臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究主要目的在於探討合作學習透過文學閱讀對台灣重補修英文閱讀理解之效益。研究對象是六十八位宜蘭高中英文重補修一年級的學生，分為實驗、控制兩組，分別施以合作學習及傳統教學法，所有重補修學生在一個月內在課堂上學習七篇英文短篇故事。針對兩組研究對象的閱讀理解，研究者分別施以七份短篇故事「成就」測驗及三份「能力」測驗，作為效益之比較分析。至於研究對象對文學閱讀之反應及閱讀方面的認知，則施以文學閱讀問卷及後設認知問卷，以評估兩組間是否有差異，若無差異，則合併兩組看整體趨勢。此外，實驗組學生對合作學習活動之回應，則經由合作學習問卷得知。
本研究的主要發現摘要如下：
1.合作學習在增強學習動機及改善整體性閱讀理解能力方面，即使在男生低成就學生組成的同質性班級仍然有效。
2.經由統計分析，合作學習對全面閱讀理解能力的提升與傳統教學並無顯著差異。此外，以合作學習模式閱讀短篇故事的表現與以傳統教學模式閱讀短篇故事的表現相似。
3.後設認知策略閱讀問卷的結果及研究者的觀察顯示合作學習配合教師的引導協助對低成就學生助益更大。
4.研究對象不習慣合作教學法，必須給予事先的訓練及給予時間適應。此外，新的教學法要能持續有效果，最好持續一段時間直到所有參與者能內化所學的東西。
5.經問卷調查分析，以合作模式及傳統模式閱讀英文短篇故事都對文學教材持正面肯定的態度。
根據本研究的主要發現，研究者提出一些合作學習在高中重補修英文閱讀教學的建議：
1.合作學習可以作為高中重補修英文閱讀教學的選擇。
2.教師並非低成就學生學習唯一的來源，有時可以扮演諮詢者的角色。
3.教師在上課中應示範正確的閱讀策略，逐字翻譯會造成低成就學生對閱讀有錯誤的認知。
4.教科書並非唯一的教材，教師應該採用有趣的教材引起學生學習動機。
5.運用合作學習之前，應該教導學生正確的小組討論技巧的觀念。
6.教師應該多關心低成就學生，注意他們的進步並常讚美鼓勵他們。

This study aims to investigate the effects of cooperative learning through reading short stories on senior high repeaters’ reading comprehension. The subjects of the study are sixty-eight first-year senior high school repeaters. Thirty-three of them join in cooperative learning as the experimental group and thirty-five are instructed in the traditional teacher-oriented strategy as the control group. All the subjects are assigned to read seven simplified American writers’ short stories. Seven tests of reading comprehension achievement are conducted to explore the effects of cooperative learning on reading comprehension achievement. The pretest and the posttest of reading comprehension proficiency are administered to probe the learning effects of different instruction strategies. Besides, the same posttest is given two months after the experiment to determine the long-term effect of cooperative learning. Then, a metacognitive awareness questionnaire and a literature reading questionnaire are adopted to examine their perceptions of reading and of literature reading. If there is no difference between the two groups, the responses will be considered as a whole to see the general tendency. Finally, a cooperative learning questionnaire is used to evaluate the participants’ responses to cooperative learning.
The major findings of this study are summarized as follows:
1. Cooperative learning works in a homogeneous class of “male” “low achievers” in terms of the participants’ motivation and their academic performance in global comprehension.
2. Although the effect of cooperative learning through literature reading on overall reading comprehension proficiency is not statistically better than that of teacher-oriented instruction, the participants involved in cooperative learning at least do as well as those in the traditional teacher-oriented classroom.
3. The results of the metacognitive awareness questionnaire and the researcher’s observation show that cooperative learning may produce better results on low achievers when teachers provide assistance or guidance.
4. Students should be given training in advance and given a period of time to get used to working cooperatively with others. Besides, if a new instruction strategy is to continuously have facilitative effects, it had better last for a period of time until the participants can internalize what they learn.
5. Low achievers get pleasure from literature reading. The attitudes toward and responses to literature reading have no differences between the experimental and control groups: being affirmative about the application of it in the reading class.
Based on the main findings of the study, some pedagogical suggestions are provided for EFL teachers.
1. The results from this study show that the cooperative learning approach can be an alternative for teaching L2 reading in the make-up course.
2. Teachers are not always the only source of students’ learning. Instead, they should sometimes play the role of consultants.
3. Teachers should teach the correct strategy of reading by demonstrating in class. Translating the text word by word in class will cause low achievers to have wrong perceptions about reading.
4. Textbooks are not the only teaching materials. Thus, teachers should adopt interesting materials to motivate students’ learning.
5. Prior to the applications of cooperative learning, students should be given correct concepts about the skills of group learning and discussion.
6. Teachers should give more concern to low achievers, pay attention to their improvement, praise them and encourage them very often.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background and motivation 1
1.1.1 Repeaters 1
1.1.2 Cooperative learning 3
1.1.3 Short stories 7
1.2 Purpose and research questions of the study 8
1.3 Definition of terms 10
1.4 Significance of the study 11
1.5 Overview of the study 11
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 13
2.1 Problems of low achievers in reading 13
2.2 The place of literature in the language classroom 16
2.3 Cooperative learning 21
2.3.1 Components of successful cooperative learning 21
2.3.2 Positive outcomes of cooperative learning in language learning 23
2.3.3 Concerns about using cooperative learning in ESL/EEL classroom 31
2.3.4 Instructional practice of cooperative learning 33
2.3.4.1 Student Teams-Achievement Division (STAD) 34
2.3.4.2 Jigsaw 35
2.3.5 Unexplored issues of cooperative learning 36
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 41
3.1 Subjects 41
3.2 Instruments 42
3.2.1 Pretest and posttest of reading comprehension proficiency 43
3.2.2 Texts of seven simplified short stories 46
3.2.3 Seven tests of reading comprehension achievement of the seven short stories 47
3.2.4 Motivation questionnaire 48
3.2.5 Perceptual learning style preference questionnaire 49
3.2.6 Metacognitive awareness questionnaire 49
3.2.7 Questionnaire on participants’ responses to cooperative learning 50
3.2.8 Questionnaire on participants’ attitudes toward literature-based reading 51
3.3 Procedures of instruction and data collection 51
3.3.1 Before the implementation of the study 51
3.3.2 While the implementation of the study 54
3.3.3 After the implementation of the study 55
3.4 Data analysis 56
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 58
4.1 The comparison of the pretest of reading comprehension proficiency 58
4.2 The comparison of reading comprehension achievement tests of the seven short stories 60
4.3 The comparison of the pretest, the posttest 1, and the posttest 2 of reading comprehension proficiency 63
4.3.1 The comparison of the pretest, the posttest 1, and the posttest 2 of reading comprehension proficiency in the control group 64
4.3.2 The comparison of the pretest, the posttest 1, and the posttest 2 of reading comprehension proficiency in the experimental group 66
4.3.3 The effects of different instruction strategies on reading comprehension proficiency 67
4.4 The comparison of the metacognitive awareness after the treatment 73
4.5 The responses to cooperative learning in the experimental group 81
4.6 The general responses to literature reading 90
4.7 The researcher’s observation of how cooperative learning indeed works through literature reading 95
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION 99
5.1 Summary of findings 99
5.2 Pedagogical implications 102
5.3 Limitations of the study 104
5.4 Suggestions for future research 105
REFERENCES 107
Appendix A-1 114
Appendix A-2 121
Appendix B 128
Appendix C 140
Appendix D 162
Appendix E 164
Appendix F 166
Appendix G 168
Appendix H 169

Ali, S. (1994). The reader-response approach: An alternative for teaching literature in a second language. Journal of Reading, 37(4), 288-296.
Aukerman, R. C. (1972). Reading in the secondary school classroom. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Avery, C. W., & Avery, B. F. (1994). Merging reading and cooperative strategies through graphic organizers. Journal of Reading, 37(8), 689-690.
Basturkmen, H. (1990). Literature and the intermediate language learner: A sample lesson with Hemingway’s “Cat in the Rain.” English Teaching Forum, 28(3), 18-21.
Basturkmen, H. (1998). Refining Procedures: A needs analysis project at Kuwait University. English Teaching Forum, 36(4), 2-9.
Beattie, J. (1994). Characteristics of students with learning disabilities and how teachers can help. In K. D. Wood & B. Algozzine (Eds.), Teaching reading to high-risk learners (pp. 123-148). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bejarano, Y. (1987). A cooperative small-group methodology in the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 21(3), 483-504.
Benton, M., & Fox, G. (1988). Teaching literature one to fourteen. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blanton, L. P., & Blanton, W. E. (1994). Providing reading instruction to mildly disabled students: Research into practice. In K. D. Wood & B. Alogozzire (Eds.), Teaching reading to high-risk learners (pp. 9-48). MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 463-494.
Brown, H. D. (1994a). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Brown, H. D. (1994b). A practical guide to language learning: A fifteen-week program of strategies for success (Y. H. Shi, Trans). San Francisco State University.
Cai, X. K. (2000). 高級中學學生成績考查座談會紀錄。高中教育，第十一期，頁26-37。
Carr, T. H., Brown, T. L., Vavrus, L. G., & Evans, M. A. (1990). Cognitive skill maps and cognitive skill profiles: Componential analysis of individual difference in children’s reading efficiency. In T. H. Carr & B. A. Levy (Eds.), Reading and its development: Component skills approaches (pp. 1-55). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. The Modern Language Journal, 73(2), 121-134.
Casanave, C. P. (1988). Comprehension monitoring in ESL reading: A neglected essential. TESOL Quarterly, 22(2), 283-302.
Chang, M. M. (1995). Teacher-oriented learning vs. cooperative learning in English reading class. 國立屏東技術學院學報，第四期，頁271-277。
Chang, Y. A. (2000). The motivation and language learning strategies of students in high school: A site study. Selected Papers from the Ninth International Symposium on English Teaching, 284-294.
Chen, H. C. (1998). The performance of junior college students studying English through cooperative learning. Paper from Proceedings of the fifth international symposium of English teaching (pp. 1231-240). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, P. C. (1991). Applying an integrated reading instructional approach to the teaching of English short stories at college level. Journal of National Cheng-Kung University, 26, 37-50.
Chen, Y. C. (1998). The perceptual learning style preferences of Taiwanese junior high school in learning English. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, R.O.C.
Chen, H. C., & Graves, M. F. (1995). Effects of previewing and providing background knowledge on Taiwanese college students’ comprehension of American short stories. TESOL Quarterly, 29(4), 663-686.
Cheng, C. K. (2000). Cooperative learning in second language instruction. 華岡外語學報，第七期，頁185-195.
Christison, M. A. (1990). Cooperative learning in the EFL classroom. English Teaching Forum, 28(4), 6-9.
Chou, Y. L. (2002). The effects of short stories on English conjunction instruction for EFL students in vocational high school. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, R.O.C.
Collie, J., & Slater, S. (1988). Literature in the language classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cooper, M. (1984). Linguistic competence of practiced and unpracticed non-native readers of English. In J. C. Alderson & A. H. Urquhart (Eds.), Reading in a foreign language (pp. 122-135). New York: Longman.
Crapse, L. (1995). Helping students construct meaning through their own questions. Journal of Reading, 38(5), 389-390.
Crismore, A., & Salim, S. F. B. S. (1997). Collaborative learning in Malaysian Postsecondary classrooms. TESOL Journal, 7(2) ,15-21.
Cunningham, J. M., & Wall, L. K. (1994). Teaching good readers to comprehend better. Journal of Reading, 37(6), 480-486.
Derry, S. L. (1990). Remediating academic difficulties through strategy training: The acquisition of useful knowledge. Remedial and Special Education, 11(6), 19-31.
Dunning, S. (1968). Teaching literature to adolescents. Atlanta, NJ: Scott, Foresman And Company.
Dymock, S. (1993). Reading but not understanding. Journal of Reading, 37(2), 86-91.
Flanigan, B. (1991). Peer tutoring and second language acquisition in the elementary school. Applied Linguistics, 12(2), 141-158.
Gajdusek, L. (1988). Toward wider use of literature in ESL: Why and how. TESOL Quarterly, 22(2), 227-258.
Gebhard, J. G. (1985). Teaching reading through assumptions about learning. English Teaching Forum, 23(3), 16-20.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current development in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406.
Guey, C. C., & Shin, D. C. (2000). On the improvement of reading comprehension abilities from cooperative learning (group discussion). 中等教育，第五十一卷，第五期，頁65-73。
Guo, C. S. (2002). The effects of different group-learning types on low-academic students’ academic performance of natural science. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taichung Teachers College, Taichung, R.O.C.
Gwin, T. (1990). Language skills through literature. English Teaching Forum, 28(3), 10-17.
Heaton, J. B. (1991). Classroom testing─Longman keys to language teaching. New York: Longman.
Hedge, T. (1985). Using readers in language teaching. London: Macmillan.
Hilke, E. V. (1990). Cooperative learning. Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Hill, J. (1986). Teaching literature in the classroom. London: Macmillan.
Hong, L. H. (1995). Teaching reading in English at senior high school. 壢商學報，第三期，頁9-18。
Hsieh, L. T. (1996). Group work and vocabulary learning. Paper from Preceedings of the fifth international symposium of English teaching (pp. 156-167). Taipei: Crane.
Huang, S. C., & Tzeng, C. S. (2000). Learning strategies used by high school proficiency learners in Taiwan. Selected Papers from the Ninth International Symposium on English Teaching, 367-372.
Huang, S. M. (2002). The effects of cooperative learning through literature: Vocabulary acquisition of EFL senior high students. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, R.O.C.
Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers─Cambridge handbooks for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ibsen, E. B. (1990). The double role of fiction in foreign language learning towards a creative methodology. English Teaching Forum, 28(3), 2-9.
Ilola, L. M., Power, K. M., & Jacobs, G. (1989). Structuring student interaction to promote learning. English Teaching Forum 27(3), 12-16.
Jacob, E., Rottenberg, L., Patrick, S., & Wheeler, E. (1996). Cooperative leaning: Context and opportunities for acquiring academic English. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 253-280.
Jang, M. Y., & Wei, J. L. (1993) 運用「合作學習」導正英語教學。英語教學雜誌，第十六卷，第三期，頁10-19。
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1975). Learning together and alone: Cooperation, competition, and individualization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1998). Cooperation in the classroom (7th ed.). Edina, MN: Interactive Book Company.
Kim, Y. H., & Goetz, E. T. (1994). Context effects on word recognition and reading comprehension of poor and good readers: A test of the interactive-compensatory hypothesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 29(1), 170-187.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.
Lai, H. M. (1984). Attitudes and attained EFL proficiency: A study of the Chinese senior high schools. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, R.O.C.
Lazar, G. (1993). Literature and language teaching: A guide for teachers and trainers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Li, C. L. (1993) 如何敎國中低成就班級。人文及社會學科教學通訊，第四卷，第四期，頁39-52。
Li, X. Y. (2000). 高級中學學生成績考查辦法─「學業考查」實務運作探討。高中教育，第十一期，頁22-25。
Liang, T. (1996). Cooperative learning in English Education. Selected Papers from the Fifth International Symposium on English Teaching, 65-72.
Liang, X., Mohan, B. A., & Early, M. (1998). Issues of cooperative learning in ESL classes: A literature review. TESL Canadian Journal, 15(2), 13-23.
Liaw, M. L. (1997). Using reader-response approach for literature reading in an EFL classroom. Tunghai Journal, 38, 113-130.
Lin, A. H. C. (1997). Project work: Cooperative learning in English reading. Wen Tzao Ursulin Junior College, 11, 19-44.
Littlejohn, A. P. 91983). Increasing learner involvement in course management. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 595-609.
Liu, X. M. (1998). 合作學習的教學策略。公民訓育學報，第七期，頁285-294。
Long, M. H., & Porter, P. A. (1985). Group work, interlanguage and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 207-228.
Luo, Y. B. (1992) From a cognitive View: Vocabulary teaching through short stories as content in EFL classrooms. 亞東工業專科學校學報，第十三期，頁(10)1-(10)27。
Marvin, M. K. L. (Ed.) (2000). American writers and their works. Taiwan: Pyramid Press.
McBeath, N. (1988). Implementing an extensive reading scheme for high school students. English Teaching Forum, 26(4),40-41.
McCormick, S. (1992). Disabled readers’ erroneous response to inferential comprehension questions: Description and analysis. Reading research Quarterly, 27(1), 55-77.
Mitchell, H. (1986). Helping slow and unmotivated teenagers learn English. English Teaching Forum, 24(2), 38-40.
Murphey, Y. (1990). You and I: Adjusting interaction to get comprehensible input. English Teaching Forum, 28(4), 2-5.
Murphey, T. (1994/1995). Tests: Learning through negotiated interaction. TESOL Journal, 4(2), 12-17.
Norton, B. (Ed.) (2001). Teaching English to large class. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 493-500.
Oster, J. (1989). Seeing with different eyes: Another view of literature in the ESL class. TESOL Quarterly, 23(1), 85-104.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Padron, Y. N., & Waxman, H. C. (1988). The effect of ESL students’ perceptions of their cognitive strategies on reading achievement. TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 146-150.
Paris, S. G., & Cross, D. R. (1984). Informed strategies for learning: A program to improve children’s reading awareness and comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(6), 1239-1252.
Pauk, W. (Ed.) (2003). Six-way paragraphs, introductory level. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Pica, T., Young, R., & Doughty, C. (1987). The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 21(4), 737-758.
Reid, J. (1995). Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. New York: Heinle & Heinle.
Reiss, M. A. (1983). Helping the unsuccessful language learner. English Teaching Forum, 21(2), 2-7.
Renegar, S. L., & Hacrtling, V. (1993). Cooperative learning in seven-grade literature groups. Clearing House, 66(4), 218-222.
Ronnquvist, L., & Sell, R. D. (1994). Teenage books for teenagers: Reflections on literature in language education. ELT Journal, 48(2), 125-132.
Rubin, D. (1993). A practical approach to teaching reading (2nd ed.) Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Rubin, J. (1975). What the ‘good language learner’ can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9(1), 41-51.
Rubin, J., & Thompson, I. (1994). How to be a successful language learner: toward learner autonomy. (2nd ed.). Boston, Mass: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 35-38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schmitt, M. C. (1990). A questionnaire to measure children’s awareness of strategic reading process. The Reading Teacher, 43(7), 454-461.
Sharkey, J. (1994/1995). Helping students become better learners. TESOL Journal, 4(2), 18-23.
Shen, Y. M., & Yang, Y. F. (1996) 語言學習心理轉變之研究以一位英語文初學者為例。教育研究資訊，第四卷，第六期，頁44-63。
Slavin, R. E. (1988). Student team learning: An overview and practical guide (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: National Education Association.
Slogan, G. (1995). Questions of definition. In M. Scoreson & B. Lehman (Eds.), Teaching with children’s books: Paths to literature-based instruction (pp.2-10). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teacher of English.
Spires, H. A., Huffman, L. E., Honeycutt, R. L., & Barrow, H. P. (1995). Socializing college developmental students to hear their academic voices with literature. Journal of Reading, 38(5), 340-345.
Stevens, K. C. (1982). Can we improve reading by teaching background information? Journal of Reading, 25, 326-329.
Swafford, J. (1995). “I wish all my groups were like this one”: Facilitating peer interaction during group work. Journal of Reading, 38(8), 626-631.
Taillefer, G.., & Paugh, T. (1998). Strategies for professional reading in L1 and L2. Journal of Research in Reading, 21(2), 96-108.
Tunncll, M. O., & Jacobs, J. S. (1989). Using “real” books: Research findings on literature based reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 42(7), 470-477.
Vellution, F. R., & Scanlon, D. M. (1991). The effects of instructional bias on word identification. In L. Rieben & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Learning to read: Basic research and its complications (pp. 189-195). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Wang, H. M. (1992) Using cooperative learning in the EFL classroom. 警專學報，第五期，頁289-316。
Wei, J. L. (1996) 國內大專學生對「合作學習」英語教學活動的看法。教育研究資訊，第四卷，第六期，頁13-26。
Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Talking shop: H. G. Widdowson on literature on literature and ELT. ELT Journal, 37(1), 30-35.
Wilson, S. R. L. (1991). The effects of cooperative learning on reading comprehension. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi.
Wong, B. Y. L. (1985). Self-questioning instructional research: A review. Review of Educational Research, 55(2), 227-268.
Wu, J. (2000). Using songs, poetry and arts in teaching EFL. 屏東師院國民教育研究所論文集，第五期，頁141-158。
Wu, J. X. (2000). 實施高中心成績考察辦法的因應措施與檢討改進建議。高中教育，第十一期，頁4-15。
Xu, Z. M. (1993) 如何提高國中低成就學生學習英語的動機與效果。人文及社會學科教學通訊，第四卷，第四期，頁6-14。
Yang, N. D. (2000). Beliefs about language learning and learning strategy use: a study of college students of English in Taiwan. Papers from the Tenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, 193-215.
You, S. Y. (1989) 重修生的心態與輔導。諮商與輔導，第十卷，第四十四期，頁43-44。
Zheng, Y. Q. (1998). Teaching reading comprehension to EFL students. 松高學報，第一期，頁303-324。
Zhou, Z. T. (1993) 外語學習中的動機因素。人文及社會學科教學通訊，第四卷，第四期，頁15-25。
Zhuang L. R., & Yang Y. F. (1995) 五專學生對英文重補修課程之觀點研究。人文及社會學科教學通訊，第四卷，第六期，頁96-112。