臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究為質性教學研究，研究步驟分為兩階段：第一階段對於台灣高三學生在學習英文寫作時所經歷的困難與需求進行初步調查；第二階段使用初步調查的結果來設計並實施提升自主學習能力的差異化英文寫作課程，並探討此教學對於學生的自主學習能力及英文寫作能力的影響。
在第一階段的初步調查中，作者於2013年5月請375位就讀於台灣北部某高中的高三學生填寫一份關於學習英文寫作困難與需求的問卷，並於6月對這些學生的10位英語教師進行訪談，以期獲得不同的觀點、瞭解教與學的差異、並從中學習他們的教學經驗。初步調查結果表示，多數學生有四種英文寫作上的困難。訪談結果表明，部分教師（但並非全部）已注意到這些問題，也曾使用不同教學策略試圖解決這些困難，學生反應基本上良好，但是仍有少部分學生認為效果不彰並提出建議。
在第二階段的後續研究中，作者於2013年8月至2014年1月於同一所高中教授一個高三班級，根據初步調查結果設計五項差異化英文寫作教學活動，以期解決此四種學習困難，並同時促進自主學習、提高學習動機、提升寫作表現。此後續研究使用的工具包括學生的學習日誌、研究者的教學日誌及課堂觀察。研究結果指出，此教學研究有效促進學生的自主學習能力、學習動機及寫作表現。最後，本研究針對台灣高中英文寫作教學以及未來相關研究提出建議。

This qualitative pedagogical research was comprised of two stages. The first stage was a preliminary investigation on Taiwanese 12th-graders' difficulties and needs in the learning of English writing; the second stage was a follow-up study where the results of the preliminary investigation were utilized to design a differentiated, autonomy-supportive English writing course. The researcher hoped to promote students' autonomy, motivation, and writing performance through this pedagogical research.
In May 2013, the researcher conducted the preliminary investigation. Firstly, a survey about the difficulties and needs in the learning of English writing was administered to 375 12th-graders who studied in a senior high school based in northern Taiwan. Next, interviews were conducted on these participants' English teachers to gain different perspectives, to discover teaching-learning discrepancies, and to learn from their teaching experiences. The results of this preliminary investigation showed that the students were plagued by four difficulties in the learning of English writing. The interview results showed that some (but not all) of the teachers had noticed and tried to solve these difficulties with various teaching approaches. The results showed that most students considered these approaches effective, but a few had dissenting opinions and raised suggestions.
From August 2013 to January 2014, the researcher conducted the follow-up study in the same target school while she taught one 12th-grade class with 42 students and designed five differentiated, autonomy-supportive English writing interventions based on the findings of the preliminary investigation. The purpose of the interventions was to solve the four writing problems, promote learner autonomy, increase learning motivation, and improve writing performance. The data were qualitative, including the students' learning journal, the researcher's teaching journal, and class observation. The findings showed that the differentiated, autonomy-supportive interventions improved the students' learner autonomy, learning motivation, and English writing performance. Lastly, this pedagogical research offered implications regarding senior high school English writing instructions in Taiwan. Suggestions for future research were also provided.

CHINESE ABSTRACT i
ENGLISH ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 2
1.1 Background of the Study 2
1.1.1 Lack of Responsibility and Learning Motivation 8
1.1.2 Mixed Writing Abilities In One Class 8
1.2 Motivation of the Study 11
1.3 Purpose of the Study 13
1.4 Significance of the Study 15
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 17
2.1 The GSAT English Composition Writing Task 18
2.2 Learner Autonomy 20
2.2.1 Definition 20
2.2.2 Promoting Learner Autonomy 22
2.2.3 Autonomy-supportive Instruction and Increased Motivation 23
2.2.4 Observation of Increased Motivation 27
2.3 Differentiated Instruction 30
2.3.1 Definition and Teaching Principles 31
2.3.2 Differentiated Instruction in L2 Writing 34
2.4 Reflective Practice in L2 Learning, Teaching, and Research 39
2.5 Pedagogical Research 45
2.6 Summary of Literature Review 46
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 49
3.1 The Preliminary Investigation 51
3.1.1 Student Survey 51
3.1.1.1 Participants 52
3.1.1.2 Data Collection 54
3.1.1.3 Procedure 55
3.1.1.4 Data Analysis 57
3.1.2 Teacher Interviews 59
3.1.2.1 Participants 60
3.1.2.2 Data Collection 60
3.1.2.3 Procedure 61
3.1.2.4 Data Analysis 63
3.2 The Follow-up Study 64
3.2.1 Participants 64
3.2.2 Data Collection 65
3.2.2.1 Learning Journal 65
3.2.2.2 Teaching Journal 67
3.2.2.3 Class Observation 68
3.2.2.4 Preassessment and Summative Assessment 69
3.2.3 Procedure 70
3.2.4 Data Analysis 71
3.2.4.1 Learning Journal 72
3.2.4.2 Preassessment and Summative Assessment 72
CHAPTER FOUR FINDINGS OF THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION 75
4.1 Students' Attitude about English Writing and Teachers' Responses 76
4.2 Student-perceived Difficulties and Teachers' Responses 81
4.2.1 Difficulty 1: Problems with Language Use 83
4.2.2 Difficulty 2: Problems with Content and Organization 88
4.2.3 Difficulty 3: Insufficient Writing Practice 96
4.2.4 Difficulty 4: Low Learning Motivation 106
4.2.5 Summary of the Four Difficulties 120
4.3 Teachers' Approaches and Students' Responses 121
4.3.1 Students' General Responses 121
4.3.2 Teachers' Approaches 126
4.4 Students' Self-developed Strategies 156
CHAPTER FIVE CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK OF THE WRITING COURSE 166
5.1 Intervention 1: Orientation 171
5.2 Intervention 2: Individual conferencing 177
5.3 Intervention 3: Online Journaling 178
5.4 Intervention 4: Peer Evaluation 181
5.5 Intervention 5: Collaborative Writing Activity 189
CHAPTER SIX FINDINGS OF THE FOLLOW-UP STUDY 195
6.1 Findings about the Five English Writing Interventions 195
6.1.1 Intervention 1: Orientation 196
6.1.2 Intervention 2: Individual Conferencing 206
6.1.3 Intervention 3: Online Journaling 209
6.1.4 Intervention 4: Peer Evaluation 229
6.1.5 Intervention 5: Collaborative Writing Activity 243
6.2 Findings about Students' Learner Autonomy 250
6.3 Findings about Students' Learning Motivation 259
6.3.1 Strong Learning Motivation for English Writing 259
6.3.2 Exam Pressure: Motivating or Demotivating? 267
6.4 Findings about Students' English Writing Performance 270
CHAPTER SEVEN CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 277
7.1 Conclusions 277
7.2 Implications 280
7.3 Limitations 283
7.4 Future Research 286
REFERENCES 290
APPENDICES 298

Bahous, R., Bacha, N., &; Nabhani, M. (2011). Motivating students in the EFL classroom: A case study of perspectives. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 33-43.
Bailey, K. M., &; Nunan, D. (Eds.). (1996). Voices from the language classroom: Qualitative research in second language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Benson, P. (1997). The philosophy and politics of learner autonomy. In P. Benson &; P. Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 18-34). Harlow: Longman.
Benson, P., &; Voller, P. (Eds.) (1997). Autonomy and independence in language learning. Harlow: Longman.
Boud, D., Keogh, R. &; Walker, D. (2013a). Introduction: What is reflection in learning?. In D. Boud, R. Keogh &; D. Walker (Eds.), Reflection: Turning experience into learning (pp. 7-17). New York, NY: Routledge.
Boud, D., Keogh, R. &; Walker, D. (2013b). Promoting reflection in learning: a model. In D. Boud, R. Keogh &; D. Walker (Eds.), Reflection: Turning experience into learning (pp. 18-40). New York, NY: Routledge.
Brimijoin, K. (2005). Differentiation and high-stakes testing: An oxymoron?. Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 254-261.
Brown, J. D. (2011). Foreign and second language needs analysis. In M. H. Long &; C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 269-293). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Castle, K. (2006). Autonomy through pedagogical research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 1094-1103.
Castle, S., Deniz, C. B., &; Tortora, M. (2005). Flexible grouping and student learning in a high-needs school. Education and Urban Society, 37(2), 139-150.
Chang, P. C. (2003). The effects of the process writing instruction on Taiwanese high school students' overall English writing ability (Unpublished master's thesis). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chang, W. C., Yeh, H. N., Joe, S. G., You, Y. L., Chern, C. L., &; Liaw, M. L. (2007). Research on English-in-education policies and their effects on English teaching. In Proceedings of 2007 International Conference and Workshop on TEFL &; Applied Linguistics. Taipei, Taiwan.
Chen, P. J. (2010). A study on the effectiveness of a blog-integrated EFL college writing courses (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chen, Y., &; Lou, H. (2004). Students' perceptions of peer evaluation: An expectancy perspective. Journal of Education for Business, 79(5), 275-282.
Chen, S., &; Tsai, Y. (2012). Research on English teaching and learning: Taiwan (2004–2009). Language Teaching, 45(2), 180-201.
Cheng, H. F., &; Dörnyei, Z. (2007). The use of motivational strategies in language instruction: The case of EFL teaching in Taiwan. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 153-174.
Chi, F. M. (2010). Reflection as teaching inquiry: Examples from Taiwanese in‐service teachers, Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 11(2), 171-183.
Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., &; Noels, K. A. (1994). Motivation, self‐confidence, and group cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language Learning, 44(3), 417-448.
College Entrance Examination Center. (大學入學考試中心) (2011). 學科能力測驗英文考科考試說明 [Introduction to the GSAT English subject test]. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://www.ceec.edu.tw/AbilityExam/AbilityExamProfile.htm
College Entrance Examination Center. (大學入學考試中心) (2012). 101年學年度學科能力測驗試題分析英文考科[Item analysis on GSAT English 2012]. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://www.ceec.edu.tw/Research2/Default.aspx
Connell, J. P., &; Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: a motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. R. Gunnar &; L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Self processes in development: Minnesota symposium on child psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 167-216). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Cotterall, S. (1995). Readiness for autonomy: Investigating learner beliefs. System, 23(2), 195-205.
Cotterall, S. (2000). Promoting learner autonomy through the curriculum: Principles for designing language courses. ELT journal, 54(2), 109-117.
Cresswell, A. (2000). Self-monitoring in student writing: Developing learner responsibility. ELT journal, 54(3), 235-244.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Dastgoshadeh, A., &; Jalilzadeh, K. (2011). Multiple intelligences-based language curriculum for the third millennium. In 2011 International Conference on Education, Research and Innovation (Vol. 18, pp. 57-62). Singapore: IACSIT Press.
de Guzman, A. B., Albela, E. J. A., Nieto, D. R. D., Ferrer, J. B. F., &; Santos, R. N. (2006). English language learning difficulty of Korean students in a Philippine Multidisciplinary University. Asia Pacific Education Review,7(2), 152-161.
Deci, E. L., &; Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dixon, D. (2011). Measuring language learner autonomy in tertiary-level learners of English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Dörnyei, Z. (1990). Analysis of motivation components in foreign language learning. Paper presented at the 9th World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Thessaloniki, Greece. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 323 810)
Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31(3), 117-135.
Dörnyei, Z., &; Csizer, K. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language learners: Results of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2(3), 203-229.
Duda, J. L., &; Nicholls, J. G. (1992). Dimensions of achievement motivation in schoolwork and sport. Journal of educational psychology, 84(3), 290-299.
Ehrman, M. E., &; Dornyei, Z. (1998). Interpersonal dynamics in the second language classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Farrell, T. S. (2011). Exploring the professional role identities of experienced ESL teachers through reflective practice. System, 39(1), 54-62.
Feng, H. P. (2001). Writing an academic paper in English: An exploratory study of six Taiwanese graduate students. Doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Ferris, D. (2002). Treatment of error in second language student writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Adward Arnold.
Gardner, R.C., &; MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). A student's contributions to second-language learning. Part II: Affective variables. Language Teaching, 26(1), 1-11.
Gardner, R. C., &; Smythe, P. C. (1981). On the Development of the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery. Canadian Modern Language Review, 37(3), 510-25.
Gubrium, J. F., &; Holstein, J. A. (2002). Handbook of interview research: Context and method. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Hall, T. (2002). Differentiated instruction. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.principals.in/uploads/pdf/Instructional_Strategie/DI_Marching.pdf
Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L. H., &; Saddler, B. (2002). Developing self-regulated writers. Theory into practice, 41(2), 110-115.
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon
Huang, J. (2005). A diary study of difficulties and constraints in EFL learning. System, 33, 609-621.
Hume, K. (2008). Start where they are: Differentiating for success with the young adolescent. Toronto: Pearson Education Canada.
Hwang, C. C. (2005). Effective EFL education through popular authentic materials. Asian EFL Journal, 7(1), 90-101.
Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of second language writing, 12(1), 17-29.
Hyland, K., &; Hyland, F. (2006a). Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing: An introduction. In K. Hyland &; F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (pp. 1-19). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K., &; Hyland, F. (2006b). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language Teaching, 39(02), 83-101.
Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of second language writing, 16(3), 148-164.
Kao, S. F. (2002). The pedagogical context and the theoretical bases of EFL writing instruction in a Taiwanese public high school. NIDA Language and Communication Journal, 7(7), 41-72.
Kohonen, V. (1992). Experiential language learning: Second language learning as cooperative learner education. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Collaborative Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 14-39). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1988). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International.
Kvale, S., &; Brinkmann, S. (2008). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Langa, M. A., &; Yost, J. L. (2006). Curriculum mapping for differentiated instruction, K-8. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Lawrence-Brown, D. (2004). Differentiated instruction: Inclusive strategies for standards-based learning that benefit the whole class. American Secondary Education, 32(3), 34-62.
Levy, H. M. (2008). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 81(4), 161-164.
Liao, M. T., &; Wong, C. T. (2010). Effects of dialogue journals on L2 students' writing fluency, reflections, anxiety, and motivation. Journal of Reflections on English Language Teaching, 9(2), 139-170.
Lin, Z. (2012). Capitalising on learner agency and group work in learning writing in English as a foreign language. TESOL Journal, 4(4), 633-654.
Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy: Definitions, issues and problems. Dublin: Authentik.
Little, D. (2008). Knowledge about language and learner autonomy. In N. H. Hornberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 2000-2012). New York, NY: Springer.
Marshall, C., &; Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE publications.
Marginson, S. (2011). Higher education in East Asia and Singapore: Rise of the Confucian model. Higher Education, 61(5), 587-611.
Meece, J. L. (2003). Applying learner-centered principles to middle school education. Theory into Practice, 42(2), 109-116.
Min, H. T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33(2), 293-308.
Ministry of Education. (教育部) (2011). 十二年國教說帖 [White paper on the 12-Year Public Education Program]. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://blog.ilc.edu.tw/blog/blog/16946/resource/75174/818920
Ministry of Education. (教育部) (2012). 國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要語文學習領域（英語）[Grade 1-9 curriculum guidelines for language arts (English)]. Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://teach.eje.edu.tw/9CC/index.php
Ministry of Education. (教育部) (2014). 十二年國民基本教育實施計畫修正草案 [Draft amendments to the 12-Year Public Education Program implementation plan]. Retrieved September 1, 2014, from http://teach.eje.edu.tw/9CC/index.php
Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. (2008). Hero with a thousand faces: Learner autonomy, learning strategies and learning tactics in independent language learning. In S. Hurd &; T. Lewis (Eds.), Language learning strategies in independent settings (pp. 41-66). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Paris, S. G., &; Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89-101.
Phipps, J. J. (2005). E-journaling: Achieving interactive education online. Educause Quarterly, 28(1), 62-65.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., García, T., &; McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(3), 801-813.
Pulfrey, C., Darnon, C., &; Butera, F. (2013). Autonomy and task performance: Explaining the impact of grades on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 39-57.
Purpura, J.E., &; Saville, N. (2001). Developing a computerized system for investigating non-linguistic factors in L2 learning and test performance. Paper presented at the Language Testing Research Colloquium at AAAL, St. Louis, Missouri.
Ravindran, R. (2000) Towards learner autonomy: Evolution in practice－The certificate in independent language learning. In B. Sinclair, I. McGrath &; L. Terry (Eds.), Learner autonomy: Future directions (pp. 60-71). London: Longman.
Rock, M. L., Gregg, M., Ellis, E., &; Gable, R. A. (2008). REACH: A framework for differentiating classroom instruction. Preventing School Failure, 52(2), 31-47.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT journal, 59(1), 23-30.
Ryan, R. M., &; Deci, E. L. (2006). Self‐regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self‐determination, and will?. Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1557-1586.
Samway, K. D. (2006). When English language learners write. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Sanprasert, N. (2010). The application of a course management system to enhance autonomy in learning English as a foreign language. System, 38(1), 109-123.
Schunk, D. H., &; Zimmerman, B. J. (2007). Influencing children's self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading &; Writing Quarterly, 23(1), 7-25.
Shin, S. J. (2006). Learning to teach writing through tutoring and journal writing. Teacher and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 12(3), 325-345.
Skinner, E. A., &; Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581.
Spence, P., &; Liu, G. Z. (2013). Engineering English and the high-tech industry: A case study of an English needs analysis of process integration engineers at a semiconductor manufacturing company in Taiwan. English for Specific Purposes, 32(2), 97-109.
Stewart, T. (2006). Teacher‐Researcher Collaboration or Teachers' Research?. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 421-430.
Strickland, C. A. (2007). Tools for high quality differentiated instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Reconcilable differences: Standards-based teaching and differentiation. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 6-13.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2003). Fulfilling the promise of the differentiated classroom: Strategies and tools for responsive teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2006). An Alternative to Ability Grouping. Principal Leadership, 6(8), 31-32.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., ... Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119-145.
Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48(1), 20-27.
Ushioda, E. (2008). Motivation and good language learners. In Griffiths, C. (Ed.), Lessons from good language learners (pp. 19-34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Dang, H. (2006). Learner-centeredness and EFL instruction in Vietnam: A case study. International Education Journal, 7(4), 598-610.
Vickers, C. H., &; Ene, E. (2006). Grammatical accuracy and learner autonomy in advanced writing. ELT Journal, 60 (2), 109-116.
Walkington, J. (2005). Becoming a teacher: Encouraging development of teacher identity through reflective practice. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 53-64.
Walter-Echols, E. (2008). Journaling as writing practice, reflection, and personal expression. In CamTESOL Conference on English Language Teaching: Selected Papers (Vol. 4, pp. 120-131).
Waters, F. H., Smeaton, P. S., &; Burns, T. G. (2004). Action research in the secondary science classroom: Student response to differentiated, alternative assessment. American Secondary Education, 32 (3), 89-104.
Weinstein, C. E., Zimmerman, S. A., &; Palmer, D. R. (1988). Assessing learning strategies: The design and development of the LASSI. In C. E. Weistein, E. T. Goetz &; P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 25-40). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Yamamori, K., Isoda, T., Hiromori, T., &; Oxford, R. L. (2003). Using cluster analysis to uncover L2 learner differences in strategy use, will to learn, and achievement over time. IRAL, 41(4), 381-410.
Yates, L. (2005). Introducing new researchers to qualitative research: Some current options for textbooks. The Modern Language Journal, 89(3), 475-482.