Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Learner Agency in a Phonics Training and Theme-Based English Workshop – A Case Study of Four Junior High School Students
Huang, Yu- Hsuan
Chao, Chin- chi
Huang, Yu- Hsuan
|Issue Date:||2021-08-04 14:23:45 (UTC+8)|
|Abstract:||本研究旨在探討短期英語密集營和四位台灣國中生之學習者自主行為。本文採用Larsen- Freeman 對於學習者自主的架構, 進行了質性個案研究以深入了解學習者自主。研究對象為四位雲林縣一所國中生進行為期四周的短期英文密集營，主要資料是透過與四位學生及其學校老師的訪談，其他資料收集像是會議記錄，研究者日誌，學習單及學生學習歷程檔案則是用來進行三角驗證。研究結果顯示，學習者自主不單單是由單一原因而造成的,而是依其所在不同的環境和狀態改變，包含學習者的家庭背景、學習背景、個人特質以及各自對學習的觀點都和學習者自主的變化息息相關。這更彰顯了學習者自主並非固定不變，而是由各種因素互動、變動而產生的。在教學上，本研究希望能為教師或教育工作者提供一個新的視角瞭解學習者自主的動態性質。除了提供合適的訓練及教材之外，更全方位的了解和關心學生是提升學生的學習動機以及進一步提高學生之學習者自主性中不可或缺的。|
The study aims to explore the interplays between the four Taiwanese junior high school learners’ agency and the intensive English remedial workshop. Drawing on the framework of learner agency from Larsen Freeman, a qualitative case study was conducted to attain an in-depth understanding of the interactions between the learner agency and different learning contexts. The participants of this study were four students in a Taiwanese junior high school: Johnny, Kevin, Dora and Pam. Major data was collected through the interviews with the participants and their school teachers. Collection instruments such as meetings notes, researcher’s logs and students’ worksheets, portfolios were also included in order to triangulate the data. The result of the study pointed out that learner agency shifts in interaction with distinct contexts, more specifically, it is actually connected with one’s family background, learning context, personality and their own point of view toward learning. Consequently, this shows that learner agency is an interaction of many factors and the nature of learner agency is therefore dynamic. Pedagogically, this study is expected to provide a new perspective for teachers or educators about the dynamic nature of learner agency. Other than giving appropriate trainings and choosing suitable materials, it is also indispensable to spur students’ learning motivations and help them becomes agentic by providing them with a more holistic concern throughout their learning.
|Reference:||Ahearn, L. M. (2001). Language and agency. The Annual Review of Anthropology, 30(1), 109-137.|
Alptekin, C., Erçetin, G., & Bayyurt, Y. (2007). The effectiveness of a theme-based syllabus for young L2 learners. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 28(1), 1-17.
Aram, D. (2006). Early literacy interventions: The relative roles of storybook reading, alphabetic activities, and their combination. Reading and Writing, 19(5), 489-515.
Block, D. (2009). Second language identities. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 9(3), 225-228.
Breen, M. (2001). Learner contributions to language learning: New directions in research. London: Pearson Education
Brown, A. V. (2009). Students' and teachers' perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 46-60.
Cantrell, S. C., Almasi, J. F., Carter, J. C., & Rintamaa, M. (2013). Reading intervention in middle and high schools: Implementation fidelity, teacher efficacy, and student achievement. Reading Psychology, 34(1), 26-58.
Carson, L. (2012). The role of drama in task-based learning: Agency, identity and autonomy. Scenario Journal for Drama and Theatre in Foreign and Second Language Education, 6(2), 46-59.
Chamberlin-Quinlisk, C., & Senyshyn, R. M. (2012). Language teaching and intercultural education: making critical connections. Intercultural Education, 23(1), 15-23.
Chang, K. Y. R. (1991). Cooperative learning and CALL/IVD in beginning Spanish: An experiment. The Modern Language Journal, 75(2), 205-211.
Chomsky, C. (1971). Write first, read later. Childhood Education, 47(6), 296-299.
Chu, M. C., & Chen, S. H. (2014). Comparison of the effects of two phonics training programs on L2 word reading. Psychological Reports, 114(1), 272-291.
Dupuy, B. C. (2000). Content‐based instruction: Can it help ease the transition from beginning to advanced foreign language classes? Foreign language annals, 33(2), 205-223.
Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962-1023.
Flowerdew, J., & Miller, L. (2008). Social structure and individual agency in second language learning: Evidence from three life histories. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 5(4), 201-224.
Fuchs, S. (2001). Beyond agency. Sociological theory, 19(1), 24-40.
Gao, X. (2010). Strategic language learning: The roles of agency and context. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Gyogi, E. (2015). Children’s agency in language choice: A case study of two Japanese-English bilingual children in London. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(6), 749-764.
Huang, J. P., & Benson, P. (2013). Autonomy agency and identity in foreign and second language education. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 7.
Johnston, R. S., McGeown, S., & Watson, J. E. (2012). Long-term effects of synthetic versus analytic phonics teaching on the reading and spelling ability of 10-year-old boys and girls. Reading and Writing, 25(6), 1365-1384.
Jones, R. H., & Norris, S. (2005). Introducing agency. In Discourse in action: Introducing mediated discourse analysis (pp. 169-171). London, Routledge
Lantolf, J. P., Thorne, S. L., & Poehner, M. E. (2015). Sociocultural theory and Second Language Development. 207-226. New York: Routledge
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2012). Complex, dynamic systems: A new transdisciplinary theme for applied linguistics? Language Teaching, 45(2), 202-214.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2019). On language learner agency: A complex dynamic systems theory perspective. Modern Language Journal, 103(1), 61–79.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2005). Second language research: methodology and design. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Martin, J. (2004). Self-regulated learning, social cognitive theory, and agency. Educational psychologist, 39(2), 135-145.
Mercer, S. (2011). Understanding learner agency as a complex dynamic system. System, 39(4), 427-436.
Morgan, D. Y. (1956). A discussion of remedial teaching, and an account of some attempts at it. English Language Teaching Journal, 10(3), 90-96.
Mukundan, J., Mahvelati, E. H., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2012). The effect of an intensive English program on Malaysian secondary school students' language proficiency. English Language Teaching, 5(11), 1-7.
Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2011). Identity, language learning, and social change. Language teaching, 44(4), 412-446.
Osman, S. R. F., Ahmad, E. A., & Jusoff, K. (2009). Nurturing writing proficiency through theme-based instruction. International Education Studies, 2(3), 140-146.
Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257-267.
Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315-342.
Swain, M. (1996). Discovering successful second language teaching strategies and practices: From program evaluation to classroom experimentation. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 17(2-4), 89-104.
van Lier, L. (1997). Approaches to observation in classroom research; observation from an ecological perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 31(4), 783-786.
Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
|Appears in Collections:||[英國語文學系] 學位論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.