多種模式字彙註解方式對非刻意之字彙學習效益研究

Abstract

Paivio 於1986年所提出之雙碼理論顯示，人類記憶包括一管理語言及一個管理圖像之系統，兩者可以互相支援以使學習更有效率。至於這個理論在非刻意字彙學習上的應用，前人的實驗結果發現文字型的字彙註解方式若搭配圖像，會比沒有搭配圖像的情況更能幫助學習者學習。今日因電腦科技之發達，教學上不僅有靜態圖片可供使用，動畫的提供也漸漸普及。此實驗之目的即欲比較靜態圖片與動畫分別搭配文字之字彙註解方式，對於非刻意字彙學習是否有不同之效果。若有，何者成效較為顯著？ 實驗對象為來自國中八年級，三個班共七十名學生於電腦上進行閱讀活動。三組學生當中，第一組閱讀時提供之單字註解為文字加靜態圖片，第二組提供文字加動畫，第三組僅提供文字註解，作為對照組。三組學生當中皆包含男性與女性約各半。 施測工具包含兩種單字測驗，一為單字拼寫，一為字義選擇題。同樣的字彙題目於閱讀活動前一週，閱讀活動後，及閱讀活動後兩週皆給予學生測驗。實驗結果採用二因子變異數分析法分析。自變項為學生性別(包含男、女兩個水準)、字彙註解方式(包含文字搭配靜態圖片、文字搭配動畫與純文字三個水準)，依變項為字彙測驗成績。 後測結果顯示文字搭配圖片的字彙註解比純文字的效果來得好，而文字搭配圖片與文字搭配動畫兩組間的差異並不顯著。至於單字的增加數，在單字拼寫這一方面的成績，有搭配圖片或動畫這兩組顯著地較純文字組分數來得高，而整體的單字增加數則未有顯著的組別差異。另外，測驗中未發現男女生的表現有顯著不同，而此實驗結果顯示所有字義選擇題的分數皆未能顯示出字彙註解方式不同所產生的影響。 本實驗結論有下列兩點。第一，文字型單字註解若加上圖像輔助，會比純文字型單字註解方式更能幫助學習者的非刻意字彙學習，這結果同時也符合前人研究及雙碼理論。第二，文字搭配動畫相較於文字搭配圖片並未能更有效地幫助非刻意字彙學習。事實上，於本實驗結果中，文字搭配靜態圖片這一組於三組當中得到最高的字彙測驗成績，顯示這樣的字彙註解比起其他兩種字彙註解方式有更大的優勢。Experimental evidences have confirmed Paivio’s (1986) Dual Coding Theory, which claims that the verbal system and visual system in human memory can support each other to make learning more efficient. As for its application to incidental vocabulary learning, it is found that textual glosses with visual information better help learning than text-only glosses. Nowadays, not only still graphics are accessible, animation is also a way that we can get access to. This study thus aims to compare the effectiveness of still graphics and animation on incidental vocabulary learning for beginning EFL learners. Three classes of eighth-grade junior high school students, totaling 70 students, were recruited. One class read reading passages with the help of graphics-plus-text glosses, another with animation-plus-text glosses, and the other with text-only glosses. All of the three classes included male students and female students. The instruments contained production and recognition vocabulary tests and the study adapted a pretest-immediate posttest-delayed posttest measurement. A two-by-three factorial design was utilized and the results were analyzed by two-way ANOVA. Immediate posttest results showed that the effects of graphics-plus-text glosses were better than that of text-only glosses while the differences between graphics-plus- text glosses and animation-plus- text glosses were found insignificant. As for vocabulary gain, students using animation-plus-text glosses and graphics-plus-text glosses performed better than those using text-only glosses on production test, while the overall vocabulary gain didn’t show group differences. As to sex differences, no main effects were found in all tests. Besides, all of the recognition tests were not sensitive to the independent variables in this study. The conclusions were drawn as the following: first, textual glosses with visual aids (animation or graphics) better help learners’ incidental vocabulary learning than text-only glosses, which supports dual-coding theory. Second, animation cues do not have a better effect on incidental vocabulary learning than graphics cues. In fact, students using graphics+ text glosses showed an advantage over the other two types of glosses: animation+ text glosses and text-only glosses.