「質疑作者教學法」 對高中生英文閱讀理解及寫作之影響

Abstract

本研究旨在探究一閱讀教學策略「質疑作者教學法」(Questioning the Author)，對於以英文為外語的高中生之閱讀理解能力及回應寫作的質量影響。 94個十一年級的學生(其中46位在質疑作者教學法組，另外48位在控制組)參與此項為期四週六回的閱讀訓練。每一回訓練都以一則短篇故事做為教材，質疑作者教學法組著重釐清作者寫作意圖及以讀者為中心的問答；而控制組以傳統問答教學，並只著重在文字表面。前測及後測分別在教學訓練前後實施，學生在前後測時，都需於閱讀一篇短文後，回答閱讀測驗及寫作回應短文內容。此外，實驗組還需在後測時完成關於此教學法的問卷。由閱讀測驗中收集來的資料分別以事實、詮釋、回應類問題三個層面分析；回應寫作中以質量兩大層面分析，量的方面包含寫作字數、思考單位數及一個思考單位所含字數，質的方面則將各個思考單位歸類為文本回應、個人回應、智力回應和錯誤理解。最後，讀者對於此教學法的喜好、所察覺的進步及此教學法的可行性將由問卷資料分析得知。 以組別當作自變數，前測作為共變量，共變數分析後測，發現在三類閱讀測驗問題及寫作回應的質量均有一些顯著的改變。首先、在閱讀測驗方面，實驗組於回答回應類問題上優於控制組，卻在提升回答事實和詮釋類問題時不具優勢。第二、在回應寫作方面，儘管兩組的平均文長和思想單位數差不多，實驗組在一個思想單位中的平均字數高於控制組，這間接指出質疑作者教學法能提升思考複雜度卻不影響思考內容多寡。第三、以上的推測也進一步由寫作回應的內容相佐證，實驗組能產生出較多的智力回應、較少的文本回應和錯誤理解，並且在個人回應上兩組沒有顯著改變。第四、問卷分析顯現學生對於質疑作者教學法持有正向的態度，學生喜歡此教學法、且期待未來有更多的相關課程、並嘗試將此閱讀法於自行閱讀時應用。 本文依據研究結果建議質疑作者教學法足以作為一個有效提升以英語為外語學習的高中學生在閱讀理解及讀後寫作回應的高階思考能力。

This study investigates the effects of an approach to reading instruction, QtA approach, on levels of reading comprehension and on the quantity and quality of written response by EFL senior high school students. Ninety-four eleventh graders, 46 in QtA Group, the Experimental Group, and 48 in Control Group, participated in the study in six sessions during a four-week intervention. For each session, one story was covered in two different approaches for the two groups. QtA Group was taught in QtA Approach, with a focus on clarifying authorial intents and reader initiating questions, while Control Group was guided through traditional question-and-answer approach, with a focus on textual message. Prior to and after teaching intervention, pretest and posttest were implemented. In both tests, students read a passage before they answered reading comprehension questions and performed a written response. Additionally, Experimental Group completed a perception questionnaire in the posttest. Data from reading comprehension questions were analyzed in terms of factual, interpretive, responsive, and incorrect dimensions; data from written response were analyzed by its quantitative measures of words, thought units, and words per thought unit, and by its qualitative features of textual, personal, intellectual and incorrect response. In addition, readers’ preference for, perceived ability growth from, and perceived feasibility of QtA were analyzed based on the data from Perception Questionnaire. With Group as an independent variable, Pretest as a covariate, ANCOVA analyses on Posttest in three types of reading comprehension questions and four levels of written response reveal several significant findings. First, for reading comprehension questions, QtA Group performed significantly better than Control Group in responsive questions but not in factual and interpretive questions, indicating that QtA approach facilitates comprehension at the responsive level. Second, for written response, QtA Group generated more words per thought unit, despite that there was no difference between groups in the text length and the number of thought unit, indirectly reflecting the impact of QtA approach in boosting complexity in thought, albeit not in the quantity of content. This conjecture is further supported by the findings that QtA Group produced more intellectual responses and fewer textual responses and incorrect responses but no different number of personal responses than Control Group. Additionally, the questionnaire analyses point to students’ positive perception towards QtA approach. Students favored, expected the future implementation of, and transferred the use of QtA. These findings suggest that QtA approach can be an effective instructional approach to facilitating EFL high school students’ higher-order thinking not only in reading comprehension but also in written response to reading.