國小五年級社會領域實施CLIL教學結合數位科技之學習成效評估

Learning Effectiveness of Implementing Digital Technology Into Content and Language Integrated Learning for Fifth Graders of Social Studies

10.6137/RECT.202204_(128).0005

董炯靈(Tung, Chiung-Ling)；林秋斌(Lin, Chiu-Pin)；周秋惠(Chou, Chiou-Hui)

社會領域 ； 學科內容與語言整合教學法 ； 電腦輔助語言學習 ； social studies ； content and language integrated learning (CLIL) ； computer-assisted language learning (CALL)

教育傳播與科技研究

128期（2022 / 04 / 30）

61 - 78

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討國小五年級社會領域實施學科內容與語言整合教學法（content and language integrated learning, CLIL）結合數位科技對學習成效之影響。研究對象以金門縣某國小五年級兩班，共28位學生為對象，為期1個學期進行實驗教學。本研究透過準實驗設計（實驗組採用CLIL結合Plotagon教學模式，控制組採用中文結合讀者劇場教學模式），利用社會領域基本能力測驗、英語聽力與口說測驗進行前後測，採無母數統計方法之Mann-Whitney U test與Wilcoxon signed-rank test進行分析，另外也針對實驗組學生進行問卷與訪談，以瞭解學生之學習成效及看法為何。本研究結果顯示：一、實驗組與控制組學生在社會領域學習成效皆有顯著提升，且兩組不同學習成就學生在社會領域學習成效也有顯著提升，但兩組之間的前後測成績並無顯著差異。二、實驗組整體與高成就學生在英語聽力學習成效皆有顯著提升，但兩組之間的前後測成績並無顯著差異。三、實驗組整體與不同學習成就學生在英語口說學習成效皆有顯著提升，但兩組之間的前後測成績並無顯著差異。四、實驗組學生對社會領域、英語，以及使用Plotagon的學習，持正向肯定的態度。

This study combined digital technology into the content and language integrated learning (CLIL) approach for fifth-grade social studies. The quasi-experimental study involved 28 student participants in two fifth-grade classes at an elementary school in Kinmen. The treatment group used the CLIL approach combined with the Plotagon teaching tool, and the control group was taught in Chinese. Pretests and posttests were conducted in the form of a basic ability test on social studies, an English listening and speaking test, and an English learning motivation scale chart, with analyses of Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Questionnaires and interviews were also given to the treatment group to help understand their learning effectiveness and their views. The results revealed the following. 1. Learning effectiveness in social studies improved for both the treatment group and the control group. Learning effectiveness in social studies for students with different learning achievements in both groups also significantly improved. 2. The entire treatment group, as well as high-achieving students, exhibited significant improvement in English listening ability. 3. Significant improvements were made in the English speaking ability of the entire treatment group and among students with different learning achievements. There is no significant difference between two groups. 4. Finally, students in the treatment group held a positive attitude toward learning social studies, learning English, and using Plotagon.

1. 呂妍慧,袁媛(2020)。數學領域雙語教育之教學模式初探。臺灣數學教育期刊，7(1)，1-26。
   連結：
2. 趙貞怡,張堙森,葉怡芯,林彥宏(2020)。擴增實境桌遊在國小高年級社會領域教學之設計本位研究：以清領時期為例。教育傳播與科技研究，124，1-16。
   連結：
3. Agustín-Llach, M. P.(2016).Age and type of instruction (CLIC vs. traditional EFL) in lexical development.International Journal of English Studies,16(1),75-96.
4. Alvarez-Marinelli, H.,Blanco, M.,Lara-Alecio, R.,Irby, B. J.,Tong, F.,Stanley, K.,Fan, Y.(2016).Computer assisted English language learning in Costa Rican elementary schools: An experimental study.Computer Assisted Language Learning,29,103-126.
5. Andujar, A.,Salaberri-Ramiro, M. S.(2019).Exploring chat-based communication in the EFL class: Computer and mobile environments.Computer Assisted Language Learning,34,434-461.
6. Bahari, A.(2019).FonF practice model from theory to practice: CALL via focus on form approach and non-linear dynamic motivation to develop listening and speaking proficiency.Computers & Education,130,40-58.
7. Ballance, O. J.(2012).Mobile language learning: More than just “The Platform”.Language Learning & Technology,16(3),21-23.
8. Burston, J.(2011).Exploiting the pedagogical potential of MALL.Mobile Learning as the Future of Education,San Sebastián, Spain:
9. Coyle, D. (2005). CLIL: Planning tools for teachers. Retrieved from https://ateneu.xtec.cat/wikiform/wikiexport/_media/cmd/lle/clpi/modul_4/coyle2005_clilplanningtools.pdf
10. Coyle, D.(2007).Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies.International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,10,543-562.
11. Coyle, D.,Holmes, B.,King, L.(2009).Towards an integrated curriculum—CLIL National Statement and Guidelines.London, UK:The Languages Company.
12. Coyle, D.,Hood, P.,Marsh, D.(2010).CLIL: Content and language integrated learning.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
13. Dallinger, S.,Jonkmann, K.,Hollm, J.,Fiege, C.(2016).The effect of content and language integrated learning on students’ English and history competences—Killing two birds with one stone?.Learning and Instruction,41,23-31.
14. Doumanis, I.,Economou, D.,Sim, G. R.,Porter, S.(2019).The impact of multimodal collaborative virtual environments on learning: A gamified online debate.Computers & Education,130,121-138.
15. Egbert, J.(2005).CALL essentials: Principles and practice in CALL classrooms.Baltimore, MD:Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
16. Ezra, O.,Cohen, A.(2018).Contextualised MALL: L2 Chinese students in target and non-target country.Computers & Education,125,158-174.
17. Fernández Fontecha, A.,Canga Alonso, A.(2014).A preliminary study on motivation and gender in CLIL and non-CLIL types of instruction.International Journal of English Studies,14(1),21-36.
18. Gefaell, C.,Unterberger, B.(2010).CLIL programme evaluation: Deriving implementation guidelines from stakeholder perspectives.Vienna English Working Papers,19(3),29-35.
19. González Gándara, D.(2015).CLIL in Galicia: Repercussions on academic performance.Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning,8,13-24.
20. Gurvitch, R.,Lund, J.(2014).Animated video clips: Learning in the current generation.Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance,85(5),8-17.
21. Gutiérrez Martínez, A.,Ruiz de Zarobe, Y.(2017).Comparing the benefits of a metacognitive reading strategy instruction programme between CLIL and EFL primary school students.Estudios de Lingüística Inglesa Aplicada,17,71-92.
22. Hsieh, J. S. C.,Wu, W.-C. V.,Marek, M. W.(2017).Using the flipped classroom to enhance EFL learning.Computer Assisted Language Learning,30,1-21.
23. Hubbard, P.(2013).Making a case for learner training in technology enhanced language learning environments.The Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium Journal,30,163-178.
24. Kukulska-Hulme, A.,Norris, L.,Donohue, J.(2015).Mobile pedagogy for English language teaching: A guide for teachers.London, UK:British Council.
25. Loewen, S.,Crowther, D.,Isbell, D. R.,Kim, K. M.,Maloney, J.,Miller, Z, F.,Rawal, H.(2019).Mobile-assisted language learning: A Duolingo case study.ReCALL,31,293-311.
26. Nieto Moreno de Diezmas, E.(2016).The impact of CLIL on the acquisition of L2 competences and skills in primary education.International Journal of English Studies,16(2),81-101.
27. Pladevall-Ballester, E.(2019).A longitudinal study of primary school EFL learning motivation in CLIL and non-CLIL settings.Language Teaching Research,23,765-786.
28. 王文科,王智弘(2021).教育研究法.臺北:五南.
29. 王蓓菁(2020)。臺北市，國立臺北教育大學課程與教學研究所。
30. 吳文琪,歐陽芳泉(2017)。科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告,科技部。
31. 吳品湘(2016)。科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告,科技部。
32. 吳毓瑩(1996)。量表奇偶點數的效度議題。調查研究，2，5-34。
33. 林禹臻(2020)。臺北市，國立臺北教育大學課程與教學研究所。
34. 財團法人語言訓練測驗中心（n.d.）。YLE 劍橋兒童英語認證簡介。取自 https://www.lttc.ntu.edu.tw/YLEmain.htm
35. 國家發展委員會（2018）。2030 雙語國家政策發展藍圖。取自 https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMjE2Ny9hNGM4YWMwMS0zNDMyLTRhMDAtOGYwNy02NDExOWVjNWQ2ODgucGRm&n=MjAzMOmbmeiqnuWci%2bWutuaUv%2betlueZvOWxleiXjeWcli5wZGY%3d&icon=..pdf
36. 教育部（2018）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校：社會領域。取自 https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/Upload/file/27799/68319.pdf
37. 鄒文莉(2018)。科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告,科技部。
38. 臺北市政府教育局（2020）。教育局新聞稿1090304 臺北市自編中年級雙語實驗課程教材暨國中雙語教學停課不停學發表會。取自 https://www.doe.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=0F560782595DACFC&s=7E1C577654166DF7
39. 趙毓銓(2017)。科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告科技部補助專題研究計畫成果報告,科技部。