跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.236.50.201) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/06 09:32
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:莊佳芹
研究生(外文):CHUANG, CHIA-CHIN
論文名稱:班級讀書會對國小四年級學童閱讀影響之研究
論文名稱(外文):Research on the Influence of Class Literature Club on Reading of Grade Four Students in Elementary Schools
指導教授:蘇伊文蘇伊文引用關係
指導教授(外文):Su, Yi-Wen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺中教育大學
系所名稱:語文教育學系碩士班
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:2007
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:188
中文關鍵詞:班級讀書會閱讀理解閱讀興趣
外文關鍵詞:Class Literature ClubReading ComprehensionReading Interest
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:33
  • 點閱點閱:745
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:292
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:23
本研究旨在設計並驗證一套具體可行的班級讀書會活動方案並瞭解班級讀書會對國小四年級學童在增進閱讀理解能力及提升閱讀興趣上之成效。
為配合上述研究目的,本研究採準實驗研究法之不等組前後測設計,以探討採用不同閱讀指導方式對閱讀理解能力之影響。研究對象為研究者任教的彰化縣貝貝國小四年級班級學生,以研究者任教班級之27名學生為實驗組,參與每週一次,每次80分鐘之班級讀書會教學;同學年另一班級之29名學生為控制組,接受「圖書館閱讀」教學。實驗組與控制組於閱讀理解測驗前測施測後,皆依前測成績分為高、中、低閱讀理解能力組。實驗結果以t檢定及共變數分析,考驗研究假設。此外,並以班級讀書會回饋問卷、角色單、研究者省思札記,進行質的分析。
本研究之主要發現如下:
一、班級讀書會閱讀教學活動對國小四年級學童閱讀理解之影響並不顯著
二、班級讀書會閱讀教學活動對高閱讀理解能力之國小四年級學童的閱讀理解有明顯幫助
三、班級讀書會教學活動能有效培養學童的閱讀興趣
四、班級讀書會教學活動使學童獲得多方面的學習經驗
研究者根據以上研究結果加以討論並提出建議,以供教學者實施班級讀書會教學活動及日後研究之參考。
The purpose of this research is to design and testify a class-literature-club program and to study the effect of class literature club on reading comprehension and reading interest of grade four students in elementary schools.
For this purpose, the researcher adopted the pretest-posttest nonequivalent group design of quasi-experimental study to find out the influence of different teaching method on reading comprehension. The subjects of this research were the grade four students of Bei-Bei elementary school which the researcher works at. The experimental group consisted of 27 students in the researcher’s class participated in the class literature club once a week. The controlled group consisted of 29 students in another class went to the library for reading once a week. After taking the reading comprehension pretest, both the experimental group and the controlled group were divided into three groups labeled as high, middle, and low reading comprehension capacity. The experimental result was analyzed and testified by T test and ANCOVA. In addition, the feedback questionnaire on class literature club, role sheets, and the researcher’s introspection notes were also evaluated.
The conclusions were as follows.
1. The influence of class literature club on reading comprehension of grade four students in elementary schools was not significant.
2. The class literature club was significantly helpful for grade four students with high reading comprehension capacity in elementary schools.
3. The class literature club can cultivate students’ reading interest effectively.
4. After taking the class literature club, the subjects showed remarkable progress in learning in many areas.
Based on the above conclusions, the researcher discussed and proposed some suggestions for the education practical workers and future studies.
第一章 緒論
第一節 研究動機與目的................................................1
第二節 研究問題與假設................................................6
第三節 重要名詞釋義.....................................................7
第四節 研究限制.............................................................9
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 閱讀與閱讀理解........................... ....................................11
第二節 閱讀理解的歷程與層次..........................................................22
第三節 閱讀理解策略........................... ....................................32
第四節 讀書會.................................................................................43

第三章 研究方法
第一節 研究設計....................................................63
第二節 研究對象....................................................66
第三節 研究工具....................................................67
第四節 實驗書目....................................................77
第五節 活動方案....................................................79
第六節 研究程序....................................................81
第七節 資料分析....................................................85
第四章 研究結果與討論
第一節 量的分析....................................................87
第二節 從質的觀察分析學童在閱讀理解的表現............................129
第三節 實驗組在班級讀書會活動後閱讀興趣之改變情形.....................148

第五章 結論與建議
第一節 結論......................................................155
第二節 建議......................................................157
參考文獻
一、中文部分......................................................161
二、西文部分......................................................166
附錄
附錄一 閱讀理解測驗前測文章與試題......................................173
附錄二 閱讀理解測驗後測文章與試題......................................176
附錄三 班級讀書會回饋問卷..................................................180
附錄四 班級讀書會之角色單..................................................181
附錄五 實驗書目內容大要.....................................................186










表 目 次

表2-1:閱讀模式類型……………………………………………………15
表3-1:研究設計模式……………………………………………………63
表3-2:研究設計的施測流程……………………………………………65
表3-3:研究對象各組人數表……………………………………………66
表3-4:閱讀理解測驗一試題信度分析結果……………………………69
表3-5:閱讀理解測驗二試題信度分析結果……………………………70
表3-6:本研究閱讀理解前測與後測閱讀材料之難易度分析表………73
表3-7:班級讀書會活動實驗書目一覽表………………………………78
表3-8:可能的延伸活動…………………………………………………80
表4-1:組內迴歸係數同質性檢定摘要表………………………………89
表4-2:調整後的平均數…………………………………………………90
表4-3:共變數分析摘要表………………………………………………90
表4-4:實驗組與控制組之高閱讀理解能力學童後測成績t檢定分析
表……………………………………………………………………………91
表4-5:實驗組與控制組之低閱讀理解能力學童後測成績t檢定分析
表……………………………………………………………………………92
表4-6:前測選擇第一題作答情形表……………………………………92
表4-7:前測選擇第二題作答情形表……………………………………93
表4-8:前測選擇第三題作答情形表……………………………………94
表4-9:前測選擇第四題作答情形表……………………………………94
表4-10:前測選擇第五題作答情形表……………………………………95
表4-11:前測選擇第六題作答情形表……………………………………96
表4-12:前測選擇第七題作答情形表……………………………………97
表4-13:前測選擇第八題作答情形表……………………………………98
表4-14:前測選擇第九題作答情形表……………………………………98
表4-15:前測選擇第十題作答情形表……………………………………99
表4-16:前測問答第一題作答情形表……………………………………100
表4-17:前測問答第二題作答情形表……………………………………102
表4-18:前測問答第三題作答情形表……………………………………104
表4-19:前測問答第四題作答情形表……………………………………105
表4-20:後測選擇第一題作答情形表……………………………………106
表4-21:後測選擇第二題作答情形表……………………………………107
表4-22:後測選擇第三題作答情形表……………………………………108
表4-23:後測選擇第四題作答情形表……………………………………109
表4-24:後測選擇第五題作答情形表……………………………………110
表4-25:後測選擇第六題作答情形表……………………………………111
表4-26:後測選擇第七題作答情形表……………………………………111
表4-27:後測選擇第八題作答情形表……………………………………112
表4-28:後測選擇第九題作答情形表……………………………………113
表4-29:後測選擇第十題作答情形表……………………………………114
表4-30:後測問答第一題作答情形表……………………………………115
表4-31:後測問答第二題作答情形表……………………………………116
表4-32:後測問答第三題作答情形表……………………………………118
表4-33:後測問答第四題作答情形表……………………………………120
表4-34:實驗組於前測選擇題之作答表現………………………………125
表4-35:實驗組於後測選擇題之作答表現………………………………125
表4-36:實驗組於前測問答題之作答表現………………………………126
表4-37:實驗組於後測問答題之作答表現………………………………127
表4-38:實驗組與控制組以注音取代國字或寫錯別字的情形比較表…145
表4-39:問卷第一題填答情形表…………………………………………149
表4-40:問卷第二題填答情形表…………………………………………149
表4-41:問卷第三題填答情形表…………………………………………150
表4-42:問卷第五題填答情形表…………………………………………151
表4-43:問卷第六題填答情形表…………………………………………152
表4-44:問卷第七題填答情形表…………………………………………152



圖 目 次

圖2-1:由下而上的閱讀歷程模式…………………………………………16
圖2-2:由上而下的閱讀歷程模式…………………………………………17
圖2-3:Rumelhart的交互閱讀歷程模式……………………………………18
圖2-4:閱讀之循環模式……………………………………………………20
圖2-5:文本與情境模式共同決定心理文本表徵的本質…………………22
圖2-6:閱讀理解的形式……………………………………………………31
圖3-1:研究架構……………………………………………………………65
圖3-2:研究計畫流程圖……………………………………………………82
參考文獻
一、中文部分
王淑芬(1999)。不一樣的教室-如何推展「班級讀書會」。台北市:天衛。
王瓊珠(1992)。國小六年級閱讀障礙兒童與普通兒童閱讀認知能力之比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
朱靜容(2002)。蓄勢待發精采可期!兒童讀書會中年級篇。社教資料雜誌,284,12-14。
李正聖(2006)。不同型式的前導組體對國小六年級學童在科學性文章閱讀理解之比較研究。國立台中教育大學語文教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台中市。
沈惠芳(1997)。不要小看閱讀活動。台北市立圖書館館訓,15(1),16-17。
邱天助(1995)。台灣地區讀書會的現況發展與未來發展。社教雙月刊,68,6-15。
邱天助(1997)。讀書會專業手冊。台北市:張老師文化。
林宏芳(2004)。班級讀書會的經營實務。南投文教,21,95-97。
林建平(1994)。整合策略與動機的訓練方案對國小理解困難兒童的輔導效果。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版,台北市。
林美琴(1999)。兒童讀書會DIY。台北市:天衛文化圖書有限公司。
林美琴(2000a)。新閱讀文化--從兒童讀書會的閱讀功能談起。社教資料雜誌,267,1-2。
林美琴(2000b)。讀冊做伙行:讀書會完全手冊。台北市:洪健全教育文化基金會。
林振春、詹明娟(2005)。悅讀讀書會。台北市:陽昇教育基金會。
林清山、程炳林(1995)。國中生自我調整學習因素與學習表現之關係暨自我調整的閱讀理解教學策略效果之研究。教育心理學報,28,15-58。
林清山(譯)(1997)。Richard E. Mayer著。教育心理學-認知取向(Educational Psychology)。台北市:遠流。
林意雪(1999)。兒童文學與兒童讀書會。兒童文學學刊,2,265-284,台東市:台東師院。
南方快報(2003,10月30日)。台灣在全球競爭力排名踴居第五。南方快報。2006年10月25日,取自http://home.kimo.com.tw/snews1965/News/200310/20031030_1.htm
俞名芳(2003)。班級讀書會理念融入本國語文教學實施型態之研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,花蓮市。
柯華葳(1993)。語文科的閱讀教學。載於李咏吟主編:學習輔導,307-349。台北市:心理。
柯華葳(1999)。閱讀能力的發展。載於曾進興主編:語言病理學基礎,第三卷,83-119。台北市:心理。
洪月女(譯)(1998)。Kenneth S. Goodman著。談閱讀(On Reading)。台北市:心理。
洪榮昭(1998)。學習型組織的知識經營模式。社教雙月刊,88,26-37。
洪蘭(2004)。閱讀決定思想。教師天地,129,4-7。
涂翠珊(2005)。芬蘭傳真:芬蘭教育 為何第一?2006年10月22日,取自http://perc.kta.org.tw/finland%20education/
郭生玉(2001)。心理與教育測驗。台北市:精華書局。
張必隱(2002)。閱讀心理學,第2版。北京:北京師範大學。
陳米華(2003)。讀書會融入三年級語文學習領域教學之探究。國立新竹師範學院臺灣語言與語文教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹市。
教育部(2000)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北市:教育部。
張振成(1997)。新讀書會運動:讀書會。書評,28,164-167。
陳海泓(2001)。如何利用圖畫故事書發展兒童的創造力。語文教育通訊,23,64-78。
陳素惠(2004)。閱讀討論應用於國小寫作教學成效之探究。國立臺東大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺東市。
陳鴻銘(2001)。班級讀書會的經營。兒童文學研究(14)-兒童讀書會專輯,16,台北市:國語實小。
黃淑津、鄭麗玉(2004)。電腦化動態評量對國小五年級學生閱讀理解效能之研究。國民教育研究學報,12,167-201。
黃智淵、陸怡琮(2006)。閱讀自我調整策略教學對不同閱讀能力的國小學童之影響。屏東教育大學學報,24,81-106。
黃詩萍(2005)。班級讀書會實踐之行動研究—以友誼故事為例。臺北市立教育大學課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
齊若蘭、游常山、李雪莉(2003)。閱讀:新一代的知識革命。台北市:天下。
廖晉斌(2004)。國文閱讀理解策略教學對增進國中生閱讀理解能力、閱讀策略運用及學業成就效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商學系輔導活動教學所碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
廖凰伶(2000)。直接教學與全語教學對國中低閱讀能力學生閱讀理解表現之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
趙鏡中(1999a)。閱讀教學的新型態-班級讀書會的經營。民國以來國民小學語文課程教材教法研討會論文集,229-236,新竹市:新竹師院。
趙鏡中(1999b)。讀書會-一個探究團體的形成。載於國立台東師院兒童文學研究所編,讀書會、閱讀與知識,65-76,台東市:兒童文學所。
歐陽素鶯(1999)。從兩個教學模式看低年級的國語科教學。載於國立新竹師範學院民國以來國民小學語文課程教材教法研討會論文集。新竹:新竹師範學院。
劉智惠(2005)。台灣讀書會成員閱讀與圖書消費行為研究。南華大學出版事業管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
潘麗珠(2004)。我對「閱讀」的一些看法。教師天地,129,16-20。
戴維揚(2005)。小校小班重閱讀,看芬蘭想自己。2006年10月22日,取自http://perc.kta.org.tw/finland%20education/
藍慧君(1991)。學習障礙兒童與普通兒童閱讀不同結構文章之閱讀理解輿理解策略的比較研究。國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。


二、西文部分
Adams, A. , Carnine, D. & Gersten, R. (1982). Instructional Strategies for Studying Content Area Texts in the Intermediate Grades. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 27-55.
Anonymous(2005). Grades 2-5: Assign roles to get literature circles rolling. Curriculum Review, 45(4), 7-8.
Beck, Isabel L. (1989). Reading and Reasoning. The Reading Teacher, 42, 676-682.
Blanton, W. E. , Wood, K. D. & Moorman, G. B. (1990). The Role of Purpose in Reading Instruction. The Reading Teacher, 43, 486-493.
Brabham, E. , & Villaume, S. (2000). Questions and answers: Continuing conversations about literature circles. The Reading Teacher, 54 (3), 278-280.
Brown, B. A. (2002). Literature Circles in Action in the Middle School Classroom. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED478458).
Burns, B. (1998). Changing the classroom climate with literature circles. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42 (2), 124-129.
Burns, Paul C. , Roe, Betty D. , & Ross , Elinor P. (1999).Teaching Reading in Today’s Elementary Schools. Boston , NY: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Bystrom, J. (1996). Study circle. In A. C. Tuijnman(ED). International encyclopedia of adult education and training. U.K.: Pergmon Press.
Daniels, H. (1994). Literature circles: Voice and choice in book clubs and reading groups (2nd ed.). York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Daniels, H. (2001). Looking into Literature Circles Viewing Guide. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Daniels, H. (2002a). Literature Circles: Voice and Choice in book clubs and reading groups(2nd ed.). Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Daniels, H. (2002b). Rethinking role sheets. Voices From the Middle, 10 (2), 44-45.
Daniels, H. (2005). Are Literature Circles on Your IEP? Voices From the Middle, 12(4), 54-55.
Daniels, H. (2006).What’s the Next Big Thing with Literature Circles? Voices From the Middle, 13(4), 10-15.
Davis, Zephaniah T. (1994). Effects of pre-reading story mapping on elementary readers' comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 87(6), 353-360.
Devine, James T. , Ed., & Others. (1986). The Strategic Reader . Wisconsin State Reading Association Journal, 31, 25-27.
Downing, J. , & Leong, C. K. (1982). Psychology of Reading. Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Evans, S. S. , Evans, W. H. , & Mercer, C. D. (1986). Assessment for instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc..
Farinacci, M. (1998). "We have so much to talk about": Implementing literature circles as an action-research project. The Ohio Reading Teacher, 32 (2), 4-11.
Fielding, L. G. , & Pearson, P. D. (1994). Reading comprehension: What works. Educational Leadership, 51(5), 62-68.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.
Frey, N. (2006). How to Build Great Reader. Teaching Pre K-8, 36(7), 1.
Gagńe, E. D. (1985). The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
Goodman, K. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guess game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, May, 126-135.
Graham, Steve. , Harris, Karen R. , & Troia, Gary A. (2000). Self-Regulated Strategy Development Revisited: Teaching Writing Strategies to Struggling Writers. Topics in Language Disorders, 20(4), 1-14.
Hansen, J.(1981). An Inferential Comprehension Strategy for Use with Primary Grade Children. The Reading Teacher, 34, 665-669.
Hansen, J. , & Hubbard, R. (1984). Poor Readers Can Draw Inferences. The Reading Teacher, 37, 586-589.
Harris, T. L. , & Hodges, R.E. (Eds.) (1981). A dictionary of reading and related terms. Newark, ED: International Reading Association.
Heilman, A. , Blair, T. , & Ruplev, W. (1994). Principles and practices of teaching reading. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.
Hickok, E. W. (2002). Reading Program Oversight. Committee on Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions FDCH Congressional Testimon.
Hoff, D. J. (2002). Researchers Urge Officials to Reject Reading Recovery. (cover story). Education Week, 21(39), 1-2.
Huey, E. B. (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. New York: Macmillan. (Reprint by M.I.T. press in 1968).
Irwin, J. W. (1991). Teaching Reading Comprehension Processes(2nd ed). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Just, M. A. , & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329-354.
Klassen, C. R. (1993). Exploring "The color of peace": Content-area literature discussions. In K. M. Pierce, C. J. Gilles, & D. Barnes (Eds.), Cycles of meaning (pp. 237-254). Portsmouth: Heinemann
Kintsch, W.(1998). Comprehension:a paradigm for cognition. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Klinger, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. S. (1998). Collaborative strategic reading during social studies in heterogeneous fourth-grade classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 99, 3-22.
Lerner, J. (1989). Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnois, and teaching strategies(5th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Lesgold, A. & Resnick, L. (1982). How reading difficulties develop: Perspectives from a longitudinal study. In J. Das, R. Mulcahey & A. Waal (Eds.), Theory and research in learning disabilities (pp. 155–187). NY: Plenum Press.
Lesgold, A. , Resnick, L. B. , & Hammond, K. (1985). Learning to read: A longitudinal study of work skill development in two curricula. Reading Research: Advances in Theory and Practice, 4, 107-138.
Loffredo, J. (2003-2004). My First-Hand Experience with Literature Circles: A Preservice Teacher’s Reflection. Ohio Reading Teacher, 36, 1/2, 60-65.
Manzo, A. V. (1969). The ReQuest procedure. Journal of Reading, 13, 123-126.
Manzo, Anthony V. , & Others(1992). Dialectical Thinking: A Generative Approach to Critical/Creative Thinking. MO: University of Missouri-Kansas City: Center for Studies in High-Order Literacy. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED352632)
Manzo, A.V. , & Manzo, U. C. (1993). Literacy disorders: Holistic diagnosis and remediation. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Manzo, Anthony, Manzo, Ula, & Albee, Julie Jackson.(2002). iREAP: Improving reading, writing, and thinking in the wired classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy , 46(1), 42-47.
Martinez-Roldán, C. M., & Lopez-Robertson, J. M. (1999/2000). Initiating literature circles in a first-grade bilingual classroom. The Reading Teacher, 53(4), 270-281.
McIntosh, Margaret E. , & Bear, Donald R. (1993). Directed reading-thinking activities to promote learning through reading in mathematics. Clearing House, 67(1), 40-44.
Mercer, C.D. (1992). Student with learning disabilities. Columbus: Merrill Publishing Company.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L.(1984). Peciprocal teaching of comprehension-foster and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
Paris, S. G., Wasik, B. A., & Turner, J. C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P. D. Pearson(Eds.). Handbook of reading research (Vol. ll, pp.609-640). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence A. Erlbaum.
Pearson, P. D. , & Johnson, D. D. (1978). Teaching reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
Pearson, P. D. , Roehler, L. R. , Dole, J. A. , & Duffy, G. G. (1992). Developing expertise in reading comprehension. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup(Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction(2nd ed., pp.147-199). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Peralta-Nash, C. & Dutch, J.A. (2000). Literature circles: Creating an environment for choice. Primary Voices K-6, 8 (4), 29-37.
Pressley, Michael, & Beard-Dinary, Pamela.(1992).Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. Elementary School Journal , 92(5), 513-555.
Pressley, Micheal, & Wharton-McDonald, Ruth. (1997). Skilled comprehension and its development through instruction. School Psychology Review, 26(3), 448-466.
Reutzel, D. R. , & Cooter, R. B. Jr (1996). Teaching children to read: From basals to books(2nd ed.).
Rumelhart, D.E.(1985). Toward an interactive model of reading. In H. Singer & R. B. Ruddell(Eds.). Theoretical models and processes of reading. (4th ed), 864-894 ,Neward, Pelaware: International Reading Association.
Schlick Noe , K. L. (2004). Literature Circles Resource Center. Retrieved October 23, 2006, from http://www.litcircles.org/
Short, K. , & Klassen, C. (1993). Literature circles: Hearing children's voices. In B. Cullinan (Ed.), Children's voices: Talk in the classroom (pp. 66-85). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Smith, E. E., Adams, N., & Schorr, D.(1978). Fact retrieval and the paradox of interference. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 468-474.
Smith, F. (1971). Understanding reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & instion.
Spiegel, D. L. (1995). A comparison of traditional remedial programs and Reading Recovery : Guidelines for success for all programs. Reading Teacher, 49(2), 86-96.
Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Research Reading Quarterly, 16(1), pp. 32-64.
Stauffer, R. G. (1969). Teaching Reading as a Thinking Process. NY: Harper & Row.
Swaby, B. E. R. (1989). Diagnosis and correction of reading difficulties. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Therrien, W. J. (2004). Fluency and Comprehension Gains as a Result of Repeated Reading: A Meta-Analysis. Remedial and special education, 25(4), 252-261.
Tierney, R. J. , Readence, J. E. , & Dishner, E. K. (1990). Reading strategies and practice: A guide for improving instruction. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
van den Broek, P. , & Kremer, K. E. (2000). The mind in action: What It Means to Comprehension During Reading. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Reading for meaning: Fostering Comprehension in the Middle Grades (pp. 1-31). NY: Teacher’s College Press.
Walker, B. J. (1996). Diagnostic teaching of reading: Techniques for instruction and assessment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top