自我提問與學生出題策略融入國小閱讀活動對閱讀成效之影響

The Effects of Integrating Self-Questioning and Student Question-Generation Strategies into Primary School Reading Activities on Reading Performance and Affective Learning

鑑於目前閱讀研究多以教師教學、共讀本為主，較少探討學生自主策略運用、自由選書對閱讀認知與情意表現的影響，再考量閱讀領域學者擔憂外加策略對自由閱讀、沉浸閱讀對心流經驗與情意的可能負面影響，本研究探討自我提問與學生出題策略，相對於無策略導人之一般閱讀活動，對國小學生閱讀表現、閱讀動機、閱讀興趣與認知負荷的影響。採不等組前後測準實驗研究法，以臺南市某國小五年级三班學生（共76名）為研究樣本，進行七週（不含前後測）自由閱讀活動。資料以Quade's共變數分析、單因子共變數分析、變異數分析進行统計分析。結果發現三組在閱讀表現、閱讀動機、閱讀興趣及認知負荷上均無顯著差異。文末闡述可能原因解釋並提出教學與未來研究建議。

Currently, studies on reading have primarily adopted a teacher-led instruction method, with students reading the same materials and paying limited attention to the effects of students' independent strategy use. Moreover, few studies have simultaneously examined how the use of reading strategies influences both cognitive and affective learning outcomes. In addition, some scholars have argued that instruction in strategy use and task demands may interrupt the flow experience and thus may undermine the expected benefits of free and sustained reading. Therefore, the study examined the comparative effects of three reading strategies-self-questioning, student question-generation, and reading activities without strategy instruction-on elementary students' reading performance, reading motivation, reading interest, and cognitive load. A nonequivalent pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design was adopted, involving 76 fifth-grade students from three classes in an elementary school in Tainan, Taiwan. Over seven weeks (excluding pre- and post-test), students engaged in free reading sessions. Data analyzed using Quade's ANCOVA, one-way ANCOVA, and ANOVA revealed no significant differences among the three groups in reading performance, reading motivation, reading interest, or cognitive load. In other words, both intervention strategies during students' independent reading demonstrated comparable effects on reading performance, and neither of the strategy interventions negatively affected students' affective outcomes or cognitive load, as compared to the no-reading-strategy instruction group. Based on these findings, possible explanations are discussed, and recommendations for instructional implementation and future research are provided.