場地獨立/場地依賴學習風格與高中生英語閱讀策略運用之研究

Abstract

本研究的目的是透過閱讀策略的教學，探討場地依賴/場地獨立學習風格與高中生閱讀策略使用的關係。研究對象是75位桃園縣二所高中三年級的學生。主要研究工具包括：用以測量學生學習風格的鑲嵌圖形測驗、了解起始點是否一致的全民英檢中級閱讀測驗及一份用於前、後測的閱讀理解測驗，以及一份用來瞭解學生在教學前後閱讀策略使用改變情形的閱讀策略問卷，最後進行一份教學後回饋問卷以了解學生對於此實驗教學的態度及觀感。\n 研究過程分為三個階段。第一階段：執行閱讀測驗前測及閱讀策略問卷前測。閱讀測驗前測是為了瞭解受試者起始點的語言程度;閱讀策略問卷前測則是為了瞭解不同學習風格的學生，在實驗教學前閱讀策略的使用情形；第二階段：實施場地依賴/場地獨立學習風格教學、閱讀策略教學、85年至100年歷屆學測及指考閱讀測驗題型分析與練習。場地依賴/場地獨立學習風格教學是為了介紹學習風格並讓學生瞭解自己學習風格的優勢與侷限；閱讀策略教學的目的是為了介紹整體型及局部型的閱讀策略，讓學生瞭解在實際的閱讀過程中有那些策略可供運用；85年至100年歷屆閱讀測驗題型分析是為了讓學生掌握閱讀測驗的考題趨勢，練習是要讓學生熟悉使用這些閱讀策略；第三階段：執行閱讀測驗後測、閱讀策略問卷後測及教學回饋問卷。閱讀測驗後測是為了瞭解實驗教學的成效;閱讀策略問卷後測是為了瞭解不同學習風格的學習者，在經過十八週的閱讀策略教學後，在整體型及局部型的那些閱讀策略使用上產生顯著的差異;教學回饋問卷則是為了進一步了解學生對於閱讀策略教學之觀感並尋求教學改進上的建議。\n 根據研究結果，主要的發現如下:\n(1)此「閱讀策略教學」實驗，對場地依賴與場地獨立學習者的英語閱讀理解成績皆有正面影響；場地獨立學習者較場地依賴學習者進步尤為顯著。\n(2)不同的學習風格確會造成學習者在整體型及局部型閱讀策略上使用的不同。經過「閱讀策略教學」後，[相同之處]－在閱讀策略的使用：注意引言段、主要論述段及結論段、注意第一段的每一句話（特別是主旨陳述）、注意最後一段的每一句話以瞭解篇章內容、注意作者如何撰寫第一段以引起讀者興趣及注意出現同位語之處，無論是場地依賴或場地獨立的學習者，都出現顯著性的閱讀策略使用改變。[相異之處]－場地依賴學習風格的學習者，在運用整體型閱讀策略：注意作者如何撰寫最後一段，及在運用局部型閱讀策略：注意有無表達比較或對照、注意有無表達原級、比較級或最高級、注意有無表達說明、解釋或換言之的閱讀策略使用上，表現不同於場地獨立學習風格的學習者；而場地獨立學習風格的學習者，在運用整體型閱讀策略：注意作者的寫作目的、注意表達作者風格、語調、態度、立場或觀點之處、注意推斷出文章可能的來源及出處，及在運用局部型閱讀策略：注意有無表達方位順序、注意有無表達讓步、注意出現特殊體例之處、注意出現倒裝句、注意出現加強語氣之處的閱讀策略使用，表現不同於場地依賴學習風格的學習者。\n(3)不同的學習風格確會影響學習者在不同閱讀測驗題型上的表現。在「閱讀策略教學」後，場地依賴學習風格的學習者，在運用整體型閱讀策略：文章風格/作者態度、推論題型，以及在運用局部型閱讀策略：粗體單字題型上表現較佳；而場地獨立學習風格的學習者，則在運用整體型閱讀策略：主旨題、作者的寫作目的，以及在運用局部型閱讀策略的細節題及指涉題型上表現較佳。\n(4)在接受「閱讀策略教學」後，無論是場地依賴或場地獨立，大部份的受試者都給予正面肯定的評價；對閱讀較有信心；對長篇文章不再那麼畏懼；對於場地依賴/場地獨立學習風格的教學普遍認同。然對於「閱讀策略教學」在英文寫作上的助益，贊成者與態度保留者幾占各半比率；對於學習風格的教學時機因大考在即，多持謹慎保留態度。受試者也表達了他們對於最有幫助及最困難的整體型及局部型閱讀策略的看法。\n 根據本研究的發現，研究者在文末提出數點教學建議及未來相關研究方向。

The present study aims to probe into the relationship between FD/FI learning styles and reading strategy use through RSI. Seventy five students of two 12th-grade senior high school classes in Tao-Yuan County were selected as one field dependent (FD) group and one field independent (FI) group. Five instruments were used: Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT), General English Proficiency Test (GEPT), a reading strategy questionnaire (Questionnaire I), a pre-and post-test, and a students’ responses questionnaire (Questionnaire II). \n Research procedures are divided into three major stages. At the first stage, Reading Comprehension Test and Questionnaire I before RSI were conducted. Reading Comprehension Test is to understand the subjects’ language proficiency on the initial stage. Questionnaire I is employed to check out student’s reading strategy use before RSI; At the second stage, FD/FI learning styles’ instruction, RSI, and an analysis and practices of the GSAT/DRT reading comprehension tests in the JCEE from 1996 to 2011 were executed. FD/FI learning style instruction is to make students understand learning styles and be aware of their learning styles’ tendencies and possible limitations. RSI is to introduce global and local reading strategies to students. The analysis of the reading comprehension tests of the GSAT/DRT in the JCEE from 1996 to 2011 is to have students grasp the JCEE’s reading testing trends. The practices are to familiarize students with using these global and local reading strategies. At the third stage, Reading Comprehension Test after RSI, Questionnaire I after RSI, and Questionnaire II were carried out. Reading Comprehension Test after reading strategy instruction (RSI) is to examine the teaching effectiveness of RSI. Questionnaire I after RSI is to see if there is any significant difference in reading strategy use by the FD/FI groups before and after RSI. Questionnaire II is to draw participants’ feedbacks on RSI and seek pedagogical suggestions.\nMajor findings are summarized as follows. \n(1)There were significant differences between the FD group and the FI group in the pre-test and post-test. The FD group performed better than the FI group both before and after RSI; however, the FI group improved better than the FD group after RSI.\n(2)Different FD/FI learning styles affected the use of global and local reading strategies. After RSI, the FD and FI groups used the significantly different global/local reading strategies in the “identical” items [see Table 4.8 (A), p.81]. in addition, the FD and FI groups used the significantly different global/local reading strategies in the “different” items [see Table 4.8 (B)].\n (3)Different FD/FI learning styles virtually affected learners’ performance in different reading question types. After RSI, the FD group performed better than the FI group in the global question types “style/tone,” “inference,” and in the local question type “bold word,” while the FI group performed better than the FD group in the global question types “the main idea,” “writing purpose,” and in the local question types “detail” and “reference.” \n(4)Most students considered RSI useful, giving positive responses to this Reading Strategy Instruction (RSI) and learning style instruction. They were not so afraid of reading lengthy passages and became more confident. Half of the students agree with the effectiveness of RSI on writing, while another half of them held a conservative attitude towards that of RSI due to the upcoming General Scholastic Ability Test (GSAT). The most beneficial and difficult reading strategies were also discussed about students’ responses.\n Based on the findings of this study, some implications were provided and several suggestions for future studies were offered at the end of this thesis.