臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

論文提要內容：
本研究的主要目的在調查國中生聽力理解上之困難分析；為達到此研究目的，研究者設計了40題聽力測驗，來評量學生在布魯姆（Bloom）的六大認知層面上所可能遭遇的困難。連同學生回答問卷所得到的資料，來研究探尋問題如下：
(1) 可能影響聽力理解表現的因子；
(2) 六大認知目標在聽力測驗上的影響；
(3) 六大認知目標在高、低成就組別上的差異；
(4) 六大教育認知目標與整體聽力測驗表現的相關性。
其研究的主要發現如下：
(1) 較好的聽力表現與四大特質相關，其分別為受試者學習英文超過五年，受試者在測驗時不感覺到緊張或缺乏自信，受試者擁有較佳的記憶能力與支持日後高中聯考加考聽力測驗的理念。
(2) 第五大題屬高層次認知目標題組－整合（synthesis）與評量（evaluation）；受試者如答對題數愈多，實為累積習得愈多之高認知目標。換言之，受試者在第五大題答對題數愈多，其整體聽力測驗表現愈佳。
(3) 高成就受試者在高層次題型上之聽力理解表現較低成就受試者為佳。故題型如屬不同認知層次，其要求受試者之認知理解能力亦不盡相同；換言之，受試者所遭遇之聽力理解困難，也會因此而不同。
(4) 整體聽力測驗表現與各大題間之答題表現相關連；換言之，如受試者在其中某一大題表現佳，那麼其在其它大題上及整體表現上，均會表現較佳。

The purpose of the present study is to investigate students' listening comprehension difficulties. To achieve this goal, a listening comprehension test was arranged into 40 questions and designed to measure Bloom’s six levels of cognitive processing. Together with students’ responses to the questionnaire, the study probed:
(1)the significant factors, as determined by the questionnaire, that affect the listening comprehension performance;
(2)the effect of the six levels of cognitive processing on the listening comprehension test;
(3)the effect of six levels of cognitive objectives on different levels of language proficiency students; and
(4)the correlation between the six educational objectives and the performance on the listening comprehension test.
The major findings of the present study are summarized as follows:
(1)Better listening comprehension test (LCT) performance is closely connected with four characteristics. They are that the subjects have studied English for over five years, they do not feel so nervous or so much lack of confidence on the test; they have a good memory, and they support the idea of incorporating the LCT into the future high school entrance exam.
(2)Correct responses on Section Five in fact showed accumulative attainment of educational objectives. Subjects with more items answered correctly on Section Five will demonstrate better LCT performance.
(3)Difference in proficiency was a factor that significantly affected the top level of cognitive processing. High proficiency level (HPL) subjects performed better than their low proficiency level (LPL) counterparts on Section Five, which measured the higher order of cognitive processing. In other words, different cognitive domains pose different levels of difficulties to subjects, so they require different competence in order to achieve educational goals.
(4)The correlations among the LCT performance and the performance on the five sections showed that they were statistically significant. That means, if one does well on one section, s/he will do well on the others, and will do well in one’s LCT performance.

I.Introduction……………………………………………………………… 1
1.1 Background and Motivation ……………………………….. 1
1.2 Introduction to the Problem …………………………….. 4
1.3 Statement of the Problem ………………………………………… 7
1.4 Purposes of the Study ……………………………………………… 9
1.5 Research Hypotheses …………………………………… 10
1.6 Significance of the Study ………………………….. 11
1.7 Definition of Terms ……………………………………. 13
1.8 Limitation of the Study ……………………………... 14
II. Literature Review …………………………… 16
2.1 Nature of Listening ………………………………….. 16
2.2 Models of Listening Processes ……………………. 20
2.2.1 Bottom-up Processing …………………………… 22
2.2.2 Top-down Processing ………………………………. 24
2.2.3 Parallel Processing ………………………………. 26
2.3 Cognitive Processes ………………………………….. 28
2.3.1 Human as Information-Processor…………………. 28
2.3.2 Sensory Memory ………………………………………. 30
2.3.3 Short-term Memory …………………………………. 31
2.3.4 Long-term Memory …………………………………… 33
2.4 Factors Influencing Listening Comprehension…… 37
2.4.1 Text Factors ………………………………………… 37
2.4.2 Speaker Factors ……………………………………… 40
2.4.3 Listener Factors……………………………………… 41
2.4.3.1 Language Proficiency Level ………… 41
2.4.3.2 Memory as Hindrance…………………… 42
2.4.3.3 Attention and Affect ………………. 43
2.4.3.4 Age ………………………………………. 44
2.3.3.5 Background Knowledge …………….…. 45
2.4.4 Task Characteristics …………………… 46
2.4.5 Milieu Factors (Physical Setting)………….. 48
III.Methodology………………………………………………… 51
3.1 Research Design ………………………………………. 51
3.2 Subjects ………………………………………………… 52
3.3 Instruments …………………………………………….. 53
3.3.1 Listening Comprehension Test ……………………. 53
3.3.1.1 Test Materials ………………………… 54
3.3.1.2 Scheme of the Listening Comprehension Test. 54
3.3.2 Questionnaire ……………………………………….. 57
3.4 Pilot Study ……………………………………………. 58
3.5 Procedures …………………………………………….. 59
3.6 Data Analyses …………………………………………. 63
3.6.1 Coding Categories (Bloom's Six Taxonomies and Examples)……63
3.6.2 Statistical Treatments of the Collected Data 67
IV. Results and Discussion…………………………… 69
4.1 Students' Responses to the Questionnaire and their Significance for the Performance on the Listening Comprehension Test……………... 69
4.2 The Effects of Cognitive Processing on the Listening Comprehension Test Performance…………………………… 75
4.3 The Relationship between Proficiency Differences and Performance on the Listening Comprehension Test ……. 81
4.4 The Correlation between Educational Objectives and Performance on the Listening Comprehension Test…….. 83
V. Conclusions……………………………..……. 86
5.1 Summary of Research Hypotheses and Findings …. 86
5.2 Pedagogical Implications…………………………... 88
5.3 Recommendations for Future Research ……………. 90
References …………………………92
Appendix A Listening Comprehension Test -- Student's Testbook………99
Appendix B Listening Comprehension Test -- Full Transcripts…………106
Appendix C Questionnaire… 115

REFERENCES
Anderson, A. & Lynch, T. (1988). Listening. New York: Oxford University Press.
Anderson, J. R. (1976). Language, Memory and Thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
-------------------- (1983). The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University press.
-------------------- (1985). Cognitive Psychology and its Implications. (2nd ed.). New York: Freeman.
Aneiro, S. (1989). The influence of receiver apprehensions in foreign language learners on listening comprehension among Puerto Rican college students. Dissertation Abstract, New York University.
Atkinson, R.C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1971). The control of short-term memory. Scientific American, 225, 82-90.
Barlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Benson, M. J. (1994). Lecture listneing in an ethnographic perspective. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.) Academic Listening: Research perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 181-198.
Berg, T. (1987). The case against accommodation: evidence from German speech error data. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 277-99.
Blau, E. K. (1990). The effect of syntax, speed, and pauses on listening comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 746-753.
Bloom, B. S. (1974). (Ed.). Taxonomy of educational objectives : the classification of educational goals / by a committee of college and university examiners. New York: David McKay.
Bond, Z., & Garnes, S. (1980). Misperceptions of fluent speech. In Cole, R. (Ed.) Perception and Production of Fluent Speech. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bourne, L. E., Dominowski, R. L., Loftus, E. F., & Healy, A. F. (1986). Cognitive Process. (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Boyle, J. R. (1984). Factors affecting listening comprehension. ELT Journal, 38, 34-38.
Bregman, A. (1983). The formation of auditory systems. In Requin, J. (Ed.) Attention and Performance. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Broadbent, D. E. (1984). The Maltese cross: a new simplistic model for memory. Behavioral and Brain Science, 7, 55-94.
Brown, H. Douglas. (1993). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the Spoken Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, G., Anderson, A.H., Shadbolt, N. & Lynch, T. (1985). Listening Comprehension. Project JHH/190/1. Edinburgh: Scottish Education Department.
Buck, G. (1991). The testing of listening comprehension: An introspective study. Language Testing, 8, 67-91.
Call, M. (1985). Auditory short-term memory, listening comprehension, and the input hypothesis. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 765-81.
Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Carroll, D. W. (1999) Psychology of Language (3rd ed.). California: ITP Inc.
Chamot, A. U., & Kupper, L. (1992). Building Bridges: Content and learning strategies for ESL. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Chase, W. G., & Erricsson, K. A. (1981). Skilled memory. In J. Anderson (Ed.). Cognitive Skills and their Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chastain, K. (1976). The effect of discourse markers on the comprehension of lectures. Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 113-27.
Chaudron, C. (1983). Simplification of input: Topic and reinstatements and their effects on L2 learners' recognition and recall. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 437-58.
-------------- & Richards, J. (1986). The effect of discourse markers on the comprehension of lectures. Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 113-27.
Chiang, C. S., & Dunkel, P. (1992). The effect of speech modification, prior knowledge, and listening proficiency on EFL lecture learning. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 345-74.
Clark, H. H., & Clark, E. V. (1977). Psychology and Language. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Coakley, C., & Wolvin, A. (1986). Listening in the native language. In B.H. Wing (Ed.), Listening, reading, and writing: analysis and application (pp. 11-42). Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
Cofer, C. N. (1976). The Structure of Human Memory. San Francisco: Freeman.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.
Darwin, C. J., Turvey, M. T. & Crowder, R. G. (1972). An auditory analogue of the Sperling partial report procedure: Evidence for brief auditory storage. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 255-267.
Davies, Alan. (1991). Language Testing in the 1990s. In Charles, Anderson & Brian North (Eds.), Language Testing in the 1990s. UK: Prentice Hall.
Dunkel, P. (1986). The Immediate Recall of English Lecture Information by Native and Non-native Speakers of English as a Function of Note-taking. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46, 2624-2625.
Emmert, P. (1994). A definition of listening. Listening Post, 51,6.
Fan, Y. (1993). Listening: Problems and solutions. English Teaching Forum, 31(1), 16-19.
Finocchiaro, Mary and Sako, Sydney. (1983). Foreign Language Testing: A Practical Approach. NY: Regents Publishing.
Fujita, J. (1984). A preliminary inquiry into the successful and unsuccessful listening strategies of beginning college Japanese students. Dissertation Abstract, Ohio State University.
Glisan, E. W. (1985). The effect of word order on listening comprehension and pattern retention: An experiment in Spanish as a foreign language. Language Learning, 35(3), 443-72.
Greenberg, S. N., & Roscoe, S. (1987). Echoic memory interference and comprehension in a foreign language. Language Learning 38, 209-19.
Griffiths, R. (1991). Pausological research in an L2 context: A rationale and review of selected studies. Applied Linguistics, 12, 345-64.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. London : Edward Arnold.
Henner-Stanchina, C. (1987). Autonomy as metacognitive awareness: suggestions for training self-monitoring on listening comprehension. M'elanges P'edagogiques.
Henrichsen, L. E. (1984). Sandhi-variation: A filter of input for learners of ESL. Language Learning, 34, 103-26.
Howatt, A.P.R. (1984). A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
James, C. J. (1984). Are you listening? The practical components of listening comprehension. Foreign Language Annals, 17 (2), 129-133.
Johnson-Laird, P. (1984). Mental Models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kahneman, P. (1973). Attention and Effort. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Kelch, K. (1985). Modified input as an aid to comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 81-89.
Kozminsky, E. (1977). Altering comprehension: the effects of biasing titles on text comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 5, 482-490.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Long, D. R. (1990). What you don't know can't help you: An exploratory study of background knowledge and second language listening comprehension. Studies in second Language Acquisition, 12, 65-80.
Lung, R. J. (1991). A comparison of second language listening and reading comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 75, 196-204.
Lundsteen, S. W. (1979). Listening: Its impact on reading and the other language art. Una, IL: NCTE ERIC.
Lynch, T. (1998). Theoretical perspectives on listening. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18 (1), 3-19.
Madsen, Harold S. (1983). Techniques in Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Markham, P. L. (1988). Gender differences and the perceived expertness of the speaker as factors in ESL listening recall. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 397-406.
Mendelsohn, D. J. (1983). There are strategies for listening. 〔ERIC DOC NO. ED 246 648〕.
Morrow, K. (1985). The Evaluation of Tests of Communicative Performance. Prospect, 1(2).
Morton, J., & Patterson, M. (1987). A new attempt at an interpretation, or, an attempt at a new interpretation. In M. Coltheart, K. Patterson, & J. C. Marshall (Eds.), Deep dyslexia, (2nd ed). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Murphy, J. M. (1991). Oral communication in TESOL: Integrating speaking, listening, and pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 51-74.
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognitive Psychology. New York: Appletion - Century - Crofts.
Oller, J. W., Jr. and Hinofotis, F. A. B. (1976). Two Mutually Exclusive Hypotheses about Second Language Proficiency: Factor Analytic Studies of a Variety of Language Tests. Paper presented at the winter meeting of the Linguistics Society of America. Also in Oller and Perkins, in press.
O'Malley, J. C., Chamot, A., & Kupper, L. (1989). Listening compressions strategies in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10, 418-437.
Palij, M., & Aaronson, D. (1992). The role of language background in cognitive processing. In Harrris, R. J. (Ed.), Advances in Psychology. New York: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Petire, C. R. (1961). An Experimental Evaluation of Two Methods for Improving Listening Comprehension Abilities. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Purdue University. Dissertation Abstracts, 22, 2511-12.
Pichert, J. W., & Anderson, R. C. (1977). Taking different perspectives on a story. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 309-315.
Preiss, R., & Wheeless, L. (1989). Affective responses in listening: A meta-analysis of receiver apprehension outcomes. Journal of the International Listening Association, 3, 72-102.
Richards, J. C. (1985). The Context of Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
------------------ (1990). The Language Teaching Matrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
River, W. M., & Temperley, M. S. (1978). A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a Second or Foreign Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rixon, S. (1981). The teaching of listening comprehension. ELT Document, 125.
Rost, M. (1990). Listening in Language Learning. New York: Longman.
Rubin, J. (1975). What the "good language learners" can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 41-51.
---------- (1990). Improving foreign language listening comprehension. Report prepared for the US Department of Education, International Research and Studies Program, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 309-316.
---------- (1994). A review of second language listening comprehension research. The Modern Language Journal, 78 (ii), 199-221.
Rumelhart, D. E., & Ortony, A. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In R.C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 99-135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Samuels, S. J. (1984). Factors influencing listening: Inside and outside the head. Theory into Practice, 23, 183-189.
Shohamy, E., & Inbar, O. (1991). Validation of listening comprehension tests: the effect of text and question type. Language Testing, 8, 23-40.
Stevick, E. W. (1993). Memory: Old news, bad news, new news, good news about memory. JALT Journal, 15.
Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and Semantic Memory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of Memory (pp. 382-403). NY: Clarendon Press.
Ur, Penny. (1984). Teaching Listening Comprehension. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic.
Wales, R., & Marshall, J. G. (1966). The organization of linguistic performance. In J. Lyons & R. Wales (Eds.), Psycholinguistic papers: The Proceedings of the 1966 Edinburgh Conference (pp. 29-84). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Willis, J. (1981). Teaching English through English. London: Longman.
Wolff, D. (1987). Some assumption about second language text comprehension. SSLA, 9(3), 307-326.