中文摘要

本研究主要的目的是在比較學生的中文及英文閱讀信念與閱讀策略，及探究兩者之間的關聯。共有432位臺灣的大學生參與此研究，本研究所探討的閱讀信念以兩個閱讀信念模式為主軸─情意建構模式及知識傳遞模式。

研究者提出四個研究問題，第一個問題試圖比較及了解學生對中文及英文的閱讀信念，第二個問題則是比較及了解學生對中文及英文的閱讀策略，第三個問題企圖探討中文及英文閱讀信念和策略兩者之間的關聯。針對以上的三個問題，資料蒐集採取問卷調查的方式。至於第四個研究問題，研究者試圖針對不同閱讀信念模式的學生，觀察他們閱讀策略實際運用的情況，來進一步了解中文英文閱讀信念和閱讀策略之間的關聯，針對學生的實際閱讀策略運用，研究者是採用放聲思考的方法來蒐集資料。

本研究的主要發現為：(一)整體來說，學生在中文閱讀信念量表的得分顯著高於英文量表。並且學生對中文及英文抱有不同的閱讀信念模式，在閱讀中文的時候，學生普遍抱持較強的情意建構信念模式；然而在閱讀英文的時候，學生只有對情意建構模式中的個人解讀部份之得分高於知識傳遞模式，至於情意建構模式中的另一類別─情感的投入，在學生閱讀英文時，則和知識傳遞模式的得分無顯著差別。(二)閱讀策略量表的分析結果顯示，學生的中文及英文閱讀策略之間有明顯的相似以及差異之處。就相似處而言，學生不管在閱讀中文或英文時，都普遍喜歡使用的閱讀策略有三個：運用圖表來幫助理解，將內容與已知的相連結，以及來回重讀。就差異性來說，學生在讀中文時會使用較多的閱讀策略，並且會用較高比例的統整型策略；但是在讀英文時，則使用較少策略，並且對非統整型策略的運用比例較高。(三)研究結果顯示學生中文及英文的閱讀信念和閱讀策略兩者之間有顯著的正相關；此外雖然研究中發現，情意建構模式信念較強的學生會使用較多的策略，而知識傳遞模式信念較強的學生則使用較少的策略，但是各組學生之間的差異未達統計上顯著之標準。(四)放聲思考的資料分析結果顯示，不管在閱讀中英文時，有著不同閱讀信念模式的學生，會展現出不同的策略運用型態。情意建構模式信念較強的學生容易運用較多高層次的閱讀策略，而相反的，知識傳遞模式信念較強的學生則容易使用較多低層次的閱讀策略。然而研究發現此一差異性，在學生閱讀中文時比閱讀英文時明顯，因為學生在閱讀英文時，不管那一類型信念模式的學生，都過度局限於使用少數幾種區域型的閱讀策略。

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to examine learners’ beliefs about reading and reading strategies in L1 and L2. Four hundred and thirty-two Taiwanese college students participated in this study. The primary concern was to investigate whether learners’ beliefs about reading relate to their use of reading strategy in L1 (Chinese) and L2 (English) when reading for academic purposes. Readers’ beliefs were investigated in terms of the two implicit models of reading, the transaction and transmission beliefs.
Four major research questions were addressed in the study. The first research question concerned students’ beliefs about reading in L1 and L2. The second inquiry attempted to compare students’ reported use of reading strategies between languages. The third question intended to investigate whether learners’ beliefs about reading were related to their reported use of reading strategies in L1 and L2. To address these three questions, four measurement questionnaires were developed in this study to collect data. Lastly, since the fourth research question aimed to examine whether students with distinctive beliefs about reading in the two languages show any differences in how they process texts, the think-aloud method was used to collect information about students’ actual use of reading strategies.
The findings of the study were: (1) Students showed somewhat different reading belief patterns between L1 and L2. More specifically, when reading in L1, students tended to hold stronger transaction than transmission beliefs. On the other hand, when reading in L2, students were found to show differential strengths of two kinds of transaction beliefs identified in the study, with stronger endorsement to Transaction I beliefs (i.e. Reader Interpretation) than to Transaction II beliefs (i.e. Reader Engagement); no difference was found, however, between students’ Transaction II and Transmission beliefs. Furthermore, in general, students were found to hold stronger beliefs about reading in L1 than in L2, either transaction or transmission beliefs. (2) Both similarities and differences were found in students’ reported use of reading strategies between L1 and L2. Concerning the similarities between the languages, three strategies including using tables and pictures, linking content with what one already knows, and re-reading were found to be frequently used by students no matter whether they read in L1 or L2. As for the differences, students reportedly applied significantly more reading strategies in L1 than in L2. Moreover, while students reportedly used a significantly higher amount of general strategies when reading in L1, they tended to apply a significantly larger proportion of non-general strategies when reading in L2. (3) Students’ beliefs about reading and their reported use of strategies were found to be positively correlated in either L1 or L2. More specifically, both transaction and transmission beliefs were significantly correlated with the two reading strategy categories (i.e. general versus non-general). Regarding the reported uses of strategies by readers with distinctive belief types, even though there was a tendency for readers with strong transaction beliefs to report more use of reading strategies than those with strong transmission beliefs in either L1 or L2, the differences among groups were not statistically significant. (4) The qualitative results of the study have revealed that students with distinctive belief types in both languages seemed to exhibit distinctive patterns of strategy use. There was a tendency for readers with high transaction beliefs to process the text at a higher level and those with high transmission beliefs at a lower level. The differences, however, were more apparent in L1 than in L2. When reading in L2, although readers with distinctive belief types showed different strategy patterns, in general, they all tended to heavily rely on several local strategies.

Afflerbach, P. (2000). Verbal reports and protocol analysis. In Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, P. D., & Barr, R. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Alexander, P. A., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1998). A perspective on strategy research: Progress and prospects. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 129-154.
Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. The Modern Language Journal, 75, 460-472.
Arnold, J. (Ed.). (1999). Affective language learning. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Auerbach, E., & Paxton, D. (1997). It's not the English thing: Bringing reading research into the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 237-261.
Bernhardt, E. B. (1991). Reading development in a second language: Theoretical, empirical, and classroom perspectives. NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Bernhardt, E. B. (2000). Second language reading as a case study of reading scholarship in the 20th century. In Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, P. D., & Barr, R. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Mahwah, New Jersey.
Bernhardt, E. B. & Kamil, M. L. (1995). Interpreting relationships between L1 and L2 reading: Consolidating the linguistic threshold and the linguistic interdependence hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 16, 15-34.
Block, C. C., & Pressley, M. (2001). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practice. New York: Guilford.
Block, E. L. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 463-494.
Block, E. L. (1992). See how they read: Comprehension monitoring of L1 and L2 readers. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 319-343.
Blonski Hardin, V. (2001). Transfer and variation in cognitive reading strategies of Latino fourth-grade students in a late-exit bilingual program. Bilingual Research Journal, 25, 417-439.
Carrell, P. L. (1991). Second language reading: Reading ability or language proficiency? Applied Linguistics, 12, 159-179.
Cheng, C. K. (1998). A descriptive study of reading strategies used by Chinese ESL students from Taiwan, R.O. C. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansa.
Cheng, C. K. (1999). A think-aloud study of Chinese ESL readers. Paper Presented at the 1999 International Language in Education Conference, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, December 17-19. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED473 044)
Cheng, Y. S. (2001). Learners’ beliefs and second language anxiety. Concentric: Studies in English literature and linguistics, 27: 2, 209-23.
Cheng, Y.S., Chu, J., Li, C., Lin, C., Ting, J., Wu, C., Yeh, H. (2005). Constructing a textbase: Impact on strategy use and students’ reactions. Paper presented at the Twenty-second International Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the R.O.C., Taipei, Taiwan.
Chern, C. L. (1995). Think-aloud and reading instruction. In the Proceedings of the 9th Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp.116-130). Taipei: Grane Publishing Company.
Chern, C. L. (1999). Literacy Instruction in Taiwan: Teachers’ beliefs and their classroom practices. In (Eds.) Cheah, Yin Mee & Ng, Seok Moi. Language Istructional Issues in Asian Classrooms. International Development in Asia Committee, IRA.
Chiou, H. J. (2003). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling with LISREL. Taipei: Yeh Yeh Book Gallery.
Clarke, M. A. (1980). The short-circuit hypothesis of ESL reading – or when language competence interferes with reading performance. Modern Language Journal, 64, 203-209.
Cohen, A. D. (1987). Studying learner strategies: How we get the information. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.). Learner strategies in language learning (pp.31-40). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cotterall, S. M. (1995). Readiness for autonomy: investigating learner beliefs. System 23, 195-205.
Cotterall, S. M. (1999). Key variables in language learning: what do learners believe about them? System, 27, 493-513.
Davis, J. N. & Bistodeau, L. (1993). How do L1 and L2 reading differ? Evidence from think aloud protocols. The Modern Language Journal, 77, 459-471.
Devine, J. (1988). A case study of two readers: Models of reading and reading performance. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devine, & D. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive approaches to second language reading (pp.127-139). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Duke, N. K. & Pearson, P. D. (2002). Effective practices for developing reading comprehension. In Farstrup, A. E. & Samuels, S. J. (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Fitzgerald, J. (1995). English-as-a-second-language learners’ cognitive reading processes: A review of research in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 65: 2, 145-190.
Gorsuch, R. (1983). Factor Analysis. Newark, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gough, P. (1972). One second of reading. In Kavanagh, J. F. and Mattingly, I. G. (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye (pp.331-58). Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 375-406.
Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and Researching Reading. Harlow, England: Longman.
Hamada, M. (2005). Roles of decoding efficiency on second language incidental word learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University.
Harste, J. C. & Burke, C. L. (1977). A new hypothesis for reading teachers research: both teaching and learning of reading are theoretically based. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Reading: Theory, research, and practice (pp.32-40). 26th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Clemson, S.C.: National Reading Conference.
He, T. H. (2001). On-line strategy use and goal orientations: How Taiwanese English-major college freshmen with a combined mastery and performance achievement goal comprehend an English expository essay. Studies in English Language and Literature, 9, 17-28.
Ho, I. P. (2006). Using young adult literature and reader response in the EFL classroom. Selected Paper from the Fifteenth International Symposium and Book Fair on English Teaching. English Teachers’ Association, R.O.C.
Horiba, Y. (1996). Comprehension processes in L2 reading. SSLA, 18, 433-473.
Horwitz, E. K. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-32.
Horwitz, E. K. (1987). Surveying student beliefs about language learning. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.). Learner strategies in language learning (pp.119-29). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Horwitz, E. K. (1988). The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. The Modern Language Journal, 72, 283-294.
Horwitz, E. K. (1999). Cultural and situational influences on foreign language learners’ beliefs about language learning: a review of BALLI studies. System, 27, 557-576.
Hosenfeld, C. (1977). A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies of successful and unsuccessful second language learners. System, 5, 110-123.
Huang, S. & Tsai, R. R. (2003). A comparison between high and low English proficiency learners’ beliefs. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED482 579)
Hull, J. C. & Hou, Y. S. (2007). Second language reading behavior among Taiwanese university students: A mentalistic investigation of strategies. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 4.1, 27-64.
Jimenez, R.T. (1997). The strategic reading abilities and potential of five low-literacy Latina/o readers in middle school. Reading Research Quarterly, 32, 224-243.
Jimenez, R.T., Garcia, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual Latino students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31:1, 90-112.
Kamihi-Stein, L. D. (2003). Reading in two languages: how attitudes toward home language and beliefs about reading affect the behaviors of “underprepared” L2 college readers. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 35-71.
Kern, R. G. (1994). The role of mental translation in second language reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 441-461.
Kletzien, S. B. (1991). Strategy use by good and poor comprehenders reading expository text of differing levels. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 67-86.
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross linguistic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ku, K. Y. (2005). Korean high school students’ English language proficiency and Korean reading ability as factors in reading English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S.J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information process reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.
Lee, J. F. (1999). Clashes in L2 reading: Research versus practice and readers’ misconceptions. In Yound, D. J. (Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second language learning (pp.49-63). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Mantle-Bromley, C. (1995). Positive attitudes and realistic beliefs: links to proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 372-386.
Marsh, H. W. (1989). Confirmatory factor analyses of multitrait-multimethod data: Many problems and a few solutions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 335-361.
Mathewson, G. C. (1994). Model of attitude influence upon reading and learning to read. In Ruddell, R.B., M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
McKenna, M. C. (1994). Toward a model of reading attitude acquisition. In Cramer, E. H., M. Castle (Eds.), Fostering the love of reading: The affective domain in reading education. Newwark, DE: International Reading Association.
Mokhtari, K. & Reichard, C. (2000). Development of the metacognitive-awareness-of-reading- strategies inventory (MARSI). Unpublished instrument, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, USA.
Mokhtari, K. & Reichard, C. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94: 2, 249-259
Mokhtari, K. & Reichard, C. (2004). Investigating the strategic reading processes of first and second language readers in two different cultural contexts. System, 32, 379-394.
Olshavsky, J. E. (1976-1977). Reading as problem solving: An investigation of strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 12, 654-674.
Olson, G. M., Duffy, S. A., & Mack, R. L. (1984). In D. E. Kieras & M. A. Just (Eds.), New methods in reading comprehension research (pp. 253-286). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
O’Mally, J. and Chamot, A. U. (1990) Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford. R. L. (1990). Strategy Inventory for Language Learning. In Oxford, R. L. (Eds.), Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know (pp.283-300). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Oxford, R. L., Cho, Y., Leung, S., & Kim, H. J. (2004). Effect of the presence and difficulty of task on strategy use: An exploratory study. IRAL, 42, 1-47.
Padron, Y. N. & Waxman, H. C. (1988). The effect of ESL students’ perceptions of their cognitive strategies on reading achievement. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 146-150.
Peacock, M. (1999). Beliefs about language learning and their relationship to proficiency. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9, 247-265.
Pressley, M. & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, P. D., & Barr, R. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. In Farstrup, A. E. & Samuels, S. J. (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Rosenblatt, L. (1969). Towards a transactional theory of reading. Journal of Reading Behavior, 31-49.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1994). The transactional theory of reading and writing, In Ruddell, R.B., M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp.1057-1092). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Sakui, K. & Gaies, S. J. (1999). Investigating Japanese learners’ beliefs about language learning. System, 27, 473-492.
Samuels, S. J. (1994). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading, revisited. In Ruddell, R.B., M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Sarig, G. (1987). High-level reading in the first and in the foreign language: Some comparative process data. In Devine, J. et al. (Eds.), pp.105-20
Schommer, M. A. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498-504.
Schommer, M. A. (1994). An emerging conceptualization of epistemological beliefs and their role. In Garner, R. & Alexander, P. A. (Eds.), Beliefs about text and instruction with text. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schraw, G. & Bruning, R. (1996). Readers implicit models of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 190-305.
Schraw, G. & Bruning, R. (1999). How implicit models of reading affect motivation to read and reading engagement. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3:3, 281-302.
Schumann, J. H. (1998). The neurology of affect in learning. Blackwell, Oxford.
Sheorey, R. & Mokhtari, K. (2001) Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, 431-449.
Squire, J. R. (1994). Research in reader response, naturally interdisciplinary. In Ruddell, R.B., M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp.637-652). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Stanovich, K. (1980). Toward an interactive-compensatory model of individual differences in the development of reading fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 32-71.
Stevenson, M., Schoonen, R., & de Glopper, K. (2007). Inhibition or comprehension? a multidimensional comparison of reading processes in Dutch and English. Language Learning, 57, 115-154.
Tang, H. (1997). The relationship between reading comprehension processes in L1 and L2. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 18, 249-301.
Urquhart, S., & C. Weir (1998). Reading in a second language: Process, product, and practice. Harlow, England:Longman.
van Gelderen, A. Schoonen, R., de Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Simis, A., Snellings, P., & Stevenson, M. (2004). Linguistic knowledge, processing speed and metacognitive knowledge in first- and second-language reading comprehension: a componential analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96: 1, 19-30.
Wade, S. E., Tompson, A. & Watkins, W. (1994). The role of belief systems in authors and readers’ construction of text. In Garner, R. & Alexander, P. A. (Eds.), Beliefs about text and instruction with text. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wenden, A. (1987). How to be a successful language learner: insights and prescriptions from L2 learners. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.). Learner strategies in language learning (pp.103-118). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Yamashita, J. (2004). Reading attitudes in L1 and L2, and their influence on L2 extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 16:1, Retrieved September 20, 2007, from http://nflrc.hawaii.edu.rfl
Yamashita, J. (2007). The relationship of reading attitudes between L1 and L2: An investigation of adult EFL learners in Japan. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 81-105.
Yang, N. D. (1999). The relationship between EFL learners’ beliefs and learning strategy use. System, 27, 515-535
Yang, G., (2004). The relationships between readers’ beliefs and reading strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25, 3-17.