:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:Metacognitive Strategies Employed by Good and Poor College Readers in Reading Picture Books
書刊名:環球科技人文學刊
作者:蔡惠幸
作者(外文):Tsai, Huey-shing
出版日期:2009
卷期:9
頁次:頁17-28
主題關鍵詞:後設認知Metacognitio
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:20
本研究的主要目的在比較高低成就二技讀者閱讀繪本時所使用的後設認知策略的探討。六位中台灣的某私立二技三年級學生參與此研究,研究者使用訪談與錄音的方式收集資料,分析結果呈現讀者使用八種後設認知策略閱讀繪本。結果顯示在閱讀策略使用分別是默念(50%),回想已讀段落(15%),朗讀(10%),和別人討論內容(5%),翻譯成中文(5%),重讀困惑的部分(5%),畫底線標示困惑的部分(5%),和做筆記(5%)。在策略的使用差異上,高成就讀者在策略形態數與總使用次數上均高於低成就讀者。本研究建議EFL 教師運用後設認知策略幫助學生閱讀繪本,此外發現普通鄉下私立技術學院也有好讀者。
The study examines the comparative differences in metacognitve strategies employed by good and poor college readers in reading picture books. Participants in this study were six junior college students in Taiwan. Data collected for this study came from student interviews. The results revealed that students used eight types of metacognitive strategies to read picture books. The eight types are silent reading (80%), recalling the lead paragraphs (50%), reading aloud (10%), discussing the context with people (5%), translating into Chinese (5%), rereading the confusing part (5%), underlining the confusing part (5%), and taking notes (5%). The study indicates that good learners utilized more types of metacognitve strategies than the poor learners. The study suggests that EFL teachers employ metacognitive strategies to help students read picture books and further concludes that there are good students in the lower-level colleges.
期刊論文
1.Kletzien, S. B.(1991)。Strategy use by good and poor comprehenders’ reading expository text of different levels。Reading Research Quarterly,26(1),67-86。  new window
2.Block, Ellen L.(1992)。See how they read: Comprehension Monitoring of LI and L2 readers。TESOL Quarterly,26(2),319-342。  new window
3.Chi, F.(1997)。Strategy use by Good and Poor Readers: A study of four senior-high-school EFL students。Newsletter of Humanities and Social Science,6(4),81-95。  new window
4.Harmon, J. M.(2002)。Teaching independent word learning strategies to struggling readers。Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,45(7),606-615。  new window
5.Olshavsky, J. E.(1976)。Reading as problem solvingL An investigation of strategies。Reading Research Quarterly,12,654-674。  new window
6.Smith, H. K.(1967)。The responses of good and poor readers when asked to read for different purposes。Reading Research Quarterly,3(1),53-84。  new window
7.Gambrell, L. B.、Heathington, B. S.(1981)。Adult disabled readers' metacognitive awareness about reading tasks and strategies。Journal of reading Behavior,13,213-222。  new window
8.Kletzien, S. B.(1992)。Proficient and less proficient comprehenders’ strategy use for different top-level structures。Journal of Reading Behavior,24(2),191-215。  new window
9.Paris, S. G.、Myers, M.(1981)。Comprehension monitoring, memory, and study strategies of good and poor readers。Journal of Reading Behavior,13(1),5-22。  new window
10.Block, E.(1986)。The comprehension strategies of second language readers。TESOL Quarterly,20(3),463-494。  new window
11.Carrell, P. L.(1989)。Metacognitive awareness and second language reading。The Modern Language Journal,73(2),121-134。  new window
12.Paris, S. G.、Lipson, M. Y.、Wixson, K. K.(1983)。Becoming a strategic reader。Contemporary Educational Psychology,8(3),293-316。  new window
會議論文
1.紀鳳鳴(1997)。探討並比較良好與不良好高中閱讀者的閱讀過程。第14屆中華民國英語文教學研討會。台北:文鶴。19-33。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.Anderson, N. J.(2002)。The role of metacognition in second/foreign language teaching and learning,Washington, DC:ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics。,www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/011 Pan derson.html, 2002/08/08。  new window
2.Kleiman, G. M.(1982)。Comparing good and poor readers: A critique of the research (Tech. Rep. No. 246),Champaign:University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading。  new window
圖書論文
1.Devine, Joanne(1988)。A case study of two readers: Models of reading and reading performance。Interactive approaches to second language reading。Cambridge University Press。  new window
2.Baker, L.(1985)。How do we know when we don’t understand? ndards for evaluating text comprehension。Metacognition, cognition, and human performance。Orlando, FL:Academic Press。  new window
3.Hare, V. C.、Pulliam, C. A.(1980)。College students’ metacognitive awareness of reading behavior。Perspectives on reading research and instruction. Twenty-ninth year book of the national Reading Conference。Washington, DC:National Reading Conference。  new window
4.Baker, L.、Brown, A. L.(1984)。Metacognitive skills and reading。Handbook of Reading Research。New York, NY:Longman。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
QR Code
QRCODE