臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

　　英語閱讀是一項複雜的活動，其由不同的發展階段所組成 (Hackney, 1968; Thompson, Tunmer, & Nicholson, 1993; Wyse & Goswami, 2008)。在早期識字教學中，字母和聲音之間的對應關係至關重要。學習者應該具有字母知識以及聲韻覺識，以用於解碼字彙 (National Reading Panel, 2000)。為了幫助學童從根本上培養他們的英語技能，字母拼讀教學通常被採用來幫助學習者在早期階段獲得字母與聲音關係之知識。字母與聲音之關係是詞彙識別的基礎和閱讀流暢度的必備條件 (Adams, 1990; Chard & Osborn, 1999; International Reading Association, 1997; Metsala & Ehri, 1998; Moustafa & Maldonado-Colon, 1999; Villaume & Brabham, 2003)。
　　除此之外，在英語教學中，學者們提出許多教學法。針對國小學童的英語學習，肢體教學法 (TPR) 和聽講教學法 (ALM) 已被證實是有效的，因為這兩種教學法都專注於口語技能，且注重刺激與反應的形式 (Karavas, 2014; Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Lin & Chien, 2009; Linse & Nunan, 2005; Richards & Rodgers, 2001)。文獻指出肢體教學法被用於有效提升學習者的字彙 (Fahrurrozi, 2017) 和聽力理解 (Hsu, 2014)，而聽講教學法則曾被用來改善學習者聽力(Samawiyah & Saifuddin, 2016) 與口說 (Wu, 2013) 能力。然而，到目前為止，沒有實證研究在台灣小學進行使用肢體教學法於字母拼讀教學中之研究，其可行性有待證實。此外，沒有比較性研究檢視系統化字母拼讀教學整合至不同教學法之成效，例如整合至肢體教學法與聽講教學法之運用。因此，本研究主要目的為測量及比較系統化字母拼讀教學融入肢體教學法與聽講教學法中對於台灣以英語為外語學習者的字母知識、聲韻覺識與字彙解碼能力之成效。本研究另一項目的為調查學習者對於各自所接受系統化字母拼讀教學之看法。
　　研究對象為72位來自一所公立小學三年級共三個班級之學童。此三個班級之學童英語能力同質，因此隨機分入控制組、實驗組一和實驗組二。控制組並未接受實驗教學，而實驗組一接受系統化字母拼讀融入肢體教學，實驗組二則是接受系統化字母拼讀融入聽講教學。兩組實驗組每週接受一次35分鐘不同的系統化字母拼讀教學，總教學週數為八週。測驗工具包含背景問題、劍橋兒童英語認證、字母知識測驗、聲韻覺識測驗、字彙解碼測驗以及學習態度問卷。
　　結果顯示在系統化字母拼讀教學中，肢體教學法和聽講教學法對以英語為外語學習者的字母知識、聲韻覺識與字彙解碼能力都有顯著的效果。然而，肢體教學法和聽講教學法之間的主要成效差異在於研究對象的字母知識和聲韻覺識表現之進步幅度，其中肢體教學組的進步明顯優於聽講教學組。此外，從描述性統計數據來看，肢體教學組中的研究對象在三種早期識字技能方面有了更大的進步。而關於研究對象的看法，從問卷中收集的資料指出接受系統化字母拼讀融入肢體教學的學習者於Keller (1987, 2008)的ARCS動機模式之三個方面，即注意力、相關性和信心層面，顯著優於接受系統化字母拼讀融入聽講教學之學生。在滿意度方面，肢體教學組的得分仍高於聽講教學組，展現了肢體教學法所帶來的正向影響。
　　根據實證研究結果，本文建議以英語為外語之小學教師可以使用肢體教學法或聽講教學法來實施系統化字母拼讀教學，以提升國小學童識字技能，即字母知識、聲韻覺識與字彙解碼之能力；至於識字技能的教學法，可採用肢體教學法以減輕學習者壓力，並提高其學習動機和好奇心。

English reading is a complex activity which consists of different developmental stages (Hackney, 1968; Thompson, Tunmer, & Nicholson, 1993; Wyse & Goswami, 2008). In early literacy instruction, the corresponding relationships between letters and sounds are crucial. Learners should have the knowledge of alphabetical printed symbols and phonological sound awareness to decode words (National Reading Panel, 2000). In order to help young language learners build their English skills at a fundamental level, systematic phonics instruction is found to be effective toward helping learners gain the knowledge of letter-sound relationships in the early stages. Such knowledge is the foundation for word recognition and a prerequisite for reading fluency (Adams, 1990; Chard & Osborn, 1999; International Reading Association, 1997; Metsala & Ehri, 1998; Moustafa & Maldonado-Colon, 1999; National Reading Panels, 2000; Villaume & Brabham, 2003).
Besides, in English language teaching, various teaching methods have been proposed. To teach young learners, Total Physical Response (TPR) and the Audio-lingual Method (ALM) have been found to be effective since both of them focus on oral skills with stimulus and response (Karavas, 2014; Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Lin & Chien, 2009; Linse & Nunan, 2005; Richards & Rodgers, 2001). TPR has been used to improve learners’ vocabulary (Fahrurrozi, 2017) and listening comprehension (Hsu, 2014) while ALM has been used to improve learners’ listening (Samawiyah & Saifuddin, 2016) and speaking abilities (Wu, 2013). However, up to the present time, no empirical study has been implemented using Total Physical Response with phonics instruction in Taiwan elementary schools. The feasibility of implementing the TPR method in systematic phonics instruction remains a question. Additionally, no comparative study has been conducted to examine the effectiveness of different teaching methodologies, such as TPR and ALM, integrated in systematic phonics instruction. Therefore, the primary purpose of this study is to measure and compare the effectiveness of TPR and ALM toward implementing systematic phonics instruction to effectively facilitate alphabetic knowledge, phonological awareness and decoding ability among Taiwanese EFL young learners. Another purpose of the current study is to investigate the participants’ attitudes toward the respective systematic phonics instruction.
The participants were 72 third graders from three homogenous classes in one elementary school. They were randomly assigned to the control group receiving no treatment, Experimental Group 1 (TPR group) receiving the TPR systematic phonics instruction and Experimental Group 2 (ALM group) receiving the ALM systematic phonics instruction. The two experimental groups received 35-minute systematic phonics instruction once a week, with the total instruction lasting for eight weeks. The instruments included a background questionnaire, a reading test extracted from Cambridge English Test: Starters (YLE Starters), an alphabetic knowledge test, a phonological awareness test, a word decoding test and questionnaires of the participants’ attitudes toward the respective intervention.
Results showed that both TPR and ALM in systematic phonics treatments were significantly effective on facilitating EFL young learners’ alphabetic knowledge, phonological awareness and decoding ability. However, the major differences between the respective TPR and ALM instruction lay in the participants’ alphabetic knowledge and phonological awareness performance gain, showing the TPR group significantly outperformed the ALM group. In addition, judging from the descriptive statistics, the participants in the TPR group had greater improvements on the three early literacy skills. As for the participants’ perceptions, the data collected from the questionnaires indicated that learners receiving the TPR systematic phonics instruction had significantly more positive attitudes than the ones receiving the ALM systematic phonics instruction in terms of the three aspects of Keller’s (1987, 2008) ARCS model, which are Attention, Relevance and Confidence. As in the satisfaction level, the TPR group still scored higher than the ALM group, suggesting the positive effects brought by the TPR instruction.
Based on the findings, it is suggested that EFL elementary school teachers could implement TPR or ALM in systematic phonics instruction to teach young learners the early literacy skills, namely alphabetic knowledge, phonological awareness and word decoding. In terms of the teaching methods adopted in the instruction, Total Physical Response can reduce learning stress and increase learners’ motivation and curiosity to learn.

ABSTRACT (CHINESE) …………………………………………………………………… I
ABSTRACT (ENGLISH) …………………………………………………………………… IV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ……………………………………………………………… VIII
TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………………………………… X
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………………………… XIV
LIST OF FIGURE ………………………………………………………………………… XVI
CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………… 1
1.1 Background of the Study ………………………………………………………………… 1
1.2 Research Motivation and Rationale …………………………………………………… 5
1.3 Purpose of the Study ……………………………………………………………………… 7
1.4 Research Questions ……………………………………………………………………… 8
1.5 Significance of the Study ………………………………………………………………… 8
1.6 Definition of Terms ……………………………………………………………………… 9
CHAPTER TWO – LITERATURE REVIEW ……………………………………… 14
2.1 The Relationship among Alphabetic Knowledge, Phonological Awareness and
Decoding in Early Literacy Development ……………………………………………… 14
2.1.1 Stages of Reading Development ……………………………………………… 14
2.1.2 Alphabetic Knowledge …………………………………………………………… 17
2.1.3 Phonological Awareness ………………………………………………………… 19
2.1.4 Decoding …………………………………………………………………………… 23
2.2 The Significance and Types of Phonics Instruction …………………………… 26
2.2.1 The Significance and Features of Phonics Instruction …………………… 26
2.2.2 The Types of Phonics Instruction ……………………………………………… 27
2.2.3 The Features and Effectiveness of Systematic Phonics Instruction …… 28
2.3 Effectiveness of Total Physical Response and Audio-lingual Method in English
Learning …………………………………………………………………………………………… 32
2.3.1 The Features and Effectiveness of Total Physical Response ……………… 33
2.3.2 The Features and Effectiveness of Audio-lingual Method ………………… 36
CHAPTER THREE – METHODOLOGY ………………………………………… 40
3.1 The Pilot Study …………………………………………………………………………… 40
3.2 Participants ………………………………………………………………………………… 47
3.3 Research Context ………………………………………………………………………… 49
3.4 Teaching Materials ……………………………………………………………………… 49
3.5 Research Design and Implementation Procedures ………………………………… 52
3.6 Phonics Instruction ……………………………………………………………………… 54
3.7 Instruments ………………………………………………………………………………… 56
3.7.1 Background Questionnaire ……………………………………………………… 56
3.7.2 Cambridge English Reading Test: Starters (YLE Starters) ……………… 57
3.7.3 Alphabetic Knowledge Pretest / Posttest ……………………………………… 57
3.7.4 Phonological Awareness Pretest / Posttest …………………………………… 58
3.7.5 Word Decoding Pretest / Posttest ……………………………………………… 59
3.7.6 Questionnaire of the Subjects’ Attitudes toward the Respective TPR
and ALM Systematic Phonics Instruction ………………………………………… 60
3.8 Data Analysis ……………………………………………………………………………… 61
CHAPTER FOUR – RESULTS AND DISCUSSION …………………………… 63
4.1 Results for Two Forms of Phonics Instruction on Participants’ Three Elements
of Early Literacy …………………………………………………………………………… 64
4.1.1 Participants’ Alphabetic Knowledge Performance Before and After
Treatment ………………………………………………………………………………… 64
4.1.2 Participants’ Phonological Awareness Performance Before and After
Treatment ………………………………………………………………………………… 66
4.1.3 Participants’ Decoding Performance Before and After Treatment ……… 71
4.2 Comparison Results of Two Forms of Systematic Phonics Instruction on Three
Elements of Early Literacy ………………………………………………………………… 79
4.2.1 Three Group Pretest Comparison in Alphabetic Knowledge, PA and
Decoding …………………………………………………………………………………… 79
4.2.2 Three Group Posttest Comparison in Alphabetic Knowledge, PA and
Decoding ………………………………………………………………………………… 80
4.2.3 Three Group Comparison for PA, Decoding Achievement and Proficiency
Posttests …………………………………………………………………………………… 83
4.2.4 Three Group Comparison for Alphabetic Knowledge, PA and Decoding
Gain Scores ……………………………………………………………………………… 86
4.3 Results of Attitudes toward TPR and ALM Systematic Phonics Instruction … 95
4.3.1 Comparison of Overall Questionnaire Responses for the Experimental
Groups ……………………………………………………………………………………… 95
4.3.2 Attention Scale Comparison of Questionnaire Responses for
Experimental Groups …………………………………………………………………… 98
4.3.3 Relevance Scale Comparison of Questionnaire Responses for
Experimental Groups …………………………………………………………………… 100
4.3.4 Confidence Scale Comparison of Questionnaire Responses for
Experimental Groups …………………………………………………………………… 102
4.3.5 Satisfaction Scale Comparison of Questionnaire Responses for
Experimental Groups …………………………………………………………………… 104
CHAPTER FIVE – CONCLUSION ………………………………………………… 108
5.1 The Major Findings …………………………………………………………………… 108
5.2 Pedagogical Implications ……………………………………………………………… 113
5.3 Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Future Research ……………… 115
REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………… 118
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………………………… 141
Appendix A The Word Reading Test Modified from TOWRE-2 as the Pretest and Posttest …………………………………………………………………… 141
Appendix B The Self-developed Word Recognition Test as the Pretest and Posttest ………………………………………………………………………… 142
Appendix C Questionnaire for TPR Systematic Phonics Instruction …………… 144
Appendix D The Discrimination and Item Difficulty of Word Recognition Test……………………………………………………………………………… 146
Appendix E The Units and Decodable Texts in Super Phonics: From Phonics to Reading ………………………………………………………………………… 148
Appendix F Body Gestures for the 26 Alphabets (Retrieved from Pinkfong) …… 150
Appendix G Background Questionnaire (Chinese Version) ………………………… 154
Appendix H Background Questionnaire (English Version) ………………………… 155
Appendix I Alphabetic Knowledge Test as the Pretest and Posttest …………… 156
Appendix J Item Difficulty and Item Discrimination Indices of Alphabetic Knowledge Test ……………………………………………………………… 157
Appendix K Self-developed Phonological Awareness Test as the Pretest and Posttest ………………………………………………………………………… 158
Appendix L Item Difficulty and Item Discrimination Indices of Phonological Awareness Test ……………………………………………………………… 159
Appendix M Word Decoding Test as the Pretest and Posttest ……………………… 160
Appendix N Item Difficulty and Item Discrimination Indices of Decoding Test …………………………………………………………………………… 161
Appendix O Questionnaire for TPR Systematic Phonics Instruction (Chinese Version) …………………………………………………………… 162
Appendix P Questionnaire for TPR Systematic Phonics Instruction (English Version) …………………………………………………………… 164
Appendix Q Questionnaire for ALM Systematic Phonics Instruction (Chinese Version) …………………………………………………………… 166
Appendix R Questionnaire for ALM Systematic Phonics Instruction (English Version) …………………………………………………………… 168
Appendix S Sample Lesson Plan for TPR Systematic Phonics Instruction …… 170
Appendix T Sample Lesson Plan for ALM Systematic Phonics Instruction … 173
Appendix U Pictures of TPR Group in TPR Systematic Phonics Instruction … 176
Appendix V Pictures of ALM Group in ALM Systematic Phonics
Instruction …………………………………………………………………… 177

Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Adams, M. J. (2011). The relation between alphabetic basics, word recognition, and reading. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 4-24). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Asher, J. J. (1966). The learning strategy of the Total Physical Response: A review. The Modern Language Journal, 50(2), 79-84. Retrieved from ERIC, Number: ED028664.
Bahtiar, Y. (2017). Using the Total Physical Response to improve students’ vocabulary mastery. SELL Journal, 2(1), 9-23.
Bear, D. R., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (2012). Words their way: Word study for phonics, vocabulary, and spelling instruction (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Bingham, A., & Pennington, J. L. (2007). As easy as ABC: Facilitating early literacy enrichment experiences. Young Exceptional Children, 10(2), 17-29.
Blevins, W. (2006). Phonics from A to Z. New York, NY: Scholastic.
Bowey, J. A. (2006). Need for systematic synthetic phonics teaching within the early reading curriculum. Australian Psychologist. 41(2), 79-84. doi: 10.1080/00050060600610334
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., & Kameenui, E. J. (1997). Direct instruction reading (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Chang, J. (2003). Developing fourth graders’ word recognition and spelling abilities in English (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Chard, D. J., & Osborn, J. (1999). Phonics and word recognition instruction in early reading programs: Guidelines for accessibility. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14(2), 107-117.
Chard, D. J., Pikulski, J. J., & Templeton, S. (2000). From phonemic awareness to fluency: Effective decoding instruction in a research-based reading program. Houghton Mifflin Reading, 1-12. Retrieved from https://www.eduplace.com/state/author/chard_pik_temp.pdf
Chen, I. C. (2015). The effects of an integrative phonics remedial instruction program on six Taiwanese elementary school low-achievers’ English phonics and spelling performance (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Chen, S. C. (2015). A study of using English songs on Youtube to improve vocabulary recitation and phonological awareness: A case study on grade five students in Hsinchu County (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Chen, W. Y., & Cheng, Y. S. (2010). A case study on foreign English teachers’ challenges in Taiwanese elementary schools. System, 38, 41-49. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.12.004
Chen, Y. C. (2010). A study of enhancing EFL young learners’ sight vocabulary acquisition and oral reading fluency through pop song singing-reading instruction (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Chien, C. W. (2015). Influence of differentiated instruction workshop on Taiwanese elementary school English teachers’ activity design. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(2), 270-281.
Coates, R. A. G., Gorham, J., & Nicholas, R. (2017). The efficacy of phonics-based instruction of English as a second language in an Italian high school: A randomised controlled trial. GIST Education and Learning Research Journal, (15), 29-67.
Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experiments: Nonequivalent control group designs. In T. D. Cook & D. T. Campbell (Eds.), Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings (pp. 103-118). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Coyne, M. D., Kame’enui, E. J., & Simmons, D. C. (2001). Prevention and intervention in beginning reading: Two complex systems. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16(2), 62-73.
Cunningham, J. W., Cunningham, P. M., Hoffman, J. V., & Yopp, H. K. (1998). Phonemic awareness and the teaching of reading: A position statement from the board of directors of the International Reading Association. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Dessemontet, S. R., Martinet, C., de Chambrier, A. F., Martini-Willemin, B. M., & Audrin, C. (2019). Review: A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of phonics instruction for teaching decoding skills to students with intellectual disability. Educational Research Review, 26, 52-70.
Dixon, L. Q. (2011). Singaporean kindergartners’ phonological awareness and English writing skills. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 32(3), 98-108. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2011.02.008
Earle, G. A., & Sayeski, K. L. (2016). Systematic instruction in phoneme-grapheme correspondence for students with reading disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 52(5), 262-269. doi: 10.1177/1053451216676798
Ediger, M. (1998). Which word recognition techniques should be taught? Reading Improvement, 35(2), 73-79.
Ediger, M. (2000). Teaching reading successfully. New Delhi, India: Discovery Publishing House.
Ehri, L. C. (1995). Phases of development in learning to read words by sight. Journal of Research in Reading, 18(2), 116-125.
Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Study of Reading, 9(2), 167-188.
Ehri, L. C. & Flugman, B. (2018). Mentoring teachers in systematic phonics instruction: Effectiveness of an intensive year-long program for kindergarten through 3rd grade teachers and their students. Reading & Writing, 31(2), 425-456.
Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S. A., & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 393-447. doi: 10.3102/00346543071003393
Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Willows, D. M., Schuster, B. V., Yaghoub-Zadeh Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(3), 250-287.
Er, S. (2013). Using total physical response method in early childhood foreign language teaching environments. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1766-1768. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.113
Fahrurrozi. (2017). Improving students' vocabulary mastery by using Total Physical Response. English Language Teaching, 10(3), 118-127. doi: 10.5539/elt.v10n3p118
Fox, B. J. (2008). Word identification strategies: Building phonics into a classroom reading program (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Foy, J. G., & Mann, V. (2006). Changes in letter sound knowledge are associated with development of phonological awareness in pre-school children. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(2), 143-161.
Gandhi, A. G., Ogut, B., Stein, L., Bzura, R., & Danielson, L. (2017). Enhancing accessibility for students with decoding difficulties on large-scale reading assessments. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(6), 540-551. doi: 10.1177/0022219417714774
Ghani, M. Z., & Ghous N. H. H. M. (2014). The effectiveness of Total Physical Response (TPR) approach in helping slow young learners with low achievement acquire English as a second language. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 4(6), 1-13.
Goldberg, H., & Lederberg, A. (2015). Acquisition of the alphabetic principle in deaf and hard-of-hearing preschoolers: the role of phonology in letter-sound learning. Reading & Writing, 28(4), 509-525
Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Hackney, B. (1968). Reading achievement and word recognition skills. The Reading Teacher, 21(6), 515-518.
Hagen-Burke, S., Burke, M. D., & Crowder, C. (2006). The convergent validity of the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills and the Test of Word Reading Efficiency for the beginning of first grade. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 31(4), 1-15.
Hall, G. (2011). Exploring English language teaching: Language in action. Routledge Introductions to Applied Linguistics. Routledge, London.
Helland, T., Tjus, T., Hovden, M., Ofte, S., & Heimann, M. (2011). Effects of bottom-up and top-down intervention principles in emergent literacy in children at risk of developmental dyslexia: A longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(2), 105-122.
Henbest, V. S., & Apel, K. (2017). Effective word reading instruction: What does the evidence tell us? Communication Disorders Quarterly, 39(1), 303-311. doi: 10.1177/1525740116685183
Henry, M. K. (1989). Children’ word structure knowledge: Implication for decoding and spelling instruction. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 135-152.
Hsu, C. C. (2013). Effects of integrating Total Physical Response into kinect technology on learning English vocabulary (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Hsu, H. C., & Lin, C. H. (2006). The effects of Total Physical Response on English functional vocabulary learning for students with disabilities in the elementary school (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Hsu, H. W. (2004). Teaching English through TPR: Case studies on Taiwanese children’s EFL development (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Hsu, Y. C. (2017). The effect of prior phonics learning experiences on fifth graders’ phonics performance (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Huang, S. B. (1999). The study of the investigation of the teachers’ opinions about in junior high school (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Huang, S. Y. (2012). The effects of intensive phonics instruction on EFL fifth graders’ decoding and encoding abilities and English learning attitudes (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
International Reading Association (1997). The role of phonics in reading instruction: A position statement of the International Reading Association. Retrieved from ERIC, Number: ED437647.
International Reading Association & National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1998). Learning to read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices for young children. Young Children, 53(4), 30-46.
Jones, C., & Reutzel, D. R. (2012). Enhanced alphabet knowledge instruction: Exploring a change of frequency, focus, and distributed cycles of review. Reading Psychology, 33(5), 448-464.
Juel, C., & Minden-Cupp, C. (2000). Learning to read words: Linguistic units and instructional strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 458-492.
Kahn-Horwitz, J. (2016). Providing English foreign language teachers with content knowledge to facilitate decoding and spelling acquisition: a longitudinal perspective. The International Dyslexia Association, 66(1), 147-170. doi: 10.1007/s11881-015-0120-0
Karava, E. (2014). Applied linguistics to foreign language teaching and learning: Approaches and methods for foreign language teaching. Athens, Greece: National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.
Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2-10. Retrieved from JSTOR.
Keller, J. M. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and e3-learning. Distance Education, 29(2), 175-185. doi: 10.1080/01587910802154970
Kim, Y. S., Petscher, Y., Foorman, B. R., & Zhou, C. (2010). The contributions of phonological awareness and letter-name knowledge to letter-sound acquisition - a cross-classified multilevel model approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 313-326.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
Kress, J. E., & Fry, E. B. (2016). The reading teacher's book of lists (6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bas.
Kunnu, W. (2017). The development of speaking skills through Audio-lingual Method, presented at International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference, Albena, Bulgaria, 2017. doi: 10.5593/SGEMSOCIAL2017/HB31/S10.040
Kuo, M. Y. (2012). The effects of preliminary phonics instruction on EFL fifth-graders' oral reading performance (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lee, F. H. (2004). An investigation of middle school EFL teachers’ beliefs in and attitudes toward English teaching in southern Taiwan (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Lee, M. N. (2011). The effectiveness of two phonics instructional approaches on Taiwanese EFL young readers’ single word reading and spelling (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Lee, P. C. (2017). The effects of an interactive reading aloud method for focused phonics instruction on EFL low achievers’ word recognition and reading fluency (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Lee, T. T. (2017). An action research of using games on 5th grader’s English remedial instruction program for improving students’ phonics and learning attitudes (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Lerner, M. D., & Lonigan, C. J. (2016). Bidirectional relations between phonological awareness and letter knowledge in preschool revisited: A growth curve analysis of the relation between two code-related skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 144, 166-183.
Lin, F. J. (2000). The Audio-lingual Method in English curriculum design and teaching in elementary schools (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Lin, H. C., & Chien, S. C. (2009). An introduction to English teaching: A textbook for English educators. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG
Lin, W. H. (2014). The acquisition of phonics rules for Taiwanese EFL pupils: An investigation (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Linse, C. T., & Nunan, D. (2005). Practical English language teaching: Young learners. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Liu, J. C. (2014). The impact of phonological awareness on EFL students’ learning (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Liu, Q. X., & Shi, J. F. (2007). An analysis of language teaching approaches and methods - Effectiveness and weakness. US-China Education Review, 4(1), 69-71.
Lo, H. C. (2016). Enhancing first graders’ phonics performance, oral reading accuracy and automaticity by applying systematic synthetic phonics instruction integrating multisensory approach (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., & Anthony, J. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36, 596-613.
Maddox, K., & Feng, J. (2013). Whole language instruction vs. phonics instruction: Effect on reading fluency and spelling accuracy of first grade students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Georgia Educational Research Association, Savannah, GA.
Mahapatra, S. (2016). Planning behaviour in good and poor readers. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(4), 1-5. Retrieved from ERIC, Number: EJ1092364.
Manolitsis, G., & Tafa, E. (2011). Letter-name letter-sound and phonological awareness: Evidence from Greek-speaking kindergarten children. Reading & Writing, 24(1), 27-53. doi: 10.1007/s11145-009-9200-z
Mart, C. T. (2013). The Audio-Lingual Method: An easy way of achieving speech. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(12), 63-65. doi:10.6007/IJARBSS/v3-i12/412
McKay, P. (2006). Assessing young language learners. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
McKenna, M. C., Walpole, S., & Jang, B. G. (2017). Validation of the Informal Decoding Inventory. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 42(2), 110-118. doi: 10.1177/1534508416640747
McLachlan, C., & Arrow, A. (2010). Alphabet and phonological awareness: Can it be enhanced in the early childhood setting? International Research in Early Childhood Education, 1(1), 84-94.
McLachlan, C., & Arrow, A. (2014). Promoting alphabet knowledge and phonological awareness in low socioeconomic child care settings: A quasi experimental study in five New Zealand centers. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27(5), 819-839.
Mesmer, H. A. E., & Griffith, P. L. (2005) Everybody’s selling it: But just what is explicit, systematic phonics instruction? The Reading Teacher, 59(4), 366-376.
Metsala, J. L., & Ehri, L. C. (1998). Word recognition in beginning literacy. Mahwah, N.J.: Routledge.
Moats, L. C. (2000). Speech to print: Language essentials for teachers. Baltimore: MD: Paul H Brookes.
Moustafa, M., & Maldonado-Colon, E. (1999). Whole-to-part phonics instruction: Building on what children know to help them know more. The Reading Teacher, 52(5), 448-458.
Muter, V. (1994). Influence of phonological awareness and letter knowledge on beginning reading and spelling development. In C. Hulme & M. Snowling (Eds.), Reading development and dyslexia (pp. 45-62). London: Whurr.
Naeini, N. N., & Shahrokhi, M. (2016). Relationship between gender and vocabulary teaching methodology among Iranian EFL children: A comparison of TPR and Direct Method. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 7(1), 60-74. doi: 10.7575/aiac.alls.v.7n.1p.60
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (2012). Literacy in early childhood and primary education (3-8 years) (NCCA Publication No. 15). Retrieved from https://www.ncca.ie/media/2137/literacy_in_early_childhood_and_primary_education_3-8_years.pdf
National Institute for Literacy (2009). Early beginnings: Early literacy knowledge and instruction (National Institute for Literacy Contract No. ED #ED-04-CO-0041). Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/documents/NELPEarlyBeginnings09.pdf
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Reports of the Subgroups. Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf
Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Nurlaili, Nurani, S., & Yohana, L. (2015). The effectiveness of teaching English vocabulary through Total Physical Response Storytelling (TPRS). DEIKSIS, 7(1), 63-68.
Pikulski, J. J. (1997), Teaching word-identification skills and strategies: A balanced approach. Retrieved from http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/teach/.
Pikulski, J. J., & Chard, D. J. (2005). Fluency: Bridge between decoding and reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 510-519.
Privitera, G. J., & Ahlgrim-Delzell, L. (2018). Quasi-experimental and single-case experimental designs. In G. J. Privitera and L. Ahlgrim-Delzell (Eds.), Research methods for education (pp. 333-370). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Pufpaff, L. A. (2009). A developmental continuum of phonological sensitivity skills. Psychology in the Schools, 46(7), 679-691. doi: 10.1002/pits.20407
Pufpaff, L. A. (2011). Adapted assessment of phonological sensitivity skills: A preliminary investigation. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 33(1), 13-22. doi: 10.1177/1525740110367825
Putri, A. R. (2016). Teaching English for young learners using a Total Physical Response (TPR) Method. Jurnal Edulingua, 3(2), 15-22.
Rasinski, T. V. (2004). Creating fluent readers. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 46-51.
Rasinski, T. V., & Padak, N. D. (2008). From phonics to fluency: Effective teaching of decoding and reading fluency in the elementary school. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Rathvon, N. (2004). Early reading assessment: A practitioner’s handbook. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1987). The Audio-lingual Method. In J. C. Richards & T. S. Rodgers (Eds), Approaches and Methods in language teaching (pp. 44-63). Reino Unido, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, J. M. (2018). Evaluation of teaching methods to improve reading performance of English language learners. Journal for the Advancement of Educational Research International, 12(1), 25-33.
Ryder, J. F., Tunmer, W. E., & Greaney, K. T. (2008). Explicit instruction in phoneme awareness and phonemically based decoding skills as an intervention for struggling readers in whole language classrooms. Reading and Writing, 21, 349-369.
Samawiyah, Z., & Saifuddin, M. (2016). Phonetic symbols through Audiolingual Method to improve the students’ listening skill. DINAMIKA ILMU: Journal of Education, 16(1), 35-46.
Sanjaya, D., Rahmah, Sinulingga, J., Lubis, A. A., & Yusuf, M. (2014). Methods of teaching reading to EFL learners: A case study. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 2(2), 9-14.
Schumm, J. S., & Arguelles, M. E. (2006). No two learners learn alike: The importance of assessment and differentiated instruction. In J. Schumm (Ed.), Reading assessment and instruction for all learners (pp. 27-58). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Scott, W. A., & Ytreberg, L. H. (1990). Teaching English to children. Harlow: Longman.
Seliger, H. W., & Shohamy, E. (1989). The components of research. In H. W. Seliger and E. Shohamy (Eds.), Second language research methods (pp.87-112). Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.
Shankweiler, D., & Fowler, A. E. (2004). Questions people ask about the role of phonological processes in learning to read. Reading and Writing, 17(5), 483-515.
Shapiro, L. R., & Solity, J. (2008). Delivering phonological and phonics training within whole-class teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 597-620.
Shapiro, L. R., & Solity, J. (2016). Differing effects of two synthetic phonics programms on early reading development. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 182-203.
Share, D. L., & Gur, T. (1999). How reading begins: A study of preschoolers’ print identification strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 177-213.
Sierra, F. C., & Alcalá, U. D. (2007). Foreign language teaching methods: Some issues and new moves. Retrieved from http://www.encuentrojournal.org/textos/8.7. pdf.
Smith, A., & Wang, Y. (2010). The impact of visual phonics on the phonological awareness and speech production of a student who is deaf: A case study. American Annals of the Deaf, 155(2), 124-130.
Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Snowling, M. (2004). The science of dyslexia: A review of contemporary approaches. In M. Turner & J. Rack (Eds.), The study of dyslexia (pp. 77-90). New York, NY: Kluwer.
Song, L. C. (2016). A comparison of two phonics approaches - the revelational phonics approach and analytic phonics approach (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Stahl, S. A., Duffy-Hester, A. M., & Stahl, K. A. D. (1998). Everything you wanted to know about phonics (But were afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3), 338-355. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.33.3.5
Stahl, S. A., & Murray, B. A. (1994). Defining phonological awareness and its relationship to early reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 221-234.
Stanovich, K. E. (1992). Speculation on the causes and consequences of individual differences in early reading acquisition. In P. Gough, L. Ehri, & R. Treiman (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 307-342). Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.
Stanovich, K. E. (1993). Romance and reality. The Reading Teacher, 47(4), 280-291.
Stein, M., Johnson, B., & Gutlohn, L. (1999). Analyzing beginning reading programs: The relationship between decoding instruction and text. Remedial and Special Education, 20(5), 275-287. doi: 10.1177/074193259902000503
Sung, C. Y. (2017). The effects of teaching phonics via decodable text with and without phonological awareness training via predictable text on Taiwanese EFL grade-two children’s word recognition (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Tarar, J. M., Meisinger, E. B., & Dickens, R. H. (2015). Test review: Test of Word Reading Efficiency – Second Edition (TOWRE-2) by Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 30(4), 320-326.
Thompson, G. B., Tunmer, W. E., & Nicholson, T. (1993). Reading acquisition processes. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Torgesen, J. K., & Mathes, P. G. (2002). Assessment and instruction in phonological awareness (2nd ed.). Tallahassee, FL: Florida Department of Education.
Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (2012). Test of word reading efficiency – TOWRE-2 (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Tsai, K. C. (2010). The effects of Total Physical Response on English words learning for moderately mentally challenged students in elementary school (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) (2014). Seven steps to reading (Inaugural report of the READ Alliance). Retrieved from http://cks.in/read-alliance/
Vaish, V. (2014). Whole language versus code-based skills and interactional patterns in Singapore’s early literacy program. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44(2), 199-215.
Vance, N. (2017). Audio-lingual Method. Salem Press Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://dbs.ncue.edu.tw:2093/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN=89164083&lang=zh-tw&site=eds-live
Vesay, J. P., & Gischlar, K. L. (2013). The big 5: Teacher knowledge and skill acquisition in early literacy. Reading Horizons, 52(3), 281-303.
Villaume, S. K., & Brabham, E. G. (2003). Phonics instruction: Beyond the debate. The Reading Teacher, 56(5), 478-482. Retrieved from EBSCO.
Wang, Y. F. (2004). An investigation of teachers’ instructional problems with teaching English to non-English majors: A case study of southern Taiwan university of technology (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Webb, M. Y. L., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Kim, S. H. (2004). A construct validation study of phonological awareness for children entering prekindergarten. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 22(4), 304-319.
Wen, C. K. (2017). Development of an App interactive training system to improve English listening comprehension (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child development, 69, 848-872.
Wu, C. Y. (2011). Reciprocal teaching for low achievers in an EFL context (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Wu, W. S. (2006). What else after “How are you?” – Reflections on methodologies of English teaching in Taiwan. Journal of Education and Foreign Languages and Literature, 2, 71-81.
Wu, Y. C. (2013). Application of the Audio-lingual Method for enhancing Taiwanese EFL children’s willingness to communicate and speaking abilities (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Wu, Y. J. (2016). A study of phonics poetry as effective teaching materials for enhancing EFL eighth graders’ decoding of consonant digraphs and vowel diagraphs (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://libproxy.ncue.edu.tw
Wyse, D., & Goswami, U. (2008) Synthetic phonics and the reaching of reading. British Educational Research Journal, 34(6), 691-710. doi: 10.1080/01411920802268912
Yang, A. (2017). Super phonics: From phonics to reading (book 1). Taipei, Taiwan: Caves Education Training.
Yang, Y. X. (2016). Designing a board game: A study on English education (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw
Yopp, H. K., & Yopp, R. H. (2000). Supporting phonemic awareness development in the classroom. The Reading Teacher, 54(2), 130-143.