政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/94977

政大典藏 > College of Foreign Languages and Literature > Department of English > Theses > Item 140.119/94977

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/94977

Title:	透過電子郵件之過程寫作對高職學生英文寫作能力效益之研究 The Effects of Process Writing via E-mail on Vocational High School Students` English Writing Ability
Authors:	查獻瑞 Cha, Hsien jui
Contributors:	林啟一 Lin, Chi yee 查獻瑞 Cha, Hsien jui
Keywords:	過程寫作電子郵件寫作電腦中介通信同儕互評 process writing process approach E-mail writing computer-mediated communication (CMC) peer review
Date:	2007
Issue Date:	2016-05-09 13:32:02 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	有鑒於英文寫作能力日趨重要，英文寫作的教學也愈來愈受到重視。然而在高職英文寫作教學方面來看，其成效卻往往不彰。基於這個原因，研究者運用透過電子郵件之「過程寫作」教學法，期能對高職學生在英文寫作能力的提升上有所裨益。本研究以北縣某高職綜高學術學程部五十八位二年級學生為研究對象，研究者教導實驗組學生運用「過程寫作」的策略，配合在電子郵件的環境下加強英文寫作的能力；控制組學生則僅接受「過程寫作」策略之教學。實驗前，對實驗組及控制組學生施予前測來檢視學生英文寫作能力之起點行為；實驗後，對實驗組及控制組學生施予後測來檢視學生英文寫作能力之進步情形。實驗終了，再以一問卷來探討實驗組學生對實驗之態度及其自評成效。研究結果如下：一、透過電子郵件之「過程寫作」教學法對學生英文寫作能力確有助益。實驗組後測成績高於控制組；再者，實驗組在其前後測比較下，整體寫作能力有顯著之進步。二、在電子郵件的環境下運用「過程寫作」的策略幫助學生在作文中之內容、組織、文法、用字體例方面有所助益。實驗組與控制組之進步情形雖無顯著差異，實驗組進步情形仍大於控制組。三、實驗組學生對透過電子郵件之「過程寫作」教學法，持正面的態度。四、實驗組學生認為在接受透過電子郵件之「過程寫作」教學法之後，自己的英文寫作能力進步了。最後，研究者根據上述研究結果，對高職英文作文教學提出建言，作為未來從事英文寫作教學之教師及研究人員參考。 Owing to the importance of English writing ability on various purposes, teaching writing has received more and more attention nowadays. However, the traditional teaching and then learning process does not work on vocational high school students. This failure inspires the researcher to resort to alternative methods to upgrade his students` English writing ability. The present study was intended to prove that the instruction of process writing via E-mail is effective in enhancing students` English writing ability. Fifty-eight second-year students from two intact classes of Academic Oriented Course in a comprehensive high school in Taipei County participated in this study. The experimental group was taught to apply the strategies of process approach in an E-mail environment at every stage during the experiment while the control group was instructed in process writing strategies solely. Before the experiment, the pretest was used to indicate the starting points of students` writing proficiency. After the experiment, the posttest was administered to examine the effectiveness of process writing via E-mail. In addition, a response questionnaire was given to the experimental group to probe students` attitudes and their self-evaluation of the experiment. The results were as follows. First, the instruction of process writing via E-mail enhanced students` overall English writing ability. The experimental group outperformed the control group in total scores of the posttest. In addition, concerning the total scores between pretest and posttest, the experimental group made a significant progress. Second, the experimental group outperformed the control group in content, organization, grammar, diction, and mechanics after the experiment although the results showed no significant difference. Still, the experimental group made more progress in all five subskills than the control group did. Third, the majority of students in the experimental group responded positively to the instruction of process writing via E-mail. Last, most students in the experimental group considered they made a progress in their English writing ability after the experiment of process writing via E-mail. The present study concluded the effects of process writing via E-mail. Based on the results, the researcher provided writing teachers and educators with constructive suggestions for conducting a writing class or further studies.
Reference:	陳坤田，黃燦遂，林素娥，林啟一， (1993)。 <大學入學考試英文作文評分指標研究報告>。 College Entrance Examination Center (CEEC). 劉慶剛，高照明，林秀慧，游春琪，(2004)。<學測與指考英文作文評分樣例>。 College Entrance Examination Center (CEEC). Alessi, S. M. (2000). Multi-media for learning: Methods and development (3rd ed.). Massachusetts: A Pearson Education Company. Belisle, R. (1996). E-mail activities in the ESL writing class. The Internet TESL Journal, 2, 12. Bloomfield, L. (1993). Language. New York: Holt. Boswood, T. (1997). New ways of using computers in language teaching. TESOL, Alexandria, VA. Cao, Z. X. (2004). Online annotation for language learning. Unpublished master`s thesis, Chung Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan. Carney, B. (1996). Process writing and the secondary school reality: A compromise. English Journal, 85(6), 28-35. Retrieved Nov. 4th, 2004, from ProQuest database. Chang, H. L. (2003). Empower English beginning writers in a vocational school by process writing approach. Unpublished master`s thesis, National Chung Cheng University, Chia-Yi, Taiwan. Chang, P. C. (2003). The effects of the process writing instruction on Taiwanese high school students` overall English writing ability. Unpublished master`s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan. Chen, J. F., & Warden, C. A. (1994). The application & impact of PC-based software in evaluating Taiwan students` writing error types. Journal of Chiengjpn University, 3. Chen, Y. M. (1998). Peer review and learning styles. The Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on English Teaching, 289-298. Chien, I. C., & Liou, H. C. (2002). A study of an on-line multi-user English learning environment for senior high school students. In Proceedings of Taiwan Area Network Conference (pp. 359-362). National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan. Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the collaborative experience of learning. London: Routledge. Dale, H. (1997). Co-authoring in the classroom: Creating an environment for effective collaboration. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Dennis, A. R., & Valacich, J. S. (1993). Computer brainstorms: More heads are better than one. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 531-537. Emig, J. (1971). The composing processes of twelfth graders. Urbana, IL: Nation Council of Teachers of English. Featherstone, H. (1986). Cooperative learning. Harvard Education Letter, 4-6. Flower, L. (1985). Instructor`s manual to accompany Problem-solving strategies for writing. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Garner, R. & Gillingham, M. G. (1996). Internet communications in six classrooms: Conversations across time, space, and culture. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publsihers. Gere, A. R. (1987). Writing groups: History, theory, and implications. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Gray, D. (1999). The internet school. London and New York: Cassell. Harasim, L. (1990). Online education: An environment for collaboration and intellectual amplification. In L. Harasim (Ed.), Online education: Perspectives in a new environment (pp.39-46). New York: Praegeon. Harnad, S. (1991). Post-Gutenberg galaxy: The fourth revolution in the means of production and knowledge. Public-Access Computer Systems Review, 2, 39-53. Heaton, J. B. (1998). Writing English language tests. New York: Longman Group Inc. Herring, S. C. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. New York: Cambridge University Press. Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Kalkowski, P. (1988). Communication in cooperative learning groups. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. Kann, C. L. (2001). The effects of gender on Internet-assisted English writing instruction for senior high school students. Unpublished master`s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and quality of language production. Modern Language Journal, 79, 457-476. Kern, R., & Warschauer, M. (2000). Theory and practice of network-based language teaching. In Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 1-19). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kosterlnick, C. (1989). Process paradigms in design and composition: Affinities and directions. College composition and communication, 40, 267-281. Krashen, S. D. (1984). Writing: Research, theory, and applications. Oxford: Pergamon Institute of English. Li, Y. (2000). Linguistic characteristics of ESL writing in task-based e-mail activities. System, 28, 229-245. Liao, C. C. (1999). E-mailing to improve EFL learners` reading and writing abilities: Taiwan experience. The Internet TESL Journal, 5, 3. Liaw, M. (1998). Using Electronic mail for English as a foreign language instruction. System, 26, 335-352. Lindemann, E. (2001). A rhetoric for writing teachers. 4th Ed. New York: Oxford University Press. Liou, H. C. (2000). Conceptualization and implementation of an English learning web site which bridges TEFL theories and practice. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference in Multimedia Language Education. http://teens.cs.nthu.edu.tw/~excel6/paper/Rocmelia00n.doc Morretta, T. M., & Ambrosini, M. (2000). Practical approaches for teaching reading and writing in middle schools. USA: the International Reading Association, Inc. Muehleisen, V. (1997). Projects using Internet in college English classes. The Internet TESL Journal, 3, 6. Nagel, P. S. (1999). E-mail in the virtual ESL/EFL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal,5, 7. Paulston, C. B., & Bruder, M. N. (1976). Teaching language as a second language: Techniques and procedures. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop. Pennington, M. C. (1996). The power of CALL. Houston, TX: Athelstan. Pi, H. Y. (2002). Interactive writing via email: A case study of three elementary school students. Unpublished master`s thesis, National Taipei Teachers College, Taipei, Taiwan. Proett, J., & Gill, K. (1986). The writing process in action: A handbook for teachers. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Reid, J. M. (1993). Teaching ESL Writing. Eaglewood Cliffs, N. J.: Regents. Reid, J. M. (1994). The Process of Paragraph Writing. Eaglewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall Regents. Shetzer, H., & Warschauer, M. (2000). An electronic literacy approach to networked-based language teaching. In Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 171-185). New York: Cambridge University Press. Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues, and directions in ESL. In B. Kroll (Ed.) Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom, 11-23. New York: Cambridge University Press. Stallard, C. (1974). An analysis of the writing behavior of good student writers. Research in the Teaching English, 8, 206-218 Strasma, K., & Foster, G. (1992). Collaboration within writing classes: An ethnographic point of view. The Writer Instructor, spring/ summer, 111-127. Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 24, 1-14. Taiwan Network Information Center (2008, January). Internet broadband usage in Taiwan. Retrieved July, 14, 2008, from http://www.twnic.net.tw/download/200307/0801a.doc Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wang, M. C. (1993). E-mail dialogue journaling in an ESL reading and writing classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Eugene. Wang, S. R. (2006). Wed-based summary writing learning environment via the model of integrating concept mapping and sharing annotation. Unpublished master`s thesis, National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan. Warschauer, M. (1995). E-mail for English teaching: Bringing the Internet and computer learning networks into the language classroom. TESOL Publications. Warschauer, M., & Healey, M. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Foreign Language Annals, 31, 57-71. Weasenforth, D., & Lucas, S. (1997). On-line and off-line texts of non-native speakers: Distinguishable text types? Retrieved July, 12th , 2005, from http://gwis.circ.gwu.edu/~washweb/lucas.html Weinhold, K. (1997). Defining the writing process. In D. Barnes, K. Morgan, & K. Weinhold (Eds.), Writing process revisited: Sharing our stories, 1-12. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. White, B. (1985). Teaching and assessing writing. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Williams, J. G. (2003). Providing feedback on ESL students` written assignments. The Internet TESL Journal, 9 (10). Retrieved Jan. 18th, 2004, from http://iteslj.org/techniques/williams-feedback.html Woolever, Kristin. R. About writing: a rhetoric for advanced writers. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Wu, C. C. (2002). The effectiveness of computer-enhanced writing: A case study in Taichung First Senior High School. Unpublished master`s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan. Yang, S.C. (2001). Integrating computer-mediated tools in the language curriculum. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, 85-93. Yeh, D. C. (2002). Evaluation of computer-assisted teaching interactive multimedia CD-ROMs of English learning─ An example of Far East English Reader for senior high schools. Unpublished master`s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan. Young, S. S. C (2003). Integrating ICT into second language education in a vocational high school. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 447-461. Zamel, V. (1976). Teaching composition in the ESL classroom: What we can learn from research in the teaching of English. TESOL Quarterly, 10, 1, 67-76. Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. In B. Leeds (Ed.), Writing in a second language: Insights from L1 and L2 teaching and research, 155-172. New York: Longman.
Description:	碩士國立政治大學英語教學碩士在職專班 92951014
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0929510143
Data Type:	thesis
Appears in Collections:	[Department of English] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Size	Format
index.html	0Kb	HTML2	564	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...