透過線上閱讀系統探索學生閱讀策略使用

Exploring Students’ Reading Strategies via an Online Reading System

本研究旨在透過研究者自建的線上閱讀系統，為學生提供多種閱讀策略以促進閱讀能力。研究者根據Mayer（1996）的「選擇」─「組織」─「整合」閱讀模型，開發了一個線上閱讀系統，其中使用多種閱讀策略，包括「關鍵詞選擇」、「主旨組織」和「摘要構建」。研究目的在探究學生在選擇、組織和整合的閱讀過程中，具有不同閱讀能力的學生，其閱讀策略使用有何區別以及學生對此線上學習系統看法為何。參與者為60位非英語專業之大學生，並根據他們的多益英語考試閱讀成績區分為高分組和低分組。參與者接受了7週的線上英文閱讀系統指導，所收集的資料包含多益的前後測、動作記錄、問卷及半結構式的訪談。結果顯示，高分組的學生比低分組的學生更積極地使用關鍵詞選擇、主旨組織和摘要構建策略。兩組學生對此線上閱讀系統的看法都給予正向肯定。根據登錄資料顯示，高分組在「選擇」閱讀過程中，主要是通過系統中「新增單字」的功能來查詢所學文章中的單字，而低分組學生則很少使用此功能，而是依賴另一「閱讀輔助小幫手」的功能；在「組織」的閱讀過程中，這兩組學生的主要區別是使用「參考」功能的次數。高分組學生較常審查蒐集的關鍵字以回憶相關內容的含意，低分組學生則是經常重新審視閱讀文本，而不使用參考功能中先前蒐集的關鍵字；在「整合」閱讀過程中，高分組學生更積極點擊「參考」功能，回顧他們蒐集的關鍵詞及主旨，並在發布摘要之前確定主要大綱，而低分組學生則無。

This study investigated students’ use of multiple reading strategies to facilitate their reading processes via an online reading system based on Mayer’s (1996) Selecting- Organizing- Integrating model of the reading process. This system was designed to engage students in using keyword selection, main idea identification, and summary construction as reading comprehension strategies. This study explored the differences in strategy use among students with different proficiency levels when practicing the strategies of Selecting, Organizing, and Integrating and their perceptions of multiple reading strategies training in an on-line learning system. Sixty non-English major college students were divided into the more proficiency (MP) and less proficiency (LP) groups based on their Testing of English for International Communication (TOEIC) reading scores. Participants then received seven weeks of online English reading system instruction. Data collected included pre- and post-test TOEIC scores, action log, questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews. The results showed that the MP students were more actively engaged in the use of keyword selection, main idea identification, and summary construction than the LP students. Overall, students’ perceptions of the multiple reading strategies training system were very positive. The action log showed that the MP students mainly identified the key words through add keywords, while the LP students rarely added keywords but relied on the keyword extractor. In terms of the use of the strategy of main idea identification, the major difference between these two groups was how frequently they reviewed collected keywords were reviewed through reference. The MP students reviewed the collected keywords to recall the meaning of the content, whereas the LP students often re-read the text to write the main ideas without referencing the collected keywords. In the strategy of summary construction, the MP students more actively engaged in using reference to review their collected keywords and identify main ideas before posting summaries than the LP students.