本研究旨在比較「經驗教學法」與「講述教學法」對促進聽障生句型理解之成效。採用單一受試實驗設計中的比較介入交替處理。參與者為國小三、四年級自足式啟聰班之聽障生共五名,研究工具為「句型理解能力測驗」及研究者自編之句型理解能力評量單。實驗教學計三週十八節課(每週三天,每天二節課)。主要研究結果如下: 一、 在交替教學階段,五位參與者以經驗教學法的學習成效優於講述教學法的;在成效教學階段,以講述教學法不會的句型,改以經驗教學法學習,參與者全數學會。撤除實驗教學後,有二位參與者表現出實驗教學的保留效果,其他三位參與者的保留效果不穩定。整體而言,五位參與者在撤除實驗教學後的表現均優於實驗教學前。 二、 參與者在實驗教學前的句型理解錯誤概念,經由二種實驗教學法的教學後,五位參與者學會了64%到77﹪原本不理解的句型概念,其中以經驗教學法學會的概念數多於講述教學法。 三、 參與者在經驗教學法下的學習成效,優於講述教學法。
The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of experiential instruction and didactic instruction on sentences comprehension of students with hearing impairments. “Multiple Schedule Design” in single subject design was used to achieve the research purpose. Participants were five third and forth grade students with hearing impairments at elementary school level. The instruments included “The Test of Sentence Comprehension” and the evaluation sheet designed by the author. The experimental teaching were 18 sessions which lasted three weeks(3 days a week, 2 sessions a day). The main results were as follows: 1. At the alternating treatment stage, all participants’ performances under experiential instruction were better than that of didactic instruction. At the effect treatment stage, with experiential instruction, all participants comprehended sentences that they did not understand under didactic instruction. After the experimental teaching, there were two students who demonstrated maintain effect, the other three students’ performances were unstable. Generally speaking, all students had better performances after the experimental teaching than they were before. 2. After experimental teaching, the students could understand 64﹪to 77﹪sentence concepts that they didn’t before. All students learned more sentence concepts in experiential instruction than in didactic instruction. 3. Students with hearing impairments got more effects from experiential instruction than didactic instruction.