論 文 公 開 資 料

回到論文查詢
類型：學位論文
研究生中文名：陳怡君
研究生英文名：Yi-June Chen
論文中文名稱：閱讀背後的故事: 洞悉高中生在三種不同英語文本之閱讀錯誤分析研究
論文英文名稱：A READING MISCUE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH TEXTS OF THREE GENRES FOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
指導教授：張玉玲 Ye-Ling Chang
學位類別：碩士
院校名稱：國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱：英語學系
畢業學年度：104
論文出版年：2016
學號：610212210
語文別：英文
論文頁數：108
關鍵詞：閱讀錯誤, Reading Miscue Analysis
論文中文摘要：論文摘要:
本研究藉由閱讀錯誤分析，比較與分析高中學生對於三種不同英語文體，包含敘述文、說明文、議論文之英語閱讀表現。在閱讀三種不同英語文體之前，學生之英語閱讀的背景、態度、困難、與策略在閱讀訪談中被探究，接著複述(retelling)文章旨意。最後，學生在三種不同英語文體中之閱讀錯誤以及複述表現則藉由閱讀錯誤分析 (Goodman, Watson and Burke)探究與比較。
本研究之主要發現如下:

一、根據閱讀訪談結果，多數學生的英文閱讀背景與困難相似。多數 學生對於英語閱讀的態度為正面，對於英語閱讀的策略使用上，學生們傾向臆測上下文意、查字典或請教英語能力好的同儕或教師。
二、 根據one-way ANOVA分析學生閱讀錯誤在三種不同英語文體中之結果，意義建構和文法關係之兩種錯誤類型有顯著差異。就意義建構錯誤類型而論，學生在說明文與敘述文、議論文與敘述文之比較中有顯著差異性。而就文法關係錯誤類型而論，學生在說明文和敘述文之比較有顯著差異。
三、根據one-way ANOVA分析學生在閱讀複述(retelling)之結果，三種不同英語文體之比較中皆有顯著差異性。而在敘述性統計中，學生在敘述文得分最低、說明文次之、議論文中得分最高。
四、根據三種不同英語文體，學生分別對三種英文文體提出困難與建議。就學生遇到的閱讀困難而言，在敘述文的文體中遇到較多不熟悉的單字，加上敘述文錯綜的故事情節使得學生較難完整地複述文章的內容。而在說明文與議論文中，學生表示由於對兩文章主題較熟悉，所以當遇到無法理解的單字或文法時，仍可從上下文意中理解文章內容。而在學生的建議方面，學生建議未來的英語教科書可多放些議論及批判性的文體，並可針對時下的議題做更深入的探討；另外，有些學生建議未來的英語教科書可操用英文敘述文，因有趣的故事情節可以提升學生的英語閱讀動機。然而，多數學生建議敘述文中較難的英語單字應當適當的簡化或解釋。
閱讀錯誤分析為一個診斷性、形成性、以及總結性的工具，作為英語教師探究學生之英語閱讀過程。閱讀錯誤分析提供老師了解學生之英語閱讀弱項，讓學生覺察與改善之。另外，閱讀錯誤分析呈現學生在不同英語文體中的英語閱讀錯誤表現。因此，藉由語言中形、音、義之錯誤特質，做深度分析。例如，在語義接受程度上，可分做三個面向，包含高度合乎語義、中度合乎語義，以及低度合乎語義。
為了提昇學生的英語閱讀，提供未來研究的建議如下。第一，期許未來的研究可探討學生們不同的英語閱讀背景以及困難。第二，期許未來的研究可以探討學生在閱讀不同種類的英文文體中的英語閱讀表現，例如:說服文和描述文。第三、期許未來的研究可運用其它的複述 (retelling) 方法，例如think-aloud，以利探究學生之英語閱讀過程。最後，期許未來的研究可以邀請更多不同英語程度的受試者，了解不同英語程度者在英語閱讀過程中可能遇到的困難，進而能夠找出解決台灣英語學習雙峰鴻溝之辦法。
論文外文摘要：ABSTRACT
The purpose of the present study is to compare and analyze tenth graders’ English reading performances among the three different English genres, including the Narration, the Exposition, and the Argumentation by means of reading miscue analysis. Before reading the three English genres, the students’ English reading backgrounds, attitudes toward English reading, English reading difficulties and strategies are explored in the individual reading interview. Then, the students retell the meaning of the texts. Finally, the students’ oral reading miscues and the retlling performances among the three English genres are investigated and compared through reading miscue inventory (Goodman, Watson & Burke, 1987).
The findings are summarized as follows:
1. From the reading interview responses, most of the students have similar English reading backgrounds and difficulties. Moreover, most of the students showed positive attitudes toward English reading. Regarding the skills of reading English texts, most of the students expressed that they will look for the dictionary, depend on the contextual clues, and asked for the help from the advanced peers or teachers.
2. Based on the one-way ANOVA analysis of the students’ English reading miscues among the three English genres, there are two significant differences, including the meaning construction and grammatical relationship reading miscues. In terms of the meaning construction reading miscues, there are significant differences between the Exposition and the Narration as well as between the Argumentation and the Narration for the students. In terms of the grammatical relationship reading miscues, there is a significant difference between the Narration and the Exposition for the students.
3. Based on the one-way ANOVA analysis of the mean scores of the retelling among the three English genres for the students, there are significant differences among the Narration and the Exposition, the Narration and the Argumentation, and the Exposition and the Argumentation. Based on the distribution of the mean scores of the retelling among the three English genres, most of the students get the lowest score in the Narration, higher score in the Exposition, and the highest scores in the Argumentation.
4. Based on the three English genres, most of the students express that their difficulties and suggestions for the three English genres. In terms of the difficulties of the three English genres, most of the students encounter more unfamiliar words in the Narration, and the complex story plots make students fail to retell the main theme completely. On the other hand, most of the students express that becuase they are more familiar with the main theme of the Exposition and the Argumentation, they tend to utilize the contexts to comprehend the texts even though there are some unfamiliar words or grammars. In terms of the students’ suggestions for the three English genres, most of the students suggest that the schools’ English textbooks add more argumentative and critical genres concerning the current issues in the future. As for the narrative genres, most of the students express that they are fascinated by the story, and it can positively increase their English reading motivations. Nevertheless, most of the students suggest that the difficult and unfamiliar words in the narrative genres should be approriately simplified or explained.

Reading miscue analysis is a diagnostic, formative, and summative tool for English teachers to investigate the students’ English reading processes. It provides teachers with opportunities to understand students’ reading weaknesses so that students can detect and improve them. In addition, reading miscue analysis reveals the students’ different English reading miscues in three different English generes. Therefore, the students’ miscues in different English genres can be analyzed and compared. Thirdly, the students’ English reading miscues can be further analyzed and diagonosed by the different reading miscues feaures, including graphic, phonemic, and meaning. For instance, the meaning construction reading miscues can be classified into three domains, including No Loss, Partial Loss, and Loss miscues.
In order to upgrade students’ English reading, there are some suggestions for future studies. First, it is hoped that the future study can investigate readers’ different English reading backgrounds and difficulties. Second, it is hoped that the future study can explore readers’ English reading performances in different English genres, such as persuasion and descriptions. Third, it is hoped that the future study can utilize other retelling approaches, such as think-aloud to explore readers’ English reading processes. Finally, it is hoped that the future study can recruit subjects on different English proficiency levels to understand their possible English problems so that it may find out the solutions to bridge the bimodal gap of the English learing in Taiwan.
論文目次：TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Background and Motivation..........................1
Purpose of the study...............................6
Research Questions.................................6
Significance of the Study..........................7
Limitations of the Study...........................7
Definition of Terms................................8

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
Importance of Reading.............................11
Reading as Processes.........................13
Reading Schemata.............................16
Reading Assessment...........................17
Reading Miscues...................................19
Reading Errors and Miscues...................20
Reading Miscue Analysis......................21
Issues on Reading Miscue Analysis............26
Genres of Texts...................................27
Factors of Texts.............................28
Genres of Texts..............................30
Knowledge of Genres of Texts
on EFL students.........................31

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY
Subjects..........................................33
Instruments.......................................34
A Reading Interview Form.....................34
Three Reading Text Selections................34
Typescripts..................................36
A Reading Miscue Coding Form.................36
A Reader Profile.............................37
Three Retelling Guides.......................38
A Retrospect Form............................39
Study Procedures..................................39
Data Analysis.....................................41
Quantitative Analysis........................41
Qualitative Analysis.........................41

CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Comparison of Reading Backgrounds
for the Students.............................43
Comparing the Reading Miscues
in Three English Texts for the Students......45
Comparing the Retelling in Three English Texts
for the Students.............................57
Comparing the Difficulties and Suggestions
for the Three English Texts
for the Students.............................59

CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions.......................................61
Implications......................................64
Suggestions for Future Research...................64

REFERENCES.............................................66
APPENDIX A-1: A Reading Interview Form.................72
APPENDIX A-2: Mysterious Stranger (Narration)..........73
APPENDIX A-3: 242 Words Short Essay on
Global Warming (Exposition)..............74
APPENDIX A-4: Pros and Cons of Internet
Chatting(Argumentation)..................75
APPENDIX B-1: Typescripts of the Narration.............76
APPENDIX B-2: Typescripts of the Exposition............78
APPENDIX B-3: Typescripts of the Argumentation.........80
APPENDIX C: A Reading Miscue Coding Form...............82
APPENDIX D: A Reader Profile...........................83
APPENDIX E-1: Retelling Guides to
Mysterious Stranger......................84
APPENDIX E-2: Retelling Guides to 242 Words Short Essay
on Global Warming........................85
APPENDIX E-3: Retelling Guides to Pros and Cons of
Internet Chatting........................87
APPENDIX F: A Retrospect Form..........................88
APPENDIX G: Sample Reading Miscue Analyses of the
Three English Reading Selections of S5.....89
APPENDIX G-1: A Typescript of Mysterious Stranger
(Narration) of S5.................90
APPENDIX G-2: A Typescript of 242 Words Short
Essay on Global Warming (Exposition)
of S5.............................92
APPENDIX G-3: A Typescript of Pros and Cons of
Internet Chatting
(Argumentation) of S5.............94
APPENDIX G-4: A Reading Miscue Coding Form of
Mysterious Stranger
(Narration) of S5.................96
APPENDIX G-5: A Reading Miscue Coding Form
of 242 Words Short Essay on
Global Warming (Exposition)
of S5.............................97
APPENDIX G-6: A Reading Miscue Coding Form of Pros
and Cons of Internet Chatting
(Argumentation) of S5.............98
APPENDIX G-7: A Reader Profile of Mysterious
Stranger (Narration) S5...........99
APPENDIX G-8: A Reader Profile of 242 Words Short Essay
on Global Warming
(Exposition) of S5...............100
APPENDIX G-9: A Reader Profile of Pros and Cons of
Internet Chatting (Argumentation)
of S5............................101
APPENDIX H: The Post Hoc test Results of the three
English genres for the Students...........102
APPENDIX I-1: The Descriptive Statistics of Meaning
Construction Reading Miscues in Three
English Texts for the Students..........104
APPENDIX I-2: The Descriptive Statistics of
Grammatical Relationship Reading Miscues
in Three English Texts for the
Students................................105
APPENDIX I-3: The Descriptive Statistics of Graphic
Similarity Reading Miscues
in Three English Texts for the
Students................................106
APPENDIX I-4: The Descriptive Statistics of Phonemic
Similarity Reading Miscues
in Three English Texts
for the Students........................107
APPENDIX I-5: The Descriptive Statistics of
Retelling in Three English Texts
for the Students....................... 108

LIST OF FIGURES
1. A Psycholinguistic Reading Process Model
(Burke & Watson, 1982)..........................12
2. The Flow Chart of the Study Procedure..........40


LIST OF TABLES
1. Studies of Reading Miscue Analyses
in 1986 to 2010................................25
2. The Distribution of Three English
Reading Texts of Three Genres..................35
3. The Descriptive Statistics of
the Reading Miscues in Three English
Texts for the Students.........................46
4. The ANOVA Results of the Reading Miscues
in Three English Texts
for the Students...............................47
5. The Descriptive Statistics of
the Retelling Scores in Three English
Texts for the Students.........................58
6. The ANOVA Results of the Retelling in
Three English Texts for the Students...........58
7. The Post Hoc Test Results of the
Three English Genres for the Students.........102
8. The Descriptive Statistics of Meaning
Construction Reading Miscues in
Three English Texts for the
Students......................................104
9. The Descriptive Statistics of
Grammatical Relationship Reading
Miscues in Three English Texts
for the Students..............................105
10. The Descriptive Statistics of
Graphic Similarity Reading
Miscues in Three English Texts
for the Students..............................106
11. The Descriptive Statistics of
Phonemic Similarity Reading
Miscues in Three English Texts
for the Students..............................107
12. The Descriptive Statistics of
Retelling in Three English Texts
for the Students..............................108
論文參考文獻：REFERENCES

Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. New York, NJ: Cambridge University Press.
Anouschka, B., Kathleen, C. H., & Sharon, M. (2004). Language files, tenth editions. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.
Ann, M. J. (2001). Genre in the classroom: Multiple perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Adriand, J. W., & Joan, L. T., & Koomi, J. K. (2008). Retrospective miscue analysis with proficient adult ESL readers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(4), 324-333
Abbott, E. (2014). Hidden curriculum. Formative assessment. Retrieved from http://edglossary.org/hidden-curriculum
Anegela, F., Elisa, H., Kimberly, H., & Soo, J. S. (2003). Miscue analysis of native non-native speakers. Arizona Working Papers in SLAT, 10, 51-67.
Bax, S. (2011). Discourse and genre: analysing language in context. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Beaudin, C. M. (2010). Applying genre-based portfolios to improve young EFL learners’ attitude towards English writing (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York, NY: Longman.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: language us in professional settings. New York, NY: Longman.
Chan, W. (2003). Reading strategy use and motivation among Chinese good and poor readers in Hong Kong. Journal of Research in Reading, 26(2), 177–190.
Chang, G. M. (2002). The stories behind reading: insights into the reading process of recommend and non-recommended college students (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Catherine, C.(n.d.). Retrospective miscue analysis: helping older students who struggle with reading. Retrieved from http://www.wsra.org/assets/Councils/Southeast_Zone/catherine%20compton-lilly%20retrospective%20miscue%20analysis.pdf
Chen, K. L. (2011). Effects of three listening strategies on English listening comprehension and learning attitudes for low English achievers in junior high school (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Cem, A. & Gulcan, E. (2011). Effects of working memory capacity and content familiarity on literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 235-266.
Cem,A. Gulcan, E. (2011). Effects of working memory capacity and content familiarity on literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 235-266
Chern, C. I. (1994). Chinese readers’ metacognitive awareness in reading Chinese and English. Iinternational Language in Education Conference, Hong Kong.
Donna, T. (2006). What is authenticity? Retrieved from http://jalt.org/pansig/2006/HTML/Tatsuki.htm
Dorgeloh, H., & Wanner, A. (2010). Syntactic variation and genre. Berlin, NY: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & KG.
Meyer, S. F. (1991). Reading expository prose at the post-secondary level: The influence of textual variables on L2 reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 8(1), 645-662
Millar, D. (2011). Promoting genre awareness in the EFL classroom. English Teaching Forum, 49(2), 2-15.
Mora-Flores, E. (2008). Writing instruction for English learners: A focus on genre. California: Corwin Press.
Goodman, Y. M., Watson, D. J., & Burke, C. L. (1987). Reading miscue inventory: Alternative procedures. New York: Richard C. Owen.
Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6(1), 126-135.
Goodman, Y. (1996), Revaluing readers while readers revalue themselves: Retrospective Miscue Analysis. The Reading Teacher, 49(8), 600-609.
Hedgcock, J., & Ferris, D. (2009). Teaching readers of English: students, texts, and contexts. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hung, Y. L. (2010). Effects of instruction of expository text structure and graphic organizers on English reading comprehension for hunior high school studentsin southern Taiwan (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Hughes, A. (2003). Testing language teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Janet, R. K., & Joyce, H. (1975). A qualitative analysis of oral reading errorss of refelctive and impulsive second graders: A follow-up study. Journal of Reading Behavior, 3(7), 269-281
Kerry, H. (2012). The three-cueing system in reading: will it ever go away? Retrieved from http://nifdi.org/news-latest-2/blog-hempenstall/402-the-three-cueing-system-in-reading-will-it-ever-go-away
Kuo, F. L., Yeh, C. W., & Chiang, H. K. (2008). Effects of text structure instruction on chinese EFL six graders’reading comprehension and free recall, Spectrum: Studies in Language, Literature, Translation, and Interpretation, 2, 103-120
Lauren, B., & Esther, C. (2009). Learning from their miscues: differences across reading ability and text difficulty, Australian Journal of Language & Literacy, 32(3), 226-244
Laurie, E. R. (2003). Complete idiot’s guide to grammar & style (2nd ed.). New York, NY:Marie Butler-Knight
Liu, J. T. (2012). Schema theory and its instructional applications on EFL, US-China Foreign Language, 10(2), 915-920.
Lu, H. J. (2010). A comparative analysis of English reading miscues between children of immigrant and non-immigrant parents (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Maureen, W. (2006). Reading visual and multimodal texts: how is “reading”
different? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 29(1), 24-37.
Masoumeh, A., Faramarz, A. M., & Arshad, A. S. (2011). How to teach expository text structure to facilitate reading comprehension. Journal of The Reading Teacher, 64(5), 368–372.
Paul, D. L. (2012). Meaning construction in early oral reading., Journal of research in childhood education, 27, 454-471.
Carter, R. & Nation, P. (1989). AILA 6: Studies in vocabulary acquisition. In Schouten, C. & Parreren, V.(Eds.). (1989). Vocabulary learning through reading: which conditions should be met when presenting words in texts? (pp. 75-85). Retrieved from http://www.aila.info/download/publications/review/AILA06.pdf
Regina, S., & Mary, R. H. (1982). Refining composition skills: rhetoric and grammar for ESL students. New York, NJ: Macmillan.
Richard, N. (2015). Universal grammar. Retrieved from http://grammar.about.com/od/tz/g/unigramterm.htm
Rozimela, Y. (2014). The students’ genre awareness and their reading comprehension of different text types. International journal of Asia social science, 4(4), 460-469.
Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (1997). Vocabulary: description, acquisition, and pedagogy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Shuying, A. (2013). Schema theory in reading. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(1), 130-134.
Stephanie, M. (2015). What are explicit and implicit facts in reading comprehension.? Retrived from http://www.ehow.com/info_8365402_explicit-implicit-reading-comprehension.html
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tania, M. (2007). Interruptions and miscues: how teachers interrupt during reading. Journal of Reading Education, 32(3), 207-47
Tseng, W.T. (2008). A reading miscue analysis of high English achievers and low English achievers in junior high schoo (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Taylor, E. K. (2000). Using folktales. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Toledo, P. F. (2005). Genre analysis and reading of English as a foreign language: genre schemata beyond text typologies. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1059-1079. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.01.002
Williams, J. P. (2005). Instruction in reading comprehension for primary-grade students: a focus on text structure. Journal of Special Education, 39(1), 6-18.
GU
¨
LCAN ERC¸ ETIN
GU
¨
LCAN ERC¸ ETIN
GU
¨
LCAN ERC¸ ETIN
GU
¨
LCAN ERC¸ ETIN
Effects of Working Memory Capacity and
Content Familiarity on Literal and
Inferential Comprehension in L2 Reading
Effects of Working Memory Capacity and
Content Familiarity on Literal and
Inferential Comprehension in L2 Reading
Wang, W. H. (2007). Insights and perspectives of reading miscue analysis for English-majors and ESP University students in Southern Taiwan (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Wu, Y. J. (1986). Comparison of English Reading Miscues Between Junior and Senior High School Students (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung.
Zhang, L. (2006). The psycholinguistic schema theory and ESL reading methodology. CELEA Journal, 29(3), 94-97.
顏若映(1992)。教科書內容設計與閱讀理解之認知研究。教育與心理研究，15，
101-128。
電子全文下載：
IP：216.73.216.123
備註：公開版電子全文下載限登入或高師大校內網段