:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:國小差異化閱讀教學之言說分析
作者:王月美
作者(外文):Wang, Yueh-Mei
校院名稱:臺北市立大學
系所名稱:教育學系
指導教授:簡良平
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2018
主題關鍵詞:差異化閱讀教學言說分析閱讀教學Differentiated reading instructionDiscourse analysisReading instruction
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:4
差異化教學為目前因應個別差異、實現因材施教倡行之策,在班級中實施又能顧及弱勢學生,因此本研究規劃閱讀課程,於國小班級教室中實施差異化閱讀教學,以提升班級學生的閱讀能力為目標。國內課堂教學的質性研究,鮮少採言說分析方法,本研究以言說分析探究教學過程,及現場資料的處理和詮釋,期望研究結果能提高差異化閱讀教學實施之參考價值。
本研究採質性研究法,對象為北部一所市區中型小學五年級和一年級各一個班(A、B班),實施一年半的差異化閱讀教學,選擇敘事文本引導學生發展閱讀理解策略,並指導習寫學習單,提升整體讀寫能力。透過觀察、訪談等質性研究方法,蒐集課程實施之相關資料,應用言說分析工具表於差異化閱讀教學課堂分析,詮釋資料的意義,作成研究報告,深入探究差異化閱讀教學課堂之實況、遭遇之困境,及因應解決策略。
研究結果發現A、B二班實施差異化閱讀教學可分為三部份,一、差異化閱讀教學之實踐策略為:課程為本之差異化閱讀教學依學生能力調整課程進度與教學類型,運用閱讀教學策略提升學生閱讀理解能力,實施差異化教學策略增進學生閱讀學習效果,以形成性評量掌握學生之學習進展與成果。二、差異化閱讀教學之教室生活分析,師生互動建構之課程經驗為:規律有序之教室生活圖像、師生共構之情境意義、友善關懷之師生互動關係、教師主導之教室權力、聯結相關事物增進閱讀之效應、師生對話建構閱讀知識、教師教學文化模式之形塑。三、差異化閱讀教學之成效與困境,由學生閱讀理解測驗結果呈現進步成績、弱勢學生閱讀學習進步和教師專業成長,可知差異化閱讀教學實施有所成效;檢討教學歷程中遭遇之困境為差異化閱讀教學備課壓力大,閱讀教材非正式課程、教學時間難安排。並綜合討論二班實施之問題及因應解決策略:增進教師差異化閱讀教學知能,組織教師團隊增進改變動力,增置閱讀教學教室情境設備,差異化閱讀教學納入學校整體課程計畫實施,以提升差異化閱讀教學之成效。
研究結論為:以課程為本的差異化閱讀教學提升學生閱讀能力,以閱讀教學策略激活學生閱讀思考,以差異化教學策略增進學生閱讀學習效果,以形成性評量鼓勵學生閱讀學習進展,友善互動的班級管理支持學生安心學習,設置豐富的學習環境啟發學生閱讀學習,差異化閱讀教學鼓舞弱勢學生閱讀動機,差異化閱讀教學促進教師專業發展,言說分析探究差異化閱讀教學文化模式之形塑。最後提出對於教師、學校、未來研究之建議,以有助於實施差異化閱讀教學,並有效提升學生閱讀能力。
Nowadays, differentiated instruction is a well-accepted countermeasure against individual differences and meets the advocacy of teaching according to learner level, it can also cover the learning requirement of the disadvantaged students when implemented in the class. This study designs a reading curriculum and implements differentiated reading instruction in primary school classes to enhance the reading competence of primary students. Seldom in Taiwan the qualitative researches, conducted so far, on classroom instruction adopt the discourse analysis method. This study makes an attempt to use the discourse analysis approach, along with observation and interview, to investigate the process of differentiated reading instruction, handle the field data collected, and make interpretation. It is expected that the study result can be a valuable reference for promoting differentiated reading instruction.
By way of case study, this study chooses one grade fifth class and one first class, hereinafter referred to as class A and class B, from a middle-sized urban primary school of northern Taiwan. The targeted classes are scheduled to implement differentiated reading instruction for one and half a school year. During the study span, some narrative texts are selected as reading material to induce the students to develop its reading understanding strategies and the students are guided to complete the designated worksheet in order to enhance its reading and writing competence as a whole. The researcher collects the field data from the implementation via observation and interview, and utilizes discourse analysis to analyze the differentiated reading instruction classes, interprets the meaning behind the collected data, prepares the study report, further inquiries the status quo of differentiated reading instruction and problem encountered, and proposes some counter-strategies.
The study result shows that class A and B have something in common while implementing differentiated reading instruction as below: firstly, the workable differentiated reading instruction implementation strategies include adjusting the curriculum schedule and instruction approach flexibly to the curriculum-based differentiated reading instruction depending on learner competence; using reading instruction strategies to enhance the students reading understanding competence; implementing the differentiated instruction strategies to enhance students reading learning effectiveness; using formative evaluation to understand the differentiated reading instruction learning outcome and progress of the students. Secondly, the curriculum experience constructed by teacher-student interaction after conducting classroom discourse analysis are shown as below: the routine and orderly classroom life image; the context meaning constructed mutually by the teachers and the students; the friendly and caring atmosphere of teacher-student interaction relationship; the classroom power dominated by the teachers; the reading instruction effect of linking the things concerned together; the construction of reading knowledge through teacher-student dialogue; the modeling of the teacher instruction culture pattern. Thirdly, the effects and difficulties while implementing differentiated reading instruction are proposed as followings: the differentiated reading instruction is effective which can be validated by the students reading understanding test result, the progress made by the disadvantaged students, and the teachers professional improvement. In the difficulties aspect, the difficulties encountered during the reading instruction process include differentiated reading instruction makes teacher stressful when doing pre-class preparation, the selected reading material is not belong to the existing formal curriculum, the extra time for conducting differentiated reading instruction is hard to arrange. Also, this study makes an overall discussion about the differences between the two targeted classes and proposes some counter-strategies as below: to enhance teachers differentiated reading instruction knowledge and skills, to organize teacher partner teams and provide changing agent, to equip classroom with the context facilities which is necessary for fulfilling differentiated reading instruction, and the differentiated reading instruction is suggested to be included in the school curriculum plan as a whole.
This study concludes with some research outcomes, inclusive of the curriculum-based differentiated reading instruction can help improve the students reading competence, the reading instruction strategies can help trigger the students reading thinking capabilities, formative evaluation can help grasp the students reading learning progress, the friendly teacher-student interaction way of classroom management can help provide a stable learning environment for students, the well-equipped learning setting can help stimulate the students reading learning, the differentiated reading instruction can help invoke the reading motive of the disadvantaged students, the differentiated reading instruction can help boost the teachers professional development, the discourse analysis is a feasible approach to inquiry the modeling of classroom differentiated reading instruction culture. Finally, this study proposes some suggestions concerning differentiated reading instruction to teachers, schools and future studies.
參考文獻
一、中文部分
丁嘉琳(2008)。尋找閱讀的下一步:臺灣閱讀出了什麼問題。載於天下雜誌教育基金會編著,閱讀,動起來-借鏡國際成功經驗,看見孩子微笑閱讀(12-17頁)。臺北:天下雜誌。
卞娜娜、陳怡君、凱恩(譯)(2008)。第56號教室的奇蹟: 讓達賴喇嘛、美國總統、歐普拉都感動推薦的老師(原作者: Esquith, R.)。臺北:高寶。
天下雜誌教育基金會(2008)。閱讀,動起來:借鏡國際成功經驗,看見孩子微笑閱讀。臺北:天下雜誌。
方永泉(2006)。批判取向教育哲學的發展、議題及展望。載於李錦旭、王慧蘭主編,批判教育學:臺灣的探索(23-57頁)。臺北:心理。
王文方(2011)。語言哲學。臺北:三民。
王月美(2011)。弱勢學生學習之潛在課程分析—偏鄉學校之經驗與困境。載於淡江大學主辦,2011年弱勢學生增能教育學術研討會暨工作坊論文集(71-85頁)。
王月美、簡良平(2013)。應用言說分析策略探討傳統教室教學語言轉變的可能─以國小五年級閱讀課程為例。「香港亞洲研究學會第八屆研討會-亞洲的變革、發展及文化:從多角度出發」發表之論文,香港教育學院。
王勇智、曾寶瑩、陳舒儀(譯)(2010)。社會認知—一種整合的觀點(原作者:Augoustinos, M., Walker, I. & Donaghue, N.)。臺北:心理。(原著出版年:2006)
王雅玄(2005)。社會領域教科書的批判論述分析:方法論的重建。教育研究集刊,51(2),67-97。
王瑞賢(譯)(2005)。教育、象徵控制與認同:理論、研究與批判。(原作者:Bernstein, B.)。臺北:學富文化。(原著出版年:2000)
王瑞賢(2006a)。B. Bernstain符碼與教育論述導論。載於譚光鼎、王麗雲主編,教育社會學:人物與思想(259-287頁)。臺北:高等教育。
王瑞賢(譯)(2006b)。教育論述之結構化。(原作者:Bernstein, B.)。臺北:巨流。(原著出版年:1990)
王瑞賢(譯)(2007)。階級、符碼與控制(第三卷): 教育傳遞理論之建構(原作者:Bernstein, B.)。臺北:聯經。(原著出版年:2003)
王瓊珠、陳淑麗(2010)。突破閱讀困難:理論與實務。臺北:心理。
卯靜儒、張建成(2005)。在地化與全球化之間:解嚴後臺灣課程改革論述的擺盪。臺灣教育社會學研究,5(1),39-76。
朱永生(2003)。話語分析五十年:回顧與展望。外國語(Journal of Foreign Language),2003(3),43-50。
江逸之(2007)。全球都相信 閱讀就是競爭力。遠見雜誌,254。取自https://www.gvm.com.tw/article.html?id=11877
余光雄(2009)。英語語言學概論(第二版)。臺北:書林。
吳沛嶸(譯)(2009)。文化研究核心議題與關鍵爭辯(原作者:Barker, C.)。新北市:韋伯文化國際。(原著出版年:2002)
李平(譯)(1997)。經營多元智慧:開展以學生為中心的教學(原作者:Armstrong, T.)。臺北:遠流。(原著出版年:1994)
李玉琇、蔣文祈(譯)(2010)。認知心理學。(原作者:Sternberg, R. J. )。臺北:新加坡商聖智學習。(原著出版年:2009)
李佳琪(2013)。建構差異化閱讀教學之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北。
李惠娉(2014)。國小六年級閱讀課程運用差異化教學之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹教育大學,新竹。
李櫻(2012)。語用研究與華語教學。新北市:正中。
谷瑞勉(譯)(1999)。鷹架兒童的學習─維高斯基與幼兒教育(原作者:Berk, L. E. & Winsler, A.)。台北:心理出版社。(原著出版年:1995)
辛斌(2008)。批評話語分析:批評與反思。外語學刊,6,63-70。
岳修平(譯)(2000)。教學心理學—學習的認知基礎(原作者:Gagné, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., Yekovich, F. R.)。臺北:遠流。(原著出版年:1993)
林秀麗、林庭瑤、洪惠芬(譯)(2003)。最新社會學理論的觀點(原作者:Cuff, E. C., Sharrock W. W., Francis, D. W.)。新北市:韋伯文化國際。(原著出版年:1998)
林佩璇(2000)。個案研究及其在教育研究上的應用。載於中正大學教育研究所主編,質的研究方法(239-263頁)。高雄市:麗文文化。
林昱貞(2002)。批判教育學在台灣:發展與困境。教育研究集刊,48(4),1-25。
林清山(譯)(1995)。教學心理學—認知取向(原作者:Mayer, R. E.)。臺北:遠流。(原著出版年:1987)
邱誌勇、許夢芸(譯)(2012)。細讀文化研究基礎(原作者:Lewis, J.)。新北市:韋伯文化國際。(原著出版年:2002)
姜添輝(2002)。資本社會中的社會流動與學校體系-批判教育社會學的分析。臺北:高等教育。
施盈廷、劉忠博、張時健(譯)(2011)。反身性方法論:質性研究的新視野。(原作者:Alvesson, M. & Sköldberg, K.)。新北市:韋伯文化國際。(原著出版年:2000)
柯華葳(1993)。語文科的閱讀教學。載於李咏吟主編,學習輔導:學習心理學的應用(307-349頁)。臺北:心理。
柯華葳(2007)。臺灣需要更多「閱讀策略」教學。載於何琦瑜、吳毓珍主編,教出寫作力(191-200頁)。臺北:天下雜誌。
柯華葳(2011)。語文課與閱讀能力的培養。教育研究月刊,210,5-14。
柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅(2008)。臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養(PIRLS 2006報告)。https://sites.google.com/site/reading8learning01/pirls/pirls-2006
柯華葳、詹益綾、丘嘉慧(2013)。PIRLS 2011報告:臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養。取自https://sites.google.com/site/reading8learning01/pirls/pirls-2011
柯朝欽、鄭祖邦(譯)(2011)。社會學理論(上下冊)(原作者:George, R. & Douglas, G.)。臺北:麥格羅希爾。(原著出版年:2004)
洪光遠、程淑華、王郁茗(譯)(2012)。社會心理學(原作者:Kassin, S., Steven, F.& Markus, H. R.)。臺北:新加坡商聖智學習。(原著出版年:2011)
洪漢鼎(1992)。語言學的轉向—當代分析哲學的發展。臺北:遠流。
洪碧霞、林素微、吳裕益(2011)。臺灣九年級學生閱讀樂趣與策略對PISA閱讀素養解釋力之探討。課程與教學季刊,14(4),1-24頁。
洪慧芳(譯)(2008)。街頭日記(原作者: Gruwell, E.)。臺北:親子天下。
胡幼慧(1996)。轉型中的質性研究:演變、批判和女性主義研究觀點。載於胡幼慧主編,質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(7-26頁)。臺北:巨流。
苗延威、張君玫(譯)(1998)。社會互動(原作者:Argyle, M.)。臺北:巨流。(原著出版年:1969)
凌爾祥(2010)。閱讀,改變人生風景。載於天下雜誌教育基金會編著,閱讀力實戰關鍵:回到閱讀核心,提升思考力(8-9頁)。臺北:天下雜誌。
徐大明、陶紅印、謝天蔚(2004)。當代社會語言學。北京:中國社會科學。
徐友漁、周國平、陳嘉映、尚杰(1996)。語言與哲學—當代英美與德法傳統比較研究。北京:生活•讀書•新知三聯書店。
徐雨村(譯)(2005)。文化人類學:文化多樣性的探索。(原作者:Kottak, C. P.)。臺北:麥格羅希爾。(原著出版年:2005)
張君玫(譯)(2007)。社會學:概念與應用。(原作者:Tumer, J. H.)。臺北:美商麥格羅•希爾。(原著出版年:1994)
張芬芬(2012)。文本分析方法論及其對教科書分析研究的啟示。載於國家教育研究院主編,開卷有益:教科書的回顧與前瞻(161-197頁)。臺北:高等教育。
張承漢(譯)(1993)。社會學。(原作者:Broom, L., Bonjean, C. M., Broom,D. H.)。臺北:巨流。(原著出版年:1990)
張春興(1993)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北:東華。
張莉慧(2009)。臺灣推動閱讀之觀察與省思。臺灣圖書館管理季刊,5(4),82-98。
梁家瑜(譯)(2009)。社會心理學(原作者:Baron, R. A., Byrne,D. & Branscombe, N. R.)。臺北:心理。(原著出版年:2007)
教育部(2010)。閱讀理解策略教學手冊。臺北:教育部。
教育部(2014)。教育部推廣閱讀情形報告。取自http://www.ey.gov.tw/ news.asp x?n=3D06E532B0D8316C&sms=4ACFA38B877F185F
畢恆達(1996)。詮釋學與質性研究。載於胡幼慧主編,質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(27-45頁)。臺北:巨流。
許殷宏(2006)。E. Goffman當代戲劇理論的思想巨擘。載於王麗雲、譚光鼎主編,教育社會學:人物與思想(205-233頁)。臺北:高等教育。
連啟舜(2015)。美國閱讀共同核心標準對閱讀教學的啟示。教育研究月刊,255,36-53。
郭俊賢、陳淑惠(譯)(1998)。多元智慧的教與學(原作者:Campbell, L., Campbell, B.& Dickinson, D.)。臺北:遠流。(原著出版年:1996)
郭俊賢、陳淑惠(譯)(2000)。多元智慧教學評量(原作者:Lazear, D.)。臺北:遠流。(原著出版年:1999)
郭瑞芬(2006)。都會區弱勢學生之學習處境-一群孩子一所學校一個都會區兩個世界。載於現代教育論壇(十五)(465-484頁)。
陶秀璈、姚小平(2010)。語言研究中的哲學問題。北京:中央。
陳向明(2000)。質的研究方法與社會科學研究。北京:教育科學。
陳伯璋(1985)。潛在課程研究。臺北:五南。
陳伯璋(2000)。質性研究方法的理論基礎。載於中正大學教育研究所主編,質的研究方法(25-49頁)。高雄市:麗文文化。
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,76,105-130。
陳墇津(譯)(1995)。言說理論(原作者:Macdonell, D.)。臺北:遠流。(原著出版年:1986)
陳碧祥(2002)。語言之哲學探究及其教育意義。國立臺北師範學院學報,15,233-262。
陳儒晰(2006)。新書評論【《教師是知識份子:邁向批判教育學的學習》導讀與評論,Giroux, H. A.著,陳儒晰譯】。課程研究,1(2),125-130。
彭秉權(譯)(2005)。批判教育學的議題與趨勢(原作者:Kanpol, B.)。高雄:麗文文化。
溫明麗(2016)。教育機會均等-序。載於溫明麗主編,教育機會均等(V-VIIІ頁)。新北市:國家教育研究院。
曾世杰(譯)(2010)。有效的讀寫教學:平衡取向教學(原作者:Pressley, M.)。臺北:心理。(原著出版年:2006)
黃君雯(2013)。差異化閱讀教學方案提升國小低年級學童閱讀理解能力之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣海洋大學,基隆市。
黃秀瑄(譯)(2009)。認知心理學(原作者:Best, J. B.)。臺北:心理。(原著出版年:1999)
黃宣範(1983)。語言哲學—意義與指涉理論的研究。臺北:文鶴。
黃涵音、廖姵如、黃元鵬、謝明珊(譯)(2013)。論述分析(原作者:Chouliaraki, L.)。載於文化分析手冊(下冊,1055-1091頁)(編者:Bennett, T. & Frow, F.)。新北市:韋伯文化國際。(原著出版年:2008)
楊金穆(2006)。維根斯坦。載於陳榮華等著,西洋哲學傳統(263-284頁)。臺北:臺大出版中心。
鄒嘉彥、游汝傑(2007)。社會語言學教程。臺北:五南。
鄒慧英、黃秀霜、陳昌明(2011)。從PISA 2009建構反應題剖析臺灣學生的閱讀問題。課程與教學季刊,14(4),25-48。
甄曉蘭(2002)。中小學課程改革與教學革新。臺北:高等教育。
甄曉蘭(2007)。偏遠國中教育機會不均等問題與相關教育政策初探。教育研究集刊,53(3),1-13。
劉福增(1988)。語言哲學。臺北:東大。
歐用生(2006)。臺灣教科書政策的批判論述分析。載於歐用生,課程理論與實踐(145-173頁)。臺北:學富。
蔡承志(譯)(2003)。語言與真實—語言哲學導論(原作者:Devitt, M.和Sterelny, K.)。臺北:國立編譯館。(原著出版年:2002,第二版)
蔡敏玲(1998)。「內」「外」之間與之外的模糊地帶:再思建構論之爭議。課程與教學季刊,1(3),81-96。
蔡敏玲、陳正乾(譯)(1997)。社會中的心智─高層次心理過程的發展(原作者:Vygotsky, L. S.)。台北:心理出版社。(原著出版年:1978)
蔡敏玲、彭海燕(譯)(1998)。教室言談:教與學的語言(原作者:Cazden, C. B.)。臺北:心理。(原著出版年:1988)
鄭玉卿(2007)。教室危機。載於甄曉蘭主編,課程經典導讀(301-325頁)。臺北:學富。
鄭玉卿(2012)。杜威芝加哥實驗學校道德實踐課程之探析。教育實踐與研究,25(1),1-28。
鄭昭明(2010)。認知心理學:理論與實踐。臺北:學富。
鄭麗玉(2009)。認知心理學—理論與應用。臺北:五南。
蕭玉佳(2011)。凌寒待暖陽:國小經濟弱勢生學習生活與學習文化之研究(未出版之博士論文)。臺北市立教育大學,臺北。
蕭昭君、陳巨擘(譯)(2003)。校園生活--批判教育學導論(原作者:McLaren, P.)。臺北:巨流。(原著出版年:1998)
戴煒華、戴煒棟(1991)。實用英語語言學。臺北:書林。
謝國平(2011)。語言學概論(第三版)。臺北:三民。
鍾榮富(2006)。當代語言學概論。臺北:五南。
韓林合(譯)(2012)。哲學語法。(原作者:Wittgenstein, L. J. J.)。北京:商務。
簡玉敏、邱美玲(2013)。教學社群運用差異化教學提升國小閱讀能力。教育研究月刊,233,61-78。
簡成熙(譯)(2010)。教育哲學導論。(原作者:Knight, G. R.)。臺北:五南。(原著出版年:2007)
簡良平(2010)。偏遠小學教師對弱勢社區環境之覺知及其教學回應。教育實踐與研究,23(2),37-64。
簡良平(2012)。弱勢者教育的觀察反省與行動改進—教師課程實踐經驗之探究。臺北:心理。
簡良平(2013)。建構差異化閱讀教學實踐架構--納入弱勢學童的學習計畫。載於中國教育學會主編,從內變革:開創教與學的主體行動(85-114頁)。臺北:學富。
顏惠君、Lupo, S. M.(2013)。滿足學生學習需求,落實教育機會均等:美國維州一所公立高中實施差異化教學之經驗與啟示。教學研究月刊,233,121-138。
顏惠君(2014)。提升國中生國文閱讀理解能力之差異化教學實踐歷程與實施成效探究(未出版之博士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學教育學系,臺北。
羅世宏等(譯)(2004)。文化研究:理論與實踐(原作者:Barker, C.)。臺北:五南。(原著出版年:2000)
羅世宏(譯)(2008)。言說分析。載於羅世宏、蔡欣怡、薛丹琦譯(原作者:M. W. Bauer & G. Gaskell 編撰),質性資料分析(225-250頁)。臺北:五南。(原著出版年:2000)
嚴祥鸞(1996)。參與觀察法。載於胡幼慧主編,質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(195-221頁)。臺北:巨流。
蘇峰山(2004)。論述分析導論。載於林本炫、何明修主編,質性研究方法及其超越(201-221頁)。高雄:復文。


二、英文部分
Alba-Juez, L.(2009). Perspectives on discourse analysis: Theory and practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Alexander, P. A. & Fox, E.(2013). A historical perspective on reading research and practice, redux. In Alvermann, D. E., Unrau, N. J. & Ruddell, R. B.(Eds.) Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed.) (pp.3-46). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Alford, R. R. (1998). The craft of inquiry: theories, methods, evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Allen, S. (2003). An analytic comparison of three models of reading strategy instruction. IRAL, 41, 319-338.
Ankrum, J. W. (2006). Differentiated reading instruction in one exemplary teacher’-s classroom: A case study(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
Ankrum, J. W. & Bean, R. M.(2007). Differentiated reading instruction: what and how. Reading Horizons, 48(1), 133-146.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Barker, C. (2012). Culture study: Theory and practice. London , UK: Sage Publications.
Bax, S.(2011). Discourse and genre: Analysing language in context. New York , NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Beatriz, B. & María-Pilar, J.(2012). Progression in complexity: contextualizing sustainable marine resources management in a 10th grade classroom. Research in Science Education, 42(1), 5-23. DOI 10.1007/s11165-011-9254-1.
Beecher, M. & Sweeny, S.M.(2008). Closing the achievement gap with curriculum enrichment and differentiation: One school's story. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19, 502-530.
Blachowicz, C. L.Z., Buhle, R., Ogle, D., Frost, S., Correa, A., Kinner, J. D.(2010). Hit the Ground Running: Ten ideas for preparing and supporting urban literacy coaches. The Reading Teacher, 63(5), 348–359. Doi:10.1598/RT.63.5.1
Bloome, D. et al. (2008). On discourse analysis in classrooms: Approaches to language and literacy research. New York , NY: Teachers College Press.
Boyd, M. P. & Markarian, W. C.(2011). Dialogic teaching: talk in service of a dialogic stance. Language and Education, 25(6), 515-534, Doi:10.1080/09500782.2011.597861
Carolan, J. & Guinn, A. (2007). Differentiation: lessons from master teachers. Educational Leadership, 64(5), 44-47.
Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning(2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Chall, J. S.(1996). Stages of reading development(2nd ed.). Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Chapman, C. & King, R.(2009). Differentiated instructional strategies for reading in the content areas. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin SAGE.
Chapman, C. & King, R.(2012). Differentiated assessment strategies: One tool doesn’t fit all. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin SAGE.
Chien, C. W.(2015). Analysis of Taiwanese elementary school English teachers’ perceptions of, designs of, and knowledge constructed about differentiated instruction in content. Cogent Education,2:1111040. Retrieved From http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2015.1111040
Christie, F.(2002). Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. New York, NY: Continuum.
Clark, K. F. & Graves, M. F.(2004). Scaffolding students' comprehension of text. International Reading Association (pp. 570-580). Doi:10.1598/RT,58.6.6
Cole, K. & Zuengler, J.(2008). The research process in classroom discourse analysis: Current perspectives. New York , NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Corsaro, W. A. (1985). Sociological approaches to discourse analysis. In: van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis, (Vol. 1, pp.167-192). London, UK: Academic Press.
Csomay, E. (2013). Lexical bundles in discourse structure: a corpus-based study of classroom discourse. Applied Linguistics, 34(3), 369-388. Doi:10.1093/applin/ams045
Cusumano, C. & Mueller, J. (2007). How differentiated instruction helps struggling students. Leadership, 36(4), 8-10.
Denton, C. A., Foorman, B. R. & Mathes, P. G. (2003). Perspective: Schools that “Beat the Odds” Implications for reading instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 24(5), 258-261. Doi:10.1177/07419325030240050101
Dewey, J.(1966). The child and the curriculum and The school and society. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Eckardt, P. N.(2014). Teacher and student supportive academic discourse while engaged in small group fourth-grade literacy lessons(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Fordham, New York.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge , UK: Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. England, UK: Pearson.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power. England, UK: Pearson.
Ferdinand de Saussure (1974). Course in general linguistics. London , UK: Fontana.
Freire, P.(1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. 30th anniversary edition. New York, NY: Continuum.
Freire, P. & Shor, I.(1987). A pedagogy for liberation: dialogues on transforming education. London, UK: Macmillan.
Garfinkel, H. (1984). Studies in ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice. New York , NY: Teachers College Press.
Gee, J. P. (1993). An introduction to human language: Fundamental concepts in linguistics. New Jersey: Prentice- Hall.
Gee, J. P. (2008). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses(3rd ed.). New York , NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2011a). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method(3rd ed.). New York , NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2011b). How to do discourse analysis: A toolkit. New York , NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2012). Discourse analysis:Stories go to school. In Gee, Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses(4th ed., pp.127-146). New York, NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. P. & Green, J. L. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning and social practice:A methodological study. Review of research in education, 23,119-169.
Gee, J. P. & Handford, M. (2012). The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis. New York , NY: Routledge.
Gill, R.(2000). Discourse Analysis. In: Bauer, Martin W. and Gaskell, George, (Eds.) Qualitative researching with image, sound and text (pp. 172-190). London , UK: Sage.
Gilson, C. M., Little, C. A., Ruegg, A. N., Bruce-Davis, M.(2014). An investigation of elementary teachers’ use of follow-up questions for students at different reading levels. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(2), 101-128. Doi:10.1177/1932202X14532257
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York , NY: Prentice- Hall.
Goffman, E. (2010). Relations in public: microstudies of the public order. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
Gunning, T. G.(2000). Creating literacy instruction for all children(3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Gunning, T. G.(2004). Creating literacy instruction for all children in grades pre-K to 4. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Grice, H. P. (1989). Logic and Conversation. Reprinted in Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Haager, D., Dimino, J. A. & Windmueller, M. P.(2014). Intervention for reading success. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London, UK: Longman.
Heacox, D. (2012). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom: How to reach and teach all learners. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.
Heilman, A. W., Blair, T. R., Rupley, W. H. (1990).Principles and practice of teaching reading(7th). Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York , NY: Routledge.
Howarth, D. (2000). Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Ikpeze, C. H.(2015). Teaching across Cultures: Building Pedagogical Relationships in Diverse Contexts. Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Ivey, G. (2000). Redesigning reading instruction. Educational Leadership, 58(1) 42-45.
Jaworski, A., & Coupland, N.(Eds.) (1999). The discourse reader. New York , NY: Routledge.
Kasher, A. (1985). Philosophy and discourse analysis. In: van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis, (Vol. 1, pp.231-248). London, UK: Academic Press.
Kennedy, E. & Shiel, G.(2010). Raising literacy levels with collaborative on-site professional development in an urban disadvantaged school. The Reading Teacher, 63(5), 372–383. DOI:10.1598/RT.63.5.3
Kucan, L.(2007). Insights from teachers who analyzed transcripts of their own classroom discussions. The Reading Teacher, 61(3), 228-236. Doi:10.1598/RT.61.3.3
Levy, H. M.(2008). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House, 81(4), 161-164.
Logan, B.(2011). Examining differentiated instruction: Teachers respond. Higher Education Journal, 13, 1-14.
Mahdavi, J. N. & Tensfeldt, L.(2013). Untangling reading comprehension strategy instruction assisting struggling readers in the primary grades. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth,57(2), 77-92. Doi:10.1080/1045988X.2012.668576
Margolis, E.(2001). The hidden curriculum in higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Martin, J. R.(2000). Close Reading: Functional Linguistics as a Tool for Critical Analysis. In: Unsworth, L. (Ed.), Researching language in schools and communities: Functional linguistics perspectives (pp.275-302). London: Cassell.
MacLure, M.(2003). Discourse in education and social research. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning and Instruction(2nd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
McElhone, D.(2015). Using stems and supported inquiry to help an elementary teacher move toward dialogic reading instruction. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 50(2), 156-171.
McIntyre, E., Hulan, N. & Layne, V.(2011). Reading instruction for diverse classrooms: Research-based, culturally responsive practice. New York , NY: The Guiford Press.
McKenna, M. C., & Stahl, K. A. D.(2015). Assessment for reading instruction(3rd ed.). New York , NY: The Guilford Press.
Mckeown, G. M., Beck, I. L. & Blake, R. G.K.(2009). Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: A comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Reading Research Quarterly, 44(3),218-253.
McLaren, P.(1988). Foreword: critical theory and the meaning of hope. In: Giroux, H. A., Teachers as intellectuals (pp. ix-xxi). Granby, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
Mercer, N.(2004). Sociocultural discourse analysis: analyzing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 137-168.
Mercer, N.(2010). The analysis of classroom talk: Methods and methodologies. British Journal of Education Psychology, 80, 1-14.
Mercer, N. & Howe, C.(2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1, 12-21.
Mesmer, H. A. E. (2008). Tools for matching readers to texts : research-based practices. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Metropolitan Center for Urban Education (2008). Culturally responsive differentiated instructional strategies. New York University. Retrieved from http://steinhardt. nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/uploads/005/120/Culturally%20Responsive%20Differientiated%20Instruction.pdf
Mills, S.(1997). Discourse. New York, NY: Routledge.
Mostow, J., & Chen, W.(2009). Generating instruction automatically for the reading strategy of self-questioning. Retrieved from http://www.cs.cmu.edu /afs/cs.cmu.edu/Web/People/listen/pdfs/AIED2009-self-question-final-A4.pdf
Nettles, D. H.(2006). Comprehensive literacy instruction in today’s classroom: The whole, the parts, and the heart. Boston: Pearson Education.
Nordlund, M. (2003). Differentiated instruction: Meeting the educational needs of all students in your classroom. Lanham, Maryland: ScarecrowEducation.
OECD(2009). PISA 2009 assessment framework: Key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/44455820.pdf
Paltridge, B.(2006). Discourse analysis: An introduction. New York, NY: Continuum.
Pearson, P. D.(2009). The roots of reading comprehension instruction. In Israel, S. E. & Duffy, G. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension. New York, NY: Routledge.
Pettig, K. M.(2000). On the road to differentiated practice. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 14-18.
Pritchard, A. & Woollard, J.(2010). Psychology for the classroom: constructivism and social learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
Reis, S. M., D. McCoach, B., Little, C. A., Muller, L. M. & Kaniskan, R. B.(2011). The Effects of Differentiated Instruction and Enrichment Pedagogy on Reading Achievement in Five Elementary Schools. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 462–501. DOI: 10.3102/0002831210382891
Rex, L. A. et al. (2010). A review of discourse analysis in literacy research: Equitable access. Reading Research Quarterly,45(1), 94-115. dx.doi.org/10.1598/PRQ.45.1.5
Rex, L. A. & Schiller, L.(2009). Using discourse analysis to improve classroom interaction. New York, NY: Routledge.
Roberts, J. L. & Inman, T. F.(2007). Strategies for differentiating instruction: Best practices for the classroom. Texas: Prufrock Press.
Rymes, B.(2009). Classroom discourse analysis: A tool for critical reflection. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D., Hamilton, H. E.(2003). The handbook of discourse analysis. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Searle, J. R.(1969). Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Simons, H.(2009). Case study research in practice. London, UK: Sage.
Smolkin, L. B. & Donovan, C. A.(2008). “Oh excellent, excellent question!”: Developmental differences and comprehension acquisition. In: Robinson, R. D. & McKenna, M. C., Issues and Trends in Literacy Education (4th ed., pp.73-90). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Snow, C. E.(2002). Reading for understanding : toward a research and development program in reading comprehension. RAND reading study group, Retrieved From https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/MR1465.pdf
Stahl, K. A. D. & McKenna, M. C.(2013). Reading assessment in an RTI framework. New York, NY: The Guiford Press.
Stewart, O. S.(2016). Teachers’ perceptions of differentiated instruction in elementary reading. Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies, University of Walden. Retrieved From http://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article=3344&context=dissertations
Taylor, B. K.(2015). Content, process, and product: modeling differentiated instruction. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 51(1), 13-17. Doi:10.1080/00228958.2015.988559
The 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. Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf
The Ontario Ministry of Education (2006). A guide to effective literacy instruction, Grades 4 to 6–Volume One. Retrieved From http://www.eworkshop.on.ca/edu/resources/guides/Guide_Lit_456_Vol_1_Pt1_Junior_Learner.pdf
Thousand, J. S., Villa, R. A. & Nevin, A. I.(2007). Differentiating instruction: collaborative planning and teaching for universally designed learning. California: Corwin Press.
Tomlinson, C. A.(1995). Deciding to differentiate instruction in middle school: One school’s journey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(2), 77-87.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development).
Tomlinson, C. A. (2009). Intersections between differentiation and literacy nstruction: Shared principles worth sharing. The NERA journal, 45(1), 28-33.
Tomlinson, C. A. & Cunningham, C. (2003). Differentiation in practice: a resource guide for differentiating curriculum, grades K-5. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A. & Imbeau, M. B.(2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A. & McTighe. J.(2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design: connecting content and kids. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A. & Moon, T. R.(2013).Assessment and student success in a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Turner, J. D., Applegate, A. J., Applegate, M. D.(2011). New teachers as literacy leaders. The Reading Teacher, 64(7), 550–552. Doi:10.1598/RT.64.7.12
Turville, J. (2008). Differentiating by student learning preferences: Strategies and lesson plans. New York, NY: Eye on education.
Turville, J., Allen, L. & Nickelsen, L.(2010). Differentiating by readiness: Strategies and lesson plans for tiered instruction grades K-8. New York, NY: Eye on education.
van der Aalsvoort, G. M. & Harinck, F. J. H.(2001). Scaffolding: Classroom teaching behavior for use with young students with learning disabilities. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 36(2), 29-39.
van Dijk, T. A. (1985). Introduction: discourse analysis as a new cross-discipline. In van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse dnalysis, (Vol. 1, pp.1-10). London, UK: Academic Press.
van Dijk, T. A. (1997a). The study of discourse. In: T. A. van Dijk (Ed.). Discourse as structure and process (pp.1-34). London, UK: Sage.
van Dijk, T. A. (1997b). Discourse as interaction in society. In: T. A. van Dijk (Ed.). Discourse as social interaction (pp.1-37). London, UK: Sage.
Walpole, S. & McKenna, M. C.(2007). Differentiated reading instruction: Strategies for the primary grades. New York, NY: The Guiford Press.
Walpole, S. & McKenna, M. C.(2009). How to plan differentiated reading instruction: Resources for grades k-3. New York, NY: The Guiford Press.
Walpole, S., McKenna, M. C. & Phillppakos, Z. A.(2011). Differentiated reading instruction in grades 4 & 5: Strategies and resource. New York, NY: The Guiford Press.
Wan, S. W. Y. (2016). Differentiated instruction: Hong Kong prospective teachers’ teaching efficacy and beliefs, Teachers and Teaching, 22(2), 148-176. Doi:10.1080/13540602.2015.1055435
Wodak, R. & Meyer, M. (Eds.) (2001). Methods of critical discourse analysis. London, UK: Sage.
Yule, G. (2010). The study of language: An introduction (4th ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE