多文本課外閱讀對增進國中學生理解歷史主題之研究：以「外侮」主題為例
作者:唐淑華(國立臺灣師範大學教育學系)、蔡孟寧(國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系)、林烘煜(佛光大學心理學系)
卷期：60卷第3期
日期：2015年9月
頁碼：63-94
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.2015.60(3).03
摘要：
本研究旨在探討如何透過多文本課外閱讀以增進國中學生對歷史主題的理解。共分兩個研究進行，第一個為前導研究，採觀察與訪談方式以瞭解國中歷史教學的現況，並採內容分析方式探討如何架構「外侮」此一主題的多文本課外閱讀書單；第二個則為正式研究，採準實驗法，以瞭解透過多文本課外閱讀是否能有效增進學生多面向之理解。前導研究首先根據課程綱要選定「外侮」此一主題，再根據多文本閱讀的原則挑選文本。結果發現，可採用「文本互織」原則挑選課外讀物，將教科書設定為「控制式文本」，再根據「補充式文本」、「衝突式文本」、「綜觀式文本」等原則篩選課外書籍。正式研究則發現，多文本閱讀在認知理解等面向的效果較為明顯，但在情意上意見則較不一致。根據發現，篇末乃提出相關建議以供關心閱讀教育工作者參考。
關鍵詞：多文本閱讀、多面向理解、透過閱讀而學習、課外閱讀
《詳全文》
參考文獻：
- 文化部（2013）。龍應台：出版是國力也是國安。取自http://www.moc.gov.tw/artnews.do?method= findById&id=1222852534605【Ministry of Culture. (2013). Lung, Ying-Tai: Publishing is national power and national security. Retrieved from http://www.moc.gov.tw/artnews.do?method=findById&id=1222852534605】
- 江逸之（2007）。一年只花1,375元買書，450萬成人不看書，台灣怎來競爭力。遠見雜誌，254。取自http://www.gvm.com.tw/CatelogCover/Catelog_List.aspx?go=cover&pu=1&isid=254【Jiang, Y.-J. (2007). How does Taiwan have the competitive strength, if people only spend 1,375 dollars a year on books yet 4.5 million adults don’t read? Global Views Monthly, 254. Retrieved from http://www.gvm.com.tw/ CatelogCover/Catelog_List.aspx?go=cover&pu=1&isid=254】
- 行政院（2013）。「臺灣出版產業發展策略」報告。取自http://www.ey.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx? n=F8BAEBE9491FC830&s=4EC5DB716B126E35【Executive Yuan. (2013). Report of “The strategies to develop publishing industry in Taiwan”. Retrieved from http://www.ey.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=F8BAEBE9491FC830&s=4EC5DB716B126E35】
- 吳敏而（2013）。多文本閱讀的教學研發。國立臺北教育大學語文集刊，23，123-157。【Wu, R. J. (2013). Design experiments to promote intertextuality in reading. Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 23, 123-157.】
- 呂瑞蓮、周倩（2013）。臺灣地區國中小學校圖書館經營管理調查研究。圖書資訊學研究，7（2），29-79。【Lu, J.-L., & Chou, C. (2013). Transliteracy and the study of libraries in Taiwan’s elementary and junior high schools. Journal of Library and Information Science Research, 7(2), 29-79.】
» 展開更多
- 文化部（2013）。龍應台：出版是國力也是國安。取自http://www.moc.gov.tw/artnews.do?method= findById&id=1222852534605【Ministry of Culture. (2013). Lung, Ying-Tai: Publishing is national power and national security. Retrieved from http://www.moc.gov.tw/artnews.do?method=findById&id=1222852534605】
- 江逸之（2007）。一年只花1,375元買書，450萬成人不看書，台灣怎來競爭力。遠見雜誌，254。取自http://www.gvm.com.tw/CatelogCover/Catelog_List.aspx?go=cover&pu=1&isid=254【Jiang, Y.-J. (2007). How does Taiwan have the competitive strength, if people only spend 1,375 dollars a year on books yet 4.5 million adults don’t read? Global Views Monthly, 254. Retrieved from http://www.gvm.com.tw/ CatelogCover/Catelog_List.aspx?go=cover&pu=1&isid=254】
- 行政院（2013）。「臺灣出版產業發展策略」報告。取自http://www.ey.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx? n=F8BAEBE9491FC830&s=4EC5DB716B126E35【Executive Yuan. (2013). Report of “The strategies to develop publishing industry in Taiwan”. Retrieved from http://www.ey.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=F8BAEBE9491FC830&s=4EC5DB716B126E35】
- 吳敏而（2013）。多文本閱讀的教學研發。國立臺北教育大學語文集刊，23，123-157。【Wu, R. J. (2013). Design experiments to promote intertextuality in reading. Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 23, 123-157.】
- 呂瑞蓮、周倩（2013）。臺灣地區國中小學校圖書館經營管理調查研究。圖書資訊學研究，7（2），29-79。【Lu, J.-L., & Chou, C. (2013). Transliteracy and the study of libraries in Taiwan’s elementary and junior high schools. Journal of Library and Information Science Research, 7(2), 29-79.】
- 林妙玲（2007a）。台灣閱讀最少族群：13～18歲 不閱讀，青少年如何「轉大人」。遠見雜誌，254。取自http://www.gvm.com.tw/Boardcontent_13290.html【Lin, M.-L. (2007a). The least-read group in Taiwan: from 13- to 18-year-olds and how do teenagers become mature if they don’t read? Global Views Monthly, 254. Retrieved from http://www.gvm.com.tw/Boardcontent_ 13290.html】
- 林妙玲（2007b）。適合他們的書在哪裡？「三不一沒有」的青少年讀物市場。遠見雜誌，254。取自http://store.gvm.com.tw/article_content_13292.html【Lin, M.-L. (2007b). Where are the appropriate books for them? The 3 noes in the book markets for teenagers. Global Views Monthly, 254. Retrieved from http://store.gvm.com.tw/article_content_13292.html】
- 林清山（1988）。實驗設計的基本原則。載於楊國樞、文崇一、吳聰賢、李亦園（編），社會及行為科學研究法（pp. 87-130）。臺北市：東華。【Lin, C.-S. (1988). The fundamental principles in the experimental design. In G.-S. Yang, C.-Y. Wun, C.-S. Wu, & Y.-Y. Li (Eds.), Research methods in social and behavioral sciences (pp. 87-130). Taipei, Taiwan: Tung Hua.】
- 林惠敏、宋雪芳（2010）。國中生使用學校圖書館行為之研究：以臺北市士林國中為例。臺灣圖書館管理季刊，6（3），95-111。【Lin, H.-M., & Song, S.-F. (2010). A study on the behaviour of using school library of junior high school students: A case of Taipei Shilin municipal junior high school. Interdisciplinary Journal of Taiwan Library Administration, 6(3), 95-111.】
- 柯華葳（2006）。教出閱讀力。臺北市：天下。【Ke, H.-W. (2006). Teach to read. Taipei, Taiwan: Common Wealth.】
- 柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅（2008）。PIRLS 2006報告：臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養。取自http://lrn.ncu.edu.tw/pirls/PIRLS%202006%20Report.html【Ke, H.-W., Zhan, Y.-L., Zhang, J.-Y., & Yu, T.-Y. (2008). International report of PIRLS 2006: Reading literacy of the fourth graders in Taiwan. Retrieved from http://lrn.ncu.edu.tw/pirls/PIRLS%202006%20Report.html】
- 許瑛玿、莊福泰、林祖強（2012）。解析設計研究法的架構與實施：以科學教育研究為例。教育科學研究期刊，57（1），1-27。doi:10.3966/2073753X2012035701001【Hsu, Y.-S., Chuang, F.-T., & Lin, T.-C. (2012). Exploring the framework and implementation of the design research method in science education. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 57(1), 1-27. doi:10.3966/2073753X 2012035701001】
- 許獻元（2006，2月24日）。您的孩子補過頭了嗎？臺灣教育長期追蹤資料庫電子報，51。取自http://www.teps.sinica.edu.tw/TEPSNews/TEPS~News_051.pdf【Hsu, H.-Y. (2006, February 24). Have your children spent too much time in cramming schools? Taiwan Education Panel Survey, 51. Retrieved from http://www.teps.sinica.edu.tw/TEPSNews/TEPS~News_051.pdf】
- 教育部（2003）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要社會學習領域。臺北市：作者。【Ministry of Education. (2003). Grade 1-9 social learning curriculum guidelines. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】
- 教育部重編國語辭典修訂本（無日期）。外侮。取自http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/cgi-bin/newDict/ dict.sh?cond=%A5%7E%ABV&pieceLen=50&fld=1&cat=&ukey=-990526470&serial=1&recNo=1&op=f&imgFont=1【Revised Chinese Dictionary of Ministry of Education. (n.d.). Foreign aggression. Retrieved from http://dict.revised. moe.edu.tw/cgi-bin/newDict/dict.sh?cond=%A5%7E%ABV&pieceLen=50&fld=1&cat=&ukey=-990526470&serial=1&recNo=1&op=f&imgFont=1】
- 閔慧慈、徐文珊（2008）。補充閱讀對台灣以英語為外語學習者在英文字彙習得與保存的成效。師大學報：人文與社會科學類，53（1），83-115。doi:10.6210/JNTNULL.2008.53(1).05【Min, H.-T., & Hsu, W.-S. (2008). The impact of supplemental reading on vocabulary acquisition and retention with EFL learners in Taiwan. Journal of Taiwan Normal University: Humanities & Social Science, 53(1), 83-115. doi:10.6210/JNTNULL.2008.53(1).05】
- 陳明來（2001）。臺北市公立國中生課外閱讀行為之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。【Chen, M.-L. (2001). The study on the reading behavior of Taipei municipal junior high school students (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.】
- 陳雅華、楊凱琳（2010）。自行閱讀與文本編排對國一學生有關勾股定理的概念、程序與解題表現之影響。教育科學研究期刊，55（2），147-166。doi:10.3966/2073753X2010065502005【Chen, Y.-H., & Yang, K.-L. (2010). The effects of self-reading and text layouts on seventh graders’ mathematical performance about Pythagorean theorem. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 55(2), 147-166. doi:10. 3966/2073753X2010065502005】
- 黃國正（2010）。臺灣各級學校實施圖書館利用教育之概況。臺灣圖書館管理季刊，6（4），86-94。【Huang, G.-J. (2010). The condition of library use education in all level schools in Taiwan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Taiwan Library Administration, 6(4), 86-94.】
- 趙金婷（2007）。幼兒對不同版本故事書的文本互織反應之探究。新竹教育大學教育學報，24（1），1-28。【Chou, J.-T. (2007). Young children’s intertextual response among fairytale variants. Educational Journal of NHCUE, 24(1), 1-28.】
- 蔡慧美（2005）。國中生課外閱讀行為與經驗之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣大學，臺北市。【Tsai, H.-M. (2005). Study of junior high school student extracurricular reading behavior and experience (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.】
- 盧雪梅（2011）。國中基測國文科閱讀文本暨學生表現分析。教育研究與發展期刊，7（2），115-152。【Lu, S.-M. (2011). Structures and examining performances of the reading tasks of the Chinese basic competence for junior high school students. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 7(2), 115-152.】
- Adler, M. J., & Van Daren, C.（2003）。如何閱讀一本書（郝明義、朱衣，譯）。臺北市：臺灣商務。（原著出版於1972年）【Adler, M. J., & Van Daren, C. (2003). How to read a book? (M.-Y. Hao & Y. Zhu, Trans.). Taipei, Taiwan: The Commercial. (Original work published 1972)】
- Bråaten, L., Gil, L., & Strømsø, H. (2011). The role of different task instructions and reader characteristics when learning from multiple expository texts. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 95-122). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
- Byrnes, J. P. (2000). Using instructional time effectively. In L. Baker, M. J. Dreher, & J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp. 188-208). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
- Chall, J. S., Jacobs, V. A., & Baldwin, L. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1990). Assessing print exposure and orthographic processing skill in children: A quick measure of reading experience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 733-740. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.733
- Hartman, D. K., & Allison, J. (1996). Promoting inquiry-oriented discussions using multiple texts. In L. B. Gambrell & J. F. Almasi (Eds.), Lively discussions! Fostering engaged reading (pp. 106-133). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
- Hartman, D. K., & Hartman, J. A. (1993). Reading across texts: Expanding the role of the reader. The Reading Teacher, 47(3), 202-211.
- Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163-182. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163
- Lee, P. J. (2005). Putting principles into practice: Understanding history. In M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn (pp. 31-77). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
- Mandeville, T. F. (1994). KWLA: Linking the affective and cognitive domains. The Reading Teacher, 47(8), 20-21.
- McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 1-43. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1401_1
- Mol, S. E., & Bus, A. G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137(2), 267-296. doi:10.1037/a0021890
- National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- Ogle, D. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39(6), 564-570. doi:10.1598/RT.39.6.11
- Pearson, P. D. (2009). The roots of reading comprehension instruction. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 1-35). New York, NY: Routledge.
- Pearson, P. D., Hansen, J., & Gordon, C. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young children’s comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Literacy Research 11(3), 201-209. doi:10.1080/10862967909547324
- Richardson, J. S., Morgan, R. F., & Fleener, C. E. (2012). Reading to learn in the content areas (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
- Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. (1997, February). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Paper presented at the U.S. National Research Center for the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
- Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
- Stahl, S. A., Hynd, C. R., Britton, B. K., McNish, M. M., & Bosquet, D. (1995). What happens when students read multiple source documents in history? Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 430-456.
- Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360-407. doi:10.1598/RRQ.21.4.1
- Stanovich, K. E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
- Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(4), 402-433. doi:10.2307/747605
- Strømsø, H., Bråaten, I., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2003). Students’ strategic use of multiple sources during expository text reading: A longitudinal think-aloud study. Cognition and Instruction, 21(2), 113-147. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2102_01
- Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
- Wiley, J., & Voss, J. F. (1999). Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 301-311. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.91.2.301
- Zarnowski, M. (2006). Making sense of history: Using high-quality literature and hands-on experiences to build content knowledge. New York, NY: Scholastic.
Journal directory listing - Volume 60 (2015) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【60(3)】September
Using Multiple Texts to Foster Junior High Students’ Historical Understanding
Author: Shu-Hua Tang(Department of Education, National Taiwan Normal University), Meng-Ning Tsai (Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling, National Taiwan Normal University), Hung-Yu Lin(Department of Psychology, Fo Guang University)
Vol.&No.：Vol. 60, No. 3
Date：September 2015
Pages：63-94
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.2015.60(3).03
Abstract：
The present study explored how seventh-grade students can benefit from reading multiple texts on controversial topics in history. The study was divided into two parts. The first part entailed classroom observations, interviews, and content analyses of the curriculum framework, textbook, and teacher's manual. It was to select trade books and adolescent literature as multiple sources of further reading in the study of history. The second part compared seventh graders’ construction of meaning after reading textbooks and trade books chosen to enrich the textbook’s content. It was found that by setting textbooks as controlling texts, those complementary texts, conflicting texts and synoptical texts can facilitate students’ deep understanding. By depicting a well-defined relationship between multiple texts and history learning (including content and disciplinary knowledge), this study has implications for theories of reading comprehension for multiple texts and for the design and choice of instructional materials in history.
Keywords：multiple texts, multiple understanding, read to learn, outside reading