Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/49894
|
| Title: | 後設認知閱讀策略訓練對國中生英語閱讀理解及態度的效益研究
The effects of metacognitive reading strategy training on English reading comprehension and attitudes of junior high school students |
| Authors: | 曾鈺惠
Tseng, Yu Hwei |
| Contributors: | 余明忠
Yu, Ming Chun
曾鈺惠
Tseng, Yu Hwei |
| Keywords: | 後設認知閱讀策略
Metacognitive Reading Strategies |
| Date: | 2008 |
| Issue Date: | 2010-12-09 12:24:18 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究的目的在探討後設認知閱讀策略在EFL國中生英語閱讀上的效益。尤其是探究此訓練對高、低分組學生後設認知閱讀策略的使用差異，對英語閱讀觀點及理解之影響，以及學生對後設認知閱讀策略訓練所作的回應。
本研究以新竹縣某國中的一個七年級班級30位學生為研究對象，將學生分為高分組及低分組。這些學生接受為期四週的三種後設認知閱讀策略訓練 (分別為文意圖像策略、預測策略、總結策略)在英語閱讀上之運用。
在資料分析上，主要是針對高、低分組在前後實驗，在後設認知閱讀策略使用上的差異作比較及質的分析。高分組及低分組在閱讀理解測驗上的閱讀能力表現也會做量的分析。除此之外，學生們對於後設認知策略訓練所作的回應，予以質的分析。
本研究的主要總結如下：
1. 後設認知閱讀策略訓練能有效提升高分組及低分組兩組在後設認知閱讀策略上的使用。
2. 後設認知閱讀策略訓練有助於改善高分組及低分組的英語閱讀理解，學生們對後設認知閱讀策略訓練在閱讀理解方面的效益，皆抱持肯定的態度，尤其是低分組學生。
3. 後設認知閱讀策略訓練有助於高分組及低分組的學生，尤其是低分組學生，建立更正確的英語閱讀觀念。
4. 大部分的學生對於後設認知閱讀策略訓練的效益皆表示肯定的態度，並且樂於運用這些後設認知閱讀策略於英語閱讀上，且樂於學習新的閱讀策略。
最後，根據實驗的結果提供一些教學上的建議。
The purpose of the present study is to investigate the effects of metacognitive reading strategy training (MRST) on junior-high-school students’ EFL reading. Specifically, the differences of metacognitive reading strategy use between HPG and LPG, perceptions of reading, English reading comprehension, and their responses to the metacognitive reading strategy training (MRST) are probed.
The participants of this study were thirty junior high school students from one seven-grade class in Shingchu C. The participants were divided into high-proficient group and low-proficient group. These participants received the four-week training (MRST) with three metacognitive reading strategies (semantic mapping, prediction, and summarizing) in reading English texts. In the data collection, the differences between HPG and LPG in metacognitive reading strategy use in the pre-treatment and post-treatment were compared and analyzed qualitatively. Also, HPG and LPG students’ reading performance in reading comprehension tests between the pre-treatment and post-treatment were analyzed quantitatively. In addition, students’ perceptions toward the effects of the MRST were analyzed qualitatively.
Based on the data analyses, the findings of the study are summarized as follows:
1. The MRST was effective in enhancing both HPG and LPG readers’ metacognitive awareness of strategy use.
2. The MRST helped improve both HPG and LPG readers’ comprehension in reading English texts, and students, especially LPG, had positive attitude toward the effectiveness of the MRST in improving reading comprehension.
3. The MRST helped both groups of students, especially LPG readers, have more correct perceptions toward English reading.
4. Most of the students exhibited positive attitude toward the effectiveness of the MRST and showed their willingness to apply the learned metacognitive reading strategies as well as to learn new reading strategies in English reading.
Finally, some pedagogical implications and suggestions are provided on the basis of the findings in this study. |
| Reference: | Abromitis, B. (1994). The role of metacognition: Implication for instruction. Literacy Research Report, 19, 3-31. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 371291).
Alessi, S. M., Anderson, T. H., & Goetz, E. T. (1979). An investigation of lookbacks during studying. Discourse Processes, 2, 197-212.
Alexander, P., & Judy, J. (1988). The interaction of domain-specific knowledge and strategic knowledge in academic performance. Review of Educational Research, 58, 375-404.
Almasi, J. F. (2003). Teaching strategic process in reading. New York: The Guilford Press.
Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75, 461-472.
Anderson, R. C. (1984). Some reflections on the requisition of knowledge. Educational Researcher, 13, 5-10.
Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A., & Wilkinson, I. A. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the Commission On Reading. Urbana, IL: Center for the Study of Reading.
Anderson, R. C., Reynolds, R. E., Schallert, D. L & Goetz, E. T. (1977). Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 14, 367-381.
Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J., & Anderson, M. C. (1978). Schemata as scaffolding for the representation of information in connected discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 433-440.
Andre, M., & Anderson, T. H. (1978-79). The development and evaluation of a self-questioning study technique. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 605-623.
Antonacci, P.A. (1991). Students search for meaning in the text through semantic mapping . Social Education, 55(3), 174-175.
Armbruster, B. B., & Anderson, T. H. (1981). Content area textbooks (Rdg. Ed. Rep. No. 23). Urbana: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
August, D. L., Flavell, J. H., & Clift, R. (1984). Comparison of comprehension monitoring of skilled and less skilled readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 39-53.
Ausubel, D. P. (1980). Schemata, cognitive structure, and advance organizers: A reply to Anderson, Spiro, and Anderson. American Educational Research Journal, 17, 400-404.
Baker, L. (1979). Comprehension monitoring: Identifying and coping with text confusions (Tech. Rep. No. 145). Champion: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 177 525)
Baker, L. (1979). Comprehension monitoring: Identifying and coping with text confusions. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 365-374.
Baker, L. (1985). How do we know when we don’t know? Standards for evaluating text comprehension. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (Vol. 1, pp. 155-205). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Baker, L. (1985b). How do we know when we don’t understand? Standards for evaluating text comprehension. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (Vol. 1, pp. 155-205). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Baker, L., & Anderson, R. I. (1982). Effects of inconsistent information on text processing: Evidence for comprehension monitoring. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 281-294.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353-394).
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984b). Cognitive monitoring in reading. In J. Flood
(Ed.), Understanding reading comprehension: Cognition, language, and the structure of prose (pp. 21-44). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Baker, L., & Brown, A.L. (1984b). Metacognitive skills and reading. In D.P. Pearson (ED.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Baumann, J. F., Seifert-Kessell, N., & Jones, L. (1987, December). Effects of think-aloud instruction on elementary students’ ability to monitor their comprehension. Paper presented at the National Reading Conference, ST. Petersburg, FL.
Bean, T. W., & Steenwyk, E.L. (1984). The effect of three forms of summarization instruction on sixth graders’ summary writing and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 297-306.
Block, E. L. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 463-494.
Block, E. L. (1992). See how they read: Comprehension monitoring of L1 and L2 readers. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 319-343.
Borko, H., Shavelson, R. J., & Stern, P. (1981). Teacher’s decisions in planning of reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 449-466.
Brandsford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Brandsford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. (1973). Considerations of some problems of comprehension. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 383-438). New York: Academic Press.
Braun, C., Rennie, B. J., & Labercane, G. D. (1986). A conference approach to the development of metacognitive awareness. Solving problems in literacy: Learners, teachers, and researchers. The 35th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference, 204-209.
Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 453-481). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, A. L. (1985). Metacognition: The development of selective attention strategies for learning from texts. In H. Singer & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (3rd ed.) (pp. 501-526). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Brown, A. L., Armbruster, B. B., & Baker, L. (1984). The role of metacognition in reading and studying. In J. Orasanu (Ed.), A decade of reading research: Implications for practice (pp. 49-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations, Inc.
Brown, A. L., Armbruster, B. B., & Baker, L. (1986). The role of metacognition in reading and studying. In J. Orasanu (Ed.), Reading comprehension: From research to practice (pp. 49-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, A., Brandsford, J., Ferrara, R., & Champione, J. (1983). Learning, remembering, and understanding. In P.H. Mussen (Series Ed.) & J. Flavell & E. Markman (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Cognitive development (4th ed., pp. 77-166). New York: Wiley.
Brown, A.L., & Campione, J. C. (1979). The effects of knowledge and experience on the formation of retrieval plans for studying from texts. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sukes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory. London: Academic.
Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., & Day, J.D. (1981). Learning to learn: On training students to learn from texts. Educational Researcher, 10(2), 14-21.
Brown, A. L., & Day, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 1-14.
Brown, A. L., Day, J. D., & Jones, R. S. (1983). The development of plans for summarizing texts. Child Development, 54, 968-979.
Brown, A. L., & Smiley, S. (1977). Rating the importance of structural units of prose passages: A problem of metacognitive development. Child Development, 48, 1-8.
Brown, A.L., & Smiley, S. (1978). The development of strategies for studying texts. Child Development, 49, 1076-1088.
Bruinsma, R. (1990). Learning to ride a bike and learning to read: Children’s conception of reading. Australian Journal of Reading:13:114-127.
Calfee, R. (1981). Cognitive psychology and educational practice. In D. C. Berliner (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 9, pp. 3-73). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Canney, G., & Winograd, P. (1979). Schemata for reading and reading comprehension performance (Tech. Rep. No. 120). Champaign, IL: University of Illinois, Center for the Studying of Reading. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 169 520)
Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. The Modern Language Journal, 73(2), 121-134.
Carrell, P. L. (1992). Awareness of text structure: Effects on recall. Language Learning, 42, 1-20.
Carrell, P. L., Pharis, B. G. & Liberto, J. C. (1989). Metacognitive strategies training for ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 23(4), 647-678.
Cassanave, C. P. (1988). Comprehension monitoring in ESL reading: A neglected essential. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 282-302.
Cavanaugh, J. C., & Perlmutter, M. (1982). Metamemory: A critical examination. Child Development, 53, 11-28.
Chang, C. K. (2000). The relationship between four metacognitive factors and reading ability. The Proceeding of the 17th International Symposium on English Teaching, 227-293. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co. Ltd.
Chen, J. C. (2005). Explicit instruction of reading strategies at senior high school in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Cheng, C. K. (2000). The relationship between metacognitive factors and reading ability. In the Proceeding of the Seventeenth conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 277-294). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Cheng, L.Y. (1991). The study of freshman English reading: The application of metacognitive strategies. In the Proceedings of the Second Education Research in Taiwan Province (pp. 596-635). Taichung: Taiwan Province Government.
Chern, C.L. (1994). Chinese Readers’ Metacognitive Awareness in Reading Chinese and English (FL 023 225). Papers presented at the Annual International Language in Education Conference (Hong Kong, 1993). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 386 060)
Clarke, M. A. (1979). Reading in Spanish and English: Evidence from adult ESL students. Language Learning, 29, 121-150.
Clarke, M. A. (1980). The short-circuit hypothesis of ESL reading or when language competence interferes with reading performance. Modern Language Journal, 64, 203-209.
Craig, M. T., & Yore, L. D. (1995). Middle school students’ metacognitive knowledge about science reading and science text: An interview study. Reading Psychology, 16, 169-213.
Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. (1988). Developmental and instructional analysis of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131.
Cummins, J. (1981). Four misconceptions about language proficiency in bilingual education. NABE Journal, 5(3), 31-45.
Cziko, G. A. (1980). Language competence and reading strategies: A comparison of first-and second-language oral reading errors. Language Learning, 30, 101-104.
Day, J. D. (1980). Teaching summarization skills: a comparison of training methods. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois.
Dewitz, P., Carr, E. M., & Patberg, J. P. (1987). Effects of inference training on comprehension and comprehension monitoring. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 99-119.
Dole, Janice, Gerald G. Duffy, Laura R. Roehler, and P. David Pearson (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research 61 (2): 239-264.
Duffy, G. G. (1982). Fighting off the alligators: What research in real classrooms has to say about reading instruction. Journal of Reading Behavior, 14, 357-373.
Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Herman, B. A. (1988) Modeling mental process helps poor readers become strategic readers. The Reading Teacher, 41, 762-767.
Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Sivan, E., Rackliffe, G., Book, C., Meloth, M. S., Vavrus, L. G., Wesselman, R., Putnam, J., & Bassiri, D. (1987). Effects of explaning the reasoning associated with using reading strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481-533.
Duffy, G. G, Roehler, L. R., Sivan, E., Rackliffe, G., Book, C., Meloth, M. S., Vavrus, L. G., Wesselman, R., Putnam, J., & Bassiri, D. (1987). Effects of explaining the reasoning associated with using reading strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 347-368.
Durkin, D. (1978-1979). What classroom observations reveal about reading comprehension instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 14, 481-553.
Durkin, D. (1981). Reading comprehension instruction in five basal reader series. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 515-544.
Ehrlich, M. F., Remond, M., & Tardieu, H. (1999). Processing of anaphoric devices in young skilled and less skilled comprehenders: Differences in metacognitive monitoring. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11 (1), 29-63.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Flavell, J. H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In W.P. Dickson (Ed.), Children’s oral Communication skills (pp. 35-60). New York: Academic Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1985). Cognitive development (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Forrest-Pressley, D. L., & Waller, T. G. (1984). Cognition, metacogniton, and reading. New York: Springer.
Gambrell, L. B., & Heathington, B. S. (1981). Adult disabled readers’ metacognitive awareness about reading tasks and strategies. Journal of Reading Behavior, 13, 215-222.
Garner, R. (1980). Monitoring of understanding: An investigation of good and poor readers’ awareness of induced miscomprehension of text. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12, 55-64.
Garner, R. (1981). Monitoring of passage inconsistency among poor comprehenders: A preliminary test of the “piecemeal processing” explanation. Journal of Educational Research, 74, 159-162.
Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Garner, R. (1992). Metacognition and self-monitoring strategies. In S. J. Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 236-252). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Garner, R., & Kraus, C. (1981-1982). Good and poor comprehender differences in knowing and regulating reading behaviors. Educational Research Quarterly, 6, 5-12.
Garner, R., Macready, G. B., & Wagoner, S. (1984). Readers’ acquisition of the components of the text-lookback strategy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 300-309.
Garner, R., & Reis, R. (1981). Monitoring and resolving comprehension obstacles: An investigation of spontaneous text lookbacks among upper-grade good and poor comprehenders. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 439-447.
Garner, R., Wagoner, S., & Smith, T. (1983). Externalizing question-answering strategies of good and poor comprehenders. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 439-447.
Geva, E. (2000). Processing novel phonemic contrasts in the acquisition of L2 word reading. Scientific Studies in Reading, 4, 295-312.
Glenberg, A. M., Wilkinson, A. C., & Epstein, W. (1982). The illusion of knowing: Failure in the self-assessment of comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 10, 597-602.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second-language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 375-406.
Hare, V. C. (1981). Readers’ problem identification and problem solving strategies for high and low knowledge articles. Journal of Reading Behavior, 13, 359-365.
Hare, V. C., & Borchardt, K. M. (1984). Direct instruction of summarization skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 62-78.
Harris, P. L., Kruithof, A., Terwogt, M. M., & Visser, T. (1981). Children’s detection and awareness of textual anomaly. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31, 212-230.
Harvey, Stephanie and Ann Goudivs (2000). Strategies That Work: Teaching Comprehension to Enhance Understanding. New York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Hiebert, E. H. (1983). An examination of ability grouping for reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 231-255.
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
Ko, M. Y. (2004). A critical literature review of metacognitive reading strategy instruction. Journal of National Huwei University of Science & Technology, 1, 239-250.
Kolers, P. A. (1970). Three stages of reading. In H. Levin & J. P. Williams (Eds.), Basic studies on reading (pp. 90-118). New York: Basic Books.
Krashen, S. D. (1988). Do we learn to read by reading? The relationship between free reading and reading ability. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Linguistics in content: Connecting observation and understanding: Vol. 2. Advances in discourse processes (pp. 269-298). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Kreutzer, M. A., Leonard, C., & Flavell, J. H. (1975). An interview study of children’s knowledge about memory. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 40(1, Serial No.159)
Lesgold, A. M., & Perfetti, C. A. (1978). Interactive processes in reading comprehension. Discourse Processes, 1, 323-336.
Lin, W. L. (2004). An investigation of reading strategy instruction on EFL junior high school students. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chung Cheng University.
Lonberger, R. (1988, February). Effects of training in a self-generated learning strategy on the prose processing abilities of 4th and 6th graders. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Education Association, Savannah, GA.
Masur, E. F., McIntyre, C. W., & Flavell, J. H. ( 1973). Developmental changes in apportionment of study time among items in multiple free recall task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 15, 237-246.
McNeil, J. D. (1987). Metacognition in reading comprehension. In McNeil (Eds.), Reading comprehension: New direction for classroom practice (2nd edit.) (pp. 91-105). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.
Mosenthal, P. (1983). The influence of social situation on children’s classroom comprehension of text. The Elementary School Journal, 83, 537-547.
Myers, M., & Paris, S. G.. (1978). Children’s metacognitive knowledge abinstruout reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 680-690.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Reviews, 84, 231-259.
Nist, S., & Holschuh, J., (2000). Comprehension strategies at the college level. In R. Flippo & D. Caverly (Eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (pp. 75-104). Mahwh, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nuttall, C. (1996). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. London: Heinemann.
Otto, W. (1985). Metacognition and reading instruction Journal of Reading, 28, 573-575.
Oxford, R., Crookall, D., Cohen, A., Lavine, R., Nyikos, M. & Sutter, W. (1990). Strategy training for language learners: Six situational case studies and a training model. Foreign Language Annals, 22:197-216.
Paris, S. G., Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 293-316.
Paris, S. G. & Oka, E. (1986). Children’s reading strategies, metacognition, and motivation. Developmental Review, 6, 25-26.
Palincsar, A. M. (1985, April). Unpacking “multicomponent, metacognitive training packages.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Palinscar, A. M., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
Paris, S. G., Cross, D. R., & Lipson, M. Y. (1984). Informed strategies for learning: A program to improve children’s reading awareness and comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1239-1252.
Paris, S. G., & Jacobs, J. E. (1984). The benefits of informed instruction for children’s reading awareness and comprehension skills. Child Development, 55, 2083-2093.
Paris, S. G., & Lindauer, B. K. (1982). The development of cognitive skills during childhood. In B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 333-349). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Paris, S. G., & Myers, M. (1981). Comprehension Monitoring, memory, and study strategies of good and poor readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 13, 5-22.
Paris, S., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 15-51). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pearson, P. D., & Dole, J. A. (1987). Explicit comprehension instruction: A review of the research and a new conceptualization of instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 88, 153-167.
Persson, U. B. (1994). Reading for understanding: An empirical contribution to the metacognition of reading comprehension. Linkoping Studies in Education and Psychology Dissertations, No. 41.
Pichert, J. W. (1979). Sensitivity to what is important in prose (Tech. Rep. No. 149). Urbana: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 179 946).
Pintrich, P.R. (2002) The role of metacogitive knowledge in learning, teaching and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41 (4) 219-225.
Pintrich, P.R., & Degroot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
Pintrich, P.R., & Wolters, C., & Baxer, G. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self-regulation learning. In G. Schraw & J. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 43-97). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
Pressley, M., Goodchild, F., Fleet, J., Zajchowski, R., & Evans, E. D. (1989). The challenges of classroom strategy instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 89, 301-342.
Resnick, L. B. (1984). Comprehending and learning: Implications for a cognitive theory of instruction. In H. Mandl, N. L. Stein, & T. Trabasso (Eds.), learning and comprehension of text (pp. 431-443). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Risko, V. J., & Feldman, N. (1986). Teaching young remedial readers to generate questions as they read. Reading Psychology, 23, 54-64.
Rinehart, S.D., Stahl, S. A, & Erickson, L. G. (1986). Some effects of summarization training on reading and studying. Reading Research Quarterly, 21,442-438.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance (Vol. 6, pp. 573-603). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R.J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 33-53). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Samuels, S. J., & Kamil, M. L. (1984). Models of the reading process. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 185-224). New York: Longman.
Sarig, G. (1987). High-level reading in the first and in the foreign language: Some comparative process data. In J. Devine, P. L. Carrell, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Research in reading in English as a second language (pp. 105-120). Washington, D. C.: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
Schmitt, M. C. (1988). The effects of an elaborated, directed activity on the metacomprehension skills of third graders. Dialogues in literacy research. The 37th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference, 167-181.
Schmitt, M. C. (1990). A Questionnaire to measure children’s awareness of strategic reading processes. The Reading Teacher, March, 1990, 454-461.
Schneider, W., & Pressley, M. (1997). Memory development between two and twenty. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, 431-449.
Smith, F. (1977). Making sense of reading-and of reading instruction. Harvard Educational Review, 47, 386-395.
Smith, F. (1982). Understanding reading (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Smith, H. K. (1967). The responses of good and poor readers when asked to read for different purposes. Reading Research Quarterly, 3, 53 -83.
Spilich, G. J., Vesonder, G. T., Chiesi, H. L., & Voss, J. F. (1979). Text processing of domain-related information for individuals with high and low domain knowledge. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,18, 275-290.
Spiro, R. J. (1979). Etiology of reading comprehension style. In M. L. Kamil & A. J. Moe (Eds.), Reading Research: Studies and applications (pp. 118-122). Clemson, SC: National Reading Conference.
Spiro, R. J., & Tirre, W. C. (1980). Individual differences in schema utilization during discourse processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 204-208.
Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71.
Steffensen, M. S., Joag-dev, C., & Anderson, R. C. (1979). A cross-cultural perspective on reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 10-29.
Taylor, B. M. (1982). Text structure and children’s comprehension and memory for expository materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 15, 401-405.
Taylor, B. M., & Beach, R. W. (1984). The effects of text structure instruction on middle-grade students’ comprehension and production of expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 19(2), 134-146.
Taylor, B. M., & Berkowitz, B. S. (1980). Facilitating children’s comprehension of content material. In M. L. Kamil & A. J. Moe (Eds.), Perspectives in reading research and instruction (Twenty-ninth Yearbook of the National Reading Conference, pp. 64-68). Clemson, SC: National Reading Conference.
Tulving, E., & Gold, C. (1963). Stimulus information and contextual information as determinants of tachistoscopic recognition of words. Journals of Experimental Psychology, 66, 319-327.
Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
Vygotsky, Lev Semonovich, (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wagoner, S. A. (1983). Comprehension monitoring: What it is and what we know about it. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 328-346.
Wagoner, R. K. & Sternberg, R. J. (1983). Executive control of reading. Unpublished manuscript.
Wellman, H. M. (1978). Knowledge of the interaction of memory variables: A developmental study of metamemory. Developmental Psychologist, 14, 24-29.
Wellman, H. M., Collins, J., & Glieberman, J. (1981). Understanding the combination of memory variables: Developing conceptions of memory limitations. Child Development, 52, 1313-1317.
Winograd, P. N.(1984). Strategic difficulties in summarizing texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 404-425.
Winograd, P. N., & Johnston, P. (1982). Comprehension monitoring and the error detection paradigm. Journal of Reading Behavior, 14, 61-76.
Yuill, N., & Joscelyne, T. (1988) Effect of organizational cues and strategies on good and poor comprehenders’ story understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 152-158.
Zabrucky, K., & Ratner, H. H. (1989). Effects of reading ability on children’s comprehension evaluation and regulation. Journal of Reading Behavior, 21, 69-84. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
英語教學碩士在職專班
93951019
97 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0939510191 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [英語教學碩士在職專班] 學位論文
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
