青海民族地区藏汉双语两类教学模式效果定量对比探析——以海南州第二民族高级中学为实证案例

A Quantitative Comparative Analysis of the Effects of Two Tibetan-Chinese Bilingual Teaching Models in Ethnic Areas of Qinghai—An Empirical Case Study of Hainan Prefecture No. 2 Ethnic Senior High School

摘要: 双语教育模式是少数民族聚居区经长期实践形成的稳定且具操作性的教学范式。青海民族地区历经多年探索，形成两类核心藏汉双语教学模式：一类为除汉语文外其余课程均用民族语文授课，另一类为除民族语文课外其他课程全采用汉语文教学。两类模式在实践中均取得一定成效，但学界相关研究多以定性描述为主，缺乏系统量化评估，导致教学模式选择争议持续存在。本研究以青海省海南州第二民族高级中学2014~2017年高考总评成绩为样本，采用独立样本T检验对两类模式的教学效果进行定量对比。结果显示，在坚持“按语言能力分班、实施双语教学、依学生优势语言授课”原则的前提下，两类模式的整体教学效果无显著差异；分科目检验则表明，一类模式在藏语文等民族特色学科优势突出，二类模式在汉语文、英语、理综等通用学科表现更优。本研究为民族地区学校科学选择双语教学模式、推动双语教育规范化发展提供了量化依据。

Abstract: Bilingual education models are stable and operable teaching paradigms formed through long-term practice in ethnic minority concentrated regions. After years of exploration, two core Tibetan-Chinese bilingual teaching models have taken shape ethnic areas of Qinghai. One model delivers all courses in the ethnic language except for Chinese language lessons, while the other conducts all courses in Chinese except for ethnic language courses. Both models have achieved certain results in practice. However, academic research in this field has been dominated by qualitative descriptions, lacking systematic quantitative evaluation, which has led to persistent disputes over the selection of teaching models. Taking the overall college entrance examination scores of Hainan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture No. 2 Ethnic Senior High School in Qinghai Province from 2014 to 2017 as the research sample, this study adopted an independent-samples t-test to conduct a quantitative comparison of the teaching effectiveness of the two models. The results show that on the premise of adhering to the principles of “classifying students by language proficiency, implementing bilingual teaching, and delivering courses in accordance with students’ dominant language”, there is no significant difference in the overall teaching effectiveness between the two models. Subject-specific tests indicate that the first model demonstrates prominent advantages in ethnic characteristic disciplines such as Tibetan language, whereas the second model performs better in general disciplines including Chinese language, English and comprehensive science. This study provides a quantitative basis for schools in ethnic areas to scientifically select bilingual teaching models and promote the standardized development of bilingual education.