國小寫作想法產出之大量閱讀與自由寫數位學習活動設計與探討

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：26

、訪客IP：18.217.144.32

姓名

吳宣宏(Shiuan-Hung Wu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

國小寫作想法產出之大量閱讀與自由寫數位學習活動設計與探討
(Design and Exploration of a Digital Learning Activity for Writing: Idea Generation through Extensive Reading and Freewriting in Elementary School)

相關論文

★ 探索電玩遊戲頻率對於視覺注意力表現能力的效應	★ 代理表現學習模式—以動物同伴為例
★ 常用邏輯句型重組之學習	★ 電腦支援國小數學文字題擬題活動初探
★ 解釋數學：透過科技支援創作與討論以增強小學生的數學溝通能力	★ 提問式鷹架教學結合數位閱讀寫作系統對國小低年級學生語文能力的影響
★ 數學島：興趣驅動之國小數學線上平台設計與初步評估	★ 以「猜擬題」活動增進學生數學文字題解題能力
★ 基於學生練習使用回饋之學習成效預測模型與動態題數練習機制	★ 透過主題地圖與寵物同伴促進閱讀更深更廣的書籍
★ 具推薦書籍功能之閱讀島系統架構設計	★ 透過學生影片創作進行國小數學學習:趣創者理論之應用
★ 英文單字樂園：學生自創字卡搭配複習機制強化英文字彙學習之系統設計及學習成效初探	★ 設計與實作明日寫作系統增進國小學生寫作表現
★ 設計與實踐「提升式寫作」活動以提升國小學生寫作品質與寫作興趣	★ TTPR：設計科技強化型全肢體反應為了小學生和國中生在印尼學習英語詞彙

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

本研究旨在探討大量閱讀與自由寫結合的Elbow-He學習模式，又稱量讀寫學習模式，對於國小四年級學童寫作想法產出之影響。首先，建構一個讓學習者進行量讀與自由寫活動的「量讀寫學習系統」；其次，探究Elbow-He學習模式對學生寫作想法的產出、寫作能力與寫作態度之影響，以及瞭解學生對Elbow-He學習模式之評價；最後，藉由觀察與訪談進一步探究學童在學習活動中的表現。
本研究以桃園縣某國小四年級的一個班級為研究對象(共32人)，採實驗設計中的單組前後測設計，每週兩次，共進行12次量讀與自由寫活動。班級學童每人使用小型筆記型電腦進行個人語文學習，並且透過文章分享互相觀摩同儕間的自由寫作品。
經過為期十週的語文學習活動後，將量化與質性的研究資料整理分析，歸納出本研究的結論如下：
(1)在寫作想法產出方面，學生想法產出有逐漸增多的趨勢，顯示Elbow-He學習模式能有效刺激學生寫作想法之產出。
(2)在寫作能力方面，並未有太明顯的進步。
(3)在寫作態度方面，經過Elbow-He學習模式之後，整體學生抱持更為積極與正向的寫作態度。
(4)在閱讀理解能力方面，經過Elbow-He學習模式之後，學生的閱讀理解能力有顯著提升。
(5)在課程滿意度方面，學童在課程回饋問卷的填答結果顯示Elbow-He學習系統讓學生操作起來簡便容易，也能很愉悅的透過電腦進行閱讀、寫作與文章分享等學習活動。

摘要(英)

The main purpose of this study was to explore the effects on idea-generation through a combination of extensive reading and freewriting which also meant “Elbow-He learning model”, also meant “amount of reading-writing learning model”. This was done firstly through the design and implementation of an “Elbow-He learning system” that could be used by learners to study through the activities of extensive reading and freewriting. Furthermore, this study was conducted in a classroom of fifth-grade students to additionally investigate the practicality of the system, the influence of the language system on fifth-graders’ writing ideas, writing skill, writing attitude, and reading comprehension, and the effectiveness of the curriculum. Changes in the performance of students learning the language arts by this system were analyzed through classroom observations and one-on-one interviews.
A one-group pretest-posttest design was implemented in this study. Participants were 32 students at an elementary school in Taoyuan County, Taiwan. This study was conducted over twelve different learning sessions, two per week. The experimental design consisted of students participating in extensive reading and freewriting activities on the computer. Each student had their own Aspire One notebook computer, also known as a netbook, to study previously written passages and to share their articles, which were primarily written through the freewriting process.
The main results of two-weeks of pre-training and ten-weeks of language activities, derived from both quantitative and qualitative research data, indicated that:
(1)In the aspect of the writing idea generation, the students’ writing ideas progressively increased over time. The Elbow-He learning model can effectively stimulate the generation of more writing ideas among the students.
(2)In the aspect of the writing skills, the students’ writing skills were not observed to make significant progress.
(3)In the aspect of the writing attitude, after the experiment, students overall held more positive attitudes towards writing through language learning model.
(4)In the aspect of the reading comprehension, the students’ reading comprehension improved significantly.
(5)The questionnaire results indicate that in the aspect of feedback on the curriculum, the students felt that it was very easy to use the “Elbow-He learning system”. They enjoyed using the computer to study many language activities, including extensive reading, freewriting and the sharing of articles.

關鍵字(中)

★ 寫作想法
★ 自由寫
★ 大量閱讀

關鍵字(英)

★ writing idea
★ freewriting
★ extensive reading

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iv
目次 vi
圖次 ix
表次 xi
第一章緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 5
1.3 研究問題 6
1.4 名詞釋義 7
1.5 論文架構 8
第二章文獻探討 11
2.1 大量閱讀 11
2.1.1 大量閱讀的定義 11
2.1.2 大量閱讀的優點 12
2.1.3 大量閱讀與精讀的比較 13
2.2 自由寫 14
2.2.1 自由寫的起源 14
2.2.2 自由寫的優點 16
2.2.3 增進自由寫成效之策略 18
2.2.4 主題式自由寫 21
2.3 寫作想法產出之研究 21
2.4 讀寫結合相關理論 24
2.4.1 讀與寫關係 24
2.4.2 讀寫結合 26
2.4.3 讀寫結合相關實徵研究 27
第三章活動模組設計 35
3.1 設計理念 35
3.2 學習流程 38
第四章系統設計 41
4.1 系統設計理念 41
4.2 系統環境與架構 43
4.3 系統功能及介面介紹 44
4.4 系統初次測試 54
4.5 系統功能修正 56
第五章系統實驗與評估 63
5.1 實驗一：系統測試 63
5.1.1 實驗目的 63
5.1.2 實驗對象與環境 63
5.1.3 實驗教材與打字訓練 64
5.1.4 實驗流程 67
5.1.5 資料蒐集方式 69
5.1.6 研究現象初步觀察與討論 70
5.2 實驗二：ELBOW-HE學習模式 72
5.2.1 實驗目的 72
5.2.2 實驗對象與環境 72
5.2.3 活動修正 74
5.2.4 實驗教材與打字訓練 75
5.2.5 實驗流程 79
5.2.5 研究工具 85
5.2.6 資料蒐集與分析 102
第六章實驗結果與討論 107
6.1 自由寫字數統計分析 107
6.2 寫作想法產出之影響 108
6.3 寫作能力的影響 113
6.4 寫作態度的影響 115
6.5 閱讀理解能力之影響 119
6.6 Elbow-He學習模式的問卷回饋分析 121
6.7 綜合討論 132
第七章結論與建議 137
7.1 結論 137
7.2 建議 141
參考文獻 143
英文文獻 143
中文文獻 149
附錄 153
附錄一寫作態度量表 153
附錄二語文學習活動問卷 157
附錄三單元難易度調查問卷 161
附錄四實驗觀察記錄表 163
附錄五學生訪談大綱 164

參考文獻

英文文獻
Antepara, R. (2003). Using news stories in the ESL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, 9 (12). Retrieved August 2, 2007, from http://iteslj.org/.
Arnold, R. (1991). Writing development:Magic in the brain. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
Bamford, J. (1984). Extensive reading by means of graded readers. Reading in a Foreign Language, 2, 218-260.
Bamford, J., & Day, R. R. (1998). Teaching reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 124-41.
Beach, R & Eaton, S. (1984). Factors influencing self-assessing and revising by college freshmen In R Beach & L. Bridwell (Eds.), New Directions in Composition Research . 149- 170. New York The Guilford Press.
Bell, T. (1998). Extensive reading. Why? And How. The Internet TESL Journal, 4 (12).Retrieved August 2, 2007, from http://iteslj.org/.
Bell, T. (2001). Extensive reading: speed and comprehension. The Reading Matrix, 1 (1).Retrieved August 2, 2007, from http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/bell/index.html.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale , N. J.: Erlbaum.
Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215-241.
Berry, A., Brinck, T., Greenberg, D., Joseph, H., & Rodrigo, V. (2006). Implementation of an extensive reading program with adult learners. Adult Basic Education, 16 (2),81-97.
Bright, J. A., & McGregor, G. P. (1977). Teaching English as a second language. London: Longman.
Britton, J., Burgess, T., Martin, N., McLeod, A & Rosen, H. (1975). The development of writing abilities, 11-18. London: Macmillan Education.
Brookes, A., & Grundy, P. (1990). Writing for academic purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Chou, Y. L. (2002). The effects of short stories on English conjunction instruction for EFL students in vocational high school. Unpublished master thesis, English Department of National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.
Constantino, R. (1995). Learning to read in a second language doesn’t have to hurt: The effect of pleasure reading. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39, 68-69.
Davis, C. (1995). Extensive reading: an expensive extravagance?. ELT Journal, 49, 329-335.
Day, R.R., & Bamford, J. (1998). Extensive reading in the second language classroom. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dexter,S.L.,Anderson,R.E., & Becker, H. J. (1999). Teachers’ views of computers as catalysts for changes in their teaching practive. Journal of Research on Computing in Education,31(3), 221-239.
Dias,L.B.(1999), Integrating technology: some things you should know. Learning & Leading with Technology, 27 (3), 10-13.
Dickerson, Mi. (1987). Exploring the inner landscape: The journal in the writing class. In T. Fulwiler (Ed.), The Journal Book, 129-136, Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, Heinemann.
Ding, X., & Qian, J. (2004). Schemata and their interactive application in English reading. Sino-US English Teaching, 1 (12). Retrieved August 2, 2007, from http://www.linguist.org.cn/doc/su200412/su20041202.doc
Dupuy, B., Tse, L., & Cook, T. (1996). Bring books into the classroom: first steps in turning college-level ESL students into readers. TESOL Journal, 5, 10-15.
Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Elley, W., & Mangubhai, F. (1983). The impact of reading on second language learning. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 53-67.
Faigley, L., Daly, J. & Witte, S. (1981). The role of writing apprehension in writing performance and competence. Journal of Education Research, 75, 16-21.
Fishman, S. M. (1997). Student writing in philosophy: A sketch of five techniques. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 69, 53-66.
Flower, L. S. , & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The Dynamics of composing: Make plans and juggling constraints. Cognitive process in writing. 31-50.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College composition and communication, 32, 4 , 365-387.
Goodman, K.(1986). What’s whole in whole language?. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.
Grabe. W. (1995).Why is it so difficult to make extensive reading the key component of L2 reading instruction?. Paper presented at the Reading Research Colloquium, Annual TESOL Convention, Long Beach, CA.
Graves, D. (1978). Balance the Basics: Let Them Write. New York: Ford Foundation.
Hafiz, F. M., & Tudor, I. (1989). Extensive reading and the development of languageskills. ELT Journal, 43(1), 4-13.
Hayes, J. R. , & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steninberg (Eds), Cognitive process in writing. Hillsdale , N. J.: Erlbaum.
Hedge, T. (1985). Using readers in language teaching. Hertfordshire: Modern English Publications.
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kao, N. H. (2006). Graded readers and young adults literature in an extensive reading classroom. Unpublished master thesis, English Department of Tsing Hua University,Taiwan.
Katstra, J., Tollefson, N., & Gilbert, E. (1987). The effects of peer evaluation on attitude toward writing and writing fluency of ninth grade students. Journal of Educational Research, 80(3), 168-172.
Kinstch, W. (1974). The representation of meaning in memory. New York: Wiley.
Krashen, S. (2001). More smoke and mirrors: A critique of the National ReadingPanel report on fluency. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(2), 119-123.
Lao, C .Y., & Krashen. S.D. (2000). The impact of popular literature study on literacy development in EFL: More evidence for the power of reading. System, 28, 261-270.
Lee, H. (1999). Investigation of Freewriting Activities in ESL Process Writing Classrooms. Research Online. Retrieved May 24, 2009, from http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk1/tape9/PQDD_0005/MQ43312.pdf
Li, L. Y. (2007). Exploring the Use of Focused Freewriting in Developing Academic Writing. Research Online. Retrieved May 24, 2009, from http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol4/iss1/5.
Lindemann, E. (1982). Ken Macrorie: A Review Essay. College English, 44(4),358-367.
Loucky, J. P. (1996). Combining intensive and extensive reading strategies with cooperative and communicative learning activities. Retrieved August 2, 2007, from http://ww7.tiki.ne.jp/~call4all/PDFfiles/j04-combining.pdf.
Lucas, T. (1990). Personal journal writing as a classroom genre. In J. Peyton (Ed.), Students and Teachers Writing Together, 99-124. Virginia: TESOL, Inc.
Macrorie, K. (1970). Telling Writing(1st ed.). New York, CA：Boynton/Cook Press.
Mason, B., & Krashen, S. (1997). Extensive reading in English as a foreign language. System, 25, 91-102.
Mehlinger, H. D.(1996). School reform in the information age. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(6), 400-407.
Moersch, C. (1999). Assessing current technology use in the classroom: A key to efficient staff development and technology planning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 26(8),40-43,49.
Moffet, M. (1982). Student internit and pertinence of content in selecting. Reading Materials. Reading Improvement, 19(4), 310-312.
Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in Teaching Writing. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reynolds, M. (1984). Freewriting’s Origin. The English Journal, 18, 81-82.
Reynolds, M. (1988). Make Free Writing More Productive. College Composition and Communication, 39(1), 81-82.
Robb, T. N., & Susser, B. (1990). EFL extensive reading instruction: Research and procedure. JALT, 12(2). Retrieved August 2, 2007, from http://www.cc.kyoto-su.ac.jp/~trobb/sussrobb.html
Scardamalia, M. , Bereiter, C. & Woodruff, E. (1980). The effects of content knowledge on writing. Paper presented at Educational Research Association, Boston.
Sheu, S, P. H. (2003). Extensive reading with EFL learners at beginning level. TESL Reporter, 36 (2), 8-26.
Shih, M. M. (2005). Creative curriculum design for extensive reading. Paper presented at the English Teachers’ Swap, Taiwan.
Somerville, E. M. & Crème, P. (2005). Asking Pompeii questions: a co-operative approach to writing in the disciplines. Teaching in Higher Education, 10(1), 17-28.
Sprague, D. & Dede, C. (1999). If I teach this way, am I doing my job? Constructivism in the classroom. Learning & Leading with Technology, 27 (1),6-9.
Vanett, L. & D. Jurich. (1990). A context for collaboration: Teachers and students writing together. In: Peyton, J. (Ed.). Students and teachers writing together: Perspectives on journal writing. Alexandria: TESOL, 49-62.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and Language. Massachusetts: The M.I.T. Press.
West, M. (1955). Simplified and abridged. In W. R. Lee (Eds.) (1967), ELT selection (pp. 188-192). London: Oxford University Press.
White, M. (2005). What is extensive reading. Retrieved May 14, 2009, from http://www.360doc.com/showWeb/0/0/246295.aspx.
Williams,J.D.(1989). Preparing to teach writing. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing
Wolcott, W& Dianne, B. (1987). Attitude as it affects developmental writers’ essays(Eric Document Reproduction Service, EJ 379796).
中文文獻
毛國楠(1997)。如何激勵學生的學習動機。載於林清山(主編)，有效學習的方法(63-76頁)。台北市：教育部。
王家珍(1999）。讀寫結合的修辭教學對國小兒童寫作修辭能力的影響。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，花蓮縣。
王瑀(2004）。以同儕互評與討論提升小六學童之寫作表現。國立中央大學學習與教學所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
朱作仁(1993)。小學作文教學心理學。福建：福建教育。
何克抗(2007)。兒童思維發展新論—及其在語文教學中的應用。北京：北京師範大學出版社。
何萬貫(1996）。提高學業成績稍遜中學生讀、寫能力的教學策略----多讀多寫。教育學報，24(2)，81-96。
何萬貫(1992)。語文教學的聲與色。教育學報，20(2)，177-183。
何萬貫(1995)。中學生作文中觀念的組織與聯繫的研究。教育學報，23(2)，169-181。
何萬貫(1998)。高效能中文科課程設計與教學研究。香港教育署課程發展處中文組編：創思薈萃---學者談中學中國語文課程。香港：教育署課程發展處，1-7。
何萬貫、歐佩娟(1998)。中文科範文教學的時間分配。閱讀與寫作教學，73-79。
岑紹基（1998）。寫作教學新趨勢 — 黑爾本高中學生學習寫作報告的啟示。優質教育 — 中文教育新趨勢，343-356。
林銀美(2005)。國小五年級國語科讀寫結合教學之行動研究。國立屏東師範學院教育行政研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。
林鍾隆(2000)。愉快的作文課。台北縣：螢火蟲出版社。
邱天助(1995)。電訊網路與終生教育的發展。教學科技與媒體，20，10-15。
南美英(2007)。晨讀10分鐘─培養快樂閱讀習慣、增進學習力78種高效策略。台北市：天下雜誌。
柯華葳(2006)。教出閱讀力。台北市：天下雜誌。
柯華葳(2003)。作文評分標準研究（未出版）
柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅(2008)。臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養(PIRLS 2006 報告)。行政院國家科學委員會科學教育處研究成果報告(報告編號NSC 93-2522-S-008-005-)，未出版。
洪蘭(2002)。活化大腦激發創造力。天下雜誌，263，92-94。
洪蘭(2003)。創造力與觀察力。回饋會訊，67。檢索日期：2005/9/16，取自http://www.eshare.org.tw/3_Book/Book_txt.asp
韋志成(2001)。語文教學情境論。廣西教育出版社。
涂芝嘉(2001)。國小三年級國語科讀寫結合教學之行動研究----以丫丫班為例。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
張新仁(1992)。寫作教學研究-認知心理學取向。高雄：復文。
梁淑婷(2006)。線上同儕互評對國小六年級學童寫作學習成效影響之實驗研究。國立中央大學學習與教學所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
莊淑娥（2005）。五年級讀寫結合之教學研究。國立臺北教育大學語文教育所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳英豪、簡楚瑛、王萬清(1988)。同儕互動對國小學生寫作能力之影響研究。省立台南師範學院。
黃根基(2005)。培養寫作能力超強的孩子。台北市：奧林文化。
楊昭儀、徐新逸 (1997)。建構網路學習社群的教學設計模式。視聽教育，39(3)，15-27。
楊琇雅(2007)。傳統英文閱讀教學與精讀及廣讀教學對於高職低成就生在克漏字測驗上之影響。國立政治大學英文教學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
葉乃靜（1998）。從閱讀談通俗讀物之蒐藏。大學圖書館，2（2），120-134。檢索日期：2006/3/14，取自http://www.lib.ntu.edu.tw/General/publication/univj/uj2-2/content2-2.htm。
蔡慧美(2008)。整合大量閱讀與寫作教學之行動研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義市。
鄭博真（1996）。寫作修改教學策略對國小學生寫作修改表現、寫作修改能力、寫作品質和寫作態度之影響研究。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所，未出版，台南市。
謝錫金(1996)。香港學生寫作思維過程：暫停的種類和功能。教育研究學報，11(1)，52-72。
羅秋昭(1996)。國小語文科教材教法。台北：五南。
羅素貞(1992)。寫作之觀念產出歷程研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。

指導教授

陳德懷、柯華葳、辜玉旻
(Tak-wai Chan、Hwa-wei Ko、Yu-min Ku)

審核日期

2009-7-15

推文