跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.210.132.31) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/08/19 18:32
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:戴瓊瑩
研究生(外文):Chiung-ying Tai
論文名稱:多元智能理論在國中英語教學上的應用:九年一貫課程中另類英語教學模式的探討
論文名稱(外文):APPLICATION OF A MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES MODEL IN ENGLISH INSTRUCTION IN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL: IMPLICATION OF AN ALTERNATIVE ENGLISH INSTRUCTION MODEL IN THE NINE-YEAR EDUCATION PROGRAM
指導教授:張玉玲張玉玲引用關係
指導教授(外文):Ye-ling Chang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱:英語學系
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:英文
論文頁數:178
中文關鍵詞:多元智能多元智能模式英語教學九年一貫主題式教學學習類型
外文關鍵詞:multiple intelligencesMI modelEnglish instructionNine-Year Education Program (NYEP)thematic teachinglearning style
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:29
  • 點閱點閱:2356
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:743
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:16
本文旨在探究多元智能理論在國中英語教學的效益。文中探討了在多元智能教學模式,學生對英語學習的興趣、學生對多元智能活動、教材與主題式教學的反應、教室內互動的情形、以及他們對於四種語言藝術的表現與意見。
參加本實驗的受試者為八十四位國中一年級的學生,研究者根據他們的多元智能表現與對國中英語課的意見來設計課程。在實驗過程中,研究者觀察他們在課堂上的反應,要求學生記錄自己個人的英語學習雜記,並請他們在實驗結束後回答一份有關上課態度的問卷。
本研究的主要發現如下:
1. 多元智能教學模式提高學生對學習英語的興趣。
2. 學生喜歡多元智能活動,如看電影、玩遊戲、上網學習英語。
3. 學生喜歡課外補充教材,如星座生肖、小說哈利波特、外國文化習俗介紹,加強英語學習。
4. 學生對主題式英語教學給予肯定的意見。
5. 上課時教室互動大致上不錯,特別是學生間的互動比師生間的互動還要熱絡。
6. 學生在英語聽、說、讀及寫四方面的表現很有進步。
為了使台灣的國中英語教學更有效益,更能幫助學生發展多元智能,茲提供下列六點意見作為教師教學時之參考:
1. 國中英語教師應瞭解學生個別差異,並幫助他們發展個別之多元智能。
2. 國中英語教師應該融合各種教學方法與技巧來創造新的教學模式,變化英語教學。
3. 國中英語教師應該安排有啟發性、有意義的教學活動以幫助學生有效地學習英語。
4. 國中英語教師應該提供學生課本及各種不同的英文補充教材。
5. 國中英語課應該提供學生許多練習聽、說、讀、寫的機會。
6. 國中英語教師應該使用各種不同的方法來進行評量,以幫助學生發現自己學習英文之優點及待改進之處。
The present study investigates the effects of the multiple intelligences (MI) model on English instruction in junior high school. Specifically, the students’ interest in learning English, and their responses to the MI activities, the learning materials, the thematic teaching, and the classroom interaction are analyzed. In addition, the students’ performance and responses to the four language arts are investigated.
The subjects in this study included two classes of seventh-grade students in junior high school. The researcher designed the lesson plans based on the students’ multiple intelligences inventory and their responses to English classes in junior high. For the data analyses, the researcher observed the students’ language performance in class and collected their responses to English teaching in their learning journals. Besides, the students’ responses to the MI model in the questionnaire were collected after the study. Based on the data analyses, both quantitative and qualitative, the findings of the study are described as follows:
1. The MI model helped trigger the students’ motivation to learn English. Many of the students expressed that they became more interested in learning English at the end of the study.
2. The students liked the MI activities done in the study, such as watching movies, playing games, and learning English on the Internet.
3. The students enjoyed the supplemental learning materials utilized in the study, such as the horoscope and the Chinese signs, the fiction “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone”, and the information about foreign cultures and customs.
4. The students gave positive responses to the thematic teaching conducted in the study. Through the integration of the knowledge, the information and activities in the four selected thematic units in the thematic teaching stimulated the students to learn English joyfully and actively.
5. The classroom interaction in this study was generally good. Especially, the interaction among the students was better than that between the teacher and students.
6. The students made good progress in their performance in the four language arts. Through various kinds of MI activities, the students were inspired to improve their listening, speaking, reading and writing.
In order to maximize the effects of EFL teaching in junior high school in Taiwan and make the best use of the MI model in English classes in junior high school, the researcher makes the following pedagogical implications:
1. EFL teachers should identify students’ individual differences and then help them develop unique intelligences in learning English.
2. EFL teachers should vary English teaching by creating a teaching model with the use of innovative methodologies and techniques.
3. EFL teachers should arrange intriguing and meaningful MI activities in class to facilitate students’ English learning.
4. EFL teachers should give students diverse supplemental learning materials besides the textbooks.
5. EFL teachers should provide students with abundant meaningful contexts to practice English listening, speaking, reading and writing.
6. EFL teachers should use various ways of assessment to help students identify their strengths and weaknesses in learning English.
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Background and Motivation 1
Purposes of the Study 6
Research Questions 7
Definition of Terms 7
Significance of the Study 11
Limitations of the Study 11
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
Development and Philosophy of Gardner’s Theory ofMultiple Intelligences 13
Development of Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences 14
Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences 15
Criteria of Intelligence Assessment 15
Eight Intelligences 17
Implications and Myths of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences 20
Implications of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences 21
Myths and Realties of Multiple Intelligences 22
Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles 24
The Nine-Year Education Program and the Theory ofMultiple Intelligences 26
Characteristics of the Nine-Year Education Program 27
English Instruction in the Nine-Year Education Program 29
The Relationship Between the Nine-Year Education Programand the Theory of Multiple Intelligences 31
Assessment in the Theory of Multiple Intelligences 33
Guide to Assessment Instrument of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences 33
Authentic Assessment and Standardized Testing 35
Tools for Assessing Multiple Intelligences 37
Application of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences inEnglish Instruction 40
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY
Subjects 45
Instruments 46
A Questionnaire on Students'''' Multiple Intelligences Performance 46
A Questionnaire on Students’ Opinions of English Learning 47
A Questionnaire on Students’ Attitude Toward English Learning in the MI Class 47
A Classroom Observation Checklist 48
Students’ English Learning Journals 49
Students’ Assigned Works for Assessment 49
Procedures 50
Data Analysis 53
Quantitative Analysis 53
Qualitative Analysis 54
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISSCUSSION
The Influence of the MI Model on Students’ Interest in Learning English 55
The Students’ Responses to MI Activities, Learning Materials, andThematic Teaching 62
Discussion about the Students’ Responses to MI Activities 62
Discussion about the Students’ Responses to Learning Materials 72
Discussion about the Students’ Responses to Thematic Teaching 83
The Students’ Responses to the Classroom Interaction 92
The Students’ Performance and Responses to the Four Language Arts 99
The Students’ Performance and Responses to Listening Activities 101
The Students’ Performance and Responses to Speaking Activities 103
The Students’ Performance and Responses to Reading Activities 105
The Students’ Performance and Responses to Writing Activities 107
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions 113
Implications 117
Suggestions 121
REFERENCES 124
Appendix A: A Lesson Plan for the MI Model 134
Appendix B: Suggested Multiple Intelligences Activities on Halloween 139
Appendix C: A Thematic Unit Plan on Halloween 143
Appendix D: A Thematic Unit Plan on Thanksgiving Day 145
Appendix E: A Thematic Unit Plan on the Fiction of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone 147
Appendix F: A Thematic Unit Plan on New Year 150
Appendix G: A Questionnaire on Students’ Multiple Intelligences Performance 152
Appendix H: A Questionnaire on Students’ Opinions of English Learning 156
Appendix I: A Questionnaire on Students’ Attitude Toward English Learning in the MI Class 158
Appendix J: Transcriptions of Students’ Responses to the Questionnaire on Students’ Attitude Toward English Learning in the MI Class 161
Appendix K: A Classroom Observation Checklist (Campbell, Campbell & Dickson, 1998) 164
Appendix L: Students’ English Learning Journals 165
Appendix M: Transcriptions of Students’ Responses to English Learning in the MI Class in Students'''' English Leaning Journals 167
Appendix N: A Worksheet of Thematic Unit “Halloween” 171
Appendix O: A Worksheet of Thematic Unit “Thanksgiving Day” 173
Appendix P: A Worksheet of Thematic Unit “Harry Potter” 175
Appendix Q: A Worksheet of Thematic Unit “New Year” 177
Anderson, M. (1992). Intelligence and development: A cognitive theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Armstrong, T. (1987). In their own way. Los Angeles: CA. J. P. Tarcher.
Armstrong, T. (1988). Learning differences─Not disabilities. Principal, 68(1), 34-36.
Armstrong, T. (1993). 7 kinds of smart: Identifying and developing your many intelligences. New York: Plume.
Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Beane, J. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Beckman, M. (1999). Multiple Ways of Knowing: Howard Gardner''''s Theory of Multiple Intelligences Extend and Enhance Student Learning. http://www.earlychildhood.com/Articles/index.cfm?FuseAction=Article&A=19
Bellanca, J. (1997). Active learning handbook for the multiple intelligences classroom. Arlington Heights: IRI/SkyLight Training and Publishing.
Bellanca, J., Chapman, C., & Swartz, E. (1994). Multiple assessments for multiple intelligences (2nd ed.). Arlington Heights: IRI/SkyLight Training and Publishing.
Blythe, T., & Howard, G. (1990). A school for all intelligences. Educational Leadership, 47(7), 33-37.
Boggeman, S., Hoerr, T. R., & Wallach, C. (1994). Celebrating multiple intelligences: Teaching for success: A practical guide created by the faculty of the New City School. St. Louis: The New City School.
Brandt, R. (1993). On teaching for understanding: A conversation with Howard Gardner. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 4-7.
Brown, B. L. (1997). New learning strategies for generation X. ERIC Digest. ED411414.
Brown, H. D. (1987). Principles of language learning and teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Brualdi, A. C. (1996). Multiple intelligences: Gardner’s theory. ERIC Digest. ED410226. http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed410226.html
Brumfit, C. J., & Johnson, K. (Eds.). (1979). The communicative approach to language teaching. New York: Oxford.
Campbell, B. (1989). Multiple intelligence in the classroom. On the Beam, 9(2), 7. http://www.newhorizons.org/art_miclsrm.html
Campbell, B. (1990). The research results of a multiple intelligences classroom. On the Beam, 11(1), 7. http://www.newhorizons.org/art_mireserch.html
Campbell, L. (1997). Variations on a theme: How teachers interpret MI theory. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 14-19.
Campbell, L., & Campbell, B. (1999). Multiple intelligences and student achievement: Success stories from six schools. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Campbell, L., Campbell, B., & Dickinson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning through multiple intelligences (2nd ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Celce-Murcia, M., & McIntosh, L. (Eds.). (1984). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Taiwan: Newbury House.
Chapman, C. (1993). If the shoe fits…: How to develop multiple intelligences in the classroom. Arlington Heights: IRI/SkyLight Training and Publishing.
Chastain, K. (1988). Developing second language skills: Theory and practice. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanowich.
Checkley, K. (1997). The first seven… and the eighth: A conversation with Howard Gardner. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 8-13.
Chen, C. Y. (2001). What are the important implications for educators of Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences. Journal of National Taichung Teachers College, 15, 171-189.
Christenbury, L., & Kelly, P. P. (1994). What textbooks can and cannot do. English Journal, 83(3), 76-80.
Christison, M. A. (1996). Teaching and learning language through multiple intelligences. TESOL Journal, 6(1), 10-14.
Christison, M. A. (1997). Creativity in second and foreign language teaching. TESOL Matters, 7(2). http://www.tesol/org/assoc/prez/1997/pm9704.html
Christison, M. A. (1998). Applying multiple intelligences theory: In preservice and inservice TEFL education programs. English Teaching Forum, 36(2), 2. http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol36/no2/p2.htm
Christison, M. A. (1999). Multiple intelligences: Theory and practice in adult ESL. http://www.cal.org/ncle/digests/MI.htm
Claire, E. (1999). ESL teacher’s holiday activities kit. Taiwan: Prentice Hall Regents.
Clark, L. R. (2000). Thematic teaching. http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/faculty/clark/module3/content/cover.htm
Costanzo, M., & Paxton, D. (1999). Multiple assessments for multiple intelligences. Focus on Basics, 3(A), 24-27. http://gseweb.harvard.edu/~ncsall/fob/1999/paxton.htm
Coustan, T., & Rocka, L. (1999). Putting theory into practice. Focus on Basics, 3(A), 21-24. http://gseweb.harvard.edu/~ncsall/fob/1999/coustan.htm
Cross, D. (1999). A practical handbook of language teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Ellison, L. (1992). Using multiple intelligences to set goals. Educational Leadership, 50(2), 69-72.
Emig, V. B. (1997). A multiple intelligences inventory. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 47-50.
Evans, C. (1995). Access, equity, and intelligence: Another look at tracking. English Journal, 84(8), 63-65.
Felder, R. M. (1996). Matters of style. ASEE Prism, 6(4), 18-23. http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/LS-Prism.htm
Gage, R. (1995). Excuse me, you’re cramping my style: Kinesthetics for the classroom. English Journal, 84(8), 52-55.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1991a). Intelligence in seven steps. Creating the future: Perspectives on educational change. Dickinson, D., & Aston Clinton, B. (Ed.). UK: Accelerated Learning Systems. http://www.newhorizons.org/crfut_gardner.html
Gardner, H. (1991b). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993a). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (10th anniversary ed.). New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993b). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1997). Multiple intelligences as a partner in school improvement. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 20-21.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H., & Blythe, T. (1990). A School for all intelligences. Educational Leadership, 47(7), 33-37.
Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1990). Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4-10.
Gardner, H., Kornhaber, M. L., & Wake, W. K. (1996). Intelligence: Multiple perspectives. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Glasgow, J. N., & Bush, M. S. (1995). Promoting active learning and collaborative writing through a marketing project. English Journal, 84(8), 32-37.
Golebiowska, A., & Wingate, J. (Eds.). (1990). Getting students to talk. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall.
Greenhawk, J. (1997). Multiple intelligences meet standards. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 62-64.
Griffiths, C., & Parr, J. M. (2001). Language-learning strategies: theory and perception. ELT Journal Volume, 55(3), 247-254.
Guild, P. B. (1997). Where do the learning theories overlap? Educational Leadership, 55(1), 30-31.
Haas, M. (2000). Thematic, communicative language teaching in the K-8 classroom. ERIC Digest. ED444380.
Haggerty, B. A. (1995). Nurturing intelligences: A guide to multiple intelligences theory and teaching. Menlo Park, California: Addison-Wesley.
Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.
Hoerr, T. R. (1992). How our school applied multiple intelligences theory. Educational Leadership, 50(2), 67-68.
Hoerr, T. R. (1997). The naturalist intelligence. http://www.blarg.net/~building/trm_hoerrmi.html
Hoerr, T. R., & Wallach, C. (1996). Succeeding with multiple intelligences: Teaching through the personal intelligences. St. Louis: The New City School, Inc.
Jean, M. (1999). MI, the GED, and Me. Focus on Basics, 3(A). http://gseweb.harvard.edu/~ncsall/fob/1999/jean.htm
Kallenbach, S. (1999). Emerging themes in adult multiple intelligences research. Focus on Basics, 3(A). http://gseweb.harvard.edu/~ncsall/fob/1999/kallen.htm
Kang, S. (1999). Learning styles: Implications for ESL/EFL instruction. English Teaching Forum, 37(4), 6.
Krashen, S. (1989). Language acquisition and language education. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall.
Krashen, S. (1998). Has whole language failed? ESL Magazine, November/December. http://www.eslmag.com/KrashenStory.html
Lado, R. (1988). Teaching English across cultures. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lambert, W. E. (1997). From Crockett to Tubman: Investigating historical perspectives. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 51-54.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
Latham, A. S. (1997). Quantifying MI’s gains. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 84-85.
Lazear, D. (1994). Multiple intelligence approaches to assessment: Solving the assessment conundrum. Tucson, Arizona: Zephyr Press.
Lazear, D. (1999). Eight ways of knowing: Teaching for multiple intelligences (3rd ed.). Illinois: SkyLight Training and Publishing.
Leuo, B. G., & Lee, Z. P. (1999). A study on the rationale of the Nine-Year Coherent Curriculum Plan for compulsory education. http://www.iest.edu.tw/report/report11/report13.htm
Lewis, M., & Hill, J. (1993). Source book for teaching English as a foreign language. Oxford: Heinemann.
Lin, P. Y. (2000). Multiple Intelligences Theory and English Language Teaching. Department of English, NCCU. http://highschool.english.nccu.edu.tw/paper/ying.doc
Lipson, M., Valencia, S., Wixson, K., & Peters, C. (1993). Integration and thematic teaching: Integration to improve teaching and learning. Language Arts, 70(4), 252-263.
Lynn, M. J. (1995). Caveat emptor: Using innovative classroom assessment. TESOL Journal, 5(1), 36-37.
Manner, B. M. (2001). Learning styles and multiple intelligences in students. Journal of College Science Teaching, 30(6), 390-393.
Marks-Tarlow, T. (1996). Creativity inside out: Learning through multiple intelligences. Menlo Park, California: Addison-Wesley.
McClaskey, J. (1995). Assessing student learning through multiple intelligences. English Journal, 84(8), 56-59.
Mckeon, D. (2001). Future perfect: Lessons for a 21st century TESOL. TESOL Matters, 11(3). http://www.tesol/org/pubs/articles/2001/tm0106-01.html
Merrefield, G. E. (1997). Three Billy goats and Gardner. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 58-61.
Met, M. (2001). Why language learning matters. Educational Leadership, 59(2), 36-40.
Miele, F. (1995). Skeptic Magazine Interview With Robert Sternberg on The Bell Curve. http://cognet.mit.edu/MITECS/Entry/sternberg
Ministry of Education. (1999a). 1999 progress report. http://www.edu.tw/english/index.htm
Ministry of Education. (1999b). National education development and reform for the new millennium. Taipei International Conference on Education. http://www.eje.ntnu.tw/1-english/ejeEnglish.htm
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching & learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Pan, C. H. (2001). Corpus Analyses of the vocabulary in the English textbooks of primary schools and Junior high schools in Kaohsiung. Journal of Chang Jung Christian University, 5(1), 171-191.
Pica, T. (2000). Tradition and transition in English language teaching methodology. System, 28, 1-18.
Pirie, B. (1995). Meaning through motion: Kinesthetic English. English Journal, 84(8), 46-51.
Powell, J. (1999). What’s new in assessment and evaluation? http://www.earlychildhood.com/Articles/index.cfm?FuseAction=Article&A=17
Quirk, R., & Widdowson, H. G. (1985) (Eds.). English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Reid, J. M. (1995). (Ed.). Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Longman dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics. London: Longman.
Rodgers, T. (2000). Methodology in the New Millennium. English Teaching Forum, 38(2), 2.
Rogers, T., O’Neill, C., & Jasinski, J. (1995). Transforming texts: Intelligences in action. English Journal, 84(8), 41-45.
Rowling, J. K. (1998). Harry Potter and the sorcerer’s stone. New York: Scholastic.
Samples, B. (1992). Using learning modalities to celebrate intelligence. Educational Leadership, 50(2), 62-66.
Schniedewind, N., & Davidson, E. (2000). Differentiating cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 24-27.
Schnitzer, S. (1993). Designing an authentic assessment. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 32-35.
Shrum, J. L., & Gilsan, E. W. (2000). Teacher’s handbook: Contextualized language instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Silver, H., Strong, R., & Perini, M. (1997). Integrating learning styles and multiple intelligences. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 22-27.
Simeone, W. F. (1995). Accommodating multiple intelligences in the English classroom. English Journal, 84(8), 63-65.
Simpson, J. M. (2000). Practicing multiple intelligences in an EFL class. TESOL Journal, 9(1), 30-32.
Smagorinsky, P. (1995). Multiple intelligences in the English class: An overview. English Journal, 84(8), 19-26.
Stern, D. (1995). Teaching English so it matters: Creating curriculum for and with high school students. California: Corwin Press.
Tai, F. M. (2001). Students’ perceptions of multiple intelligences as a guide to Curriculum designing. Hsiuping Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1, 1-12.
Tsao, F. F., Huang, T. S., Shih, Y. H., & Huang, T. L. (1983). (Eds.). EFL readings for Chinese teachers. Taiwan: Grane.
Tucker, B. (1995). Minds of their own: Visualizers compose. English Journal, 84(8), 27-31.
Vardell, S. M. (1998). Thematic units: integrating the curriculum. http://www.ncte.org/teach/Vardell9069.html
Vialle, W. (1997). In Australia: Multiple intelligences in multiple settings. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 65-69.
Viens, J. (1999). Understanding multiple intelligences: The theory behind the practice. Focus on Basics, 3(A). http://gseweb.harvard.edu/~ncsall/fob/1999/viens.htm
Weber, E. (1992). Curriculum for success. On the Beam, 12(3), 4-5. http://www.newhorizons.org/article_weber92.html
王為國(民88)。九年一貫制課程與多元智慧論。國教輔導,39(2),3-7。
王為國(民89)。國民小學應用多元智能理論的歷程分析與評估之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士論文。
田耐青(民88)。由多元智慧理論的觀點談教學評量:一些台灣的實例。教師天地,99,32-38。
石素錦(民90)。談國小英語教學的新趨勢。敦煌英語教學雜誌,29,8-11。
江雪齡(民89)。從多元智慧談課程設計。中等教育,51(1),43-52。
何金針(民89)。多元智慧補救教學實施方案在錦和中學。台灣教育,596,38-43。
李珀(民89)。多元智慧與教學。教師天地,106,22-32。
李露絲(民87)。好玩又有趣的幼兒節慶教學。敦煌英語教學雜誌,18,11-13。
林美玲(民89)。多元智力理論與課程整合關係─九年一貫新課程建議。師說月刊,148,9-28
周祝瑛(民89)。從多元智慧看國內教改的可能性。教師天地,106,11-13。
施玉惠(民90)。溝通式教學法:針對九年一貫新課程。英語教學雜誌,25(3),
封四維(民89)。多元智慧教學─以國中英語科為例。師大書苑。
梁彩玲(民88)。多元智能與國中英語教學。英語教學雜誌,24(1),74-85。
教育部(民83)。國民中學英語課程標準。
教育部(民89)。國民中小學九年一貫課程試辦工作輔導手冊─國中初步成果實例篇。
教育部(民90)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。
張玉玲(民88)。兒童英語教學師資訓練指引。高雄復文書局。
張玉玲(民88)。互動式英語教學。敦煌英語教學雜誌,20,6-13。
葉錫南(民88)。九年一貫課程英語科之多元化評量。英語教學雜誌,24(3),5-27
楊瑞明(民89)。中等教育變革的多元智能省思。教育研究資訊,8(2),1-8。
齊邦媛等(民86)。國民中學英語教科書第一冊。國立編譯館。
趙子嘉(民88)。談霍華德嘉納的多元智能論和英語教學。英語教學雜誌,24(2),47-62。
歐用生(民88)。從「課程統整」的概念評九年一貫課程。教師天地,101,15-24。
廖春文(民89)。九年一貫課程的迷思。國教輔導,40(1),20-32。
鄭博真(民89)。多元智能理論在課程統整的應用與設計。台灣教育,596,28-37。
戴維揚(民88a)。評析九年一貫英語科課程綱領草案。教師天地,100,20-27。
戴維揚(民88b)。跨世紀的國民教育階段九年一貫英語科課程新趨勢。教育研究資訊,7(4),1-18。
戴維揚(民90)。多元智慧與英語教學。開創課程新世紀 ─九年一貫課程學習領域教學研討會。國立臺灣師範大學與中華民國教材研究發展學會合辦。 http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/csd/kao/kao8/2-2.htm
謝良足(民87)。英美文化節慶教學。敦煌英語教學雜誌,16,6-10
顏佩如(民89)。「多元智能」在教學上的反思。中等教育,51(3),82-93。
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 梁彩玲(民88)。多元智能與國中英語教學。英語教學雜誌,24(1),74-85。
2. 田耐青(民88)。由多元智慧理論的觀點談教學評量:一些台灣的實例。教師天地,99,32-38。
3. 周祝瑛(民89)。從多元智慧看國內教改的可能性。教師天地,106,11-13。
4. 施玉惠(民90)。溝通式教學法:針對九年一貫新課程。英語教學雜誌,25(3),
5. 林美玲(民89)。多元智力理論與課程整合關係─九年一貫新課程建議。師說月刊,148,9-28
6. 李珀(民89)。多元智慧與教學。教師天地,106,22-32。
7. 石素錦(民90)。談國小英語教學的新趨勢。敦煌英語教學雜誌,29,8-11。
8. 王為國(民88)。九年一貫制課程與多元智慧論。國教輔導,39(2),3-7。
9. 葉錫南(民88)。九年一貫課程英語科之多元化評量。英語教學雜誌,24(3),5-27
10. 楊瑞明(民89)。中等教育變革的多元智能省思。教育研究資訊,8(2),1-8。
11. 趙子嘉(民88)。談霍華德嘉納的多元智能論和英語教學。英語教學雜誌,24(2),47-62。
12. 歐用生(民88)。從「課程統整」的概念評九年一貫課程。教師天地,101,15-24。
13. 廖春文(民89)。九年一貫課程的迷思。國教輔導,40(1),20-32。
14. 戴維揚(民88a)。評析九年一貫英語科課程綱領草案。教師天地,100,20-27。
15. 戴維揚(民88b)。跨世紀的國民教育階段九年一貫英語科課程新趨勢。教育研究資訊,7(4),1-18。
 
1. 屏東縣國小英語教師使用電子白板於英語教學之現況探討屏東縣國小英語教師使用電子白板於英語教學之現況探討屏東縣國小英語教師使用電子白板於英語教學之現況探討
2. 數位遊戲式英語教學之學習成效與滿意度研究-以國小二年級學生為例數位遊戲式英語教學之學習成效與滿意度研究-以國小二年級學生為例
3. 外籍教師之英語教學現況調查研究--以高雄市國民中學英語教學為例
4. 一位準教師在蘭嶼的英語教學研究:融合觀光元素的達悟學童英語教學
5. 具英語教學能力之國小級任教師擔任英語教學之個案研究
6. 多媒體應用於英語教學之行動研究─以澎湖某小學為例多媒體應用於英語教學之行動研究-以澎湖某小學為例
7. 文化與英語教學:中學英語教師之看法與教學
8. 溝通式教學對學童英語及文化學習之效益
9. 國民小學英語教學實施現況及其遭遇問題之研究-以台中市為例
10. 在台外籍教師英語教學現況與其對台灣英語教學政策之看法
11. 應用多元智能活動讓國中英語教學[熱]起來
12. 電子教科書融入英語教學對國中生英語學習動機與學習成就之影響
13. 多元智能英語教學模式之建立與驗證
14. 技職院校學生英語能力高及低者英語學習策略之研究
15. 角色扮演活動與英語教學:活動類型與學生程度如何影響學習過程與成效