政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/124230

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/124230

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | 全文筆數/總筆數 : 113822/144841 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51797296 線上人數 : 575

RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.

搜尋範圍

查詢小技巧：

您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果

若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料

進階搜尋

主頁 ‧ 登入 ‧ 上傳 ‧ 說明 ‧ 關於政大典藏 ‧ 管理

到手機版

政大機構典藏 > 教育學院 > 教育學系 > 學位論文 > Item 140.119/124230

請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/124230

題名:	知識翻新活動對英語閱讀理解、焦慮及動機之影響 The Effects of Knowledge Building on Reading Comprehension, Reading Motivation and Reading Anxiety
作者:	葉晏瑜 Yeh, Yen-Yu
貢獻者:	洪煌堯葉晏瑜 Yeh, Yen-Yu
關鍵詞:	知識翻新活動閱讀理解閱讀焦慮閱讀動機 Knowledge building activities Reading comprehension Reading anxiety Reading motivation
日期:	2019
上傳時間:	2019-07-01 11:06:41 (UTC+8)
摘要:	本研究的主要目的在探討知識翻新（knowledge building）活動融入英語閱讀教學對學生閱讀理解、閱讀焦慮、以及閱讀動機之影響。研究對象為台北市某國中九年級兩班學生：一班為實驗組（n=14），一班為控制組（n=17）。前者採用知識翻新活動融入教學，後者則使用分組合作教學。兩組學生皆使用相同的知識論壇（knowledge building）作為輔助課堂學習的線上平台。本研究之研究問題包含：（1）知識翻新活動融入英語閱讀教學對於提升學生閱讀理解的成效為何？（2）知識翻新活動融入英語閱讀教學是否能降低學生閱讀焦慮？（3）知識翻新活動融入英語閱讀教學能否引起學生較高的閱讀動機？（4）知識翻新活動融入英語閱讀教學是否能促進學生產出高品質的想法？（5）知識翻新與分組合作學習兩組學生在知識論壇上的活動情形有何差異？研究資料來源包括：（1）PIRLS閱讀測驗前後測；（2）閱讀焦慮量表前後測；（3）閱讀動機量表；（4）生活情境簡答題；與（5）平台貼文。資料分析方式採用共變數分析、相依樣本t檢定、獨立樣本t檢定、質化分析及行為順序檢定等。主要研究結果發現：（1）相較於分組合作學習組，知識翻新活動融入英語閱讀教學較能夠提升學生的英語深層閱讀理解；（2）知識翻新活動融入英語閱讀教學在降低學生英語閱讀焦慮上並無顯著效果；（3）知識翻新活動融入英語閱讀教學在引起學生英語閱讀動機上並無優於分組合作學習教學；（4）知識翻新組學生產出的想法在品質方面優於分組合作學習組學生；（5）知識翻新組學生在知識論壇中的貼文多與個人生活經驗相關且多元；然而分組合作學習組學生的貼文則較為單調，只侷限在文本內容的單字或文意。 The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of knowledge building activities on students` English reading comprehension, reading anxiety, and reading motivation. Participants in this study were two groups of ninth-grade students from a junior high school in Taipei. Knowledge building activities were integrated into English reading classes of the experimental group (n=14), while students in the control group (n=17) were engaged in a collaborative learning environment that highlights division of labor. Both groups of students used Knowledge Forum as an online platform to enhance their learning. The research questions of this study include: (1) what is the effect of integrating knowledge building activities into English reading classes on improving students` reading comprehension? (2) does the integration of knowledge building activities into English reading classes reduce students` reading anxiety? (3) does the integration of knowledge building activities into English reading classes arouse students` higher reading motivation? (4) does the integration of knowledge building into English reading classes help students produce high-quality ideas? (5) what are the differences between the two treatment groups of students` activities on knowledge Forum? Data sources include: (1) pre-and post-tests from PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study) reading comprehension test; (2) pre-and post-tests from reading anxiety scale; (3) reading motivation scale; (4) essay questions related to life experience; and (5) posts on Knowledge Forum. Data were analyzed by one-way ANCOVA, paired t-test, independent samples t-test, qualitative analysis and behavior sequential analysis. The main findings are as follows: (1) compared with the control group (i.e., learning through collaborative learning that highlights division of labor), the integration of knowledge building activities into English reading classes leads to deeper levels of reading comprehension of students; (2) the integration of knowledge building activities into English reading classes shows no significant effect on reducing students` English reading anxiety; (3) the integration of knowledge building activities into English reading classes is not superior to collaborative learning environment in arousing students` English reading motivation; (4) the quality of the ideas produced by students in the experimental group is better than that of students in the control group; (5) most of the posts from the experimental group are diversified and related to personal life experiences of the students; however, the posts from the control group are monotonous and confined to discussion regarding the textbook vocabulary and the meaning of text content.
參考文獻:	王雅卉（2011）。國二學生的英語閱讀動機,英語閱讀態度及英語閱讀成就之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。吳侃書（2016）。大學生英語閱讀動機與英語閱讀行為之相關研究（未出版之碩士論文）。康寧大學，台南市。吳清基（2010）。推動臺灣的閱讀教育－全民來閱讀。研考雙月刊， 34， 62-66。李秋美（2011）。明示閱讀策略教學對EFL學生閱讀焦慮與理解的影響（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。林秀玉（2006）。小組合作學習達到真正成功必備的要點。科學教育月刊，295，23-32。林盈珊（2014）。臺灣高中生之英語閱讀焦慮研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。林春麗（2018）。合作學習對初二學生數學學習動機與學習成就影響之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。林惠媚（2017）。合作學習對台灣小學生英語聽力焦慮與聽力理解之效益（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。施佩吟（2016）。新北市國中學生英語閱讀焦慮、閱讀策略與閱讀成就關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立政治大學，台北市。柯華葳（1994）。從心理學觀點談兒童閱讀能力的培養。華文世界，74，63-67。柯華葳、張郁雯、詹益綾、丘嘉慧（2017）。PIRLS 2016臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養國家報告。桃園市：國立中央大學。侯翠貞（2009）。高職非英語主修學生英語閱讀焦慮與閱讀理解能力之相關研究（未出版之碩士論文）。朝陽科技大學，台中市。柯寶喬（2011）。國中學生英文閱讀動機、閱讀策略與閱讀行為之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。大葉大學，彰化縣。陳子響（2018）。以解題歷程融入合作學習促進高中物理解題自我效能及合作學習觀點之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。陳勇汀（2017)。滯後序列分析計算器。未出版之工具。取自http://blog.pulipuli.info/2017/10/behavior-analysis-lag-sequential.html 陳佩宜（2011）。國中生英語閱讀動機、英語學習動機與英語成就之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。陳麗雲（2007年7月18日）。世界各國閱讀實況分析－以「閱讀新一代知識革命」為例。取自：http://163.20.156.8/ClassSystemv2/UploadDocument/167_%C5%AA%AA%BA%AD%AB%ADn.pdf 教育部（2018年8月21日）。107學年度新生閱讀推廣計畫。取自：http://bookstart2018.book24.com.tw:2018/public/web_page.aspx?id=1 黃政傑、林佩璇（1996）。合作學習，臺北市: 五南。葉佳盈（2018）。合作學習教學法對提升學習動機之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。中國文化大學，台北市。楊承螢（2014）。英語電子繪本閱讀討論教學對國小五年級學生英語閱讀動機及閱讀能力影響之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺南大學，台南市。劉秀嫚（1998）。合作學習的教學策略。公民訓育學報，7，285-294。蔡姿娟（2004）。合作學習教學法對高三學生英語閱讀理解及態度之效益研究。國民教育研究學報，13，261-283。潘建蓉（2017）。交互教學法結合英語讀物對國中學生英語閱讀動機與閱讀理解之影響（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺南大學，台南市。蘇宜芬（2004）。閱讀理解的影響因素及其在教學上的意義。教師天地，129，21-28。 Baker, L., & Wigfield, A. (1999). Dimensions of children`s motivation for reading and their relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(4), 452-477. Benton, S. L., & Kiewra, K. A. (1987). The assessment of cognitive factors in academic abilities. In R. R. Ronning, J. A. Glover, J. C. Conoley, & J. C. Witt (Eds.), The influence of cognitive psychology on testing (pp. 145-190). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2003). Learning to work creatively with knowledge. In E. D. Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & J. V. Merrienboer (Eds.), Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions (pp. 73-78). Oxford: Elsevier Science. Bruffee, K. A. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge. Retrived from ERIC databse. (ED364160) Chow, B. W. Y., Chiu, H. T., & Wong, S. W. (2017). Anxiety in reading and listening English as a foreign language in Chinese undergraduate students. Language Teaching Research, 22(6), 719-738. Dean, D. L., Hender, J., Rodgers, T., & Santanen, E. (2006). Identifying good ideas: Constructs and scales for idea evaluation. Journal of Association for Information Systems, 7(10), 646-699. Devine, T. G. (1986). Teaching reading comprehension: From theory to practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by "collaborative learning"? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1-16). Amsterdam, NL: Pergamon, Elsevier Science. Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 239-264. Gan, Y., & Zhu, Z. (2007). A learning framework for knowledge building and collective wisdom advancement in virtual learning communities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 206-226. Gardner, R. C., Tremblay, P. F., & Masgoret, A. M. (1997). Towards a full model of second language learning: An empirical investigation. The Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 344-362. Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing. Gambrell, L. B. (1996). Creating classroom cultures that foster reading motivation. Reading Teacher, 50(1), 14-25. Gokhale, A.A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1), 22-30. Goodman, K. S. (1986). What`s Whole in Whole Language?. New Your, NY: Garn Press. Grabe, W. (1988). Reassessing the term “interactive”. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. E. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp. 56-70). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2), 147-166. Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Humenick, N. M., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., & Barbosa, P. (2006). Influences of stimulating tasks on reading motivation and comprehension. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 232-246. Hagaman, J. L., Casey, K. J., & Reid, R. (2012). The effects of the paraphrasing strategy on the reading comprehension of young students. Remedial and Special Education, 33(2), 110-123. Hong, H. Y., Chen, F. C., Chai, C. S., & Chan, W. C. (2011). Teacher-education students’ views about knowledge building theory and practice. Instructional Science, 39(4), 467-482. Hong, H. Y., Scardamalia, M., Messina, R., & Teo, C. (2008, June). Principle-based design to foster adaptive use of technology for building community knowledge. Proceedings of The 8th International Conference on International Conference for The Learning Sciences, pp. 374-381. Hoover, W. A., & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127-160. Horwitz, E. K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a foreign language anxiety scale. Tesol Quarterly, 20(3), 559-562. Johnson, K. (1982). Communicative syllabus design and methodology. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. (2007). The state of cooperative learning in postsecondary and professional settings. Educational Psychology Review, 19(1), 15-29. Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (2008). Active learning: Cooperation in the classroom. The Annual Report of Educational Psychology in Japan, 47, 29-30. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Needham Heights, MA:Allyn & Bacon. Kikas, E., Pakarinen, E., Soodla, P., Peets, K., & Lerkkanen, M. K. (2018). Associations between reading skills, interest in reading, and teaching practices in first grade. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(6), 832-849. Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5-41. Liao, H. C., & Wang, Y. H. (2018). Using comprehension strategies for students` self-efficacy, anxiety, and proficiency in reading English as a foreign language. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 46(3), 447-458. Lien, H. Y. (2016). Effects of EFL Individual Learner Variables on Foreign Language Reading Anxiety and Metacognitive Reading Strategy Use. Psychological reports, 119(1), 124-135. MacCrimmon, K. R., & Wagner, C. (1994). Stimulating ideas through creative software. Management science, 40(11), 1514-1532. McGeown, S. P., Norgate, R., & Warhurst, A. (2012). Exploring intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation among very good and very poor readers. Educational Research, 54(3), 309-322. Niess, M. L. (2018). Online learning trajectory for knowledge-building communities to reframe inservice teachers` TPACK. In Management Association, Information Resources (Eds.), Teacher training and professional development: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 839-862). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). PISA 2009 assessment framework: key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. Paris: Author. Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Murayama, I., Inagaki, S., Takenaka, M., Yamamoto, T., ... & Nakayama, H. (2006). Knowledge-building activity structures in Japanese elementary science pedagogy. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(2), 229-246. Oxford, R., & Shearin, J. (1994). Language learning motivation: Expanding the theoretical framework. The Modern language journal, 78(1), 12-28. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02011.x Parker, R. J. (2018). Designing for knowledge building: an action research study in an elementary classroom (Doctoral thesis). Retrieved from https://prism.ucalgary.ca/handle/1880/106338 Piaget, J. (1964). Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. Journal of research in science teaching, 2(3), 176-186. Reutzel, D., & Cooter, R. (2013). The essentials of teaching children to read: the teacher makes the difference. Boston, MA: Pearson. Roe, B., Smith, S. H., & Burns, P. C. (2011). Teaching reading in today`s elementary schools. Belmont, CA : Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. California: Center for Human Information Processing, University of California. Saito, Y., Garza, T. J., & Horwitz, E. K. (1999). Foreign language reading anxiety. The modern language journal, 83(2), 202-218. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal Education in a Knowledge Society, 97, 67-98. Scardamalia, M. (2004). CSILE/Knowledge forum. Education and technology: An encyclopedia, 183-192. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2010). A brief history of knowledge building. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 36(1). Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational psychologist, 26(3-4), 207-231. Sellers, V. D. (2000). Anxiety and reading comprehension in spanish as a foreign language. Foreign Language Annals, 33(5), 512. Shi, Y. Z., & Liu, Z. Q. (2006). Foreign language reading anxiety and its relationship to English achievement and gender. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 29(2), 59-64. Slavin, R. E. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of educational research, 60(3), 471-499. Smith, F. (2004). Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. Routledge. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children committee on the prevention of reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Research Council. Spoerer, N., Brunstein, J. C., & Arbeiter, K. (2007). Fostering reading comprehension in peer-tutored tandems and in small groups: Results of a training study on reciprocal teaching methods. PSYCHOLOGIE IN ERZIEHUNG UND UNTERRICHT, 54(4), 298-313. Stanovich, K. E. (2017). Attentional and automatic context effects in reading. In Interactive processes in reading (pp. 241-267). Routledge. Stevens, R. J., & Slavin, R. E. (1995). The cooperative elementary school: Effects on students’ achievement, attitudes, and social relations. American educational research journal, 32(2), 321-351. Taboada, A., Tonks, S. M., Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2009). Effects of motivational and cognitive variables on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 22(1), 85. Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Clark, K., & Walpole, S. (2000). Effective schools and accomplished teachers: Lessons about primary-grade reading instruction in low-income schools. The Elementary School Journal, 101(2), 121-165. Taylor, B. M., Pearson, P. D., Peterson, D. S., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2003). Reading growth in high-poverty classrooms: The influence of teacher practices that encourage cognitive engagement in literacy learning. The Elementary School Journal, 104(1), 3-28. Tsai, P. S., Chai, C. S., Hong, H. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2017). Students’ conceptions of and approaches to knowledge building and its relationship to learning outcomes. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(6), 749-761. Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of LS Vygotsky: Problems of the theory and history of psychology (Vol. 3). Springer Science & Business Media. Wendling, B., Schrank, F., & Schmitt, A. (2007). Educational interventions related to the WJ III tests of achievement (Woodcock–Johnson III Assessment Service Bulletin No. 8). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing. Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children`s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth or their reading. Journal of educational psychology, 89(3), 420. Zbornik, J. J., & Wallbrown, F. H. (1991). The development and validation of a scale to measure reading anxiety. Reading improvement, 28(1), 2. Zhao, A., Guo, Y., & Dynia, J. (2013). Foreign language reading anxiety: Chinese as a foreign language in the United States. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3),764-778.
描述:	碩士國立政治大學教育學系 105152006
資料來源:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105152006
資料類型:	thesis
DOI:	10.6814/NCCU201900044
顯示於類別:	[教育學系] 學位論文

文件中的檔案:

檔案	大小	格式	瀏覽次數
200601.pdf	1757Kb	Adobe PDF2	0	檢視/開啟

在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

社群 sharing

著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement

1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.

DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004 MIT & Hewlett-Packard / Enhanced by NTU Library IR team Copyright © - 回饋