在素養導向教學浪潮下，除了基本語言能力，學生亦需培養以英語文進行邏輯思考、表達與溝通的能力。本研究欲探索在高中的英語文課中，教師如何從部定教科書課文出發進行教學設計與實踐，創造學生英語表達的機會，讓學生在課堂上學習與運用英語跨技巧（聽、說、讀、寫），並同時探知與幫助學生產生主題內容及英語語言運用上的理解。

本研究為個案研究，研究參與者為北部公立高中某位英語教師及其班上的學生，研究範圍為一個單元實施的五堂課。為了探討學生在英語課堂中的口語表達與寫作表達培養與展現，本研究在課前與教師進行教學設計的訪談，並分析其設計的講義，在課中觀察並記錄師生的課堂對話及學生在組內的對話，在課後分別與師生進行訪談，探討教師在教學實踐上的想法及學生在課堂中的學習經驗。

本研究主要發現：一、在促進學生英語溝通表達與理解的課前設計中，教師以「能溝通、能表達」作為長期目標，規劃了「能遷移、能應用」的單元學習核心理解，透過設計紙本講義並規劃同儕互動，讓學生能參考講義資訊，在對全班回應前有機會先對同儕練習，減緩犯錯的緊張。二、在搭建學生英語表達與理解的教師教學實踐中，教師以課前設計硬鷹架為基礎，視學生學習狀況及表達內容而彈性提供軟鷹架，讓學生在每個學習任務中與同儕互動、有更深入的思考。過程中，教師亦關注學生情意面向的學習，並透過認知、情意方式營造學習氣氛。藉由教師的引導，不僅課文、講義中的文本成為學生閱讀的學習素材，同儕在組內或面對全班時表達的內容，亦成為值得繼續思考、探索的語言學習要點，使其成為學生在進行說、寫等輸出前所需的輸入來源，學生在input-interaction-output的模式中彼此互相學習、支持，學生不同的想法有機會互相串聯。最後，學生方能在最終的寫作任務中展現其於學習任務中透過豐厚學習經驗而獲得的理解。

In the era of competency-based instruction, besides basic language skills, students also need to acquire the ability of logic reasoning, expressing one’s ideas and communicating in English. This research aimed to explore how a teacher, based on the textbook, designed and implemented English lesson planning, and therefore created opportunities for students to communicate in English, guided students to learn and practice English integrated skills, which involve English listening, speaking, reading, and writing. At the same time, students’ understanding of the content and language usage was explored and assisted in class.

This research is a case study, and the participants involved were one senior high school English teacher in Northern Taiwan and a majority of students in her class. This study focused on one unit, which lasted for 5 periods in total. Before the unit started, the teacher was interviewed about the lesson planning; the handouts designed by the teacher was analyzed as well. During each period, conversation between the teacher and students, conversation in students’ groups were observed and analyzed. After the unit, the teacher and several students were interviewed respectively about how they think and learn in class.

Two primary findings of this research are listed here: First, during the lesson planning phase, in order to facilitate students’ English communication and understanding, under the long-term goal, “able to communicate and express yourself,” the teacher planned a unit core understanding which students may “transfer and apply” in somewhere. Also, with the handouts in hard copy and the opportunities to interact with peers, students can learn and have less fear to make mistakes while communicating in English. Secondly, during the lesson implementation phase, based on the hard scaffolds among the learning tasks, taking students’ learning and communication into consideration, soft scaffolds were thus provided by the teacher so as to make students think deeper and interact with peers meaningfully. During the class, the teacher also paid attention to students’ affective learning, and built up the learning atmosphere in cognitive and affective way. With the teacher’s guidance, students’ comprehensible English learning input didn’t limit to textbooks and the handouts only. What’s more, some language learning points in students’ output in groups or in front of the class were emphasized and encouraged to think and explore further, which could be seen as comprehensible English learning input for further learning. Therefore, students’ learning and supports thus arose in the input-interaction-output model; students’ different ideas and opinions were connected. Finally, the understanding gained and structured by students would be able to be presented in students’ writing pieces.

壹、中文
Creswell, J. W. & Clark, V. L.（2015）。如何理解研究：使用者指南（初版）〔蘇文賢譯〕。學富。（原著出版年：2009）
Vygotsky, L. S.（1997）。社會中的心智─高層次心理過程的發展〔蔡敏玲、陳正乾譯〕。心理。（原著出版年：1978）
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J.（2008）。重理解的課程設計〔賴麗針譯〕。心理。（原著出版年：2005）
Yin, R. K.（2009）。個案研究——設計與方法（初版）〔周海濤等譯〕。五南。（原著出版年：2003）
王志賓（2014）。應用讀者劇場提昇高中學生英語口語流暢度與閱讀能力之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學。
宋明佳（2014）。融入溝通式語言教學法(CLT):對於高中生英語表達能力之影響（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺北科技大學。
唐淑華（2018）。青少年閱讀素養之培育：談不同學科領域的文本引導。學富。
高聖婷（2003）。大班級小組討論對提昇英語閱讀理解能力成效之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。淡江大學。
陳向明（2002）。社會科學質的研究（初版）。五南。
教育部（2018）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要 國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校 語文領域——英語文。
陳永芳（2010）。高中英語閱讀教學中課堂討論的有效性。基礎英語教育，12（2）。
張春興（2007）。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。台灣東華。
張榮峰（2020）。增進高中學生英語口語能力與降低英語口說焦慮之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
張依珊（2009）。英語教師對課室互動及提問策略的信念與教學實踐之個案研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立政治大學。
莊弘哲（2019）。高中英文教學融入英文小說 - 採用傳統教學與討論式教學對於學生閱讀能力影響之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立政治大學。
黃敏（2016）。運用文學討論圈在高中英語課堂之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣科技大學。
趙鏡中（2011）。提昇閱讀力的敎與學：趙鏡中先生語文敎學論集。萬卷樓。
潘姵諦（2020）。運用任務型語言教學法提升國小學生英語口說表現之行動研究－以苗栗縣一所學校為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立政治大學。
蔡宇樺（2017）。運用文學圈於高中英文閱讀教學之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立東華大學。
賴玉婉（2011）。教師在國小英語課室中使用提問教學之描述性研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立中正大學。

貳、西文
Adler, P. & Adler, P. A. (1994). Observational Techniques. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Aimin, L. (2013). The study of second language acquisition under socio-cultural theory. American journal of educational research, 1(5), 162-167.
Bailey, K. M. (2003). Speaking. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English language teaching (pp. 47-66). McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Belland, B. R., Kim, C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2013). A framework for designing scaffolds that improve motivation and cognition. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 243–270.
Bier. (2015). An Exploration of the Link between Language and Cognition From Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory to CLIL. EL LE, 4(1). DOI: 10.14277/2280-6792/124
Brush, T. A., & Saye, J. W. (2002). A summary of research exploring hard and soft scaffolding for teachers and students using a multimedia supported learning environment. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 1(2), 1-12.
Burgess, J. (1994). Ideational frameworks in integrated language learning. System, 22(3), 309-318.
Chang, F. C., Chang, S. I., & Hus, H. F. (2008). Writing Activities as Stimuli for Integrating the Four Language Skills in EFL Grade-One Classes in Taiwan. English Teaching & Learning, 32(3), 115-154.
Clarà, M. (2017). How instruction influences conceptual development: Vygotsky's theory revisited. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 50-62.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Fahim, M., & Haghani, M. (2012). Sociocultural Perspectives on Foreign Language Learning. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 3(4), 693-699.
Gaskaree, B. L., Mashhady, H., & Dousti, M. (2010). Using critical thinking activities as tools to integrate language skills. Sino-US English Teaching, 7(4), 33-45.
Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd edition). New York- Routledge.
Gold, R. L. (1958). Roles in Sociological Field Observations. Social Forces, 36, 217-223.
Gredler, M. E. (2012). Understanding Vygotsky for the classroom: Is it too late?. Educational Psychology Review, 24(1), 113-131.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern language journal, 70(2), 125-132.
Johnson, K. E. (1992). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and practices during literacy instruction for non-native speakers of English. Journal of Literacy Research, 24(1), 83–108.
Lantolf, J. P., Thorne, S. L., & Poehner, M. E. (2015). Sociocultural theory and second language development. Theories in second language acquisition- An introduction, 1, 207-226.
Merriam, S. B. (2001). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mustafa, M. C., Alias, A., Isa, Z. M., Mat, M., & Abdullah, N. Y. (2019). Tools and symbols as mediation: a central concept to understand ways of improving English acquisition and proficiency. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(10A), 30-34.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge university press.
OECD (2019), "PISA 2018 Reading Framework", in PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/5c07e4f1-en.
Pardede, P. (2019). Integrated Skills Approach in EFL Classrooms: A Literature Review. In UKI Press (Ed.), PROCEEDING English Education Department Collegiate Forum 2015-2018 (pp. 147-159). UKI Press.
Pentzell, B. D. (2011). Say what? How oral communication has played second fiddle to reading instruction in language arts classrooms: a dramatic approach for remedy. Ohio Journal of English Language Arts, 51(2), 29-31.
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories an educational perspective (6th edition). Pearson.
Sokolik, M. (2003). Writing. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English Language Teaching (pp. 87-108). McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Stone, C. A. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 344-364.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In Oxford University Press (Ed.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics (pp. 125-144). Oxford University Press.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate- A step towards second language learning. Applied linguistics, 16(3), 371-391.
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. Sociocultural theory and second language learning, 78(4), 97-114.
VanPatten, B., & Benati, A. G. (2010). Key terms in second language acquisition. MPG Books Ltd.
Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford university press.
Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
Zhang, Y. (2009). Reading to speak: integrating oral communication skills. English Teaching Forum. 47(1). pp. 32-34.