運用行動裝置促進小學生的英語情境學習

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：31

、訪客IP：3.143.214.105

姓名

陳淑鈴(Holly S. L. Chen) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

運用行動裝置促進小學生的英語情境學習
(Improving English Learning in Elementary Schools with Mobile Devices in Familiar Situation)

相關論文

★ 同步表演機器人之建構與成效評估	★ 探討國小學童使用電子書多媒體註記系統結合註記分享機制對其學習行為與時間之影響
★ 先備知識對註記式多媒體電子書的影響研究：從個別環境到分享環境	★ Facilitating EFL speaking and writing with peer-tutoring and storytelling strategies in authentic learning context
★ An investigation into CKEL-supported EFL learning with TPR to reveal the importance of pronunciation and interactive sentence making	★ Investigation of Facilitating Physics Learning using Ubiquitous-Physics APP with Learning Map and Discussion Board in Authentic Contexts
★ 智慧互動SmartVpen在真實情境對於英文學習之影響	★ 利用合作虛擬化的網絡設計輔助計算機網路學習
★ 探討擴展合作式多媒體認知理論和其對EFL聽力與口語能力之影響 - 結合動覺辨識和學習者設計內容之猜謎遊戲	★ 在真實情境中利用智慧機制提升國小學生之外語口說及對話能力之評估
★ 探討在真實情境下教師回饋對學習認知與學習持續性之影響	★ 註釋、對話代理和協作概念圖支持大學生議論文寫作和後設認知的培養
★ Developing and Validating the Questionnaire and Its Model for Sustainable and Scalable Authentic Contextual Learning Supported by Mobile Apps	★ 探討個人化、情境化及社會化的智慧機制輔助真實情境國小幾何學習與其對學習成效之影響
★ Investigation of smart mechanisms for authentic contextual learning with sensor and recognition technologies	★ 探討智慧回饋如何影響學習時眼動和觸控操作的表現-以 Covid-19 快篩模擬為例

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)

情境學習對學生的學習有許多好處，特別是對於以英語作為一門外語來學習的學習者而言。本研究提出了一個使用行動裝置融入學習系統來幫助小學生在情境中練習和增進他們的英語技能。一方面，聽和說的實驗中招募了五年級的兩個班級共計60名學生；其中一個班是實驗組有30名學生，其餘學生是另一個班被分配為對照組。而另一方面，讀和寫的實驗中招募59位六年級的學生，這些學生分別來自不同的兩個班級；其中一個班是實驗組有28名學生，另一個班是對照組有31名學生。而且，實驗組的學習資源是儲存在行動載具--PDA中的多媒體學習資源，在午餐時間用來輔助學生認識有關於午餐的食材與食物。相較之下，對照組使用的是紙本印刷的圖片和文字，而且沒有配合相對應的情境，就如同傳統的上課方式一般。聽和說的實驗結果顯示，本研究所提出的系統和活動增進了學生在情境中聽與說的練習機會，並能熟悉基本詞彙和簡單的句子。而且，實驗組的學習成就顯著優於對照組。藉由系統推薦同儕聲音的功能，實驗組學生能在情境中反覆聆聽與跟讀，從而獲得更多練習的機會，並能能在情境中與同儕互動。其他顯著的發現是，學生會將午休時間和同儕的學習經驗反映在晚餐和父母的互動中，而將所學應用於日常情境中，這被定義為多樣化實踐(practice diversity)，這種多樣化實踐增加是顯著相關於學生的學習成就也提高。也就是說，當學生在情境中與同儕的多樣化實踐越多，他們的英語技能也隨之提高。透過訪談，本研究發現實驗組學生能擴展他們在校的學習到日常家庭生活中。換句話說，學生的學習不是課堂中刻意的安排的演練，而是自發性的實踐在日常生活中。此外，在讀和寫的實驗中學生可以在情境中使用行動載具輔助完成寫作任務，這些情境包括描述學校操場、教室內設施和午餐菜色及心情。實驗的結果顯示實驗組和對照組之間學生的學習成就有顯著差異。實驗組學生認為在情境中寫作的活動很有趣;因此，他們在寫作過程中更傾向於持續維持較高的學習興趣。基於訪談學生的資料顯示：在活動情境中透過本研究提出的系統輔助學生，不但能激發學生寫出更多句子，而且能描述的標的物也更清晰透徹。因此，本研究能幫助小學生在情境中學習英語。

摘要(英)

It is beneficial for students to experience situational learning, especially for English as a foreign language (EFL) learning. This research proposed a situational learning system with mobile device to help elementary school students practice and improve their English skills. On one hand, the listening and speaking experiment recruited 60 fifth-grade students from two separate EFL classes. A class of 30 students was identified as the experimental group, and the remaining students were assigned as the control group. On the other hand, the reading and writing experiment recruited 59 sixth-grade students from two separate EFL classes. A class of 28 students was identified as the experimental group, and another class of 31 students was assigned as the control group. Furthermore, the experimental group learned multimedia-based learning materials about food materials at lunch with PDAs. In contrast, the control group learned via paper-based learning materials in class without real contextual support. The results of the listening and speaking experiment show that the proposed system and designed activities provided EFL elementary school students with listening and speaking practice opportunities in basic vocabulary and simple sentences with the support of familiar, situational learning. Additionally, findings reveal that the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group in learning achievement. By providing recommended sample voices recorded by peers, students in the experimental group could repeatedly listen to the recordings in familiar situations, thus obtaining more opportunities to practice and interact with peers later. In addition, the other significant finding is that the number of peers used to practice speaking English in daily contexts, defined as practice diversity, was significantly correlated to learning improvement. That is, when students practiced speaking English with an increased number of peers, in familiar contexts, their English skills improved. After interviews with students, an interesting phenomenon was identified; students in the experimental group extended their learning from school to home. In other words, students’ learning was not only a deliberate event but the situation learning also took place spontaneously in their daily lives. Moreover, in the reading and writing system students can carry out assigned writing tasks using the support of mobile devices in situations deemed to be familiar to the students, such as on the school playground, within classroom facilities, and at lunch. The results of the experiment indicated a significant difference in learning achievement between the two groups. Students in the experimental group perceived the designed activities to be fun; thus, they were more inclined to maintain interest in situated learning scenarios. Furthermore, based on interviews with participating students from both groups, we found that the activities presented within familiar contexts, and supported by our proposed system, inspired students to not only write more sentences, but to describe the target objects clearly and thoroughly. Therefore, the proposed system and activities can help EFL students, particularly novices, learning English in familiar situational contexts.

關鍵字(中)

★ 情境學習
★ 熟悉的情境
★ 行動學習
★ 練習多樣性
★ 同儕互動
★ 以英語為外語的寫作學習

關鍵字(英)

★ situated learning
★ familiar context
★ mobile learning
★ practice diversity
★ peer interaction
★ EFL writing

論文目次

Table of Contents

Abstract i
中文摘要 iii
謝誌 iv
Table of Contents v
List of Tables vii
List of Figures viii
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1-1 Background 1
1-2 Research Purpose 8
1-3 Definition of Terms 9
1-4 Independent and Dependant Variables 11
1-4-1 Independent Variables of Listening and Speaking Activities 11
1-4-2 Independent Variables of Reading and Writing Activities 13
1-5 Research Questions 16
1-6 The Proposed Tasks vs. Traditional Method 17
Chapter 2 Literature Review 20
2-1 Mobile Assisted Language Learning 20
2-2 Situated Language Learning 22
2-3 Development of Listening and Speaking Skills with the Assistance of Mobile Technology 25
2-4 Development of Reading and Writing Skills with the Assistance of Mobile Technology 27
2-5 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) 31
Chapter 3 Research Design 33
3-1 The Proposed System 33
3-1-1 The Learning System for Listening and Speaking Tasks 33
3-1-2 The Learning System for Reading and Writing Tasks 35
3-2 Instruments 38
3-3 Participants 38
3-3-1 Participants of Listening and Speaking Tasks 39
3-3-2 Participants of Reading and Writing Tasks 40
3-4 Data Collection Procedure 41
3-4-1 Learning Activities of Listening and Speaking 42
3-4-2 Learning Activities of Reading and Writing 50
3-5 Validity and Reliability of the Questionnaire 53
3-5-1 The Questionnaire of the Listening and Speaking Tasks 53
3-5-2 The Questionnaire of the Reading and Writing Tasks 54
Chapter 4 Results and Discussion 56
4-1 Results of Listening and Speaking Tasks Analysis 56
4-1-1 The Learning Achievement of Listening and Speaking Tasks 56
4-1-2 The Effect of Recommended Voices on Learning Achievement 57
4-1-3 The Effect of Conversation Activities on Learning Achievement 58
4-1-4 The Relationship of Students’ Perceptions about Listening and Speaking Tasks 59
4-1-5 Learning in Familiar Situations 60
4-1-6 Learning tips 61
4-2 Results of Reading and Writing Tasks Analysis 61
4-2-1 The Learning Achievement of Reading and Writing Tasks 61
4-2-2 The Situated Writing Performance and the Effect on Learning Achievement 63
4-2-3 Situated Comments and the Effect on Learning Achievement 65
4-2-4 The Relationship of Student Perceptions on Reading and Writing Tasks…………………………………………. 66
4-2-5 Relationship between Writing Support and Learning Achievement 67
Chapter 5 Conclusions 68
References 71
Appendix 1 The Fan-tan and Riddle Examples 80
Appendix 2 The Pre-test for Listening and Speaking 81
Appendix 3 The Post-test for Listening and Speaking 83
Appendix 4 Questionnaire for easy to use 85
Appendix 5 Questionnaire for usefulness of the system 86
Appendix 6 Questionnaire for playfulness of activities 88
Appendix 7 Questionnaire for usefulness of activities 89

參考文獻

Acosta, B.D., Rivera, C., Willner, L.S., & Fenner, D.S. (2008). Best practices in state assessment policies for accommodating English language learners: A Delphi study. Arlington: George Washington University, Center for Equity and Excellence in Education.
Arslan, R.S., & Sahin-Kızıl, A. (2010). How can the use of blog software facilitate the writing process of English language learners? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23, 183–197.
Bickerton, D. (1981). Roots of language. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma Publishers.
Bruner, J. (1983). Child’s talk: Learning to use language. N.Y.: Norton.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Bueschel, A.C. (2008). Listening to students about learning. Stanford, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Burstall, C. (1975). “Factors Affecting Foreign-Language Learning: A Consideration of Some Relevant Research Findings.” Language Teachings and Linguistics Abstracts, 8, 5-125.
Butler, Y.G. (2004). What level of English proficiency do elementary school teachers need to attain to teach EFL? Case studies from Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, 38, 245–78.
Butler, Y.G., & Hakuta, K. (2008). Bilingualism and second language acquisition. In T.K. Bhatia & W.C. Ritchie (Eds.), The Handbook of Bilingualism (pp. 114–44). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Cannado, M.L.P. (2010). Using virtual learning environments and computer-mediated communication to enhance the lexical competence of pre-service English teachers: A quantitative and qualitative study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23, 129–50.
Carver, S.M. (2006). Assessing for deep understanding. In R.K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 205–221). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Cavus, N., & Ibrahim, D. (2009). m-Learning: An experiment in using SMS to support learning new English language words. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 78–91.
Cawelti, G.. (1995). High school restructuring: What are the critical elements？ NASSP Bulletin/ March, 1-15.
Chang, M., & Ho, C. (2009). Effects of locus of control and learner-control on web-based language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22, 189–206.
Chen, S. (1996). Current Trends in TEFL Planning for Elementary Schools in Taiwan: a Taipei Case Study. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp.27-34). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, Y.S., Kao, J.P., & Sheu, J.P. (2003). A mobile learning system for scaffolding bird watching learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 347–359.
Cheng, L., & Myles, J. (2003). Managing the change from on-site to online: Transforming ESL courses for teachers. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 18(1),
Chuang, C.C. (2006). The effects of mapping strategy applied in English children’s books instruction on the English sentence-making ability of elementary students (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
Clark, A., McQuail, S., & Moss, P. (2003). Exploring the field of listening to and consulting with young children. London: Department for Education and Skills. 29–38.
Collins, A. (1988). Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology (Technical Report No. 6899). Cambridge, MA: BBN Labs.
Cook, V. (1969). The analogy between first and second language learning. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 7, 207-216.
Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle Creek, NJ: Pearson Education.
Crystal, D. (1997). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Curtain, H.A., & Dahlberg, C.A. (2004). Languages and children, making the match: New languages for young learners. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Curtain, H., & Pesola, C.A.B. (1994). Language and Children: Making the Match. (2nd ed.). N.Y.: Longman.
Davis, F.D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Doctoral dissertation. Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340.
Dornyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. Language Learning, 53(S1), 3–32.
Dubin, F., & Olshtain, E. (1986). Course Design: Developing programs and materials for language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press.
Edasawa, Y., & Kabata, K. (2007). An ethnographic study of a key-pal project: Learning a foreign language through bilingual communication. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 189–207.
Ervin-Tripp, S.M. (1978). Is second language learning like the first? In E.M. Hatch (Ed.). Second language acquisition: A book of readings (pp.190-205). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Fallows, S., & Chandramohan, B. (2001). Multiple approaches to assessment: Reflections on use of tutor, peer and self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 6, 229–246.
Fathman, A. (1975). The relationship between age and second language productive ability. Language Learning, 25(2), 245-253.
Ferris, D.R., Pezone, S., Tade, C.R., & Tinti, S. (1997). Teacher commentary on student writing: Descriptions & implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6, 155–182.
Fullan, M. (1982). The meaning of educational change. New York: Teacher’s College Press.
Fullan, M. (1992). Successful school improvement: The implementation perspective and beyond. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Furrow, D., Nelson, K., & Benedict, H. (1979). Mother’s speech to children and syntactic developing: Some simple relationships. Journal of Child Developing, 6, 423-442.
Genesee, F. (1981). A comparison of early and late immersion programs. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 13, 115-128.
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning Through Two Languages: Studies of Immersion and Bilingual Education. New York: Newbury House.
Grimshaw, S., Dungworth, N.,McKnight, C.,&Morris, A. (2007). Electronic books: Children’s reading and comprehension. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 583–599.
Guilherme, M. (2007). English as a global language and education for cosmopolitan citizenship. Language and Intercultural Communication, 7(1), 72–90.
Hadfield, J., & Hadfield, C. (1999). Simple listening activities. UK: Oxford University.
Hall, J.K., & Verplaetse, L.S. (2000). Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Restructuring: postmodernity and the prospects for educational change. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown & A. S. Wells (Eds.), Education, culture, economy, society (pp. 338-353). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harklau, L. (2002).The role of writing in classroom second language acquisition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 329–350.
Harrell, S., & Bond, M. (2006). Listening to diversity stories: Principles for practice in community research and action. American Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 365–376.
Hazan, V., Sennema, A., Iba, M., & Faulkner, A. (2005). Effect of audiovisual perceptual training on the perception and production of consonants by Japanese learners of English. Speech Communication, 47, 360–378.
Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2010). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 23–48.
Hsu, H., Wang, S., & Comac, L. (2008). Using audioblogs to assist English-language learning: An investigation into student perception. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21, 181–198.
Huang, Y.-M., Chiu, P.-S., Liu, T.-C., & Chen, T.-S. (2011a). The design and implementation of a meaningful learning-based evaluation method for ubiquitous learning. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2291–2302.
Huang, A.F.M., Yang, S.J.H., & Liaw, S.-S. (2011b). A study of user’s acceptance on situational mashups in situational language teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01152.x
Huang, Y.-M., Huang, Y.-M., Huang, S.-H., & Lin, Y.-T. (2012). A ubiquitous English vocabulary learning system: Evidence of active/passive attitudes vs. usefulness/ease-of-use. Computers & Education, 58(1), 273–282.
Husen, T., & Postlethwaite, T.N. (1994). The international encyclopedia of education (2nd ed.). Oxford: Pergamon.
Hwang, W., Wu, S., & Su, J. (2008). A study of listening diversity and speaking for English learning with mobile device supports. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 53, 748–757.
Hwang, W.Y., & Chen, H.S.L. (2013). Users’ familiar situational contexts facilitate the practice of EFL in elementary schools with mobile devices. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 26(2), 101-125.
Hwang, W.Y., Chen, H.S.L., Shadiev, R., Huang, R.Y.M., & Chen, C.Y., (2014a). Improving English as a foreign language writing in elementary schools using mobile devices in familiar situational contexts, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(5), 359-378
Hwang, W.Y., Huang, R.Y.M., Shadiev, R., Wu, S., & Chen, H.S.L., (2014b). Effects of using mobile devices on English listening diversity and speaking for EFL elementary students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(5), 503-516.
Hwang, W.Y., Shadiev, R., & Huang, S.M. (2011). A study of a multimedia web annotation system and its effect on the EFL writing and speaking performance of junior high school students. ReCALL, 23, 160–180.
Hwang, W.Y., Yeh, D.M., & Lee, C.Y. (2003). The multi-user and multi-media interaction mechanism, Chinese Journal of Science Education, 11, 373–389.
Joe, A., Nation, P., & Newton, J. (1996). Vocabulary learning and speaking activities. English Teaching Forum, 34(1), 2–7.
Johns, T. F., Lee, H., & Wang, L. (2008). Integrating corpus-based CALL programs in teaching English through children’s literature. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21, 483–506.
Johnstone, R. (1994). Teaching modern language in primary school: Approach and implication. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 383175)
Kelch, K. (2010). Curriculum development in English language teaching: Innovations and challenges for the Asian context. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 3, 22–42.
Kong, K. (2009). A comparison of the linguistic and interactional features of language learning websites and textbooks. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 31–55.
Krashen, S., Long, M., & Scarcella, A. (1979). Age, rate and eventual attainment in second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 13, 573-582.
Krashen, S. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Krashen, S. (1987). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL, 20, 271–289.
Lan, Y.J., Sung, Y.T., & Chang, K.E. (2007). A mobile-device-supported peer-assisted learning system for collaborative early EFL reading. Language Learning & Technology, 11, 130–151.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lenders, O. (2008). Electronic glossing – is it worth the effort? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21, 457–481.
Lenneberg, E.H. (1976). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Lerstrom, A. (1990). Speaking across the curriculum: Moving toward shared responsibility. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the conference on college composition and communication, Chicago, IL.
Li, J. (2010). Learning vocabulary via computer-assisted scaffolding for text processing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23, 253–275.
Lipton, G. (1991). FLES (K-8) programs for the year 2000. Hispania, 74 (4), 1084-1086.
Liu, J., & Sadler, R.W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 193–227.
Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Corrective feedback in the chatroom: An experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 1–14.
Lu, S.I. (2008). A study of peer listening diversity for English learning with MCSCL. Master thesis. Taiwan National Central University, Institute of Network Learning Technology.
Mar Perez-Sanagustín, Pedro J. Mu~noz-Merino, Carlos Alario-Hoyos, Xavier Soldani, Carlos Delgado Kloos. (2015). Lessons learned from the design of situated learning environments to support collaborative knowledge construction. Computers & Education 87, 70—82.
Markham, D., & Hazan, V. (2004). The effect of talker-and listener-related factors on intelligibility for a real-word, open-set perception test. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 725–737.
Matsuda, P.K., & De Pew, K.E. (2002). Early second language writing: An introduction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 261–268.
McDonough, J., & Shaw, C. (1993). Materials and Methods in ELT. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ministry of Education and Training. (1999). The Ontario curriculum exemplars, grades 1–8: Writing. Toronto, Canada: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. TESL-EJ, 6, 1–20.
National Writing Project (U.S.). (2003). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific region. Tesol Quarterly, 37, 589–613.
Panitz, T. (1999). The motivational benefits of cooperative learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 78, 59–67.
Penfield, W., & Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and Brain Mechanisms. New York: Atheneum Press.
Pesola, C.A. (1993). Framework for discussion. In G. Duncan(Ed.).Colloquium on Teacher Preparation for Elementary School Foreign Language Program: Proceedings. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 401709)
Pinkwart, N., Hoppe, H.U., Milrad, M., & Perez, J. (2003). Educational scenarios for cooperative use of personal digital assistants. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 383–391.
Potosky, D. (2002). A field study of computer efficacy beliefs as an outcome of training: The role of computer playfulness, computer knowledge, and performance during training. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 241–255.
Rahimpour, M. (2010). Current trends on syllabus design in foreign language instruction. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1660–1664.
Reeves, J. (1999). Elementary School Foreign Language Programs. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 309652)
Reynolds, A.G. (1991). The cognitive consequences of bilingualism. ERIC/CLL News Bulletin, 14, 1-8.
Richards & Rodgers (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Samway, K.D. (1992). Writers’ workshop and children acquiring English as a non-native language (NCBE Program Information Guide 10). Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Schumann, J.H. (1975). Affective factors and the problem of age in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 25(2), 209-235.
Sha, G. (2009). AI-based chatterbots and spoken English teaching: A critical analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22, 269–281.
Shieh, Y. (1989). Toward Planning of English as a Foreign Language in Taiwan. In Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp.301-312). Taipei: Crane.
Silver, R., Hu, G., & Iino, M. (2002). English language education in China, Japan, and Singapore. Singapore: National Institute of Education.
Slattery, M., & Willis, J. (2003). English for primary teachers. UK: Oxford University. Slavin, R.E. (1991). Student team learning: A practical guide to cooperative learning. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Song, Y., & Fox, R. (2008a). Integrating incidental vocabulary learning using PDAs into academic studies: Undergraduate student experiences. Hong Kong: International Conference on Hybrid Learning.
Song, Y., & Fox, R. (2008b). Using PDA for undergraduate student incidental vocabulary testing. ReCALL, 20, 290–p314.
Stein, D. (1998). Situated learning in Adult Education. Columbus OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult Career and Vocational Education (ED418250).
Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be effective peer evaluators. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1, 217–233.
Stockwell, G. (2007). Vocabulary on the move: Investigating an intelligent mobile phonebased vocabulary tutor. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 365–383.
Su, Y. C. (2006). EFL teachers’ perceptions of English language policy at elementary level in Taiwan. Educational Study, 32(3), 265-283
Sun, Y.C. (2007). Learner perceptions of a concordancing tool for academic writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 323–343.
Thorton, P., & Houser, C. (2002). M-learning in transit. In P. Lewis (Ed.), The changing face of call (pp. 229–243). Lisse, the Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249–276.
Tsou, W. (2005). Improving speaking skills through instruction in oral classroom participation. Foreign Language Annals, 38(1), 46–55.
Tsou, W., Wang, W., & Tzeng, Y. (2006). Applying a multimedia storytelling website in foreign language learning. Computers & Education, 47(1), 17–28.
Tsui, A., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 147–170.
Vincent, J. (2001). The role of visually rich technology in facilitating children’s writing. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 242–250.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press
Wang, Y.-H., & Young, S. S.-C. (2014) A Study of the Design and Implementation of the ASR-based iCASL System with Corrective Feedback to Facilitate English Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 219-233.
Wei, F.H., & Chen, G.D. (2006). Collaborative mentor support in a learning context using a ubiquitous discussion forum to facilitate knowledge sharing for lifelong learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 917–935.
Wilkins, D. (1972). Grammatical, situational and notional syllabuses. Paper presented at the International Congress of Applied Linguistics, Copenhagen, Denmark.
William, F. & James, P. L., 1985. Second Language Discourse: A Vygotskyan Perspectiv. Applied Linguistics, 6 (1):19-44.
Woszczynski, A.B., Roth, P.L., & Segars, A.H. (2002). Exploring the theoretical foundations of playfulness in computer interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 369–388.
Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179–200.
Yeh, S.W., & Lo, J.J. (2009). Using online annotations to support error correction and corrective feedback. Computers & Education, 52, 882–892.

指導教授

黃武元(W.Y. Hwang)

審核日期

2015-6-29

推文