論文摘要

論文名稱：自我發問策略與合作學習（小組討論）對國中生國文閱讀 理解的效果比較考驗
學校所別：國立中山大學教育研究所
摘要別：中英文摘要
研究生：施頂清
指導教授：桂慶中博士
摘要內容
本研究主要在探討自我發問策略與合作學習（小組討論）對國中生國文閱讀理解的效果比較考驗，所探討的問題是：
一、 自我發問策略對閱讀理解能力之影響。
二、 自我發問策略結合合作學習小組討論對提昇閱讀理解能力之影響。
三、 自我發問策略結合合作學習小組討論對發問之問題類型層次之影響。
本研究採實驗研究法，以國中二年級學生共50名為研究對象，以「閱讀理解能力」前測成績分成實驗組與控制組兩組，每組各25人。研究工具是「閱讀理解能力測驗」，所得資料以t檢定作統計考驗，得到以下結果：
一、 學生在接受「自我發問策略」教學後，其閱讀理解能力獲得提昇。
二、 實驗組學生在接受自我發問策略結合合作學習小組討論的教學後，其「閱讀理解能力」後測成績優於控制組。
三、 實驗組學生在接受自我發問策略結合合作學習小組討論的教學後，其「高層次問題類型」後測成績優於控制組。
最後針對以上結果加以討論，並對有關閱讀理解教學方面提供建議，以及進一步研究之參考。

The Effect of Comparative Tests Between Self-questioning Strategy And Cooperative Learning (Group Discussion) on Junior High
School Students' Chinese Reading Comprehension

Abstract

The main purpose of this study was to discuss the effect of comparative tests between self-questioning strategy and cooperative learning (group discussion) on junior high school students' Chinese reading comprehension. The questions explored here were:
1. How did self-questioning strategy influence reading comprehension ability?
2. How did self-questioning strategy and the group discussion of cooperative learning improve and influence reading comprehension ability?
3. How did self-questioning strategy and the group discussion of cooperative learning affect the levels of question types?
The study used experimental research method. The subjects were 50 second grade students of junior high. According to the scores of the prior test on "reading comprehension ability," students were divided into an experimental group and a control group, and each one was composed of 25 students. The instrument was "test of reading comprehension ability," and the information acquired was dealt with statistical testing on the basis of t-test. The results were as followings:
1. After receiving the teaching of "self-questioning strategy," students' reading comprehension abilities were improved.
2. After the students in the experimental group received the co-teaching of self-questioning strategy and the group discussion of cooperative learning, their scores of the posttest on "reading comprehension ability" were superior to the scores of the students in the control group.
3. After the students in the experimental group accepted the co-teaching of self-questioning strategy and the group discussion of cooperative learning, their scores of the posttest on "high-level question type" were superior to the scores of the students in the control group.
Finally the study discussed the above results in more detail, and provided suggestions and references of further research concerning teaching of the reading comprehension.

自我發問策略與合作學習（小組討論）對
國中生國文閱讀理解的效果比較考驗
（目錄）
第一章：緒論
第一節：研究動機…………..………………………… 1
第二節：研究目的…………..………………………… 5
第三節：研究問題……………………………………… 5
第四節：研究假設…………………………………….. 5
第五節：名詞界定…………..………………………… 6
第二章：文獻探討
第一節：閱讀理解…………..………………………… 8
壹、閱讀的理論…………..………………………… 8
貳、閱讀理解之意義…………..…………………… 11
第二節：自我發問策略…………..…………………… 18
壹、意義與功能…………..………………………… 18
貳、問題之內涵（層次）…………..……………… 22
參、自我發問策略與閱讀理解之相關實證研究….. 27
第三節：合作學習小組討論…………..……………… 32
壹、源起與意義…………..………………………… 32
貳、小組討論與提昇閱讀理解能力之相關研究….. 37
第三章：研究方法
第一節：實驗設計…………..………………………. 43
壹、研究樣本…………..………………………… 43
貳、研究工具…………..………………………… 44
參、評分方式……………………………………… 45
肆、研究設計…………..………………………… 46
第二節：實驗變項…………..………………………… 50
第三節：資料處理…………..………………………… 51
第四節：研究限制…………..………………………… 51
第四章：結果分析與討論
第一節：結果分析…………..………………………… 52
第二節：討論…………..……………………………… 55
第五章：結論與建議…………..…………………………… 60
參考文獻
中文部分…………..…………………………………… 65
西文部分…………..………………………… ………… 67
附錄
一、 閱讀理解能力測驗…………..………………….. 73
二、 實驗教學教材…………..……………………….. 80
三、閱讀理解能力測驗難度與鑑別度分析表……….. 86
四、發問提示卡…………..………………………….. 87
五、實驗處理………………………………………….. 88
六、實驗組小組討論空間安排……………………….. 89
























圖目次
圖2-1 閱讀流程圖……………………………………9

圖3-1 研究架構圖……………………………………49

圖4-1 實驗組與控制組「閱讀理解能力測驗」後測成績平均數差異趨勢
………………………………………………..53
圖4-2 實驗組與控制組「高層次問題類型」後測成績平均數差異趨勢
………………………………………………..55




























表目次
表2-1 敘述文體分析…………………………………………14
表2-2 問題題型與題幹範例…………………………………27
表3-1 閱讀理解前測分析……………………………………44
表3-2 高層次問題類型前測分析…………………………..44
表3-3 實驗教學程序與時間分配表…………………………46
表3-4 前測分析………………………………………………49
表3-5 後測分析………………………………………………50
表4-1 控制組閱讀理解能力測驗前後測平均數與標準差…52
表4-2 實驗組與控制組「閱讀理解能力測驗」後測平均數與標準差
………………………………………………………..53
表4-3 實驗組與控制組「高層次問題類型」後測之平均數與標準差
………………………………………………………..54
表4-4 控制組高層次問題類型與閱讀理解後測成績之相關性
………………………………………………………..59
表4-5 實驗組高層次問題類型與閱讀理解後測成績之相關性
………………………………………………………..59

參 考 文 獻
一、中文部分
李詠吟（民83）：合作學習的技術層面。教育研究所集刊，35，153-168頁。
李新鄉、黃秀文、黃瓊儀（民86）：相互教學法對國小六年級學童閱讀理解能力、
後設認知能力與閱讀態度之影響。嘉義師院學報，11，89-118 。
汪榮才（民85）：國小學生之後設認知與科學文章閱讀理解。國立台南師範學院
國民教育研究所集刊，1，81-139。
余民寧、陳嘉成（民87）：以概念構圖為學習策略之教學對自然科學習的促進效
果之研究。國立政治大學學報第77期抽印本。
余民寧、潘雅芳、林偉文（民85）：概念構圖法：合作學習抑個別學習。教育與
心理研究，19，93-124。
何東墀、胡永崇（民85）：後設認知策略教學對國小閱讀障礙學童閱讀理解成效
之研究。特殊教育學報，11，173-210。
林玟慧（民84）：閱讀理解策略教學對國中閱讀障礙學生閱讀效果之研究。特殊
教育研究學刊，12，235-259。
林清山譯（民79）：教育心理學 －－ 認知取向。台北：遠流。
林蕙芬（民86）：自我教導問－答閱讀策略對國中輕度智能不足學生閱讀理解效
果之研究。特殊教育學報，12，103-123。
林蕙蓉（民84）：國小學童後設認知策略教學對國語科閱讀理解效能之研究。台
南師院學報，28，271-312。
邱美虹（民85）：學習策略與科學管理。科學教育月刊，191，2-15。
胥彥華（民79）：學習策略對國小六年級學生閱讀效果之研究。彰化師範大學特
殊教育研究所碩士論文。
韋金龍、陳玉美（民83）：突破常態編班教學困境之途徑：合作學習。教育研究
雙月刊，35，59-65。
張春興（民85）：教育心理學－－三化取向的理論與實踐。台北：東華。
張酒雄（民69）：個人特質與實驗處理的交互作用－－簡介教育心理學的ATI
（TTI）研究。國立高雄師範學院教育系及教育研究所教育學刊第二期，37-51。
張瑛玿（民83）：自我發問策略對國小學生的閱讀理解與自我發問表現之影響。
國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
陳李綢（民84）：「學習策略訓練方案」對國中生閱讀理解學習之影響。國立台
灣師範大學教育心理學報，28，77-98。
陳密桃（民79a）：國民中小學生的後設認知及其與閱讀理解之相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
陳密桃（民79b）：兒童和青少年後設認知的發展及其教學效果之分析。教育學 刊，9，107-148。
陳密桃（民81）：從認知心理學的觀點談閱讀理解。國立高雄師範大學「教育文
粹」，21，10-19。
陳淑絹（民86）：「指導-合作學習」策略應用於國小閱讀教學之理論探討。台中
師院學報，11，65-111。
郭靜姿（民83）：不同閱讀能力成敗歸因方式、策略運用與後設認知能力之差異
比較。師大學報，39，284-325。
黃政傑、林佩璇（民85）：合作學習。台北：五南。
黃瓊儀（民85）：國小學童閱讀理解策略、閱讀理解歸因與閱讀理解能力相關之
研究。國民教育研究學報，2，107-149。
詹文宏（民84）：後設認知閱讀策略對國小閱讀障礙兒童閱讀理解能力之研究。
台灣彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
鄭宇樑（民87）：後設認知閱讀教學對國小學生科學文章閱讀理解、閱讀態度及
後設認知能力影響之研究。國民教育研究集刊，4卷4期，223-259。
鄭昭明（民76）：認知心理學與教學研究－－ 一般介紹。現代教育，第二卷，
第二期，88-114。
劉玲吟（民83）：後設認知閱讀策略的教學對國中低閱讀能力學生閱讀效果之研
究。台灣彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
劉錫麒（民82）：合作反省思考的數學解題教學模式及其實證研究。教育研究資
訊，1卷5期，16-25頁。
歐用生（民83）：課程發展的基本原理。高雄：復文。
賴育民（民84）：如何增進閱讀理解能力－－後設認知取向。研習資訊，12卷
3期，29-31。
盧富美（民81）：談合作學習及其教學流程。教師之友，33卷4期，3-8。
羅彥文（民84）：國中學生國文閱讀學習之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩
士論文。
二、西文部分
Alexander, J. E., ＆ Heathington, B. S.（1988）. Assessing and correcting classroom
reading problems. Glenview, Illinois：Scott, Foresman and Company.
Anderson, R.C.（1972）.How to construct achievement tests to assess comprehension.
Review of Educational Research, 42,145-170.
Andre, M.E.D.A., ＆ Anderson（1978-79）.The development and evaluation of a self-questioning study technique. Reading Research Quarterly,14,605-623.
Armbruster, B.B.（1988）.Why some children have trouble content area textbooks. ERIC No.ED300782.
Aukerman, R.C.,＆ Aukerman, L. R.（1981）. How do I teach reading. New York：
John Wiley＆Sons.
Ausubel, D. P., ＆ Robinson, F. G.（1969）. School learning. New York：Holt, Rinehart ＆ Winston.
Baker, L.（1979）.Do I understand or do I not understand：That is the question
（Reading Education Report No.10）. Urbana：University of Idinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
Baker, L.,＆ Brown, A.L.（1984）. Metacognitive skills in reading. In D. Person（ED.）,
Handbook of reading research.
Bargh, J. A.,＆ Schual,Y.（1980）.On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of
Educational Psychology,72,593-604.
Benito, Y.M., Foley, C. L., Lewis, C. D.,＆ Prescott, P.（1984）.The effects of
instruction in question-answer relationship and metacognition on social studies comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading,16（1）, 20-29.
Berstein, S.（1973）.The effect of children's question-asking behaviours on problem solution and comprehension of written materials. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University.
Blank, S.,＆ Covington, M.（1965）.Inducing children to ask question in solving problem. Journal of Educational Research,59,21-27.
Carrier, C.A.,＆ Patridge, T.F.（1981）.Levels of questions：a framework for the
exploration of processing activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 6,305-382.
Carver, R. P.（1973）. Reading as Reading：Implications for measurement. In W.H.
Mcginitie（Ed.）Assessment problems in Reading. New York, DE：Internation Reading Association.
Chan, L.K.S., Cole, P.G.,＆ Barfett, S.（1987）.Comprehension monitoring：Detection
and identification of text inconsistencies by LD and normal students. Learning Disability Quarterly,10,114-124.
Chodos,L.B.,Hould,S.M.,＆ Rusch,R.R.（1977）.Effect of student generated pre-questions and post statements on immediate and delayed recall of fourth grade social studies content. In P.D. Pearson ＆ J.Hansen（Eds.）,Reading：Theory, research, and practice 26th yearbook of the national reading conference（pp.11-16）. Clemson,SC：National Reading Conference.
Cook, L.K.,＆ Mayer, R. E.（1983）.Reading strategies training for meaning learning
from prose. In M. Pressly＆ J. R. Lewin（Eds）, Cognitive strategy research：Educational applications（pp.87-131）. New York：Spring -Verlay.
Craiy, M.T.,＆ Yore, L.D.（1992）.Middle school students` metacognitive knowledge
about science reading and science text：Objective assessment, validation and results.（ERIC Document Reproduction Science No.ED 356 134.）
Davey, B.,＆ McBride, S.（1986）.Effects of question-generation training on reading
comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology,78（4）,256-262
Dillon,J.T（1988）.The remedial status of student questioning.Curriculum Studies,20 （3）.197-210.
Duell,O.K.（1977）.Overt and covert use of different level. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
Foote,C.J.（1998）.Student-generated higher order questioning as a study strategy. The Journal of Educational Research,92（2）,107-113.
Gagne, E.D（1985）.The cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston：Little,
Brown and Company.
Graesser, A. C.,＆ Person, N.K.（1994）.Question asking during tutoring. American
educational research journal，31（1），104-137.
Heilman, A., Blair, T.,＆ Rupley, W.（1990）.Principles and practices of teaching
reading . Columbus, Ohio：Merrill.
Huey, E.B.（1908）：The psychology and pedagogy of reading. New York：Macmillan.
（Reprinted by M.I.T press in 1968）.
Johnson, D.W.,＆ Johnson, R.T.（1994）.Learning together and alone：Cooperative,
Competitive and individualistic learning. Boston：Allyn and Bacon.
Kameenui, E.J.,＆ Simmons, D.C.（1990）.Designing instructional strategies.
Columbus, Ohio：Merrill Publishing.
King, A.（1989）.Effects of self-questioning training on college student‘s comprehensi-
on of lectures. Contemporary Education on psychology，14，366-381.
King, A.（1990）.Enchancing peer interaction and learning in the classroom through
reciprocal peer questioning. American Educational Research Journal，27（4），664-687.
King, A.（1991）. Effects of training in strategic questioning on children`s problem-
solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology,83（3）,307-317.
King, A.（1994）. Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom：effect of teaching
children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal，31（2），338-368.
King, A.,＆ Rosenshin, B.（1992）. Effects of guided cooperative questioning on
children`s knowledge construction. Journal of Experimental Education,61（2）,127-148.
King,A.,Staffieri,A.,＆ Adelgais,A.（1998）.Mutual peer tutoring：Effect of structuring tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology,90（1）,134-152.
Lou, Y., Abrami, P.C., Spence, J.C., Poulsen, C., Chamber, B.,＆ d`Apollonia, S.
（1996）.Within-class grouping：a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research,66（4）,423-458.
McInerney, V., McInerney, D.M.,＆ Marnish, H.W.（1997）.Effects of metacognitive
strategy training within a cooperative group learning context on computer achievement and anxiety：an aptitude-treatment interaction study. Journal of Educational Psychology,89（4）,686-695.
Nattiv,A.（1994）.Helping behaviors and math achievement gain of students using cooperative learning. The Elementary school Journal,94（3）,285-297.
Ofir,L.（1997）.Effects of self-directed learning, story comprehension, and self-questioning in kindergarten. The Journal of Educational Reaearch,90（6）,361-374.
Owens,A.M.（1976）.The effect of question generation, question answering ,and reading on prose learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
Palincsar, A.S.（1982）.Improving the reading comprehension of junior high students
through reciprocal teaching of comprehension-monitoring strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois.
Palincsar, A.S.,＆ Brown, H.L.（1984）.Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-foster
and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction,1,117-175.
Piaget,J.,＆ Inhelder,B.（1969）. The psychology of the child. New York：Basic Books.
Roth, W.M.,＆ Roychoudhiry, A.（1993）.The concept map as a tool for the collabor-
ative construction of knowledge：A microanalysis of high school physics students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,30,503- 534.
Rumelhart, D. E.（1977）.Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic（ED.）,
Attention and Performance（Vol.6,p.573-603）. Hillsdale, N.J.：Erlbaum.
Sadker,M.,＆ Cooper,J.（1974）.Increasing student higher-order questions. Elementary English,51,502-507.
Schmelzer,R.V.（1975）. The effect of college student constructed questions on comprehension of a passage of expository prose. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Slavin, R.E.（1985）.Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. N.Y.：Plenum.
Stacy,K.（1992）.Mathematical problem solving in groups：are two heads better than one？Journal of Mathematical Behavior,11（3）,261-275.
Stevens, R.J., Slavin, R.E.,＆ Farnish, A.M.（1991）.The effects of cooperative
learning and direct instruction in reading comprehension strategies on main idea identification. Journal of Educational Psychology,83（1）,8-16.
Vygotsky, L.S.（1978）.Mind in society：The development of higher psychological
process . Cambridge, MA：Harvard University Press.
Webb, N.M.（1985）Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International
Journal of Educational Research,13,21-39.
Wong, B.Y.L.（1985）.Self-questioning instructional research：A Review. Review
of Educational Research,2（55）,227-268.
Wong, B.Y.L.,＆ Jones,W.（1982）. Increasing metacomprehension in reading learning-disabled and normally-achieving students through self-questioning training. Learning Disability Quarterly,5,228-240.
Yager, S.,Johnson, D.W.,＆ Johnson,R.T.（1985）.Oral discussion, group-to-individual transfer, and achievement in cooperative learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology,77（1）,60-66.