(3.238.99.243) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/16 22:31
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:李郁慧
研究生(外文):Yu-hui Lee
論文名稱:第二外語學生英文寫作自我調節過程之研究
論文名稱(外文):Exploring EFL Writers’ Self-regulation during Composing Process
指導教授:游毓玲游毓玲引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yu-ling You
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立雲林科技大學
系所名稱:應用外語系碩士班
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:2005
畢業學年度:93
語文別:英文
論文頁數:153
中文關鍵詞:英文寫作自我調節後設認知
外文關鍵詞:EFL writingself-regulationmetacognition
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:149
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:4
本論文旨在探討外語學習者英文寫作自我調節 (Self-regulation/regulation of cognition) 之過程。自我調節係指個人對於自己認知或學習活動的監控、控制與調節行為,也就是指一種實際的動態 (dynamic) 後設認知活動。自我調節是獲致學習成功的一項重要因素,學習者必須意識到自身在學習過程中是一個調節認知活動的個體,如此才能達到最好的學習成效。目前現有的幾個重要的寫作模式 (Flower & Hayes, 1980; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1987; Grabe & Kaplan, 1996) 皆提及自我調節在寫作活動中的角色與作用。然而,探討寫作過程的自我調節行為研究至今仍不多;因此,本研究將辨識出外語學習者在英文寫作中所表現的自我調節行為,同時將比較熟練英文寫作者與初學寫作者在自我調節策略上使用的差異。
參與本研究的六位受試者皆就讀於同一所科技大學應外系所,分別係三位熟練英文寫作者與三位初學英文寫作者。每位參與者都必須以有聲思考的方式進行英文寫作;研究者根據其寫作過程逐字稿,辨識出寫作者的自我調節策略,並進一步分類、定義及分析。本研究發現如下:(1) 六位受試者的英文寫作自我調節行為共可分為三大類,即計畫、監控、評量,及十五項策略;(2) 熟練英文寫作者更能運用較多種類的策略;(3) 受試者幾乎很少對自己的寫作表現進行評量;(4) 就「質」而論,熟練英文寫作者的自我調節策略比初學寫作者更好。根據進一步分析,寫作時的監控活動並不一定能有效地使作者採取補救策略;而寫作者個人所具備的英文寫作後設認知、英文語言能力與背景知識都有可能是影響其寫作自我調節行為的因素。
本研究結果針對外語寫作者的自我調節策略使用,提供了更進一步的理解;此外,本文中熟讀英文寫作者的自我調節過程也可以作為初學寫作者的模範。為加強外語學生之寫作自我調節活動,英文寫作教學者可以加強學生的寫作後設認知、將自我調節訓練融入寫作課程,並可透過結合閱讀與寫作的教學方法,來增進學生的語言能力與背景知識。
The purpose of this study is to explore EFL writers’ self-regulation during writing process. Self-regulation, or regulation of cognition, refers to the dynamic metacognitve activities by which one can monitor, control, and regulate his or her cognitive and learning processes. Self-regulation is important to the success of learning in that learners need to become aware of themselves as self-regulatory organisms in order to enhance learning to the fullest (Hacker, 1998). In effect, the existing cognitive writing models, such as Flower and Hayes’ (1980), Scardamalia and Bereiter’s (1987), and Grabe and Kaplan’s (1996) all have discussed the important role and function of self-regulation during writing process. To this date, there have existed few empirical studies on writers’ regulation of cognition during composing process. Therefore, this current study intends to identify the self-regulatory strategies performed by EFL writers and to compare the difference in the self-regulatory strategy use between experienced and inexperienced EFL writers.
Three experienced and three inexperienced English-majored writers at a university of science and technology were selected to perform a writing task. They were required to verbalize their composing processes in a given writing task. Their thinking-aloud processes were transcribed and were further identified, categorized, defined, and analyzed. The findings were as follows: (1) The identified self-regulatory strategies the six writers performed were categorized into three major categories, planning, monitoring, and evaluating, consisting of fifteen strategies; (2) the experienced writers employed more types of self-regulatory strategy than the inexperienced writers; (3) all the six writers hardly employed self-regulatory strategies of evaluating; (4) the self-regulation of the experienced writers was better than that of the inexperienced writers in terms of quality. Based on the findings, the further analysis reveals that not every monitoring strategy can effectively lead to a compensatory strategy. Moreover, the writers’ metacognitive knowledge, linguistic knowledge, and world knowledge thus were argued to be the factors that affect their self-regulation during composing.
The findings provide an insight into EFL writers’ self-regulatory strategy use; the experienced writers’ self-regulatory processes may serve as a model to the inexperienced writers. To improve EFL writers’ self-regulation, writing instructors are suggested to enhance students’ metacognitive knowledge of writing, integrate self-regulatory strategy training into writing curriculum, and improve students’ language proficiency and enlarge their world knowledge through the connection of reading and writing instruction.
CHINESE ABSTRACT i
ENGLISH ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF TABLES ix
LIST OF FIGURES x

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
Background of the Study 1
Purpose of the Study 5
Research Questions 6
Definitions of Terms 6
Significance of the Study 8

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 10
Models of Composing Process 10
Flower and Hayes’ Cognitive Process Theory of Writing 10
Scardamalia and Bereiter’s Models of Writing Process 14
Grabe and Kaplan’s Model of Writing Process
as Communicative Language Use 19
Metacognition 23
  Flavell’s Notion of Metacognition 24
    Knowledge of Cognition and Regulation of Cognition 27
Self-regulation 34
Self-regulation in General Learning 34
Self-regulation in Reading Research 42
Self-regulation in Writing Research 45
Zimmerman and Risemberg’s Self-regulation View of Writing 45
Self-regulation of EFL Writers 49

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 54
Subjects 54
Instruments 56
Think-aloud Protocol 57
Writing Task 59
Procedure of Data Collection 61
Procedure of Data Analysis 62

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS 67
The Identified Self-regulatory Strategies 67
Planning 67
Identifying the Task Demands 68
Deciding on the Content Goals of Writing 69
Deciding on the Process Goals of Writing 71
Making a Decision about the Rhetorical Strategy 73
Achieving Coherence among Ideas or Paragraphs 76
Monitoring 77
Checking the Appropriateness of Lexicon 77
Checking the Sentence Structure 78

Checking Wording and Expressions 79
Checking the Surface Structure of Written text 80
Checking the Appropriateness of an Idea 81
Checking the Coherence, Consistency, and Logic 83
Checking the Conventions of English Writing 84
Detecting a Writing Difficulty or Problem 86
Checking the Linguistic Output to Determine Whether It Conveys
the Intended Meaning 87
Evaluating 88
Reflecting upon the Writing Performance 89
Self-regulatory Strategy Use of the Six Subjects 89

CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 92
Summary of Findings 92
More Types of Self-regulatory Strategy Employed by Experienced Writers 93
Rare Employment of the Self-regulatory Strategy of Evaluating 96
Better Self-regulation Performed by Experienced Writers
in Terms of Quality 96
Discussions 99
Failure of Triggering Compensatory Strategies 99
The Importance of Metacognitive Knowledge 102
Lack of Linguistic Knowledge and World Knowledge 103
Pedagogical Implications 106
Delimitations of the Study 111
Suggestions for Future Studies 112
Conclusion 113

REFERENCES 115

APPENDIXES 123
Appendix A Sample Identification of Self-regulatory Strategy 123
Appendix B English Translations of the Excerpts 140

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Motivational and Cognitive Components of Knowledge, Beliefs, and Strategies 40
Table 3.1 Background Information on Experienced Graduate Writers 55
Table 3.2 Background Information on Inexperienced College Writers 56
Table 3.3 Sample Major Categorization for Planning Strategy 64
Table 3.4 Sample Subcategorization for Planning Strategies 65
Table 3.5 Sample Definitions of Planning Strategies 66
Table 4.1 Summary of Self-regulatory Strategy Use of the Six Subjects 91

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 The model of cognitive process theory of writing
proposed by Flower and Hayes (1981) 11
Figure 2.2 The knowledge telling model
proposed by Scardamalia and Bereiter (1987) 15
Figure 2.3 The knowledge transforming model
proposed by Scardamalia and Bereiter (1987) 16
Figure 2.4 The model of writing as communicative language use
proposed by Grabe and Kaplan (1996) 20
REFERENCES
Almasi, J. F. (2003). Teaching strategic processes in reading. New York: The Guilford Press.
Andre, M. D. A., & Anderson, T. H. (1978-1979). The development and evaluation of a self-questioning study technique. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 605-623.
Baker, L. (1989). Metacognition, comprehension monitoring, and the adult reader. Educational Psychology Review,1(1), 3-38.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitve skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, J. L. Kamil, & P. Rosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman Press.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Berninger, V. W., Fuller, F., & Whitaker, D. (1996). A process model of writing development across the life span. Educational Psychology Review, 8(3), 193-218.
Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 463-494.
Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitve development and reading. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 453-480). Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.
Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65-116). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, A. L., Armbruster, B. B., & Baker, L. (1986). The Role of Metacognition in reading and studying. In J. Orasanu (Ed.), Reading comprehension: From research to practice (pp. 49-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, R., & Pressley, M. (1994). Self-regulated reading and getting meaning from text: The transactional strategies Instruction Model and its ongoing validation. In D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 155-179). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Carcia, T., & Pintrich, P. R. (1994). Regulating motivation and cognition in the classroom: The role of self-schemas and self-regulatory strategies. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 127-153). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Carrell, P. L., Gajdusek, L., & Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Instructional Science, 26, 97-112.
Carrell, P. L., Pharis, B.G., & Liberto, J.C. (1989). Metacognitive strategy training for ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 23(4), 647-678.
Casanave, C. P. (1988). Comprehension monitoring in ESL reading: A neglected
essential. TESOL Quarterly, 22(2), 283-302.
Chen, F. Y. (2003). The EFL beginning writers’ perception and metacognitive knowledge of English Writing—A study on the freshmen at university of science and technology. Master’s Thesis. National Yunlin University of Science and Technology.
Devine, J. (1993). The role of metacognition in second language reading and writing. In J. G. Carson & I. Leki (Eds.), Reading in the composition classroom: Second language perspectives (pp. 105-127). Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishes.
Ferris, D., & Hedgcock, J. S. (1998). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.
Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding—Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition (pp. 21-29). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L. Gregg, E. Steingberg (Eds.), Cognitive process in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 31-50). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387.
Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Grabe, W. (2003). Reading and writing relations: Second language perspectives on research and practice. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp. 242-262). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Towards a theory of writing. Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective (pp. 202- 236). London: Longman.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1994). The role and development of self-regulation in the writing process. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 203-228).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1997). Commentary: Self-regulation and writing: Where do We go from here? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 102-114,
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2000). The role of self-regulation and transcription skills
in writing and writing development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 3-12.
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Troia, G. A. (1998). Writing and self-regulation: Cases from the self-regulated strategy development model. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 20-41). New York: Guilford.
Hacker, D. (1998a). Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice: Issues and educational applications (pp. 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hacker, D. (1998b). Self-regulated comprehension during normal reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 165-191). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1992). Self-Regulated Strategy Development: A part of the writing process. In M. Pressley, K. R. Harris, & J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in school (pp. 277-309). New York: Academic Press.
Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L. H., & Saddler, B. (2002). Developing self-regulated writers. Theory into practice, 41(2).
Hartman, H. J. (2001). Developing students’ metacognitive knowledge and skills. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction:Theory, research, and practice (pp. 33-68). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hofer, B. K., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Teaching college students to be
self-regulated learners. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 57-85). New York: Guilford.
Jacob, J. E., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Children’s metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist 22(3 & 4), 255-278.
Kasper, L. F. (1997). Assessing the metacognitve growth of ESL student writers. TESL-EJ, 3(1). Retrived July 4, 2001, from
http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/tesi-ej/ej09/al.html
Kellogg, R. T. (1994). The psychology of writing. New York: Oxford.
Liu, C. K. (1999). Identifying the writing processes a college student has to undergo: The Generating Model. In The Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp.303-312). Taipei: Crane.
Livingston, J. A. (1997). Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved November 21, 2004, from The State University of New York at Buffalo, Graduate School of Education Web site: http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/Metacog.htm.
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitve awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.
Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25, 2-8.
Paris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K.K. (1994). Becoming as a strategic reader. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. (Reprinted from Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 293-316, 1983)
Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89-101.
Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 15-51). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Raimes, A. (1983). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 229-258.
Raphael, T. E., Englert, C. S, & Kirschner, B. W. (1989). Students’ metacognitve knowledge about writing. Research in the teaching of English, 23(4), 343-379.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, M. (1987). Knowledge-telling and knowledge transformin in written composition. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in applied psycholinguistics, 2: Reading, writing, and language learning (pp.142-175). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schraw, G. (2001). Promoting general metacognitve awareness. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice (pp. 3-16). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitve awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460-475.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitve Theories. Educational Psychology Review., 7, 351-371.
Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2000). Self-regulation and academic learning: Self-efficacy enhancing interventions. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 331-349). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Self-regulation in education: Retrospect and prospect. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman, Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 305-314). Hillsdale, N. Y.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Sitko, B. M. (1998). Knowing how to write: Metacognition and writing instruction. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 93-115). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Smagorinsky, P. (1991). The writer’s knowledge and the writing process: A protocol analysis. Research in the teaching of English, 25(3), 339-364.
Tei, E., & Stewart, O. (2003). Effective studying from text: Applying metacognitive strategies. In E. J. Paulson, S. A. Biggs, M. E. Laine, & T. L. Bullosck (Eds), College reading research and practice: Articles from the journal of college literacy and learning (pp. 223-236). Newark, DE: International Reading Association
Van Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modeling cognitive processes. London: Academic Press.
Victori, M. (1999). An analysis of writing knowledge in EFL composing: A case study of two effective and two less effective writers. System, 27, 537-555.
You, Y. L. (2002). Taiwaneses college students’ metacognitive awareness of writing in
English. Taipei: Crane.
You, Y. L., & Joe, S. G. (2001). Investigating the metacognitive awareness and strategies of English-majored university student writers. In The Selected Papers of the Tenth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp.106-119). Taipei: Crane.
You, Y. L., & Joe, S. G. (2002). Skilled writers’ metacognitve conditional knowledge and self-regulation. In The Proceedings of the Nineteenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp.515-527). Taipei: Crane.
You, Y. L., & Joe, S. G. (2003a). The differences between L2 mature and immature writers: A metacognitve approach. In The Proceedings of 2003 International Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp.597-612). Taipei: Crane.
You, Y. L., & Joe, S. G. (2003b). How to teach EFL writing metacognitively. In The Selected Papers of the Tenth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp.626-637). Taipei: Crane.
You, Y. L., & Joe, S. G. (2004). The impacts of self-regulation upon EFL writers’ performance. The impacts of self-regulation upon EFL writers’ performance. In The Proceedings of 21th International Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp.787-798). Taipei: Crane.
Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 165-187.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplar instructional models. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 1-19). New York: Guilford.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social cognitive perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 73-101.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top