論 文 摘 要
在傳統的英語閱讀教學活動中，學生的學習是被動的。今日雖崇尚溝通式教學法，從事英語教學的老師，仍以講述文法及字詞解釋為重。在此種學習環境中，同學與同學之間或老師與同學之間，難有實際的溝通互動產生。因此，本研究採用全語言教學法中的探究式教學法，配合小組策略閱讀(CSR)，以學生為中心，老師為誘導者，透過問題的設計，從事閱讀教學；學生在達成任務的過程中，批判與創造性思考得到啟發，人際技巧與情緒管理也同時增進。參與本實驗研究的學生共八十四位。他們是台北市某著名女中的兩班高一學生。兩班的入學成績(基本學力測驗)並無不同。研究者以其一班為實驗組，實施探究式教學法；另一班為控制組，採用傳統閱讀教學法。本研究目的是為探討此另類閱讀教學方式對學生英語閱讀之成效，以及此教學法在現行台灣高中教育之可行性，故本研究以學校採用之共同教科書作為閱讀教材。此外，學生學習態度問卷、學生學後回饋、學後師生訪談、教師之課堂觀察、學生小組討論結果、學生讀後心得寫作、校內的段考成績等均做為檢核此教學法的工具。
本實驗所獲得之結果和發現，歸納成以下幾點：(1)在學生學習成就方面，根據統計分析校內段考成績之結果，參與探究式教學法的學生平均成績與接受傳統閱讀教學學生並無不同，但由學生讀後心得中看出控制組學生對文章的理解錯誤較多，且實驗組學生的心得內容較豊富。(2)在學習態度方面，根據訪談及問卷結果，參與小組討論的同學比接受傳統閱讀教學的學生學到更多的自學策略及技巧，態度也較積極。多數學生覺得自己的學習方法變得較為主動。在一學期的探究式教學法之後，多數學生覺得自己的口語表達能力較以前進步。(3) 在師生對此教學法的態度方面，多數學生對此教學法持肯定態度，且希望老師繼續用此法教學，但希望老師多給予文法上的解釋。而教師則對此教學法增進師生互動、且造成學生情緒與社交上的成長表示定。
本研究結果在教學上的啟示是：(1)老師適當的提問能將書本的知識與學生的真實經驗連結，不僅提高學生的閱讀興趣，更能提昇學生的參與感，且經主動思考過的知識較不易遺忘。探究法實是提高學生閱讀能力的有效教學策略之一。(2)經由此教學法，學生不僅學到閱讀技巧，更重要的是學到了如何與同儕相處的社會技巧。尊重、分享、接納他人的意見，相互支持與協助。遇有問題會主動查詢或與人討論，具有較積極的學習態度。(3)在小組討論中，學生教學互助，互相觀摩運用閱讀策略，其在動機上的刺激勝於老師多次的勸說。對於想要提昇學生學習動機及閱讀技巧之教師，小組策略閱讀(CSR)的方法是值得嘗試與推薦。(4)探究式教學法對學生的聽、說、讀、寫能力均有增進作用，是一種全方位並全人的教學方式。

Abstract
This study aims to research on the feasibility of an inquiry-based approach to English reading instruction—by using the technique of Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR). The instructional approach puts more emphasis on students' learning than on teacher's teaching, to make classroom talks become in-depth content communication through the teacher’s leading questions, and at the same time, to develop students’ interpersonal skills. Two senior high classes, 42 students in each, were recruited. One class received experimental intervention; the other was taught via a traditional decoding approach. The experiment lasted for one semester, from September 2003 to January 2004. By examining teacher-student interviews, as well as the students' post-treatment feedbacks, attitude questionnaire, and the teacher's classroom observations, the researcher hoped to explore the effects of the new approach on teacher and student’s attitudes. By comparing students' achievements in terms of school exams and post-reading writing performance, this project explores the effects and feasibility of the inquiry-based approach and hopes to instill some food of thought into the present ELT instruction in Taiwan.
The results were summarized as follows: (1) In terms of learning achievement, no significant differences were found in students’ school exam scores, which means the experimental group did as well as the control group. But in their post-reading writing assignments, more idea units, critical thinking, and evidences of self-discovery were shown in the experimental group; on the contrary, more signs of misunderstanding while reading the texts were found in the control group. (2) In terms of learners’ attitude toward English learning, the experimental group reported much more progress in self-learning skills than the control group did. Most of the students in the experimental group reported that they became more active and enthusiastic to learn English after the intervention; meanwhile, more than 60% of them also reported that they improved in their oral skills. (3) In terms of the teacher’s and students’ attitudes toward this instructional approach, most of the students in experimental group gave positive comments on the teaching, and the teacher was also sure of the positive impacts that the teaching made to students’ social and emotional growth. Also, on the background that all students in the experimental group could sense major differences between this intervention and their former English classes, most of them still liked the teacher to continue teaching in this way, except that they asked for more grammatical explanation.
Although there were some room for improvement on grammar teaching, the inquiry-based approach proved to be viable in teaching EFL reading, especially in that it enhanced students’ critical thinking, self-learning ability, social skills, and emotional growth.
The pedagogical implications of this study are: (1) The inquiry-based pedagogy is helpful for promoting teacher-student interaction, enhancing involvement of students, and linking book knowledge with real life experience, through which knowledge is solidly built. It is really an effective teaching strategy to build up active readers. (2) The CSR technique is helpful to create a supportive learning environment to enhance students’ social and emotional skills, with which students respect and share other people’s opinions, support and help each other in the completion of tasks. (3) This instructional approach not only trains students in reading skills, but also motivates students to learn English through peer monitoring. (4) The inquiry-based pedagogy compels students to listen, speak, read, and write English at the same time and therefore has the potential to enhance the four language skills. All these validate that the inquiry-based pedagogy is a rounded, whole-personal education.

References
Abdullah, M. K. K. (1999). Developing the Critical ESL Learner: The Freire's Way. A paper presented at 5th MELTA International Conference, Malaysia. Retrieved at http://www.eltnewsletter.com/back/June2000/art192000.shtml on 2004/3/15
Alford, J. (2001). Learning language and critical literacy: Adolescent ESL students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. Vol: 45 (3): 238-49.
Anderson, N. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal. Vol: 75: 460-72.
Anderson, N. (2002). Increasing reading fluency: Activities for the EFL classroom. In The Selected Papers from the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 15-25). Taipei: Crane.
Bialystok, E. (1983). “Inferencing: Testing the ‘Hypothesis Testing’ hypothesis.” In. Seliger, H. W. & Long, M. H. (Eds.) Classroom oriented research in second language acquisition. (pp.104-23). Rowley, MA: Newbury.
Blagg, N. R. (1991). Can We Teach Intelligence? A Comprehensive Evaluation of Feuerstein's Instrumental Enrichment Program. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Boeck, T. L. & Rainey, M. (2000). Connections: Writing, reading, and critical thinking. New York : Addison Wesley Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles : an interactive approach to language pedagogy. 2nd ed. White Plains, NY: Longman Addison-Wesley.
Brown, H. D. (2002). Can you be politically correct and pedagogically critical in your classroom? In The Selected Papers from the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 34-42). Taipei: Crane.
Browne, M. N. & Keeley, S. M. (1990). Asking the right questions: A guide to critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Bruffee, K. A. (1980). A short course in writing : practical rhetoric for composition courses, writing workshops, and tutor training programs. Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop Publishers.
Bryant P. D., Klingner K. J., & Vaughn S. (2001). Collaborative strategic reading as a means to enhance peer-mediated instruction for reading comprehension and content-area learning. Remedial and Special Education. Vol: 22 (2) p.66. Publication Year: 2001. Page Number: 66
Candlin, C. N. (1991). Preface of Legutke & Thomas, (1991 [1997 printing]). Process and experience in the language classroom. London ; New York : Longman.
Carrell, P. L., Devine, J., & Eskey, D. E. (1988). Interactive approaches to second language reading. Cambridge: New York, Cambridge University Press.
Carrick, T. H., Giglio, K. & Kahn, S. (1991). An Inquiry into Inquiry. A Handbook for Teaching in the Writing Program. Retrieved at http://wrt.syr.edu/pub/handbook/
inquiry.html on 2004/3/15.
Chamot, A. U., & O'Malley, J. M. (1994). Instructional approaches and teaching procedures. In K. Spangenberg-Urbschat & R. Pritchard (Eds.), Kids come in all languages: Reading instruction for ESL students (pp. 82-107). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Chen, Bi-chu. (1999). Discrepancy of reading strategies for academic purposes between high achievers and low achievers at a junior college in Taiwan. In The Selected Papers from the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 223-34). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, Chien-yu. (2000). Senior high school EFL teachers’ views on English grammar instruction. In The Selected Papers from the Ninth International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 188-97). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, Hsiu-chuan. (1999). a comparison between cooperative learning and traditional, whole-class methods—teaching English in a junior college. In The Selected Papers from the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 259-70). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, Yih-lan. (2004). How high school students regulate learning EFL: Self-determination perspective. The Proceedings of 2004 International Conference and Workshop on TEFL & Applied Linguistics, Ming-Chuan University. (pp. 165-69). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, Yih-lan. (in press). The effect of autonomy-supportive instructions to high school students learning of English as a foreign language. A National Science Council project report. Report No: NSC92- 2411-H-130-007.
Chern, C. L. (2003). Active learning: reading, writing and thinking in EFL classes. Taiwan ELT Publishing Co.
Chern, C. L. (2004). Senior High School English Instruction: A Critical Thinking Model for Teachers and Students. A National Science Council project report. Report No: NSC 92-2411-H-003-025.
Chien, Yi-chun. (2001). Web-based MOOing for senior high English learning. In The Selected Papers from the Tenth International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 345-53). Taipei: Crane.
Cohen, G. E., Lotan, A. R., Whitcomb, A. J., Balderrama, V. M., Cossey, R., Swanson, E. P. (1999). Complex Instruction: Higher order thinking in heterogeneous classrooms. In S. Sharan (Ed.), Handbook of cooperative learning methods. Praeger: Westport, CT. Publication.
Collins, C. & Mangieri, J. (1992). Eds. Teaching thinking : an agenda for the twenty-first century. Hillsdale, N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cumming, A. (1989). Writing expertise and second-language proficiency. In A. Cumming (1994), Bilingual performance in reading and writing. Ann Arbor: John Benjamins. 173-221.
Day, R. R. (2002). Critical thinking in the EFL classroom. In The Selected Papers from the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 72-78). Taipei: Crane.
De Bono, E. (1976). Teaching Thinking. Harmondsworth: Penguin
Dechant, Emerald. (1993). Whole-language reading: A comprehensive teaching guide (Ch 4, 6, 7). Technomic Publishing Company.
Deligianni, A. (1998). Mediation: theoretical framework and functions. Retrieved at:
http://www.thrace-net.gr/bridges/t3_deligiani.htm on 2004/3/24.
Deligianni, A. (1999). Thinking Skills through English Language Tasks. In Balkan Symposium, 2001. Available at: http://www.thrace-net.gr/bridges.
Deligianni, A. (2000). The role of the teacher-as-mediator in the foreign language classroom. Available at: http://www.thrace-net.gr/bridges/6/10_The%20Role%
20of%20the%20Teacher-as-Mediator%20in%20the%20Foreign%20Language%20C.htm.
Doyle, D. (2003). Read Efficiently. Retrieved at http://english.glendale.cc.ca.us/
speed1.html on 2003/08/25.
Edelsky, C., Altwerger, B., & Flores, B. (1991). Whole language: What's the difference? Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Elley, W. (1991). Acquiring literacy in a second language: The effect of book-based programs. In A. Cumming, Bilingual performance in reading and writing. Ann Arbor: John Benjamins. 331-66.
Flavell J. H. (1977). Cognitive development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Freeman, Y. S. & Freeman, D. E. (1992). Whole Language for Second Language Learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freire, P. & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
Goodman, Kenneth. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of Reading Specialist 6:126-135.
Horiba, Y. (1993). The Role of Causal Reasoning and Language Competence in Narrative Comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Vol. 15: 49-81.
Huang, Sheng-hui. (1999). Learning toward learner autonomy: an example from an English class. In The Selected Papers from the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 375-84). Taipei: Crane.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperative learning: What special educators need to know. The Pointer, Vol. 33: 5-10.
Kasper, L. F. (2000). Content-based college ESL instruction (Ch 1-8). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kempe, A. (1993). No single meaning: Empowering students to construct socially critical readings of the text. In Fehring, H. & Green, P. (2001). Eds. Critical literacy: A collection of articles from the Australian Literacy Educators' Association. International Reading Association, Inc. & Australian Literacy Educators' Association.
Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1996). Reciprocal teaching of reading comprehension strategies for students with learning disabilities who use English as a second language. Elementary School Journal, Vol. 96: 275-93.
Klingner, JK, & Vaughn, S. (1998). Using Collaborative Strategic Reading. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30(6), 32-37. Retrieved September 10, 2003, from http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/teaching_techniques/collab_reading.html.
Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1999). Promoting reading comprehension, content learning and English acquisition through Collaborative Strategic Reading. The Reading Teacher, 52, 738-47.
Lazar, G. (2004). Literature and Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press. Ninth printing.
Legutke, M. & Thomas. (1991). Process and experience in the language classroom. Harlow: Longman.
Li, Li-te. (1999). Reevaluating EFL student writers form the perspective of literacy development. In The Selected Papers from the Eighth International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 441-52). Taipei: Crane.
Lin, Cheng-Lung. (2002). Constructivism and Second Language Learning: A Web-Based Reading-Writing Activity. M.A. thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Maclure, S., & Davies, P. (1991). (Eds.). Learning to think : thinking to learn. Oxford: Pergamon. Published for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development by Pergamon Press, 1991.
Morrow, L. M. (1993). Literacy development in the early years: helping children read and write. (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Panitz, T. (2000). Cooperative vs. Collaborative. Retrieved at http://www.winona. edu/fdc/_TheWell/00000001.htm on September 10, 2003.
Piaget, J. (1979). Science of education and the psychology of the child. (Translated from French by D. Coltman). NY: Penguin Books.
Raimes, A. (1994) Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies: a study of ESL college student writers. In A. Cumming, Bilingual performance in reading and writing. Ann Arbor: John Benjamins. 139-72.
Shrum, Judith L. & Glisan, Eileen W. (1994). Teacher’s Handbook: Contextualized Language Instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Spivey, N. N. (1997). The constructivist metaphor: Reading, writing, and the making of meaning. San Diego: Academic Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wang, Ying-hui. (2002). The Effects of Group Discussion on EFL Reading Comprehension Instruction. Unpublished M.A. thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.
Williams, M. & Burden, R. L. (2002). Psychology for Language Teachers: A social constructivist approach. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 5th edition.
Wu, Siew-Rong. (2000). The writing-reading connection: A pamphlet project at Yang Ming University. In The Selected Papers from the Ninth International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 548-55). Taipei: Crane
Yi, Ching-ching. (1998). A strategic process approach towards writing in cooperative learning. In The Selected Papers from the Seventh International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 941-52). Taipei: Crane.
Zamel, V. (1992). Writing one's way into reading. TESOL Quarterly, 26(3): 463-85.
Chinese References
Chern, C. L. (陳秋蘭) & Chen, M. L. (陳美伶) (2004) 探討高職學生對於應用分析性思考、創造性思考、以及實用性思考於英文課的看法。Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on English Teaching and learning in the Republic of China. (pp. 281-294). 朝陽科技大學.
Chiang, F. S. (江芳盛) (1990) 高雄市國民小學教師批判思考教學行為之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。未出版。
Wu, C. J. (吳青蓉) (2002) 英語學習歷程模式之驗證暨「主題建構式語言學習策略」對國中生英語學習表現影響之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。未出版。
Lin, M. L. (林美伶) (1998) 認知學徒合作學習法對國中生英語科學習成就表現、動機信念、學習策略之影響。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。未出版。
Lin, C. S. (林清山) (1997) 教育心理學—認知取向 (3版)。台北市:遠流
Chen, L. H. (陳麗華) (1995) 批判思考教學的內涵與實際。黃政傑主編，創思與合作的教學法。台北: 師大書苑。
Huang, C. C. (黃政傑) (1995) 合作學習教學法。黃政傑主編，創思與合作的教學法。台北: 師大書苑。