1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 小老師制度在國小英語補救教學上之個案研究
A remedial peer tutoring case study in an elementary school
作者 張順宜
貢獻者 招靜琪
Chao, Chin-Chi
張順宜
關鍵詞 小老師
國小英語
補救教學
日期 2010
上傳時間 4-Sep-2013 14:53:53 (UTC+8)
摘要 以往傳統研究探討同儕相互幫助的機制多在於量化性的陳述其有效結果，然而，在小老師的教學與被幫助者的學習動機上卻較少提出在兩位小朋友的言談互動中，何以促使此同儕相互幫助的機制有正面的效果。本個案研究旨在探討英語為外語的學習環境中，在國小階段的英語補救教學裡，同儕相互幫助的動機與影響。本文採用維高斯基 (Vygotsky) 社會文化學習理論來探討在台灣的國小補救教學環境中，教室兩人一組的同儕學習中，小老師如何使被幫助者語言知識建構起。
本研究對象針對30位五年級學生，分為兩人一組，共15組，實施為期20週小老師制度教學，並且針對其中一組的互動方式，作深入的研究。 研究方法採用質化的言談分析及晤談訪問。資料分析重於探討被幫助者如何藉由小老師的協助，完成該年級應學會的字母、單字認讀與基礎閱讀的過程。目的是希望呈現小老師在與被幫助者言談互動之中，小老師如何一步一步地提供合適的協助以建立被幫助者的語言知識概念。
本研究主要的發現有：
1. 這一名受過小老師制度訓練的小學生能夠很快掌握學習者的學習困難處並提供協助。
2. 這一名小老師用程度分級的協助方式來探測學習者的能力，且能夠發揮創意，給予適當的協助。學習者也表示小老師用多種問答的方式來幫助自己釐清學習盲點，這樣有助於了解自己的學習潛力。
3. 這一名小老師與學習者之間的朋友關係在學習過程中扮演重要的媒介角色。
本研究根據以上議題討論結果，在文末進一步提供建議，作為教育學者們參考。
參考文獻 Aljaafreh, A. (1992). Negative feedback in second language learning and the zone of proximal development. Dissertation, University of Delaware.
Aljaafeh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. The Modern Language Journal 78, 465-483.
Anton, M., & F. DiCamilla. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(3), 314-342.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). (Y. McGee, Translator). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Beasley, C. (1997). Students as teachers: The benefits of peer tutoring. In R. Pospisil and L. Willcoxson (Eds.), Learning Through Teaching (pp. 21-30). Proceedings of the 6th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, Murdoch University. Perth: Murdoch University. Retrieved from http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlfi1997/beasley.html
Bentz, J. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (1996). Improving peers’ helping behavior to students with learning disabilities during mathematics peer tutoring. Learning Disabilities Qaurterly, 19, 202-215.
Bergen, Timothy J. and Mi, Han-fu. (2002). Peer tutoring and the self-instructional module. Educational Research Quarterly, 25(4), 28-35.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003).Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Borkan, J. M., Miller, W. L., Neher, J. O., Cushman, R., & Crabtree, B. F.(1997). Evaluating family practice residencies: A new method for qualitative assessment. Family Medicine, 29(9), 640-647.
Chang, V. (2002, May 4). English goals too high for children. Taipei Times, pp.8.
Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners’ errors. Language Learning, 27, 29-46.
Chen, F. M., Huang, Y. L., Liu, L. (Eds.). (2003). Happy Baby Flashcards for Phonics. Taiwan Mac Educational Co., Ltd.
Chou, C. T. (2002, July 8). Closing the English proficiency gap. Taipei Times, pp.8.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Journal, 64 (1), 1-35.
Cohen, J. (1986). Theoretical considerations of peer tutoring. Psychology in the Schools, 23(2), 175-186.
Cohen, P., Kulik, J., & Kulik, C. (1982). Educational Outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 237-248.
De Lisi, R., & Golbeck, S. L. (1999). Implications of Piagetian theory for peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. New Jersey: Erlbaum Press.
Donato, R. (1994). ‘Collective scaffolding in second language learning’ in Lantolf and Appel 1994b.
Duff, P. A. (2008). Case Study Research in Applied Linguistics. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dupaul, G. J., Ervin, R. A., & Hook, C. L. (1998). Peer tutoring for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Effects on classroom behavior and academic performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31(4), 579-592.
Fantuzzo, J.W., King, J. A., & Heller, L. R. (1992). Effects of Reciprocal Peer Tutoring on Mathematics and School Adjustment: A component analysis. Journal of Educational Psuchology, 84(3), 331-339.
Fantuzzo, J.W., Polite, K., & Grayson, K. (1990). An evaluation of reciprocal peer tutoring across elementary school settings. The Journal of School Psychology, 28, 309-323.
Fawcett, L. M., & Garton, A. F. (2005). The effect of peer collaboration on children’s problem-solving ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 157-169.
Frasier, P. Y., Slatt, L., Kowlowitz, V., Kollisch, D. O., & Mintzer, M. (1997). Focus groups: A useful tool for curriculum evaluation. Family Medicine, 29(7), 500-507.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Bentz, J., Phillips, N. B., & Hamlett, C. L. (1994). The nature of student interactions during peer tutoring with and without training and experience. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 75-103.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Phillips, N. B., Karns, K., & Dutka, S. (1997). Enhance students’ helping behavior during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual methematical explanations. The Elementary School Journal, 97(3).
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Kazdan, S., & Allen, S. (1999). Effects of peer-assisted learning strategies in reading with and without training in elaborated help giving. The Elementary School Journal, 99(3), 201-219.
Garton, A. F., Harvey, R., & Pratt, C. (2003). The role of language in collaborative problem solving. Unpublished manuscript.
Garton, A. F., & Pratt, C. (2001). Peer assistance in children’s problem solving. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19, 307-318.
Greenwood, C. R., Arreaga-Mayer, C., & Utley, C. A. (2001). Class-wide peer tutoring learning management system: Applications with elementary-level English language learners. Remedial and Special Education, 22(1).
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning: Working with ESL Children in the Mainstream Elementary Classroom. Heinemann.
Hall, J. K., & Verplaetse, L. S. (2000). Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hammond, J. (ed.) (2001). Scaffolding: Teaching and Learning in Language and Literacy Education. Newtown, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association.
Hogan, D. M., & Tudge, J. R. H. (1999). Implications of Vygotsky’s theory for peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell and A. King (Eds.), Cognitive Perspectives on Peer Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Holuga, S. (1994). The effect of metacognitive strategy training with verbalization on the oral accuracy of adult second language learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto (OISE), Toronto, Canada.
Kalkowski, P. (1995). Peer and cross-age tutoring. School Improvement Research Series. North West Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/9/co18.html
King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 338-368.
King, A. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 87-115). New Jersey: Erlbaum Press.
King, A., Staffieri, A., & Adelgais, A. (1998). Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 134-152.
Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1997). From semantic to syntactic processing: How can we promote metalinguistic awareness in the French immersion classroom? In R. K. Johnson and M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion Education: International Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological Tools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kruger, A. C. (1992). The effect of peer and adult-child transactive discussions on moral reasoning. Merrill-Palmer Qaurterly, 38, 191-211.
Lantolf, J. P. (ed.) 2000. Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J. P., & Aljaafreh, A. (1995). Second language learning in the zone of proximal development: A revolutionary experience. International Journal of Educational Research 23: 619-632.
Lantolf, J. P., & Appel, G. (Eds.) (1994b). Vygotskian Approaches to Second Language Research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Press.
Levin, I., & Druyan, S. (1993). When sociocognitive transaction among peers fails: The case of misconception in science. Child Development, 64, 1571-1591.
Light, P. L., & Littleton, K. (1994). Cognitive approaches to group work. In P. Kutnick & C. Rogers (Eds.), Groups in schools (pp. 87-103). London: Cassell.
Maybin, J., Mercer, N., & Steirer, B. (1992). Scaffolding’ Learning in the Classroom. In Norman, K. (Ed.), Thinking Voices: The Work of the National Curriculum Project. Hodder & Stoughton for the National Curriculum Council, London.
Morgan, D. L. (1998). Focus group kit: The focus group guidebook (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moshman, D., & Geil, M. (1998). Collaborative reasoning: Evidence for collective reality. Thinking and Reasoning, 4, 231-248.
Nevi, C. N. (1983). Cross-age tutoring: Why does it help tutors? The Reading Teacher, 36, 829-898.
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second Language Acquisition Processes in the Classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ohta, A. S. (1995). Applying sociocultural theory to an analysis of leaner discourse: Learner-learner collaborative interaction in the zone of proximal development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 93-121.
Pugh, K. H. (2005). Peer Tutoring Do’s and Don’ts. Phi Delta Kappa Fastbacks, 528.
Puchner, Laurel D. (2003). Children teaching for learning: What happens when children teach each other in the classroom? Paper presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Rafoth, M. A. (1998). Sharing the secret: Peer tutoring and independent learning. Teaching and Change 5(3-4), 245-60.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rogoff, B., & Wertsch, J. V. (ed.) (1984). The Zone of Proximal Development: Some Conceptual Issues. Children’s Learning in the ‘Zone of Proximal Development’. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass.
Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64 (4), 479-530.
Samaha, N. V., & De Lisi, R. (2000). Peer collaboration on a nonverbal reasoning task by urban minority students. Journal of Experimental Education, 69(1), 5-14.
Schattner, P., Shmerling, A., & Murphy, B. (1993). Focus groups: A useful research method in general practice. Medical Journal of Australia, 158(9), 622-625.
Slavin, R. E. (1991). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 71-82.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on Cooperative Learning and Achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 43-69.
Strough, J., Berg, C. A., & Meegan, S. P. (2001). Friendship and gender differences in task and social interpretations of peer collaborative problem solving. Social Development, 10(1), 1-22.
Swain, M. and S. Lapkin. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 320-38.
Talyzina, N. (1981). The Psychology of Learning. Moscow: Progress Press.
Teasley, S. D. (1995). The role of talk in children’s peer collaborations. Developmental Psychology, 31(2), 207-220.
Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Tudge, J. R. H. (1992). Processes and consequences of peer collaboration: a Vygotsky analysis. Child Development, 63, 1364-79.
Tudge, J. R. H., & P. Winterhoff. (1993). Vygotsky, Piaget and Bandura: perspectives on the relations between the social world and cognitive development. Human Development, 36, 61-81.
Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. Longman, London.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Webb, N. M. (1992). Testing a theoretical model of student interaction and learning in small groups. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 102-119). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wells, G. (1986). The Meaning Makers: Children Learning Language and Using Language to Learn. Hodder & Stoughton, London.
Wertsch, J. V. (1979). The regulation of human interaction and the given-new organization of private speech. In G. Ziven (Ed.), The Development of Self-Regulation Through Private Speech. New York, NY: Wiley.
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the Social Formation of Mind. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the Mind. A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wertsch, J. V., & Hickmann, M. (1987). Problem-solving in social interaction: A microgenetic analysis. In M. Hickmann (Ed.), Social and Functional Approaches to Language and Thought. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
鄒文莉 (Tsou, W.L.) (2002)。國小篇：大班教學面面觀。敦煌英語教學雜誌，35，10-12。
林素娥、謝靜惠 (Lin, S. O., & Hsieh, C. H.) (2001)。Phonics 創意教學字母的發音。台北市：東西出版事業有限公司。
林靜宜 (Lin, C.Y.) (2003)。「國小英語教學現況民意調查」分析報告。台北：中華民國全國教師會。
劉芳伶 (Liu, F. L.) (2001)。國小英語教師教育專業能力與專門學科素養之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院，屏東。
盧貞穎 (Lu, C. Y.) (1999)。國小英語教師的成長和國小教學。人文及社會學科教學通訊，10(4)，154-166。
詹餘靜、蔣月美 (Chan, Y. C., & Chiang, Y. M.) (2002)。彈性能力分班在國小英語教學之實施：北市龍安國小個案研究。第九屆中華民國英語文教學國際研討會論文集 (頁 634-643)。台北：文鶴。
張武昌、周中天、陳純音、葉錫南、林正昌、許月貴 (Chan, W. C., Chou, C. T., Chen, C. Y., Yeh, H. N., Lin, C. C., & Hsu, Y. K. ) (2003)。國民中學學生基本學力測驗英語雙峰現象暨改進措施。台北：國立台灣師範大學英語系 (教育部委託研究)。
張愈敏 (Chang, Y. M.) (1997)。不再放牛吃草！高市篇—國中適性教育班。師說，102，36。
張新仁 (Chang, S. J.) (2001)。實施補救教學之課程設計與教學設計。教育學刊，17，85-106。
陳瓊如、李維揚 (Chen, C. J. & Li, W. Y.) (2004, May)。點燃台北縣教育局「引進大學資源、活絡英語學習」活動：以銘傳大學與中湖國小的合作模式為例。英語教育電子月刊，7。取自http://ejee.ncu.edu.tw/teacherarticle/teacherarticle.asp
賈惠文 (Jia, H. W.) (2004)。同儕個別教學對國小英語低成就學生字母拼讀學習成就及學習態度影響之研究。國立台北師範學院，台北市。
游麗卿 (You, L. C.) (1992)。Vygotsky社會文化歷史理論：搜集和分析教室社會溝通活動的對話及其脈絡探究概念發展。國教學報，11，230-258。
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
英語教學碩士在職專班
93951020
99
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093951020
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 招靜琪zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Chao, Chin-Chien_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 張順宜zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 張順宜zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2010en_US
dc.date.accessioned 4-Sep-2013 14:53:53 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 4-Sep-2013 14:53:53 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 4-Sep-2013 14:53:53 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0093951020en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/60017-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 英語教學碩士在職專班zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 93951020zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 99zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 以往傳統研究探討同儕相互幫助的機制多在於量化性的陳述其有效結果，然而，在小老師的教學與被幫助者的學習動機上卻較少提出在兩位小朋友的言談互動中，何以促使此同儕相互幫助的機制有正面的效果。本個案研究旨在探討英語為外語的學習環境中，在國小階段的英語補救教學裡，同儕相互幫助的動機與影響。本文採用維高斯基 (Vygotsky) 社會文化學習理論來探討在台灣的國小補救教學環境中，教室兩人一組的同儕學習中，小老師如何使被幫助者語言知識建構起。
本研究對象針對30位五年級學生，分為兩人一組，共15組，實施為期20週小老師制度教學，並且針對其中一組的互動方式，作深入的研究。 研究方法採用質化的言談分析及晤談訪問。資料分析重於探討被幫助者如何藉由小老師的協助，完成該年級應學會的字母、單字認讀與基礎閱讀的過程。目的是希望呈現小老師在與被幫助者言談互動之中，小老師如何一步一步地提供合適的協助以建立被幫助者的語言知識概念。
本研究主要的發現有：
1. 這一名受過小老師制度訓練的小學生能夠很快掌握學習者的學習困難處並提供協助。
2. 這一名小老師用程度分級的協助方式來探測學習者的能力，且能夠發揮創意，給予適當的協助。學習者也表示小老師用多種問答的方式來幫助自己釐清學習盲點，這樣有助於了解自己的學習潛力。
3. 這一名小老師與學習者之間的朋友關係在學習過程中扮演重要的媒介角色。
本研究根據以上議題討論結果，在文末進一步提供建議，作為教育學者們參考。		zh_TW
dc.description.tableofcontents Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………….iv
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………v
Chinese Abstract………………………………………………………………………ix
English Abstract………………………………………………………………………xi
Chapter
1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………..1
Background of the Study………………………………………………..1
Purpose of the Study…………………………………………………….4
Significance of the Study……………………………………………….4
2. Literature Review…………………………………………………………….6
Sociocultural Theory in SLA…………………………………………...6
Peer tutoring…………………………………………………………….9
Peer Tutoring in SLA…………………………………………………..11
Research Questions…………………………………………………….16
3. Methodology………………………………………………………………...17
Context of the Study…………………………………………………...17
Participants…………………………………………………………….20
Materials……………………………………………………………….23
Data Collection………………………………………………………...23
Data Analysis……………………………………………………..……31
Data Analysis Procedures……………………………………………...34
4. Results………………………………………………………………………35
Preliminary Overview of the Data: What was accomplished?.………..36
Section I—Basic Spelling………………………………………….36
Section II—Synthetic Spelling…………………………………….38
The Tutee’s Bids for Help vs The Tutor’s Developmentally Appropriate Assistance……………………………………………………………...42
Section I—Basic Spelling………………………………………….45
Section II—Synthetic Spelling…………………………………….52
Overview of the Tutee’s Gains and the Tutor’s Assistance…................65
Development of CVC Structure…………………………………...65
Development of Long Vowel Structure………………....................71
Development of Consonant Blends, Diagraphs and
Vowel Diagraphs Structure………………………………………...73
The Tutee’s Internalization of Spelling Rules…………………………78
Perceptions of the Peer Tutoring………………………………………80
The Tutor’s Perceptions……………………………………………80
The Tutee’s Perceptions…………………………………………...82
5. Discussions………………………………………………………………….84
Answers to the Research Questions…………………………………...84
6. Conclusion and Implications………………………………..........................94
Summary for the Findings……………………………………………..94
Findings of the Present Study vs. Findings of Previous Studies………95
Theoretical and Pedagogical Implications……………………………..97
Limitations of the Study……………………………………………….99
References……………………………………………………………………..101
Appendixes
A. Basic and Synthetic Spelling Word Lists……………………..110
B. Screen Test……………………………………………………114
C. Tests for the Tutee…………………………………………….117
D. Interview Questions…………………………………………..124
E. Transcription conventions…………………………………….126


List of Tables and Figures
Table 1 Assistance From Implicit to Explicit Level (Five levels)…...……………….28
Table 2 Examining Sociocultural Constructs
Related to Assistance and Internalization…………………………………….31
Table 3 Signaling “continuing” or “not continuing”…………………………………32
Table 4 Assistance From Implicit to Explicit Level (Nine levels)………………...…44
Figure 1 Procedures and Data Collection of the Study……………………………....25
Figure 2 Timeline of the Study………………………………………........................26		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 791156 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093951020en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 小老師zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 國小英語zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 補救教學zh_TW
dc.title (題名) 小老師制度在國小英語補救教學上之個案研究zh_TW
dc.title (題名) A remedial peer tutoring case study in an elementary schoolen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Aljaafreh, A. (1992). Negative feedback in second language learning and the zone of proximal development. Dissertation, University of Delaware.
Aljaafeh, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. The Modern Language Journal 78, 465-483.
Anton, M., & F. DiCamilla. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(3), 314-342.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). (Y. McGee, Translator). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Beasley, C. (1997). Students as teachers: The benefits of peer tutoring. In R. Pospisil and L. Willcoxson (Eds.), Learning Through Teaching (pp. 21-30). Proceedings of the 6th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, Murdoch University. Perth: Murdoch University. Retrieved from http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlfi1997/beasley.html
Bentz, J. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (1996). Improving peers’ helping behavior to students with learning disabilities during mathematics peer tutoring. Learning Disabilities Qaurterly, 19, 202-215.
Bergen, Timothy J. and Mi, Han-fu. (2002). Peer tutoring and the self-instructional module. Educational Research Quarterly, 25(4), 28-35.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003).Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Borkan, J. M., Miller, W. L., Neher, J. O., Cushman, R., & Crabtree, B. F.(1997). Evaluating family practice residencies: A new method for qualitative assessment. Family Medicine, 29(9), 640-647.
Chang, V. (2002, May 4). English goals too high for children. Taipei Times, pp.8.
Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners’ errors. Language Learning, 27, 29-46.
Chen, F. M., Huang, Y. L., Liu, L. (Eds.). (2003). Happy Baby Flashcards for Phonics. Taiwan Mac Educational Co., Ltd.
Chou, C. T. (2002, July 8). Closing the English proficiency gap. Taipei Times, pp.8.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Journal, 64 (1), 1-35.
Cohen, J. (1986). Theoretical considerations of peer tutoring. Psychology in the Schools, 23(2), 175-186.
Cohen, P., Kulik, J., & Kulik, C. (1982). Educational Outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 237-248.
De Lisi, R., & Golbeck, S. L. (1999). Implications of Piagetian theory for peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. New Jersey: Erlbaum Press.
Donato, R. (1994). ‘Collective scaffolding in second language learning’ in Lantolf and Appel 1994b.
Duff, P. A. (2008). Case Study Research in Applied Linguistics. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dupaul, G. J., Ervin, R. A., & Hook, C. L. (1998). Peer tutoring for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Effects on classroom behavior and academic performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31(4), 579-592.
Fantuzzo, J.W., King, J. A., & Heller, L. R. (1992). Effects of Reciprocal Peer Tutoring on Mathematics and School Adjustment: A component analysis. Journal of Educational Psuchology, 84(3), 331-339.
Fantuzzo, J.W., Polite, K., & Grayson, K. (1990). An evaluation of reciprocal peer tutoring across elementary school settings. The Journal of School Psychology, 28, 309-323.
Fawcett, L. M., & Garton, A. F. (2005). The effect of peer collaboration on children’s problem-solving ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 157-169.
Frasier, P. Y., Slatt, L., Kowlowitz, V., Kollisch, D. O., & Mintzer, M. (1997). Focus groups: A useful tool for curriculum evaluation. Family Medicine, 29(7), 500-507.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Bentz, J., Phillips, N. B., & Hamlett, C. L. (1994). The nature of student interactions during peer tutoring with and without training and experience. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 75-103.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Phillips, N. B., Karns, K., & Dutka, S. (1997). Enhance students’ helping behavior during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual methematical explanations. The Elementary School Journal, 97(3).
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Kazdan, S., & Allen, S. (1999). Effects of peer-assisted learning strategies in reading with and without training in elaborated help giving. The Elementary School Journal, 99(3), 201-219.
Garton, A. F., Harvey, R., & Pratt, C. (2003). The role of language in collaborative problem solving. Unpublished manuscript.
Garton, A. F., & Pratt, C. (2001). Peer assistance in children’s problem solving. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19, 307-318.
Greenwood, C. R., Arreaga-Mayer, C., & Utley, C. A. (2001). Class-wide peer tutoring learning management system: Applications with elementary-level English language learners. Remedial and Special Education, 22(1).
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning: Working with ESL Children in the Mainstream Elementary Classroom. Heinemann.
Hall, J. K., & Verplaetse, L. S. (2000). Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hammond, J. (ed.) (2001). Scaffolding: Teaching and Learning in Language and Literacy Education. Newtown, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association.
Hogan, D. M., & Tudge, J. R. H. (1999). Implications of Vygotsky’s theory for peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell and A. King (Eds.), Cognitive Perspectives on Peer Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Holuga, S. (1994). The effect of metacognitive strategy training with verbalization on the oral accuracy of adult second language learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto (OISE), Toronto, Canada.
Kalkowski, P. (1995). Peer and cross-age tutoring. School Improvement Research Series. North West Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/9/co18.html
King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 338-368.
King, A. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 87-115). New Jersey: Erlbaum Press.
King, A., Staffieri, A., & Adelgais, A. (1998). Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 134-152.
Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1997). From semantic to syntactic processing: How can we promote metalinguistic awareness in the French immersion classroom? In R. K. Johnson and M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion Education: International Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kozulin, A. (1998). Psychological Tools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kruger, A. C. (1992). The effect of peer and adult-child transactive discussions on moral reasoning. Merrill-Palmer Qaurterly, 38, 191-211.
Lantolf, J. P. (ed.) 2000. Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J. P., & Aljaafreh, A. (1995). Second language learning in the zone of proximal development: A revolutionary experience. International Journal of Educational Research 23: 619-632.
Lantolf, J. P., & Appel, G. (Eds.) (1994b). Vygotskian Approaches to Second Language Research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Press.
Levin, I., & Druyan, S. (1993). When sociocognitive transaction among peers fails: The case of misconception in science. Child Development, 64, 1571-1591.
Light, P. L., & Littleton, K. (1994). Cognitive approaches to group work. In P. Kutnick & C. Rogers (Eds.), Groups in schools (pp. 87-103). London: Cassell.
Maybin, J., Mercer, N., & Steirer, B. (1992). Scaffolding’ Learning in the Classroom. In Norman, K. (Ed.), Thinking Voices: The Work of the National Curriculum Project. Hodder & Stoughton for the National Curriculum Council, London.
Morgan, D. L. (1998). Focus group kit: The focus group guidebook (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moshman, D., & Geil, M. (1998). Collaborative reasoning: Evidence for collective reality. Thinking and Reasoning, 4, 231-248.
Nevi, C. N. (1983). Cross-age tutoring: Why does it help tutors? The Reading Teacher, 36, 829-898.
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second Language Acquisition Processes in the Classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ohta, A. S. (1995). Applying sociocultural theory to an analysis of leaner discourse: Learner-learner collaborative interaction in the zone of proximal development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 93-121.
Pugh, K. H. (2005). Peer Tutoring Do’s and Don’ts. Phi Delta Kappa Fastbacks, 528.
Puchner, Laurel D. (2003). Children teaching for learning: What happens when children teach each other in the classroom? Paper presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Rafoth, M. A. (1998). Sharing the secret: Peer tutoring and independent learning. Teaching and Change 5(3-4), 245-60.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rogoff, B., & Wertsch, J. V. (ed.) (1984). The Zone of Proximal Development: Some Conceptual Issues. Children’s Learning in the ‘Zone of Proximal Development’. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass.
Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64 (4), 479-530.
Samaha, N. V., & De Lisi, R. (2000). Peer collaboration on a nonverbal reasoning task by urban minority students. Journal of Experimental Education, 69(1), 5-14.
Schattner, P., Shmerling, A., & Murphy, B. (1993). Focus groups: A useful research method in general practice. Medical Journal of Australia, 158(9), 622-625.
Slavin, R. E. (1991). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 71-82.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on Cooperative Learning and Achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 43-69.
Strough, J., Berg, C. A., & Meegan, S. P. (2001). Friendship and gender differences in task and social interpretations of peer collaborative problem solving. Social Development, 10(1), 1-22.
Swain, M. and S. Lapkin. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 320-38.
Talyzina, N. (1981). The Psychology of Learning. Moscow: Progress Press.
Teasley, S. D. (1995). The role of talk in children’s peer collaborations. Developmental Psychology, 31(2), 207-220.
Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Tudge, J. R. H. (1992). Processes and consequences of peer collaboration: a Vygotsky analysis. Child Development, 63, 1364-79.
Tudge, J. R. H., & P. Winterhoff. (1993). Vygotsky, Piaget and Bandura: perspectives on the relations between the social world and cognitive development. Human Development, 36, 61-81.
Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy and Authenticity. Longman, London.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Webb, N. M. (1992). Testing a theoretical model of student interaction and learning in small groups. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 102-119). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wells, G. (1986). The Meaning Makers: Children Learning Language and Using Language to Learn. Hodder & Stoughton, London.
Wertsch, J. V. (1979). The regulation of human interaction and the given-new organization of private speech. In G. Ziven (Ed.), The Development of Self-Regulation Through Private Speech. New York, NY: Wiley.
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the Social Formation of Mind. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the Mind. A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wertsch, J. V., & Hickmann, M. (1987). Problem-solving in social interaction: A microgenetic analysis. In M. Hickmann (Ed.), Social and Functional Approaches to Language and Thought. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
鄒文莉 (Tsou, W.L.) (2002)。國小篇：大班教學面面觀。敦煌英語教學雜誌，35，10-12。
林素娥、謝靜惠 (Lin, S. O., & Hsieh, C. H.) (2001)。Phonics 創意教學字母的發音。台北市：東西出版事業有限公司。
林靜宜 (Lin, C.Y.) (2003)。「國小英語教學現況民意調查」分析報告。台北：中華民國全國教師會。
劉芳伶 (Liu, F. L.) (2001)。國小英語教師教育專業能力與專門學科素養之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院，屏東。
盧貞穎 (Lu, C. Y.) (1999)。國小英語教師的成長和國小教學。人文及社會學科教學通訊，10(4)，154-166。
詹餘靜、蔣月美 (Chan, Y. C., & Chiang, Y. M.) (2002)。彈性能力分班在國小英語教學之實施：北市龍安國小個案研究。第九屆中華民國英語文教學國際研討會論文集 (頁 634-643)。台北：文鶴。
張武昌、周中天、陳純音、葉錫南、林正昌、許月貴 (Chan, W. C., Chou, C. T., Chen, C. Y., Yeh, H. N., Lin, C. C., & Hsu, Y. K. ) (2003)。國民中學學生基本學力測驗英語雙峰現象暨改進措施。台北：國立台灣師範大學英語系 (教育部委託研究)。
張愈敏 (Chang, Y. M.) (1997)。不再放牛吃草！高市篇—國中適性教育班。師說，102，36。
張新仁 (Chang, S. J.) (2001)。實施補救教學之課程設計與教學設計。教育學刊，17，85-106。
陳瓊如、李維揚 (Chen, C. J. & Li, W. Y.) (2004, May)。點燃台北縣教育局「引進大學資源、活絡英語學習」活動：以銘傳大學與中湖國小的合作模式為例。英語教育電子月刊，7。取自http://ejee.ncu.edu.tw/teacherarticle/teacherarticle.asp
賈惠文 (Jia, H. W.) (2004)。同儕個別教學對國小英語低成就學生字母拼讀學習成就及學習態度影響之研究。國立台北師範學院，台北市。
游麗卿 (You, L. C.) (1992)。Vygotsky社會文化歷史理論：搜集和分析教室社會溝通活動的對話及其脈絡探究概念發展。國教學報，11，230-258。		zh_TW