本研究採用行動研究法記錄研究者應用執行功能訓練策略在國小英語課程的歷程、困難與因應措施。研究者以國小四年級28名學生做為教學介入對象，比較其在執行功能與英語成就表現的變化。並以訪談、觀察、記錄、省思的方式，對行動研究過程的困難與因應之道進行探討。

在研究探索期，研究者發現學生英語基本能力低落，因此引發一系列為提升學生英語能力的措施。研究者先了解原有的校園運作文化，並與導師建立合作模式。而後，以書面資料與家長溝通，建立互信的基礎。

在行動方案規劃期，研究者認為學生自發的自主學習才是穩固其學習表現的基石。因此擬訂了「執行功能訓練策略的班級經營措施」，將執行功能訓練策略融入英語教學的班級經營中。

在研究介入期，研究者因學生學習過程中的回饋與反應而對原有的教學信念產生衝擊。包括對於課堂學習應著重在營造「快樂學習」的氣氛或學生「基本能力提升」的訓練。在評量目的上，應簡化評量難度而著重在「給予學生成功的學習經驗」或進行「具鑑別力的評量標準」提供親、師、生對於學習過程的評鑑。在學生的學習經驗上，應給予學生適度的「學習壓力」或零壓力的「學習樂趣」。

在研究評鑑期，研究者審視研究介入的資料，整理研究者在過程的改變與成長。而後，分析學生在執行功能表現與英語學習表現的變化，做為研究者評鑑教學內容的依據。

研究者在此歷程中，了解英語是學生學習重要的「一部分」。在訓練過程中應建立學生學習的方法與自主學習的習慣，並且適時給學生學習樂趣，依此提高學生的學習表現。同時，研究者也因此更懂得以科學的方法向別人說明自己的教學內容，也更了解行動研究的價值與影響。

學生在執行功能表現上， 雖然「青少年執行功能量表」的自評量化分數上，除了「啟始」向度外，其餘向度前後差異皆未達統計顯著。但由質性資料分析，學生主動積極性的行為有顯著地改變，平日學習能表現許多主動完成的行為。而組織能力是學生最先被培養訓練的能力，學生在上課進行中能習慣摘要上課重點、學會組織課堂重點的做筆記方法。而規劃能力訓練是學生的新奇體驗，學生從中習得做計劃的方法；並且學生學會冷靜處理衝突的技能，能自己主動地和平解決衝突問題。學生同時經驗了如何做計劃與完成計畫的活動；彈性地在不同的教學主題中轉換；保持良好的教室常規、抑制其衝動發言的行為；參與了解別人與自己特點的活動，也培養了檢查的技能。

學生在英語學習表現上，雖然剛開始學生因為沒有預期英語課程訓練作業與先前學習經驗不同，同時教師移除或減少環境的支持措施與提醒協助。因此，學生的英語成績表現呈現一度先持平或些微落後，而後又大步進步的趨勢。而組間表現分析，高、中能力組學生亦呈現與此整體表現相同的趨勢，低能力組學生則因補救教學、合作學習的支持而呈現緩步進步的趨勢。不僅在量化資料中顯示，高、中、低組學生皆能在此訓練中獲益。由家長與導師的反應中，亦表示學生英語學習的自主性提升。研究者課堂觀察也認為學生展現了自主負責的學習態度並且班級中產生了互助合作的學習氣氛。

In this study, action research is employed to document the processes, difficulties, and adaptive measures taken by researchers during the application of executive function training strategies for elementary school English courses. The researcher examines 28 students in the fourth grade of elementary school as targets of teaching intervention. Changes in executive function and English achievements are compared. Interviews, observations, records, and introspections are employed to examine the difficulties in the action research process and approaches by which to respond to these difficulties.

During the exploration stage of this research, the researcher observed that the students’ basic English abilities were low or declining. A series of measures were subsequently developed to enhance the English abilities of the students. First, the researcher acquired an understanding of the existing campus operational culture and then established a cooperation model with the class teacher. Afterward, written information was employed to communicate with students’ parents and establish a foundation of mutual trust.

During the planning stage for the action plan, the researcher asserted that the students’ spontaneous and autonomous learning was the foundation for stabilizing learning performances. Therefore, the “Class management measures for executive function training strategies” were formulated. This included the incorporation of executive function training strategies into the class management of English instruction.

During the intervention stage of this research, because of student feedback and responses during the learning process, the researcher’s originally held educational beliefs were influenced. This included whether classroom learning should focus on developing a “happy learning” atmosphere or training students for “enhancing basic abilities.” Regarding evaluation goals, whether the difficulty level of the evaluations should be simplified and emphasis placed on “providing students with successful learning experiences,” or “evaluation standards with discrimination power” should be conducted to provide assessments for parents, teachers, and students was contemplated. Regarding the learning experience of students, questions regarding whether appropriate “learning pressure” should be applied to the students or a zero-pressure “learning for fun” atmosphere should be developed were also addressed.

During the assessment stage of this research, the researcher reviewed the data from the research intervention. The change and growth of the researcher during the process was organized. Afterward, the developments of students’ executive function and English study performances were analyzed to form a basis for evaluating teaching content.

During this process, the researcher observed that English is a crucial element of students’ learning. During the training process, the learning methods and autonomous learning habits of students should be established. Fun during learning should also be provided to students at appropriate times to enhance their learning performance. At the same time, the researcher also became more capable of scientifically explaining personal teaching and instruction content to others, and has acquired a greater understanding of the value and influence of action research.

Regarding the executive function performance of students, although the quantified scores from the self-evaluated “Youth Executive Function Scale” show no statistically significant differences in all dimensions except “initiation” before and after the study, qualitative data analysis shows that the proactive behavior of students demonstrates significant change. Daily learning displays many actively or independently completed behaviors. The organizing ability of students was the first to be trained and cultivated. While attending classes, students could develop habits of summarizing the key points of each class and learned note-taking methods that organized key points. Training regarding planning ability was a novel experience for the students. The students were instructed on and learned methods for developing plans and they also learned skills for calmly resolving conflicts. They are able to actively and peacefully resolve conflict issues independently. The students also experienced activities on developing and completing plans; they flexibly changed between various education topics, maintained classroom order and norms, refrained from impulsive speaking behavior, joined activities for understanding the unique characteristics of others and themselves, and developed skills for inspection and examination.

Regarding students’ English learning performance, in the beginning of the study, students did not expect that the training in their English courses would be different from their previous learning experiences, and the teacher removed or reduced environmental support measures and reminder aid. Therefore, the students’ English achievement scores showed a steady or slightly decreasing trend before improving significantly. The performance analysis of different groups shows that the students in the high and medium ability groups exhibit a trend that is identical to the overall performance. The low ability group students progressed slowly because of the support from remedial teaching and cooperative learning. Not only does the quantified data show that students in high, middle, and low ability groups all benefited from this training, feedback from parents and class teachers also shows an increase in the autonomy of English learning for students. The classroom observations of the researcher show that the students demonstrated independent or autonomous and responsible learning attitudes, and generated a cooperative and helpful learning atmosphere in the class.

一、中文部分
文世豪（2009）。以英語流行歌曲提升國小六年級學生英語學習成效與學習態度之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台北教育大學，台北市。
王亭力（2007）。注意力缺陷過動症之認知行為親子治療團體成效：執行功能之分析（未出版之碩士論文）。高雄醫學大學，高雄市。
田宜純（2009）。以班級經營強化內在學習動機之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立東華大學，花蓮市。
石素錦(2003) 國小英語教學師生言談互動模式之探討。高雄師大學報，15(2)，419-446。
行政院教育改革審議委員會（1996）教育改革總諮議報告書。取自http://192.192.169.230/cgi-bin/edu_project/d_display?home=index&path=/ap/edu_project/toc&sysid=000000833&qval=%B3%F8%A7i%AE%D1&phonetic=0&fuzzy=0&pass
朱文雄（1991）。國小班級經營（台灣省國民教育輔導叢書）。台灣省政府教育廳編印。
朱惠美（2002）。國小學生快樂學英語，該學些什麼？國教新知，49(1)，1-7。
吳明清（2004）。小學英語教育問題。台灣教育，629，45-48。
吳明隆（2000）。班級經營與教學新趨勢。五南：台北市。
李竹芳（2009）。高功能泛自閉症學童執行功能與侷限重複症狀之初探（未出版之碩士論文）。中原大學，桃園縣。
李宏鎰（1994）。大腦的執行功能。特殊教育季刊，90，1-7。
李金玲（2004）。分組方式在技專校院合作學習外語教學成效之研究（未出版之博士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
李漢文（2003）。台東縣九年一貫課程英語科教學實施現況與意見調查之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台東師範學院，台東縣。
卓鈺佩（2009）。以英語童謠及戲劇活動進行國小英語補救教學之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台北教育大學，台北市。
林于雯（2003）。屏東縣國民小學英語教學實施現況及其遭遇問題之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院，屏東縣。
林弘彬（2009）。比較執行功能缺損與無缺損之物質使用者在衝動測驗之表現（未出版之碩士論文）。長庚大學，桃園縣。
林生傳（2003）。教育研究法：全方位的統整與分析。台北：心理。
林政逸（2005）。國民小學英語教育政策執行現況與相關問題之研究。國民教育研究集刊，14，155-172。
林蕙蓉（1998）兒童英語聽力技巧教學。語言教育通訊，16，61-76。
施玉惠、朱惠美（1999）。國小英語課程之精神與特色。教育研究資訊，7(2)，1-5。
施玉惠、張中天、陳淑嬌、朱惠美、陳純音、葉錫南(1999)國民中小學英語教學及評量模式研究。教育部委託專題研究計畫成果報告，未出版。
施穆穆（2008）。運用英語圖畫書於國小低年級之英語閱讀教學設計(未出版之碩士論文)。淡江大學，台北市。
范姜怡君（2006）。任務型導向對台灣國小英語學習成效之探討(未出版之碩士論文)。元智大學，桃園縣。
韋金龍(1999)。國小英語可能面臨的難題與對策。英語教學雜誌，24(1)，86-92。
倪子洛（2011）。早期發展正常之極低出生體重早產兒於學齡前執行功能之受損研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立成功大學，台南市。
夏林清譯（2006）。行動研究方法導論：教師動手做研究。臺北市：遠流。
徐智瑩（2006）。運用多媒體遊戲提升兒童英語認字、拼字能力與學習態度之研究-以桃園縣某國小為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台北教育大學，台北市。
教育部（2003）。國民中小學英語教學手冊。台北市：作者。
教育部（2008）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要語文學習領域（英語）。台北市：作者。
莊琇惠（2008）。機構中老男性患有腦血管疾病危險因子合併重鬱症者之執行功能障礙（未出版之碩士論文）。國立成功大學，台南市。
許民憲（2008）。第一型與第二型雙極症患者的語言記憶與執行功能表現差異（未出版之碩士論文）。國立成功大學，台南市。
許嘉芬（2007）。注意力缺失/過動成人患者衝動選擇行為與執行功能之探討：一量化行為分析研究（未出版之碩士論文）。長庚大學，桃園縣。
郭千惠（2012）。美國「帶起每個孩子法案」之教育績效評估制度及其啟示。教育行政雙月刊，77，63-87。
郭明德(2001)。班級經營：理論、實務、策略與研究。台北市：五南。
陳心怡、陳美芳、胡心慈、李俊仁（2012）。執行運作功能提升方案對縮小學業成就變異性之成效探討。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究第一年期中成果報告(編號：NSC100-2628-H-003-011-
My2)，未出版。
陳向明（2002）。教師如何做質的研究。台北市：洪葉文化。
陳孟筳（2010）。學齡期高功能自閉症與亞斯伯格症孩童執行功能之訓練成效（未出版之碩士論文）。國立成功大學，台南市。
陳東家（2011）。以眼動儀探討大學生之不同亞型注意力缺失/過動疾患傾向與執行功能的關連性（未出版之碩士論文）。輔仁大學，新北市。
陳俊佑（2000）。台北市實施國小英語教學之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立政治大學，台北市。
陳彩堉（2010）。慢性精神分裂病患者之執行功能與日常生活功能的關聯研究（未出版之碩士論文）。高雄醫學大學，高雄市。
陳靖（2011）。阿茲海默型失智症患者執行注意功能缺損對生活執行功能表現之影響（未出版之碩士論文）。國立成功大學，台南市。
單延愷、陳映雪、蘇東平（2004）。兒童與青少年注意力、記憶與執行功能之發展性常模。臨床心理學刊，1（1），21-29。
曾也真（2009）。國民小學初任教師班級經營困擾與因應策略之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。臺北市立教育大學，臺北市。
黃光雄主譯(2001)。質性教育研究：理論與方法。濤石，台北市。
黃亦通（2008）。美國中小學學習表現之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立暨南國際大學，南投縣。
黃美容（2006）。朗讀練習對國小學童英語發音、單字認讀能力與英語學習態度之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台北教育大學，台北市。
黃瑾瑜（2002）。國民小學英語教學實施現況及意見之調查研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台南師範學院，台南市。
葉在庭（2007）。正常老年人在心智理論、執行功能與社會智力關係的探討（未出版之碩士論文）。臺灣大學，台北市。
廖淵豪（2007）。國民小學班級經營效能指標之建構(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺東大學，台東縣。
劉怡伶（2007）。探討國小英語教師使用繪本教學之信念與課堂應用(未出版之碩士論文)。靜宜大學，台中市。
劉慶仁（2002）。從「不讓孩子落後法」看美國中小學教育改革。教師天地，121，76-88。
潘世尊（2005）。教育行動研究：理論、實踐與反省。臺北市：心理。
蔡清田（2000）。教育行動研究。臺北市：五南。
蔡清田（2004）。行動研究。在黃光雄編著，教育研究法：規劃與評鑑（頁798-836）。台北市：美商麥格羅‧希爾。
蔣貴枝（2000）。國小英語課程與教學之個案研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台中師範學院，台中市。
鄭增財（2006）。行動研究原理與實務。臺北市：五南。
戴維揚（2002）。國小英語課程的沿革與展望。中等教育，53(2)，32-51。
謝一謙（2002）。國民小學英語教學實施現況及其遭遇問題之研究－以台中市為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台中師範學院，台中市。
謝淑娟（2001）。桃園縣國民小學英語教學實施現況之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹師範學院，新竹縣。
羅琪季（2007）。國小高年級學童參加校外英語補習及其校內英語學習態度之研究—以台北縣雙和區為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台北教育大學，台北市。
蘇宗偉（2007）。精神分裂症患者之自殺行為與執行功能反應抑制缺失（未出版之碩士論文）。臺灣大學，台北市。
二、英文部分
Adelman, C. (1993) Kurt Lewin and the origins of action research.　Education Action Research, 1(1),7-24
Akin-Little, K. A., Little, S. G., & Laniti, M. (2007).Teachers’ use of classroom management procedures in the United States and Greece: Across-cultural comparison. School Psychology International, 28, 53-62.
Bibok, M. B., Carpendale, J. I. M., & Müller, U. (2009). Parental scaffolding and the development of executive function. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2009(123), 17-34.
Carlson, S. M. (2009). Social origins of executive function development. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2009(123), 87-98.
Channon, S., Pratt, P., & Robertson, M. M. (2003). Executive function, memory, and learning in Tourette's syndrome. Neuropsychology, 17(2), 247-254.
Chelune, G. J., & Baer, R. A. (1986). Developmental norms for the wisconsin card sorting test. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 8(3), 219-228.
Cox, A. J.(2007).No mind left behind. NY: Penguin Group.
Denckla, M. B. (2007). Executive Function: Binding Together the Definitions of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Learning Disabilities. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive Function in Education: from Theory to Practice (pp. 5-17). New York: The Guilford Press.
DePrince, A. P., Weinzierl, K. M., & Combs, M. D. (2009). Executive function performance and trauma exposure in a community sample of children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 33(6), 353-361.
Emmer, E. T. & Stough, L. M. (2001) Classroom management: a critical part of educational psychology. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 103-112
Evertson, C. M.,Emmer, E. T., Sonford, J. P., Clements, B. S. (1983) Improving classroom management: an experiment in elementary school classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 84(2), 172-188.
Feldman, A. (2007). Validity and quality in action research. Educational Action Research, 15(1), 21-32.
Fischer, K. W., & Daley, S. G. (2007). Connecting Cognitive Science and Neuroscience to Education. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive Function in Education: from Theory to Practice (pp. 55-75). New York: The Guilford Press.
Galda, L., Cullinan, B. E. & Strickland, D. S.(1997)Language, Literacy and the Child. Harcourt brace College Publishers.
Gan, Zhengdong(2003).Self-directed language learning among university EFL students in mainland China and Hong Kong : a study of attitudes, strategies and motivation. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong(China)
Garon, N., Bryson, S. E., & Smith, I. M.(2008) Executive function in preschoolers: a review using an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 31-60
Gaskins, I. W., & Pressley, M. (2007). Teaching Metacognitive Strategies That Address Executive Function Processes within a Schoolwide Curriculum. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Excutive Function in Education: from Theory to Practice (pp. 261-285). New York: The Guilford Press.
Gordon, L. M. (2001, Fall) High teacher efficacy as a marker of teacher effectiveness in the domain of classroom management. Paper presented at the annual convention of California Council on Teacher Education Fall 2001 Conference, San Diego, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED465731)
Gioia, G. A.; Isquith, P. K.; Guy, S. C.; Kenworthy, L.(2000) TEST REVIEW Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function. Child Neuropsychology.6(3), p235-238.
Heikkinen, H. L. T., Huttunen, R., & Syrjälä, L. (2007). Action research as narrative: five principles for validation. Educational Action Research, 15(1), 5-19.
Hughes, C. H., & Ensor, R. A. (2009). How do families help or hinder the emergence of early executive function? New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2009(123), 35-50.
Hughes, C., & Ensor, R. (2008). Does Executive Function Matter for Preschoolers’ Problem Behaviors? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36(1), 1-14.
Hughes, D. M., Turkstra, L. S., & Wulfeck, B. B. (2009)Parent and self-ratings of executive function in adolescents with specific language impairment. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. 44(6),901-16.
Humphrey J. H., & Humphrey J. H. (1985). Controlling Stress in Children. Charles C. Illinois: Thomas, Publisher, Springfield.
Johansen A., Little, S. G. & Akin-Little, A.(2011). An examination of New Zealand teachers’ attributions and perceptions of behavior, classroom management, and the level of formal teacher training received in behavior management.Kairaranga,12(2),3-10
Jenks, K. M., De Moor, J., & Van Lieshout, E. C. D. M. (2009). Arithmetic difficulties in children with cerebral palsy are related to executive function and working memory. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50(7), 824-833.
Jacobs, J., Lanza, S., Osgood, D. W., Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (2002) Changes in children’s self-competence and values: Gender and domain differences across grades one through twelve. Child Development, 73, 509-527.
Kemmis, S.(2010) What is to be done? The place of action research. Educational Action Research, 18(4),417-427
Lewis, C., & Carpendale, J. I. M. (2009). Introduction: Links between social interaction and executive function. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2009(123), 1-15.
Lezak, M. D.(1995)Neuropsychological Assessment, 3rd. New York, Oxford University Press. 602-649
Meltzer, L. (2007). Executive Function Difficulties in Different Diagnostic Groups: Challenges of Identification and Treatment. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive Function in Education: from Theory to Practice (pp. 73-75). New York: The Guilford Press.
Meltzer, L., Pollica, L. S., & Barzillai, M. (2007). Executive Function in the Classroom: Embedding Strategy Instruction into Daily Teaching Practices. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive Function in Education: from Theory to Practice (pp. 165-193). New York: The Guilford Press.
Moran, S., & Gardner, H. (2007). "Hill, Skill, and Will": Executive Function from a Multiple-Intelligences Perspective. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive Function in Education: from Theory to Practice (pp. 19-38). New York: The Gilford Press.
Morley, J. (1991) The pronunciation component in teaching English to speakers of other languages. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 481-520
Nasey, C.(2012)Teachers’ use of classroom-based management strategies: a survey on New Zealand teachers.(Unpublished master’s thesis)Massey University, Albany(New Zealand)
O'Brien, R. (2001). An Overview of the Methodological Approach of Action Research. In Roberto Richardson (Ed.), Theory and Practice of Action Research. Available: http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html (Accessed 2012/01/02)
Razza, R. A., & Blair, C. (2009). Associations among false-belief understanding, executive function, and social competence: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 332-343.
Reynolds, C. R., & Horton Jr., (2008). Assessing executive functions: a life-span perspective. Psychology in the Schools, 45(9), 875-886.
Rubin, J. (1981). Study of cognitive processes in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 118-131.
Roditi, B. N., & Steinberg, J. (2007). The Strategic Math Classroom. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive Function in Education: from Theory to Practice (pp. 237-259). New York: The Guilford Press.
Rose, D., & Rose, K. (2007). Deficits in Executive Function Process. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive Function in Education: from Theory to Practice (pp. 287-307). New York: The Guilford Press.
Rosselli, M., & Ardila, A. (1993). Developmental norms for the Wisconsin card sorting test in 5-to 12-year-old children. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 7(2), 145-154.
Salimpoor, V. N., & Desrocher, M. (2006). Increasing the utility of EF assessment of executive function in children. Developmental Disabilities Bulletin, 34(1/2), 15-42.
Teng, Kuei-Hsun(2005). Perceptions of Taiwanese students to English learning as functions of self-efficacy, motivation, learning activities and self-directed learning. Unpublished doctor’s thesis. University of Idaho, Moscow.
Welsh, M. C., & Pennington, B. F. (1988). Assessing frontal lobe functioning in children: Views from developmental psychology. Developmental Neuropsychology, 4(3), 199-230.
Wilson, K. R., Donders, J. , Nguyen, L. (2011) Self and parent ratings of executive functioning after adolescent traumatic brain injury. Rehabilitation Psychology, 56(2), 100-106.
Zelazo, P. D., Carter, A., Reznick, J. S., & Frye, D. (1997). Early Development of Executive Function: A Problem-solving Framework. Review of General Psychology, 1(2), 198-226.