在英文課堂中利用互惠式教學法提昇臺灣高中生思考之研究

Using Reciprocal Teaching to Develop Thinking in a Senior High EFL Classroom in Taiwan

蕭若綺(Anna Jo-chii Shiau)

指導教授 ： 陳秋蘭

國立臺灣師範大學/文學院/英語學系/碩士(2010年)

摘要

普通高級中學英文科98課綱即將於2010年實施，其最大特色在於納入批判性思考(critical thinking)與創造性思考(creative thinking)的培養。然而思考能力在台灣教育界並不受重視，而且國內研究尚未對此議題有深入的探討。雖然坊間教科書已如火如荼地進行修編，但面對即將推行的98課綱，許多英文老師仍覺得無所適從。因此，本研究目的主要探討互惠式教學法(reciprocal teaching)實行於高中英語教學現場的可行性，著重於探討此教學法是否能有效提昇學生的思考能力。
參與本研究的學生為台北市某校三十六位高一男生。本實驗為期六週，每週有兩節課的時間。本實驗的閱讀教材為五篇短篇故事，其改編自坊間針對高一生設計的教科書。本研究作者嘗試使用互惠式教學法(reciprocal teaching)引導學生閱讀，並透過學生提問(student-generated questions)及問卷調查(questionnaire)了解互惠式教學法的教學成效。本研究作者主要採用布魯姆(B. S. Bloom)1956年提出的認知領域教育目標分類(A Taxonomy of Educational Objectives)來分析學生的問題，學生提出的問題可分為六類：一、事實性問題(factual questions)；二、 詮釋性問題(interpretational questions)；三、經驗性問題(experiential questions)；四、分析性問題(analytical questions)；五、評鑑性問題(evaluative questions)；六、創造性問題(creative questions)。
研究結果顯示，雖然大部分學生仍停留於提問「事實性問題」及「詮釋性問題」，但學生普遍問比較多有關文章大意的問題，而且他們問「詮釋性問題」多於問「事實性問題」。此外，學生不但問比較多「分析性問題」與「評鑑性問題」，「分析性問題」與「評鑑性問題」在問題內容上也比較具有變化性。學生的「創造性問題」雖然在數量上沒有明顯地改變，但在問題內容上卻變得比較多元。「經驗性問題」則比較少出現在學生提問中。學生普遍認為自己從互惠式教學法中學到互惠式教學法的四個閱讀策略－預測(predicting)、澄清(clarifying)、概述(summarizing)、提問(questioning)，英文語言能力有進步，變得比較主動學英文，也比較能掌握自己學習的情況。學生也認為自己在閱讀時比較會思考故事深層的意義，而且變得比較會問問題。針對互惠式教學法的四個閱讀策略，學生認為最有幫助閱讀理解的是「概述」，但最難學會的也是「概述」。總之，學生普遍喜歡使用互惠式教學法閱讀文章，而且互惠式教學法有助於提昇他們的思考能力。以上教學實驗結果證明互惠式教學法不但能提昇英語能力，更能引導學生進行深度思考，足為實現98課綱英文能力指標的教學方法之ㄧ。在結論中，本研究提出實行互惠式教學法於台灣英語教學現場的建議，並同時提出不足之處，以供將來研究參考。

關鍵字

批判性思考 ； 互惠式教學法 ； 布魯姆認知分類

並列摘要

The 2010 Guidelines for Senior High School English Curriculum marks an important breakthrough in English language teaching in Taiwan. It is the first time that critical thinking and creative thinking are included in the curriculum guidelines. However, many English teachers are concerned about the feasibility of the guidelines, for little has been known about how to teach higher level thinking in regular classes. This study aims to explore whether reciprocal teaching－a reading instructional approach that consists of predicting, clarifying, summarizing, and questioning－is effective in developing higher level thinking among senior high school students and how much the students like the approach.
The case study approach was used to conduct the present study. The participants were 36 male students in the first year of senior high school. During the six-week study, the students read five short stories via the reciprocal teaching method. Student-generated questions and the participants’ responses to the Perception Questionnaire were collected and analyzed. The coding scheme used to evaluate student-generated questions was adapted from Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy. Students’ questions were then categorized into (1) factual questions, (2) interpretational questions, (3) experiential questions, (4) analytical questions, (5) evaluative questions, and (6) creative questions.
Important findings were summarized below. First, though the students tended to ask more lower level questions (i.e. factual questions and interpretational questions), they asked more interpretational questions than factual questions, and the factual questions were more related to the main idea of the stories than the details. Besides, the number of analytical questions and evaluative questions increased, and a great variety was found in the content of the questions. In addition, though the students did not make much progress in asking more creative questions, a great variety was also found in the content of such questions. What’s more, the students asked very few experiential questions, which seemed to be related to the characteristics of the stories. Most students had positive opinions about reciprocal teaching. They learned the four reading strategies of reciprocal teaching, improved their language skills, became more active learners, and became more conscious of their own learning and thinking. Furthermore, they became more able to read critically and more capable of asking “good” questions. Among the four reading strategies of reciprocal teaching, summary generation was simultaneously rated as the most useful strategy in facilitating reading comprehension and the most difficult one to learn. Pedagogical implications, limitations, and suggestions for future studies were presented as well.

並列關鍵字

critical thinking ； reciprocal teaching ； Bloom's taxonomy

參考文獻

Liaw, M. L. (2007). Content-based reading and writing for critical thinking skills in an EFL context. English Teaching & Learning, 31(2), 45-87.

Lin, Chun-yen. (2006). Incorporating critical thinking into English language teaching in the film-based classroom. Journal of Education and Foreign Languages and Literature, 2, 53-69.

Liu, Yu-chen. (2005). Interact with authors: The effect of questioning the author on the recall, inference generation, and comprehension of EFL junior high school. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy of learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.

Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2002). Levels of thinking required by comprehension questions in informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 56(2), 174-180.