| Abstract: | 筆者試圖探討台灣學生寫作的「籌創」過程, 同時結合「服務學習」研究, 以探索「服務學習」所提供學生真實經驗與社會文化互動會如何影響寫作「籌創」的過程。 「籌創」簡單來說是研究寫作時所有醞釀、計畫、構思與發現的行為。許多人也許直覺地相信經驗的轉化與靈感的創造是自我摸索不可言喻的一種微妙的經驗累積,很難透過教與學的方式習得。但是如果寫作「籌創」--靈感與構思的能力被證明可以藉由社會互動、經驗與文化的體驗而增進, 那麼,寫作中的「籌創」過程與強調社會文化互動的教學法,如「服務學習,」則在未來的研究與教學中應該值得更高度的重視。筆者的研究問題是根據Lauer (2004)的籌創定義而產生： 1.服務與非服務學習學生資料收集上有何不同? 2. 服務與非服務學習學生想法產生上有何不同? 3.服務與非服務學習學生觀點成立上有何不同? 4.服務經驗如何影響學生的作者身份來分析寫作情境需求? 服務與非服務學習學生在作者身份上有何不同? 本計畫是一個質化的實驗設計，筆者以teacher-researcher 的身份參與研究過程。實驗將參與學生分為兩組。每組人數約為20 人左右, 實驗組的學生選修「服務學習」融入的大學英文學術寫作課程；對照組的學生選修的是傳統的大學英文學術寫作課程。資料收集包括問卷、反思日記、學生寫作作品、面談資料等。問卷與面談問題將針對其寫作時「籌創」的過程、架構論點的策略、讀者的分析、「服務學習」經驗的轉換、收集資料的考慮、個人寫作角色的變化、和寫作問題的解決之道等。學生的作文、反思日記、問卷、與面談紀錄都會納入多角對照分析。透過研究問題一的探討, 筆者預期多元的「服務學習」資料可以提供寫作的學生更高的寫作動機與更多元的寫作探討角度。研究問題二的探討可以瞭解實驗組與對照組學生在發展想法上的認知過程與認知路徑差異。 筆者預期「服務學習」的學生因為寫作想法的產生是經歷親身的體驗與真實世界的參與感觸, 「服務學習」的學生可以在寫作上展現比「非服務學習」的學生更高的知識擁有權。從學生的問卷、面談與文章內容筆者希望可以瞭解學生在論點架構的過程、認知路徑與論點深度。筆者假設實驗組的學生因為參與「服務學習」可以對討論議題有更深入的看法, 而且「服務學習」的學生更能理解不同的反對聲音, 他們的論點因此能更深入並更具批判性。從研究問題四的探討中, 筆者期待藉由文辭分析看到實驗組的學生具有更多元的作者身份變化。參與「服務學習」的學生可以因應寫作需求以圈內人的角度深度探討議題, 也可保有圈外人的冷靜和不同的思考角度來客觀的分析議題, 使得問題的切入點可以更豐富, 同時使學生可以因為紮實的服務體驗與服務議題相關的知識習得, 使學生在寫作時可以更有自信的展現專家的姿態與筆調。
“Invention,” in general, can be defined as all the writing acts of incubation, planning, idea generation, discourse development and argument construction. According to Cicero, invention is viewed as one of the five important elements of rhetoric. Although issues of invention have been widely discussed in L1 writing research, invention studies in Taiwan are severely scarce. This study attempts to shed lights on how community services, featuring social cultural interactions and situated learning, impact on Taiwanese students’ writing invention. Based on Lauer’s (2004) definitions of invention, the four research questions are: 1. How does service learning experience influence data collection? 2. How does service learning experience influence idea generation? 3. How does service learning experience influence argument development? 4. How does service learning experience influence identity construction? A qualitative research will be conducted. There will be about 20 participants in each of the experimental and the control group respectively. Students in the experimental group will volunteer in non‐profit organizations while taking the course of English academic writing. All of the three writing projects, narration, comparison/contrast and argumentation, are requested to write according to students’ volunteer experience. Students in the control group will have the same writing instruction as the experimental group except volunteering in communities. Instead of writing the three required projects based on service experience, students in the control group can choose any social‐cultural related topics to write the three projects. Multiple data, including questionnaire (x1), interview protocol (x1), reflection journals (x2) and students’ writing texts (x3) will be collected for triangulation analysis. It is hypothesized that students taking service learning may have more contextual resources for data collection than those who do not take service learning; hands‐on service learning experience enables students of the experimental group to have better knowledge ownership than the students of the control group; service learning experience empowers students to develop more effective arguments, and cultural exposure and social interaction allow students taking service learning to have authorial identity and enable them to transfer textual identities between insiders and outsiders. If students’ writing invention can be positively affected by service learning, applications and implications of service learning to writing invention should deserve more attention in the field of writing study |
