臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在台灣，越來越多的新住民子女因為家庭的因素，流動於台灣與其他國家的教育體制中，這些新住民子女因為華語能力不足，在回到台灣時，課業及人際關係都受到極大的挑戰。鍾鎮城（2017）定義曾於國外非台灣國教體制接受一定期限教育之學童，或是曾數次銜轉於台灣國教及其他教育體制之學童，稱為「跨國銜轉學生」。這些學生通常因為華語能力跟不上同年級的學生而被降轉或是進入輔導機制的資源班，但在台灣師培體制中又缺乏專為教導母語非華語的學生之教學訓練，因此對教師而言，溝通問題常常會造成教師的無助感；對學生而言，華語本身所帶來的陌生感和溝通上的障礙每每讓他們對華語產生學習焦慮。本研究目的在於探討越南背景學生在個別化華語課室中所使用的溝通策略及影響其使用溝通策略的因素。
本研究採用民族誌研究，以台灣南部某兩間中學做為研究場域，蒐集兩位學生與兩位教師在華語教學中的課室語言。語料蒐集包含：學生背景資料表、課室錄影、田野筆記，以及半結構式訪談，資料分析方式主要分為兩層次：先將課室語料依照Dörnyei和Scott（1995、1997）的溝通策略分為三個類別：直接策略、互動策略、間接策略；再將訪談的內容與課室語料進行交叉比對以回應研究問題。
研究結果顯示兩位學生使用的溝通策略分散在三類別中，其中又以互動策略最多，且其使用的溝通策略具有個別差異，其背後原因包含教師與學生的因素，教師因素包含：教學目標、教師語言；學生因素包含：個性、語言焦慮、學習動機。本研究的研究結果也顯示越南背景跨國銜轉學生的溝通策略有其多樣性。
最後，本研究結論有三：（1）越南背景學生的溝通策略使用並非完全是因為語言能力不足而產生；（2）個別化華語課程對越南背景學生在溝通策略表現上有相當大的影響；（3）專業華語教師介入有助於越南背景學生於溝通策略上的輸出。
根據上述的結論，研究者提出三點教學建議：（1）華語教師在個別化教學時必須觀察越南背景學生的溝通策略以引導教學內容；（2）華語教師可採個別化華語教學可以給予越南背景學生更多立即性的回饋及差異化學習任務。；（3）華語教師應針對越南背景學生做更適切的華語能力評量。

More and more new immigrant children transfer between Taiwan and other countries’ education systems because of the family factors. When they come to Taiwanese school settings, they will face challenges either in learning or interpersonal relationships because of their language proficiency of Chinese as a second language (CSL). Chun (2017) defines children who have been educated for a certain period of time outside the Taiwanese education system, or have been transferred for several times between Taiwan's education system and other countries’ education systems, are called “transnational students”. It is common that these students are usually sent to a lower grade or into the counseling classes if their language proficiency cannot catch up their peer’s regular classroom performance. However, the teacher training system in Taiwan does not include the ideas of CSL teaching. Therefore, for teachers, the communicative difficulty often leads to a sense of helplessness; for students, the unfamiliarity with Chinese and the barriers to communication make them feel anxious about learning Chinese. The purpose of this study is to analyze the communicative strategies used by the Transnational Vietnamese-Taiwanese students in the individualized CSL classrooms and the influencing factors of communicative strategies.
This is an ethnographic study. Participants are two transnational students with Vietnamese background in two different junior high schools locate at southern Taiwan and two of their teachers. The data collection includes video recordings, field notes, and semi-structured interviews. The strategies of communication collected from participants are divided into three categories based on Dörnyei and Scott (1995, 1997): Direct Strategy, Interaction Strategy, and Indirect Strategy. And then the researcher cross-checked the data in order to answer the research questions.
The study found that the communicative strategies used by students were scattered among these three categories and the Interaction Strategy is the most widely used. Two students show their preference in communicative strategy respectively. The reasons related to the communicative strategies difference also involve the factors between teachers and students. The factors associated with teachers are teaching goals and teacher's language use. The factors associated with students are personality, language anxiety, and learning motivation. This study also reveals the diversity of transnational Vietnamese-Taiwanese students' communicative strategies.
Three conclusions in this study are: (1) transnational Vietnamese-Taiwanese students' communicative strategies are not entirely related to the lack of language proficiency; (2) individualized Chinese classes have a considerable impact on the performance of communicative strategies for transnational Vietnamese-Taiwanese students (3) CSL teachers can help transnational Vietnamese-Taiwanese students to improve their communicative strategy.
Three teaching suggestions are provided for future researchers and teachers: (1) CSL teachers need to observe the transnational Vietnamese-Taiwanese students’ communicative strategies in order to properly facilitate his/her teaching process. (2) CSL teachers need to give transnational Vietnamese-Taiwanese students immediate feedback and differentiated learning tasks; (3) CSL teachers need to conduct a multi-dimensional assessment to better accommodate the transnational Vietnamese-Taiwanese students’ learning contexts.

⽬次
第⼀章 緒論…………………………………………………………………………1
第⼀節 研究動機與研究範圍…………………………………………………1
第⼆節 研究⽬的與研究問題…………………………………………………4
第三節 名詞解釋………………………………………………………………5
第四節 研究重要性……………………………………………………………8
第⼆章 ⽂獻探討……………………………………………………………………11
第⼀節 溝通能⼒與溝通策略…………………………………………………11
第⼆節 溝通策略的分類………………………………………………………14
第三節 溝通策略的應⽤………………………………………………………29
第三章 研究⽅法……………………………………………………………………33
第⼀節 研究對象與場域………………………………………………………33
第⼆節 研究⼯具………………………………………………………………40
第三節 資料分析………………………………………………………………42
第四章 課室語料與訪談分析………………………………………………………47
第⼀節 課室語料的呈現………………………………………………………47
第⼆節 影響學⽣在個別化教學使⽤溝通策略的因素………………………76
第五章 結論與建議…………………………………………………………………91
第⼀節 研究結論………………………………………………………………91
第⼆節 研究的限制……………………………………………………………95
第三節 教學與研究建議………………………………………………………96
參考⽂獻……………………………………………………………………………100
附錄⼀ 研究對象背景資料………………………………………………………106
附錄⼆ 導師（或⾏政⽼師訪談稿）………………………………………………107
附錄三 華語教師訪談稿…………………………………………………………108
附錄四 學⽣訪談稿………………………………………………………………109

表⽬次
表 2-1 Tarone（1977）的溝通策略主要分類與細項分類…………………………15
表 2-2 Bialystok（1983）的溝通策略主要分類與細項分類………………………18
表 2-3 Dörnyei & Scott（1997）直接策略中的溝通策略項⽬……………………22
表 2-4 Dörnyei & Scott（1997）互動策略中的溝通策略項⽬……………………25
表 2-5 Dörnyei & Scott（1995）間接策略中的溝通策略項⽬……………………26
表 2-6 Nakatani 的兩⼤溝通分類與細項…………………………………………28
表 3-1 研究對象⽬前在台的家庭背景表…………………………………………34
表 3-2 兩位研究對象的就學背景…………………………………………………36
表 3-3 S1 和 S2 教學前的華語的聽、說、讀、寫能⼒評估表…………………37
表 3-4 本研究華語教師的教學時間、教學語⾔以及教材內容表………………38
表 3-5 S1 與 S2 的課室錄影時間表………………………………………………41
表 3-6 語料編碼⽅式……………………………………………………………43
表 3-7 語料呈現⽅式……………………………………………………………44
表 4-1 S1 溝通策略語料數⽬分布………………………………………………49
表 4-2 S2 溝通策略語料數⽬分布………………………………………………67
表 4-3 S1 與 S2 直接、互動、間接策略總數與百分⽐……………………………74
表 4-4 Dörnyei 和 Scott 三種策略與三種意識⽐較………………………………75
表 4-5 以 S1、S2 的溝通策略模式…………………………………………………90

圖⽬次
圖 2-1：Tarone 和 Yule 的語⾔學習四⼤功能………………………………………12
圖 3-1：A 國中個別化華語教學場域⽰意圖………………………………………39
圖 3-2：B 國中個別化華語教學場域⽰意圖………………………………………39

江芷玲（2008）。越南新住民跨文化語言學習策略研究。臺北：秀威資訊。
何自然（2000）。語用學新解。北京：北京大學。
宋如瑜（2009）。華語教學實務。臺北：正中書局。
何淑貞、張孝裕、陳立芬、舒兆民、蔡雅薰、賴明德（2008）。華語文教學導論。臺北：三
民書局。
何祥如、謝國斌、歐淑宜（2006）。多元文化教育之實踐--「跨文化了解與溝通策略」初
探。國際文化研究，2(1)。
李維德（2012）。台灣大學生溝通能力的學習策略研究。蘭陽學報，11，66-67。
林青蓉（2013）。波蘭零起點大學生華語學習策略之探究：以SILL5.1量表為檢測工具（碩
士論文）。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。
林美淑、魏聰祺（2012）。新住民華語文教學之可行性設計。中原華語文學報，10，113-
142。
林俊宏、李延輝、羅云廷、賴慈芸（譯）（2014）。第二語教學最高指導原則。台北：臺灣培
生。
林淑璋、林佳燕、吳翠華、王旭、勝倉仁（2015）。探討有關英日雙外語學習者溝通策略之
教學、應用與實踐。台灣日語教育學報，24。
林開忠、鍾宜興（2011）。東南亞教育發展、現況與省思。新北市：巨流圖書。
徐大明、陶紅印、謝天蔚（1997）。當代社會語言學。北京：中國社會科學。
教育部（2016）。新住民子女就讀國中小人數分布概況統計。取自教育部網站：http://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=829446EED325AD02&sms=26FB481681F7B203&s=4C810A112728CC60
教育部（2017）。教育部國民及學前教育署補助新住民子女教育輔導計畫作業原則。取自教
育部網站：http://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContentDetails.aspx?id=FL038611&KeyWordHL=&StyleType=1
曾蓉俞（2015）。在台灣學習中文之課堂互動溝通策略：外籍學生的觀點（碩士論文）。取自
臺灣博碩士論文系統。
葉郁菁（2012）。我國新住民子女學習母語政策之推動與實踐探討。教育資料與研究，106，57-82。
趙虹嫣（2008）。一位美籍學生跨文化溝通策略之個案研究（碩士論文）。取自臺灣博碩士論
文系統。
潘艾瑪（2015）。在台灣的印尼學生之外語溝通焦慮和口語溝通策略使用。（碩士論文）。取
自臺灣博碩士論文系統。
鄒嘉彥、游汝傑（2007）。社會語言學教程。臺北：五南。
鍾鎮城（2015）。第二語言習得與教學。臺北：新學林。
鍾鎮城（2017）。跨國銜轉孩子之系統建置研究與評估計畫。教育部，未出版。
鍾鳳嬌、王國川、陳永朗（2006）。屏東地區外籍與本國籍配偶子女在語文、心智能力發展
與學習行為之比較研究-探析家庭背景的影響。教育心理學報，37，4，411-429。
Ataollah M. (2010). Techiques to teach commication strategies, Journal of Language Teaching and Rearch, 1(5), 640-646.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principle of Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Pearson Education.
Bialystok, E. (1983). Some Factors in the Selection and Implementsation of Communication Strategies. In C. Fearch & G. Kasper(Eds.), Strategies in Interlanguage Communication, (pp.110-118). Harlow, UK: Longman.
Bialystok, E. (1990) Communication Strategies: A Psychological Analysis of Second- Language Use. UK: Blackwell.
Chen, S.Q. (1990). A Study of Communication Strategies in Interlanguage Production by Chinese EFL learners. Language Learning, 40, 155-187.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. Language and communication, 2(27), 2-27.
Davis N. J. (1992). Teaching about Inequality: Student Resistance, Paralysis, and Rage, Teaching Sociology, 20(3), 232-238.
Duchene A., Moyer M. & Roberts C. (2013). Language, Migration and Social Inequalities: A Critical Sociolinguistic Perspective on Institution and Work, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Dornyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communica- tion strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 55–85.
Dornyei, Z. & Scott, M. L. (1997). Communication Strategies in a Second Language: Definitions
and Taxonomies. Language Learning, 47(1), 173-210.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press. 
Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (1983). Strategies in interlanguage communication. London, UK: Longman.
Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (1984). Two ways of defining communication strategies. Language Learning, 34, 45-63.
Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the Evolution of Society. Boston, UK: Beacon Press.
Horwitz, E. K. & Cope, J. (1986). Preliminary Evidence for the Reliability and Validity of a Foreign Language Anxiety Scale, TESOL, 20, 559-562.
Horwitz, E. K. (1991). Language anxiety: From theory and research to classroom implications. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Hymes, D. H. (1972). On Communicative Competence. Baltimore, Maryland: Penguin Books.
Mei A. (2010). Use of Comminication Strategies by Chinese EFL Learners, Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33(2), 110-125.
LeCompte M. D. & Preissle J. (1993). Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research.Bradford, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Liu J. (2001). Asian students’ classroom communication patterns in U.S. university. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.tw/books?id=8o7NAz-EybgC&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=Adjusting+communication+strategies+to+language+proficiency&source=bl&ots=N85Kpf3mRL&sig=NE0VRBWDIhQA5HACyKJ_12z2NDU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjoyOGi2fnTAhXFi5QKHcG3B8gQ6AEIRTAH#v=onepage&q=Adjusting%20communication%20strategies%20to%20language%20proficiency&f=false
Long, M. H. (1989). Native speaker/ non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistic, 4, 126-141.
Nakatani Y. (2006), Developing an oral communication strategy inventory, The Modern Language Journal, 90, 151-168.
O’ Malley, J., & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House.
Oxford, R. L. (1992). Research on second language learning strategies. Annuals Review of Applied
Linguistic, 13,175-87.
Oxford, R. & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. The Modern Language Learning Journal, 73, 291-300.
Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: Concepts and relationships. IRAL, 41, 271-278.
Savignon, S. (2005). Communicative Competence: Theory and classroom practice. Reading, MA: Addision-Wesley.
Stevick, Earl W. (1989). Success with foreign languages: Seven who achieved it and what worked for them. London: Prentice Hall.
Su-Hie T. and Grace Y. L. Phan (2008). Adjusting communication strategies to language proficiency. Retrieved May 22, 2017, from https://books.google.com.tw/books/about/Adjusting_Communication_Strategies_to_La.html?id=X74KkAEACAAJ&redir_esc=y
Tarone, E. (1977). Conscious communication strategies in interlanguage: A progress report. TESOL,
77, 194-203.
Tarone, E. (1981). Some thought on the notion of communication strategy. TESOL Quarterly, 15(3), 285-295.
Tarone, E.& Yule, G. (1987). Communication Strategies in east-west interaction. In L. E. Smith. (Ed.). Discourse across cultures: Strategies in World English, (pp.49-65). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Tarone, E. (1989). Focus on the Language Learner. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tarone, E. (2009). Literacy and Second Language Oracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Whitbourne, S. K. (2005). Adult development and aging：Biopsychosocial perspectives. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Ya-ni Z. (2007). Communication strategies and foreign language learning, US-China Foreign
Language, 5(4), 43-48