| 摘要: | 面對全球將寫作能力納入考試的趨勢，臺灣亦在考試制度上顯現了對於寫作能力的重視，而在落實寫作教學的過程中，教學者可能面對學生寫作態度不佳、動機低落或是寫作教學授課時數不足等問題，而遊戲化教學經許多研究證實能提升學習動機及學習表現，因此本研究旨在探討遊戲化寫作教學是否能替代限制式寫作教學，藉由降低高中生寫作焦慮程度，增進其議論文寫作能力。本研究以臺灣北部某女中之高二、三學生為實驗對象，實驗組學生為高三自然組前段班及高二自然組特殊選材班，共35人；控制組學生為社會組前段班共17人，共兩組，總共52人。實驗組學生先接受遊戲化寫作教學，控制組先接受限制式寫作教學。透過混和設計變異數分析檢驗寫作焦慮程度及寫作測驗前、後測各項成績差異，以相關分析檢驗學生心流體驗分數與寫作焦慮程度之相關性及學生寫作焦慮程度與議論文寫作能力之相關性。研究結果顯示兩組學生在論據數量的寫作能力並未因接受不同教學而有顯著提升，在寫作焦慮方面也並未因接受不同教學有顯著下降。但兩組學生在立意取材（p < .05）、遣詞造句（p < .05）、結構組織（p < .05）等面向的寫作能力及寫作總分（p < .01）上皆有顯著提升。而心流與立意取材（r = .056）、遣詞造句（r = .087）、結構組織（r = -.129）等寫作能力及寫作總分（r = -.019）之間未達顯著相關，與寫作焦慮（r = .091）之間也並無顯著相關；寫作焦慮與立意取材（r = -.035）、遣詞造句（r = -.082）、結構組織（r = -.085）等寫作能力及寫作總分（r = -.102）之間也並未達顯著相關，但趨勢上呈現負相關；寫作能力之間呈現高度正相關，並且寫作總分與論據數量（r = .455）、立意取材（r = .907）、遣詞造句（r = .930）、結構組織（r = .833）等寫作能力之間亦呈現高度正相關。根據本研究結果，學生能透過遊戲化寫作教學提升議論文寫作能力，亦期望本研究能為國文教師在寫作教學中多一項選擇，協助學生學習寫作議論文。;In response to the global trend of incorporating writing competence into large-scale assessments, Taiwan has likewise increased its emphasis on writing ability within its examination system. However, in the practical implementation of writing instruction, teachers often face challenges such as students’ negative attitudes toward writing, low learning motivation, and insufficient instructional time. Prior research has demonstrated that gamified instruction can enhance both learning motivation and academic performance. Therefore, the present study aims to examine whether gamified writing instruction can serve as an alternative to constrained writing instruction by reducing high school students’ writing anxiety and improving their argumentative writing performance.
Participants were 52 eleventh- and twelfth-grade students from an all-girls senior high school in northern Taiwan. The experimental group consisted of 35 students from a high-achieving natural-science class in grade 12 and a special-admission natural-science class in grade 11, whereas the control group comprised 17 students from a high-achieving social-science class. The experimental group received gamified writing instruction, while the control group received constrained writing instruction. A mixed-design ANOVA was employed to examine differences in writing anxiety and various dimensions of writing performance between pretest and posttest. Correlational analyses were further conducted to explore relationships among students’ flow experience, writing anxiety, and argumentative writing performance.
The results revealed no significant improvements in the number of arguments generated, nor significant reductions in writing anxiety, for either group based on the type of instruction received. Nevertheless, both groups showed significant gains in idea development (p < .05), word choice and sentence fluency (p < .05), organizational structure (p < .05), and overall writing scores (p < .01). Flow experience was not significantly correlated with idea development (r = .056), word choice and sentence fluency (r = .087), organizational structure (r = –.129), or overall writing performance (r = –.019), nor with writing anxiety (r = .091). Writing anxiety likewise did not show significant correlations with idea development (r = –.035), word choice and sentence fluency (r = –.082), organizational structure (r = –.085), or overall writing performance (r = –.102), though the correlations were generally negative in direction. Strong positive correlations were found among all dimensions of writing performance, and overall writing scores were positively associated with number of arguments (r = .455), idea development (r = .907), word choice and sentence fluency (r = .930), and organizational structure (r = .833).
Based on these findings, the study suggests that gamified writing instruction has the potential to enhance students’ argumentative writing performance. It is hoped that the results may provide Chinese language teachers with an additional instructional approach to support students in developing their argumentative writing skills. |
