臺灣高中學生英文作文錯誤批改之成效

黃郁萍; Yu-ping Huang

臺灣高中學生英文作文錯誤批改之成效

dc.contributor	馮和平博士	zh_TW
dc.contributor	Dr. Ho-ping Feng	en_US
dc.contributor.author	黃郁萍	zh_TW
dc.contributor.author	Yu-ping Huang	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2019-09-03T12:26:10Z
dc.date.available	2012-01-01
dc.date.available	2019-09-03T12:26:10Z
dc.date.issued	2006
dc.description.abstract	中文摘要本研究旨在探討兩種錯誤批改方式對九十位高中女學生的寫作表現及其態度之影響。在四個月的實驗期間，每一位參與的學生共寫了四個題目，每個題目兩篇草稿。第一個題目的第一篇草稿作為前測，而第四個題目的第一篇草稿作為後測。對於四十五位直接批改組學生的文章，老師直接批改其錯誤並提供正確答案。至於其他四十五位代碼批改組的學生，老師則以代碼指出他們文章中錯誤的地方及其類別。所有參與學生都要依據老師的提示或修改，將每篇文章的第一篇草稿加以修正。學生作文品質進步與否係依據大學入學考試作文評閱標準來評定，而其寫作正確性是否增加，則由每篇文章的犯錯率來決定。此外，在實驗結束時，學生對於兩種錯誤批改方式的態度亦反應於他們所填寫的態度問卷中。研究的結果顯示，在改進學生寫作品質及增進其文法準確性方面，兩種批改方法同樣有效。但是這兩種方式對於不同寫作程度的學生之影響並不相同。雖然對於低程度的學生而言，這兩種批改方式的影響並無顯著不同，但是對於高程度的學生來說，代碼批改組不論在文章品質或文法準確性上均優於直接批改組。因此，代碼批改方式對於高程度學生成效較顯著。再者，不同程度的學生對於兩種批改方式的態度亦不相同。高程度學生，對於代碼批改，相較於直接批改的方式，抱持較正面的態度。而低程度的同學則喜歡直接批改方式勝於代碼批改方式。基於研究的結果，提供下列建議供高中寫作教師參考。首先，此二種有效可行的批改方式皆可應用於實際教學中。然而在實行當中，老師仍須瞭解此二種批改方式對於不同程度學生的影響並不相同，對於高程度學生，建議使用代碼批改方式；至於低程度的學生，直接批改可能更適合他們。	zh_TW
dc.description.abstract	Abstract This empirical pre-post study aimed to investigate the effects of two error correction methods on the writing performance of 90 senior high school EFL female students and their attitudes toward the treatments. During the four months of the experiment, the 90 participants were asked to write on four topics, and for each topic two drafts were written. The first draft on the first topic served as the pretest while the first draft on the last topic, the posttest. For the first draft on each topic, the 45 students in the direct group received direct error correction from their teacher; whereas the remaining 45 students in the code group received code error correction with the types of their errors identified by their teacher. All the participants revised their first draft based on their teacher’s correction or error codes. The writing quality of the pre-and post-tests was measured by the CEEC rating scale while the writing accuracy was measured by the ratio of the number of errors to the total number of words written in each single draft. Besides, students’ attitudes toward the implemented treatments were also measured by an attitude questionnaire administered at the end of the treatments. The findings revealed that the two correction methods were equally effective in improving students’ writing quality and accuracy, but their effects differed on students of different writing proficiency. Although no significant difference was found between the two treatment groups at lower proficiency level, higher-proficiency students from the code group outperformed those from the direct group in terms of their improvement in either writing quality or accuracy, indicating students of higher proficiency benefited more form code correction method. Also revealed in the finding were the students’ attitudes toward the two correction methods. The difference in students’ attitude mainly existed between students of different proficiency levels. Students of higher proficiency held more positive attitudes toward code error correction than direct error correction, while students of lower proficiency preferred direct error correction to code error correction. Based on the results, some suggestions are made for writing teaches’ reference. First, high school writing teachers can consider incorporating both correction methods in their teaching since they are verified to be effective and feasible. Nevertheless, when practicing the two correction methods, writing teachers have to take into consideration students’ writing proficiency. For students of higher proficiency, writing teachers are recommended to use code error correction which better tailors to the needs of those students. As for students of lower proficiency, direct error correction can be a better choice because it reduces their frustration which in turn encourages them to continue writing.	en_US
dc.description.sponsorship	英語學系	zh_TW
dc.identifier	GN0588211025
dc.identifier.uri	http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22GN0588211025%22.&%22.id.&
dc.identifier.uri	http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/97520
dc.language	中文
dc.subject	錯誤批改	zh_TW
dc.subject	錯誤代碼	zh_TW
dc.subject	教師回饋	zh_TW
dc.subject	Error Correction	en_US
dc.subject	Error Code	en_US
dc.subject	Teacher Feedback	en_US
dc.title	臺灣高中學生英文作文錯誤批改之成效	zh_TW
dc.title	The Effects of Error Correction on the English Writing of Senior High School Students in Taiwan	en_US