前寫作活動對不同能力二語學習者的寫作與協作表現之探究

Abstract

本篇論文旨在探究不同型態的合作分組(同質組/異質組)對二語學習者的寫作表現與協作表現之差異。受試者為來自兩個班級的62位東南亞籍學生，研究時長為八週。兩個班級經前測後顯示中文能力不相等，各分成同質組四組與異質組四組，第一週為寫作前的討論，並要求學生將討論內容張貼至網站Padlet，第二週則進行寫作活動，以兩週為一循環並重複三次，兩班接受完全相同的寫作指引並完成相同的寫作題目。此研究收集學生的寫作成績與討論的內容進行分析。實驗結果顯示兩個班級在不同能力分組的寫作成績上皆沒有顯著的差異，但在中文能力較基礎的班級中，無論是同質或是異質組的低成就學生寫作成績皆有進步；反之，高成就學生則不然。而在寫作前的討論內容中，兩個班級則有明顯的差異。中文能力較基礎的學生雖在回答時錯誤率較高，但經歸納後發現有多數的原因是由於學生較重視是否能與文章內容產生共鳴。在中文能力較好的班級中，學生在討論時針對教師的問題所回答的內容與答案數量也與中文能力較基礎班級的學生有顯著差異，能力較好的學生回答的數量較多，且多是以客觀的角度在回答問題；而能力較低的學生則多只回答一個原因，且大多以主觀判斷來回答。

This study aims to explore the differences between two types of cooperative grouping (homogeneous group / heterogeneous group) on the writing performance and collaborative performance of CFL learners. The participants were 62 foreign students in two classes, and the study lasted for 8 weeks. After the pre-test, the two classes showed that their Chinese abilities were not equal. They were divided into 8 homogeneous groups and 8 heterogeneous groups. The first week was the group discussion on a website called Padlet, and the second week was the writing activities. The two-week cycle was repeated three times. Both classes received the identical writing instructions and identical writing tasks. Two kinds of data were collected and analyzed: students' writing scores and their discussed content on Padlet. The results showed that both classes had no significant improvement in writing performance among different ability grouping. However, the lower achievement students improved in their writing performance, no matter they were in homogeneous group or heterogeneous group. On the contrary, the higher achievement students had no improvement in writing performance. Apparently, there were differences between the two classes in the discussion content. Although the basic-ability students have more error when answering, it was found that students tended to pay more attention to whether they could empathize with the content of the article or not. In the class with better Chinese ability, the content and number of answers that students answered to the teacher's questions during the discussion were also significantly different from those of students in the class with relatively basic Chinese ability. Higher achievement students answered more, and most of them answered questions from an objective point of view. Most lower achievement students only answered one reason, and most of them answered with subjective judgments.