現今電子書廣泛運用於教育領域。語言教師試圖使用電子書來提升學習者的閱讀理解能力，是由於電子書配有朗讀功能、動畫、聲音、音樂、多媒體效果等。另一方面，有研究指出閱讀電子書會使讀者感到眼睛疲憊、易於分心、閱讀疲乏。為了要幫助學習者閱讀電子書，本研究試圖探究運用圖像組織來提升學習者的後設認知策略及自主學習能力於電子書閱讀。
八十七位大學二年級學生被分配到自製圖像組織組，八十三位大學二年級學生被分配到教師自製圖像組織組。兩組學生完成後設認知問卷與自主學習問卷後，接受為期四週的後設認知策略訓練及製作圖像組織訓練。接著，自製圖像組織組需讀完電子書後再自製屬於自己的圖像組織，並持續十週。教師自製圖像組織組的學生被要求閱讀電子書後，下載教師設計的圖像組織學習單並完成該學習單的空格部分。兩組學生皆須將完成後的圖像組織帶至課堂上，並與組員分享自身的後設認知策略使用與分享該電子書的故事內容。在學期末時，兩組學生完成了十個圖像組織後，並再填寫後設認知問卷與自主學習問卷。
本研究主要發現如下：第一，自製圖像組織組的學生在後設認知策略使用、自主學習信念、自主學習行為，比教師自製圖像組織組的學生有較明顯的顯著差異。第二， 成對樣本t檢定顯示自製圖像組織組的學生在後設認知策略使用及自主行為上有顯著差異。第三，雖然教師自製圖像組織無法直接地幫助學生提升後設認知策略使用，但卻可以有效提升學習者在語言學習的自主行為。
根據上述結果，本研究建議教師可以運用後設認知策略訓練，提升學習者的閱讀能力於電子書閱讀。再者，教師可以讓學生自製圖像組織來提升後設認知意識。最後，教師自製圖像組織可被用來幫助初階學習者了解該讀本內容的因果關係，也能協助初階學習者運用瀏覽的閱讀策略。

Today, electronic books (e-books) are widely implemented in educational context. Language teachers intend to use e-books to enhance language learners’ reading comprehension because of its features of read-aloud function, animation, sound, music video, multimedia effect, and so on. However, previous studies indicated the weakness of reading e-book such as tired eyes, distractions, and lengthy information. In order to help learners read e-books, this study attempted to investigate the effect of graphic organizers on enhancing learners’ metacognitive strategies use and learner autonomy in an e-book reading environment.
Eighty-seven sophomores coming from two classes were assigned to the self-generated organizer group and eighty-three were assigned to the ready-made organizer group. Both groups were asked to respond to the questionnaires of metacognitive strategy use and learner autonomy. Metacognitive strategy and graphic organizer instruction were given to self-generated and ready-made organizer groups for 4 weeks. Then, the self-generated organizer group was asked to create their own graphic organizers after reading each e-book. The Ready-made organizer group was required to read an e-book, download ready-made organizer, and fill in the information. Both groups were asked to bring their organizers weekly, discuss their metacognitive strategy use, and share the e-book reading content. In the end of the semester, both groups finishing at least ten graphic organizers were asked to complete the questionnaires of metacognitive strategy use and learner autonomy.
The major findings were presented as follows. First, the learners who studied e-book accompanied by a self-generated organizer significantly outperformed the ready-made organizer group on the metacognitive reading strategies use, autonomous beliefs, and autonomous behavior. Second, the results of the paired-sample t-test revealed significant differences regarding the self-generated organizer group’s autonomous behaviors and metacognitive strategies on e-book reading after using self-generated organizer. Third, the ready-made organizer cannot help the learners improve metacognitive reading strategies directly, but it can significantly promote the learners’ autonomous behaviors.
Based on the major findings, it is suggested that the training in metacognitive strategy instruction can enhance the learners’ reading comprehension in an e-book reading environment. Furthermore, the EFL instructors can use self-generated organizers to enhance the learners’ use of metacognitive strategy. Additionally, ready-made organizer can help the learners with lower language proficiency understand the relationships of each construct and employ the strategy of scanning.

Aghaie, R., & Zhang, L. J. (2012). Effects of explicit instruction in cognitive and metacognitive reading strategies on Iranian EFL students’ reading performance and strategy transfer. Instructional Science, 40(6), 1063-1081.
Al-Hinnawi, A. N. (2012). The Effect of the Graphic Organizer Strategy on University Students' English Vocabulary Building. English Language Teaching, 5(12), 62-69.
Al-Seghayer, K. (2016). Factors that Facilitate or Hinder the Use of Computer-Assisted Reading in the L2 Reading Classroom. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 16(2), 64-80.
Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Anderson, N. J. (2003). Metacognitive reading strategies increase L2 performance. The Language Teacher, 27, 20-22.
Arnold, N. (2009). Online extensive reading for advanced foreign language learners: An evaluation study. Foreign Language Annals, 42(2), 340-366.
Ashby, J., & Rayner, K. (2006). Literacy development: Insights from research on skilled reading. In D. Dickinson & S. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (Vol. 2, pp.52-63). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in learning and retention of meaningful material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 267-272.
Benson, P. (1997). ‘The Philosophy and politics of learner autonomy’. In P. Benson and P. Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning.
London, UK: Longman, pp.18-34.
Barron, R. F. (1969). The use of vocabulary as an advance organizer. In H. L. Herber, & P. L. Sanders (Eds.), Research in reading in the content areas: First year report (pp.29-39). New York, NY: Syracuse University, Reading and Language Arts Center.
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and Researching Autonomy in Language Learning. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and Researching Autonomy in Language Learning (2nd Edition). London, UK: Longman.
Blin, F. (2004). CALL and the development of learner autonomy: Towards an activity- theoretical perspective. ReCALL, 16(2), 377-395.
Bonnett, M., & Cuypers, S. (2003). Autonomy and authenticity in education. In N. Blake, P. Smeyers, R. Smith, & P. Standish (Eds.), The blackwell guide to the philosophy of education (pp. 326-340). Oxford, UK.: Blackwell.
Boyle, J. R., & Weishaar, M. (1997). The effects of expert-generated versus students-generated cognitive organizers on the reading comprehension of students with mild disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 12, 228-235.
Breznitz, Z. (2006). Fluency in reading. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cañas, A. J., Reiska, P., & Möllits, A. (2017). Developing higher-order thinking skills with concept mapping: A case of pedagogic frailty. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 9(3), 348.
Cao, Y. (2012). A study of metacognitive strategies in web-based English autonomous learning. IPEDR, 37, 66-69.
Chan, S. (1999). The Chinese learner-a question of style. Education and Traning, 41(6/7), 294-304.
Chang, L. Y. H. (2007). The influences of group processes on learners’ autonomous beliefs and behaviors. System, 35(3), 322-337.
Chang, M. M., & Lin, M. C. (2014). The effect of reflective learning e-journals on reading comprehension and communication in language learning. Computers & Education, 71, 124-132.
Cheng, J.H. (2015). A Study of Impact of eBook-Integrated English Teaching in a Junior High Class on Students’ Academic Achievement and Learning Motivation. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung.
Chiu, C. H., Huang, C. C., & Chang, W. T. (2000). The evaluation and influence of interaction in network supported collaborative concept mapping. Computers and Education, 34(1), 17-25.
Chou, M. H. (2013). Strategy use for reading English for general and specific academic purposes in testing and nontesting contexts. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(2), 175-197.
Chou, I. C. (2016). Reading for the purpose of responding to literature: EFL students’ perceptions of e-books. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(1), 1-20.
Chu, H. (2003). Electronic books: Viewpoints from users and potential users. Library Hi Tech, 21, 340-346.
Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. New York: Teachers College Record.
Colliot, T., & Jamet, É. (2018). Does self-generating a graphic organizer while reading improve students' learning? Computers & Education, 126, 13-22.
Cubukcu, F. (2008). How to enhance reading comprehension through metacognitive strategies. Journal of International Social Research, 1(2), 83-93.
Dabarera, C., Renandya, W. A., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). The impact of metacognitive scaffolding and monitoring on reading comprehension. System, 42, 462-473.
Darch, C., & Carnine, D. (1986). Teaching content area material to learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 53 (3), 240-246.
Davis, J. N., & Lyman‐Hager, M. A. (1997). Computers and L2 Reading: Student Performance, Student Attitudes 1. Foreign Language Annals, 30(1), 58-72.
Evans, C., & Gibbons, N. J. (2007). The interactivity effect in multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1147-1160.
Fisher, R. (2008). Dialogic teaching: developing thinking and metacognition through philosophical discussion-developing speaking and listening with young children. In R. Evans, & D. Jones (Eds.), Metacognitive approaches to developing oracy (pp.47-63). New York, NY: Routledge.
Fisher, W.P. Jr. (2007). Research Scale Instrument Quality Criteria. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 21(1), 1095.
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Gerdeman, J. L., Lux, K., & Jacko, J. (2013). Using concept mapping to build clinical judgment skills. Nurse Education in Practice, 13(1), 11-17.
Gilakjani, A. P., Sabouri, N. B., & Zabihniaemran, A. (2015). What Are the Barriers in the Use of Computer Technology in EFL Instruction? Review of European studies, 7(11), 213.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Griffiths, C. (2013). The strategy factor in successful language learning. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Grimshaw, S., Dungworth, N., McKnight, C., & Morris, A. (2007). Electronic books: Children’s reading and comprehension. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 583-599.
Guthrie, J. T. (2002). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M.L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 137-154). New York, NY: Longman.
Gyri-Rozenblit, S. (1989). Effects of a tree diagram on students’ comprehension of main ideas in an expository text with multiple themes. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 236-247.
Healey, J. (2007). Theory and research: Autonomy and language learning. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, practice, and critical issues (p.377-p.388).IL: TESOL, Inc.
Hilbert, T. S., & Renkl, A. (2008). Concept mapping as a follow-up strategy to learning from texts: What characterizes good and poor mappers? Instructional Science, 36(1), 53-73.
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy in Foreign Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
Huang, H. C. (2013). E-reading and e-discussion: EFL learners' perceptions of an e-book reading program. Computer assisted language learning, 26(3), 258-281.
Huang, H. C., Chern, C. L., & Lin, C. C. (2009). EFL learners’ use of online reading strategies and comprehension of texts: An exploratory study. Computers & Education, 52(1), 13-26.
Huang, H. S., Chiou, C. C., Chiang, H. K., Lai, S. H., Huang, C. Y., & Chou, Y. Y. (2012). Effects of multidimensional concept maps on fourth graders’ learning in web-based computer course. Computers & Education, 58(3), 863-873.
Ihmeideh, F. M. (2014). The effect of electronic books on enhancing emergent literacy skills of pre-school children. Computers & Education, 79, 40-48.
Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2007). Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a foreign language, 19(1), 34-55.
Karbalaei, A. (2010). A comparison of the metacognitive reading strategies used by EFL and ESL readers. The Reading Matrix, 10(2), 165-180.
Kelley, M., & Clausen-Grace, N. (2013). Comprehension shouldn’t be silent. Newark: International Reading Association. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com.ezproxyl. lib.asu.edu
Khezrlou, S., Ellis, R., & Sadeghi, K. (2017). Effects of computer-assisted glosses on EFL learners' vocabulary acquisition and reading comprehension in three learning conditions. System, 65, 104-116.
Lai, C., & Gu, M. (2011). Self-regulated out-of-class language learning with technology. Computer assisted language learning, 24(4), 317-335.
Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65-99.
Larson, L.C. (2008). Electronic reading workshop: Beyond books with new literacies and instructional technologies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52, 121– 131.
Lin, C.-C., & Lin, I. Y.-j. (2009). “E-book flood” for changing EFL learners’ reading attitudes. In S. c. Kong, H. Ogata, H.C. Arnseth, C.K.K. Chan, T. Hirashima, F. Klett, J.H.M. Lee, C.C. Liu, C.K. Looi, M. Milrad, A Mitrovic, K. Nakabayashi, S.L. Wong, & S.J.H. Yang (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computers in Education [CDROM] (pp.769-779). Hong Kong,
China: Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.
Little, D. (1990). Autonomy in language learning. Teaching modern languages, 81-87.
Little, D. (1991). Learner Autonomy 1: Definitions, Issues and Problems. Dublin, Ireland: Authentik.
Little, D. (1997). Language awareness and the autonomous language learner’, Language Awareness, 6 (2/3): 93-104.
Little, D. (2000). Learner autonomy: Why foreign languages should occupy a central role in the curriculum. In S. Green (Ed.), New perspectives on teaching and learning modern languages. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Littlejohn, A. (1983). Increasing learner involvement in course management, TESOL Quarterly, 17 (4), 595-608.
Liu, H., & Qi, W. (2017). Establishing Learner Autonomy in China’s Universities through Achievement Presentation. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(3), 588-593.
Liu, P. L. (2011). A study on the use of computerized concept mapping to assist ESL learners’ writing. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2548-2558.
Liu, P. L., Chen, C. J., & Chang, Y. J. (2010). Effects of a computer-assisted concept mapping learning strategy on EFL college students’ English reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 54(2), 436-445.
Liu, S. H., & Lee, G. G. (2013). Using a concept map knowledge management system to enhance the learning of Biology. Computers & Education, 68, 105-116.
Livingstone, D.W. (2006). ‘Informal learning: Conceptual distinctions and preliminary findings’. In Z. Bekerman, N.C. Burbules and D. Silberman-Keller (Eds) Learning in Places: The Informal Educational Reader (pp.203-227). New
York, NY: Peter Lang.
McCormick, M. (2006). Text comprehensibility and graphic organizers: Influences on reading to learn in sixth-grade social studies (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3235091)
Miranda, T., Johnson, K. A., & Rossi-Williams, D. (2012). E-readers: Powering up for engagement. Educational Leadership, 69 (9), 1-3.
Mnning, B.H., &Payne, B. D. (1996). Self-talk for teachers and students: metacognitive strategies for personal and classroom use. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Nguyen, L. T. C., & Gu, Y. (2013). Strategy-based instruction: A learner-focused approach to developing learner autonomy. Language Teaching Research, 17(1), 9-30.
O’Malley, J.M. and Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Oscarson, M. (1989). Self-assessment of language proficiency: Rationale and applications. Language testing, 6(1), 1-13.
Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House/ Harper & Row.
Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. (1 st ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Longman.
Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self- regulation in context. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Park, H. R., & Kim, D. (2011). Reading-strategy use by English as a second language learners in online reading tasks. Computers & Education, 57(3), 2156-2166.
Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures. New York, NY: Viking Penguin Inc.
Praveen, S. D., & Rajan, P. (2013). Using Graphic Organizers to Improve Reading Comprehension Skills for the Middle School ESL Students. English Language Teaching, 6(2), 155-170.
Prupura, J. (1997). An analysis of the relationships between test taker’s cognitive and metacognitive strategy use and second language test performance. Language Learning, 42(2), 289-325.
Rao, Z. (2006). Helping Chinese EFL students develop learner autonomy through portfolios. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 5(2), 113-122.
Rasekh, Z.E., & Ranjbary, R. (2003). Metacognitive strategy training for vocabulary learning. TESL-EJ , 7, 1-17.
Robinson, D. H., & Skinner, C. H. (1996). Why graphic organizers facilitate search processes: Fewer words or computationally efficient indexing? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 166-180.
Rule, A. C. (2006). Editorial: the components of authentic learning. Journal of Authentic Learning, 33(1),1-10.
Sanprasert, N. (2010). The application of a course management system to enhance autonomy in learning English as a foreign language. System, 38(1), 109-123.
Scanlon, D. J., Duran, G. Z., Reyes, E. I., & Gallego, M. A. (1992). Interactive semantic mapping: An interactive approach to enhancing LD students’ content area comprehension. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 7, 142-146.
Shetzer, H. & Warschauer, M. (2000). An electronic literacy approach to network-based language learning. In Warschauer, M. and Kern, R. (eds.), Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice (pp.171-185). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 171-185.
Shoari, E., & Farrokhi, F. (2014). The effects of graphic organizer strategy on improving Iranian EFL learners’ vocabulary learning. Research in English language pedagogy, 2(1), 71-82.
Spear, G.E. & Mocker, D.W. (1984). ‘The organizing circumstance: Environmental determinants in self-directed learning’, Adult Education Quarterly, 35: 1-10.
Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Metacognition, abilities, and developing expertise: what makes an expert student? In H. J. Hartman(Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: theory, research, and practice (pp.247-260). London, UK: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

The Regent of the University of Minnesota and Barbara Martinson (2004). Concept Map: Assessment Rubric. The Digital Media Center (DMC), Office of Information Technology: The University of Minnesota.
Urquhart, S., & Weir, C. (1998). Reading in a second language: Process, product and practice. New York, NY: Longman.
Tomlin, R.S. and Villa, V. (1994). ‘Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition’, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 183-203.
Warschauer, M. & Healy, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: an overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71.
Wenden, A. (1991). Learner strategies for learner autonomy: Planning and implementing learner training for language learners. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wenden, A. (1995). Learner training in context: A knowledge-based approach, System, 23 (2), 183-194.
Wenden, A. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning, Applied Linguistics, 19 (4), 515-537.
Williams, J. P., & Atkins, J. G. (2009). The role of metacognition in teaching reading comprehension to primary students. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 26-43). New York, NY: Routledge.
Wilson, N. S., & Bai, H. (2010). The relationships and impact of teachers’ metacognitive knowledge and pedagogical understandings of metacognition. Metacognition Learning, 5(3), 269-288.
Yang, Y. F. (2010). Developing a reciprocal teaching/learning system for college remedial reading instruction. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1193-1201.
Zahedi, Y., & Abdi, M. (2012). The effect of semantic mapping strategy on EFL learners’ vocabulary learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 2273-2280.