to say what’s important?” or “Whose standards and judgments do we use?”

The correct response, it seems to me, is, is we ready to do away with standards and judgments? Is anyone going to argue seriously that a life of cheating and swindling is as worthy as a life of honest, hard work? Is anyone (with the exception of some literature professors at our elite universities) going to argue seriously the intellectual corollary, that a Marvel comic book is as good as Macbeth? Unless we are willing to embrace some pretty silly position, we’ve got to admit the need for moral and intellectual standards.The problem is that some people tend to regard anyone who would pronounce a definitive judgment as an unsophisticated Philistine or a closed-minded “elitist” trying to impose his view on everybody else.

The truth of the real world is that without standards and judgments, there can be no progress. Unless we are prepared to say irrational things—that nothing can be proven more valuable than anything else or that everything is equally worthless—we must ask the normative question.It may come, as a surprise to those who fell that to be “progressive” is to be value-neutral. But as Matthew Amold said, “the world is forwarded by having its attention fixed on the best things” and if the world can’t decide what the best things are, at least to some degree, then it follows that progress, and character, is in trouble. We shouldn’t be reluctant to declare that some things, some lives, books, ideas, and values are better than others. It is the responsibility of the schools to teach these better things.

At one time, we weren’t so reluctant to teach them. In the mid-nineteenth century, a diverse, widespread group of crusaders began to work for the public support of what was then called the “common school”, the forerunner of the public school. They were to be charged with the mission of school felt that the nation could fulfill its destiny only if every new generation was taught these values together in a common institution.

The leaders of the common school movement were mainly citizens who were prominent in their communities—businessmen, ministers, local civic and government officials. These people saw the schools as upholders of standards of individual morality and small incubators of civic and personal virtue; the founders of the public schools had faith that public education could teach good moral and civic character from a common ground of American values.

But in the past quarter century or so, some of the so-called experts became experts of value neutrality, and moral education was increasingly left in their hands. The commonsense view of parents and the publicthat schools should reinforce rather than undermine the values of home, family, and country, was increasingly rejected.

There are those today still that claim we are now too diverse a nation, that we consist of too many competing convictions and interests to instill common values. They are wrong. Of course we are a diverse people. We have always been a diverse people. And as Madison wrote in FederalistNo.10, the competing, balancing interests of a diverse people can help ensure the survival of liberty.But there are values that all American citizens share and that we should want all American students to know and to make their own: honesty, fairness, self-discipline, fidelity to task, friends, and family, personal responsibility, love of country, and belief in the principles of liberty, equality, and the freedom to practice one’s faith.The explicit teaching of these values is the legacy of the common schools, and it is a legacy to which we must return.

9. Schools Should Teach Values

People often said, “Yes, we should teach these values, but how do we teach them?” this question deserves a candid response, one that isn’t given often enough. It is by exposing our children to good character and inviting its imitation that we will transmit to them a moral foundation. This happens when teachers and principals, by their words and actions, embody sound convictions. As Oxford’s Mary Warnock has written, “You cannot teach morality without being committed to morality yourself; and you cannot be committed to morality yourself without holding that some things are right and others wrong.” The theologian Martin Buber wrote that the educator is distinguished from all other influences “by his will to take part in the stamping of character and by his consciousness that he represents in the eyes of the growing person a certain selection of what is, the selection of what is ‘right’, of what should be.” It is in this will, Buber says, in this clear standing for something, that the “vocation as an educator finds its fundamental expression.”

There is no escaping the fact that young people need as example principals and teachers who know the difference between right and wrong, good and bad, and who themselves exemplify high moral purpose.

As Education Secretary, I visited a class at Waterbury Elementary School in Waterbury, Vermont, and asked the students, “Is this a good school?” They answered, “Yes, this is a good school.” I asked them, “Why?” Among other things, one eight-year-old said, “The principal Mr. Riegel, makes good rules and everybody obeys them.” So I said, “Give me an example.” And another answered, “You can’t climb on the pipes in the bathroom. We don’t climb on the pipes and the principal doesn’t either.”

This example is probably too simple to please a lot of people who want to make the topic of moral education difficult, but there is something profound in the answer of those children, something education should pay more attention to.You can’t expect children to take messages about rules or morality seriously unless they see adults taking those rules seriously in their day-to-day affairs. Certain must be said, certain limits lay down, and certain examples set. There is no other way.

We should also do a better job at curriculum selection. The research shows that most “values education” exercises and separate courses in “moral reasoning” tend not to affect children’s behavior; if anything, they may leave children morally adrift. Where to turn? I believe our literature and our history are a rich quarry of moral literacy. We should mine that quarry. Children should have at their disposal a stock of examples illustrating what we believe to be right and wrong, good and bad—examples illustrating what are morally right and wrong can indeed be known and that there is a difference.

What kind of stories, historical events, and famous lives am I talking about? If we want our children to know about honesty, we should teach them about Abe Lincoln walking three miles to return six cents and conversely, about Aesop’s shepherd boy who cried wolf if we want them to know about courage, we should teach them about Joan of Arc, Horatius at the bridge, and Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. If we want them to know about persistence in the face of adversity, they should know about the voyages of Columbus and the character of Washington during the Civil War. And our youngest should be told about the Little Engine That Could. If we want them to know about respect for the law, they should understand why Socrates told Crito: “No, I must submit to the decree of Athens.” If we want our children to respect the rights of others, they should read the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the Gettysburg Address, and Martin Luther King, Jr.’ “Letter from Birmingham jail.” From the Bible they should know about Ruth’s loyalty to Naomi, Joseph’s forgiveness of his brothers, Jonathan’s friendship with David, the Good Samaritan’s kindness toward a stranger, and David’s cleverness and courage in facing Goliath.

These are only a few of the hundreds of examples we can call on. And we need not get into issues like nuclear war, abortion, creationism, or euthanasia. This may come as a disappointment to some people, but the fact is that the formation of character in young people is educationally a task different from, and prior to, the discussion of the great, difficult controversies of the day. First things come first. We should teach values the same way we teach other things: one step at a time. We should not use the fact that there are many difficult and controversial moral questions as an argument against basic instruction in the subject.

After all, we do not argue against teaching physics because laser physics is difficult, against teaching American history because there are heated disputes about the Founders’ intent. Every field has its complexities and its controversies. And every field has its basics, its fundamentals. So they are too with forming character and achieving moral literacy.As any parent knows, teaching character is a difficult task. But it is a crucial task, because we want our children to be healthy, happy, and successful but decent, strong, and good. None of this happens automatically; there is no genetic transmission of virtue. It takes the conscious, committed efforts of adults. It takes careful attention.

10. College Pressures

Mainly I try to remind that the road ahead is a long one and that it will have more unexpected turns than they think. There will be plenty of time to change jobs, change careers, change whole attitudes and approaches. They don not want to hear such liberating news. They want a map—right now – that they can follow unswervingly to career security, financial security, Social Security and, presumably, a prepaid grave.

What I wish for all students is some release from the clammy grip of the future. I wish them a chance to savor each segment of their education as an experience in itself and not as a grim preparation for the next step. I wish them the right to experiment, to trip and fall, to learn that defeat is as instructive as victory and is not the end of the world.

My wish, of course, is na?ve. One of the national gods venerated in our media—the million-dollar athlete, the wealthy executive—and glorified in our praise of possessions. In the presence of such a potent state religion, the young are growing up old.

I see four kinds of pressure working on college students today: economic pressure, parental pressure, peer pressure, and self-induced pressure. It is easy to look around for villains—to blame the colleges for charging too much money, the professors for assigning too much work, the parents for pushing their children too far, and the students for driving themselves too hard. But there are no villains: only victims.

“In the late 1960s.” one dean told me. “The typical question that I got from students was ‘Why is there so much suffering in the world’ or ‘how I can make a contribution?’ Today it’s ‘Do you think it would look better for getting into law school if I did a double major in history and political science, or just majored in one of them?’” many other deans confirmed this pattern. One said: “They are trying to find an edge—the intangible something that will look better on paper if two students are about equal.”

Note the emphasis on looking better. The transcript has become a sacred document, the passport to security. How one appears on paper is more important than how one appears in person. A is for Admirable and B is for Borderline, even though, in Yale’s official system of grading, A means “excellent” and B means “very good.” Today, looking very good is no longer good enough, especially for students who hope to go on to law school or medical school. They know that entrance into the better schools will be an entrance into the better law firms and better medical practices where they will make a lot of money. They also know that the odds are harsh. Yale Law School, for instance, matriculates 170students from an applicant pool of 3,700; Harvard enrolls 550 from a pool of 7,000.

It’s all very well for those of us who write letters of recommendation for our students to stress the qualities of humanity that will make them good lawyers or doctors. And it’s nice to think that admission officers are ready reading our letters and looking for the extra dimension of commitment or concern. Still, it would be hard for a student not to visualize these officers shuffling so many transcripts studded with As that they regard a B as positively shameful.

The pressure is almost as heavy on students who just want to graduate and get a job. Long gone are the days of the “gentleman’s C.” when students journeyed through college with a certain relaxation, sampling a wide variety of courses-music, art, philosophy, classics, anthropology, poetry, religion—that would send them out as liberally educated men and women. If I were an employer I would rather employ graduates who have this range and curiosity than those who narrowly pursued safe subjects and high grades. I know countless students whose inquiring minds exhilarate me. I like to hear the play of their ideas. I do not know if they are getting As or Cs, and I do not care. I also like them as people. The country needs them, and they will find satisfying jobs. I tell them to relax. They cannot.

Nor can I blame them. They live in a brutal economy. Tuition, room, and board at most private colleges now come to at least $7,000, not counting books and fees. This might seem to suggest that the colleges are getting rich. But they are equally battered by inflation. Tuition covers only 60 percent of what it costs to educate a student, and ordinarily the remainder comes from what college receives in endowments, grants, and gifts. Now, the remainder keeps being swallowed by the cruel costs—higher every year—of just opening the doors. Heating oil is up. Insurance is up. Postage is up. Health-premium costs are up. Everything is up. Deficits are up. We are witnessing in American the creation of a brotherhood of paupers—colleges, parents, and students, joined by the common bond of debt.

Today it is not unusual for a student, even if he works part time at college and full time during the summer, to accrue $5,000 in loans after four years—loans that he must start to repay within one year after graduation. Exhorted at commencement to go forth into the world, he is already behind as he goes forth. How could he not feel under pressure throughout college to prepare for this day of reckoning? I have used “he,” incidentally, only for brevity. Women at Yale are under no less pressure to justify their expensive education to themselves, their parents, and society. In fact, they are probably under more pressure. For although they leave college superbly equipped to bring fresh leadership to traditionally male jobs, society has not yet caught up with this fact.

Along with economic pressure goes parental pressure. Inevitably, the two are deeply intertwined.

I see many students taking pre-medical courses with joyless tenacity. They go off to their labs as if they were going to the dentist. It saddens me because I know tem in other corners of their life as cheerful people.

“Do you want to medical school?” I asked them.

“I guess so,” they say, without conviction, or “Not really.”

“Then why are you going?”

“Well, my parents want me to be a doctor. They are paying all this money and …”

Poor students, poor parents, they are caught in one of the oldest webs of love and duty and guilt. The parents mean will; they are trying to steer their sons and draughts toward a secure future. But the sons and daughter want to major in history or classics or philosophy—subjects with no “practical” value. Where’s the payoff on the humanities? It’s not easy to persuade such loving parents that the humanities do indeed pay off. The intellectual faculties developed by studying subjects like history and classics—an ability to synthesize and relate, to weigh cause and effect, to see events in perspective—are just the faculties that make creative leaders in business or almost any general field. Still, many fathers would rather put their money on courses that point toward specific profession—courses that are pre-law, pre-medical, pre-business, or, as I sometimes heard it put, “pre-rich.”

But the pressure on students is severe. They are truly torn. One part of them feels obliged to fulfill their parents’ expectations; after all, their parents are older and presumably wiser. Another part tells them that the expectations that are right for their parents are not right for them.

I know a student who wants to be an artist. She is very obviously an artist and will be a good one—she has already had several modest local exhibits. Meanwhile she is growing as a well-round person and taking humanistic subjects that will enrich the inner resources out of which her art will grow. But her father is strongly opposed. He thinks that an artist is a “dumb” thing to be. The student vacillates and tries to please everybody. She keeps up with her art somewhat furtively and takes some of the “dumb” courses her father wants her to take—at least they are dumb courses for her. She is a free spirit on a campus of tense students—no small achievement in it—and she deserves to follow her muse.

Peer pressure and self-induced pressure are also intertwined, and they begin almost at the beginning of freshman year.

“I had a freshman student I’ll call Linda,” one dean told me, “who came in and said she was under terrible pressure because her roommate, Barbara, was much brighter and studied all the time. I could not tell her that Barbara had come in two hours earlier to say the same thing about Linda.”

The story is almost funny—except that it is not. It is symptomatic of all the pressure put together. When every student thinks every other student is working harder and doing better, the only solution is to study harder still. I see students going off to the library every night after dinner and coming back when it closes at midnight. I wish they would sometimes forget about their peers and go to a movie. I hear the clacking of typewriters in the hours before dawn. I see the tension in their eyes when exams are approaching and papers are due: “Will I get everything done?”

Probably they won’t. They will get blocked. They will sleep. They will oversleep. They will bug out.

Part of the problem is that they are expected to do. A professor will assign five page papers. Several students will start writing ten page papers to impress him. Then more students will write ten page papers, and a few will raise the ante to fifteen. Pity the poor student who is still just doing the assignment.

“Once you have twenty or thirty percent of the student population deliberately overexerting,” one dean points out, “It’s bad for everybody. When a teacher gets more and more effort from his class, the student who is doing normal work can be perceived as not doing well. The tactic work, psychologically.”

Why cannot the professor just cut back and not accept longer papers? He can, and he probably will. But by then the term will be half over and the damage done. Grade fever is highly contagious and not easily reversed. Besides, the professor’s main concern is with his course. He knows his students only in relation to the course and does not know that they are also overexerting in their other courses. Nor is it really his business. He did not sign up for dealing with the student as a whole person and with all the emotional baggage the student brought along from home. That’s what deans, masters, chaplains, and psychiatrists are for.

To some extent this is nothing new: a certain number of professors have always been self-contained islands of scholarship and shyness, more comfortable with books than with people. But the new pauperism has widened the gap still further, for professors who actually like to spend time with students do not have as much time to spend. They are also overexerting. If they are young, they are busy trying to publish in order not to perish, hanging by their figure nails onto a shrinking profession.

If they are old and tenured, they are buried under the duties of administering departments—as departmental chairmen or members of committees—that have been thinned out by the budgetary axe.

Ultimately it will be the students’ own business to break the circles in which they are trapped. They are too young to be prisoners of their parents’ dreams and their classmates’ fears. They must be jolted into believing into themselves as unique men and women who have the power to shape their own future.

“Violence is being done to the undergraduate experience,” says Carlos Hortas. “College should be open-ended: at the end it should open many, many roads. Instead, students are choosing their goal in advance, and their choices narrow as they go along. It’s almost as if they think that the country has been codified in the type of jobs that exist-that they’ve got to fit into certain slots. Therefore, fit into the best paying slot.”

“They ought to take chances. Not taking chances will lead to life of colorless mediocrity. They’ll be comfortable. But something in the spirit will be missing.”

I have painted too drab a portrait of today’s students, making them seem a solemn lot. That is only half of their story; if they were so dreary I wouldn’t so thoroughly enjoy their company. The other half is that they are easy to like. They are quick to laugh and to offer friendship. They are not introverts. They are usually kind and are more considerate of one another than any student generation I have known.

Nor are they so obsessed with their studies that they avoid sports and extracurricular activities. On the contrary, they juggle their crowded hours to play on a variety of teams, perform with musical and dramatic groups, and write for campus publications. But this in turn is one more cause of anxiety. There are too many choices. Academically, they have 1,300 courses to select from; outside class they have to decide how much spare time they can spare and how to spend it.

This means that they engage in fewer extracurricular pursuits than their predecessors did. If they want to row on the crew and play in the symphony they will eliminate one; in the ‘60s they would have done both. They also tend to choose activities that are self-limiting. Drama, for instance, is flourishing in all twelve of Yale’s residential colleges, as it never has before. Students hurl themselves into these productions—as actors, directors, carpenters, and technicians—with a dedication to create the best possible play, knowing that the day will come when the run will end and they can get back to their studies.

They also cannot afford to be the willing slave of organizations like the Yale Daily News. Last spring at the one-hundredth anniversary banquet of that paper—who’s past chairmen include such once and future kings as Potter Stewart, Kingman Brewster, and William F. Buckley, Jr.—much was made of the fact that the editorial staff used to be small and totally committed and that “newsies” routinely worked fifty hours a week. In effect they belonged to a club; Newsies is how they defined themselves at Yale. Today’s students will one or two articles a week, when he can, and he defines himself as a student. I’ve never heard the word Newsie except at the banquet.

If I have described the modern undergraduate primarily as a driven creature who is largely ignoring the blithe spirit inside who keeps trying to come out and play, it’s because that’s where the crunch is, not only at Yale but throughout American education. It’s why I think we should all be worried about the values that are nurturing a generation so fearful of risk and so goal-obsessed at such an early age.

I tell students that there is no one “right” way to get ahead—that each of them is a different person, starting from a different point and bound for a different destination. I tell neither them that change is a tonic and that all the slots are not codified nor the frontiers closed.One of my ways of telling them is to invite men and women who have achieved success outside the academic world to come and talk informally with my students during the year. They are heads of companies or ad agencies, editors of magazines, politicians, public officials, television magnates, labor leaders, business executives, Broadway products, artists, writers, economists, photographers, scientists, historians—a mixed bag of achievers.

I asked them to say a few words about how they got started. The students assume that they started in their present profession and knew all along that it was what they wanted to do. Luckily for me, most of them got into their field by a circuitous route, to their surprise, after many detours. The students are startled. They can hardly conceive of a career that was not pre-planned. They can hardly imagine allowing the hand of God or chance to nudge them down some unforeseen trail.

11. To Err Is Wrong

In the summer of 1979, Boston Red Sox first baseman Carl Yastrzemski became the fifteenth player in baseball history to reach the three thousand hit plateaus. This event drew a lot of media attention, and for about a week prior to the attainment of this goal, hundreds of reports covered Yaz’s every more. Finally, one reporter asked, “Hey Yaz, aren’t you afraid all of this attention will go to your head?” Yastrzemski replied, “I look at this way: in my career I’ve been up to bat over ten thousand times. That means I’ve been unsuccessful at the plate over seven thousand times. That fact alone keeps me from getting a swollen head.”?

Most people consider success and failure as opposites, but they are actually both products of the same process. As Yaz suggest, an activity that produces a hit may also produce a miss. It is the same with creative thinking; the same energy that generates good creative ideas also produces errors.

Many people, however, are not comfortable with errors. Our educational system, based on “the right answer” belief, cultivates our thinking in another, more conservative way. From an early age, we are taught that right answers are good and incorrect answers are bad. This value is deeply embedded in the incentive system used in most schools:

Right over 90% of the time = “A”

Right over 80% of the time = “B~”

Right over 70% of the time = “C~” Right over 60% of the time = “D~” Less than 60% correct, you fail.

From this we learn to be right as often as possible and to keep our mistakes to a minimum. We learn, in other words, that “to err is wrong.

Playing It Safe

With this kind of attitude, you aren’t going to be taking too many chances. If you learn that failing even a litter penalizes you (e.g., being wrong only 15% of the time garners you only a “B” performance), you learn not to make mistakes. And more important, you learn not to put yourself to situation where you might fall. This leads to conservative thought pattern designed to avoid the stigma our society puts on “failure”.

I have a friend who recently graduated from college with a Master’s degree in Journalism. For the last six month, she has been trying to find a job, but to no avail. I talked with her about situation, and realized that her problem is that she doesn’t know how to fail. She went through eighteen years of schooling to try any approaches where she might fail. She has been conditioned to believe that failure is bad in and of itself, rather than a potential stepping-stone to new ideas.

Look around. How many middle managers, housewives, administrators, teachers, and other people do you see who are to try anything new because of this failure? Most of us have learned not to make mistakes in public. As a result, we remove ourselves from many learning experience except for those occurring in the most private of circumstances.

Different Logic

From a practical point of view, “to err is wrong” makes sense. Our survival in the everyday world requires us to perform thousand of small tasks without failure. Think about it: you wouldn’t last very long if you were to step out in front of traffic or stick your hand a pot of boiling water. In addition, engineers whose bridges collapse, stock brokers who lose money for their clients, and copywriters whose ad campaigns decrease sales won’t keep their jobs very long.

Nevertheless, too great an adherence to the belief “to err is wrong” can greatly undermine your attempts to generate new ideas. If you are more concerned with producing right answers than generating original ideas, you’ll probably make uncritical use of the rules, formulae, and procedures used to obtain these right answers. By doing this, you’ll by-pass the germinal phase of the creative process, and thus spend litter time testing assumptions, challenging the rules, asking what-if questions, or just playing around with the problem. All of these techniques will produce some incorrect answers, but in the germinal phase errors are viewed as a necessary by-product of creative thinking. As Yaz would put it, “if you want the hits, be prepared for the misses.” That’s the way the game of life goes.

Errors as Stepping Stones

Whenever an error pops up, the usual response is “Jeez, another screw up, what went wrong this time?” the creative thinker, on the other hand, will realize the potential value of errors, and perhaps say something like, “Would you look at that! Where can it lead our thinking?” and then he or she will go on to use the error as a stepping stone to a new idea.As a matter of fact, the whole history of discovery is filed with people who used erroneous assumptions and failed ideas as stepping-stones to new ideas. Columbus thought he was finding a shorter route to India. Johannes Kepler stumbled on to the idea of interplanetary gravity because of assumptions that were right for the wrong reasons. And, Thomas Edison knew 1800 ways not to build a light bulb.

The following story about the automotive genius Charles Kettering exemplifies the spirit of working through erroneous assumptions to good ideas. In 1912, when the automobile industry was just beginning to grow, Kettering was interested in improving gasoline engine efficiency. The problem he faced was“knockthe phenomenon in which gasoline takes too long to burn in the cylinder-thereby reducing efficiency.

Kettering began searching for ways to eliminate the “knock.” He thought to him, “How can I get the gasoline to combust in the cylinder at an earlier time?” the key concept here is “early”. Searching for analogous situations, he looked around for models of “things that happen early.” He thought of historical models, physical models, and biological models. Finally, he remembered a particular plant, the trailing arbutus, which “happens early,” i.e., it blooms in the snow (“earlier” than other plants). One of this plant’s chief characteristics is its’ red leaves, which help the plant retain light at certain wavelengths. Kettering figured that it must be the red color, which made the trailing arbutus bloom earlier.

Now came the critical step in Kettering’s chain of thought. He asked himself, “How can I make the gasoline red?” perhaps I’ll put red dye in the gasoline—maybe that’ll make it combust earlier.” He looked around his workshop, and found that he didn’t have any red dye. But he did happen to have some iodine—perhaps that would do. He added the iodine to the gasoline and, lo and behold, the engine didn’t “knock”.

篇3：英语写作浅谈

论文摘要：英语新课程改革的重点是强调从学生的学习兴趣、生活经验和认知水平出发，倡导体验、实践、合作与交流的学习方式和任务型的教学途径，发展学生的综合语言运用能力。本文认为学生的写作却I练可以分为以下几个方面：一是基础训练，包括阅读、背诵和复述三项内容；二是写作实践，包括仿写、指导写作、自由写作和连续写作四个阶段；最后是修改完善，包括自改、教师面批和多层面修改三个环节。经过这样的层层递进和循环往复，学生不但能养成良好的写作习惯，更能在写作测试中文思泉涌，取得好的成绩。

论文关键词：英语课程改革写作训练创新教学

外语教学中听、说、读、写是一个有机的整体。但学生普遍对写有畏难情绪，懒于动笔，总觉得英语作文无话可说。其实它是由英语词汇、语法、主题及其写作手法等互相依赖、互相作用的诸要素组成的有机整体。英语新课程改革的重点就是改变英语课程过分重视语法和词汇知识的讲解与传授、忽视对学生语言运用能力的培养的倾向，强调课程从学生的学习兴趣、生活经验和认知水平出发，倡导体验、实践、参与合作与交流学习方式和任务型的教学途径，发展学生的综合语言运用能力，使学习的过程成为学生自主学习能力的过程。在长期的教学实践中，我认为学生的写作训练可以分为几个方面：

一、基础训练

掌握所学的知识，能够熟练的运用英语进行交际是写好作文的前提。所以要想提高学生的写作能力，我认为下面的练习时必不可少也是行之有效的。

(一)阅读。新课本的课文容量大，生词多，语法也较为复杂，学生理解起来有一定困难。养成良好的阅读习惯，形成语感，使学生能够将所学知识在句子和课文中消化吸收，会使他们有一定的成就感。同时增加一定的课外阅读量也能够开阔他们的视野，写作起来便不拘泥于重复单调的词汇和句式。

(二)背诵。新课本的内容和学生生活密切相关，涉及到很多实际问题。要求学生背诵课本里的典型例句和文章，可以使他们在写作时有很多现成可用的句子，降低写作的难度。也可以鼓励学生课下用专门的笔记本摘录课外读物上自己喜欢的文章片段和名言警句，扩大知识的积累，为更好的写作储备更多更好的素材。

(三)复述。对于复杂难懂或较为重要的阅读材料，教师可通过阅读后的复述训练，提高学生的写作能力。可以通过两种形式进行训练：其一、让学生先阅读一份材料，然后让他们合上书本，口述内容，再由其他学生补充，最后写出材料大意。其二、老师设计按文章思路设计一些启发性问题，学生通过阅读，获取信息，将键词句进行板书，形成初步思想，然后列出写作提纲。学生当堂写作，老师进行面批，经初稿、二稿，润饰、定稿，然后上交。

二、写作实践

写作实践阶段的教学目标是要求学生在充分准备的基础上进行文字写作实践。这一阶段的具体内容有五项：（一)分析写作主题；(二)草稿及自检错误；(三)教师批改；(四)重写；(五)初步定稿。在英语教学中，写作是按句子、段落和篇章三个层次来练习的。因此，教师应由易到难，由简到繁，循序渐进地进行教学，帮助学生逐步提高写的技能，逐级递升英语写作水平。中学英语写作教学的顺序一般是这样设计的。

(一)仿写。在这一阶段，学生在教师指导下进行写作活动。在写作时，应提倡模仿以英语为本族语的人所写的东西。现在的课文都可以作为范文，每单元也都布置了这样的写作练习。例如，可以让学生按不同体裁和主题整理一些范文，看他们如何组织写作，如何运用词语和句子，从中学习一些写作技巧，然后进行套用。还可以让学生做一些语句排序、汉译英、填空练习或解答问题，用适当的词句把这些答案重新组合起来就是一个完整的短文。

(二)指导写作。在这一阶段，教师可以和学生一起议定若干写作提纲，然后让学生自己写作文。学生有一些创作自由，但教师还应在谋篇布局、语言运用上给学生一些有限的指导。在写作的过程中还要告诉学生尽量避开生涩的词句，和过于复杂的句式，遇到不会的单词应用其它近义词进行替换。 (三)自由写作。在这一阶段，教师可以让学生进行自由写作，他们可以写自己喜欢的主题。最好的办法是要求学生每天用英语记日记、写信、写博客等，他们可充分表达自己的思想。教师也可每天定一个统一的题目，让学生写。

(四)连续写作。要求学生列出写作提纲，让教师过目。然后每天课余写一部分内容，就像电视连续剧那样，续写不断。在教师规定的时间内完成(一般以两周为宜)，写好后，互相交换阅读，互相评论对方的作文草稿，提出修改意见。同伴问互相阅读作文的方法，可以形成一种语言意识。学生既是作者又是读者，他们通过批评性地阅读别人的作文，可以学到更多的写作知识和技巧，这学得更深、更广，而且更活。最后进行评选，将优秀作文张贴在写作园地里，此举能极大地激发学生写作的积极性。

三、修改完善

修改阶段可使学生的作文逐步完善。具体有三项内容：(一)自改；(二)教师而批；(三)多层面的修改，教师提出学生普遍存在的错误，学生对自己的文章进行多层面的修改。

教师在审评前首先应向学生展现作文评判标准(如分档和分值)，在评改学生的作文时，不仅把重点放在拼写和语法结构上，也应放在它所表达的思想及表达方式上，看学生对材料的分析是否正确、有新意，文章是否切中题目，等等。不可仅判个分数，还要有评价意见。对学生的作文立意好的要表扬，遣词造句精当的也要表扬，也可把好的作文当作范文来读。在自改阶段，老师要教给学生自改的方法并提出相应的要求。首先学生的自查不是一遍，而是按下面几个方面进行重复阅读和修改。

教师要求学生基本修改以下项：一是检查拼写、大小写、标点符号及词形变化是否正确；二是检查体裁，看文章的格式布局、开头和结尾用语是否正确；三是检查要点是否齐全，字数是否符合要求；四是检查时态语法是否有错误；五是行文是否流畅，语言是否丰富；六是卷面一定要干净整洁，字迹要工整。

作文经教师审阅后，学生还要继续修改。如此往复，直至达到师生双方共同认可的作品和分数。这样，学生虽然写的是一篇作文，但是反反复复练习的机会很多，长此以往，学生不但能养成良好的写作习惯，更能在写作测试中文思泉涌，取得好的成绩。

总之，书面表达是基础知识和基本技能及语言活用的体现。在平时教学中，应尊重主体――学生，客体――语言和教师、教法、条件等教学环境的实际，辩证地处理三者之间的互相促进、互相制约关系，带着书面表达的问题去学习各种语言材料，不断研究、调整书面表达教学方法。在具体的操作过程中，老师要认真备课，认真备教材，选择符合学生生活实际的主题。认真备学生，将学生分成好、中、差三等。针对不同层次的学生，提出不同的要求，好的要求他们行文布局要流畅，可以多用些复杂句式；中等生要保证文章意思表达清楚，句式可以简洁清楚，尽量不要出现语法错误；稍差一些的学生，要提醒他们不要少要点，用最简单的句子表达清楚即可。其次实施“教育爱”和“情感教育”，缩短师生距离，使学生变“要我写”的观念为“我要写”，通过适当的优化方式，激发学生“成功的喜悦”，进而增强其自信心。不要只是让学生进行单纯地机械练习，而是要是通过学生自己的活动，让他们学有所悟，把英语当作母语一样运用。

以上只是我在英语写作教学方面的一点心得，在新课程标准的要求下，英语教学的创新教育改革如火如荼，作为一线教师，更应不断学习，逐步提高理论水平，在教育教学实践中摸索适合本地学生学情发展，行之有效的教学模式，形成自己独特的教学特点。

篇4：英语写作浅谈

1．体裁教学法在英语写作教学中的应用

体裁教学法就是在课堂教学中，自觉运用体裁和体裁分析理论，围绕语篇的图式结构开展教学活动，其目的是使学生了解不同体裁的语篇具有不同的交际目的和篇章结构。语篇既是语言建构又是社会意义建构，既让学生掌握图式结构又能够了解其构建过程。笔者在高职院校写作教学方面有多年的实践，尝试过多种教学法，效果不甚明显。经过体裁教学法的理论学习与初步课堂实践，觉得体裁教学法比较适合于高职院校实用英语写作教学[1]。

首先，体裁教学法是以语篇的社会功能和交际目的为核心，这与英语写作的最终目的是一致的。其次，体裁分析法引导学生掌握同一体裁的不同语篇的语篇结构和文体特征。实用英语写作的素材大多为社交信函和常用商务信函。另外，高职高专英语应用能力写作考试多以应用文为主，高度结构化的体裁分析比较适合考试要求，从这点上说，体裁教学法的采用可以增强学生学习信心，减轻考试焦虑感，一定程度上对提高写作考试成绩和写作能力都有益处。

从体裁分析理论看，写作是同社会情景密切相关的，写作是作者与某一特定社会情景沟通的手段。情景语境通常包括三要素[2]：语场、语旨、语式。语场指交际的内容和目的，语旨指交际双方的关系，语式指交际的方式。以确立贸易关系信函为例，在教学过程中，教师应特别强调这类文章的交际目的和与之相适应的社会情景语境的分析：语场、语旨和语式等。教师应指导学生列出其图式结构，分析其特点，这样对学生习得英语写作有重要意义。当然，体裁教学法并不否定成果教学法中常用的语言层面的分析。相反，教师应和学生一起参与特定体裁的用词和句法的分析，这样可以使学生认识到不同体裁有不同的语言表现形式和体裁结构，能使他们在较短的时间内掌握语言建构和意义建构，完成与社会的书面交往。

2．目标教学法在英语写作教学中的应用

所谓目标教学，就是以布卢姆的教育目标分类学为基础，以掌握学习策略为理论指导的一种科学化、标化、系统化的教学模式。在写作教学中运用目标教学法首先从有计划地确立目标开始。通过让学习者通过完成各种目标不断接触新知识、得出新结论，提高运用语言的能力。

目标教学法在写作教学中的实施必须由浅入深，由简到繁，从易到难，有计划、有步骤地进行阶梯式训练。为增强写作课程的方向性和主动性，师生都要对写作课的目标了然于胸，这有利于激发学生原来存储的与目标相关的经验和知识，并以此作为生长点和衔接点去生成新知识，增长新经验。要让学生明白自己的近期目标是通过全国英语应用能力考试，拿到毕业证；远期目标是毕业后面向就业市场，满足社会需求，掌握和运用各种应用文，学以致用，解决实际问题。目标教学法在写作课程实施中通常有四个步骤[3]：扩大词汇量，提高基础写作水平；写作要点和格式的训练；写作内容和质量的训练。批改反馈，修改成型。教师要把学生上交的写作初稿认真批改，检查从语言知识积累阶段走向语言知识运用阶段的成果。教师要做到对每个学生的水平和问题心中有数。确定主题是否明确，内容是否充实，结构是否合理。不可攀，增强其英语学习的成就感。

3．错误分析法在英语写作教学中的应用

高职学生在英语写作过程中经常会出现如拼写、词汇、语法、句子结构、语篇结构等方面的错误，如何从理论上认识这些错误，改进写作教学，提高学生写作水平，是值得我们认真探讨的。

错误分析理论是英国应用语言学家科德受母语习得中错误分析的启发而提出的。错误分析理论认为，外语学习者的语言错误并不意味着学习上的失败，它反映了学习者对目的语所做的假设，这种假设只有在与目的语体系不符时才会出现偏差，因此，学习过程中的错误是不可避免的[4]。通过错误分析，可以让我们了解学习者是如何建立和检验假设的，进而探索外语学习的心理过程，寻找错误的来源，帮助学习者纠正错误。

通常来讲，作为教学或准备教学材料的一种辅助方式，进行错误分析主要有以下三个原因：搞清学习者语言学习过程中采取的策略；试图搞清造成学习者错误的原因；获取有关语言学习者普遍难点的信息。

学生在写作过程中产生错误是不可避免的正常现象，是学生学习语言内化知识的外显反映。但对于教师来说，对学生作文中的错误应持宽容态度，允许错误存在。通过对学生错误的分析，教师不仅可以清楚地了解学生产生错误的原因，帮助他们分析自己的错误，开展有针对性的指导，并且还可以对学生普遍存在的错误在课堂上一一解释说明。

纠错不是教学的目的，只是完善教学效果的一种手段。语言错误的形式多种多样，但无论哪一种错误，教师都不要急于亲自纠正。由于学习是渐进的，有些错误是暂时的，因此教师要善于启发引导学生自己去发现错误、分析错误、纠正错误。

参考文献：

[1]韩金龙，英语写作教学：过程体裁教学法[J]，外语界，20xx

[2]韩金龙，秦秀白，体裁分析与体裁教学法[J]，外语界，20xx

[3]教育部高等教育司．高职高专教育英语课程基本要求[M]．北京：高等教育出版社，20xx

[4]赵芳，景品兰．错误分析及其在英语教学中的运用[J]．雁北师范学院学报，20xx

[5]杨宇红．错误分析理论在大学英语写作训练中的运用[J]．宁波大学学报，20xx

篇5：英语写作浅谈

摘要：高中英语写作作为高中英语教学的重要组成部分，对于学生英语能力的提高意义重大。基于此，文章在分析高中英语写作现状及成因的基础上，从转变教学观念，完善和创新教学方法，改善教学评价方式，要求学生进行针对性写作训练四个方面探讨了高中英语写作教学质量的提升策略。

关键词：高中英语；写作教学；教学质量

中学英语教学大纲中指明了培养学生的写作能力是英语教学的目的之一。英语写作作为高考的必考内容，对学生的升学有着重大的现实意义，而且高中英语写作属于基础性的写作，这种奠基性的地位才更加凸显了高中英语写作的重要性。要提高高中英语写作教学质量，要从教师、学生这两个教学角色上进行针对性研究。

一、高中英语写作现状

（一）高中生英语写作中的问题

首先，缺少英语学习的浓厚氛围。由于英语不是我国的母语，这种非母语式的教学氛围极为缺乏。其次，写作思维上，学生在写作时由于受到汉语的写作思维的影响，学生在英语写作过程中，不能正确运用各种英语语法和词汇[1]，有时还会出现作文已经写了一大半，但是主题思想还未出现，这种冗长的繁琐的表达方式，降低了英语文章的可读性和说服力，不利于学生英语写作水平的提高。

（二）高中英语写作的教学现状

一方面，学校以及教师对学生的英语交际能力的培养有所忽视。由于受到应试教育的影响，我国的英语教学，对于学生英语实践能力的培养有所欠缺[2]。另一方面，教师的英语写作教学方式陈旧，缺乏创新，不能引起学生的学习兴趣。

二、高中英语写作问题的成因分析

首先，教学观念上存在误区导致教学实践上出现问题。虽然英语写作在高中英语中占据着很大比重，但从目前的教学现状中来看，学生写作能力无法有效提高，与教师平时只注重语法讲解，缺乏英语写作的专项训练有着很大关系。其次，教学方法上忽视了对学生英语写作思维的训练，范文学习成为我国英语写作教学的主要方法，这不利于学生拓展其写作思维。模板学习不仅禁锢了学生的写作思维，还容易出现千篇 一律的现象，不利于学生自我创新能力的发展。最后，英语写作教学中的教学评价存在问题，由于我国的高中生源较多，班级容量较大，因此教师在英语作业的批改中往往存在简化的缺点[3]。例如，选择题与部分词汇题教师自己可以通过读卡机进行评分，而在英语作文环节就进行简化，直接将范文发给学生，让学生进行参考自评，导致教师无法清楚地了解到学生写作中的不足之处。

三、高中英语写作教学质量提升的策略

（一）转变教学观念

英语教师身处教育第一线，应该明确高中英语写作在学生英语学习与实践应用中的基础作用。“滴水穿石”也非一日之功，英语写作是一个日积月累的过程，需要教师在教学过程中注重学生英语交际能力的培养，真正让学生体会到学习英语的快乐。打破为了考试而学习的观念，向学生传递学习英语是为了更好地与世界交流，让学生在轻松愉快地氛围中主动学习，提高英语学习的效率。此外，教师还应该树立一种终身学习的观念，在培养学生的同时不断地提升自己的写作水平，做到真正的“为人师表”，为提高学生的写作水平奠定基础。

（二）完善和创新教学方法

应试教育下的教学方法已经不能适应素质教育的要求，教师不仅要在教学观念上与时俱进，还需要不断完善自己的教学方法。通过认真审批每一个学生的英语作业，找出学生英语写作的瓶颈，提出针对性的策略。在整个高中英语学习过程中，重视英语写作的专项训练。英语的口语交际能力是一门基本功，良好的英语口语交际能力是学生写作水平提高的基础。教师可以通过课上的全英文教学以及组织课外英语学习小组等方式，为学生创造一个良好的学习氛围，提高学生的英语口语能力。

（三）改善教学评价方式

教学评价虽然是教学环节的末梢，却直接影响着学生下一步的学习状态，有效的教学评价能够激发学生的学习热情。高中生的心理特点极其复杂，教师的评价一定程度影响到他们学习英语的态度，因此，应多采取鼓励与批评相结合的评价方式，针对不同性格特点的学生采取不同的方法，确保有效激发学生的英语学习兴趣。

（四）要求学生进行针对性写作训练

教师应要求学生在日常生活中多参与英语实践活动，提高英语口语能力，拓展英语写作思维。同时养成自主学习的习惯，针对英语写作短板进行专项训练，并借助网络社交平台拓展学生与国际友人的交流渠道，提高英语交际能力，在实际交流中丰富自己的词汇量，提升自己的英语写作水平。

总之，提高高中英语写作教学质量是一个长期的循序渐进的过程，教师和学生都要做到“对症下药”，才能有效提高高中英语写作的整体水平。

参考文献：

[1]李晓芳.提升高中英语听力教学质量的策略[J].中国现代教育装备,20xx(22):16-17.

[2]林书珍.范文背诵在高中生英语写作中的有效性研究[D].济南:山东师范大学,20xx.

[3]王才文.混合学习在高中英语写作教学中的应用研究[D].济南:山东师范大学,20xx.

篇6：英语写作浅谈

摘要：英语写作最能体现一个人学习外语的整体素质和综合能力，如何提高学生的写作水平和促进写作教学是英语教师亟待解决的一大难题。学生要写好英语作文必须具备一定的词汇积累及语法基础，并进行专门的训练，高中英语的写作教学可以从下面几个方面进行训练和引导。

关键词：英语写作；基础；兴趣；训练指导

一、提高学生的英语写作能力，牢固一定的基础

英语属于结构语言，有着自己的基本句型、固定搭配、固定短语等，要想在写作中用上它们，用好它们，必须加强这方面的基本训练。（1）抓学生写字基本功。学生的字体好坏直接影响学生非智力因素的得分。为使学生写得快，写得规范，少丢卷面分和感情分，教师应加强学生的平时练字；（2 ）抓学生词汇积累。在掌握教材词汇的基础上，及时补充一些课外词汇并加强背诵重点词汇、典型句式、精彩段落和重要章节，为写作积累大量的素材；（3 ）加强五种基本句型结构教学：几乎所有的英语句型都是五种句型的扩大、延伸或变化，因此训练学生“写”就要抓住五种基本句型的训练；（4 ）时态是英语写作的关键，在一开始的写作训练中，教师就要有意识地训练学生一动笔时就考虑动词的时态。

二、兴趣是最好的老师，要培养学生对英语写作的兴趣

认识兴趣是力求认识世界、渴望获得科学文化知识和不断探求真理而带有情绪色彩的意向活动。许多科学家、发明家取得伟大成就的原因之一就是具有浓厚的认识兴趣或强烈的求知欲。当一个学生对某种学习产生兴趣时， 他总是积极主动而且心情愉快地进行学习，不觉得学习是一种沉重的负担。有兴趣的学习不仅能使学生全神贯注、积极思考，甚至能达到废寝忘食的境地。人在满怀兴趣的状态下所学习的一切，常常掌握得迅速而牢固，因此教师应最大限度地激发他们正确的学习动机，培养他们英语写作的兴趣。

三、要让学生清楚高考英语写作命题规律，并对学生进行系统训练

广东高考英语写作分两个部分：基础写作和读写任务。基础写作主要考查学生对英语基本句型的运用，整合知识的能力和语言结构安排及基本表述的能力。此题基本不要求考生对写作内容进行发挥，只需将所给信息完整准确连贯地写出就可以了。其实际上就是翻译和连词成句，()扩句成文的形式。读写任务又分概括所给短文和发表考生个人看法两部分，侧重考查考生转述他人观点、提出自我观点、论证所提观点的思维能力，考查考生概括能力和较高的语篇布局能力。清楚这些要求就可以有侧重地分别进行训练。

要在基础写作上有所突破，教师首先要制订一个长期的教学计划，对学生进行各种题材的训练，设计出不同的文体练习，总结各种文体的特点和规律。不同的题材，我们要给出行文模式，然后反复写，使之熟练。在训练写作时，我们应该定量限时，形成一种快速完成任务的习惯，改掉学生写作时那种拖泥带水的坏习惯。俗话说，熟能生巧。因此，我们要坚持勤写多练，每星期固定一定的时间进行写作训练，使学生经常处于英语思维状态，形成英语思维习惯，使学生写出的文章得体流畅。

要提高读写任务，先要分体裁（一般是记叙文、议论文或说明文）、有计划地训练学生概括所给短文的能力。第二部分一般分三个自然段，每个自然段段首写一个主题句，然后再围绕这个主题句展开。系统地训练学生写主题句的方法：直接回答，翻译要点，明示观点，引出经历，说出感受等及主题句展开方式：说明原因，逐条举例，细化主题，说明结果，叙述经过等。

四、要使学生真正取得进步，一定要对学生的作文进行有效的指导

及时讲评，抓好习作讲评课，及时反馈信息，是提高学生书面表达能力不可缺少的一项工作。批阅过程中，要认真记录习作中存在的带有普遍性和典型性的错误，为讲评课做好材料准备。讲评时将优秀作品读给全班学生听，给予鼓励。备好、上好讲评课，使不同层次的学生在每次习作中都能有所收获，逐步提高自己的写作水平。

明确写作步骤：

（1）认真审题。理解题意、抓住中心、掌握要领，对题目进行仔细研究、透彻理解是写好作文关键的一步。审题时要仔细理解试题的提示语，弄清试题对内容和形式方面的具体要求。（2）明确得分点。高考作文批阅时按要点给分，考生应细心分析，摸清主题和内容要点，然后一一写全。（3）准确表达，要符合英语语言习惯。答题时，不要急于把所表达的内容先用汉语固定下来，然后再逐词逐句地硬译，而要在不改变原文基本内容的前提下，灵活地运用最熟悉、最有把握的词汇和句型。（4）书写要清楚美观，文章位置适中。

书面表达属主观性试题，阅卷的主观印象直接关系到等级得分。第（5）时间要安排得当。高考阅卷中常常有考生因为第一卷耗时太多，致使第二卷时间不够。

五、“授之以鱼，不如授之以渔”,要培养学生自己修改的习惯俗话说“:文章不厌百回改”“, 三分写七分改”.一篇好的书面表达，修改所占的分量是显而易见的。传统写作教学模式是老师精心指导，学生独立完成，老师批改，并评讲学生写作。其弊端是所有学生都是被动的，主体性作用不能发挥出来。事实上，教师对每篇书面表达都详细批阅并及时反馈是不可能的。必须变教法，把“球”踢给学生。叶圣陶说：“批改固然教育之要务，然需进一步想，必使学生能自改作文，教书应该把作文的修改权还给学生，让学生在自我的习作和反复修改中悟出写作的规律来”.

总之，要真正提高书面表达的水平，主要靠坚实的基础知识和平时大量的写作训练，只要充分重视，认真训练，就一定会有所成效。