(3.236.214.19) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/09 23:15
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:::

: 
twitterline
研究生:徐心怡
研究生(外文):Hsin-Yi Hsu
論文名稱:分組人數對高低成就學生在認字及閱讀理解能力之比較
論文名稱(外文):The Effects of Group Size of Cooperative Learning on Word Recognition and Reading Comprehension Skills in Students with Different English Abilities
指導教授:陳錦芬陳錦芬引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chin-Fen Chen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺北教育大學
系所名稱:兒童英語教育研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:普通科目教育學類
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:119
中文關鍵詞:合作學習合作統整閱讀寫作法分組高低成就閱讀能力認字閱讀理解
外文關鍵詞:cooperative learningword recognitonreading coomprehensioncoopeartive integrated reading and composition (CIRC)group sizehigh achieverslow achievers
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:13
  • 點閱點閱:723
  • 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:111
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:16
摘要
閱讀一直以來被認為是獲取新知及語言習得的重要管道,但是現今國小英語課裡學生人數過多,以致於英文老師很難顧及到每個學生的需求。既然閱讀活動很難在大班級裡有效地實施,許多學者建議使用合作學習來解決這種困境。
整合閱讀寫作合作學習模式(Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition)已經在美國及英語為第二外語的地區被證實是一種有效的教學方式來改善學生的閱讀能力,因此本研究旨在使用整合閱讀寫作合作學習模式(CIRC)來促進台灣國小學生的認字(English word recognition)和閱讀理解能力(English reading comprehension),並探討小組人數是否會影響到學生認字和閱讀理解能力上的表現,此外不同程度的學生透過此合作模式後是否有顯著的進步也會一倂探討。
本研究的發現如下:
(一) 小組人數沒有顯著的影響學生認字和閱讀理解能力上的表現。
(二) 不同程度的學生透過此合作模式後進步的情況不同:低成就的學生不論是在配對組(pair-work group)還是多人小組(teamwork group) 認字和閱讀理解能力都有顯著的進步;兩種分組合作模式下高成就的學生在認字和閱讀理解能力上則都無顯著的進步。
Abstract
Reading has been viewed as major means of learning new information and a valuable source of language input. However, the number of students in an English class is so large that it is hard for English teachers to take care of the need of every student. Since reading activities are hard to carry out in such a big class, cooperative learning method has been strongly recommended by educators.
Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), has been proved an effective method to improve students’ reading performance either in the United States or in the ESL context. Therefore, this study aims to adopt this teaching method to facilitate elementary school students’ abilities in English word recognition and reading comprehension in Taiwan context and investigate whether the group size affects the students’ English reading performance, and whether the different levels of students contribute to different achievements.
The results of this study are summarized as follows. Firstly, the group size is not a vital factor that affects students’ performance in word recognition and reading comprehension. Secondly, the different levels of students contribute to different achievement: the low achievers in both groups (pair-work group and teamwork group) make significant progress in terms of word recognition and reading comprehension while the high achievers in both groups do not show significant process either in word recognition or in reading comprehension.
CHAPTER 1 1
Introduction 1
Research Purposes and Research Questions 4
Definitions of Terms 5
Cooperative learning 5
CIRC 5
Pair-work cooperative learning reading group 5
Teamwork cooperative learning reading group 5
Word recognition 5
Reading comprehension 6
Students with high level of reading ability 6
Students with low level of reading ability 6
CHAPTER 2 7
Literature Review 7
Theoretical Framework of Cooperative Learning 7
Cognitive theory 7
Motivational theory 9
The Characteristics of the Cooperative Learning. 9
Positive interdependence 10
Face-to-face promotive interaction 11
Individual accountability and personal responsibility 11
Interpersonal and small group skills 11
Group processing 12
The Benefits of Cooperative Learning 12
Reach intellectual goals easily 13
Gain the comprehension of L2 13
Facilitate classroom management 14
Relative Studies of Cooperative Learning in Taiwan 17
The Reading Act 18
The reading process 18
The components of English reading 20
The instruction model in reading 24
The Application of CIRC in English Reading Instruction. 25
The significance of CIRC 26
The features and strategies of CIRC instruction 26
The rationale for applying CIRC in this study 29
The Group Size in Cooperative Learning 32
CHAPTER 3 34
Methodology 34
Research Procedure and Design 34
Pilot Study 37
Research Design of the Main Study 38
Setting and participants 38
The teamwork group 39
The pair-work group 39
Instruction Models 40
Reading materials 41
The Instructor 43
The mode for the teamwork group 43
The mode for the pair-work group 44
The instruction activities 45
Research Tools 48
Data collection 48
Data analysis 50
CHAPTER 4 51
Results 51
Students Background Analysis 51
Students’ Performance on Reading Pretest and Posttest 52
The pair-work group 53
The teamwork group 55
Comparison the Achievement of Pair-work Group and Teamwork Group 57
The Reading Achievement Made by High and Low English Proficiency Students in Both Groups 58
The statistical results 59
The high achievers’ attitudes toward CIRC 63
Other Findings in the CIRC Instruction 66
CHAPTER 5 68
Discussions and Suggestions 68
Discussions of the Main Findings in this Study 68
Students’ reading performance 68
The group size issue in the study 72
The achievement made by low and high achievers in both groups 74
Pedagogical Implications 77
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Studies 78
References 80
Appendix A--- Reading Pretest 90
Appendix B--- Reading Posttest 97
Appendix C--- Vocabulary Worksheet 104
Appendix D--- Discussion Worksheet 105
Appendix E--- Questionnaire 106
Appendix F--- Observation Sheet 107
Appendix G--- Instruction Schedule 108
Appendix H--- Teaching Plan 109
Appendix I--- Interview Ouestions 114
Appendix J--- Teacher’s Journal 116
References
Acikgoz, K. (1991, April). Cooperative, competitive and traditional techniques and foreign language achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Teachers of English as a Second Language, New York.
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
Afflerbach, P. P. (1990). The influence of prior knowledge and text genre on reader’s prediction strategies. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22(2), 131-148.
Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1983). Reading comprehension and the assessment and acquisition of word knowledge. In B. Hutson (Ed.), Advances in reading/language research (pp.231-256). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Anderson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The Jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: stage Publications, Inc.
Anderson, R. C., Reynolds, R. E., Schallert, D. L., & Goetz, E. T. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 14(4), 367-381.
Allen, S. D. (1991). Ability grouping research reviews: What do they say about grouping and the gifted? Educational Leadership,48(6), 60-65.
Alloport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Person (Ed.), Handbook of reading research. New York: Longman.
Bassano, S., & Christison, M. A. (1988). Cooperative learning in the ESL classroom. TESOL Newsletter, 22(2) 8-9.
Beck, I., Mckeown, M., Mccaslin, E., & Burkes, A. (1979). Instructional dimensions that may affect reading comprehension: Examples from two commercial reading programs (Technical Report No. 1979/20). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh. Learning and Research and Development Center.
Bejarano, Y. (l987). A cooperative small-group methodology in the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 21 (3), 483-504.
Badley, L., & Bryant, P. E. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read: A causal connection. Nature, 30, 419-421.
Bray, R., Kerr, N., & Atkin, S. (1978). Group size, problem difficulty, and group performance on unitary disjunctive tasks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1224-1240.
Brown, A. L ., & Palincsar, A. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from text by means of informed, self-controlled training. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2, 1-17.
Burn, N., &Grove, S. K. (1987). The practice of nursing research: Conduct, critique, and utilization. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders.
Burn, P. C., Roe, B. D., & Smith, S. H. (2002). Teaching reading in today’s elementary schools. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Calderon, M., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., & Slavin, R.E. (1998). Effects of bilingual cooperative integrated reading and composition on students making the transition from Spanish to English reading. The Elementary School Journal, 99,153-165.
Calderon, M. (1999). Promoting Language Proficiency and Academic Achievement through Cooperation. ED436983.
Cohen & Elizathbeth, G. (1994). Design groupwork: strategies for heterogeneous classroom. New York: Columbia University.
Collins, K. M., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2000). Treatment by attitude interactions as a mediator of group performance in research methodology courses. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. Bowling Green, KY.
Dactorow, M., Wittrock, M. C., & Marks, C. (1978). Generative processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 109-118.
Dahl, P. (1979). An experimental program for teaching high speed word recognition and comprehension skills. In J. Button, T. Lovitt & Rowland (Eds.), Communication research in learning disabilities and mental retardation (pp. 33-65). Baltimore: University Park Press.
Damon, W. (1984). Peer education: The untapped potential. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 5, 331-2-343.
Deutsch, M. (l949). A theory of cooperation and competition. Human Relations, 2, 25-279.
Devin-Sheehan, L., Feldman, R., & Allen, (1976). Research on children tutoring children: A critical review. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 355-385.
Ditza, M., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., (1986). Adults in cooperative learning: Effects of group size and group gender composition on group learning behaviors (A Summary). ED279788.
Dlugosz, D. W. (2000). Rethinking the role of reading in teaching a foreign language to young learners. English Language Teaching Journal, 54, 284-290.
Ediger, A. (2001). Teaching children literacy skills in a second language. In M. C. Muricia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp.153-169). Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Edwards, K. J. & DeVries, D. L. (1972). Learning games and student teams: Their effects on student attitudes and achievement (Report No. 147). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools.
Ehri, L. C., & Sweet, J. (1991). Fingerpoint-reading of memorized text: What enables beginners to process the print? Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 442-462.
Ely, R. (2001). Language and literacy in the school years. In J. B. Gleason (Ed.). The development of language. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Frantz , L. J. (1979) The effects of the student teams achievement approach in reading on peer attitudes. Master’s thesis, Old Dominion.
Fox, D. (1985). Psychology, ideology, utopia, and the commons. American Psychology, 40, 48-58
Goodman, K. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6, 126-135.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406.
Groff, P. (1998). Where’s the phonics? Making a case for its direct and systematic instruction. The Reading Teacher, 52, 138-141.
Hansen, J. (1981). The effects of inference training and practice on young children’s reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 391-417.
Hiebert, E. (1983). An examination of ability groupings for reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 231-255.
Hulten, B. H., & Devries, D. L. (1976). Team competition and group practice: Effects on student achievement and attitudes (Report No. 212). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools.
Indik, B. (1965). Organization size and member participation: Some empirical tests of alternative explanations. Human Relations, 18(4), 339-350.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1981).Effects of cooperative and individualistic learning experiences on interethnic interaction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 444-449.
Johnson, R. T. (1987). On cooperation in schools: A conversation with David and Roger Johnson. Educational Leadership﹐45 (3) ﹐14-19.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1986). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs﹐NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Toward a cooperative effort:A response to Slavin. Educational Leadership﹐46 (7) ﹐80-81
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs﹐NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & D. Anderson. (1976). The effects of cooperative vs. individual instruction on student prosocial behavior, attitudes toward learning, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 446-52.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1992). Advanced cooperative learning. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W. & Waxman, H. C. (1985). Evaluating the effects of the “groups of four” program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Long, M. H., & Porter P. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquistion. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 207-228.
Kagan, S. (1977). Social motives and behaviors of Mexican-American and Anglo-American children. In J. L. Martinez (Ed.), Chicano psychology. New York: Academic Press.
Kagan, S. (1988). Cooperative learning resource for teachers. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Resources for Teachers.
Kagan, S. (1989a). Cooperative learning resource for teachers. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Resources for Teachers.
Kerr, N. (1989). Illusions of efficacy: The effects on group size on perceived efficacy in social dilemmas. Journal of Social Experimental Psychology, 35, 287-313.
Kessler, C. (1992). Cooperative language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
LaBerge, D., & Samuel, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.
Madden, N. A., & Slavin, R. E. (1983a). Effects of cooperative learning on the social acceptance of mainstreamed academically handicapped students. Journal of Special Education, 17, 171-182.
Magney, J. R. (1997). Working and learning together. Techniques: Making Education and Career Connections, 72(6), 57.
McGroarty, M. (1989). The benefits of cooperative learning arrangements in second language instruction. National Association for Bilingual Association Journal, 13(2), 127-143.
McNeil, J. D. (1992). Reading comprehension: New directions for classroom practice. NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
Messick, D., & Brewer, M. (1983). Solving social dilemmas: A review. In L. Wheeler & P. Shaver (Eds.) Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 11-44). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Mezynski, K. (1983). Issues concerning the acquisition of knowledge: Effects of vocabulary training on reading comprehension. Review of Educational Research, 53(2), 253-279.
Murray, F. B. (1982). Teaching through social conflict. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 7, 257-271.
Myers, M., & Pairs, S. (1978). Children’s metacognitive knowledge about reading. Journal of Education Psychology, 70, 680-690.
Nagy, W. E. (1988). Teaching vocabulary to improve reading comprehension. Newark, Del.: International Reading Association.
Olson, M. (1965). The logical of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Olsen, R., & Kagan, S. (l992). About cooperative learning. In C. Kessler (Ed.), Cooperative language learning: A teacher's resource book (pp. 1-30). NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Pace, A. J. (1981). Comprehension monitoring by elementary students: When does it occur? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles.
Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. L (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117-175.
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.
Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Pica, T., Young, R., & Doughty, C. (1987). The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 21(4), 737-758.
Prado-Olmos, P. L. (1993). Students “Do” process: Bilingual students’ interactions in a small reading group. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Atlants, GA. April, 12-16, 1993).
Raphael, T. E. (1980). The effects of metacognitive strategy awareness training on students’ question answering behavior. Doctoral dessertation, University of Illinois, Urbana.
Reutzel, D. R. (2004). Organizing literacy instruction: Effective grouping strategies and organizational plans. In L. B. Gambrell, L. M. Morrow, S.B. Neuman, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Best practices n literacy instruction. (pp.271-291). New York: Guilford Press.
Robison, A. (1990). Cooperation or exploitation: The argument against cooperative learning for talented students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14(1), 9-27.
Roe, M. F. (1992). Reading strategy instruction: Complexities and possibilities in middle school. Journal of Reading, 36, 190-196.
Ryan, F. (1982). Identifying and remediating failures in reading comprehension: Toward an instructional approach for poor comprehenders. In G. MacKinnon & T. Walker (Eds.), Advances in reading research (Vol. 3). New York: Academic Press.
Samuels, S. J. (1979). The method of repeated reading. Reading Teacher, 32, 403-408.
Samuels, S. J. (1981). Some essentials of decoding. Exceptional Education Quarterly, 2, 11-25.
Samuels, S. J. (1988). Decoding and automaticity: Helping poor reader become automatic at word recognition. The Reading Teacher, 41, 756-760.
Sharan, S., Kussell, P., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., Bejarano, Y., Raviv, S., & Sharan, Y. (1984). Cooperative learning in the classroom: Research in desegregated schools. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sharan, S., & Shachar﹐H. (1988). Language and leraning in the cooperative classroom. N.Y.:Spring-Verlag.
Share, D. L. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: Sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151-218.
Slavin, R. E. (1978b). Student teams and comparison among equals: Effects on academic performance and student attitudes. Journal of Education Psychology, 70, 532-538.
Slavin, R. E. (1979). Effects of biracial learning teams on cross-racial relationships. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 381-387.
Slavin, R. E. (1980a). Effects of individual learning expectations on students’ achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 520-524.
Slavin, R. E. (1983a). Cooperative learning. New York: Longman.
Slavin, R. E. (1983). Team-assisted individualization: A cooperative learning solution for adaptive instruction in mathematics. ERIC Document﹐ED2328521.
Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative learning: theory, research, and practice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (l995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. (2nd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Slavin, R. E. (l995). Cooperative integrated reading and writing (CIRC): A brief overview. ED378569.
Snow, C. M., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
Stahl, S. A.., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72-110.
Stephan, F., & Mishler, E. (1952). The distribution of participation in small group: An exponential approximation. American Sociological Review, 17, 598-608.
Stevens, R. J., & Durkin, S. (1992). Using student team reading and student team writing in middle schools: Two evaluations (Technical Report No. 36). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students.
Stevens, R. J., Madden, N. A., Slavin, R. E., & Farnish, A. M. (1987). Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition: Two field experiments. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 433-454.
Stevens, R. J., & Slavin, R. E. (1995). Effects of a cooperative learning approach in reading and writing on academically handicapped and nonhandicapped students. Elementary School Journal, 95, 241-262.
Stevens, R. J., Slavin, R. E., Farnish, A. M., & Mandden, N. A. (1988). Effects of cooperative learning and direct instruction in reading comprehension strategies on main idea identification. Paper present at the Annual Conference of the American Eduction Research Association, New Orleans.
Tanner, N. B. (1988). Phonics, In J. E. Alexander (Ed.), Teaching reading (pp. 75-103). Glenview, IN: Scott, Foresman and Company.
Tombin, E. A., & Davids, B. R. (1985). Technical report of the evaluation of the race/human relations program: A study of cooperative learning environment strategies. San Diego: San Diego Public Schools
Tudge, J. (1992). Vygotsky, the zone of proximal development, and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom practice. In L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp.155-172). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Van Oudenhoven, J. P., Van Berkum, G. & Swen-Koopmans, T. (1987). Effects of cooperation and feedback by fellow pupils on spelling achievement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 2, 83-91.
Vermette, P. J. (1998). Making cooperative learning work: Students teams in K-12 classroom. Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Merrill.
Vygostsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society (ed. M. Cole, John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Watson, G., & Johnson, D. W. (1972). Social psychology: Issues and insights (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott.
Webb, N. M. (1983). Predicting learning form student interaction: Defining the interaction variable. Educational Psychologist, 18, 33-41.
Webb, N. M. (1985). Student interaction and learning in small groups: A research Summary. In Slavin, et al. (Eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp.147-172). N.Y.:Plenum.
Weinstein, C. E. (1982). Training students to use elaboration learning strategies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 7, 301-311.
Werley, H. H., & Fitzpatrick, J. J. (1985). Annual review of nursing research (Vol 3). New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Willian G., & Fredrica L. S. (2001). Reading for academic purposes: Guidelines for the ESL/ EFL teacher. In C. M. Marianne (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language. (pp.187-203). Boston: Thomson Learning, Inc.
Wittrock, M. C. (1978). The cognitive movement in instruction. Educational Psychologist,13,15-29
Yager, S., Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1985). Oral discussion, group-to individual transfer and achievement in cooperative learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 60-66.


中文部份
于富雲(民90)。從理論基礎探究合作學習的教學效益。教育資料與研究,38,22-27。
李中莉 (民92)。以合作閱讀策略教學促進學童閱讀理解與字彙學習能力。國立臺北師範學院兒童英語教育研究所碩士論文。
李淑媛(民88)。不同教學法對國小二年級學習障礙學童識字教學成效之研究。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
林世元(民86)。合作學習在國小數學低成就學生補救教學實施成效之研究。國立嘉義師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
林益源(民93)。國小高年級健康與體育合作學習之行動研究。國立中正大學教育研究所碩士論文。
韋金龍 (民88)。 國小英語教學可能面臨的難題及對策。英語教學, 24(1), 86-92
梁彩玲 (民91)。合作學習在國中英語教學之實施及成效。國立臺灣師範大學英語研究所博士論文
秦翠虹 (民92)。合作學習對國小英語教學成效之研究。國立臺北師範學院兒童英語教育研究所碩士論文
陳玉美; 韋金龍 (民82)。 「合作學習」困擾之探討。 英語教學, 18(1),19-24
陳姿青 (民91)。 國小英語教學的困難與展望。 師友, 425, 15-19
教育部 (民93)。國民小學英語教學延伸至三年級之課程綱要。
黃怡文(民92)。不同分組方式對常態分班下國中學生口語能力的影響。淡江大學英文學系碩士論文。
黃政傑; 林佩璿(民85)。合作學習。臺北:五南。
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔