臺灣閱讀策略教學政策與執行

Reading Policy and Reading Instruction in Taiwan

10.6209/JORIES.202003_65(1).0004

柯華葳(Hwa-Wei Ko)

悅讀101 ； 課文本位閱讀理解策略教學 ； 國際閱讀素養研究 ； Reading 101 (MOE) ； textbook-based approach to reading instruction ； progress in international reading literacy study

教育科學研究期刊

65卷1期（2020 / 03 / 01）

93 - 114

繁體中文

基於臺灣學生在PIRLS 2006和PISA 2006的閱讀表現以及當時學校語文教學和閱讀教育狀況，教育部（2008）推出「悅讀101－國民中小學提升閱讀計畫」，計畫期程為2008-2017年，主要工作項目有增加學校圖書量、設置圖書教師、推動閱讀策略教學等。本文將以推動閱讀策略教學為主，透過歷屆PIRLS資料與觀課，檢視10年間以經費補助研發、教師培訓等方式，學校落實閱讀理解教學的狀況。在閱讀策略教學推展上，經由教學實驗成果出版《閱讀理解策略教學手冊》加上專家學者提出「閱讀理解策略成分雙向表」，兩者作為師資培育教材編寫依據，並建立「課文本位閱讀理解教學模式」，設計教案供教師參考。在教師專業成長方面，除在臺灣設立四區閱讀教學研發中心，各自擔起責任縣市師培工作，亦辦理線上初階研習課程，使更多教師認識閱讀理解策略及其教學。推動閱讀策略教學的成果，包括國語科教學時間和跨科閱讀指導時間比例增加、教師每天教導閱讀策略比例增加。然學生在學校獨立閱讀時間並未增加，閱讀範疇的寬廣度則增加不多。透過觀課，研究者發現使用閱讀策略教學的教師，有人用之於無形，有人按部就班，亦不乏有教師只教策略步驟，甚至要求學生有標準答案，忽略使用閱讀策略的目的是為加深文本的理解。這顯示有部分教師對於閱讀理解以及透過閱讀學習和獨立閱讀的信念有再澄清的必要。這也是下一階段推動閱讀策略教學須注意的地方。

After the 2006 report of the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study was published in Taiwan, the Ministry of Education released a Reading 101 policy to encourage reading instruction in elementary schools. Few Chinese language arts teachers were familiar with reading strategies before 2006. To promote the teaching of reading and comprehension strategies in elementary classes, a textbook-based approach was initiated for reading instruction. A framework and guidelines were first developed for teaching reading and comprehension strategies in elementary schools. Example lesson plans were then compiled, and an in-service training program was provided or teachers. After implementing the Reading 101 policy for 10 years, teachers' ratings of their daily adoption of reading strategies in their classes increased. Yet, while conducting classroom observations, discussions with the teachers, and feedback analysis for the teachers, the teachers were categorized into the following three groups based on their mastery level of providing instructions on reading comprehension strategies: 1. The teacher demonstrates understanding of the strategy principle and uses appropriate teaching methods to convey the principle to students. 2. The teacher did not demonstrate a full understanding of the strategy principle but often mentioned the terminologies, which were not comprehensible to their students. 3. The teacher demonstrated their understanding of the strategy principle and used very complicated methods to teach their students. Thus, the students were confused about several topics. Some teachers had practical skills but did not understand why reading strategies should be incorporated in their teaching methodology. A follow-up design of professional development should be used to encourage teachers to conduct more discussions pertaining to the process and meaning of reading and practice a teaching methodology that involves reading instruction. Professional group interaction on the significance of reading can shape their teaching practice in the class.

1. 陳明蕾, M.-L.(2019)。台灣十年來教師閱讀教學與學生閱讀表現關係之探討：來自 PIRLS 2006、2011 與 2016 的證據。教育心理學報，51(1)，51-82。
   連結：
2. 謝進昌, J.-C.(2015)。有效的中文閱讀理解策略：國內實徵研究之最佳證據整合。教育科學研究期刊，60(2)，33-77。
   連結：
3. Fullan, M.(2001).The new meaning of educational change.New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
4. Lin, F.-L.,Wang, T.-Y.,Yang, K.-L.(2018).Description and evaluation of a large-scale project to facilitate student engagement in learning mathematics.Studies in Educational Evaluation,58,178-186.
5. Mullis, I. V. S.,Martin, M. O.,Kennedy, A. M.,Pierre, F.(2007).PIRLS 2006 international report: IEA’s progress in international reading literacy study in primary schools in 40 countries.Chestnut Hill, MA:Boston College.
6. Palincsar, A. S.,Brown, A. L.(1984).Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities.Cognition and Instruction,1(2),117-175.
7. Viennet, R.,Pont, B.(2017).OECD Education Working PaperOECD Education Working Paper,Paris, France:OECD Publishing.
8. 柯華葳（編）, H.-W. (Ed.)(2010).閱讀理解策略教學手冊.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部=Ministry of Education.
9. 柯華葳, H.-W.(2019)。,臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部=Ministry of Education。
10. 柯華葳, H.-W.(2012)。由參與 PIRLS 看國際評比。2020 教育願景，臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:
11. 柯華葳, H.-W.(2013)。閱讀是新世紀必要的學習管道。人文與社會科學簡訊，14(4)，4-11。
12. 柯華葳, H.-W.,張郁雯, Y.-W.,詹益綾, Y.-L.,丘嘉慧, C.-H.(2017)。,桃園市=Taoyuan, Taiwan:國立中央大學=National Central University。
13. 柯華葳, H.-W.,詹益綾, Y.-L.,張建妤, C.-Y.,游婷雅, T.-Y.(2007)。,桃園市=Taoyuan, Taiwan:國立中央大學=National Central University。
14. 徐秋月, C.-Y.,吳正新, C.-H.,劉妍希, Y.-S.(2011)。閱讀素養與學校因素關係的探討。臺灣 PISA 2009 結果報告，臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:
15. 張俊彥, C.-Y.,李哲迪, C.-D.,任宗浩, T.-H.,林碧珍, P.-J.,張美玉, M.-Y.,曹博盛, P.-S.,張瑋寧, W.-N.(2018)。,臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:國立臺灣師範大學科學教育中心=Science Education Center, National Taiwan Normal University。
16. 教育部=Ministry of Education(2008)。教育部（2008）。悅讀 101－國民中小學提升閱讀計畫。臺北市：作者。【Ministry of Education. (2008). Reading 101-Plan to promote reading in elementary and junior high schools. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】。
17. 陳利銘, L.-M.,許添明, T.-M.(2003)。我國小班政策之檢討與改進建議。教育政策論壇，6(2)，1-20。
18. 臺灣 PISA 國家研究中心=Taiwan PISA Center(2015).臺灣 PISA 2012 結果報告.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:心理=Psychological.
19. 鄭博文, B-W.,廖年淼, N-S.,陳斐娟, F-C.(2018)。十二年國教不同入學管道學生學習困擾之比較分析。教育政策論壇，21(1)，1-29。

1. Ming-Lei Chen,Chia-Hsing Chen(2023)。Role of Fourth Graders' Vocabulary Ability in Modulating Their Multiple-Text Comprehension: An Eye Tracking Study。教育心理學報，55(1)，181-204。
2. 陳佳欣,林素微(2023)。臺灣學生後設認知與閱讀素養的關聯：PISA 2009與PISA 2018資料的比較。測驗學刊，70(3)，193-220。
3. 洪儷瑜,李佩臻(2022)。偏鄉國小國語補救教學實施跨年級教學之行動研究。課程與教學，25(1)，35-66。
4. 陸怡琮(2021)。課文本位閱讀策略教學對原住民國小學童閱讀理解與詞彙理解的影響。課程與教學，24(3)，25-53。
5. 謝進昌(2021)。以「補充性表現水平描述輔助自陳式測量構念」之延伸Angoff標準設定研究。教育心理學報，53(2)，307-334。
6. 謝卓君,閔詩紜(2022)。臺灣閱讀教育治理之城鄉差異探究。教育科學研究期刊，67(4)，73-104。
7. 嚴愛群,林淑媛(2022)。跳出課本框架走向UbD雙語教學設計的師資培育課程紀錄。中等教育，73(3)，85-98。
8. 張郁雯(2021)。國小二、三年級學童朗讀流暢能力之成長模式探究。教育心理學報，53(2)，463-479。
9. (2022)。東亞國家閱讀素養教育效率比較——以PISA 2018為例。教育學刊，59，77-117。
10. (2024)。國中生的閱讀技巧變化軌跡對於學習成就影響之探究。學校行政，151，1-29。
11. (2024)。中文詞素覺識訓練軟體對台灣南部偏遠地區國小四年級弱讀生詞彙知識成效之影響。教育學報，52(1)，61-83。