跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(18.97.14.82) 您好!臺灣時間:2025/02/15 02:07
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:洪于筑
研究生(外文):Yu-chu Hung
論文名稱:三種生字註解方式對高職生閱讀理解及名詞辨認之效益研究
論文名稱(外文):THE EFFECTS OF THREE DIFFERENT VOCABULARY GLOSSARIES ON READING COMPREHENSION AND NOUN RECOGNITION OF EFL VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
指導教授:張玉玲張玉玲引用關係
指導教授(外文):Ye-ling Chang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱:英語學系
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2006
畢業學年度:94
語文別:英文
論文頁數:123
中文關鍵詞:生字註解生字註解呈現在文章邊緣詞彙組圖形組體閱讀理解名詞辨認
外文關鍵詞:vocabulary glossarymarginal glosseslexical setgraphic organizerreading comprehensionnoun recognition
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:3
  • 點閱點閱:302
  • 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:5
本研究旨在探討三種生字註解方式對高職生閱讀理解及名詞辨認的影響,這三種生字註解分別是將生字註解呈現在文章邊緣(marginal glosses)、將生字註解以詞彙組(lexical set)的方式呈現及將生字註解以圖形組體(graphic organizer)的方式呈現。本研究探討了受試者在閱讀測驗、立即名詞辨認測驗及延宕名詞辨認測驗上的表現,也針對受試者在三種測驗上的表現作相關性的探索。受試者對這三種名詞註解的看法也一併列入討論。
本研究的實驗對象為三班曾文農工一年級的學生(共98人)。此三班被任意分派至三組,分別為MG組、LS組及GO組。MG組的學生必須閱讀在文章邊緣附上生字註解的英文文章,LS組的學生必須閱讀將生字註解以詞彙組的方式呈現的英文文章,GO組的學生必須閱讀將生字註解以圖形組體的方式呈現的英文文章。之後,三組學生都必須進行閱讀測驗及立即名詞辨認測驗,並填寫問卷。一週後,進行延宕名詞辨認測驗以了解所有受試者對先前學習的單字是否記得。
本研究結果摘要如下:
1.三組受試者在閱讀測驗上的表現並沒有顯著差異。故在本實驗中,三種生字註解方式對幫助閱讀理解的效果是相當的。
2.在輔助受試者最初的單字學習方面,將生字註解以圖形組體的方式呈現的效果顯著優於將生字註解以詞彙組的方式呈現。但在延長受試者對單字的記憶方面,三種生字註解的效果並沒有顯著差異。
3.在比較各組在立即名詞辨認測驗和延宕名詞辨認測驗上的表現,各組皆達顯著差異,亦即一週後各組皆顯著地遺忘了先前所學的單字。而在單字遺忘量上的比較,三組之間單字遺忘的量是相當的。
4.受試者在立即名詞辨認測驗和延宕名詞辨認測驗上的表現式呈現正相關,亦即此兩種名詞辨認測驗的建構是公平和適當的,而且實驗也是控制恰當的。在文章邊緣附上生字註解的方式則被發現能有效同時幫助閱讀理解及單字學習。
5.三組受試者皆認為他們所使用的生字註解可以幫助理解文章、增進閱讀速度及單字學習。然而,三組受試者也都認為他們所使用的生字註解無法大幅度提升他們閱讀英文文章的興趣及信心。
總而言之,本研究建議教師及教材編製者應該嘗試將生字註解以圖形組體呈現的方式去幫助學生學習單字。再者,因為同時學習語意相近的生字容易造成學習困難,教師及教材編製者應該避免同時呈現語意相近的生字。另外,教師在指派輔助閱讀教材時,可以提供學生們附在文章邊緣的生字註解。最後,教師應該了解生字註解並非方位的輔助教具,在提升學生閱讀英文文章的興趣及信心方面,僅提供學生生字註解是不夠的,教師應該提供額外的協助及指導。
This study investigated the effects of three different vocabulary glossaries—the marginal glosses (the MG), the glosses arranged in lexical sets (the LS), and the glosses arranged in graphic organizers (the GO), on vocational high school students’ reading comprehension and noun recognition. Specifically, the subjects’ performances on the reading comprehension tests, the immediate noun recognition tests and the delayed noun recognition tests were investigated and discussed. Furthermore, the correlations among the subjects’ performances on the tests and the subjects’ responses to the effects of the three vocabulary glossaries were explored and discussed.
Three intact classes of the first year (98 subjects in total) at Tzeng-Wen Industrial Vocational High School were recruited in this study. The three classes were randomly assigned to three groups: MG group, LS group, and GO group. The MG group was required to read the reading texts with the MG; the LS group was asked to read the reading texts with the LS; the GO group was instructed to read the reading texts with the GO. After reading the reading texts, all of the three groups were asked to do the reading comprehension tests and the immediate noun recognition tests, and fill the questionnaires. One week later, the delayed noun recognition tests were carried out to measure the subjects’ vocabulary retention.
The major findings of this study were summarized as follows:
1.No significant difference was found in terms of the subjects’ performances on reading comprehension tests. Thus, under the conditions in this study, the effects of the MG, the LS, and the GO on facilitating the subjects’ reading comprehension were found to be similar.
2.The GO was revealed to be significantly effective in assisting the subjects’ initial vocabulary learning than the LS, yet the effects of these three vocabulary glossaries on extending the subjects’ retention of the vocabulary for one week did not differ greatly from one another.
3.The comparisons of each group’s difference between the immediate and the delayed tests reached a significant level, which showed that all of the three groups had a significant vocabulary loss one week later. However, all of the three groups were discovered to suffer similar amount of vocabulary loss after one week.
4.Positive correlations were found between all of the subjects’ performances on the immediate and the delayed noun recognition tests, which indicated that the noun recognition tests were fairly and properly designed and the experiment was adequately controlled. It was disclosed that the MG could facilitate one’s reading comprehension and vocabulary learning at the same time.
5.All of the three groups positively deemed that the vocabulary glossary they used could facilitate their reading comprehension, increase their reading rate, and assist their vocabulary learning. Nevertheless, all of the three groups indicated that the vocabulary glossary they used might not greatly promote their interest in reading and confidence to read English texts.
In conclusion, it is suggested that the language teachers and material designers can try the GO to help the students learn vocabulary. Also, since learning difficulties were found stemming from learning semantically similar new words at the same time, the language teachers and material designers should avoid presenting semantically similar new words together. In addition, the language teachers can provide students with marginal glosses when they assign supplementary reading materials. Last but no least, the language teachers should be aware that the vocabulary glossaries are not all-purpose techniques. Concerning the increase of students’ interest in learning and confidence to learn English, teachers should offer students appropriate assistance and guidance.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgements i
Chinese Abstract ii
English Abstract iv
Table of Contents vi
List of Tables Xi
List of Figures xiii

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
Background and Motivation 1
Statement of the Problems 4
Purposes of the Study 5
Research Questions 6
Significance of the Study 6
Limitations of the Study 7
Definition of Terms 7

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 10
Knowledge of Vocabulary 10
Knowing a Word 10
Factors Affecting Vocabulary Learning 13
Language Context 13
Parts of Speech 14
Similarities to Other Words 16
Vocabulary Knowledge and Reading Comprehension 17
Vocabulary Size and Reading Comprehension 17
Reading and Vocabulary Development 18
Three Information Processing Models 19
A Bottom-up Model 20
A Top-down Model 22
An Interactive Model 25
Vocabulary Glossaries, Reading Comprehension, and Vocabulary Learning 26
Vocabulary Glosses 27
The Advantages of Using Vocabulary Glosses 27
The Limitations of Using Vocabulary Glosses 28
Vocabulary Glosses Presented in Marginal Glosses 29
Studies on Marginal Glosses 30
Vocabulary Glosses Presented in Lexical Sets 33
Studies on Vocabulary Glosses in Lexical Sets 35
Vocabulary Glosses Presented in Graphic Organizers 37
Studies on Vocabulary Glosses in Graphic Organizers 38

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 41
Subjects 41
Instruments 43
Reading Texts 43
Target Words 44
Vocabulary Glossaries 46
Reading Comprehension Tests (Part A) 47
Immediate Noun Recognition Tests 48
Delayed Noun Recognition Tests 48
Questionnaires 49
Interview 49
Procedure 50
Data Analysis 52

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 54
The Subjects’ Performances on the Reading Comprehension Tests 54
The Subjects’ Performances on the Immediate and the Delayed Noun Recognition Tests 56
The Subjects’ Vocabulary Loss between the Immediate and Delayed Noun Recognition Tests 60
Correlations Among the Three Groups’ Performances on Three Tests 62
Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of the Vocabulary Glossaries 66
The Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Facilitating Reading Comprehension 66
The Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Aiding Reading Rate 68
The Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Assisting Vocabulary Learning 70
The Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Increasing Reading Interest 72
The Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Enhancing Reading Confidence 73
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 76
Conclusions 76
Implications 79
Suggestions for Further Research 80

REFERENCES 82

APPENDIXES
Appendix A-1: Text “Moderation for Health” 90
Appendix A-2: Text “Moderation for Health” and Vocabulary Glossary for MG Group 91
Appendix A-3: Text “Moderation for Health” and Vocabulary Glossary for LS Group 92
Appendix A-4: Text “Moderation for Health” and Vocabulary Glossary for GO Group 93
Appendix B-1: Text “Fight Fire with …Flies?” 95
Appendix B-2: Text “Fight Fire with …Flies?” and Vocabulary Glossary for MG Group 96
Appendix B-3: Text “Fight Fire with …Flies?” and Vocabulary Glossary for LS Group 97
Appendix B-4: Text “Fight Fire with …Flies?” and Vocabulary Glossary for GO Group 98
Appendix C: Checklist of Key Words
100
Appendix D-1: Part A: A Reading Comprehension Test on “Moderation for Health” 101
Appendix D-2: Part A: A Reading Comprehension Test on “Fight Fire with…Flies?” 102
Appendix D-3: An Answer Sheet of Reading Comprehension Tests (Part A) 103
Appendix E-1: Part B: An Immediate Noun Recognition Test on “Moderation for Health” 104
Appendix E-2: Part B: An Immediate Noun Recognition Test on “Fight Fire with…Flies?” 105
Appendix E-3: An Answer Sheet of Immediate Noun Recognition Tests (Part B) 116
Appendix F-1: A Delayed Noun Recognition Test on “Moderation for Health” 107
Appendix F-2: A Delayed Noun Recognition Test on “Fight Fire with…Flies?” 108
Appendix F-3: An Answer Sheet of the Delayed Noun Recognition Tests 109
Appendix G-1: A Questionnaire on the Students’ Responses to the Learning Effects of Vocabulary Glossary for MG Group 110
Appendix G-2: A Questionnaire on the Students’ Responses to the Learning Effects of Vocabulary Glossary for LS Group 113
Appendix G-3: A Questionnaire on the Students’ Responses to the Learning Effects of Vocabulary Glossary for GO Group 116
Appendix H: Chinese Transcriptions of the Subjects’ Responses in the Interview 119


LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Distinctions Among Bottom-up Model, Top-down Model, and Interactive Model 20
2. The Mean Scores of the Two Monthly Tests in the First Semester for the Three Classes 42
3. Distribution of the Subjects in the Three Groups 43
4. The Percentage of Words in the Three Word Lists in Each Text 45
5. The Target Words in the Texts 46
6. Reading Comprehension Scores of Subjects in MG group, LS group, and Go group 55
7. Immediate and Delayed Noun Recognition Scores of Subjects in MG Group, LS Group, and Go Group 57
8. Paired-Sample t-Test of the Three Groups’ Immediate and Delayed Vocabulary Tests 60
9. MG Group, LS Group, and Go Groups’ Differences Between Immediate and Delayed Noun Recognition Tests 62
10. Correlations Among MG Group’s Performances on the Reading Comprehension Test, the Immediate Noun Recognition Test, and the Delayed Noun Recognition Test 64
11. Correlations Among LS Group’s Performances on the Reading Comprehension Test, the Immediate Noun Recognition Test, and the Delayed Noun Recognition Test 65
12. Correlations Among GO Group’s Performances on the Reading Comprehension Test, the Immediate Noun Recognition Test, and the Delayed Noun Recognition Test 65
13. Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Facilitating Reading Comprehension 66
14. Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Adding Reading Rate 68
15. Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Vocabulary Learning 70
16. Subjects' Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Increasing Reading Interests 72
17. Subjects’ Responses to the Effects of Vocabulary Glossaries on Enhancing Reading Confidence 74


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. The flow chart of the study procedure 54
REFERENCES

Abdullah, K. I. (1993). Teaching reading vocabulary: From theory to practice. Forum, 31(3). Retrieved December 29, 2004, from: http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol31/no3/p10.htm
Aitchison, J. (1987). Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Inc.
Allen, E. D., & Vallette, R. M. (1972). Modern language classroom techniques: A Handbook. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich Inc.
Anderson, N. (1999). Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies. Toronto: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Baxendell, B. W. (2003). Consistent, coherent, creative: The 3 C's of graphic organizers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(3), 46-53. Retrieved December 29, 2004, from: the EBSCO database.
Bensoussan, M. (1983). Dictionaries and tests of EFL reading comprehension. ELT Journal 37(4), 341-345.
Boyle, J. R., & Weishaar, M. (1997). The effects of exert-generated versus students-generated cognitive organizers on the reading comprehension of students with leaning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 12(4), 228-235.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). NY: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed.). NY: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. NY: Pearson Education, Inc.
Carrell, P. L. (1984). Schema theory and ESL reading: Classroom implications and applications. The Modern Language Journal, 68, 332-343.
Carrell, P. L. (1988a). Interactive text processing: implications for ESL/second language reading classrooms. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 239-259). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Carrell, P. L. (1988b). Introduction: Interactive approaches to second language reading. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 1-7). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Carrell, P. L., & Eisterhold, J. C. (1988). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 56-70). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Carroll, D. W. (1999). Psychology of Language (3rd ed.). CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Channell, J. (1981). Applying semantic theory to vocabulary teaching. ELT Journal, 35, 115-122.
Chen, Y. M. (2004). The effect of marginal glosses on reading comprehension and vocabulary learning. Unpublished master thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.
Coady, J. (1993). Research on ESL/EFL vocabulary acquisition: putting it in context. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary acquisition (pp. 3-23). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Coady, J. (1997). L2 vocabulary acquisition through extensive reading. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 225-237). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coady, J., Magoto, J., Hubbard, P., Graney, J., & Mokhtari, K. (1993). High frequency vocabulary and reading proficiency in ESL readers. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 217-228). NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Crow, J. T., & Quigley, J. R. (1985). A semantic field approach to passive vocabulary acquisition for reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 497-513.
Davis, J. N. (1989). Facilitating effects of marginal glosses on foreign reading. The Modern Language Journal, 73(1), 41-48.
Dechant, E. (1991). Understanding and teaching reading: An interactive model. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
DiCecco, V. M., & Gleason, M. M. (2002). Using graphic organizers to attain relational knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(4), 306-320. Retrieved December 29, 2004, from: the EBSCO database.
Esksy, D. E. (1988). Holding in the bottom: An interactive approach to the language problems of second language readers. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 93-100). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Esksy, D. E., & Grabe, W. (1988). Interactive models for second language reading: perspectives on instruction. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 223-238). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Gairns, R., & Redman, S. (1986). Working with words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodman, K. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of The Reading Specialist, 6(1), 126-135.
Goodman, K. (1988). The reading process. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 11-21). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Grabe, W. (1988). Reassessing the term “interactive.” In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 56-70). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current development in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-398.
Hayes, B. L. (1991). The effective teaching of reading. In B. L. Hayes (Ed.), Effective strategies for teaching reading (pp. 3-12). MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Heatley, A., Nation, I.S.P., & Coxhead, A. (2002). RANGE and FREQUENCY programs [Computer software and manual]. Retrieved July 28, 2004, from http://www.vuw.ac.nz/lals/staff/Paul_Nation
Hirsh, D., & Nation, I. S. P. (1992). What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts for pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language, 8, 689-696.
Horton, S. V., Lovitt, T. C., & Bergerud, D. (1990). The effectiveness of graphic organizers for three classifications of secondary students in content area classes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(1), 12-22.
Hu, M., & Nation, I. S. P. (2000). Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 13 (1), 403-430. Retrieved October 21, 2004, from: http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/PastIssues/volume.html#131
Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M. & Greidanus, T. (1996). Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: the influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use and reoccurrence of unknown words. Modern Language Journal, 80, 327-339.
Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51, 539-558.
Jacobs, G. M., Dufon, P., & Fong, CH. (1994). L1 and L2 vocabulary glosses in L2 reading passages: their effectiveness for increasing comprehension and vocabulary knowledge. Journal of research in Reading, 17, 19-28.
Johnson, P. L. (1982). Effects on reading comprehension of building background knowledge. TESOL Quarterly, 16(3), 503-516.
Kelly, P. (1991). Lexical ignorance: The main obstacle to listening comprehension with advanced foreign language learners. IRAL, 29(2), 135-149.

Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 440-464.
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.
Laufer, B. (1990). Why are some words more difficult than others? – Some intralexical factors that affect the learning of words. IRAL, 28(4), 293-307.
Laufer, B. (1997a). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t know, words you think you know, and words you can’t guess. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 20-34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B. (1997b). What’s in a word that makes it hard or easy? Intralexical factors affecting the difficulty of vocabulary acquisition. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 140-155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liu, K. L. (2003). A comparison of effects of learning words in semantic and thematic clusters in a tertiary EFL class in Taiwan. Unpublished master thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Liu, N., & Nation, I. S. P. (1985). Factors affecting guessing vocabulary in context. RELC Journal, 16(1), 33-42.
Lomicka, L. (1998). "To gloss or not to gloss": An investigation of reading comprehension online. Language Learning & Technology, 1(2), 41-50. Retrieved May 19, 2005, from: http://polyglot.cal.msu.edu/llt/vol1num2/article2/default.html
McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Merkley, D. M., & Jefferies, D. (2001). Guidelines for implementing a graphic organizer. The Reading Teacher, 54(4), 350-357. Retrieved December 29, 2004, from: the EBSCO database.
Moore, D. W., & Readence, J. E. (1984). A quantitative and qualitative review of graphic organizer research. Journal of Educational Research, 78(1), 11-17. Retrieved March 3, 2005, from: the EBSCO database.
Nagy, W. (1997). On the role of context in first-and second-language vocabulary learning. In N., Schmitt, & M., McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 64-83). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, P. (2000). Learning vocabulary in lexical sets: Dangers and guidelines. TESOL Journal, 9(2), 6-10.
Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept maps and Vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools for science and mathematics education. Instructional Science, 19, 29-52.
Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language Learning, 52(3), 513-536.
Richards, J. C. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 10, 77-89.
Robinson, D. H., Katayama, A. D., & Fan, A. (1996). Evidence for conjoint retention of information encoded from spatial adjunct displays. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 211-239.
Rodgers, T. S. (1969). On measuring vocabulary difficulty: an analysis of item variables in learning Russian-English vocabulary pairs. International Review of Applied Linguistic, 7, 327-343.
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. 217-228). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (1997). Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Singleton, D. M. (1999). Exploring the second language mental lexicon. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, F. (1982). Understanding reading. NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Solso, R. L. (1995). Cognitive psychology, (4th ed). MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Stanovich, K. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71.
Stanovich, K. (1981). Attentional and automatic context effects. In A. Lesgold, & C. Perfetti (Eds.), Interactive processes in reading (pp. 241-267). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stoller, F. L., & Grabe, W. (1993). Implications for L2 vocabulary acquisition and instruction from L1 vocabulary research. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 217-228). NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Sue, L. (2004). A study of vocational high school student’s EFL difficulties and the solutions – Based on National Tainan Commercial and Vocational Senior High School. Unpublished master thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan.
Tinkham, T. (1993). The effects of semantic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. System, 21(3), 371-380.
Tinkham, T. (1997). The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second Language Research, 13(2), 138-163.
Vekiri, I. (2002). What Is the Value of Graphical Displays in Learning? Educational Psychology Review, 14(3), 261–312.
Waring, R. (1997). The negative effects of learning words in semantic sets: a replication. System, 25, 261-274.
Watanabe, Y. (1997). Input, intake, and retention. Effects of increased processing on incidental learning of foreign language vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(3), 287-306.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊