Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0731116-172532 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0731116-172532
論文名稱
Title
利用訊息交換活動與個人化溝通策略促進英語溝通
Using Information Gap Activity and Personalized Communication Strategy to Promote English Communication
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
108
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2016-07-22
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2016-08-31
關鍵字
Keywords
訊息交換活動、溝通式教學法、行動學習、個人化溝通策略、溝通意願、英語溝通
personalized communication strategy, mobile-learning, Willingness to Communicate, English communication, Information Gap, Communicative Language Teaching
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5816 次,被下載 911
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5816 times, has been downloaded 911 times.
中文摘要
訊息交換活動是一種有效的溝通式教學方法,但目前在EFL環境下實行遇到許多問題,學習者覺得用英文提問困難、缺乏順暢的對話交替、語言上的回饋不足。不好的活動設計會降低學習者的課堂參與度,並降低溝通意願,影響學習成效。又,當學習者以英語溝通時,可能因語言能力不足導致溝通中斷,此時學習者需要使用溝通策略來維持溝通,若溝通中斷會導致學習者無法對話,影響英語溝通學習。在溝通式教學環境下使用溝通策略,則能幫助學習者克服溝通困難,以完成任務。然而提供學習者所偏好的溝通策略,學習者能更廣泛運用溝通策略,進而提升學習成效。因此本研究設計一名為Smart talk的智慧型手機應用程式,來促進課堂中的訊息交換活動。以及設計Smart talk CS系統,及時給予學習者個人化溝通策略,以解決上述問題。本研究使用準實驗法隨機將三班分為Let’ s talk (傳統訊息交換組) 、Smart talk (手機輔助組) 、Smart talk CS (手機輔助融入溝通策略) 三組,人數分別為30、36、32人,並進行三週的實驗。Let’ s talk以紙本教材進行訊息交換活動,Smart talk是為改善目前EFL下實行溝通式教學法所遇到的問題,來設計出執行於智慧型手機上的應用程式,Smart talk CS則是以Smart talk為基礎,再加入個人化溝通策略來促進訊息交換活動。前後測包含溝通意願問卷、自覺溝通策略能力問卷、並進行英語溝通學習成效後測與訪談。研究結果顯示Smart talk顯著提升學習者英語溝通學習成效、流暢度策略、精確度策略與流暢度保持策略的使用;Smart talk CS顯著增加學習者語意協商策略的使用。訪談中學習者提到使用系統能提升課堂參與度且更願意溝通,授課教師表示有用系統的組別互動較多,且老師可以即時瞭解學生的學習進度。未來研究期望能設計為全英文課程,讓課堂練習更貼近真實情境,並激發學習者溝通策略的使用,並結合不同的科技輔助學習。加強後台功能,教師能更了解學習者狀況、自行上傳修改課程內容,來增加課程彈性,讓老師與學生有更好的學習經驗。
Abstract
Information Gap activity is an effective method in Communicative Language Teaching (CLT); however, it oftentimes has practicality problems for English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. It lacks scaffolds for initiating questions, turn-taking for learners to interact, feedback to facilitate communication. Poor design of classroom activity might reduce learners’ participation, Willingness to Communicate (WTC), and learning performance. Because of insufficient language proficiency, there can be a communication breakdown during communication in English. When there is a communication breakdown, language input can be constrained. However, the use of communication strategies can help learners maintain a communication, or compensate for the lack of language knowledge. In the case of WTC in a classroom environment, using communication strategies can help learners overcome communication difficulties and complete tasks. Thus, providing learners preferred communication strategies can improve learning performance. To resolve problem in Information Gap activities, this study developed two smart phone applications called Smart talk in order to facilitate classroom of Information Gap activities, and Smart talk CS to provide personalized communication strategies to learners in real time. This study adopted a quasi-experimental design where learners were divided into three groups: Let’s talk, Smart talk, and Smart talk CS. Let’s talk used textbook to go through Information Gap activities. Smart talk structured IG practice on a smartphone application. Smart talk CS was based on the Smart talk, and then adds personalized communication strategies to promote Information Gap activities. Results showed that Smart talk-facilitated Information Gap activities significantly improved learners learning performance, fluency-oriented strategies, accuracy-oriented strategies, and fluency-maintaining strategies. Also, Smart talk CS enhances learning outcome as the frequency of use negotiation for meaning strategies increased. This result is also supported by our subsequent interview with the learners reported that the use of Smart talk and Smart talk CS during practice could improve participation and willingness to communicate. The instructor mentioned that learners were more engaged when using the system and their progress were monitored immediately. For the future research, the course can mandate the task to be English only, which would facilitate the use of communication strategies. Finally, the background system can be multifunctional. It is hoped that this study demonstrates how teachers can integrate smartphones into classroom activities by making language learning a rich and interactive learning experience.
目次 Table of Contents
論文審定書 i
論文提要 ii
致謝 iii
摘要 iv
Abstract v
目錄 vii
圖目錄 viii
表目錄 x
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 3
第三節 研究問題 4
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 溝通式教學法 5
第二節 訊息交換活動 6
第三節 溝通意願 7
第四節 溝通策略 8
第五節 行動學習 12
第六節 個人化學習 13
第三章 系統設計 14
第一節 內容設計 14
第二節 介面與流程設計 16
第三節 個人化溝通策略 21
第四章 研究方法 24
第一節 研究架構 24
第二節 研究變數之操作性定義 25
第三節 研究假說 27
第四節 研究工具 28
第五節 實驗設計 29
第六節 資料分析 36
第五章 結果與討論 37
第一節 人口統計變項 37
第二節 英語溝通學習成效分析 37
第三節 訊息交換活動完成度 44
第四節 英語溝通意願問卷分析 44
第五節 質性訪談結果 46
第六節 自覺英語溝通策略能力問卷分析 49
第七節 學習活動問卷分析 55
第八節 綜合討論 57
第六章 結論 62
第一節 研究發現 62
第二節 研究貢獻 64
第三節 研究限制 66
第四節 未來研究 67
參考文獻 68
附錄一 溝通意願與學習活動問卷 72
附錄二 自覺溝通策略能力問卷 75
附錄三 後測題目 77
附錄四 基本資料問卷 82
附錄五 紙本教材 83
參考文獻 References
Ansarey, D. (2012). Communicative Language Teaching in EFL contexts: teachers’ attitude and perception in Bangladesh. ASA University Review, 6(1), 61-78.
Aubrey, S. C. (2010). Influences on Japanese students’ willingness to communicate across three different sized EFL classes (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Auckland).
Banciu, V., & Jireghie, A. (2012). Communicative Language Teaching. Public Policy and Administration Review, 1(8), 94-98.
Butler, Y. G. (2011). The implementation of communicative and task-based language teaching in the Asia-Pacific region. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 36-57.
Canale, M. (1983). On some dimensions of language proficiency. In J. W. Oller, Jr. (Ed.), Issues in language testing research. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Chen, N. S., & Hsieh, S. W. (2008). Effects of short-term memory and content representation type on mobile language learning. Language Learning and Technology, 12(3), 93-113.
Chung, I. F., & Huang, Y. C. (2009). The implementation of Communicative Language Teaching: An investigation of students' viewpoints. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 18(1), 67-78.
Cohen. J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1984). Two ways of defining communication strategies. Language Learning, 34, 45-63.
Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). Communication strategies at work. In Communication strategies: Psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives.
Glass, G. V., Peckham, P. D., & Sanders, J. R. (1972). Consequences of failure to meet assumptions underlying the fixed effects analyses of variance and covariance. Review of educational research, 42(3), 237-288.
Hartley, H. O. (1950). The maximum F-ratio as a short-cut test for heterogeneity of variance. Biometrika, 308-312.
Hsu, C. K., Hwang, G. J., & Chang, C. K. (2013). A personalized recommendation-based mobile learning approach to improving the reading performance of EFL students. Computers & Education, 63, 327-336.
Hwang, W.Y. & Chen, H.S.L. (2013). Users' familiar situational contexts facilitate the practice of EFL in elementary schools with mobile devices. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(2), 101-125.
Järvelä, S., Naykki, P., Laru, J., & Luokkanen, T. (2007). Structuring and regulating collaborative learning in higher education with wireless networks and mobile tools. Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 71–79.
Kang, S. J.(2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33(2), 277-292.
Khoshsima, H., & Saed, A. (2016). Task-based Instruction and Vocabulary Learning: A Comparative Study of Jigsaw and Information Gap Tasks on Vocabulary Learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 5(5), 228-236.
Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2006). Mobile language learning now and in the future.
Lai, C. Y., & Wu, C. C. (2006). Using handhelds in a Jigsaw cooperative learning environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(4), 284-297.
Lam, W. Y. (2010). Implementing communication strategy instruction in the ESL oral classroom: What do low-proficiency learners tell us?. TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 11.
Liskin-Gasparro, J. E. (1996). Circumlocution, communication strategies, and the ACTFL proficiency guidelines: An analysis of student discourse. Foreign Language Annals, 29 (3), 317-330.
Littlewood, W. T. (1981). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liu, T. Y., & Chu, Y. L. (2010). Using ubiquitous games in an English listening and speaking course: Impact on learning outcomes and motivation. Computers & Education, 55(2), 630-643.
Luo, B. R., Lin, Y. L., Chen, N. S., & Fang, W. C. (2015, July). Using Smartphone to Facilitate English Communication and Willingness to Communicate in a Communicative Language Teaching Classroom. In Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) , 2015 IEEE 15th International Conference on (pp. 320-322). IEEE.
MacIntyre, P. (2007). Willingness to communicate in the second language: Understanding the decision to speak as a volitional process. The Modern Language Journal, 91(5), 564–576.
MacIntyre, P., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15(1), 3–26.
MacIntyre, P., Dörnyei, Z., Clément, R., & Noels, K. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562.
Mahmoodi, M. H., & Moazam, I. (2014). Willingness to Communicate (WTC) and L2 Achievement: The Case of Arabic Language Learners. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1069-1076.
Nakatani, Y. (2005). The effects of awareness‐raising training on oral communication strategy use. The Modern Language Journal, 89(1), 76-91.
Nakatani, Y. (2006). Developing an Oral Communication Strategy Inventory. The Modern Language Journal, 90(2) , 151-168.
Nakatani, Y., & Goh, C. (2007). A review of oral communication strategies: focus on interactionist and psycholinguistic perspectives. In A.D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and practice (pp. 207-227). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Nakatani, Y. (2010). Identifying Strategies That Facilitate EFL Learners' Oral Communication: A Classroom Study Using Multiple Data Collection Procedures. The Modern Language Journal, 94(1), 116-136.
Neu, H., & Reeser, T. W. (1997). Parle-moi Un Peu: Information Gap Activities for Beginning French Classes. Helene & Helene.
Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL quarterly, 279-295.
O'Donoghue, J. (2009). Technology-Supported Environments for Personalized Learning: Methods and Case Studies: Methods and Case Studies. IGI Global.
Ounis, T. (2016). Exploring the Use of Oral Communication Strategies by High and Low Proficiency learners of English: Tunisian EFL students as a case study. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies (IJHCS) ISSN 2356-5926, 3(1), 1077-1098.
Poulisse, N. & Schils, E. (1989). The influence of task-and-proficiency-related factors on the use of compensatory strategies: A quantitative analysis. Language Learning, 39(1), 15-48.
Rabab’ah, G. (2016). The Effect of Communication Strategy Training on the Development of EFL Learners’ Strategic Competence and Oral Communicative Ability. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 45(3), 625-651.
Reinders, H., & Wattana, S. (2014). Can I say something? The effects of digital game play on willingness to communicate. Language Learning & Technology, 18(2), 101-123.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, W. R. (2009). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. New York: Longman.
Sartika, D. (2016). Teaching speaking using the Information Gap technique. English Education Journal, 7(3), 273-285.
Shen, L., & Suwanthep, J. (2011). E-learning Constructive Role Plays for EFL Learners in China's Tertiary Education. Online Submission, 49.
Song, Y., Wong, L. H., & Looi, C. K. (2012). Fostering personalized learning in science inquiry supported by mobile technologies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(4), 679-701.
Wu, K. H. (2010). The relationship between language learners’ anxiety and learning strategy in the CLT classrooms. International Education Studies, 3(1), 174-191.
Wong, L. H., & Looi, C. K. (2010). Vocabulary learning by mobile‐assisted authentic content creation and social meaning‐making: two case studies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 421-433.
Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54-66.
Yashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., & Shimizu, K. (2004). The influence of attitudes and affect on willingness to communicate and second language communication. Language Learning, 54(1), 119-152.
Yu, H., Li, H., & Gou, X. (2011).The personality-based variables and their correlations underlying willingness to communicate. Asian Social Science, 7(3), 253-257.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code