Title

三種早期閱讀介入方案對社經弱勢幼兒的教學效果研究

Translated Titles

The Effects of 3 Early Reading Programs on Social-Economically Disadvantaged Kindergartners

DOI

10.6778/NTTUERJ.201006.0093

Authors

簡淑真(Shu-Jane Chien)

Key Words

早期介入 ; 早期閱讀 ; 社經弱勢幼兒 ; early intervention ; reading intervention ; disadvantaged children

PublicationName

臺東大學教育學報

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

21卷1期(2010 / 06 / 01)

Page #

93 - 123

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本研究以不等組前後測的準實驗設計,探討偏遠社經弱勢地區幼兒閱讀早期介入教學成效。共有375個平均齡63個月的(至2005年9月)幼兒參與,其中社經弱勢幼兒271人(三實驗組:聲韻57人、識字88人、繪本59人;弱勢社經對照組67人)、優勢社經對照組104人。實驗教學採平衡教學取向,強調閱讀,不教書寫,教學設計配合有效教學原則,由受過訓的原班教師以外加方式進行,每日40分鐘,每週4日,進行30週。對照組則進行原來的統整課程。所有弱勢幼兒都做前測,優勢對照組是後來加入的,無前測。五組幼兒都接受四次後測(國幼班上、下期末、小一上期中、末)。結果發現:一、介入教學即時效果顯著:國幼班畢業前,聲韻組在和聲韻有關分數、繪本組在聽覺詞彙分數上都明顯提升,且顯著優於弱勢對照組;識字組的認字量,則不只領先弱勢各組,甚至高過優勢對照組。二、三種介入教學各在其目標能力上有長期效果:小一上的注音及國語文分數,聲韻組、繪本組都顯著高於弱勢對照組;識字組在識字量上仍顯著高於弱勢對照組。三、介入教學雖能拉近弱勢組與優勢的距離,但仍未能超越優勢對照組:優勢對照組在各種測驗上,除了國幼班將結束時在常用字識字測驗上曾被識字組超過,其餘都一路顯著領先弱勢各組。研究者據此提出和弱勢幼兒閱讀介入相關的結論與建議。

English Abstract

This study examined the effects of 3 early reading programs on social-economically disadvantaged kindergarteners. A total of 347 kindergartners, averagely aged 63 months, participated in the study. The disadvantaged children were grouped into 4 subgroups. Children in the experimental groups received intervention sessions of 3 programs. There were phonological/phonetic training (PH group, 57 children), character recognition training (CH group, 88 children), and picture book reading training (PIC group, 67 children). Children were given a 40-minute teaching session per day, 4 days per week, for 30 weeks. A group of 67 children from poor families and another group of 104 children, who were from middle-class families, served as disadvantaged and affluent control groups respectively. Besides pretests, all children received post-tests at 4 time points in kindergarten and first grade. Main findings were: 1. At the end of kindergarten year, the 3 intervention groups outperformed the disadvantaged control group at scores of the target reading abilities taught in the corresponding programs. 2. The intervention effects lasted for at least 6 months. At the end of the first semester in first grade, when compared to the disadvantaged group, the PH group outperformed on the Chinese phonetic symbol tests, CH on the Chinese recognition tests, and PIC group on the reading comprehension tests, respectively. The effect of PH group was particularly evident with superiority. 3. The affluent control group outperformed the disadvantaged children on of every test scores collected in this study. However, when the SES was statistically controlled, there were no significant difference among PH, PIC and the affluent group on tests of Chinese phonetic symbol and character recognition. These results indicate that early reading intervention in kindergarten is feasible and its effect can last for at least 6 months which prevents disadvantaged children from academic failures in their first semester of schooling.

Topic Category 社會科學 > 教育學
社會科學 > 社會學
Reference
  1. 王瓊珠、洪儷瑜、陳秀芬(2007)。低識字能力學生識字量發展之研究—馬太效應之可能表現。特殊教育研究學刊,32(3),1-16。
    連結:
  2. 王麗雲、游錦雲(2005)。學童社經背景與暑期經驗對暑期學習成就進展影響之研究。教育研究集刊,51(4),1-41。
    連結:
  3. 陳淑麗(2008)。國小弱勢學生課業輔導現況調查之研究。台東大學教育學報,19,1-32。
    連結:
  4. 曾世杰、簡淑真(2006)。全語法爭議的文獻回顧:兼論其對弱勢學生之影響。台東大學教育學報,17(2),1-31。
    連結:
  5. 黃毅志(2003)。「台灣地區新職業聲望與社經地位量表」之建構與評估:社會科學與教育社會學研究本土化。教育研究集刊,49(4),1-31。
    連結:
  6. 台東縣政府(2007)。台東縣教育報告書。2008年2月11日,取自http://210.240.134.171
  7. 教育部國教司(2007)。教育部全球資訊網。2008年2月11日,取自http://www.edu.tw/
  8. 陳修元(2001)。簡單兩百字識字量表。未出版。
  9. 行政院主計處(2005a)。台灣地區家庭收支調查。2007年7月9日,取自http://fies2.tpg.gov.tw/doc/result/94/212/13-36.xlsA
  10. 行政院主計處(2005b)。人力資源統計年報。2007年10月29日,取自http://www.stat.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=17286&ctNode=517
  11. Adams, M. J.(1990).Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
  12. Alexander, K. L.,Entwisle, D. R.,Olson, L. S.(2007).Lasting consequences of the summer learning gap.American Sociological Review,72(2),167-180.
  13. Bear, D. R.,Invernizzi, M.,Templeton, S.,Johnston, F.(2004).Words their way.Columbus, OH:Pearson Education, Inc..
  14. Blachman, B. A.(1994).Kindergarten teachers develop phoneme awareness in low-income, inner-city classrooms: Does it make a difference?.Reading and Writing,6(1),1-18.
  15. Chapman, J. W.,Tunmer, W. E.,Prochnow, J. E.(2001).Does success in the Reading Recovery program depend on developing proficiency in phonological processing skills? A longitudinal study in a whole language instructional context.Scientific Studies of Reading,5,141-176.
  16. Englert, C. S.,Hiebert, E. H.(1984).Children's developing awareness of text structures in expository materials.Journal of Educational Psychology,76,65-74.
  17. Entwisle , D. R.,Alexander, K. L.,Olson , L. S.(1997).Children, schools and inequality.Boulder, CO:Westview Press.
  18. Foorman, B. R.,Torgesen, J.(2001).Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction promote reading success in all children.Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,16(4),203-212.
  19. Foorman, B.,Francis, D. J.,Fletcher, J. M.,Schatschneider, C.,Mehta, P.(1998).The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children.Journal of educational psychology,90,37-55.
  20. Jeynes, W. H.,Littell, S. W.(2000).A meta-analysis of studies examining the effect of whole language instruction on the literacy of low-SES students.Elementary School Journal,101,21-33.
  21. Juel, C.(1988).Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades.Journal of Educational Psychology,80,437-447.
  22. Juel, C.(1993).What makes literacy tutoring effective?.Reading research quarterly,31,268-289.
  23. Juel, C.,Minden-Cupp, C.(2000).Learning to read words: Linguistic units and instructional strategies.Reading Research Quarterly,35,458-492.
  24. McGee, L.,Richgels, D. J.(2003).Designing early literacy programs.New York:The Guilford Press.
  25. National Reading Panel(2000).Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the Scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.Washington, DC:National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
  26. Pikulski, J. J.(1994).Preventing reading failure: A review of five effective programs.Reading Teacher,48(1),30-39.
  27. Shankweiler, D. P.,Liberman, I. Y.(1989).Phonology and reading disability: Solving the reading puzzle.Ann Arbor, MI:University of Michigan Press.
  28. Stahl, S. A.,Miller, P. D.(1989).Whole language and language experience approaches for beginning reading: A quantitative research synthesis.Review of educational research,59,87-116.
  29. Stanovich, K. E.(1993).Does reading make you smarter? Literacy and the development of verbal intelligence.Advanced Child Development Behavior,24,133-80.
  30. Stanovich, K. E.(1986).Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the development of reading fluency.Reading Research Quarterly,16,32-71.
  31. Torgesen, J. K.(2000).Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problems of treatment resisters.Learning Disabilities Research and Practices,15(1),55-64.
  32. Torgesen, J. K.,Alexander, A.,Wagner, R.,Rashotte, C.,Voeller, K.,Conway, T.(2001).Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long term outcomes from two instructional approaches.Journal of Learning Disabilities,34(1),33-58.
  33. Torgesen, J. K.,Wagner, R. K.,Rashotte, C. A.(1994).Longitudinal studies of phonological processing and reading.Journal of Learning Disabilities,27,276-286.
  34. Vaughn, S.,Klingner, J. K.,Bryant, D. P.(2001).Collaborative strategic reading as a means to enhance peer-mediated instruction for reading comprehension and content-area learning.Remedial and Special Education,22(2),66-74.
  35. Vellutino, F. R.,Scanlon, D. M.,Sipay, E. R.,Small, S. G.,Pratt, A.,Chen, R.(1996).Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of special reading disability.Journal of Educational Psychology,88(4),601-638.
  36. 王瓊珠(2003)。行政院國科會專題研究計畫成果報告(NSC91-2413-H-133-014)行政院國科會專題研究計畫成果報告(NSC91-2413-H-133-014),台北:台北市立師範學院。
  37. 台東縣政府教育局(2006)。台東縣教育白皮書。台東:台東縣政府教育局。
  38. 巫有鎰(1999)。影響國小學生學業成就的因果機制以台北市和台東縣作比較。教育研究集刊,43,213-242。
  39. 巫有鎰、黃毅志(2009)。山地原住民的成績比平地原住民差嗎?可能影響台東縣原住民各族與漢人國小學生學業成績差異的因素機制。台灣教育社會學研究,6,41-89。
  40. 林俊瑩、黃毅志(2008)。影響台灣地區學生學業成就的因果機制:結構方程模式的探究。台灣教育社會學研究,8(1),45-88。
  41. 洪儷瑜、王瓊珠、張郁雯、陳秀芬(2006)。識字畫評估測驗。台北:教育部。
  42. 陳怡靖、陳密桃、黃毅志(2006)。台灣地區高中多元入學與教育機會的關聯性之實徵研究。教育與心理研究,23(3),433-459。
  43. 陳淑麗、熊同鑫(2007)。台東地區弱勢國中學生課輔現況與困境之探究。教育資料與研究雙月刊,76,105-130。
  44. 陸莉、劉鴻香(1998)。修訂畢保德圖畫詞彙測驗指導手冊。台北:心理。
  45. 曾世杰、王素卿(2003)。音素覺識在中文閱讀習得歷程中的角色:個案研究。台東大學教育學報,14,1-28。
  46. 曾世杰、陳淑麗(2007)。注音補救教學對一年級低成就學童的教學成效實驗研究。教育與心理研究,30(3),53-77。
  47. 甄曉蘭(2005)。行政院國家科學委員會專案研究報告行政院國家科學委員會專案研究報告,台北:國立台灣師範大學教育學系。
  48. 簡淑真、曾世杰(2007)。教育部委託報告教育部委託報告,台北:教育部。
Times Cited
  1. 黃育美(2011)。幼兒烹飪科學教學研究─以「漢堡」為例。臺東大學進修部暑期幼兒教育碩士班學位論文。2011。1-164。 
  2. 宋寶麟(2017)。經濟弱勢家庭學齡前兒童托育安排及其對兒童發展之影響探究。臺灣大學社會工作學研究所學位論文。2017。1-123。 
  3. 賴涵婷(2011)。弱勢幼兒就學準備度及其日後學習成就之探討。政治大學幼兒教育所學位論文。2011。1-184。
  4. 許芳萍(2011)。學齡前兒童提前學習注音符號之研究- -以高雄縣旗山區為例。臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系學位論文。2011。1-177。
  5. 施郁如(2013)。小學一年級兒童學校適應之研究。臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系學位論文。2013。1-248。