臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著網路科技與數位教學媒體的普及，多媒體教材取代傳統型態教學已是趨勢。多媒體教材有許多類型，如影像、圖片、聲音……等。在英語課程教學上，簡報及影片結合教學也逐漸受到重視。本研究以Lautamatti’s (1987) 所提出之主題結構分析(Topical Structure Analysis)為設計範本，依此製作簡報以及多媒體教材來進行英語寫作教學，藉此探討多媒體教材融入英語寫作教學與一般傳統教學之差異。本研究將筆者所任教的班級分別應用多媒體教材與應用一般傳統教材，讓受試者寫出同樣題目的敘述文，採量化及文字表述方式來比較兩種不同互動方式對學生寫作架構之差異與影響。藉此研究不同互動方式的多媒體教材教法，分析學生的寫作架構之差異。在分析受測者的文章結構之後發現，接受多媒體教材教學的學生能夠掌握主題發展；其寫出的文章的流暢度及連貫性都較高。最後根據本研究結論提出多媒體教材融入國高中英語寫作教學，以協助台灣學生寫出流暢的英文作文。

關鍵字: 主題結構分析、英語寫作、多媒體英語教學、教育科技

Educational technology is nowadays prevailing worldwide. By using and managing appropriate online resources, students are able to facilitate learning and improve performance. Especially visualization is gaining increased visibility in education because of its convenience and universality. With multimedia and visualization aids, the style of teaching and learning is gradually changing. In the traditional classroom, teaching materials are amplified by using technology and multimedia, such as videos, images and sound. The development in multimedia brought the transitions in the forms of teaching materials and instructional tools. The purpose of this research is to investigate effect of teaching English writing with visualization aid to 2nd graders in senior high school in Taiwan. With descriptive-qualitative design, this paper aims to answer how multimedia education tool effect students’ learning results by looking into the topical structures employed in students’ descriptive writings after a series of instruction implemented with multimedia in English writing classes. Based on the above conclusions, it is highly recommended that writing instruction combined with multimedia be introduced as one of writing approaches in Taiwan in order to enhance the coherence in ESL/EFL writings.

Keywords: Topical Structure Analysis, English Writing, Multimedia, English Instruction, Educational Technology

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the study 1
1.2 Motivation of the study 2
1.3 Research questions 2
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 4
2.1 Coherence in English writing 4
2.2 The incoherence problem in ESL/EFL writings 6
2.3 Lautamatti’s (1987) Topical Structure Analysis (TSA) 9
2.4 Studies of Lautamatti’s (1987) Topical Structure Analysis (TSA) employed in teaching 15
2.5 Multimedia education tools for effective teaching and learning 16
2.6 Visualization in education 18
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 20
3.1 Research Setting 20
3.1.1 Subjects 20
3.1.2 The Teaching Procedure 21
3.1.3 The Teaching Material 23
3.1.4 Implement of the Course 28
3.1.5 The Background of the Students 29
3.1.6 The Writing Task 32
3.2 Data Collection 32
3.2.1 The Instrument for Analyzing Topical Structure 32
3.3 Procedure of Data Collection 39
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS & DISCUSSION 41
4.1 Quantitative Analysis 41
4.2 Qualitative Analysis 44
4.2.1 Detailed discussion of parallel progression 44
4.2.2 Detailed discussion of sequential progression 55
4.2.3. Detailed discussion of extended parallel progression 60
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS 67
5.1 Summary of the Findings 67
5.2 Pedagogical Implications 70
5.2.1 TSA as a revision tool in ESL/EFL writing instruction 70
5.2.2 TSA as a Teaching Tool in ESL/EFL Writing Instruction 72
5.2.3 Multimedia Education Tools in ESL/EFL Writing Instruction 72
5.3 Limitations of the Study 74
5.4 Suggestions for Future Studies 74
5.5 Conclusion 75
Reference 76

1.Almaden, D. O. (2006). An analysis of the topical structure of paragraphs written by Filipino students. The Asia-Pacific Education Research, 15(1), 127-153.
2.Arcavi, A. (2003). The role of visual representations in the learning of mathematics. Educational studies in mathematics, 52(3), 215-241.Hyland, K. (2018). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Bloomsbury Publishing. Kaplan, Robert B., and William Grabe. "A modern history of written discourse analysis." Journal of second language writing11.3 (2002): 191-223.
3.Bajrami, L., & Ismaili, M. (2016). The role of video materials in EFL classrooms. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 502-506.
4.Cakir, I. (2006). The use of video as an audio-visual material in foreign language teaching classroom. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 5(4), 67-72.
5.Chiu. Y. H. (2004). Coaching a student to develop coherence based on topical structure analysis: A case study. Journal of Language and Learning. 2(2), 154-170.
6.Connor, U. & M. Farmer (1990). Topical structure analysis as a revision strategy for ESL writers. In Barbara Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: research insights for the classroom. Cambridge: CUP
7.Dawn, S. (2013, December). Multimedia, animation, and computer graphics—Mapping of study of virtual characters to cognitive understanding. In Innovation and Technology in Education (MITE), 2013 IEEE International Conference in MOOC (pp. 75-79). IEEE.
8.Devetak, I. (2011). Visualisation in Education. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 1(4), 5-10.
9.Firbas, J. (1986). On the dynamics of written communication in the light of the theory of functional sentence perspective. Studying writing: Linguistic approaches, 40-71.
10.Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). Spoken and written modes of meaning. Media texts: Authors and readers, 7, 51-73.
11.Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse. London, Continuum.
12.Iskander, M. F. (2014, July). Multimedia and technology based electromagnetic education. In Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium (APSURSI), 2014 IEEE (pp. 531-532). IEEE.
13.Johns, A. M. (1986). Coherence and academic writing: Some definitions and suggestions for teaching. Tesol Quarterly, 20(2), 247-265.
14.Kapi, A. Y., Osman, N., Ramli, R. Z., & Taib, J. M. (2017). Multimedia Education Tools for Effective Teaching and Learning. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC), 9(2-8), 143-146.
15.Kaplan, R. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16, 1-20.
16.Kilic, M., Genç, B., & Badac, E. (2016). Topical structure in argumentative essays of efl learners and implications for writing classes. Journal of language and linguistic studies, 12(2), 108.
17.Lau, R. W., Yen, N. Y., Li, F., & Wah, B. (2014). Recent development in multimedia e-learning technologies. World Wide Web, 17(2), 189-198.
18.Lautamatti, L. (1987). Observations on the development of the topic of simplified discourse. In Ulla Connor and R.B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages, analysis of L2 texts, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
19.Lee, I. (1998). Enhancing ESL students' awareness of coherence-creating mechanisms in writing. TESL Canada Journal, 15(2), 36-49.
20.Lee, I. (2002). Teaching coherence to ESL students: A classroom inquiry. Journal of second language writing, 11(2), 135-159.
21.Lin, S.O., Huang, T.S., Lin, C.I., & Chen, K.T. (1993). Construction and grading of English composition tests in the JCEE(大學入學考試英文作文之命題與評分). In Selected Papers from the Tenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China. (pp. 557-609). Taipei: Crane.
22.Liu, J. (2009). Intercultural rhetorical pattern differences in English argumentative writing. English as International Language Journal 4, 93-109.
23.Liu, P. L. (2011). A study on the use of computerized concept mapping to assist ESL learners’ writing. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2548-2558.
24.Naps, T., Cooper, S., Koldehofe, B., Leska, C., Rößling, G., Dann, W., ... & Anderson, J. (2003, June). Evaluating the educational impact of visualization. In ACM Sigcse Bulletin (Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 124-136). ACM.
25.Park, K., & Nam, D. (2015). Analysis of thematic structure in L2 writing a systemic functional perspective.
26.Presmeg, N. C. (1992). Prototypes, metaphors, metonymies and imaginative rationality in high school mathematics. Educational studies in mathematics, 23(6), 595-610..
27.Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 407-430.
28.Regala-Flores, E., & Yin, K. (2015). Topical Structure Analysis as an Assessment Tool in Student Academic Writing. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature®, 21(1).
29.Richards, J. et al. (1985). Longman dictionary of applied linguistics. London: Longman.
30.Schneider, M., & U. Connor. (1990). Analyzing topical structure in ESL essays: Not all topics are equal. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12, 411-427.
31.Shabana, N. O. (2018). Topical Structure Analysis Assessing First-Year Egyptian University Students’ Internal Coherence of Their EFL Writing. In Assessing EFL Writing in the 21st Century Arab World (pp. 53-78). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
32.Shatri, K., & Buza, K. (2017). The Use of Visualization in Teaching and Learning Process for Developing Critical Thinking of Students. European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research, 9(1), 71-74.
33.Silva, T. (1992). L1 vs. L2 writing: ESL graduate students’ perceptions. TESL Canada Journal, 10(1), 27-48.
34.Simpson, J. M. (2000). Topical structural analysis of academic paragraph in English and Spanish. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 293-309.
35.Spack, R. (1997). The rhetoric construction of multilingual students. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 765-774.
36.Spencer, Wang & Xing. (2008). Raising students' awareness of cross-cultural contrastive rhetoric in English writing via an e-learning course. Language Learning & Technology. 12(2), 71-93.
37.Srinivasan, D. (2013, December). Effectiveness of e-learning components in building stronger foundation in engineering fundamentals. In Engineering Education (ICEED), 2013 IEEE 5th Conference on (pp. 78-83). IEEE.
38.Surjono, H. D. (2015). The effects of multimedia and learning style on student achievement in online electronics course. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 14(1), 116-122.
39.Veřmiřovský, J. (2013). The Importance of Visualisation in Education.
40.Wang, M., & Jacobson, M. J. (2011). Guest Editorial-Knowledge Visualization for Learning and Knowledge Management. Educational Technology & Society, 14(3), 1-3.
41.Witte, S.P. (1983). Topical structure and writing quality: A study of the argumentative texts of college writers. Montreal, Canada.
42.Zedan, A. M., Yusoff, M. Y. Z. B. M., & Mohamed, M. R. B. (2015). An innovative Teaching Method in Islamic Studies: the Use of PowerPoint in University of Malaya as Case Study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182, 543-549.