閱讀之摘要歷程探究

Exploring the Processes of Summarization

10.6251/BEP.20151124

連啟舜(Chi-Shun Lien)；陳弘輝(Hung-Hui Chen)；曾玉村(Yu-Htsuen Tzeng)

鉅觀結構 ； 摘要歷程 ； 閱讀理解 ； macrostructure ； summarization process ； reading comprehension

教育心理學報

48卷2期（2016 / 12 / 01）

133 - 158

繁體中文

本研究以Kintsch 與van Dijk（1978）的理論模式為基礎來探討不同年齡的讀者之摘要歷程。藉由實驗材料的操弄，測量兒童摘要能力以探討兒童閱讀的心理歷程，進而探討摘要能力與中文理解的關係。研究方法選取三年級及六年級受試者各34 名，每人閱讀三篇不同歷程版本之說明文後，進行自由回憶作業、摘要評量及文本理解測驗。研究結果發現：一、摘要整體表現和閱讀理解、自由回憶、文本理解皆呈現中等之相關；而在不同歷程之摘要表現上，刪除歷程和歸納、建構歷程之相關不顯著，刪除所使用到的摘要次能力不同於歸納和建構。二、不同年級讀者在閱讀後的摘要表現、自由回憶及文本理解在發展上有顯著的差異，六年級學童皆優於三年級學童。三、不同發展階段的讀者在摘要「次能力」表現有顯著差異，刪除的能力明顯優於歸納和建構的能力，其中建構能力是發展最不成熟的能力。在作答分析中顯示僅有五分之一的三年級學童和三分之一的六年級學童能正確選出文章的主題句。

According to Kintsch and van Dijk’s (1978) theoretical model, we investigated the summarization processes of children with different ages. By manipulating three versions of texts, this study measured the process of reading comprehension and investigated the relationship between reading ability and summarization for Chinese readers. Participants were 34 third graders and 34 sixth grades. They were asked to read three different versions of texts and then performed three cognitive tasks (free recall, summarization, textbase questions). The results showed that there were moderate correlations among the measures of summarization, free recall and text comprehension, but no correlations among the measures of deletion, generalization and construction processes. Sixth graders outperformed third graders on all cognitive tasks. Readers at different developmental stages exhibited a significant difference in the sub-process of children’s summarization skills. The performance on the deletion-version was better than that on the generalization-version and construction-version. Among them, the performance on construction-version was the worst. Only one-fifth of third graders and one-third of sixth graders could select topic sentences of the text correctly.

1. Tzeng, Y.,Chen, P. L.(2006).The effects of causal structure on levels of representation for Chinese children.Chinese Journal of Psychology,48(2),115-138.
   連結：
2. 陳明蕾、王學誠、柯華葳(2009)。中文語意空間建置及心理效度驗證：以潛在語意分析技術為基礎。中華心理學刊，51(4)，415-435。
   連結：
3. 陸怡琮(2011)。摘要策略教學對提升國小五年級學童摘要能力與閱讀理解的成效。教育科學研究期刊，56(3)，91-118。
   連結：
4. Anderson, R. C.(Ed.),Spiro, R.(Ed.),Montague, W.(Ed.)(1977).Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Anderson, V.,Hidi, S.(1988).Teaching students to summarize.Educational Leadership,46(4),26-28.
6. Brown, A. L.,Day, J. D.(1983).Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,22,1-14.
7. Garner, R.(1982).Efficient text summarization: Costs and benefits.Journal of Educational Research,75(5),275-279.
8. Hare, V. C.,Rabinowitz, M.,Schieble, K. M.(1989).Text effects on main idea comprehension.Reading Research Quarterly,24,72-88.
9. Kamil, M. L.(Ed.),Mosenthal, P. B.(Ed.),Pearson, P. D.(Ed.),Barr, R.(Ed.)(2000).Handbook of reading research: Volume III.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Kintsch, W.(1994).Text comprehension, memory, and learning.American Psychologist,49,294-303.
11. Kintsch, W.(1998).Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition.Cambridge, MA:Cambridge University Press.
12. Kintsch, W.(1988).The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model.Psychological Review,95,163-182.
13. Kintsch, W.,Van Dijk, T. A.(1978).Toward a model of text comprehension and production.Psychological Review,85(5),363-394.
14. LaBerge, D.,Samuels, S. J.(1974).Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading.Cognitive Psychology,6,293-323.
15. Landauer, T. K.,Foltz, P. W.,Laham, D.(1998).An introduction to latent semantic analysis.Discourse Processes,25,259-284.
16. Leslie, L.,Caldwell, J.(1995).Qualitative reading Inventory-II.New York, NY:Harper Collins College.
17. Lien, C.,Lin, S.(2007).What can we learn from reading comprehension instruction studies? A meta-analysis of Taiwanese reading instruction studies.American Educational Research Association (AERA) 2007 Annual Meeting,Chicago, IL, USA:
18. Magliano, J. P.,Graesser, A. C.(1991).A there-pronged method for studying inference generation in literary text.Poetics,20,193-232.
19. McKenna, M. C.,Stahl, K. A. D.(2009).Assessment for reading instruction.New York, NY:Guilford Press.
20. McNamara, D. S. (Ed.)(2007).Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies.New York, NY:Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. McNamara, D.S.(Ed.)(2007).Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
22. O'Reilly, T.,McNamara, D. S.(2007).Reversing the reverse cohesion effect: Good texts can be better for strategic, high-knowledge readers.Discourse Processes,43,121-152.
23. Paris, S. G.(Ed),Stahl, S. A.(Ed)(2005).Children's reading comprehension and assessment.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
24. Perfetti, C. A.(1985).Reading ability.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
25. Ruddell, R. B.(Ed.),Unrau, N. J.(Ed.)(2004).Theoretical models and processes of reading.Newark, DE:International Reading.
26. Savolainen, H.,Ahonen, T.,Aro, M.,Tolvanen, A.,Holopainen, L.(2008).Reading comprehension, word reading and spelling as predictors of school achievement and choice of secondary education.Learning and Instruction,18(2),201-210.
27. Shavelson, R. J.(Ed.),Towne, L.(Ed.),National Research CouncilCommittee on scientific principles for education research(2002).Scientific research in education.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
28. Snow, C. E.(2002).Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program in reading comprehension.Santa Monica, CA:RAND.
29. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory=SEDL(2003).National Staff Development Council standards assessment inventory: Summary report of instrument development process and psychometric properties.Austin, TX:Author.
30. Taylor, B. M.(Ed.),Graves, M. F.(Ed.),van den Broek, P.(Ed.)(2000).Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades.New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
31. van Dijk, T. A.(1980).Macrostructures: An interdisciplinary study of global structures in discourse, interaction, and cognition.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
32. van Dijk, T. A.,Kintsch, W.(1983).Strategies of discourse comprehension.New York, NY:Academic Press.
33. Williams, J. P.(1984).Categorization, macrostucture, and finding the main idea.Journal of Educational Psychology,76,874-879.
34. Williams, J. P.,Taylor, M. B.,de Cani, J. S.(1984).Constructing macrostructure for expository text.Journal of Educational Psychology,76,1065-1075.
35. Williams, J. P.,Taylor, M. B.,Ganger, S.(1981).Text variations at the level of the individual sentence and the comprehension of simple expository paragraphs.Journal of Educational Psychology,73,851-865.
36. 吳英長(1998)。國民小學國語故事體課文摘寫大意的教學過程之分析。臺東師院學報，9，149-184。
37. 林世華、黃寶園(1998)。柯氏性格量表效度概化之統合分析。師大學報：教育類，43(2)，21-42。
38. 邱上真、洪碧霞(1999)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃成果報告,行政院國家科學委員會。
39. 柯華葳(1999)。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。台北=Taipei, Taiwan:行政院國家科學委員會特殊教育工作小組=Special Education Unit, National Science Council。
40. 柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅(2008)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告,行政院國家科學委員會。
41. 國立臺南師範學院測驗發展中心編(1998)。國小教學評量的反省與前瞻。台南=Tainan, Taiwan:國立臺南師範學院測驗發展中心=Test Development Center, National Tainan Teachers College。
42. 張新仁(2010)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,行政院國家科學委員會。
43. 張新仁(2009)。台灣閱讀摘要研究回顧與前瞻。台灣閱讀研究回顧與展望座談會手冊
44. 張碧容、鄒慧英(2005)。國小四年級學生閱讀摘要實作表現及自我評量之研究。國立台南大學學報，39(1)，149-174。
45. 教育部(1998)。重編國語辭典修訂本（網路版）。
46. 連啟舜(2002)。Taipei, Taiwan，國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所=National Taiwan Normal University。
47. 黃秀霜(1996)。中文年級認字量表。台北=Taipei, Taiwan:心理=Psychological。
48. 楊韻平(1993)。Taipei, Taiwan，國立政治大學教育研究所=National Chengchi University。

1. 蔡玲婉(Ling-Wan Tsai)(2021)。國語科改編課文的使用與理解－以〈憨孫耶，好去睏啊！〉的教學為例。教科書研究。14(3)。1-42。