Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/77345300/17687
Title: 不同閱讀能力學生成敗歸因方式、策略運用與後設認知能力之差異比較
Other Titles: Comparisons of the Attributional Styles, Strategy Use and Metacognitive Ability Among the Students with Different Reading Abilities
Authors: 郭靜姿
Issue Date: Jun-1994
Publisher: 國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處
Office of Research and Development
Abstract: 本研究旨在比較不同中英文閱讀能力學生在成敗歸因方式、閱讀策略運用與後設認知能力上之差異。研究對象取自臺灣北區四所辦理數理資優教育的高中,受試總計有高一學生466名,其中資優生143名,普通生323名。被鑑定為中文高閱讀能力的學生為167名,中文低閱讀能力的學生為131名;而英文高閱讀能力的學生為179名,英文低閱讀能力學生為139名。研究工具包括七種:成敗歸因量表、閱讀態度問卷、閱讀策略調查表、中文閱讀材料與評量題目、英文閱讀材料與評量題目、閱讀策略認知晤談量表及閱讀理解測驗(錯誤偵測測驗)。本研究結果發現:高閱讀能力學生的成敗歸因方式及閱讀態度較低閱讀能力學生為優,對於各種閱讀策略之運用次數多於低閱讀能力學生,而其後設理解能力亦優於低閱讀能力學生。惟這兩組學生在錯誤偵測能力上的差異卻未達到顯著水準。研究者建議學校教學應多加強學生錯誤辨識及批判的能力,以提高學生閱讀理解的層次。
The main purpose of this study was to compare the attributional styles, reading motivation, strategy use, and metacognition of two groups studentswith different reading comprehensive ability. The subjects were 11th grade students selected from the four seniorhigh schools engaged in gifted educatrion in Taipei area. There Were 143gifted students talented in Math and Science and 323 average students. Among of them, 167 were identified as high reading ability in Chinese,131 were identified as low reading ability in Chinese; While 179 were identified as high reading ability in English, 139 were identified as low readingability in English. Instruments used are: (1) Success/Failure Attribution Scale, (2) Reading Attitude Questionnaire, (3) Strategy Use Questionnaire, (4) Errordetecting Test, (5) Reading Strategy Interview Scale, (6) Chinese Reading Comprehension Test and Self- Prediction Checklist, (7) English Reading Comprehension Test and Self-Prediction Checklist. The results are as followings: 1. The high reading ability group showed better achievement motivation, lower fear of failure, and better reading attitude than the low reading ability group. 2. The high reading ability group reported use more strategies thanthe low reading ability group while reading. 3. The high reading ability group behaved higher metacognitive skillsthan the the low reading ability group, but there is no significant difference of the error-detecting ability between the two groups. The researchersuggested school teachers to help the students improve their critical abilityin the future.
URI: http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw//handle/77345300/17687
Other Identifiers: CEC522FE-6B54-5E49-6B87-084828D6EA2A
Appears in Collections:師大學報

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
ntnulib_ja_L0801_0039_284.pdf1.45 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.