臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在編製國民小學高年級學生線上閱讀理解測驗，並發展班級規模之線上閱讀理解教學課程，以探討國民小學學生線上閱讀理解相關議題。本研究採便利抽樣，樣本為自台灣及澎湖地區十個縣市共600位國小高年級學生，實驗教學學生為一班五年級學生，共31人，並藉由訪談三位不同線上閱讀理解表現水準學生以了解其線上閱讀理解策略是否不同。本研究主要發現如下：本研究所編製之國民小學高年級學生線上閱讀理解測驗計量品質有進步空間；不同性別、不同年級的受試者在線上閱讀測驗表現有顯著差異，城鄉之間則無差異，線上閱讀理解表現與書面閱讀能力、國語文成績、資訊成績相關達到顯著，不同國語文能力、資訊能力受試在線上閱讀理解表現有顯著差異。線上閱讀理解教學有助於提升學生之線上閱讀理解表現，且教學效果遷移到書面閱讀理解。不同線上閱讀理解表現水準學生所使用的線上閱讀理解策略有差異。最後，根據結論提出建議，供後續測驗編製、教學以及研究參考。

The purpose of this study was to develop an online reading comprehension test for 5th, 6th graders and develop class-scale online reading comprehension curriculum to explore the related issues about online reading comprehension of target students. 600 target graders were selected from 10 cities and counties to complete the test. The experiment teaching was administrated to 31 5th graders. It also sought to explore the difference of online reading strategy among three students who read online at different levels of proficiency. The finding were as follows: There is still room for the online reading comprehension test to improve its psychometric quality. The performance of different background children was also analyzed. Gender and grade difference were found, but location difference wasn’t. The paper reading comprehension ability, language art ability and computer skill were related to online reading comprehension. Besides that, children’s language academic performance and computer skills influence their online reading comprehension. Online reading comprehension curriculum had effect to improve students’ performance on online reading comprehension. And the effect transferred to the printed reading comprehension. Students who read online at different levels of proficiency have different reading strategies. Finally, the implication was discuss, and suggestions for test development, teaching and research that focus on online reading related issues were provided.

中文摘要 i
英文摘要 iii
謝 誌 v
目 次 vii
表 次 x
圖 次 xiii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二節 名詞釋義 8
第三節 待答問題 9
第四節 研究假設 11
第五節 研究限制 12
第二章 文獻探討 13
第一節 線上閱讀的意義與內涵 13
第二節 線上閱讀理解策略探討 26
第三節 線上閱讀理解教學策略之探討 41
第四節 線上閱讀理解測驗的議題 54

第三章 研究方法 61
第一節 研究架構 61
第二節 研究對象 63
第三節 研究工具 68
第四節 資料處理與統計方法 87
第四章 結果分析與討論 91
第一節 線上閱讀理解測驗心理計量特徵與因素結構 91
第二節 不同背景學生之線上閱讀理解測驗表現分析 105
第三節 線上閱讀理解教學效益分析 111
第四節 不同線上閱讀理解表縣學生訪談分析 124
第五章 結論與建議 133
第一節 結論 133
第二節 建議 137
參考文獻 142
附錄1 154
附錄2 157
附錄3 159

表 次
表2-1 線上閱讀不同觀點比較 23
表2-2 紙本閱讀與線上閱讀理解策略之比較 28
表2-3 書面閱讀技巧應用於線上文本之方式 30
表2-4 國小學生判斷網頁可讀性、可信度及可用性標準 46
表3-1 國小高年級線上閱讀理解測驗預試樣本人數 63
表3-2 國小高年級線上閱讀理解測驗正式施測樣本人數 65
表3-3 不同線上閱讀理解表現學生在各面向表現一覽表 67
表3-4 線上閱讀理解測驗作業分析 69
表3-5 國小高年級線上閱讀理解測驗開放式題目評分規範 71
表3-6 國小高年級線上閱讀理解測驗開放式題目評分示例 72
表3-7 預試題目項目分析結果總表 75
表3-8 線上閱讀理解測驗預試解說總變異量 76
表3-9 預試題目主成份分析轉軸後因素負荷量摘要表 77
表3-10 實驗教學學生線上閱讀理解測驗前測表現分析 81
表3-11 線上閱讀理解教學設計 84
表4-1 線上閱讀理解測驗項目分析描述統計摘要表 92
表4-2 線上閱讀理解測驗項目分析逐題描述統計表 93
表4-3 開放式題目學生得分情形一覽表 94
表4-4 線上閱讀理解測意的適配度指標 100
表4-5 線上閱讀理解測驗最佳模式驗證式因素分析結果 102
表4-6 不同性別之國小學童在線上閱讀理解測驗得分t 考驗摘要表 106
表4-7 不同城鄉之國小學童在線上閱讀理解測驗得分t 考驗摘要表 106
表4-8 不同年級之國小學童在線上閱讀理解測驗得分t 考驗摘要表 107
表 4-9 不同國語文能力之學童在線上閱讀理解測驗得分t 考驗摘要表 108
表4-10 不同資訊能力之學童在線上閱讀理解測驗得分t 考驗摘要表 108
表4-11 接受實驗教學學生在「線上閱讀理解測驗」前後測t 考驗摘要表 111
表4-12 實驗教學學生在「國小中高年級閱讀理解測驗」甲乙式成績t 考驗
摘要表 112
表4-13 實驗教學學生作答歷程錯誤策略分析表 119
表4-14 不同線上閱讀理解表現學生理解策略分析不同線上閱讀理解表現學生
理解策略分析 131

圖 次
圖2-1 紙本媒介文本關係圖 55
圖2-2 電子媒介文本關係圖 55
圖2-3 ERA 試題之文本處理與導航的關係 57
圖3-1 研究流程與架構 62
圖3-2 數位讀寫教學系統登入畫面 78
圖3-3 線上閱讀理解測驗題目示例一 79
圖3-4 線上閱讀理解測驗選項畫面示例二 79
圖4-1 線上閱讀理解模式A 徑路圖 96
圖4-2 線上閱讀理解模式A 標準化估計值 97
圖4-3 線上閱讀理解模式B 標準化估計值 99
圖4-4 線上閱讀理解模式C 標準化估計值 100
圖4-5 Screen2 錄影擷圖畫面一 117
圖4-6 Screen2 錄影擷圖畫面二 117
圖4-7 Screen2 錄影擷圖畫面三 118

台灣PISA國家研究中心 (2010) 。台灣 PISA 2009 精簡報告。台南市：國立台南大學。
余民寧 (2006) 。潛在變項模式：SIMPLIS的應用。台北市: 高等教育文化事業。
林尹千、洪碧霞 (2012) 。國中學生社會領域線上閱讀素養評量工具之發展。國立臺灣科技大學人文社會學報，8(2)， 32。
林巧敏 (2009)。 推動國中小學童數位閱讀計畫之探討。台灣圖書館管理季刊， 5(2)，49-67。
林珊如 (2010) 。數位時代的閱讀：青少年網路閱讀的爭議與未來. 圖書資訊學刊，8(2)，25。
施如齡、呂芸樺 (2006)。 文本式網路超文本的閱讀理解歷程。2006年電腦與網路科技在教育上的應用研討會。
柯華葳 (1999)。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。中國測驗學會測驗年刊， 46(2)，1-11。
柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅 (2008) 。台灣四年級學生閱讀素養PIRLS2006 報告。行政院國家科學委員專題研究成果報告 （編號：NSC 96-MOE-S-008-002）。桃園縣：國立中央大學。
張毓仁、柯華葳、邱皓政、歐宗霖、溫福星 (2011) 。教師閱讀教學行為與學生閱讀態度和閱讀能力自我評價對於閱讀成就之跨層次影響：以PIRLS 2006為例。教育科學研究期刊， 56(2)， 69-105。
教育部 (2008)。教育部中小學資訊教育白皮書2008-2011。台北市: 教育部。
黃慕萱 (2002)。資訊社會與終身學習— 從小學生的資訊需求和資訊尋求看資訊網路內容的選擇和介面的設計 (II): 行政院國家科學委員會。
經濟建設委員會 (2009)。台灣寬頻網路普及競爭力全球第六。台北：經濟建設委員會。
葉雅鏽 (2009)。國中學生線上閱讀素養與策略調整特徵之探討。國立台南大學測驗統計研究所碩士論文，未出版。
簡志明 (2011) 。線上閱讀對偏遠地區六年級學生閱讀理解的影響. 碩士，國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育學系在職進修碩士班碩士論文，未出版。
Agee, J., &; Altarriba, J. (2009). Changing conceptions and uses of computer technologies in the everyday literacy practices of sixth and seventh graders. Research in the Teaching of English, 43(4), 363-396.
Amadieu, F., Tricot, A., &; Marin, C. (2009). Prior knowledge in learning from a non-linear electronic document: Disorientation and coherence of the reading sequences. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 381-388.
Anderson, R., &; Balajthy, E. (2009). Stories about struggling readers and technology. Reading Teacher, 62(6), 540-542.
Antonenko, P. D., &; Niederhauser, D. S. (2010). The influence of leads on cognitive load and learning in a hypertext environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 140-150.
Arthaud, T. J., &; Goracke, T. (2006). Implementing a structured story web and outline strategy to assist struggling readers.. Reading Teacher, 59(6), 581-586. doi: 10.1598/rt.59.6.8
Baildon, R., &; Baildon, M. (2008). Guiding independence: developing a research tool to Support Student Decision Making in Selecting Online Information Sources. Reading Teacher, 61(8), 636-647.
Brown, G. J. (2002). Beyond print: reading digitally. Library Hi Tech, 19(4), 390-399.
Brown, G. J. (2002). Beyond Print: Reading Digitally. Library Hi Tech, 19(4), 390-399.
Buckingham, D. (2008). CHAPTER FOUR: Defining digital literacy . In C. Lankshear and M. Knobel (eds.) Digital Literacies. Peter Lang Digital Literacies: Concepts, Policies &; Practices (pp. 73-89) .New York:Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Burke, J. (2002). The Internet Reader.. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 38.
Chen, C., &; Rada, R. (1996). Interacting with hypertext: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Human-Computer Interaction, 11(2), 125-156.
Chen, H.-Y. (2009). Online Reading Comprehension Strategies among General and Special Education Elementary and Middle School Students. Online Submission. Feb.12,2011 Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&;db=eric&;AN=ED506429&;lang=zh-tw&;site=ehost-live.
Cheung, K. C., &; Sit, P. S. (2008). Electronic reading assessment: The PISA approach for the international comparison of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 4(4).
Coiro, J. (2003a) Reading comprehension on the internet: Expanding Our Understanding of Reading Comprehension to Encompass New Literacies. The Reading Teacher.56(6).
Coiro, J. (2003b). Rethinking comprehension strategies to better prepare students for critically evaluating content on the Internet. The NERA Journal, 39(2), 29-34.
Coiro, J. (2005). Making sense of online text. Educational Leadership, 63(2), 30-35.
Coiro, J. (2006). Measuring online reading comprehension: Accessing, evaluating, and communicating information. Paper presented at the Developing Internet Reading comprehension strategies among adolescents at risk to become dropouts, San Francisco, CA.
Coiro, J. (2007). Exploring changes to reading comprehension on the Internet: Paradoxes and possibilities for diverse adolescent readers. doctor, University of Connecticut.
Coiro, J. (2009). Rethinking online reading assessment. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 59-63.
Coiro, J., &; Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214-257.
Coiro, J., &; Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214-257.
Duke, N. K. (2004). The Case for Information Text. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 40.
Duke, N. K., &; Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup &; S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction. (3 ed., pp. 205-242). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Eagleton, M. B., &; Guinee, K. (2002). Strategies for supporting student Internet inquiry. New England Reading Association Journal, 38(2), 39-47.
Evans, E., &; Po, J. (2007). A break in the transaction: Examining students' responses to digital texts. Computers and Composition, 24(1), 56-73.
Guthrie, K., &; Kirsch, I. S. (1987). Distinctions between reading comprehension and location information in text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 220-227.
Handsfield, L. J., Dean, T. R., &; Cielocha, K. M. (2009). Becoming Critical Consumers and Producers of Text: Teaching Literacy with Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. Reading Teacher, 63(1), 40-50.
Henry, L. A. (2006). SEARCHing for an answer: The critical role of new literacies while reading on the Internet. Reading Teacher, 59(7), 614-627.
Johnsson-Smaragdi, U., &; Jonsson, A. (2006). Book reading in leisure time: Long term changes in young peoples’ book reading habits. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research Review, 50(5), 22.
Kamil, M. L., &; Lane, D. M. (1998). Researching the relation between technology and literacy: An agenda for the 21th century. In D. Reinking, M. McKenna, L.D. Labbo &; R.D.Keifer (Eds.), The handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world. (pp. 323-341). NJ: Erlbaum.
Kingsley, T. L. (2012). Integrating new literacy instruction to support online reading comprehension: An examination of online literacy performance in 5th grade classrooms. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 72(10-A), 3619.
Krachmer, R. A. (2004). Creating connections: Using the internet to support struggling readers' background knowledge. Reading &; Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 20(3), 331-335. doi: 10.1080/10573560490446330
Krachmer, R. A. (2008). The journey ahead: Thirteen yeachers report how the internet influence literacy and literacy instruction in their K-12 classroom. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, A. C. &; D. J. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of Research on New Literacies (pp. 1241-1280). NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
Kramarski, B., &; Feldman, Y. (2000). Internet in the classroom: Effects on reading comprehension, motivation and metacognitive awareness.. Educational Media International, 37(3), 149-155. doi: 10.1080/09523980050184709
Kuiper, E., Volman, M., &; Terwel, J. (2005). The Web as an information resource in K-12 education: strategies for supporting students in searching and processing iInformation. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 285-328.
Kymes, A. (2005). Teaching online comprehension strategies using think-alouds. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(6), 492-500.
Lent, R. C. (2009). Literacy for real: reading, thinking, and learning in the content areas: Teachers College Press.
Leu , D. J. (2001). Internet project: preparing students for new literacies in a global village. Reading Teacher, 54(6), 568.
Leu , D. J. (2002). Internet workshop: making time for literacy. Reading Teacher, 55(5), 466.
Leu, D. J. (2000). Our children's future: Changing the focus of literacy and literacy instruction The Reading Teacher (Vol. 53, pp. 424-431).
Leu, D. J., &; Reinking, D. (1996). Bringing insights from reading research to research on electronic learning environments. In V. O. H. &; S. de Mul (Eds.), Cognitive Aspects of Electronic Text Processing. (pp. 43-75). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Leu, D. J., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D. K., Henry, L. A., &; Reinking, D. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. In C. C. Block, S. Paris &; P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Comprehension Instruction: Research-Based Best Practices (pp. 321-345). New York: Guilford Press.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., &; Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In N. U. R.B. Ruddell (Ed.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570-1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Leu, D. J., Leu, D. D., &; Coiro, J. (2004). Teaching with the internet K-12: New literacies for new times (4 ed.). MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Leu, D. J., McVerry, G., O’Byrne, I., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., &; Hartman, D. K. (2009). The new literacies of online reading comprehension and the Irony of No Child Left Behind: Students who require our assistance the most actually receive it the least. . In L. M. Morrow, R. Rueda &; D. Lapp (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Literacy and Diversity. New York: Guilford.
Leu, D. J., McVerry, J. G., O'Byrne, W. L., Kiili, C., Zawilinski, L., Everett-Cacopardo, H., Forzani, E. (2011). The New Literacies of Online Reading Comprehension: Expanding the Literacy and Learning Curriculum. Journal of Adolescent &; Adult Literacy, 55(1), 5-14.
Leu, D. J., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., Banerjee, M., Housand, B., Liu, Y., et al. (2006). What is new about the new literacies of online reading comprehension? In L. R. A. Berger, &; J. Eakle (Ed.), Secondary school reading and writing: What research reveals for classroom practices. Chicago: NCTE/NCRLL.
Leu, D., &; Kinzer, C. (2000). The convergence of literacy instruction with networked technologies for information and communication. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(1), 108-127.
Leu, D., Reinking, D., Carter, A., Cadtek, J., Coiro, J., Henry, A. A., . Zawilinski, L. (2007). Defining Online Reading Comprehension: Using Think Aloud Verbal Protocols To Refine A Preliminary Model of Internet Reading Comprehension Processes. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Conference, Chicago, IL.
Levin, J. R. (1986). Four Cognitive Principles of Learning-Strategy Instruction. Educational Psychologist, 21(1/2), 3.
Logan, S., &; Johnston, R. (2009). Gender differences in reading ability and attitudes: examining where these differences lie. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(2), 16.
Lu, Y.-L. (2010). Children's information seeking in coping with daily-life problems: An investigation of fifth- and sixth-grade students. Library &; Information Science Research (07408188), 32(1), 77-88. doi: 10.1016/j.lisr.2009.09.004
MacGregor, D. (2004). Literacy Software Saves Struggling Readers.. T H E Journal, 32(4), 52-52.
Manguel, A. (1996). A history of reading. New York: Viking.
Marksa, G. N. (2008). Accounting for the gender gaps in student performance in reading and mathematics: evidence from 31 countries. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 11.
Mayer, R. E. (2000). The challenge of multimedia literacy. In A. W. Pailliotet &; P. B. Mosenthal (Eds.), Reconceptualizing literacy in the media age (pp. 363-376). CT: JAI Press.
Meyer, B. J. F., Middlemiss, W., Theodorou, E., Brezinski, K. L., McDougall, J., &; Bartlett, B. J. (2002). Effects of structure strategy instruction delivered to fifth-grade children using the Internet with and without the aid of older adult tutors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 486-519. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.486
Mmack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In N. U. R.B. Ruddell (Ed.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570-1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Mokhtari, K., Kymes, A., &; Edwards, P. (2008). Assessing the New Literacies of Online Reading Comprehension: An Informative Interview With W. Ian O'Byrne, Lisa Zawilinski, J. Greg McVerry, and Donald J. Leu at the University of Connecticut Reading Teacher (Vol. 62, pp. 354-357).
Natoinal Reading Panel(2000). Teaching children to read: An evidencebased assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. In N. I. o. C. H. a. H. Development &; U. S. D. o. Education (Eds.). Washington.
Ostenson, J. (2009). Skeptics on the Internet: Teaching Students to Read Critically. English Journal, 98(5), 54-59.
Owens, R. F., Hester, J. L., &; Teale, W. H. (2002). Where do you want to go today? Inquiry-based learning and technology integration. Reading Teacher, 55(7), 616.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2007). Beyond the Three Rs: Voter Attitudes Toward 21st Century Skills. Retrieved 6,1, 2010, from http://www.p21.org/documents/P21_pollreport_singlepg.pdf
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson &; R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading resear (Vol. 3, pp. 545-561). NJ: Erlbaum.
Protopsaltis, A., &; Bouki, V. (2004). Cognitive aspects of web-based hypertext: An experimental approach. WSEAS Transactions on information Science and Applications, 1, 1268-1276.
RAND Reading Study Group(2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&;D Program in Reading Comprehension. CA: RAND Reading Study Group.
Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of Composite Reliability for Congeneric Measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(2), 173-184.
Rouet, J.-F., Levonen, J. J., Dillon, A., &; Spiro, R. J. (1996). Hypertext and cognition. Mahweh, N: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rouet, J.-F., Levonen, J. J., Dillon, A., &; Spiro, R. J. (1996). Hypertext and cognition. Mahweh, N: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rowsell, J., &; Burka, A. (2009). Reading by Design: Two Case Studies of Digital Reading Practices. Journal of Adolescent &; Adult Literacy, 2, 106-118.
Salmerón, L., Gil, L., Bråten, I., &; Strømsø, H. (2010). Comprehension effects of signalling relationships between documents in search engines. [Article]. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 419-426. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.013
Schacter, J., Chung, G. K. W. K., &; Dorr, A. (1998). Children's Internet Searching on Complex Problems: Performance and Process Analyses. [Article]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(9), 840-849.
Schmar-Dobler, E. (2003). Reading on the Internet: The link between literacy and technology. Journal of Adolescent &; Adult Literacy, 47(1), 80-85.
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002). Weaving the literacy Web: Changes in reading from page to screen. Reading Teacher, 55(7), 662.
Thompson, M. (2008). Multimodal teaching and learning: Creating spaces for content teachers Journal of Adolescent &; Adult Literacy (Vol. 52, pp. 144-153).
Transliteracies Project(2007). Research in the technological, social, and cultural practices of online reading. Retrieved 6.25, 2010, from transliteracies.english.ucsb.edu/category/researchproject/ definition-of-online-reading
Tsai, M.J. (2009). Online Information Searching Strategy Inventory (OISSI): A quick version and a complete version. Computers &; Education, 53(2), 473-483.
Walpole, S., &; Blamey, K. L. (2008). Elementary literacy coaches: The reality of dual roles. Reading Teacher, 62(3), 222-231.
Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., &; Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2009). How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information. Computers &; Education, 52(1), 234-246.
Walsh, M. (Writer). (2008). Worlds have collided and modes have merged: classroom evidence of changed literacy practices, Literacy: Blackwell Publishing Limited.
Walsh, M., Asha, J., &; Sprainger, N. (Writers). (2007). Reading digital texts, Australian Journal of Language &; Literacy: Australian Literacy Educators' Association.
Wilder, P., &; Dressman, M. (2006). New literacies, enduring challenges? The influence of capital on adolescent readers’Internet practices. In D.E. Alvermann, K.A. Hinchman, D.W. Moore, S.F. Phelps &; D. R. Waff (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents’lives (2 ed., pp. 205-229). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wolf, M., &; Barzillai, M. (2009). The Importance of Deep Reading. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 32-37.