配對問答關係教學法實施於國中英語課室之研究

The Feasibility of Dyad QAR in an EFL Junior-High-School Class

林貞伃(Chen-Yu Lin)

指導教授 ： 紀鳳鳴

國立中正大學/文學院/英語教學研究所/碩士(2013年)

摘要

問答關係教學法(Question Answer Relationships，簡稱QAR)能提供閱讀理解教學一個完整的架構，同時做為改善教師和學生提問能力的工具。相關研究顯示，問答關係教學法能有效提昇學生在閱讀理解、學習、記憶文章內容上的能力。此外，問答關係教學法中的四種問題答案關係—「就在那裡」、「想與找」、「作者與我」和「我自己」（Right There, Think & Search, Author & Me, and On My Own QARs）讓老師和學生在課室中能使用共同的語言來思考並討論回答問題的訊息來源。本研究旨在探討：台灣國中生在進行配對學習問答關係任務中如何互動，並了解配對學習對學生問答關係策略學習的影響，以及問答關係策略對學生閱讀理解和英語學習上的助益。參與者為28位八年級學生，共分成14組，接受為期六週共12節課之四種問答關係實驗教學。在實驗教學結束後，各組學生需完成兩人一組的問答關係任務，參與者與組員共同討論出問答關係策略之四種問題及答案。在兩人小組問題答案任務完成後，每位參與者接受訪談，所有口說資料均轉為逐字稿。資料收集主要包含：配對在問答關係任務中的討論內容、配對討論出之四種問題以及訪談的逐字稿。研究結果發現配對在兩人小組問答關係任務中的討論架構可分為三種：根據閱讀階段（ORTA）、根據任務指示（RTOA）及根據參與者想法的隨意序列（varied sequences）。而討論模式分為八種：語言協助、聽寫句子、導引想法、共同組織問題、安排工作進度、提問、請求說明以及分享想法。此外，研究發現，即使配對採用相同的討論架構進行任務，他們所使用的討論模式也不盡相同，此結果顯示配對在共助學習中的差異性和多樣性。再者，檢視14組在問答關係任務中所討論出的四種問題和答案，結果發現大部分的參與者都能在兩人小組的任務中透過問答關係之四種問題來理解文章。然而，研究結果亦顯示配對學習並無法保證任務的成功，研究發現少許錯誤發生在五組的問題或答案上，這和他們在配對學習中的互動方式有密切的關聯性，小組的溝通能力不足或缺乏熱切互動，是造成錯誤無法修正或察覺的原因。最後，學生們不僅肯定配對學習對問答關係策略學習的幫助，同時也表達問答關係策略是提昇他們閱讀理解和語言學習的良好工具。本研究並提供一些教學建議及未來研究導向。

關鍵字

閱讀理解 ； 配對學習 ； 共助學習 ； 問答關係教學法

並列摘要

QAR (Question Answer Relationships) can provide a framework for comprehension instruction as well as a pedagogical tool to improve teachers’ and students’ questioning abilities. Researchers have demonstrated the effects of QAR on the promotion of students’ comprehension, learning, and remembering of reading materials. With the provision of the four core QARs (i.e., Right There, Think & Search, Author & Me, and On My Own QARs), QAR provides a shared language for teachers and students to think and talk about sources of information to answer questions in the classroom. This study was undertaken to examine how 28 Taiwanese eighth-grade students interacted to generate and answer their QARs in the dyadic QAR task, and explored the impact of this collaboration on their learning QARs as well as the effect of QARs on their reading comprehension and English learning. The study carried out a six-week QAR instruction in which 28 eighth graders, forming 14 dyads, learned to generate and answer four types of QAR questions. After the QAR instruction, each dyad was required to complete a dyadic QAR task. The dyadic QAR task was approached with dyadic discussions to generate four types of QAR questions and answers in relation to an informational text. All the participants were interviewed after they had completed the task. Data sources included each dyad’s discussion and worksheet in the QAR task, and semi-structured oral interviews after the tasks had been completed. Three discussion frameworks (ORTA, RTOA, and varied sequences) and eight discussion patterns (assisting in language, dictating English sentences, eliciting ideas, joint meaning making, organizing work procedures, posing questions, requesting clarification, and sharing ideas) emerged from the data analysis of the 14 dyadic discussions. Moreover, the variations in the frequency of using the eight discussion patterns revealed that even under the same discussion framework, the participants collaborated in diverse ways. Furthermore, the worksheets of the 14 dyads showed that most of the participants could comprehend the text through generating and answering QAR questions in dyadic work. However, dyad collaboration cannot guarantee the success of the QAR task. Five dyads’ wrong QAR questions or answers were found to be closely associated with their dyadic interactions. The inability to negotiate with each other or the lack of intense interaction obstructed them from repairing or detecting their mistakes. Finally, the participants perceived the dyad collaboration as a way of facilitating QAR learning, and most of them regarded QAR as an effective tool to enhance their reading comprehension and English language learning. The pedagogical implications of this study and suggestions for future research are also provided.

並列關鍵字

dyad collaboration ； reading comprehension ； collaborative learning ； QAR

參考文獻

Almeida, P. (2010). Classroom questioning: teachers’ perceptions and practices.

Almeida, P. (2010). Questioning patterns and teaching strategies in secondary

Almeida, P. (2011). Can I ask a question? The importance of classroom questioning.

Almeida, P., & Neri de Souza, F. (2010). Questioning profiles in secondary science

Anderson, N. J. (1999). Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies.