臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究主要目的是探討以同儕互助合作為主之英語教學方法(PIBTL)對國中學生聽力理解測驗中的理解表現之效益影響。此外，本研究透過同儕互助合作學習來瞭解國中教育會考的聽力理解測驗成績與三種聽力測驗的題項類型之間是否存在顯著的相關性。
本實驗採用準實驗設計。有兩班九年級60個學生參與此項研究：一個班級是實驗組，另一班則是對照組。每一組各有30位學生。實驗組以同儕互助合作的英語教學方法為主，而對照組則以傳統的教師主導的英語教學為主。實驗前，兩組先施予英語學習動機問卷、英語學習方式問卷和國中教育會考聽力模擬測驗等三項的前測；之後，實驗組實施以同儕互助合作為主之英語教學方法於英語課堂中，而對照組則接受傳統的教師主導的英語教學。經過12周的教學實驗，這兩組分別再接受英語學習動機問卷、英語學習方式問卷和國中教育會考聽力模擬測驗等三項的後測。本研究採用t檢驗、單因數變異數分析、皮爾森積差係數法分析問卷及測驗資料。
基於量與質數據的分析，其結果歸納如下：
1. PIBTL對提高實驗組學生在課堂英語聽力理解動機的效益明顯高於TTCI對對
照組學生的英語聽力理解動機的效益。
2. PIBTL對實驗組期末聽力理解成績的影響大於TTCI對對照組的影響。
3. 整體實驗組在PIBTL後英語聽力理解測驗成績顯著的提高且具有統計學上的
意義，而對照組在傳統教學方法下成績沒有顯著提高。
4. 本研究中實驗組學生在任何一種聽力測驗題項的表現仍優於對照組學生，且
成績達到統計學意義。
5. 就皮爾遜相關係數測試值而言，當實驗組學生在第二或第三類聽力測驗題項
得分高時，他們整體的聽力成績也會提高；而對照組的學生也是如此。
研究結果證明，教師在教學上可以運用PIBTL幫助學生提高英語聽力理解能力，並提高學生發展英語聽力理解的動機和積極性。再者，本研究的學生高度重視PIBTL作為一種有益且有趣的學習方法，能使他們在小組討論中有更多的學習機會，更少的壓力更能與同儕良性的互動與合作。

This study mainly aimed to investigate junior high school students' performance on listening comprehension test based on Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning (PIBTL). Moreover, the study aimed to find out whether there is any significant correlation between the performance on listening comprehension test of the CAPJHSS and the three test item types through PIBTL.
The study adopted a quasi-experimental design. There were sixty subjects of two classes in the ninth grade taking part in this study. One of the classes was the experimental group and the other was the control group. There were thirty students in each group. The experimental group received Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning, while the control group was taught through Traditional Teacher-Centered Instruction. After taking the pretest on English Learning Motivation Questionnaire, English Learning Method Questionnaire and the Simulated Listening Comprehension Test of the CAPJHSS, Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning was implemented in the English class of the experimental group, while the control group received Traditional Teacher-Centered Instruction. After twelve weeks, both groups took the posttest on English Learning Motivation Questionnaire, English Learning Method Questionnaire and the Simulated Listening Comprehension Test of the CAPJHSS. The present study adopted a quantitative approach using the T-test, One-way ANOVA, and Pearson product-moment coefficient method to analyze the data.
Based on the quantitative and qualitative data analysis, the findings were summarized as follows:
1. The effects of PIBTL on the students in Experimental Groups were significantly and positively better than those of TTCI on the students in the Control Group in terms of their motivation toward improving English listening comprehension in class.
2. The effects of PIBTL on the Experimental Group were greater than those of TTCI
on the Control Group in terms of their achievements in the final listening comprehension exam.
3. The overall Experimental Group obtained striking improvement after the PIBTL,
in contrast to the Control Group’s no effect in their enhancement of English listening comprehension test with the traditional teaching method.
4. In the present study the Experimental Group students performed still better than
the Control Group ones with respect to all three types of test item, and their performance reached a statistical significance.
5. As far as the values on the Pearson Correlation Coefficient test were concerned,
when an Experimental Group student scored high on Item Type 2 or Item Type 3, s/he would make better performance on the listening comprehension test, and that it was also true of a Control Group student.
The results show that teachers can use PIBTL in teaching to help students improve their listening comprehension ability and improve their motivation and enthusiasm in developing English listening comprehension. Moreover, students in this study attach great importance to PIBTL as a beneficial and interesting learning method, which can enable them to have more learning opportunities in group discussions, and to interact and cooperate with their peers in a benign manner with less pressure.

Table of Contents

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION………………………………………………….1
1.1 Background and Motivation……………………………………………………...1
1.2 Purposes of the Study…………………………………………………………..12
1.3 Research Questions………………………………………………….………….13
1.4 Significance of the Study……………………………………………………….14
1.5 Limitations of the Study……………………………………………………...…15
1.6 Definitions of Terms and Abbreviations.……………………….……………….16
1.7 Organization of This Study.……………………………………….…………..….17

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW.…………………………………….…..19
2.1 Learning Motivation……..……………………………………………………….19
2.2 Language Learning Motivation…………………………………………………..19
2.3 Nature of Listening………………………………………………………………20
2.4 Models of Listening Comprehension Processes………………………………….20
2.5 Cognitive Processes…………………………………..…………………………..20
2.6 Factors Affecting Listening Comprehension………………………………….….21
2.7 Backwash Effect.…………………………………………………………………21
2.8 Listening Comprehension Test and Difficulties in Listening Comprehension…..22
2.9 The Traditional Teaching Approach in EFL.……………………………………22
2.9.1 The Features…………………………………………………………………..22
2.10 The Cooperative Learning Theory….…………………………………………..23
2.10.1. Features of Cooperative Learning……………………………………………24
2.10.2 Development of the CL……………………………………………………….26
2.10.3 Elements of Activating the CL………………………………………………..27
2.10.3.1 Group processing……………………………………………………………28
2.11 Research Findings on Cooperative Learning…………………………………...30
2.11.1 Strengths………………………………………………………………………30
2.11.1.1 Improving academic achievement…………………………………………..31
2.11.1.2 Promoting Learning Motivation…………………………………………….34
2.11.1.3 Enhancing Learning Autonomy…………………………………………….36
2.11.1.4 Developing Positive Learning Attitudes..…………………………………..37
2.11.1.5 Enhancing Self-esteem……………………………………………………...38
2.11.1.6 Developing social skills…………………………………………………….39
2.11.1.7 Improving interpersonal relationships………………………………………40
2.11.2 Weakness……………………………………………………………………...43

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY..……………………………………………47
3.1 Research Design………….………………………………………………………47
3.2 Subjects…………………………………………………………………………..48
3.3 Procedures of Instruction………………………………………………………...48
3.4 Instruments……………………………………………………………………….52
3.4.1 The Listening Comprehension Test….…………………………………………52
3.4.2 Questionnaire…………………………………………………………………..54
3.4.3 SPSS for Windows……………………………………………………………..55
3.5 Data Collection and Analysis…………………………………………………….55
3.5.1 Examples of the Three Item Types of the Listening Comprehension
Test……..56
3.5.2 Statistical Treatments of the Collected Data…………………………………...57
3.6 Flowchart of the Procedures of the Study………………………………………..59

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…………………………………60
4.1 Effects of the Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning (PIBTL) on Students’
Motivation toward Performing Better on Their Listening Comprehension
Test................................................60
4.1.1 The Comparison of Students’ Learning Motivation between the
Experimental and the Control Groups………………………………………61
4.1.2 Effects of TTCI and PIBTL on Enhancing Students’ Learning Motivation
within the Control Group and the Experimental Group Respectively
before and after the Experiment……………………..…………………….....64
4.1.3 Effects of TTCI and PIBTL on Students’ English Academic Performance
on Listening Comprehension in the Control Group and the Experimental
Group Respectively before and after the Experiment………………..…..…..67
4.2 Effects on Students’ Preference of the English Learning Style in the
Classroom through PIBTL and TTCI………………………………………….69
4.2.1 The Comparison of Preference for English Learning Method in
Experimental and Control Groups after the Treatment………………………71
4.2.2 The Experimental Group Students' Perspectives on PIBTL.........……..72
4.3 Effects of the Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning (PIBTL) and
Traditional Teacher-Centered Instruction (TTCI) on Students’
Performance on Listening Comprehension Tests……………..…….…………..75
4.4 The Effects of Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning on Students’
Performance on Three Types of Test Item of the Listening Comprehension
Test...........................................80
4.4.1 The Effects of Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning on Students’
Performance on the First Type of Test Item…………………………………...80
4.4.2 The Effects of Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning on Students’
Performance on the Second Type of Test Item………………………………...82
4.4.3 The Effects of Peer Interaction-Based Team Learning on Students’
Performance on the Third Type of Test Item…………………………...……...84
4.5 The Pearson Correlation Between Three Item Types and Performance on the
Listening Comprehension Test In Two Groups……………………………..…..88

CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS………………………..91
5.1 Summary of the Major Findings and Results………………………………….....91
5.1.1 The Major Findings………………………………………………………...…..91
5.1.2 Motivation toward Improving English Listening Comprehension
through PIBTL…………………………………………………………….......94
5.1.3 Experimental Group’s Perception of PIBTL…………………………………...95
5.1.4 Strengths and Weaknesses Found during the Experiment…………………….96
5.1.5 Effects of PIBTL on Students’ Developing English Listening
Comprehension Skills…………………………………………………………97
5.1.6 Conclusions………………………………………………………………….....98
5.2 Pedagogical Implications………………………………………………………...99
5.3 Suggestions for Future Studies………………………………………………….103

References…………………………………………………………………………..106
APPENDIX A…………………………..…………………………………………..117
APPENDIX B…………………………..…………………………………………..119
APPENDIX C…………………………..…………………………………………..121
APPENDIX D…………………………..…………………………………………..124
APPENDIX E…………………………..…………………………………………..125
APPENDIX F…………………………..……………………………………….…..128

LIST OF TABLES

2.1 Comparison between Cooperative Learning Groups and Traditional Learning
Groups…………………………………………………...……………..………..29
3.1 Scheme of the Listening Comprehension Test simulated to that of the
CAPJHSS (國中教育會考) ...............................................53
3.2 Scheme of the Questionnaire in the Present Research …………………………..55
4.1 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Students’ Pre-
motivation in Experimental and Control Groups before the Treatment……61
4.2 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Students’ Post-
motivation in Experimental and Control Groups after the Treatment…….62
4.3 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Students’
Post-motivation Based on Each Category in Experimental and Control
Groups after the Treatment…………………………………………………...63
4.4 Paired-Samples T-Test Results of Student’ Pre- and Post-motivation in
the Control Group……………………..……………………………………………..65
4.5 Paired-Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison between Student’
Pre-motivation and Post-motivation in the Experimental Group……………….66
4.6 Paired-Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison between Student’ Scores
of English Academic Performance on Listening Comprehension in the
Control Group……………………………………………………………………………67
4.7 Paired-Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison between Student’ Scores
of English Academic Performance on Listening Comprehension in the
Experimental Group…………………………………………………………………………...68
4.8 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Listening Comprehension
Pretest in Experimental and Control Groups………………………………………………69
4.9 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Preference for
English Learning Method in Experimental and Control Groups after the
Treatment…………………………………………………………………….....71
4.10 Paired-Samples T-Test Results of the Experimental Group’s Attitudes
toward English Learning Method before and after Treatment………………………..72
4.11 The Percentage of the 25 Items in the Second Part of the Questionnaire
in the Experimental Group after the Treatment…………………………..….…73
4.12 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Students’
Listening Comprehension Pretest in the Experimental and Control Groups
before the Experiment………………………………………………………………….......76
4.13 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Students’
Listening Comprehension Posttest in the Experimental and Control Groups
after the Experiment………………………………………………………………….......77
4.14 Paired-Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison between Student’
Pretest and Posttest Scores of English Listening Comprehension
Performance in the Experimental Group…………………………………………………………….78
4.15 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Students'
Performance on the First Type of Test Item in Experimental and Control
Groups after the Treatment………………………………………………………..…….81
4.16 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Students'
Performance on the Second Type of Test Item in Experimental and Control
Groups after the Treatment………………………………………………..……82
4.17 Independent Samples T-Test Results of the Comparison of Students'
Performance on the Third Type of Test Item in Experimental and Control
Groups after the Treatment………………………………………………..………….....84
4.18 The Mean scores for the Experimental Group and the Control Group
Students' Performance on Three Item Types……………………………..……………...85
4.19 Pearson Correlation Analysis of the Three Item Types and LCT for the
Experimental Group Students…………………………………………………..89
4.20 Pearson's Correlation of the Three Item Types and LCT for the Control
Group Students…………………………………………………………………………89

LIST OF FIGURES

4.1 The comparison of students’ English listening comprehension pre- and
post-tests in the Experimental and the Control Groups…………………………………..78
4.2 The comparison of students’ English listening comprehension performance
in the Experimental and the Control Groups………………………………………….83
4.3 The comparison of students’ English listening comprehension performance
on the tree types of test item in the Experimental and the Control
Groups…………....87

REFERENCES
Adams, D.N. & Hamm, M.E. (1990) Cooperative learning - Critical thinking and collaboration across the curriculum, Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
Allen, P.M. (1988). Evolution: Why the Whole Is Greater than the Sum of its Parts, in Wolfe. M.A. et al. (eds.) Ecodynamics: Contribution to Theoretical Ecology, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Aneiro, S. (1989). The influence of receiver apprehensions in foreign language learners on listening comprehension among Puerto Rican college students. Dissertation Abstract, New York University.
Asher, J. J. (1977). Learning another language through actions: the complete teacher’s guidebook. Los Gatos, Calif.: Sky Oaks Productions.
Bassey, E. J. (1986). Demi-span as a measure of skeletal size. Ann Hum Biol 13: 499-502.
Bejarano, Y. 1987. A Cooperative Small-Group Methodology in the Language Classroom. TESOL Quarterly 21: 483-504.
Belasco, S. (1965) "Nucleation and the Audio-lingual Approach" in The Modern Language Journal 44:482-491.
Blau, E. (1990). The Effect of Syntax, Speed and Pauses on Listening Comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 746-753.
Bloom, B. S. (1974). (Ed.). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals / by a committee of college and university examiners. New York: David McKay.
Brown, G. (1987). Twenty-five years of teaching listening comprehension. English Teaching Forum, 25(4), 2-15.
Brown, H. Douglas. (1993). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Brown, H. Douglas. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
Brown, J.I. (1949). Why not teaching listening? School and Society, LXIX, 113-116.
Bassey EJ. Demi-span as a measure of skeletal size. Ann Hum Biol.
1986;13:499–502.
Bassey EJ. Demi-span as a measure of skeletal size. Ann Hum Biol.
1986;13:499–502.
Bassey EJ. Demi-span as a measure of skeletal size. Ann Hum Biol.
1986;13:499–502.
Buck, G. (1991). The testing of listening comprehension: An introspective study. Language Testing, 8, 67-91.
Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Budd, R. & Wright, T. (1992) ‘Putting a process syllabus into practice’. In D. Nunan (ed.) Collaborative Language Learning and Teaching, Cambridge University Press, pp. 208-229.
Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Calhoun, C. (1993). Civil society and public sphere. Public Culture Winter 1993.
Carroll, D. W. (1999). Psychology of Language (3rd ed.). California: ITP Inc.
Cayer, R.L., Green, J., & Baker, E.E.B.JR. (1971). Listening and speaking in the English classroom. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Chamot, A. U., & Kupper, L. (1992). Building Bridges: Content and learning strategies for ESL. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Chase, W. G., & Erricsson, K. A. (1981). Skilled memory. In J. Anderson (Ed.). Cognitive Skills and their Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chastain, K. (1976). The effect of discourse markers on the comprehension of lectures. Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 113-27.
Chen, H. C. (1998). The performance of junior college students studying English through cooperative learning. Paper from The Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on English Teaching, 231-240.
Chen, H. C. (1999). A comparison between cooperative learning and traditional, whole-class methods─teaching English in a junior college. Paper from The Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching, 259-269.
Chen, K. P. (2005). Renowned Translators: Their Theory and Practice (in Chinese), Shanghai, Fudan University Press, p.346.
Chiang, C. S., & Dunkel, P. (1992). The effect of speech modification, prior knowledge, and listening proficiency on EFL lecture learning. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 345-74.
Christison, M. A. (1990). Cooperative learning in the EFL classroom. English Teaching Forum, 28 (4), 6-9.
Chang, M. (1995). Teacher-oriented learning vs. cooperative learning in English reading class. Journal of Pingtung Polytechnic Institute, 4, 271-277.
Chang, C. P. (1999). How to carry out small-group teaching. NTNU Alumnus Bulletin, 297, 13-16.
Chang, Y. (2002). A survey of primary school English education in Miao-li County. English Teaching & Learning, 26 (3), 19-37.
Chang, Y. W. (2003). A study of the effects of cooperative learning on English earning at vocational high school. (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Changhua Normal University, Changhua, ROC.
Chen, L. S. (2002). A Mobile Scaffolding-Aid-Based Bird -Watching Learning System, Proceedings of IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE'02), pp.15-22.
Chiu, M-H. (2002). Dynamic processes of conceptual change: Analysis of constructing mental models of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(8), 688-712.
Darwin, C. J., Turvey, M. T. & Crowder, R. G. (1972). An auditory analogue of the Sperling partial report procedure: Evidence for brief auditory storage. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 255-267.
Davis, N.F. (1980). Putting receptive skills first: An experiment in sequencing. Canadian Modern Language Review, 36, 461-467.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Dulay, H. C., Burt, M. K., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dunkel, P. (1986). The Immediate Recall of English Lecture Information by Native and Non-native Speakers of English as a Function of Note-taking. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46, 2624-2625.
Dornyei, Z. (1997). Psychological processes in cooperative language learning: group dynamics and motivation. Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 482-493.
Elliott, J. (1991). A practical guide to action research. Action Research for Educational Change. (pp. 70-89) Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Ellis, Gail & Barbara Sinclair (1994). Learning to learn English. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Ellis, Gail & Barbara Sinclair (1994). Learning to learn English. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Ellis, G., & Sinclair, B. (1994). Learning to learn English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fan, Y. (1993). Listening: Problems and solutions. English Teaching Forum, 31(1), 16-19.
Feyten, C. M. (1991). The power of listening ability: An overlooked dimension in language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 75(2), 173-180.
Freeman M (1993). Peer assessment by groups of group work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, vol 20, no 3, pp 289-292
Fujita, J. (1984). A preliminary inquiry into the successful and unsuccessful listening strategies of beginning college Japanese students. Dissertation Abstract, Ohio State University.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational Variables in Second-Language Acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13, 266-272.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language Learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitude and Motivation. Baltimore, MD: Edward Arnold.
Glisan, E. W. (1985). The effect of word order on listening comprehension and pattern retention: An experiment in Spanish as a foreign language. Language Learning, 35(3), 443-72.
Gahith and Shaaban20, 1995, cited in Chen, 1999
Goh, C.C.M. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners' listening comprehension problems. System, 28(1), 55-57.
Goh, C.C.M. (2002). ‘Exploring listening comprehension tactics and their interaction
patterns.’ System 30: 185-206.
Greenberg, S. N., & Roscoe, S. (1987). Echoic memory interference and comprehension in a foreign language. Language Learning 38, 209-19.
Griffiths, R. (1991). Pausological research in an L2 context: A rationale and review of selected studies. Applied Linguistics, 12, 345-64.
Goh, C. C. M. (1997). Metacognitive awareness and second language listeners. ELT Journal, 51(4), 361-369.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. London : Edward Arnold.
Hauserman, C. (1992). Seeking an effective cooperative learning strategy. Contemporary Education, 63 (3), 185-190.
Heaton, J. B. (1990) Writing English Language Tests. UK: Longman.
Henner-Stanchina, C. (1987). Autonomy as metacognitive awareness: suggestions for training self-monitoring on listening comprehension. M'elanges P'edagogiques.
Hill, M. H. (1992). Strategies for encouraging collaborative learning with a traditional classroom. Contemporary Education, 63 (3), 216-9.
Holubec, E. J. (1992). How do you get there from here? : getting started with cooperative learning. Contemporary Education, 63 (3), 181-184.
Huang, G. W. (1992). The teaching of English grammar in the Chinese classroom, paper presented at Language World conference, Edinburgh. Google Scholar.
Huerta, T. (1979). Motivation in secondary school. English Teaching Forum, 17(3),13-15.
Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hyslop, N., & Tone, B. (1988). Listening: Are we teaching it, and if so. How? (ERIC Digest No. 3 ED 295 13288) HTTP:// WWW.ERICIR.SYR.EDU.: 5pp
Jacobs H, et al. (2002) Completion of mitosis requires neither fzr/rap nor fzr2, a male germline-specific Drosophila Cdh1 homolog. Curr Biol 12(16):1435-41.
Johnson, D.W & Johnson, R.T. 1983. Social interdependence and perceived academic and persona1 support in the classroom. Journal of Social Psychology 120:77-82.
Johnson, D. W. and Johnson R. T. (1985) The internal dynamics of cooperative learning groups, In: Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn, R. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R. Lazarowitz, C. Webb, and R. Schmuck Eds. Plenium Press, New York.
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1987). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Johnson, D. W. and Johnson R. T. (1989a). Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Interaction Book Company, Edina, MN.
Johnson, D. W. and Johnson R. T. (1989b). Leading the cooperative school. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning (5th ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Johnson, D.W, Johnson, R.T & Holubec, E. 1984/1993. Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W; R. Johnson y E. Holubec (1992): Advanced Cooperative Learning, Edina, Minnesota, Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1994). Cooperative Learning in the Classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company, pp.6-9.
Jules, V. (1992). Cooperative learning: student perceptions of the changing structure of learning. Contemporary Education, 63 (3), 191-194.
Kessler, C. (Ed.). (1992). Cooperative language learning: A teacher's resource book. Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice Hall Regents. 257 pp. Paperback.
Kohonen, V. (1992). Experiential language learning: second language learning as cooperative learner education. In D. Nunan (ed.), Collaborative Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 14-39). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis. New York: Longman.
Kagan, S. (1995). We can talk: Cooperative learning in the elementary ESL classroom. Washington D C: Eric Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistic.
Klingner, J. K. 2000. The Helping Behaviors of Fifth Graders While Using Collaborative Strategic Reading During ESL Content Classes. TESOL Quarterly 34:69-98.
Lai, C. J. & Li, L. S. (1992). The teaching strategies of applying cooperative learning. Secondary School Education, 43 (4), 87-91.
Landry, D.L. (1969). The neglect of listening. Elementary English, XVII, 599-605.
Li, D. (1998). “It’s Always More Difficult than You Plan and Imagine”: Teachers’ Perceived Difficulties in Introducing the Communicative Approach. TESOL Quarterly. Washington, D.C., pp. 677-703.
Liang, T. L. (1996). Cooperative learning in English education. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on English Education (pp. 65-71). Taipei: Crane.
Liang, T. L. (2002). Implementation and Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning in English Teaching in Junior High School. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Institute of English, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Liang, X., Mohan, B. A. & Early, M. (1998). Issues of cooperative learning in ESL classes: a literature review. TESL Canada Journal, 15 (2), 13-23.
Liao, P. S. (2007). Teachers’ beliefs about teaching English to elementary school children, English Teaching & Learning, 31(1): 43-76.
Lin, M. L. (1998). The Effects of Cognitive Apprenticeships Collaborative Learning on English Learning Achievement, Motivational Belief, and Learning Strategies of Second Graders of Junior High School. Master Thesis. National Taiwan Normal University.
Lin, P. X. (1992). The Experimental Study on Cooperative Learning Approach in Vocational High School in Taiwan. Master Thesis. National Taiwan Normal University.
Lin, S. Y. (1998). The Effects of Cooperative Learning on Remedial Instruction for Low Mathematics Achievement Primary School Students. Master Thesis. National Chia-yi Teacher College.
Liu, H. J. (1998). Cooperative Learning in Computer Science Laboratory. Master Thesis. National Taiwan Normal University.
Liu, Y. (1997). Cooperative learning: the small-group method in the EFL classroom in junior high school. English Teaching and Learning, 22(2), 29-46.
Long, D. R. (1990). What you don't know can't help you: An exploratory study of background knowledge and second language listening comprehension. Studies in second Language Acquisition, 12, 65-80.
Lung, R. J. (1991). A comparison of second language listening and reading comprehension. Modern Language Journal, 75, 196-204.
Markham, P. L. (1988). Gender differences and the perceived expertness of the speaker as factors in ESL listening recall. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 397-406.
Nicholas, L. N. (1988). Teaching listening comprehension. English Teaching Forum, 26(1), 19-22.
Olsen, R. E. W-B., & Kagan, S. (1992). About cooperative learning. In C. Kessler (Ed.), Cooperative language learning: A teacher's resource book (pp. 1-30). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Olsen, D. R. (2007). "Evaluating User Interface Systems Research," UIST 2007, ACM.
O'Malley, J. C., Chamot, A., & Kupper, L. (1989). Listening compressions strategies in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10, 418-437.
O’Malley, J.M. & A.U. Chamot. (1990). ‘Learning strategies in second language
acquisition.’ London: Cambridge University Press.
Palij, M., & Aaronson, D. (1992). The role of language background in cognitive processing. In Harrris, R. J. (Ed.), Advances in Psychology. New York: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Preiss, R., & Wheeless, L. (1989). Affective responses in listening: A meta-analysis of receiver apprehension outcomes. Journal of the International Listening Association, 3, 72-102.
Presseisen, B. Z. (1992). A perspective on the evolution of cooperative thinking. In N. Davidson & T. Worsham (Eds.), Enhancing thinking through cooperative learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Putnam, J. W. (1997). Cooperative learning in diverse classrooms. Upper Sadddle River, N. J.: Merrill.
Qin, Z., Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Cooperative versus competitive effects and problem solving. Review of Educational Research, 65 (2), 129-143.
Quinn, Mary Ellen, and Marilyn Molloy. (1992) “‘I Learned to Talk Mathematics’: Using Cooperative Groups with College Minority Students.” In Cooperative Language Learning: A Teacher’s Resource Book, edited by Carolyn Kessler. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Richards, J. C. (1983). “Listening Comprehension: Approach, Design, Procedure,” TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 2, 1983, pp. 219-240.
Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2005). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-00843-3.
Rixon, S. (1981). The teaching of listening comprehension. ELT Document, 125.
Ross, J. A., and Cousins, J. B. (1994). Brief research report: intentions to seek and give help, and behavior in cooperative learning groups. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 476-482.
Rost, M. (1990). Listening in Language Learning. New York: Longman.
Rost, M. (1990). Improving foreign language listening comprehension. Report prepared for the US Department of Education, International Research and Studies Program, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 309-316.
Rost, M. (1994). A review of second language listening comprehension research. The Modern Language Journal, 78 (ii), 199-221.
Rumelhart, D. E., & Ortony, A. (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In R.C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 99-135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schinke-Llano, L. (1994). On the value of a Vygotskian framework for SLA theory and Research. Language Learning. 43, 121-129.
Sharan, S. (1980). Cooperative learning in small groups: recent methods and effects on achievement, attitudes, and ethnic relations. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 241-271.
Sharan, S. (1990). Cooperative learning: a perspective on research and practice. In S. Sharan (Ed.), Cooperative Learning: Theory and Research (pp. 285-300). NY: Praeger Publishers.
Sharan, Y & Sharan, S. (1992). Expanding cooperative learning through group investigation. New York: Teachers College Press.
Slavin, R. E. (1980). Effects of student teams and peer tutoring on academic achievement and time on-task. Journal of Experimental Education, 48, 252-257.
Slavin, R. E. (1983). Cooperative learning. New York, NY: Longman.
Slavin, R. E. (1988). Cooperative learning and student achievement. Educational Leadership, 46(2).
Slavin, R. E. (1991a). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71-82.
Slavin, R. E. (1991b). Group rewards make groupwork work: response to Kohn. Educational Leadership, 48(5), 89-91.
Slavin, R.E. (1994). Using Student Team Learning (2nd Ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: what we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 43-69.
Slavin, R. E. (1997). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Slavin, R.E. (2006). Research and effectiveness: A ‘10 percent solution’ that can make evidence-based reform a reality. Education Week.
Stevick, E. W. (1993). Memory: Old news, bad news, new news, good news about memory. JALT Journal, 15.
Su, P. Ch. (1994). The effect of visual elements on English listening comprehension: Videotape-testing versus audiotape-testing. Kaohsiung Normal University Journal, 5, 63-87.
Solomon, D. et al. (1985). A program to promote interpersonal consideration and cooperation in children. In R. E. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R. Hertz-Lazarowitz, C. Webb, & R. Schmuck (Eds.), Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn (pp. 371-401). New York: Plenum.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Some roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253), Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Teng, H. C. (1994). Effects of cultural schemata and visual cues on Chinese students’ EFL listening comprehension. Paper presented at the 11th National Conference on English Teaching, Republic of China, Taipei.
Thomson, C. K. (1998). Junior teacher internship: promoting cooperative interaction and learner autonomy in foreign language classrooms. Foreign Language Annals, 31 (4), 569-583.
Tsai, Y. S. (1997). A Collaborative Action Research on the Cooperative Learning Physical Science in the Second Year of Junior High School. Master Thesis. National Chang Hua Normal University.
Tsai, S. (1998). The Effects of Cooperative Learning on Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Senior High School Students. Master Thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Tsai, Y. J. (2008). A case study of cultivating junior high students’ English reading competency through cooperative strategy-based instruction. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Taiwan: National Cheng Kung University.
Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and Semantic Memory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of Memory (pp. 382-403). NY: Clarendon Press.
Vandergrift, L. (1997). ‘The strategies of second language (French) listeners.’
Foreign Language Annals 30: 387-409.
Vandergrift, L. (1999). Facilitating second language listening comprehension: acquiring successful strategies. ELT Journal, 53(3), 168-176.
Vandergrift, L. (2003). ‘Orchestrating strategy use: Toward a model of the skilled
second language listener’. Language Learning 53: 463-496.
van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wang, H. M. (1992). Using cooperative learning in the EFL classroom. National Taiwan Police College Bulletin, 5, 289-317.
Webb, N. M. (1985). Student interaction and learning in small groups. In R. E. Slavin, et al. (Eds.), Learning to Cooperate, Cooperating to Learn (pp. 147-172). New York: Plenum.
Wei, C. L. (1997). Collaboration in EFL classroom: an investigation of DFLL learners' perceptions of jigsaw cooperative learning technique in freshman English classes.
Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 223-238). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co.
Wei, C. L., & Chen, Y. M. (1993). Cooperative learning: A study of English teaching pedagogy─the perspectives of college students in Taiwan. In W. P. Li et al. (Eds), Papers from the Tenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 175-191. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Company, Ltd.
Weir, C.J. (1990). Communicative Language Testing. UK: Pretince Hall International Ltd.
Wing, B.H. (Ed.). (1986). Listening, reading, writing: Analysis and application.
Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
Wolff, D. (1987). Some assumption about second language text comprehension. SSLA, 9(3), 307-326.
Wolff, F., & Marsnik, N. (1992). Perceptive listening. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Wu, Z. (1998).Cognitive process and teaching of information processing Strategy. Education Practice, 4(1), 156-163.
Yang, H. H. (1997). Action Research: An Example for Applying Cooperative Learning to Teach Senior High School Chemistry. Master Thesis. National Changhua Normal University.
Ye, S. Z. (1993). An experimental Study on Cooperative Learning in Music Teaching at Senior High School. Master Thesis. National Taiwan Normal University.
Yi, C. (2001). Practical ways to maximize the efficacy of cooperation. English Teaching and Learning, 22(2), 64-85.
Yao, T. K. (1996). Remarks on Communicative Listening Teaching. Wenshi xuibao,
26, 17-24
Yeh, Y. C. (2004). Students’ perceptions of cooperative learning methods in one senior high school EFL classroom in Taiwan. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Ming Chuan University, Tao-yuan, ROC.
Yen, X. (1995). Motivation, attitudes, and achievement: A study of Taiwan Police College students in learning English. National Taiwan Police College Bulletin, 8, 327-373.
Yu, G. K. (1993). Cooperative learning for heterogeneous EFL classrooms in secondary schools in Taiwan. Kaohsiung Normal University Journal, 4, 209-229.
Yu, G. (1995). Implementing cooperative learning approach in an EFL class in Taiwan. NSC-83-0301-S-017-008.
Zhao, Y. (1997). The effects of listener’s control of speech rate on second language comprehension. Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 49–68.