臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

歸納法與演繹法常常被使用在文法教學上，然而，那一種方式在文法學習上較有益處一直都被廣泛的討論。因此本研究目的在於探討歸納法與演繹法在主修英文的大一新生兩學期的英文與文法寫作課的教學成效。五十一位主修英文的大一新生參與本研究 (歸納組：24人，演繹組：27人)。主要的發現包含：(1) 演繹組與歸納組的學生在學期表現與四次考試的成績並無明顯差異；(2) 演繹組與歸納組的學生在四次的考試寫作上，使用的總字數並無顯著差異，但在2008年期末考試的課堂寫作上，演繹組的學生使用的字數明顯的比歸納組的學生多；(3) 演繹組與歸納組的學生在四次的考試寫作上，使用的總句數和個別的四次的考試寫作，個別使用的句數並無顯著差異；(4) 演繹組的學生在四次考試寫作上，使用的複雜句的總數比歸納組的學生多，在2008年期末考試的課堂寫作上，演繹組的學生也比歸納組的使用較多的複雜句；(5) 在四次考試寫作上，演繹組的學生使用情態助動詞加動詞和助動詞加動詞的動詞結構的總數比歸納組學生多，在2008年期末考試的課堂寫作上，演繹組的學生使用較多助動詞加動詞的動詞結構，在2009年期中考試的課堂寫作上，演繹組的學生使用較多情態助動詞加動詞的動詞結構；(6) 演繹組與歸納組的學生各自在四次課堂考試寫作上的比較上，所使用的動詞、助動詞加動詞和情態助動詞加動詞大部份都有顯著的改善；(7) 大部份的學生較偏愛歸納法；(8) 大部份的學生表示上過英文文法寫作課後，他們的文法概念比以前好很多；(9) 大部份的學生希望老師可以在英文文法寫作課上提供更多寫作上的協助。本文最後根據研究結果提出教學及未來研究之建議。

Deductive and inductive methods were often used in grammar teaching. However, that which method would be more beneficial to language learners has always been widely discussed. Thus, the study was to examine the teaching effects of the deductive and inductive methods, and the setting was college freshmen’s English Grammar and Writing Class during two academic semesters. Fifty-one English-major freshmen participated in this study (24 in deductive group, 27 in inductive group). The important findings included that (a) the participants’ general performance in the two semesters did not show any significant differences between deductive and inductive groups; (b) the sum of the words that the participants used did not show significant differences on the four exams, but in final exam, 2008 (fall semester), deductive group performed better in the words used in the in-class writing essay; (c) there were no significant differences in the sum of the complete sentences used on the four exams, and no differences were found in each pair of the in-class writing essays on the four exams between the two groups; (d) deductive group performed better than the inductive group in the sum of the complex sentences used on the four exams, and in final exam, 2008 (fall semester), deductive group also performed better in the complex sentences used in the in-class writing essay; (e) deductive group outperformed the inductive group in the sum of the ‘auxiliary + verb’ and ‘modal + verb’ phrases used on the four exams, and deductive group also performed better in the ‘auxiliary + verb’ phrases used in final exam, 2008 (fall semester), ‘modal + verb’ ‘auxiliary + verb’ phrases used in midterm exam, 2009 (spring semester) in the in-class writing essays on the four exams; (f) the participants in both of the groups performed significantly improved in the three types of verb used in the in-class writing essays on the four exams after they received grammar instructions by deductive and inductive methods; (g) most participants preferred deductive method more than inductive method; (h) most participants expressed that their grammatical concepts made progress after taking English Grammar and Writing Class; (i) most participants hoped that the writing teachers could offer more help to them in learning writing skill. Pedagogical implications and suggestions for future studies were provided.

Abstract (Chinese) i
Abstract (English) ii
Acknowledgements iv
Table of Contents v
Tables viii
CHAPTER 1 1
Introduction 1
Background 1
Statement of the Problems 3
Purpose of the Study 5
Research Questions 5
Significance of the Study 7
Definitions of Terms 7
CHAPTER 2 9
Literature Review 9
Theoretical Background of Deductive and Inductive Methods in Second Language Grammar Teaching 9
Advantages and Disadvantages of Deductive and Inductive Methods 12
Teaching English Writing in ESL/EFL Classroom 15
The Role of Grammar in Writing 16
Related Studies of Deductive and Inductive Methods in Second Language Grammar Teaching 17
Summary 23
CHAPTER 3 24
Methodology 24
Subjects 24
Instruments 25
Final Grades 27
Exams 28
Questionnaire 29
Procedures 29
Data Analysis 33
CHAPTER 4 35
Results 35
The Participants’ Two Final Grades in the Two Semesters 36
The Participants’ Grades on the Four Exams 37
The Participants’ Performances in Their In-Class Writing Essays on the Four Exams 38
The Participants’ Responses After Receiving Grammar Instructions by Deductive and Inductive Methods and the English Grammar and Writing Class 60
CHAPTER 5 64
Discussions and Conclusions 64
Summary of Major Findings 64
Discussion 66
The Participants’ Grades in the Two Semesters and on the Four Exams 66
The Participants’ Writing Performances in Their In-Class Writing Essays on the Four Exams 67
The Participants’ Responses After Receiving Grammar Instructions by Deductive and Inductive Methods and the English Grammar and Writing Class 69
Conclusion 71
Pedagogical Implications 72
Suggestions for Future Studies 73
References 74
Appendix A: The Detailed Contents of the Five Chapters for Teaching Deductive and Inductive Groups in the Fall Semester, 2008 79
Appendix B: The Detailed Contents of the Five Chapters for Teaching Deductive and Inductive Groups in the Spring Semester, 2009 80
Appendix C: Questionnaire (Chinese) 81
Appendix D: Questionnaire (English) 82

References
AbuSeileek, A. (2009). The effect of using an online-based course on the learning of grammar inductively and deductively. ReCALL, 21(3), 319-336.
Al-jarf, R. (2009, March 7). Re: A role of grammar in developing EFL freshman students’ writing skills [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/blogs/reemasado/role-grammar-developing-efl-freshman-students-writing-skills
Azar, B. (2007). Grammar-based teaching: A Practitioner’s perspective. TESL-EJ, 11 (2), 1-12.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, S. C. (2002). 技術學院應用外語系的定位與發展. [The development and orientation of Department of Applied English in technological colleges.]. Technological & Vocational Education Journal Bimonthly, 68, 34-37.
Chen, Y. M. (1998). 國內英文作文教學之回顧與展望. [The retrospection and prospect of the English writing in Taiwan.]. Proceedings of the Fifteen Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, 15, 331-344. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co.
Chen, Y. M. (2002). The problems of university EFL writing in Taiwan. The Korea TESOL Journal, 5(1), 59-79.
Chin, B. A . (2007). The role of grammar in improving student’s writing. [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.sadlier-oxford.com/docs/language/paper_chin.cfm
Decoo, W. (1996). The induction-deduction opposition: Ambiguities and complexities of the didactic reality. IRAL, 34, 95-118.
Ellis, R. (2003). Understanding second language acquisition (4th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Erlam, R. (2003). The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the acquisition of direct object pronouns in French as a second language. The Modern Language Journal, 87 (2), 242-260.
Farrell, T. S. C., & Lim, P. C. P. (2005). Concepts of grammar teaching: A case study of teacher’s beliefs and classroom practice. TESL-EJ, 9(2), 1-13.
Fischer, R. A. (1979). The inductive and deductive controversy revisited. The Modern Language Journal, 63(3), 98-105.
Frodesen, J. (2001). Grammar in writing. In C. Marianne (Ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (pp. 233-248). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Gollin, J. (1998). Deductive vs. inductive language learning. ELT Journal, 52(1), 88-89.
Haight, C. E., Herron, C., & Cole, S. P. (2007). The effects of deductive and guided inductive instructional approaches in the learning of grammar in the elementary foreign language college classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 40(2), 288-310.
Hammerly, H. (1975). The deduction/Induction controversy. The Modern Language Journal, 59, 15-18.
Herron, C., & Tomasello, M. (1992). Acquiring grammatical structures by guided induction. The French Review, 65(5), 708-718.
Li, C. L. (2004). An analytical study of errors in college students’ English writing: A case study at Mei-Ho Institute of Technology. Journal of Da-Yeh University, 13(2), 19-37.
Lin, L. L. (2010, November 11). The role of grammar in writing in second language acquisition. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED503439.
Meeks, K. (1994). Issues in ESL: Is Grammar a dirty word? College ESL, 4(2), 39-42.
Mojica, L. A. (2010). An investigation on self-reported writing problems and actual writing deficiencies of EFL learners in the beginners’ level. TESOL Journal, 2, 24-38.
Murdick, W. (1996). What English teachers need to know about grammar. The English Journal, 85 (7), 38-45.
Mohammed, A. A., & Jaber, H. A. (2008). The effects of deductive and inductive approaches of teaching on Jordanian University students’ use of the active and passive voice in English. College Student Journal, 42(2), 545-553.
Mohan, B. A., & Lo, A. Y. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3),515-534.
Nagata, N. (1997). An experimental comparison of deductive and inductive feedback generated by a simple parser. System, 25(4), 515-534.
Nunan, D. (2003). Grammar. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English Language Teaching (pp. 153-158). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Pajunen, N. (2007). Deductive and inductive approaches in teaching singular and plural nouns in English. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Languages, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Ross, C. T. (1996). Grammar, according to students and teacher. The English Journal, 85(7), 74.
Schleppegrell, M. J., & Go, A. L. (2007). Analyzing of English learners: A functional Approach. Language Arts, 84 (6), 529-538.
Seliger, H. W. (1975). Inductive method and deductive method in language teaching: A re-examination. IRAL, 13(1), 1-18.
Shaffer. C. (1989). A comparison of inductive and deductive approaches to teaching foreign languages. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 395-403.
Silber, P. (1979). Teaching written English as a second language. College Composition and Communication, 30(3), 296-300.
Takimoto, M. (2008). The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the development of language learners’ pragmatic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 92(3), 369-386.
Tan, H. (2007). A study of EFL learner’ writing errors and instructional strategies. KSU Journal, 4, 113-122.
Widodo, H. P. (2006). Approaches and procedures for teaching grammar. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 5(1), 122-141.
Wong, Y. Y. V. (2010). Investigating ESL students’ grammar in writing. US-China Education Review, 8(1), 22-31.
Yan, Y. (2010). Towards an eclectic framework for teaching EFL writing in a Chinese context. US-China Education Review, 7 (3), 29-34.
Zamel, V. (1976). Teaching composition in the ESL classroom: What we can learn from research in the teaching of English. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 67-76.