The Effect of Reciprocal Teaching on Seventh Graders’Self- Efficiency and Chinese Academic Achievement
徐千惠、謝智玲
E-mail: 9800750@mail.dyu.edu.tw
ABSTRACT
This study investigated the effectiveness of reciprocal teaching used as a learning strategy with students in Chinese classrooms.
Sixty-four seventh grade students partici-pated in the study. Variables of interest were students' creativity and motivation when learning from ten Chinese text, students' reported use of reciprocal teaching (Summa-rizing, questioning, clarifying, prediciting) for learning Chinese from 12 texts. A ran-domized pre-test-post-test control group design was employed. The finding showed a statistically significant interaction of reciprocal teaching for creativity and motivation. For all outcome variables, the reciprocal teaching group showed significantly greater gains from pre-test to post-test than the control group. The findings have implications for both practice and research.disadvantages of cooperative learning and teaching.
Keywords : reciprocal teaching, self-efficacy, chinese academic achievement Table of Contents
內容目錄 中文摘要．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． iii 英文摘要．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．
．．．．． iv 誌謝辭．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． v 內容目錄．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．
．．．．．． vi 表目錄．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． viii 圖目錄．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．
．．．．．．．． x 第一章 緒論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 1 第一節 研究動機．．．．．．
．．．．．．．．． 1 第二節 研究目的．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 4 第三節 研究問題與假設．．
．．．．．．．．．． 5 第四節 名詞解釋．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 5 第五節 研究範圍與限制．
．．．．．．．．．．． 6 第二章 文獻探討．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 9 第一節 交互教學的內涵 與理論依據．．．．．．． 9 第二節 自我效能的理論依據與特色．．．．．．． 21 第三節 交互教學與 自我效能、國文學業成就的相 關研究．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 29 第三章 研究方法．．．
．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 36 第一節 實驗課程的實施．．．．．．．．．．．． 36 第二節 研究設 計．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 37 第三節 研究對象．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 39 第四節 研 究工具．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 40 第五節 研究程序．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 42 第四章 研 究結果與討論．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 49 第一節 交互教學對自我效能的影響．．．．．．． 49 第二 節 交互教學對國文學業成就之影響．．．．． 51 第三節 交互教學活動回饋．．．．．．．．．．． 58 第四節 綜合討論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 59 第五章 結論與建議結論與建議．．．．．．．．．．． 63 第一節 結論．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 63 第一節 建議．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．
． 64 參考文獻 ．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 67 附錄A 自我效能量表預試．．．．．．．．．．
．．． 79 附錄B 教學活動回饋單．．．．．．．．．．．．．． 80 附錄C 交互教學教案設計．．．．．．．．
．．．．． 81 附錄D 心理出版社股份有限公司同意書．．．．．．． 96 REFERENCES
一、中文部分 古秀梅(2004)，國小學生閱讀動機、閱讀態度、閱讀行為與國語科學業成就之相關研究，國立中山大學教育研究所未出版 之碩士論文。 李姿德(2003)，交互教學法對增進聽覺障礙學生閱讀理解能力之研究，國立台南師範學院特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論 文。 李旻樺，林清文(2003)，高中學生之自我效能成功期望，學習任務價值動機調整策略之研究，中華輔導學報，14，117-145。 李新 鄉，黃秀文，黃瓊儀(1997)，相互教學法對國小六年級學童閱讀能力、後設認知能力閱讀態度之影響，嘉義師範學報，11，89-118。 林 建平(1994)，整合學習策略動機的訓練方案對國小閱讀理解困難兒童的輔導效果，國立台灣師範大學心理輔導研究所未出版之博士論文
。 林蕙蓉(1995)，國小學童後設認知策略教學對國語科閱讀理解效能之研究，國立台南師院學報，28，271-312。 邱連煌(2005)，自我效 能:促進維持動機信念，國教天地，0(161)，1-9。 柯華葳(2006)，教出閱讀力，台北:天下。 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)，國立中央大學學習與教學研究所。 孫志麟(1991)，自我效能的基本概念及其在教育上的應用
，教育研究，22，47-53。 涂志賢(1998)，相互教學法對國小六年級學童國語科閱讀理解後設認知、自我效能影響之研究，國立花蓮師範 學院國民教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。 教育部(2005)，國民中小學語文教學參考手冊，台北:教育部。 許淑玫(2000)，國小六年級閱讀
小組實施交互教學之個案研究，國立台中師範大學國民教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。 許天威，陳政見(1994)，國中新生國語文能力測 驗，台北:心理。 陳玉玲(1995)，目標設定、目標投入與自我效能對國小學生數學作業表現的影響，國立高雄師範大學教育學系未出版之 碩士論文。 曾陳密桃(1982)，國民中小學的後設認知及其閱讀理解之相關研究，國立政治大學教育研究所未出版之博士論文。 曾玉 玲(1993)，台北市高智商低成就國中學生學習信念與相關因素之探討，國立政治大學教育研究所之未出版之碩士論文。 黃麗鈴，徐新 逸(1999)，學業成就自我效能影響因素之探討，諮商輔導，160，2-5。 黃德祥(2002)，青少年發展與輔導(2版)，台北:五南。 詹詩韻
（2004），相互教學法對增進國小資源班學生閱讀理解能力成效之研究，國立台東大學教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。 楊正敏(2008, December 11)，數學科學低成就 國二生偏高，聯合報。 楊淑萍(1995)，自我效能認知技巧學習和生涯發展上的應用(下)，諮商與輔導
，111，20-25。 楊榮昌(2002)，相互教學法對國小五年級學童閱讀理解、後設認知及閱讀動機之影響，國立屏東師範學院教育心理輔導 研究所未出版之碩士論文。 楊惠芳(2007, December 5)，學生基礎素養 台灣國際排名 數學第一 科學第四 閱讀第十六，國語日報。 廖晉 斌(2003)，國文閱讀理解策略對增進國中生閱讀理解能力、閱讀策略運用及學業成就效果之研究，國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商所未出 版之碩士論文。 蔡佩芳(2005)，相互交學法對國小國語文閱讀教學成效研究，國立高雄師範大學教育學系課程教學研究所未出版之碩士 論文。 蔡翠華(1996)，國小數學學習障礙學生的學習型態與學習策略之相關研究，國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所未出版之碩士論文
。 趙柏原(1999)，國中學生自我效能、求助態度與課業求助行為之相關研究，國立彰化師範大學教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。 劉潔 玲(2001)，學業成就不足學習動機問題之研究，教育研究資訊，9(3)，86-105。 劉信雄(1992)，國小學生認知風格、學習策略、自我效能 與學業成就關係之研究，國立政治大學教育研究所未出版之博士論文。 鄭慧婷(2004)，國小高年級學童閱讀科學類課外書籍興趣與「自 然與生活科技」學習之相關研究，台北市立師範學院科學教育研究所未出版之碩士論文。 聯合國科教文組織(1998)，教育—財富蘊含其 中，聯合國科教文組織。 簡素蘭(2005)，如何提升青少年語文能力，師友月刊，455，28-29。 蘇宜芬(1991)，後設認知訓練課程對國小 低閱讀能力學生的閱讀理解與後設認知能力之影響，國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所未出版之碩士論文。 二、英文部分 Alfassi, M. (1998). Reading for meaning: The efficacy of reciprocal teaching in fostering reading comprehension in high school students in remedial reading classes. American Educational Research Journal, 35(2), 309-332. Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skill of reading. In P.D.Pearson, Handbook of reading research, 353-394, New York: Longman. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of be-havioral of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 4, 71-81. Bandura, A.
(1995). Self-efficacy in Changing Societies. Cambridge University. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass commnunity. Media Psychology, 3, 265-299. Borkowski, J. G. (1992). Metacognitive theory: A framework for teaching literacy, writing, and math skills. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 253-257. Brown, A. L., & Day, J. D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 1-14. Brown, A., ＆ Palinscar, A. S. (1989). Guide, cooperative learning and individual knowledge acquisition. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction (pp. 393-452). NJ: Lawence Erlbaum. Bruce, M. E., & Chan, L. K. S. (1991).
Reciprocal teaching and tran-senvironmental programming: A program to facilitate the reading comprehension of students with reading difficulties.
Remedial and Special Education, 12(5), 44-54. Carter, C. J. (1997). Why reciprocal teaching. Educational leadership, 54(6), 64-68. Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., Sivan, E., Rackliffe, G., Book, C., Meloth, M.,Vavrus, L. G., Wesselmann, R., Putmam, J., & Bassiri, D. (1987). Effects of explaining the reasoning associated with us-ing reading strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 347-368. Frances, S., & Eckart, J. A. (1992).
The effects of reciprocal teaching on comprehension. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED350572. Garner, R. (1992).Self-regulated learning strategy shifts, and shared expertise: Reactions to Palincsar and Klenk. Journal of Learn-ing Disabilities,25(4), 226-229. Hacker, D. J., &
Tenent, A. (2002). Implementing reciprocal teaching in the classroom: Overcoming obstacles and making modifica-tions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 699-718. Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1989). An exploratory of the mathematics self-efficacy mathematics task performance correspondence. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 261-273. Hilawani, A., & Yasser, A. (1993). Implementing reciprocal teaching: Was it effective? Annual Meeting of the Midwest Association of Teachers of Educational Psychology, Anderson, IN. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED363614.) Jacobs, J. E., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Children Metacognition About Reading:Issues in Definition,
Measurement, and Instruction . Educational Psychologist, 22(3-4), 255-278. Kelly, M., Moore, D. W., & Tuck, B. F. (1994). Reciprocal teaching in a regular primary school classroom. Journal of Educational Reserch, 88(1), 53-61. Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1996). Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension strategies for students with learning disabilities who use English as a second language. The Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 275-293. Lederer, J. M. (2000). Reciprocal teaching of social studies in inclu-sive elementary-classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(1), 91-106. Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., & Bieschke, K. J. (1991). Mathematics self-efficacy: sources and relation to science-based career choice.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 38(4), 424-430. Lysynchuk, L. M., Pressley, M., & Vye, N. J. (1990). Reciprocal teaching improves standardize reading-comprehension per-formance in poor comprehenders. The Elementary School Journal, 90(5), 469-484. Maddux, J. E. (1995). Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: The-ory, research, and application. New York: Plenum Press. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578. Palincsar, A. S. (1984). Reciprocal teaching: working within the zone of proximal development. 68th Annual Meeting of the Ameri-can Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Re-production Service NO.
ED246385.) Palincsar, A. S. (1986). The role of dialogue in providing scaffolded instruction. Education psychologist, 21, 73-98. Palincsar, A. S.
(1987). Collaboration for Collaborative Learning of Text Comprehension. Annual meeting of the American Educa-tional Research Association, Washington, DC. (ERIC Docu-ment Reproduction Service No. ED 285123). Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Structured dialogues among communities of
first grade learners. Annual Meeting of the American Educa-tional Research Association, San Francisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED305168.) Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of com-prehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1989). Enhancing instructional time through attention to metacognition. Journal of Learning Dis-abilities, 20(2), 66-75. Parsons, J. E., Ruble, D. N., Hodges, K. L., & Small, A. W. (1976).
Cognitive-developmental factors in emerging sex differences in achievement-related expectancies. The Journal of Social Is-sues, 32, 47-62. Pressley, M., Snyder, B. L., & Cariglia-Bull, T. (1987). How can good strategy use be taught to children? Evaluation of six alterna-tiveapproaches. In Cormier, S. M., & Hagman, J. D. (Eds). Transfer of learning: Contemporary research and applications, 81-120. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H.
(2002). Motivation in education: The-ory, research, and applications. New Jersey: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Rinehart, S. D., Stahl, S. A. ＆ Enickson, L. G. (1986). Some effects of summarization training on reading and studying. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 422-438. Rogoff, B., & Gardner, W. (1984). Guidance in cognitive development: An examination of mother-child instruction. In B. Rogoff, & J. Lave (Eds.) Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (p. 95-116). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal Teaching:
A Review of the Research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479-530. Ryan, A. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). Achievement and social moti-vational influences on help seeking in the classroom. In Kara-benick(Ed.), Strategic help seeking: Implications for learning and
teaching(61-94). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Schunk, D. H. (1988). Perceived self-efficacy and related social cog-nitive processes as predictors of student academic perform-ance . Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED293866). Skinner, E. A., Wellborn, J. G., & Connell, J. P. (1990). What it takes to do well in school and whether I’ve got it: A process model of perceived control and children’s engagement and achieve-ment in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 22-32.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development higher psy-chological process. Edited and translated by M. Cole, V. John Steiner, S.
Scribner, & E. Souberman. Cambridge, MA: Har-vard University Press
