進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-0102201012510600
論文名稱(中文) 互動式閱讀策略教學法對英文閱讀理解能力效益之研究
論文名稱(英文) Effects of Interactive Reading Strategy Instruction on High School Students’ Reading Comprehension
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 外國語文學系在職專班
系所名稱(英) Department of Foreign Languages & Literature (on the job class)
學年度 98
學期 1
出版年 99
研究生(中文) 胡唐毓
研究生(英文) Tang-Yu Hu
學號 k2796111
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
論文頁數 178頁
口試委員 口試委員-劉繼仁
口試委員-李敏瑜
指導教授-陳璧清
中文關鍵字 閱讀策略  互動式閱讀策略教學法  閱讀理解 
英文關鍵字 Reading strategy  Interactive reading strategy instruction  Reading comprehension 
學科別分類
中文摘要 台灣自實施九年一貫課程以來,政府大力推動各階段的英語教育,針對國民中小學課程綱要英語領域,強調國中階段的學生應發展閱讀不同體裁與閱讀理解的能力,因此認知策略的教學成為教育者關注的重要議題。本研究的目的是在探討互動式閱讀策略教學對於台灣國中生閱讀能力的效益,並研究此閱讀策略教學法對國中生的閱讀策略習得的成效。此外,文中也深入研究國中生對閱讀策略的使用,以及學生對此教學法的回應。
本研究以台南縣某國中六十八位三年級學生為研究對象,進行為期兩個月的教學實驗研究。在教學過程中,老師挑選六個基本學力測驗經常出現的題型中所使用的閱讀策略來進行閱讀策略的訓練:找尋細節資訊、推測文章情境、找出代名詞指涉、猜測單字意義、確認文章主旨以及導出暗示推論。訓練的方法採用互動式策略教學法,強調學生透過明示的策略教學、老師的示範教學、老師的引導教學、學生填寫閱讀紀錄表、學生的小組討論以及學生的獨立練習等方式來學習閱讀策略。研究的主要工具是前、後測(採自仿全民英檢初級的閱讀測驗)、學生使用閱讀策略問卷、及學生對此教學法的回饋問卷。本研究的主要發現如下:
1. 整體而言,學生在後測的表現優於前測的表現,表示本研究中採用的互動式閱讀策略教學對學生的閱讀能力提升有其顯著效果。
2. 從各組學生的閱讀策略表現發現,互動式閱讀策略教學對於中等程度以下的學生的閱讀能力提昇更為顯著。
3. 至於學生在閱讀策略習得方面,此教學法對於學生習得找尋細節資訊、推測文章情境、猜測單字意義以及導出暗示推論等策略有顯著效果,但在找出代名詞指涉和確認文章主旨策略方面,並無顯著的效果。
4. 大部分學生在實驗後使用策略較為頻繁,顯示互動式教學法有助於增強學生對閱讀策略的觀念和使用。
5. 大部分的學生對於互動式教學法在閱讀理解表現上的成效抱持肯定的態度,認為透過此教學學法能學習到閱讀策略的使用。
6. 問卷結果顯示,學生認為小組討論最能幫助他們學習閱讀策略的使用,而填寫閱讀紀錄表普遍被認為對學習效果不佳。

本研究結果建議,在未來的閱讀教學中,教師可以善加利用互動式閱讀策略的教學,並依學生的需要調整教學法,幫助學生把這些閱讀策略內化為閱讀技巧,使學生在閱讀過程中能自動運用閱讀技巧來提升他們的閱讀理解能力。
英文摘要 With regard to the goal of the reading competence of curriculum for junior high school in Taiwan, the emphasis is put on the learning the use of cognitive strategies to independently comprehend all kinds of texts. Teaching and learning cognitive strategies is therefore a crucial issue in Taiwan. The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of the interactive reading strategy (IRS) instruction on junior high school students’ reading comprehension. The participants’ performances on different types of reading comprehension questions were further examined to see if there were significant effects of strategy instruction on participants’ acquisition of diverse reading strategies. In addition, the study explored participants’ the frequencies of the students’ strategy use and their responses to the interactive reading strategy instruction.
The participants of the present study included 68 ninth-graders from a junior high school in Tainan County. Six specific strategiesfinding detailed information, identifying pronoun references, guessing the meaning of a vocabulary, formulating the main idea, inferring the occasion, and making inferenceswere adopted to teach through diverse teaching methods. During the eight-week strategy instruction, these strategies were taught through explicit strategy instruction, teacher’s modeling, teacher’s scaffolding, writing recording sheets, group discussion, and independent reading. The reading comprehension questions of the mock test of the Elementary Level of GEPT were used as the pretest and posttest to measure the participants’ reading comprehension before and after the instruction. A questionnaire was conducted to explore participants’ frequencies of strategy use and their attitudes toward the interactive reading strategy instruction. Based on the data analyses, the major findings of the study were summarized as follows.
1. The participants made improvement after receiving the instruction, which implied that IRS instruction also worked in a Taiwanese setting since it can foster students’ use of strategies to enhance their reading comprehension.
2. To be specific, among the students with different proficient levels, low proficient students benefited most from the IRS instruction.
3. The IRS instruction enhanced students’ abilities of finding detailed information, inferring the occasion, guessing the vocabulary, and making the inference. However, the results showed that it was not effective enough for students to identify the reference and formulate the main idea of a text.
4. The frequencies of participants’ strategy use increased after the instruction, which indicated that the IRS instruction effectively build up students’ knowledge of using strategies.
5. Most of the students had positive responses toward the strategy instruction. They commonly agreed that the IRS instruction help them acquire the strategies and enhance their comprehension.
6. Among the six teaching methods, group discussion was considered as the most effective one (42.6%) that helped students acquire the instructed strategies while writing recording sheets was regarded as the least effective teaching method (1.5%) during the strategy instruction.
In sum, this proposed IRS instruction can enhance EFL learners’ reading comprehension, and the participants commonly had positive attitudes toward the IRS instruction. The findings of the study have pedagogical implications for language practitioners seeking to enhance their teaching practice.
論文目次 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements I
Abstract (Chinese) II
Abstract (English) IV
Table of Contents VI
List of Tables X
List of Figures XI

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
Background of the Study 1
Motivation 6
Purpose of the Study 10
Research Questions 11
Significance of the Study 14
Limitation of the Study 16
Definition of Terms 18

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 20
Cognitive Strategy Instruction 20
Approaches of Reading Strategy Instruction 22
Reciprocal Teaching 24
Direct Explanation Model 27
Transactional Strategies Instruction 29
Recent Explicit Strategy Instruction 31
Interactive Reading Strategy Instruction 33
Explicit Strategy Explanation 33
Teacher’s Modeling 34
Teacher’s Scaffolding 36
Writing Recording Sheets 38
Group Discussion 40
Independent Reading 42
Selection of Cognitive Strategies 43
Basic Competence Test 44
Bloom’s Taxonomy 46
Critique 49

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 51
Participants 51
Instruction 53
Overview 54
Materials 57
Procedures 64
Instruments 70
Reading Comprehension Test 70
Questionnaires 72
Data Analysis 74

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 76
Overview 76
1. Effects of Interactive Reading Strategy Instruction on Junior High School Students’ Reading Comprehension 78
Question 1-A 79
Question 1-B 80
Discussion 81
2. Effects of Interactive Reading Strategy Instruction on the Acquisition of Different Strategies 84
Question 2-A 85
Question 2-B 86
Question 2-C. 88
Discussion 92
3. The Frequency of Students’ Use of Reading Strategies before and after the Interactive Reading Strategy Instruction 98
Question 3-A 99
Question 3-B 100
Question 3-C 103
Discussion 109
4. Students’ Responses to the Interactive Reading Strategy Instruction 112
Question 4-A 113
Question 4-B 115
Question 4-C. 117
Discussion 122
Summary 125

CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION 127
Summary of the Major Findings 127
Discussion of the Findings 130
Limitation of the Study 131
Pedagogical Implications 133
Suggestions for Further Research 135

REFERENCES 138

APPENDIXES
Appendix A The Consent for the Participants (Chinese) 150
Appendix B The Consent for the Participants (English) 151
Appendix C Class Schedule 152
Appendix D Samples of Teaching Materials 154
Appendix E Reading Comprehension Test 159
Appendix F Pre-Questionnaire (Chinese) 167
Appendix G Pre-Questionnaire (English) 169
Appendix H Post-Questionnaire (Chinese) 171
Appendix I Post-Questionnaire (English) 175

LIST OF TABLES
Table
4.1 Summary of Participants’ Background 78
4.2 Participants’ Performance on Pre- and Post-test Reading Comprehension 80
4.3 High, Intermediate, and Low Proficient Level Students’ Performance on Reading Comprehension 81
4.4 Participants’ Performance of Pre- and Post-test Scores for Each Type of Strategy 86
4.5 The Participants’ Overall Performance on Different Types of Questions in the BCT of 2009 87
4.6 Descriptive Statistics of High Proficient Students’ Acquisition of Each Strategy 89
4.7 Descriptive statistics of intermediate proficient students’ acquisition of each strategy 90
4.8 Descriptive statistics of low proficient students’ acquisition of each strategy 92
4.9 Frequencies of the Students’ Strategy Use before and after the Instruction 102
4.10 Students’ Responses to the Easiest and Most Difficult Strategies after the Instruction……………………………………………………………………….108
4.11 Students’ Attitudes toward the Effects of the Whole Implementation of the Interactive Reading Strategy Instruction 114
4.12 Students’ Attitudes toward the Way to Learn the Strategies through the Six Teaching Methods 116
4.13 Ranking of the Percentages of Students’ Responses to the Most Effective Teaching Method 122


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
3.1 The Procedures of Conducting the Study 56
4.1 The Participants’ Expected Performances for Each Type of Questions 97
4.2 High, Intermediate, and Low Proficient Students’ Performance for the Six Types of Questions before and after the Instruction 97
4.3 Students’ Responses to the Easiest and Most Difficult Strategies after the Instruction 108
4.4 Students’ Responses to the Most Effective Teaching Method 122


參考文獻 REFERENCES
Aebersold, J. A., & Field, M. L. (1997). From reader to reading teachers: Issues and strategies for second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alexander, P. A. (1996). The past, present, and future of knowledge research: A reexamination of the role of knowledge in learning and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 31, 89-92.
Alfassi, M. (2004). Reading to learn: Effects of combined strategy instruction on high school students. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(4), 171-184.
Alvermann, D. E., & Eakle, A. J. (2003). Comprehension instruction: Adolescents and their multiple literacies. In A. P. Sweet, & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 12-29). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Ambe, E. B. (2007) Inviting reluctant adolescent readers into the literacy club: Some comprehension strategies to tutor individuals or small groups of reluctant readers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(8), 632-639.
Anderson, N. J. (1999). Exploring second language reading. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Anderson, V. (1992). A teacher development project in transactional strategies instruction for teachers of severely reading-disabled adolescents. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8, 391-403.
Antoniou, F., & Souvignier, E. (2007). Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 5(1), 41-57.
Baumann, J. F., Jones, L. A., & Seifert-Kessell, N. (1993). Using thinkn alouds to enhance children’s comprehension monitoring abilities. The Reading Teacher, 47(3), 184-193.
Beckman, P. (2002). Strategy instruction. ERIC Digest. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 474302). Retrieved August 25, 2009, from
http://www.ericdigests.org/2003-5/strategy.htm
Block, C. C., & Johnson, R. B. (2002). The thinking process approach to comprehension development: Preparing students for their future comprehension challenges. In C. C. Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice (pp. 54-79). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Block, C. C., Gambrell, L. B., & Pressley, M. (2002). Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Blum, P. (2004). Improving low reading ages in the secondary school. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Brown, R. (2008). The road not yet taken: transactional strategies approach to comprehension instruction. The Reading Teacher, 61(7), 538-547.
Cakir, O. (2008). The effect of textual differences on children’s processing strategies. Reading Improvement, 69-83.
Casteel, C. P., Isom, B. A., & Jordan, K. F. (2000). Creating confident and competent readers: Transactional strategies instruction. Intervention in School & Clinic, 36(2), 67-74.
Chang, L. S. (張拉士) (2001). 國中基本學力測驗之我思我見。 師說, 154, 14-16.
Chang, W. C. (張武昌) (2006). 台灣的英語教育:現況與省思。 教育資料與研究, 69, 129-144.
Clark, K. F., & Graves, M. F. (2005). Scaffolding students’ comprehension of text. The Reading Teacher, 58, 570-580.
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman.
Cole, A. D. (2006). Scaffolding beginning readers: Micro and macro cues teachers use during students oral reading. Reading Teacher, 59(5), 450-459.
Collins, C. (1991). Reading instruction that increases thinking abilities. Journal of Reading, 34, 510-516.
Corte, E. D., Verschaffel, L., & Ven, A. V. D. (2001). Improving text comprehension strategies in upper primary school children: A design experiment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 531-559.
D’Arcangelo, M. (2002). The challenge of content-area reading. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 12-16.
Dawson, H. (2004). Cooperative learning and peer orientation effects on motivation and achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 97(3), 159-166.
Day, R. R., & Park, J. S. (2005). Developing reading comprehension questions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 60-73.
Dewitz, P., & Dewitz, P. K. (2003). They can read the words, but they can’t understand: Refining comprehension assessment. The Reading Teacher, 56, 422-435.
Duffy, G. G., Rochler, L. R., Sivan, E., Rackliffe, G., Book, C., Meloth, M., Vavrus, L. G., Wesselmann, R., Putmam, J., & Bassiri, D. (1987). The effects of explaining the reasoning associated with using reading strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 347-368.
Duke, N. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed.) (pp. 205-242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Dunston, P. J. (2002). Instructional components for promoting thoughtful literacy learning. In C. C. Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice (pp. 135-151). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Eilers, L., & Pinkley, C. (2006). Metacognitive strategies help students to comprehend all text. Reading Improvement, 43(1). Retrieved July 2007 from Proquest.
Fordham, N. W. (2006). Crafting questions that address comprehension strategies in content reading. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(5), 390-396.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2008). Shared readings: Modeling comprehension, vocabulary, text structures, and text features for older readers. The Reading Teacher, 61(7), 548-556.
Gambrell, L. B., Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (2002). Improving comprehension instruction: An urgent priority. In C. C. Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice (pp. 3-16). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Garcia, G. E. (2003). The reading comprehension development and instruction of English-language learners. In A. P. Sweet, & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 30-50). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1986). Direct instruction in reading comprehension. Educational Leadership, 43(7), 70-78.
Gillet, J. W., Temple, C., & Crawford, A. (2008). Understanding reading problems: Assessment and instruction. (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Glendinning, E. H., & Holmstrom, B. (1992). Study reading: A course in reading skills for academic purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Greenway, C. (2002). The process, pitfalls and benefits of implementing a reciprocal teaching intervention to improve the reading comprehension of a group of year 6 pupils. Educational Psychology in Practice, 18(2), 113-137.
Hashey, J. M., & Connors, D. J. (2003). Learn from our journey: Reciprocal teaching action research. Reading Teacher, 57(3), 224-232.
Herrell, A. L., & Jordan, M. (2006). 50 strategies for improving vocabulary, comprehension, and fluency: An active learning approach. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Hilden, K. R., & Pressley, M. (2007). Self-regulation through transactional strategies instruction. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23, 51-75.
Ho, W. C. (何文慶) (2001). 從基本學力測驗談起。 師友, 405, 34-36.
Hsieh, F. F. (謝霏霏) (2001). 既期待又怕受傷害的萬心交集-第一次國中基本學力測驗後。 師說, 154, 16-18.
Hsu, S. C. (2004). Reading comprehension difficulties and reading strategies of junior high school EFL students in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.
Janzen, J. (2002). Teaching strategic reading. In J. C. Richards, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching (pp. 287-294). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Jensen, M., Duranczyk, I., Staats, S., Moore, R., Hatch, J., & Somdahl, C. (2006). Using a reciprocal teaching strategy to create multiple-choice exam questions. American Biology Teacher, 68(6), 67-71.
Jitendra, A. K., Chard, D., Hoppes, M. K., Renouf, K., & Gardill, M. C. (2001). An evaluation of main idea strategy instruction in four commercial reading programs: Implications for students with learning problems. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 17, 53-73.
Jitendra, A. K., Hoppes, M. K., & Yan, P. X. (2000). Enhancing main idea comprehension for students with learning problems: The role of a summarization strategy and self-monitoring instruction. The Journal of Special Education, 34(3), 127-139.
Johnson, B. E. (2006). The reading edge: Thirteen ways to build reading comprehension (2nd ed.). Taipei: Bookman Books.
Jones, B., Palincsar, A., Ogle, D., & Carr, E. (1987). Strategic teaching and learning: Cognitive instruction in the content area. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Arreaga-Mayer, C., Wills, H., Longstaff, J., Culpepper, M., & Walton, C. (2007). Use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English language learners in elementary grades: Secondary-tier intervention. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(3), 153-168.
Keene, E. O. (2002). From good to memorable: Characteristics of highly effective comprehension teaching. In C. C. Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice (pp. 80-105). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1999). Promoting reading comprehension, content learning, and English acquisition through collaborative strategic reading (CSR). The Reading Teacher, 52(7), 738-747.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Kuhn, D., & Dean, D., Jr. (2004). Metacognition: A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theory into Practice, 43(4), 268-273.
Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Grant, M. (2008). “You can read this text-I’ll show you how”: Interactive comprehension instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(5), 372-383.
Lau, K. L. (2006). Reading strategy use between Chinese good and poor readers: A think-aloud study. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 383-399.
Lee, C. L. (2003). Promoting reading comprehension ability and vocabulary learning through collaborative strategic reading. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei Teacher College, Taiwan.
Lei, W. (雷文) (2001). 國中基本學力測驗問題總體驗。 師說, 154, 4-7.
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1996). Reflections on “promoting thinking skills of students with learning disabilities: Effects on recall and comprehension of expository prose.” Exceptionality, 6(1), 53-57.
McGregor, T. (2007). Comprehension connections: Bridges to strategic reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Meltzer, J., & Hamann, E. T. (2006). Literacy for English learners and regular students, too. Education Digest, 71(8), 32-40.
Merrill, M. D., & Gilbert, C. G. (2008). Effective peer interaction in a problem-centered instructional strategy. Distance Education, 29(2), 199-207.
Mikulecky, B. S., & Jeffries, L. (2007). Advanced reading power: Extensive reading, vocabulary building, comprehension skills, reading faster. White Plains, NY: Pearson/Longman.
Morehead, P. A., & Sledge, J. (2006). Follow the teacher leaders: The potential of teacher leadership to close the achievement gap. In A. Salhi (Ed.), Excellence in teaching and learning: Bridging the gaps in theory, practice, and policy (pp. 69-78). Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Nentl, N., & Zietlow, R. (2008). Using Bloom’s taxonomy to teach critical thinking skills to business students. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 1(2), 159-172.
Oster, L. (2001). Using think-aloud for reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 55(1), 64-69.
Owocki, G. (2003). Comprehension: Strategic instruction for K-3 students. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Oxford, R. L. (2002). Language learning strategies in a nutshell: Update and ESL suggestions. In J. C. Richards, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching (pp. 124-132). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Palincsar, A. S. (2003). Collaborative approaches to comprehension instruction. In A. P. Sweet, & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 99-114). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
Palincsar, A. S., Brown, A. L., & Martin, S. M. (1987). Peer interaction in reading comprehension instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22, 231-253.
Pinnel, G. S. (2002). The guided reading lesson: Explaining, supporting, and promoting for comprehension. In C. C. Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice (pp. 106-134). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pressley, M. (2002). Improving comprehension instruction: A path for the future. In C. C. Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice (pp. 385-399). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Gaskin, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J., Almasi, L., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. Elementary School Journal, 92, 511-554.
Pritchard, R. (1990). The effects of cultural schemata on reading processing strategies. Reading Research Quaterly, 25, 273-295.
RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward a R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Science and Technology Policy Institute, RAND Education.
Remeo, L. (2002). At-risk students: Learning to break through comprehension barriers. In C. C. Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice (pp. 354-369). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Reutzel, D. R., Camperell, K., & Smith, J. A. (2002). Hitting the wall: Helping struggling readers comprehend. In C. C. Block, L. B. Gambrell, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: Rethinking research, theory, and classroom practice (pp. 321-353). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rhoder, C. (2002). Mindful reading: Strategy training that facilitates transfer. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6), 498-512.
Richard, R. D., & Park, J. S. (2005). Developing reading comprehension questions. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 61-73.
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Teaching reading. In J. C. Richards, & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching (pp. 273-275). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Rupley, W. H., Blair, T. R., & Nichols, W. D. (2009). Effective reading instruction for struggling readers: The role of direct/explicit teaching. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25, 125-138.
Sainsburry, M. (2003). Thinking aloud: Children’s interactions with text. Reading Litereacy and Language, November, 131-135.
Scharlach, T. D. (2008). START comprehending: Students and teachers actively reading text. The Reading Teacher, 62(1), 20-31.
Slater, W. H., & Horstman, F. R., (2002). Teaching reading and writing to struggling middle and high school students: The case for reciprocal teaching. Preventing School Failure, 46(4), 163-166.
Smith, A. L. (2006). Think-aloud mysteries: Using structured, sentence by sentence text passages to teach comprehension strategies. The Reading Teacher, 59(8), 764-773.
Spörer, N., Brunstein, J. C., & Kieschke, U. (2009). Improving students’ reading comprehension skills: Effects of strategy instruction and reciprocal teaching. Learning and Instruction, 19, 272-286.
Stahl, K. A. D. (2004). Proof, practice, and promise: Comprehension strategy instruction in the primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 57, 598-609.
Sweet, A. P., & Snow, C. E. (Ed.). (2003). Rethinking reading comprehension. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Takala, M. (2006). The effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension in mainstream and special (SLI) education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(5), 559-576.
Thomas, K. F., & Barksdale-Ladd, M. A. (2000). Metacognitive process: Teaching strategies in literacy education courses. Reading Psychology, 21, 67-84.
Tsai, Y. J. (2008). A case study of cultivating junior high students’ English reading comprehension through cooperative strategy-based instruction. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.
Urquhart, S., & Weir, C. (1999). Reading in a second language: Process, product, and practice. London and New York: Longman.
Vaughn, S., Levy, S., Coleman, M., & Bos, C. S. (2003). Reading instruction for students with LD and EBD: A synthesis of observation studies. Journal of Special Education, 36, 2-13.
Vellutino, F. R. (2003). Individual differences as sources of variability in reading comprehension in elementary school children. In A. P. Sweet, & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 51-81). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Wang, Y. H. (王逸慧) (2001). 基本學力測驗之實施:問題與展望。 教育研究資訊, 9(1), 15-31.
Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers: A social constructivist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yau, L. C. (2005). Two Mandarin readers in Taiwan: Characteristics of children with higher and lower proficiency levels. Journal of Research in Reading, 28(2), 108-124.
Yang, C. Y. (2007). An analysis of the English reading comprehension tests in the basic competence test and the instruction of the reading skills and strategies in class. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taiwan.
Yeh, I. C. (2006). The effects of reading strategies instruction on junior high school students’ reading comprehension in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taiwan.
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2015-02-03起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2015-02-03起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw