(3.230.76.48) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/11 09:45
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:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:李利德
研究生(外文):Li-Te Li
論文名稱:主題探索式課程對成人英文寫作學習者的影響
論文名稱(外文):The Effects of Implementing Theme Cycles on Adult EFL Writers
指導教授:黃月貴黃月貴引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yueh-Kuey Huang
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:淡江大學
系所名稱:英文學系
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:2003
畢業學年度:91
語文別:英文
論文頁數:465
中文關鍵詞:全語文主題探索式課程英語作為外語的學習成人學生英文寫作學習閱讀與寫作以學生為中心的學習解放型教育對話英文寫作成效英文寫作自信英文寫作焦慮全人教育以人為本的學習個案研究教師做為研究者的研究反思與成長弗雷勒羅傑斯
外文關鍵詞:whole languagetheme cyclesEFL writingadult EFL writersreading and writinglearner-centered learningeducation of liberationdialoguevoicewriting performancewriting confidencewriting anxietypersonal growth and empowermentwhole-person educationhumanistic learningcase studyteacher as researcherCarl RogersPaulo Freire
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:453
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:13
本研究旨在探討成人英語文教育的實施,尤其是英文寫作的學習。以某國立大學夜間公教人員英語進修班的學生為研究對象,進行以學生為中心的主題式讀寫能力培養,為期一年,觀察學習過程及成效,並加以分析評估。
有鑒於過往國內英語文教學的僵化及過於注重支離破碎的語言分析,本研究以全語文(Whole Language)的理論為基礎,加上羅傑斯(Carl Rogers)以人為中心的教育理念,以及弗雷勒(Paulo Freire)的解放型教育(Education of Liberation),以期提供成人學習英語文讀寫的另一種嚐試。全語文強調語言的整體性及語言學習的不可分割性。認為語言學習的最佳狀態是聽、說、讀、寫同時並行,且完整的故事內容優於片段的單句練習。此外,全語文強調有意義的學習必須是學習內容與學生的背景、生活、興趣密切相關。同樣地,羅傑斯的人本主義教育觀,認為學習者是一切學習的中心,教學者應尊重學習者,視學習者為獨特的個體並充滿潛在的能力。弗雷勒(Paulo Freire)的解放型教育(Education of Liberation)也認為學習者有潛在的能力,尤其是成人學生。成人學生有豐富的人生經驗及專業背景,這些資源應被尊重。因此,學生可以是老師的老師,老師也可以是學生的學生。弗雷勒(Paulo Freire)主張學習應是一種持續對談的關係,學習者透過與自身、環境、社會的持續對談,思考、批判、並應用所學。基於上述的理論,不難認定英文寫作是學習者內在思想的呈現,而非單單字句組合的練習。寫作者必須對他想呈現的思想內容有興趣或有意見,才有可能竭盡所能搜尋恰當的字眼,以表達他的想法。因此,英文寫作課程是否也能提供這樣的學習彈性和空間,讓學習者選擇自己關注的議題,進行閱讀、討論、寫作分享,並在這過程中提升英文寫作的能力,就成為本研究的主要議題。
本研究中的公教人員讀寫課程為期一年。上學期學生依據自己的興趣、專業、關懷、及語言能力決定一主題,並環繞主題選擇適合自己的閱讀材料。讀後心得及相關見解以扎記、信件、留言版訊息、以及正式論文型態呈現,與同學和老師分享,並於期末做口頭報告。下學期全班共同閱讀與學生生活息息相關的英文暢銷書,一同討論、交換意見,閱讀心得同樣以不同類型呈現。所有正式論文均需修改至少兩次。學生的創作常是寫作架構分析的範本,學生因此從寫作中學寫作。
研究方法採質量並重。學習過程及成效分析,以學生整學年的學習歷程檔案(Portfolio)為主,輔以學年前後所填之「英文寫作自信」及「英文寫作焦慮」問卷調查,透過質化與量化的研究分析,檢測學生參加英文閱讀寫作班之前與之後,英文寫作能力是否提升?英文寫作自信是否增強?英文寫作焦慮是否減弱?甚至學生人格及內在性格是否因此潛移默化?
研究結果顯示,主題探索式課程提升學生英文寫作能力,包括內容更為豐富、組織架構更為完整、語言較為生動貼切、且呈現寫作者的聲音(voice)及獨特性(uniqueness)。同時,主題探索式課程增強學生的英文寫作自信,並舒緩英文寫作焦慮,學生不再視英文寫作為畏途,反而展現對英文寫作的喜愛。此外,以人為本且以學生為中心的主題探索式課程培養學生勇於嘗試的精神、強化學生反思的能力、並拓展關懷的視野。
本研究的目的不僅在於喚起寫作教學者對教材選用、授課方式、以及自主學習的省思,並強調語言學習的整體性、學習者的全人觀照、以及師生互重互信且持續不斷對談的重要性能,進而使英語文寫作教學者思索如何有效地應用此類以學生為中心、以主題式閱讀寫作為主軸的英語文教學於不同層級、背景、和能力的學生群中。
English learning is very popular in Taiwan. In addition to language schools for children, different courses are offered to adults who have left schools for years. Writing is one of them and is usually considered important to English proficiency. However, students are usually fond of listening and speaking classes but show their reluctance to attending a writing class. This tendency is a result of the way English is taught. The two major factors are the way of EFL writing instruction and materials selection.
The purpose of the study is to raise the awareness of the importance of relevant materials and to explore an alternative way of instruction to see what influences it might have on adult EFL writers. In order to highlight the importance of relevant materials, theories and philosophies focusing on authentic materials, learner-centered learning, and liberatory education have been reviewed, especially the concepts of whole language philosophy, the major concerns of Rogerian learning, and the central beliefs of Freirean education. The alternative way of instruction refers to theme cycles learning. Theme cycles value the process of learning and integrate various learning skills. It promotes learner-centered learning and makes learning relevant to learners’ interests and concerns.
An adult EFL reading and writing class, during the 2000-2001 school year, was the site for the study. This class was a Level 1 class of the Government Employees English Program (GEEP), sponsored by the language center of a national university in Taipei city. The class met once a week for three hours each time in a language lab. The participants in this study were 1 male and 7 female students. Their age ranged from 25 to 45 years old. Two of them held bachelor’s degrees and the other 6 had received their master’s degrees. The years of learning English varied, but most of them had little experience of learning English writing.
The research methods used in this study were ethnographic methods, case study, and teacher as researcher. The data were collected throughout the school year of 2000-2001, including individual portfolios (essays, journals, oral reports, etc.), questionnaires, final self-evaluation, e-mail correspondences (information exchange, informal interview, etc.), field notes (observation, interaction, etc.), and reflective journals. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses were used in this study. The purpose of quantitative analysis was to investigate the writing performance and attitudes of the participants as a whole, while the purpose of qualitative analysis was to detail the changes individual made during the research study. To analyze essays, the comparison of means was applied for prompt writing drafts. The paired-sample t-test was used to analyze the data of participants’ writing attitudes obtained from pre-class and post-class questionnaires on writing self-efficacy and writing apprehension. Triangulation approach was used to investigate the transcribed and coded qualitative data. It is hoped that the combination of quantitative and qualitative analysis would provide a thorough investigation for this study.
The results of this study shows that in a whole-to-part and meaning-oriented learning environment, students improved language use as well as writing content and organization. When they were involved in a learner-centered theme cycles learning, students showed personal growth and empowerment. Not only was their writing confidence increased but their writing anxiety was also decreased. With the emphasis of dialogical way of learning, students cultivated critical thinking and presented their real voice in writing.
This study proves the efficacy of implementing whole-language-based theme cycles to an adult EFL reading-writing class. The future research can be done with different EFL learners, such as high school students, university English majors, or teachers in training programs. The study suggests the effect of dialogical way of learning, so it is worth further research to know what makes reciprocal dialogue possible. In addition, it is interesting to further investigate whether the teacher involved in a theme cycles curriculum also experiences personal growth and empowerment.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHINESE ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………v
ENGLISH ABSTRACT………………………………………………………vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………x
TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………xiii
LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………xix
LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………xxii
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY…………………………………1
1.1 Problem Statement…………………………………………….1
1.2 Purpose of the Study………………………………………3
1.3 Significance of the Study………………………………5
1.4 Operational Definition of Terms…………………………6
1.5 Research Questions……………………………………………8
1.6 Chapter Content……………………………………………8
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE…………………………………13
2.1 Content and Rationale for Selection……………………13
2.2 Historical View of ESL/EFL Writing…………15
2.2.1 Definitions of ESL Writing and Methods of Teaching ESL Writing…………………15
2.2.2 The Instruction of EFL Writing in Taiwan………………22
2.3 Writing in a Whole Language Perspective………………25
2.3.1 Pertinent Research on Whole Language Application in ESL Writing………………………………………32
2.3.2 Current Research on Whole Language Application in
Taiwan……………………………………………38
2.4 Carl Rogers’ Whole-Person Education………………43
2.4.1 Characteristics of Rogerian Learning…………………44
2.4.2 Shared Beliefs with Whole Language………………………49
2.5 Paulo Freire’s Education of Liberation……………50
2.5.1 Characteristics of Freirean Pedagogy……………………51
2.5.2 Shared Beliefs with Whole Language and Carl Rogers…57
2.6 Theme Cycles: A Whole Language Application…………60
2.6.1 Definition of Theme Cycles………………………………60
2.6.2 Application of Theme Cycles………………………………62
III. METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………67
3.1 Rationale for the Research Methods…………………67
3.1.1 Ethnographic Methods……………………………………68
3.1.2 Case Study……………………………………………………69
3.1.3 Teacher as Researcher……………………………………70
3.2 The Pilot Study……………………………………………71
3.3 Design of the Formal Study……………………………77
3.3.1 The Class and the Setting………………………………77
3.3.2 The Participants………………………………………………78
3.3.3 The Teacher-Researcher and the Teaching Philosophy…79
3.3.4 The Typical Classroom Activities…………………………82
3.3.5 Informed Consent……………………………………………87
3.4 Materials and Instruments………………………………88
3.5 Procedures……………………………………………………92
3.5.1 Procedures of Theme Cycles Implementation…………92
3.5.2 Procedures of Data Collection…………………………99
3.6 Data Analysis………………………………………………………102
IV. DATA PRESENTATION AND RESULTS……………………………105
4.1 Basic Information of the Class………………………105
4.2 The Case Studies…………………………………………106
4.2.1 Anne………………….……………………………………108
4.2.1.1 Personal Profile……………………..…………………108
4.2.1.2 Writing Performance: Essay Scores…………………109
4.2.1.3 Writing Attitudes: Results of Questionnaires…………112
4.2.1.4 Personal Growth/Empowerment: Portfolio Evaluation..114
4.2.2 Jenny……………………………………………………….115
4.2.2.1 Personal Profile………………………………………115
4.2.2.2 Writing Performance: Essay Scores…………………116
4.2.2.3 Writing Attitudes: Results of Questionnaires…………119
4.2.2.4 Personal Growth/Empowerment: Portfolio Evaluation120
4.2.3 Judy………………….……………………………………122
4.2.3.1 Personal Profile……………………..…………………122
4.2.3.2 Writing Performance: Essay Scores…………………123
4.2.3.3 Writing Attitudes: Results of Questionnaires…………125
4.2.3.4 Personal Growth/Empowerment: Portfolio Evaluation..127
4.2.4 Joyce…………………..……………………………………128
4.2.4.1 Personal Profile……………………..…………………129
4.2.4.2 Writing Performance: Essay Scores…………………130
4.2.4.3 Writing Attitudes: Results of Questionnaires…………131
4.2.4.4 Personal Growth/Empowerment: Portfolio Evaluation..133
4.2.5 Ken………………….………………………………………134
4.2.5.1 Personal Profile……………………..…………………134
4.2.5.2 Writing Performance: Essay Scores…………………136
4.2.5.3 Writing Attitudes: Results of Questionnaires…………138
4.2.5.4 Personal Growth/Empowerment: Portfolio Evaluation..140
4.2.6 Lin………………….………………………………………141
4.2.6.1 Personal Profile……………………..…………………141
4.2.6.2 Writing Performance: Essay Scores…………………142
4.2.6.3 Writing Attitudes: Results of Questionnaires………….144
4.2.6.4 Personal Growth/Empowerment: Portfolio Evaluation..146
4.2.7 Maria…………………..……………………………………148
4.2.7.1 Personal Profile……………………..…………………148
4.2.7.2 Writing Performance: Essay Scores…………………...149
4.2.7.3 Writing Attitudes: Results of Questionnaires………….150
4.2.7.4 Personal Growth/Empowerment: Portfolio Evaluation..152
4.2.8 Peggy………………….…………………………………….154
4.2.8.1 Personal Profile……………………..…………………154
4.2.8.2 Writing Performance: Essay Scores…………………...155
4.2.8.3 Writing Attitudes: Results of Questionnaires………….157
4.2.8.4 Personal Growth/Empowerment: Portfolio Evaluation..158
4.3 General Profile of the Class…………………………160
4.3.1 Writing Performance of the Class…………………………161
4.3.2 Writing Attitudes of the Class……………………………163
4.3.3 Personal Growth and Empowerment…………………………167
V. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA…………………169
5.1 Analysis of Writing Performance……………………169
5.1.1 Writing Performance from Weak to Good………………170
5.1.1.1 Jenny…………………………………………………170
5.1.1.2 Judy……………………………………………………185
5.1.2 Writing Performance from Average to Good.…………200
5.1.2.1 Anne…………………………………………………..201
5.1.2.2 Lin……………………………………………………..220
5.1.3 Writing Performance from Weak to Average.………..238
5.1.3.1 Joyce………………………………………………….238
5.2 Analysis of Writing Attitudes: Writing Confidence.257
5.2.1 Writing Confidence from Low to High………………258
5.2.1.1 Jenny…………………………………………………258
5.2.2 Writing Confidence from Low to Middle…………………262
5.2.2.1 Anne…………………………………………………262
5.2.2.2 Judy……………………………………………………266
5.2.3 Writing Confidence form Middle to High……………268
5.2.3.1 Joyce…………………………………………………268
5.2.3.2 Lin……………………………………………………270
5.3 Analysis of Writing Attitudes: Writing Anxiety……272
5.3.1 Writing Anxiety from High to Middle…….…………273
5.3.1.1 Anne…………………………………………………...273
5.3.2 Writing Anxiety from Middle to Low…………………275
5.3.2.1 Jenny………………………………………………...…275
5.3.2.2 Joyce………………………………………………...…279
5.3.2.3 Lin……………………………………………………..281
5.3.3 Writing Anxiety from Higher Middle to Lower Middle.284
5.3.3.1 Judy……………………………………………………284
5.4 Personal Growth and Empowerment………………………286
5.4.1 Superior……………………………………………………..287
5.4.1.1 Lin……………………………………………………..287
5.4.1.2 Jenny…………………………………………………...291
5.4.2 Between Superior and Good…..……………………………297
5.4.2.1 Judy……………………………………………………297
5.4.2.2 Joyce…………………………………………………...305
5.4.3 Good………………………………………….……………..308
5.4.3.1 Anne…………………………………………………...308
5.5 Discussion of the Results..………………………….312
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS…..………………...323
6.1 Summary of the Study……………………………………323
6.2 Implications of the Study……………………………...327
6.3 Recommendations for Future Research………………….331
6.4 Conclusions………………………………………………334
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………...337
APPENDIXES……………………………………………………………..361
VITA…………………………………………………………………...461
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 Basic Information of the Class………...105
Table 4.2 Anne’s Basic Information…………………108
Table 4.3 Anne’s Essay Scores………………………109
Table 4.4 Frequency Check of Anne’s Writing Self-efficacy...12
Table 4.5 Frequency Check of Anne’s Writing Apprehension……112
Table 4.6 Mean Scores of Anne’s Writing Self-efficacy and Apprehension….112
Table 4.7 Mean Scores of Anne’s Portfolio………..114
Table 4.8 Jenny’s Basic Information………………..115
Table 4.9 Jenny’s Essay Scores………………………..117
Table 4.10 Frequency Check of Jenny’s Writing Self-efficacy………………119
Table 4.11 Frequency Check of Jenny’s Writing Apprehension……...…...119
Table 4.12 Mean Scores of Jenny’s Writing Self-efficacy and Apprehension….119
Table 4.13 Mean Scores of Jenny’s Portfolio……...120
Table 4.14 Judy’s Basic Information……………………122
Table 4.15 Judy’s Essay Scores………………………123
Table 4.16 Frequency Check of Judy’s Writing Self-efficacy………………….125
Table 4.17 Frequency Check of Judy’s Writing Apprehension………………....125
Table 4.18 Mean Scores of Judy’s Writing Self-efficacy and Apprehension…...126
Table 4.19 Mean Scores of Judy’s Portfolio…………127
Table 4.20 Joyce’s Basic Information…………………..129
Table 4.21 Joyce’s Essay Scores…………………..130
Table 4.22 Frequency Check of Joyce’s Writing Self-efficacy…………………131
Table 4.23 Frequency Check of Joyce’s Writing Apprehension………………..132
Table 4.24 Mean Scores of Joyce’s Writing Self-efficacy and Apprehension….132
Table 4.25 Mean Scores of Joyce’s Portfolio………...133
Table 4.26 Ken’s Basic Information…………………….135
Table 4.27 Ken’s Essay Scores……………………….136
Table 4.28 Frequency Check of Ken’s Writing Self-efficacy…………………..138
Table 4.29 Frequency Check of Ken’s Writing Apprehension…………………138
Table 4.30 Mean Score of Ken’s Writing Self-efficacy and Apprehension…….139
Table 4.31 Mean Scores of Ken’s Portfolio………….140
Table 4.32 Lin’s Basic Information…………………..142
Table 4.33 Lin’s Essay Scores……………………..143
Table 4.34 Frequency Check of Lin’s Writing Self-efficacy……144
Table 4.35 Frequency Check of Lin’s Writing Apprehension…………………..145
Table 4.36 Mean Scores of Lin’s Writing Self-efficacy and Apprehension…….145
Table 4.37 Mean Scores of Lin’s Portfolio…………..146
Table 4.38 Maria’s Basic Information………………..148
Table 4.39 Maria’s Essay Scores…………………..149
Table 4.40 Frequency Check of Maria’s Writing Self-efficacy………………...151
Table 4.41 Frequency Check of Maria’s Writing Apprehension………………..151
Table 4.42 Mean Scores of Maria’s Writing Self-efficacy and Apprehension….151
Table 4.43 Mean Scores of Maria’s Portfolio………..152
Table 4.44 Peggy’s Basic Information…………….154
Table 4.45 Peggy’s Essay Scores…………………….155
Table 4.46 Frequency Check of Peggy’s Writing Self-efficacy………………...157
Table 4.47 Frequency Check of Peggy’s Writing Apprehension……………….157
Table 4.48 Mean Scores of Peggy’s Writing Self-efficacy and Apprehension…157
Table 4.49 Mean Scores of Peggy’s Portfolio………..159
Table 4.50 Paired-sample T-test for Scores on Prompt Writing………………..162
Table 4.51 Paired-sample T-test for Scores on Writing Self-efficacy…………..164
Table 4.52 Paired-sample T-test for Scores on Writing Apprehension…………166
Table 4.53 Results of Portfolio Evaluation of the Class………………………..167
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 Results of Anne’s Questionnaires…………113
Figure 4.2 Results of Jenny’s Questionnaires..……120
Figure 4.3 Results of Judy’s Questionnaires…………126
Figure 4.4 Results of Joyce’s Questionnaires………..132
Figure 4.5 Results of Ken’s Questionnaires……………139
Figure 4.6 Results of Lin’s Questionnaires………..145
Figure 4.7 Results of Maria’s Questionnaires………..152
Figure 4.8 Results of Peggy’s Questionnaires….158
Figure 4.9 Writing Performance of the Class (1)……161
Figure 4.10 Writing Performance of the Class (2)…….161
Figure 4.11 Writing Self-efficacy of the Class (1)….163
Figure 4.12 Writing Self-efficacy of the Class (2)……163
Figure 4.13 Writing Apprehension of the Class (1)……165
Figure 4.14 Writing Apprehension of the Class (2)……165
REFERENCES
Altwerger, B., & Flores, B. (1994). Theme cycles: Creating communities of
learners. Primary Voices K-6, 2 (1), 2-6.
Andrews-Sullivan, M., & Negrete, E. O. (1994). Our struggles with theme cycle.
Primary Voices K-6, 2 (1), 15-19.
Arthur, B. M. (1991). Working with new ESL students in a junior high school
reading class. Journal of Reading, 34, 628-631.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Barnes, G. A. (1981). Crisscross: Structured writing in context. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bartolome, L. I. (1994). Beyond the methods Fetish: Toward a humanizing
pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 64 (2), 173-194.
Beane, J. A. (1995). Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge.
Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 616-622.
Bentley, L. (1999). Paulo Freire: A brief biography [On-Line WWW].
Available: http://www.unomaha.edu/~pto/paulo.htm
Bergeron, B. S. (1990). What does the term whole language mean? Constructing
a definition from the literature. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22 (4), 301-329.
Berthoff, A. (1985). [Review of the book The politics of education: Culture,
power, and liberation]. Journal of Education, 167 (1), 140-143.
Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication strategies: A psychological analysis of
second-language use. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
Bird, L. (1987). What is whole language? In “Dialogue,” D. Jacobs (Ed.),
Teachers networking: The whole language newsletter, 1 (1). New York: Richard C. Owen.
Blanton, L. (1987) Reshaping ESL students’ perception of writing. EFL
Journal, 41 (2), 112-118.
Brinton, D., Snow, M., & Wesche, M. (1989). Content-based second language
instruction. New York: Newbury House.
Brophy, J. (1988). Research on teacher effects: Uses and abuses. Elementary
School Journal, 89, 20.
Brown, D. (1988). Understanding research in second language learning: A
teacher’s guide to statistics and research design. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, H., & Mathie, V. (1991). Inside whole language: A classroom view.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cambourne, B. (1988). The whole story: Natural learning and the acquisition of
literacy in the classroom. Auckland, New Zealand: Scholastic.
Carl Rogers, core conditions and education [On-line]. (2001). Encyclopedia of
Informal Education. Available http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-rogers.htm
Castro, E. (1994). Implementing theme cycle: One teacher’s way. Primary
Voices K-6, 2 (1), 7-14.
Chang, Y. L. (1988). Pen pal letter activity in written instruction for college
students and high school students. Proceedings of the 5th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 193-209. Taipei: Crane.
Chapman, M., & Anderson, J. (1996). Putting theory into practice: A day in two
classrooms. In V. Froese (Ed.), Whole-Language: Practice and Theory (pp. ). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Chen, H. C. (1988). Computer assisted writing in Taiwan: Methods and
perspectives. Proceedings of the 5th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 173-191). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, Y. M. (1994). The whole language approach to language instruction:
Philosophical beliefs, theory, and practice. Journal of National Chung Cheng University, Sec. I: Humanities, 5 (1), 365-397.
Chen, Y. M. (1996). To revise or not to revise: A comparison of single-drafted
writing vs. multi-drafted writing. Proceedings of the 13th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 63-72. Taipei: Crane.
Chen, Y. M. (1997). An investigation of EFL students’ perceptions of revision in
English composition. Proceedings of the 14th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 273-292. Taipei: Crane.
Chen, Y. M. (2001). The whole language approach to teaching reading. The
National Chi Nan University Journal, 5 (1), 161-180.
Cheng, Y. S. (1998). A qualitative inquiry of language anxiety: Interviews with
Taiwanese EFL students. The Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on English Teaching, pp. 309-320. Taipei: Crane.
Cheng, Y. S. (1999). A study of second language writing anxiety and individual
learner variables. Paper presented at the 8th International Symposium on English Teaching, Taipei, Taiwan (November).
Cheng, Y. S. (2001). Learner’s beliefs and second language anxiety.
Concentric: Studies in English Literature and Linguistics, 27 (2), 209-223. Taipei: NTNU.
Chiang, M. C. (1999). The effects of model-based instruction on Chinese students’
English writing. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.
Clark, J. (1992). Whole language literacy for at-risk learners. Washington, DC:
ERIC Clearinghouse.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and
knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.
Connor, U. (1984). A study of cohesion and coherence in English as a second
language students’ writing. Papers in Linguistics: International Journal of Communication, 17, 301-316.
Crawford, A. N. (1993). Literature, integrated language arts, and the language
minority child: A focus on meaning. In A. Carrasquillo & C. Hedley (Eds.), Whole Language and the Bilingual Learner. Norwood, NJ: Albex.
Cumming, A. (1989). Writing expertise and second language proficiency.
Language learning, 39 (1), 81-135.
Daly, J. A., & Miller, M. D. (1975). The empirical development of an instrument
to measure writing apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 9, 242-249.
De Carlo, J. E. (1995). Perspectives in whole language. Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
Denzin, N. K. (1990). Interpretive interactionism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Dewey, J. (1963). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Dirkx, J. M. & Prenger, S. M. (1997). A guide for planning and implementing
instruction for adults: A theme-based approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Edelsky, C., Altwerger, B., & Flores, B. (1991). Whole language: What’s the
difference? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. London: Macmillan Education.
Elbow, P. (1998a). Writing without teachers (New ed.). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Elbow, P. (1998b). Writing with power: Techniques for mastering the writing
Process (New ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Elias, J. L. (1994). Paulo Freire: Pedagogue of liberation. Malabar, FL: Krieger.
Engstrom, Y. (1986). The zone of proximal development as the basic category of
educational psychology. LCHC Quarterly, 8, 23-42.
Faigle, L., Cherry, R., Jolliffe, D., & Skinner, A. (1993). Assessing writers’
knowledge and processes of composing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Feeley, J., Strickland, D., & Wepner, S. (Eds.). (1991). Process reading and
writing: A literature-based approach. New York: Teachers College Press.
Flynn, S. (1986). Production vs. comprehension: Definition underlying
competencies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 2, 135-164.
Flynn, S., & O’Neil, W. A. (Eds.). (1988). Linguistics theory in second language
acquisition. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (1988). Whole language content lessons for
ESL students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (22nd, Chicago, March 8-13). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 295 468)
Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (1991). Practicing what we preach: Whole
language with teachers of bilingual learners. In Y. M. Goodman, W. J. Hood, & K. S. Goodman (Eds.), Organizing for whole language (pp. 348-363). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freeman, Y. S., & Freeman, D. E. (1989). Evaluation of second-language junior
and senior high school students. In K. S. Goodman, Y. M. Goodman, & W. J. Hood (Eds.), The whole language evaluation book (pp. 141-150).
Freeman, Y. S., & Freeman, D. E. (1992). Whole language for second language
learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freeman, Y. S., & Freeman, D. E. (1998). ESL/EFL teaching: Principles for
success. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). New
York: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1971). Extension or communication? Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.
Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power, and liberation.
South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed (New revised 20th-annversary ed.)
(M. B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1994). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed (R. R.
Barr, Trans.). New York: Continuum.
Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world.
South Hadley, MA: Bergin.
Freire, P., Fraser, J. W., Macedo, D., McKinnon, T., & Stokes, W. T. (Eds.).
(1997). Mentoring the mentor: A critical dialogue with Paulo Freire. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Friend, H. (1985). The effect of science and mathematics integration on selected
seventh grade students’ attitudes toward and achievement in science. School Science and Mathematics, 85, 453-461.
Froese, V. (1991). Whole-language: Practice and theory. Boston, MA: Allyn
and Bacon.
Fromkin, V., & Rodman, R. (1988). An introduction to language (4th ed.). Fort
Worth: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
Gadotti, M. (1994). Reading Paulo Freire: His life and work (J. Milton, Trans.).
New York: SUNY Press.
Gadotti, M., & Torres, C. A. (n.d.). Paulo Freire: A Homage [On-line WWW].
Available: http://www.nl.edu/ace/Homage.html
Gaies, S. (1976). Gradation in formal second language instruction as a factor in
the development of interlanguage. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwest Modern Language Association, November 4-7.
Gass, S. M., & Madden, C. G. (Eds.). (1985). Input in second language
acquisition. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (1992). Language transfer in language learning.
Philadelphia: J. Benjamin.
Goetz, J. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in
educational research. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Goodman, K. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of
the Reading Specialist, May, 126-135.
Goodman, K. (1969). Analysis of oral reading miscues: Applied
psycholinguistics. Reading Research Quarterly, 5, 9-30.
Goodman, K. (1986). What’s whole in whole language. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Goodman, K. (1992). I didn’t found whole language. The Reading Teacher, 46
(3), 188-199.
Goodman, Y. (1989). Roots of the whole-language movement. The Elementary
School Journal, 90 (2), 113-127.
Graman, T. (1988). Education for humanization: Applying Paulo Freire’s
pedagogy to learning a second language. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 4, 433-448.
Graves, D., & Hansen, J. (1983). The Author’s Chair. Language Arts, 60,
176-183.
Gunkel, J. (1991). Please teach America: Keisuke’s journey into a language
community. Language Arts, 68, 303-310.
Gust, J. (1994). Enhancing self-esteem: A whole language approach:
Esteem-building thematic units. Carthage, IL: Good Apple.
Gutloff, K. (Ed.). (1996). Integrated thematic teaching. West Haven, CT:
National Education Association Professional Library.
Hall, N. (1994). Written dialogue with young children: Making writing live. In
A. D. Flurkey & R. J. Meyer (Eds.), Under the Whole Language Umbrella: Many Cultures, Many Voices (pp. 343-356). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teacher of English (NCTE).
Halliday, M. A. K. (1977). Explorations in the functions of language. New York:
Elsvier North-Holland.
Hamayan, E. V. (1989). Teaching writing to potentially English proficient students
using whole language approaches. Program Information Guide Series, National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Illinois Resource Center. Number 11, Summer 1989. pp. 1-15.
Hamayan, E., & Pfleger, M. (1987). Developing literacy in English as a second
language: Guidelines for teachers of young children from nonliterate backgrounds. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Hansen, J. (1992). Literacy portfolios: Helping Students know themselves.
Educational Leadership, 49, 66-68.
Harste, J. C., Pierce, K. M., & Cairney, T. (Eds.). (1985). The authoring cycle: A
viewing guide. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Hatch, E. (1992). Discourse and language education. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Heald-Taylor, G. (1989). The administrator’s guide to whole language. Katonah,
Y: Richard C. Owen.
Heaney, T. (1995). Issues in Freirean Pedagogy. Thresholds in Education
[On-line WWW]. Available:
http://nlu.nl.edu/ace/Resources/Documents/FreireIssues.html
Hsu, Y. (1994). Whole language and ESL children. Washington, DC: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics.
Huang, Y. K. (1997). Changes in freshman English programs for non-English
majors at universities in Taiwan. In J. E. Katchen & Y. N. Leung (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 332-341). Taipei: Crane.
Huang, Y. K. (1998). Whole language and fluency first applications: Ideas that
work. In J. E. Katchen & Y. N. Leung (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 537-546). Taipei: Crane.
Hydrick, J. (Ed.). (1991). Whole language: Empowerment at the chalk face.
The Proceedings of the 1989 National Council of Teachers of English Day of Whole Language. New York: Scholastic Inc.
Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride and J.
Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
Jacobs, G. (1988). Cooperative goal structure: A way to improve group activities.
EFL Journal, 42 (2), 97-101.
Jacobs, H. L., Zingraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. B.
(1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Jama, V. (1992). Integrating English as a second language instruction with the
regular elementary- and middle-school curriculum: Can it work? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), Vancouver, B.C., March 3-7.
Janopoulos, M. (1992). Writing across the curriculum and the NNS student.
Paper presented at the International TESOL Convention, Vancouver, B.C. (March).
Johns, A. (1986). Coherence and academic writing: Some definitions and
suggestions for teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 20 (2), 247-266.
Johns, A. (1991). Interpreting an English essay competency examination.
Written Communication, 8 (3), 379-401.
Johnson, D. M. (1992). Approaches to research in second language learning.
New York, NY: Longman.
Kameen, P. (1978). A mechanical, meaningful and communicative framework for
ESL sentence combining exercises. TESOL Quarterly, 12 (4), 395-401.
Kaplan, R. B. (1988). Contrastive rhetoric and second language learning: Notes
towards a theory of contrastive rhetoric. In A. Purves (Ed.), Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric (pp. 275-304). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Kaspar, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1993). Interlanguage pragmatics. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Katchen, J. E. (1987). Coordination in the EFL curriculum: Writing and public
speaking. Proceedings of the 4th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 275-289. Taipei: Crane.
Kirschenbaum, H., & Henderson, V. L. (Eds.). (1989). Carl Rogers: Dialogues.
Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Knoblauch, C. H. & Brannon, L. (1984). Rhetorical traditions and the teaching of
writing. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language
learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition.
Oxfrod: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). Inquiries and insights: Second language teaching,
immersion and bilingual education, literacy. Hayward, CA: Alemany.
Krashen, S. D. (1999). Three arguments against whole language & why they are
wrong. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Kroll, B. (1991). Teaching writing in the ESL context. In M. Celce-Murcia
(Ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (2nd ed.), (pp. 245-263). New York: Newburry House/Harper Collins.
Lamb, H., & Best, D. L. (1990). Language and literacy: The ESL whole language
connection. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 324 915)
Lehman, J. R. (1994). Integrating science and mathematics: Perceptions of
preservice and practicing elementary teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 94, 58-64.
Leki, I. (1989). Academic writing: Techniques and tasks. New York: St.
Martin’s Press.
Li, L. T. (1996). Enhancing sensitivity to human needs: EFL learners in
Taiwan. Paper presented in TESOL ’96 Convention in Chicago, USA; accepted for inclusion in the ERIC database of educational documents. [ED 403 756]
Li, L. T. (1997). Enhancing sensitivity to human needs: Whole language
application. The Proceedings of the 14th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 143-156. Taipei: Crane.
Li, L. T. (1998a). Integrating EFL Learning Using Collaborative Taped Journals.
Paper presented in TESOL ‘98 Convention in Seattle, USA.
Li, L. T. (1998b). Publishing Students’ Writing: A Magic Wand for EFL Writing.
The proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on English Teaching, pp. 649-658.
Li, L. T. (2000a). A Chinese EFL Learner Overcomes the Fear of English
Listening and Speaking. Jieng-E, 11 (4), pp. 35-48.
Li, L. T. (2000b). Beyond Language Skills: A Whole Language Teacher’s
Monologue. Jieng-E, 12 (1), pp. 47-58.
Li, L. T. (2001). Theme cycles: Empowering adult EFL writers. Paper presented
at the 10th International Symposium on English Teaching, Taipei, Taiwan (November).
Lim, H. L., & Watson, J. W. (1993). Whole language content classes for
second-language learners. The Reading Teacher, 46, 384-393.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Liou, H. C. (1991). A whole language class. Journal of Huang-Pu, 24, 247-252.
Lipson, M., Valencia, S., Wixson, K., & Peters, C. (1993). Integration and
thematic teaching: Integration to improve teaching and learning. Language Arts, 70, 252-263.
Loewe, M. A. (1998a). Implementing whole language in a university-level ESL
curriculum. In C. Weaver (Ed.), Lessons to share: On teaching grammar in context (pp. 260-278). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Loewe, M. A. (1998b). Meeting the special needs of the English as a second
language (ESL) students in public schools. In C. Weaver (Ed.), Lessons to share: On teaching grammar in context (pp. 244-259). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lou, Y. H. (1998). What it whole language? English Teaching and Learning.
23 (1), 76-90.
Lu, Y. L. (2002). Teaching ESL literacy through the whole language approach.
Journal of Ging-Chung Business College, 5, 191-200.
MacGowan-Gilhooly, A. (1991). Fluency first: Reversing the traditional ESL
sequence. Journal of Basic Writing, 10 (1), 73-85.
MacGowan-Gilhooly, A. (1996a). Achieving clarity in English: A whole-language
book (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IW: Kendall/Hunt.
MacGowan-Gilhooly, A. (1996b). Achieving fluency in English: A
whole-language book (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IW: Kendall/Hunt.
Manning, G., & Manning, M. (Eds.). (1989). Whole language: Beliefs and
practices, K-8. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Manning, M., Manning, G., & Long, R. (1994). Theme immersion: Inquiry based
curriculum in elementary and middle schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Mansfield, B. (1989). Students’ perceptions of an integrated unit: A case study.
Social Studies, 80, 135-140.
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
McCallum, G. P. (1970). Idiom drills: For students of English as a second
language. New York: Harper & Row.
McKee, M. (1983). Academic writing vs. composition. TECFORS, 6 (5), 7-11.
McLaren, P. (1999). A pedagogy of possibility: Reflecting upon Paulo Freire’s
politics of education: In memory of Paulo Freire. Research News and Comment, 28 (2), 49-56.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mills, H., & Clyde, J. (Eds.). (1990). Portraits of whole language classrooms:
Learning for all ages. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Mitch, A. (1997). Tuesdays with Morrie: an old man, a young man, and life’s
greatest lesson. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Mitchell, D. (1982). The process of reading: A cognitive analysis of fluent reading
and learning to read. New York: Wiley.
Moll, L. (1990). Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and
application of sociohistorical psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Murray, D. (1982). Learning by teaching. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.
Murray, D. (1985). A writing teacher teaches writing (2nd ed.). Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin.
Murray, G. (Ed.). (1980). Language awareness and reading. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Nash, T. (1987). The continuing development of an English department writing
program. Proceedings of the 4th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 317-326. Taipei: Crane.
Nash, T., Hsieh, T. L., & Chen, S. I. (1989). An evaluation of computer-aided
composition. Proceedings of the 6th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 313-323. Taipei: Crane.
Nehls, D. (1988). Interlanguage studies. Heidelberg, Germany: J. Groos.
Nelson, M. W. (1991). At the point of need: Teaching basic and ESL writers.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Newman, J. M. (Ed.). (1985). Whole language: Theory in use. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
Newman, J. M., & Church, S. M. (1990). Myths of whole language. The
Reading Teacher, 44 (1), 20-26.
Nickel, G. (1989). Some controversies in present-day error analysis: “Contrastive”
vs. “non-contrastive.” International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 27 (4), 293-305.
Nigohosian, E. (1992). Meeting the challenge of diversity: Applying whole
language theory in the kindergarten with ESL Korean children. ERIC Clearinghouse.
Nissani, M. (1995). Fruits, salads, and smoothies: A working definition of
interdisciplinarity. Journal of Educational Thought, 29, 121-128.
Olarewaju, A. O. (1988). Instructional objectives: What effects do they have on
students’ attitudes towards integrated science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 283-291.
Pack, A., & Hendrichsen, L. (1981). Sentence combination: Writing and
combining standard English sentences. Rowley, MA: Newburry House.
Pajares, F., & Johnson, M. J. (1994). Confidence and competence in writing: The
role of self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 28, 313-331.
Pajares, F., & Johnson, M. J. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs and the writing
performance of entering high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 33, 163-175.
Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1997). Influence of self-efficacy on elementary
students’ writing. The Journal of Educational Research, 90 (6), 353-360.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Peetoom, A. (1986). Shared reading: Safe risks with whole books. Richmond
Hill, Ontario: Scholastic-TAB.
People you should know: Freire [On-line WWW]. (n.d.). Available:
http://www.nl.edu/ace/Resources/Freire.html
Peyton, J. K. (Ed.). (1990). Students and teachers writing together: Perspectives
on journal writing. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Peyton, J. K., & Reed, L. (1990). Dialogue journal writing with nonnative English
speakers: A handbook for teachers. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Peyton, J. K., & Staton, J. (1992). Dialogue journal writing with nonnative
English speakers: An instructional packet for teachers and workshop leaders. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Piaget, J. (1955). The language and thought of the child. New York: Meridian.
Popp, M. (1996). Teaching language and literature in elementary classrooms: A
resource book for professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Purves, A., & Purves, W. (1986). On the nature and formation of interpretive and
rhetorical communities. In T. N. Postlethwaite (Ed.), International Education Research: Papers in Honor of Torstern Husen (pp. 45-64). Oxford: Pergamon.
Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Raimes, A. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom
study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (2), 229-258.
Reid, J. M. (1982). The process of composition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Reid, J. M. (1993). Teaching ESL writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
Regents.
Rice, M. K., & Burns, J. U. (1986). Thinking/writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Richards, J., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Longman dictionary of language
teaching & applied linguistics. UK: Longman.
Ridley, L. (1990). Whole language in the ESL classroom. In H. Mills & J. A.
Clyde (Eds.), Portraits of whole language classrooms: Learning for all ages (pp. 213-228). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Rigg, P. (1985). Petra: Learning to read at 45. Journal of Education, 167, 1,
129-139.
Rigg, P. (1991). Whole language in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 25 (3), 521-542.
Rivers, W. (1964). The psychologist and the foreign language teacher. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Rivers, W. (1968). Teaching foreign language skills. Chicago: University Press.
Rogers, C. R. (1961a). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of
psychotherapy. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Rogers, C. R. (1961b). This is me. In C. R. Rogers, On becoming a person: A
therapist’s view of psychotherapy (pp. 3-27). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80’s. Columbus, OH: Charles E.
Merrill.
Rogers, C. R., & Freiberg, H. J. (1994). Freedom to learn (3rd ed.). New York:
Macmillan.
Rogers, C. R., & Stevens, B. (1967). Person to person: The problem of being
human. Moab, Utah: Real People Press.
Rolheiser, C., Bower, B., & Stevahn, L. (2000). The portfolio organizer:
Succeeding with portfolios in your classroom. Alexandria, VG: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Rosenblatt, L. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of
the literary work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Samway, K. D. (1992). Writers’ workshop and children acquiring English as a
non-native language. National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Program Information Guide Series. Number 10, Spring 1992, pp. 1-27.
Santos, T. (1988). Professors’ reactions to the academic writing of non-native
speaking students. TESOL Quarterly, 18 (4), 671-688.
Santos, T. (1992). What do we teach when we teach ESL writing? Paper
presented at the International TESOL Convention, Vancouver, B. C. (March).
Saussure, F. (1966). Course in general linguistics (W. Baskin, Trans.). New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Schachter, J. (1990). Communicative competence revisited. In B. Harley, P.
Allen, J. Cummins, & M. Swain (Eds.), The development of second language proficiency (pp. 39-49). London: Cambridge University Press.
Schell, J. W., & Wicklein, R. C. (1993). Integration of mathematics, science, and
technology education: A basis for thinking and problem solving. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 18, 49-76.
Schenk, M. J. (1988). Read, write, revise: A guide to academic writing. New
York: St. Martin’s Press.
Schmidt, W. H., Roehler, L., Caul, J. L., Buchman, M., Diamond, B., Solomon, D., &
Cianciolo, P. (1985). The uses of curriculum integration in language arts instruction: A study of six classrooms. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 17, 305-320.
Scott, V. M. (1996). Rethinking foreign language writing. Boston, MA:
Newbury House.
Selinker, L. (1991). Rediscovering interlanguage. London: Longman.
Shanahan, T. (1997). Reading-writing relationships, thematic units, inquiry
learning … In pursuit of effective integrated literacy instruction. The Reading Teacher, 51 (1), 12-19.
Shaughnessy, M. (1977). Errors and expectations. New York: Oxford.
Shell, D., Murphy, C. C., & Bruning, R. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and outcome
expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81 (1), 91-100.
Shen, T. C. (2000). The “whole language versus direct skill instruction” debate:
Perspective from L1 literacy classrooms. Paper presented at the 9th International Symposium on English Teaching, November 10-12, Taipei.
Shook, R. (1978). Sentence-combining: A theory and two reviews. TESL
Reporter, 2, 4-7, 12, 15.
Shor, I. (Ed.). (1987). Freire for the classroom: A sourcebook for liberatory
teaching. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Shor, I., & Freire, P. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: Dialogues on
transforming education. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
Short, K., Harste, J., & Burke, C. (1996). Creating classrooms for authors and
inquirers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Simic, M. (1993). Publishing children’s writing. ERIC Digest. Washington,
[ED 363 884]
Sladky, P. (1994). Why we need to publish student writers. Nashville, TN.
[ED 371 352]
Smith, F. (1983). Essays into literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Smith, F. (1994a). Understanding reading (5th ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Smith, F. (1994b). Writing and the writer (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Smith, F. (1997). Reading without nonsense (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Smith, M. K. (2002). Paulo Freire and informal education [On-line WWW].
Available: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-freir.htm
Smoke, T. (1987). A writer’s workbook: An interactive writing text for ESL
students. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Sommers, N. (1980). Revision strategies of student writers and experienced adult
writers. College Composition and Communication, 31, 378-388.
Spack, R. (1984). Invention strategies and the ESL college composition student.
TESOL Quarterly, 18 (4), 649-670.
Spack, R., & Sadow, C. (1983). Student-teacher working journals in ESL
freshman composition. TESOL Quarterly, 17 (4), 575-594.
Taylor, B. (1981). Content and written form: A two-way street. TESOL
Quarterly, 15 (1), 5-13.
Teng, C. S. (1985). How I use the overhead projector to reach English
composition in my classroom. Proceedings of the 12th Conference on English
Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 259-265. Taipei: Crane.
Tseng, Y. H. (1997). Attacking mythology: EFL whole language in a Taiwanese
classroom. The Proceedings of the 14th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 157-168. Taipei: Crane.
Tung, C. A. (1995). The teaching of basic writing: A more effective approach.
Proceedings of the 9th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 363-379. Taipei: Crane.
Uchniat, J. D. (1990). Language and culture: N.T.U. students of English
composition and their responses and reactions to a western pedagogy of modern composition theory. Proceedings of the 7th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 117-132. Taipei: Crane.
Ueland, B. (1987). If you want to write. Saint Paul, MN: Graywolf Press.
Vacca, R. T., & Rasinski, T. V. (1992). Case studies in whole language.
Philadelphia, PA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Valencia, S. (1990). A portfolio approach to classroom reading assessment: The
whys, whats, and hows. The Reading Teacher, 43, 338-340.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language (E. Hanfmann, & G. Vakar, Trans.).
Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
Wasserstein, P. (1995). What middle schoolers say about their schoolwork.
Educational Leadership, 53 (1), 41-43.
Watson, D. J. (1989). Defining and describing whole language. The Elementary
School Journal, 90 (2), 129-141.
Watson-Gegeo, K. A. (1988). Ethnography in ESL: Defining the essentials.
TESOL Quarterly, 22, 575-592.
Weaver, C. (1988). Reading process and practice: From socio-psycholinguistics to
whole language. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Weaver, C. (1990). Understanding whole language: From principles to practice.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Weaver, C. (1994). Reading process and practice: From socio-psycholinguistics to
whole language (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Weaver, C. (1996). Teaching grammar in context. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Weaver, C., Chaston, J., & Peterson, S. (1993). Theme exploration: A voyage of
discovery. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
White, R. V. (1987). Writing advanced. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, K. (1993). Whole language ESL: Reading, writing, and speaking. Paper
presented at the National Conference on Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers, Denver, CO, May 9-13.
Wink, J. (2000). Critical pedagogy: Notes from the real world (2nd ed.). New
York, NY: Longman.
Wohl, M. (1985). Techniques for writing: Composition (2nd ed.). Rowley, MA:
Newburry House.
Yao, C. K. (1997). An overview of writing theory and research: From cognitive to
social-cognitive. The Journal of National Chung-Hsin University (Taichung Campus, Evening Division), 3, 183-202.
Yu, A. (1990). Discipline and freedom. [On-Line WWW] Available:
http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~alex/education/essays/discipline.html
Yu, T. H. (2001). The literature review of “whole language with respect to
learning English as a second language.” Journal of Te-Ming College, 18, 189-201.
Zamel, V. (1980). Re-evaluating sentence-combining practice. TESOL
Quarterly, 14 (1), 81-90.
Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: The process of discovering meaning. TESOL
Quarterly, 16 (2), 195-209.
Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case
studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17 (2), 165-187.
王備五。(民73)。基礎英文作文教材教法。中華民國第一屆英語文教學研討會
論文集,頁455-465。
江光榮。(民90)。人性的迷失與復歸:羅傑斯的人本心理學。台北市:貓頭鷹出
版;城邦文化發行。
沈添鉦。(民80)。簡介「全語言」的語文教學。教師之友,第32卷第四期,27-31.
沈添鉦、黃秀文。(民86)。全語教學在國小實施的個案報告。八十六學年度教
育學術研討會論文集(3)語文教育組, 頁881-905.
吳芝儀,李奉儒(譯)。(民84)。質的評鑑與研究。台北縣:桂冠圖書公司。
林春仲。(民73)。從作文理論探討英文作文教學。中華民國第一屆英語文教學
研討會論文集,頁383-394。
官美智。(民75)。高中英文作文─引導式作文看圖作文教學之研究與設計。中
華民國第三屆英語文教學研討會論文集,頁115-124。
高實政。(民82)。過程寫作教學觀的理論及應用在大學寫作課程的教案設計。
中華民國第十屆英語文教學研討會論文集,頁49-64。
陳玉美。(民87)。國內英文作文教學之回顧與展望。中華民國第十五屆英語文
教學研討會論文集,頁331-344。
曾月紅。(民87)。從兩大學派探討全語文教學理論。教育研究資料,6 (1),76-90.
曾月紅。(民89)。兒童英語文教學:全語文觀點。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
張強仁。(民73)。中學作文教學與聯考作文之回顧與展望。中華民國第一屆英
語文教學研討會論文集,頁395-402。
趙涵華。(民83)。整體語言教育─理論、研究、特質、及問題。台北市立師範
學院學報,第25期,389-402。
趙涵華。(民84)。全語文教育的精神。教育心,第8期,52-53。
劉賢軒。(民75)。談科技英文寫作教學。中華民國第三屆英語文教學研討會論
文集,頁87-99。
劉賢軒。(民76)。從書面語的言談特性談到我國大學階段的英文寫作教育。中
華民國第四屆英語文教學研討會論文集,頁99-110。
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 倪寧(2001)廣告學教程,北京:中國人民出版社。耿慶武(2002)中國區域經濟發展,台北市:聯經。翁秀琪(1998)大眾傳播理論與實證,台北:三民。翁秀琪(2000)多元典範下傳播研究方法的省思-從口述歷史在傳播研究中的應用談起,新聞學研究,第64輯。馬乃光主編(2001)上海當代新聞史,上海市:復旦大學出版社。
2. 胡光夏 (1999, July) 廣告文化理論學派之探討----三種解讀廣告文本的取徑分析,廣告學研究第十三集,p93-111。
3. 沈添鉦。(民80)。簡介「全語言」的語文教學。教師之友,第32卷第四期,27-31.
4. 魏然(1997) 改革開放後對中國大陸廣告事業的發展暨其對新聞媒體影響之研究,東亞季刊,民國八十六年春季,第二十八卷第二期,p134-155。
5. 魏然(1997,July) 大陸消費者不同生活形態對消費行為以廣告的態度影響之研究,廣告學研究第九集,p33-50。戴元光(2001)20世紀中國新聞學與傳播學,上海市:復旦大學出版社。
6. Vincent Mosco (1998) 傳播政治經濟學,:再思考與再更新,台北市:五南。三、期刊雜誌于有先(1995)『認清新時期的形式和任務爭取報刊新繁榮』,北京,中國報刊月報第2期,p23。仇學忠 (1994,Dec) 中國大陸國營廣告公司的出路和對策,動腦224輯,p69-73。
7. 王泰允 (1995,Feb)大陸內銷廣告策略與媒體運用,貿易週刊1625期,p24-28。
8. 沈昭良 (1994,May) 大陸廣告現狀報告,廣告雜誌,頁98-105。何吉森(2002),WTO對我國傳播產業政策之影響,廣播與電視期刊,p20-22。
9. 卓聖格 (1993,Nov) 中國現代廣告的濫觴--清末明初的上海廣告,廣告雜誌。
10. 凌來誠(2001,Oct)廣告公司五種經營思考,廣告雜誌125輯。國家統計局(1995),中華人民共和國國家統計局關於一九九四年國民經濟和社會發展的統計公報,北京:中國統計,p4。動腦雜誌編輯部 (1994,Sep) 大中華經營策略一統華人市場,動腦221輯,p41-45。
11. 動腦雜誌編輯部(2003,Mar)台灣綜合廣告代理商排行榜,動腦雜誌323輯,p20。張元培 (1991,Jan) 運動廣告與大眾文化,中華民國體育學會體育學報第二十二輯,p35-46。
12. 張素華(2001,Sep)從收費制度看代理體系,廣告雜誌124輯,p50-52。張素華(2002,Aug)廣告老店積極接軌國際資源,廣告雜誌123輯,p112。梁海燕(2003,Jan),報紙贏家-廣州日報,北京,中國廣告雜誌,p19。陳文怡 (1997,July) 9則前進大陸的7字箴言,廣告雜誌,7月,頁72-73。 陳明莉(1997,July)1997前進大陸,廣告雜誌,p54-55。
13. 陳雯麗(2001,Jan),2000年中國熱門商品,動腦雜誌297輯,p41-44。
14. 陳薇薇 (1998,Dec) 等待另一種解藥--談大陸藥品廣告的種種限制,廣告雜誌,p82-86。
15. 曾國源 (2000,July) 未來科技發展對媒體環境的衝擊,動腦291輯,7月,民國89年,p55-58。
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔