交互教學歷程中學生發問類型及教師鷹架之探討

Exploring Students' Questioning Types and Teacher's Scaffoldings in Reciprocal Teaching Process

許淑玫(Shu-Mei Hsu) ； 游自達(Tzu-Ta Yiu)

《課程與教學》 3卷4期 (2000/10) Pp. 1-30+169

https://doi.org/10.6384/CIQ.200010.0001

摘要

本研究旨在探討交互教學歷程中，學生發問類型及其轉變情形與教師所提供之鷹架及其對鷹架教學之看法。研究者採取質化研究（qualitative research）方式，以大和國小六年級六個學生所組成之閱讀小組為研究對象，透過參與觀察（participant observation）輔以訪談（interview）方式蒐集資料，分析歸納後發現結果如下：（一）交互教學歷程中，學生發問類型主要有五，分別為：無法提出問題、發問細節問題、以「How」和「Why」發問以部份取代整體之問題、提出推論問題及發問主要概念問題等；且其發問類型隨著參與交互教學時間的增加產生轉變情形。（二）教師針對學生策略學習困難處所提供的鷹架類型頗多，普遍透過口語和對話方式呈現。主要歸納為；鼓勵參與、策略技巧外顯化、降低工作負荷及提供學習回饋等四大類。其中以經由提示方式來鷹架學生學習的情形最多，其次分別是讚美、評論、活動細步化及邀請補充等。（三）本研究教師對鷹架教學的看法主要關注有三：學生舊經驗與學習動機、變化師生互動方式及考量個別差異等，其鷹架因應學生不同反應與表現具有多元的特質。

關鍵字

交互教學 ； 閱請策略 ； 閱讀教學 ； 發問類型 ； 鷹架

並列摘要

The purposes of this study was to explore students' questioning types and their changes. It also investigates the scaffoldings the teacher provided and teacher's attitude toward the scaffoldings. Six sixth-graders in an elementary school were selected as an experimental group for reading instruction. Qualitative approach with participant observation and interviews were employed to collect data. The main findings of this study are as follows:1. Students had five questioning types in reciprocal teaching process. (1) Students couldnot ask any questions after reading the text. (2) Students only produced detailed questions. (3) Students used ”How” and ”Why” to generate some questions from part of the text instead of the whole. (4) Students could bring up rational questions. (5) Students could ask questions about main ideas. As the time of reciprocal teaching increased, students' questioning types changed.2. According to students' questioning types, the teacher provided a variety of scaffoldings presented with oral interaction and dialogues. The scaffoldings were summarized into four categories, including encouragement for participation, externalization of strategic skills, reduction in workload and providing learning feedback. In this study, the teacher's main scaffolding was providing cues. Praising, giving comments, activity analysis and inviting supplements followed.3. The teacher's attitude toward scaffoldings was focused on three parts, including paying attention to students' prior learning experience and motivation, adjusting the interaction between the teacher and students, and respecting students' individual differences. The teacher's scaffoldings in this study had diversification according to students' different responses and performances.

並列關鍵字

reciprocal teaching ； reading strategy ； reading teaching ； questioning type ； scaffolding

參考文獻

Aarnoutse, C.(1997).Teaching reading comprehension strategies to very poor decoders in a listening situation.Educational Resources Information Center.

Alfassi, M.(1998).Reading for meaning: the efficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering reading comprehension in high school students in remedial reading classes.American Educational Research Journal.35(2),309-332.

Bruce, M. E.,Chan, L. K. S.(1991).Reciprocal teaching and transenvironmental programming: a program to facilitate the reading comprehension of students with reading difficulties.Remedial and Special Education.12(5),44-54.

Greasser, A. C.,Person, N. K.(1994).Question asking during tutoring.American Educational Research Journal.31(1),104-137.

Keller, J. M.(1987).The systematic process of motivational design.Performance and Instructional Journal.26(9/10),1-8.