臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討施以小組合作學習的方式閱讀英文名著小說對高中生英語字彙習得之效益。研究對象為高雄縣林園高中76位高三學生，分為實驗、控制兩組，以同樣時間閱讀同一英文名著小說，並分別施以小組合作學習活動及傳統教師教學法，以研究對象所習得之英語字彙程度分別施以前測、後測，作為效益之比較分析，並再對所有研究對象施以問卷調查，以期瞭解他們對合作學習活動及閱讀英文名著之回應。
本研究的結果摘要如下：
1. 在具備基本相似的英文程度及字彙能力，並閱讀同一英文名著小說的 情境下，施以合作學習活動的學生，其英文字彙習得之效益高於施以傳統教師教學法之學生，經統計分析達顯著差異。
2. 控制組接受教師以傳統教學法閱讀英文名著後，英文字彙的後測與前 測成績比較，經統計分析達顯著差異。
3. 實驗組經過異質分組接受合作學習閱讀英文名著後，每一小組間英文字彙後測成績的比較，經統計分析並無達顯著差異。
4. 經問卷調查分析，以合作學習模式及傳統教學模式閱讀英文名著的受試者，其所採取之英文字彙學習策略不同。
5. 經問卷調查分析，英文字彙測驗高成就者(前25%)與低成就者(後25%)對於合作學習教學活動的反應大部分均傾向於正面的肯定。
最後，在文學閱讀的反應上，經問卷分析，大部分受試者也呈現正面意見。因此，本研究建議英文教學可採異質分組合作學習之教學活動，並選擇適當的英文文學名著閱讀，可幫助學生更有效率地學習英文字彙，且能增進閱讀理解力。

This study aims to explore the effects of cooperative learning (CL) through reading English literature on vocabulary acquisition of EFL senior high students. Seventy-six senior students at Lin-yuan Senior High School in Kaohsiung County participate in this study as the subjects, who are separated into the experimental and control groups. During the span of this study, all the subjects in the two groups are assigned to read a simplified version of English novel. In the meantime, they are respectively applied CL activities and traditional teacher-oriented teaching activities. Besides, they are applied the pretest and posttest of vocabulary proficiency to be analyzed and compared the learning effects. At last, a questionnaire is adopted to investigate the subjects’ responses to and perceptions of cooperative learning and literature reading.
The main results of this study are summarized as follows:
1. Under the circumstances of similar English academic performance and vocabulary proficiency, after the subjects finish reading the same English novel, those who are applied CL activities dominate those who are applied traditional teacher-oriented teaching activities in their posttest of English vocabulary proficiency. Through the statistical analysis, the outcome has reached the level of significant difference.
2. The control group, which receives the teacher’s traditional teaching activities while reading the English novel, has reached the level of statistically significant difference in the pretest and the posttest of vocabulary proficiency.
3. The experimental group, which is further divided into heterogeneous small groups and receives CL activities while reading the English novel, does not present the level of statistically significant difference in the posttest of vocabulary proficiency among small groups.
4. Through the investigation and analysis of the questionnaire, the subjects who are respectively applied CL activities and traditional teacher-oriented teaching activities adopt different strategies in learning English vocabulary.
5. Through the questionnaire, both the subjects with higher grades in vocabulary proficiency (the first 25%) and lower grades in vocabulary proficiency (the last 25%) mostly express positive affirmation in the responses to CL activities.
Finally, in the responses to literature reading, through the questionnaire, most subjects hold supportive attitudes. It is, consequently, suggested in this study that reading literature through CL activities not only assists students in learning vocabulary more efficiently, but hopefully promotes their reading comprehension.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION ………………………… 1
Background and Motivation ……………………………………………. 1
Statements of the Problems …………………………………………….. 5
Purposes of the Study …………………………………………………… 6
Research Questions …………………………………………………….. 7
Significance of the Study ………………………………………………. 8
Definitions of Terms ……………………………………………………. 8
Limitations of the Study ………………………………………………… 9
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW ……………….. 11
Introduction ……………………………………………………………… 11
Theories of L2 Vocabulary Instruction …………………………………... 11
Functions of L2 Literature Reading ……………………………………… 15
Definitions and Benefits of Cooperative Learning (CL) ………………… 19
Theoretical Foundations of CL …………………………………………... 23
Achievements of Research on CL ……………………………………….. 28
Theories and Functions of Three Major CL Activities …………………... 32
Student Team and Achievement Division (STAD) ………………….. 32
Jigsaw ……………………………………………………………….. 35
Discussion Group (DG) …………………………………………….. 37
Perplexity and Limitations of CL ………………………………………. 39
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY ……………………. 43
Subjects …………………………………………………………………. 43
Instruments ……………………………………………………………… 45
The Text of a Simplified Novel …………………………………….. 45
Two Word Lists …………………………………………………….. 47
Two Tests of Vocabulary Proficiency ………………………………. 50
A Questionnaire …………………………………………………….. 52
Research Design ………………………………………………………… 52
Procedures ………………………………………………………………. 55
Data Analysis ……………………………………………………………. 61
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ……….. 63
Introduction ……………………………………………………………… 63
The Results of the Pretest of Vocabulary Proficiency …………………… 63
The Results of the Posttest of Vocabulary Proficiency ………………….. 66
The Comparison of the Pretest and the Posttest of the Control Group ….. 68
The Comparison of the Posttest Among Different Learning Groups
in the Experimental Group ………………………………………………. 69
The Comparison of Learning Vocabulary from Literature through
Cooperative and Individual Learning ……………………………………. 72
The Comparison of Different Attitudes toward and Responses to CL …... 74
The General Responses to Literature Reading …………………………... 79
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND
SUGGESTIONS ……………………………. 83
Conclusions ………………………………………………………………. 83
Pedagogical Implications ………………………………………………… 85
Suggestions for Future Research ………………………………………… 87
REFERENCES ……………………………………………………….. 89
APPENDIXES ……………………………………………………… 105
Appendix A …………………………………………………………….. 105
Appendix B-1 Word List One ………………………………………. 106
Appendix B-2 Word List Two ………………………………………. 108
Appendix C-1 Pretest of Vocabulary Proficiency …………………… 110
Appendix C-2 Posttest of Vocabulary Proficiency ………………….. 112
Appendix D Questionnaire ……………………………………….. 114

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice: Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
Anderson, P. A., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. T. Guthie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching (pp. 77-117). Newark, Del.: International Reading Association.
Armstrong, B., Johnson. D. W., & Balow, B. (1981). Effects of cooperative versus individualistic learning experiences on interpersonal attraction between learning-disabled and normal-progress elementary school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 6, 102-109.
Aronson, E. N., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA & London: Sage Publications.
Asselin, S. B., & Vasa, S. F. (1981). Let the kids help one another: A model training and evaluation system for the utilization of peer tutors with special needs students in vocational education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 209481).
Axelrod, S. (1973). Comparisons of individuals and group contingencies in two special classes. Behavior Therapy, 4, 83-90.
Bassano, S., & Christison, M. A. (1988). Cooperative learning in the ESL classroom. TESOL Newsletter, 22 (2), 8-9.
Beck, I., & Mckeown, M. (1991). Conditions of vocabulary acquisition. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. P. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, 2 (pp. 789-814). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Bejarano, Y. (1987). A cooperative small group methodology in the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 21 (3), 483-501.
Blaney, N. T., Stephen, C., Rosenfield, D., Aronson, E., & Sikes, J. (1977). Interdependence in the classroom: A field study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 121-128.
Bondi, E. F. (1982). Two heads are better than one: Peer tutoring makes the difference. Academic Therapy, 17 (4), 401-405.
Brett, A., Rothlein, L., & Hurley, M. (1996). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories and explanation of target words. The Elementary School Journal, 96, 415-422.
Bronte, E. (1992). Wuthering heights. In C. M. Yung, & D. Foulds (Eds.), Oxford progressive English readers, grade 5 (pp. 1-116). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Brown, J.B., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32-42.
Calkins, L. M. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Carter, R. (1998). Vocabulary: Applied linguistic perspectives. London: Routledge.
Chen Y. M. & Wei J. L. (1993). The perplexity of cooperative learning. English Teaching & Learning, 18 (1), 19-24.
Coady, J., & Huckin, T. (Eds.) (1997). Second language vocabulary acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, E. G. (1980). Design and redesign of the desegregated school: Problems of status, power, and conflict. In W. G. Stephan and J. R. Feagin (Eds.), Desegregation: Past, present, and future (pp. 250-268). New York: Plenum Press.
Cohen, E. (1986). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
Cohen, P. A., & Kulik, J. A. (1981). Synthesis of research on the effects of tutoring. Research Information Service, 39, 227-229.
Collie, J., & Slater, S. (1987). Literature in the language classroom: A resource book of ideas and activities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Custodio, B., & Sutton, M. J. (1998). Literature-based ESL for secondary school students. TESOL Journal, 7 (5), 19-23.
Daneman, M. (1991). Individual differences in reading skills. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, 2 (pp. 512-538). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Dansereau, D. F. (1985). Learning strategy research. In J. Segel, S. Chipman, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Relating instruction to basic research, 1 (pp.258-269). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Davis, F. (1944). Fundamental factors of comprehension in reading. Psychometrika, 9, 185-197.
Davis, F. (1968). Research in comprehension in reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 3, 499-545.
Delanian, S. M. (1980). The influence of peer group pressure upon adolescents’ learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 198411).
Deutsch, M. (1949a). A theory of cooperation and competition. Human Relations, 2, 129-152.
Deutsch, M. (1949b). An experimental study of the effects of cooperation and competition upon group processes. Human Relations, 2, 199-232.
Deutsch, M. (1962). Cooperation and trust: Some theoretical notes. In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 275-319). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Devin-Sheehan, L., Feldman, R. S., & Allen, V. L. (1976). Research on children tutoring children: A critical review. Review of Educational Research, 50 (2), 315-342.
Dewey, J. (1957). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and education. NY: Free Press.
Dipardo, A. & Freedman, S, W. (1988). Peer response groups in the writing classroom: Theoretic foundations and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 58, 119-149.
Di Pietro R. J. (1987). Strategic instruction. U. S. A.: Cambridge University Press.
Dole, J. A., & Sloan, C., & Trathen, W. (1995). Teaching vocabulary within the context of literature. Journal of Reading, 38, 452-460.
Elley, W. B. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 174-187.
Elliott, A. H. (1977). Turning it around in education with student tutoring. The Clearing House, 50, 285-290.
Ellis, N. (Ed.) (1994). Implicit and explicit learning of languages. London: Academic Press.
Ellis, N. (1995). Vocabulary acquisition: Psychological perspectives and pedagogical implications. The Language Teacher, 19 (2), 12-16.
Farr, R., & Beck, M. (1989). Evaluating language development: Formal Methods. Paper presented at NCTE, Aug. 13, 1989.
Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. R., & Peterson, P. L. (1989). Learning mathematics with understanding: Cognitively guided instruction. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching. (pp. 195-221). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Fraser, S. C., Beaman, A. L., Diener, E., & Kelem, R. T. (1977). Two, three, or four heads are better than one: Modification of college performance by peer monitoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 101-108.
Freebody, P., & Anderson, R. (1983). Effects on text comprehension of differing proportions and locations of difficult vocabulary. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15, 19-39.
Fry, E. (1977). Fry’s readability graph: Calculations, validity and extension to level 17. Journal of Reading, 21, 242-252.
Gairns, R., & Redman, S. (1986). Working with words: A guide to teaching and learning vocabulary. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Gartner, A., Kohler, M., & Riessman, F. (1971). Children teach children: Learning by teaching. New York: Harper & Row.
Gauthier, L. R. (1991). The effects of vocabulary gain upon instructional reading level. Reading Improvement, 28, 195-202.
Gauthier, L. R. (2001). Coop-Dis-Q: A reading comprehension strategy. Intervention in School & Clinic, 36 (4), 217-220.
Gibson, S. S. (1992). Faculty and student communities: The interactive contexts of teachers and learners. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Teachers of English, Louisville, KY. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 355551).
Goodman, K. (1986). What’s whole in whole language? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Graves, D. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.
Graves, M. F. (1986). Vocabulary learning and instruction. In E. Z. Rothkopf (Ed.), Review of research in education, 13 (pp. 49-89). Washington: American Educational Research Association.
Gurnee, H. (1968). Learning under competitive and collaborative sets. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 26-34.
Hansen, G. (1986). Cooperative vs. individual learning effects on vocabulary retention. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 269742).
Harris, J., & Aldridge, J. (1983). 3 for me is better than 2 for you. Academic Therapy, 18 (3), 361-364.
Herman, P. A., & Dole, J. (1988). Theory and practice in vocabulary learning and instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 89 (1), 43-54.
Hiebert, E. H. (1980). Peers as reading teachers. Language Arts, 57, 877-881.
Hoffman, J. V. (1980). Studying contextual build-up during reading through cumulative cloze. Journal of Reading, 12, 337-341.
Hudson, T. (1982). The effects of induced schemata on the short circuit in L2 reading: Non-decoding factors in L2 reading performance. Language Learning, 32, 1-31.
Jacobsen, D., Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. (1993). Methods for teaching: A skills approach. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Johnson, D. W. (1970). The social psychology of education. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1974). Instructional goal structure: Cooperative, competitive, or individualistic. Review of Educational Research, 44, 213-240.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1981). Effects of cooperative and individualistic learning experiences on interethnic interaction. Journal of Education Psychology, 73, 454-459.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1986). Learning together and alone: Cooperation, competition, and individualization (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MH: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and individual learning. Needham, Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1994). The new circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom and school. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., Holubec, E. J., & Roy, P. (1984). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. U. S. A.: Edwards Brother, Inc.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Johnson, J. & Anderson, D. (1976). The effects of cooperative vs. individualized instruction on student prosocial behavior, attitudes toward learning, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 446-452.
Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47-62.
Kagan, S. (1977). Social motives and behaviors of Mexican-American and Anglo-American children. In J. L. Martinez (Ed.), Chicano Psychology (pp. 80-93). New York: Academic Press.
Kagan, S. (1985). Learning to cooperate. In R. Slavin (Ed.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp. 63-89). NY: Plenum Press.
Kagan, S. (1988). Cooperative learning resources for teachers. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Resources for Teachers.
Klein, Z., & Eshel, Y. (1980). Integrating Jerusalem Schools. New York: Academic Press.
Klesius, J., & Searls, E. (1991). Vocabulary instruction. Reading Psychology, 12, 165-171.
Kottler, J. A., & Zehm, S. J. (1993). Solitude: A resource for active student learning. People & Education, 1(2), 196-202.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). The “fundamental pedagogical principle” in second language teaching. Studia Linguistica, 35 (1ž), 50-70.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. (1987). Applications of psycholinguistic research to the classroom. In M. H. Long, & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings (pp. 33-44). Singapore: Harper & Row.
Kruse, A. F. (1979). Vocabulary in context. ELT Journal, 33 (3), 207-213.
Land, W. A. (1984). Peer tutoring: Student achievement and self-concept as reviewed in selected literature. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 252302).
Langer, J. (1997). Literacy acquisition through literature. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 40, 602-614.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
Larsen, S. C., & Ehly, S. (1976). Peering tutoring: An aid to individual instruction. The Clearing House, 49, 273-277.
Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York: Harper.
Lippett, R., & Lippett, P. (1968). Cross-age helpers. Today’s Education, 57, 24-26.
Martino, L., & Johnson, D. W. (1979). Cooperative and individualistic experiences among disabled and normal children. Journal of Social Psychology, 109, 177-183.
McGroarty, M. (1989). The benefits of cooperative learning arrangements in second language instruction. NABE Journal, 13 (2), 127-143.
McLellan, H. (1993). Evaluation in a situated learning environment. Educational Technology, 38 (3), 39-45.
Moore, D. M., & Harris, R. D. (1976). Teacher-student cooperative instructional design models for peering teaching and student motivated self-instruction. Educational Technology, 16 (4), 21-24.
Morrisey, P. A. (1975). A guide for teachers: How to set up a peer tutoring system in your classroom. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 163684).
Nagy, W. E. (1988). Vocabulary instruction and reading comprehension. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 300781).
Nation, I. S. P. (1980). Strategies for receptive vocabulary learning. REIC Journal Supplement Guidelines, 3, 18-23.
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching & learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Nation, P. & Coady, J. (1988). Vocabulary and reading. In R. Carter, & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary and language teaching (pp. 97-110). London: Longman.
Nevin, A., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1982). Effects of groups and individual contingencies on academic performance and social relations of special needs students. Journal of Social Psychology, 116, 41-59.
Olsen, R. E. W-B & Kagan S. (1992). About cooperative learning. In C. Kessler (Ed.), Cooperative language learning: A teacher’s resource book (pp. 1-30). N.J. : Prentice Hall Regents.
Oxford, R., & Crookall, D. (1988). Learning strategies. In J. B. Gleason (Ed.), You can take it with you: Helping students maintain foreign language skills beyond the classroom (pp. 248-259). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Paribakht, T. S. & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language acquisition. In J. Coady, & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 22-35). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Pigot, H., Pantuzzo, J. & Clement, P. (1986). The effects of reciprocal peer tutoring and group contingencies on the academic performance of elementary school children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 93-98.
Renegar, S. L. & Hacrtling, V. (1993). Cooperative learning in seventh-grade literature groups. Clearing House, 66 (4), 218-222.
Reutzel, D. R. (1985). Reconciling schema theory and the basal reading lesson. The Reading Teacher, 39 (2), 194-198.
Ron, A. (1977). Actors and stage directors in teaching. Iyunim Bekinuch, 14, 167-172.
Rupley, W. H., Logan, J. W., & Nichols, W. D. (1998). Vocabulary instruction in a balanced reading program. The Reading Teacher, 52 (4), 336-346.
Saga, H. (1987). Incorporating literature into ESL instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (Eds.). (1997). Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Seliger H. (1987). Psycholinguistic issues in second language acquisition. In L. M. Beebe (Ed.), Issues in second language acquisition (pp.17-40). Columbia: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Sharan, S., Kussell, P., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., Bejarano, Y., Ravis, S., & Sharan, Y. (1984). Cooperative learning in the classroom: Research in desegregated schools. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sharan, Y. & Sharan, S. (1992). Expanding cooperative learning through group investigation. Nork: Teachers College Press.
Sinclair, J. (Ed.). (1995). Collins Cobuild English Dictionary. London: HarperCollins.
Skon, L., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1981). Cooperative peer interaction versus individual competition and individualistic efforts: Efforts on the acquisition of cognitive reasoning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 83-91.
Slavin, R. E. (1977). How student learning teams can integrate the desegregated classroom. Integrated Education, 15, 56-58.
Slavin, R. E. (1978a). Using student team learning. Boltimore: The John Hopkins University.
Slavin, R. E. (1978b). Student teams and achievement divisions. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 12, 39-49.
Slavin, R. E. (1979). Effects of biracial learning teams on cross-racial relationships. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 381-387.
Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50 (2), 315-342.
Slavin, R. E. (1983a). Cooperative learning. New York: Longman.
Slavin, R. E. (1983b). When does cooperative leaning increase student achievement? Psychological Bulletin, 94 (3), 429-445.
Slavin, R. E. (1987). Cooperative learning: Student teams. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Needham, Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (1994). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R. E., & Oickle, E. (1980). Effects of learning teams on student achievement and race relations in a desegregated middle school. Presentation at the American Educational Research Association.
Slavin, R. E., & Oickle, E. (1981). Effects of learning teams on student achievement and race relations: Treatment by race interactions. Sociology of Education, 54, 174-180.
Slavin, R. et al. (1985). Learning to Cooperate: Cooperating to Learn. New York: Plenum.
Sloan, G. (1995). Questions of definition. In M. Sorenson & B. Lehman (Eds.), Teaching with children’s books: Paths to literature-based instruction (pp. 2-10). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teacher of English.
Smith, K., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1981). Can conflict be constructive? Controversy versus concurrence seeking in learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 651-653.
Smith, K., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1982). Effects of cooperative and individualistic instruction on the achievement of handicapped, regular, and gifted students. Journal of Social Psychology, 116, 277-282.
Smith, K., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1984). Effects of controversy on learning in cooperative groups. Journal of Social Psychology, 122, 199-209.
Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56, 72-110.
Stebbins, L. B., St. Pierre, R. G., Proper, E. C., Anderson, R. B., & Cerva, T. R. (1977). Education as experimentation: A planned variation model, IV-A, an evaluation of follow through. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associate.
Tagore, R. (1980). Macmillan Pocket Tagore Edition. Madras: Yu-Jen.
Thelen, H. A. (1967). Group interactional factors in learning. In E. M. Bower, & W. C. Hollister (Eds.), Behavioral science frontiers in education (pp. 261-287). New York: John Wiley.
Thorndyke, R. (1973). Reading comprehension education in fifteen countries. New York: Wiley.
Tsay S. J. (1998). The effects of cooperative learning on teaching English as a foreign language to senior high school students. A master’s thesis submitted to Department of English National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Tunncll, M. O., & Jacobs, J. S. (1989). Using “real” books: Research findings on literature based reading instruction. Reading Teacher, 42, 470-477.
Turco, T. & Elliott, S. (1990). Acceptability and effectiveness of group contingencies for improving spelling achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 28, 27-37.
Venetis, A. (1999). Teaching vocabulary: Within the context of literature and reading or through isolated word lists. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 427312).
Webb, N. (1985). Student interaction and behavior in small groups: A research summary. In R. E. Slavin (Ed.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp. 238-251). NY: Plenum Press.
Webb, N. (1988). Small group problem solving: Peer interaction and learning. International Association for the Study of Cooperation in Education Newsletter, 9, nos. 3 & 4, 11-12.
Wei J. L. & Chen Y. M. (1993). The initial exploration of cooperative learning: The viewpoints of college students. The publication of the thesis in the 10th English Teaching Seminar R. O. C.
Wilkinson, M. (1994). Using student stories to build vocabulary in cooperative learning groups. The Clearing House, 67 (4), 221-223.
Ying, Y. S. (2001). Acquiring vocabulary through a context-based approach. English Teaching Forum, 39, 18-34.