臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

論文摘要： 
    本論文旨在探討世界文化遺產教學對南台灣高雄市國中九十一位七年級學生英
文閱讀及擴展文化視野之效益。首先，研究者用成對樣本
t
考驗研究學生於該教學
方案實施 12 周前、後的英文閱讀能力之增益，及學生對於閱讀英文讀物看法及學生
文化視野擴展之轉變。其次，研究者研究學生在世界文化遺產方案實施後，採用敘
述性統計來做分析學生對於實施該方案的感受情形，並探討其對於該方案中運用到
的合作學習之回應與看法。最後，研究者分析學生對於世界文化遺產方案課程的獲
益及所遭遇困難及建議，則以質性分析法討論。 
    本研究結果摘要如下： 
一、 學生的英文閱讀理解能力上有顯著差異。根據後測增加之平均分數顯示，
利用世界文化遺產教學可以提升學生的英語閱讀理解能力。 
二、 學生的英文閱讀態度方面有兩項顯著差異，進而，根據後測增加之平均分
數可知，學生對於英文閱讀態度有正向的回應，且特別是學生在閱讀英文
時更能瞭解重要的單字，且學生能統整文章大意並掌握文章主旨。  
三、 學生在擴展文化視野方面有兩項顯著差異，進而，根據後測增加之平均分
數可知，多數學生對於文化視野擴展有正向的回應，且特別是學生能夠理
解並描述其他國家的文化特色，且學生也能描繪出課程中選擇之世界文化
遺產，並寫下對世界文化遺產課程的正面回應。   
iv  
四、 多數學生對世界文化遺產課程方面持肯定的態度，特別是學生表示課程步
驟說明清楚且評量方式恰當。此外，學生認為課程幫助他們加強不同的閱
讀策略，例如重點摘要，找文章重點等等方法，以理解文章。 
五、 多數學生對課程中的合作學習方面抱持肯定的態度。特別是學生認為合作
學習有助降低學習焦慮。此外，學生也認為透過與同組同學討論分享想法
後，能學習他人優點，進而完成課程中的任務。 
六、 在實施世界文化遺產課程後，學生表示他們在課程中的主要收穫包含(一)
拓展文化視野，(二)增進英文閱讀能力。另外，學生遭遇的困難則包含(一)
英文表達能力不足，(二) 缺少背景知識。至於建議方面，除了希望未來
老師能給予較簡易的英文單字，或提供中英雙語的說明。最後，學生也期
待未來可以規劃學生或特別感興趣的國家至世界文化遺產課程中，有助於
引起學生的學習動機，以提升其英語閱讀的學習成效。 
    根據上述研究結果，首先，EFL 教師能融合主題式教學法至正規的課程中，有助
於提升學生的英文閱讀能力。此外，教師也能結合利用世界文化遺產的主題課程，
來幫助學生提升對世界文化主題相關的英語閱讀能力，並擴展學生的文化視野。其
次，合作學習法能加強課程中學生和學生之間的聯繫和互動，因此學生可利用課程
中團隊合作，和同組夥伴一同探索世界文化遺產的價值及拓展文化遺產的視野。最
後，閱讀是開啟通往世界文化的一扇窗，出版業能將英文閱讀與世界文化遺產、世
界地理遺產及世界文明遺產做結合，將能帶給 EFL 教師和學生不同的世界文化觀點。   

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of theprogram of world cultural heritages (PWCH) on English reading for 91 seventhgraders in southern Taiwan. To be specific, the students’ scores from thepretest and post-test of English reading were compared by paired samples t-test, and so were the studentresponses to the pre-study and post-study questionnaires on the studentresponses to English reading. Moreover, descriptive statistics were applied toprobe into student responses to the five-point scale questions on the culturalvision and the PWCH. Finally, the data collected from the open-ended questionson the students’ gains, difficulties, and suggestions for the PWCH were analyzedand discussed qualitatively.
Based on the data analyses, the major findings of the presentstudy are summarized as follows.
     1. There is a significant difference in Englishreading comprehension for the students before and after the PWCH. In addition, fromthe increased mean scores in the post-test, the students made progress in theirEnglish reading comprehension.
     2. There are two significant differencesin the student responses to English reading before and after the PWCH. In addition,from the increased mean scores in the post-test, they were more positive to understandingthe key words and summarizing the main idea of the context after the PWCH.
     3. There are two significant differencesin the student responses to cultural vision before and after the PWCH. Specifically,students expressed that they could understand and describe the traits of culturesof the other countries. They also sketched and did written responses to the selectedworld cultural heritages.
 4. The students showed positive responses tothe PWCH. Specifically, they agreed that the guidance of the task was clear andits evaluation standard was appropriate. Besides, the students agreed that thePWCH enhanced their English reading skills such as summarizing and searchingfor information.
     5. The students showed positive responses tocooperative learning in the PWCH and expressed their fondness for cooperationduring the PWCH. Specifically, they decreased their learning anxiety and learnedhow to share ideas, and how to accomplish the tasks with their group membersthrough group discussions.
     6. Afterthe PWCH, the students’ gains, difficulties and suggestions were explored. Specifically,the students’ gains included (a) broadening cultural vision, and (b)improvement in English reading. In addition, the difficulties they encounteredin the PWCH included (a) lower language proficiency, and (b) lack of backgroundknowledge. As to suggestions, most of the students hoped to read with English readingmaterials in an English-Chinese bilingual version in the future.
Based on the study findings, three implications wereproposed. To begin with, EFL teachers may incorporatethe themed-based instruction into the regular English teaching to improvestudents’ English reading comprehension. In addition, the teachers mayincorporate world culture into curriculum to help learners experience theirworld cultural vision. Second, cooperative learning enhancesstudent-and-student relations and achieves mutual assistance among groupmembers. So EFL students may work together with their partners to explore theworld cultural heritages. By cooperative learning, they may become aware of thevalue of it and expand their scope of it all together. As for publishers, they may publish a lot of EFL reading materials on (a)world culture heritages, (b) world
geographicalheritages, and (c) world civilization heritages. Since reading materials arewindows on the world and the civilizations, the publishers may bring differentaspects of the world to both EFL teachers and students.  

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Background and Motivation 1
Purposes of the Study 6
Research Questions 7
Significance of the Study 7
Limitations of the Study 8
Definitions of Terms 9
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
Exploring Cultural Vision 11
Culture and Language 12
Crossing the Cultural Boundary 13
Exploring Cultural Vision 15
Empowering Reading Instruction 17
Reading the Word and the World 17
Empowering Reading Instruction 19
Applying Cooperation in Reading Instruction21
Theme-based Teaching 23
Nature of Theme-based Teaching 24
Features of Theme-based Teaching 25
Exploring World Cultural Heritages inEnglish Classes 28
CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY
Subjects 31
Instruments 32
 ASample Lesson Plan 32
 ThePretest of English Reading Comprehension 33
 ThePost-test of English Reading Comprehension 34
 APre-study Questionnaire on the Student Responses to
 English Reading and Cultural Vision34
 APost-study Questionnaire on the Student Responses to
 English Reading and the PWCH35
Study Procedures 36
Data Analysis 38
 Quantitative Analysis 39
 Qualitative Analysis 39
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Comparison of English Reading Comprehensionfor the 40
 Students Before and After the PWCH
Comparison of the Responses to EnglishReading for the 41
Students Before and After the PWCH
Comparison of the Student Responses toCultural Vision 46
The Student Responses to the PWCH 57
The Student Responses to CooperativeLearning 63
The Students' Gains, Difficulties andSuggestions for the PWCH 67
 TheStudents’ Gains for the PWCH 67
 TheStudents’ Difficulties in the PWCH 71
 TheStudents’ Difficulties in the PWCH 73
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS ANDSUGGESTIONS
 Conclusions 77
 Implications 79
 Suggestions 80
REFERENCES 82
APPENDIXES
Appendix A: A Sample Lesson 91
Appendix B-1: A Pre-study Questionnaire onthe Student Responses to
English Reading and Cultural Vision(English Version)93
Appendix B-2: A Pre-study Questionnaire onthe Student Responses to
 English Reading and Cultural Vision (ChineseVersion)95
Appendix C-1: A Post-study Questionnaire onthe Student Responses to
 English Reading and the PWCH (English Version)97
Appendix C-2: A Post-study Questionnaire onthe Student Responses to
 English Reading and the PWCH (Chinese Version)101
Appendix D-1 : Worksheet 1 - Unit 1Archaeological Site of Olympia, Greece 105
Appendix D-2 : Worksheet 2 - Unit 2 RapaNui National Park, Chile 109
Appendix D-3 : Worksheet 3 - Unit 3 Towerof London, the UK 113
Appendix D-4 : Worksheet 4 - Unit 4 MogaoCave, China 117
Appendix D-5 : Worksheet 5 - Unit 5 TajMahal, India 122
Appendix D-6 : Worksheet 6 - Unit 6 AngkorWat, Cambodia 126
Appendix E : The Reliability of thePost-study Questionnaire 131
Appendix F : The Validity of the Post-studyQuestionnaire 133
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Tables
1. Comparison of English ReadingComprehension for the Students
Before and After the PWCH41
2. Comparison of the Responses to EnglishReading for the Students
Before and After the PWCH42
3. Comparison of the Student Responses toCultural Vision Before and
After the PWCH47
4. The Student Responses to Cultural Visionin the PWCH 52
5. The Student Responses to the PWCH 58
6. The Student Responses to CooperativeLearning in the PWCH 63
7. The Students' Gains from the PWCH 68
8. The Students' Difficulties in the PWCH71
9. The Students' Suggestions for the PWCH74
Figures
1. A Flow Chart of the Study Procedures 37
2. A Sample of Students’ Worksheets on theQuestion Generating Task 44
3. A Sample of a Student’s Worksheet on theMind Mapping 45
4. A Sample of Students’ Worksheets of theObserving Task 1 49
5. A Sample of Student’s Worksheets on theObserving Task 2 50
6. A Sample of a Student’s Worksheet on theMind Mapping 61

REFERENCES
 
 ADDIN EN.REFLIST Akpinar, K. D., &Öztürk, M. S. (2009). Teaching culture and language through folktales. Ekev Academic Review, 13(40), 69-84.
Alger,C. F., & Harf, J. E. (1986). Global education: Why? For whom? About what? Promising practices in global education: Ahandbook with case studies. National Council on Foreign Language andInternational Studies.
Bateson, M. C. (1994). Peripheral visions: Learning along the way. New York:HarperCollins.
Bennett, M. J. (1986). Adevelopmental approach to training for intercultural sensitivity. International journal ofintercultural relations, 10(2),179-196.
Brett, A., Rothlein, L., Hurley, M.(1996). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories and explanations oftarget words. The Elementary SchoolJournal, 96 (4), 415- 422.
Brinton, D. M. (2001). A theme-basedliterature course: Focus on the city of angels. Understanding the courses we teach: Local perspectives on Englishlanguage teaching, 281-308.
Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche,M. (2003). Content-based second languageinstruction. Ann Arbor: the University of Michigan Press.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Longman.
Byram,M. (1989). Cultural studies in foreign language education. Clevedon, UK:Multilingual Matters.
Calderón, M., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., &Slavin, R. (1998). Effects of bilingual cooperative integrated reading andcomposition on students making the transition from Spanish to English reading. The Elementary School Journal, 99(2),153-165.
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Carlo, J. E. D. (1995). Perpective in whole lanugage. Needham Heights, MA: Ally and Bacon.
Cottle, S. (2000). Ethnic minorities & the media: Changing cultural boundaries.London: McGraw-Hill Education.
Cox, K. E., & Guthrie, J. T. (2001).Motivational and cognitive contributions to students' amount of reading. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(1),116-131.
Crandall, J. (1992). Content-centeredlanguage learning in the United States. AnnualReview of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 111-126.
Crandall, J., Spanos, G., Christian, D.,Simich-Dudgeon, C., & Willetts, K. (1987). Integrating language and contentinstruction for language minority students. Washington,DC: National Clearing House for Bilingual Education.
Dirkx, J. M., & Pregner, S. M. (1997). Planning a implementing instruction foradults. San Feancisco: Jossey-Bass.
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning:Vygotskianapproaches to second language research. Norwood: Ablex.
Doorenbos, A. Z., Schim, S. M., Benkert, R.,& Borse, N. N. (2005). Psychometric evaluation of the cultural competenceassessment instrument among healthcare providers. Nursing Research, 54(5), 324-331.
Dudley-Evans, T., St John, M. J., &Saint John, M. J. (1998). Developments inEnglish for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Dueñas, M. (2004). The whats, whys, hows andwhos of content-based instruction in second/foreign language education. International journal of English studies, 4(1),73-96.
Duffy, G. G. (2009). Explaining reading: A resource for teaching concepts, skills, andstrategies. New York: Guilford.
Earley, P. C., & Mosakowski, E. (2004).Cultural intelligence. Harvard BusinessReview, 82(10), 139-146.
Fredericks, A. D. (1997). Teaching the Integrated Language Arts:Process and Practice. Boston: Addison-Wesley Educational Publisher.
Fredericks, A. D., Blake-Kline, K. B., &Kristo, J. V. (1997). Teaching theintegrated language and arts: Process and practice. New York: Longman.
Freire, P. (1985). Reading the world andreading the word: An interview with Paulo Freire. Language Arts, 62(1), 15-21.
Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world.Hoboken NJ: Taylor & Francis.
Fry, E. (2001). How to teach reading. Hoboken NJ: Taylor & Francis.
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. London: Hachette.
Gianelli, M. (1991). Thematic units:Creating an environment for learning. TESOL Journal, 1(1), 13-15.
Gildersleeve-Neumann, C. E., &Wright, K. L. (2010). English speech acquisition in 3-to 5-year-old childrenlearning Russian and English. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services inSchools.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (1997).Content-based instruction: Research foundations. The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language andcontent, 5-21.
Grayling, A. C. (2011). The meaning of things: Applying philosophy to life. London: Hachette.
Gregory, G. H., & Kuzmich, L.(2009). Student teams that get results: Teaching tools for thedifferentiated classroom. California: Corwin Press.  
Grosse, C. U. (2004). Thecompetitive advantage of foreign languages and cultural knowledge. The Modern Language Journal, 88(3), 351-373.
Hall, J. K. (2013). Teaching andresearching: Language and culture. London: Routledge.
Hanson, K., & Hay, L. (1999). Rethinkingliterature circles: Reading and rolemaking in a virtual classroom environment. Orana,35(3), 17.
Hanvey, R. G. (1976). An attainable global perspective. New York: Center for GlobalPerspectives in Education.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Huxley, A. (1932). Brave new world. London: Pearson Education.
Jenks, A. C. (2011). From “lists of traits”to “open-mindedness”: Emerging issues in cultural competence education. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, 35(2),209.
Jenness, D. (1990). Making sense of social studies. New York: MacMillan.
Johns, A. M. (1997). English for specificpurposes and content-based instruction: What is the relationship. The content-based classroom: Perspectives onintegrating language and content, 363-366.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith,K. A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basingpractice on validated theory. Journalon Excellence in University Teaching, 25(4),1-26.
Kagan, S., & Kagan, M. (1994). Thestructural approach: Six keys to cooperative learning. Handbook of cooperative learning methods, 115, 33.
Kiziltan, N., & ERSANLI, C. (2007).The contributions of theme-based CBI to Turkish young learners' languagedevelopment in English. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(1), 133-148.     
Kramsch, C., & Widdowson, H. (1998). Language and culture. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
Lam, M., McGroarty, E., Kropinski, A.,MacDonald, L., Pedersen, S., Høiby, N., & Lam, J. (1989). Occurrence of acommon lipopolysaccharide antigen in standard and clinical strains ofPseudomonas aeruginosa. Journal of clinical microbiology, 27(5),962-967.
Lowell, J. R. (1912). Poems of JamesRussell Lowell. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  
Mason, C. E. R. (1992). What foreign language teachers believe about reading and readinginstruction: A classroom study of six secondary French and Spanish teachers.(Unpublished doctoral dissertation) ,Columbus:The Ohio State University. Retrieved from http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=9227253
Morley, D., & Robins, K. (2002). Spaces of identity: Global media, electroniclandscapes and cultural boundaries. London: Routledge.
National Reading Panel.(2000). Report of the National ReadingPanel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of thescientific research literature on reading and its implications for readinginstruction: Reports of the subgroups. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Health.
Newman, D. (2003). On borders and power: Atheoretical framework. Journal ofBorderlands Studies, 18(1), 13-25.
Oak, M. (2012). Why is reading important? Retrievedfrom http://www.buzzle.com/articles/why-is-reading-important.html
Orlich, D. C., Harder, R. J., Callahan, R.C., Trevisan, M. S., & Brown, A. H. (2012). Teaching strategies: A guide to effective instruction. Boston:Cengage Learning.
Osland, J. S., & Bird, A. (2000). Beyondsophisticated stereotyping: Cultural sensemaking in context. Academy of Management Perspectives, 14(1),65-77.
Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001).Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational psychologist, 36(2), 89-101.
Peters, T., Schubeck, K., & Hopkins, K.(1995). A thematic approach: Theory and practice at the Aleknagik school. The Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 633-636.
Presseisen, B.Z. (1992). A perspective on the evolution ofcooperative thinking: Enhancing thinking through cooperative learning.Columbia: Columbia University Teachers College.
Raento, P., & Hottola, P. (2005). Whereon earth is New York? Pedagogical lessons
 
            fromFinnish geography students’ knowledge of the United States. International Research in Geographical &Environmental Education, 14(1), 5-27.
Robinson, R., & Good, T. L. (1987). Becoming an effective reading teacher.New York: Haper & Row.
Roehl, W. S. (1991). Geographic illiteracyand the travel and tourism educator. Hospitality& Tourism Educator, 3(3), 14-47.
Rogers, R., Malancharuvil-Berkes, E.,Mosley, M., Hui, D., & Joseph, G. O. G. (2005). Critical discourse analysisin education: A review of the literature. Reviewof educational research, 75(3), 365-416.
Seelye, H. N. (1984). Teaching Culture.Strategies for Intercultural Communication.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice. NeedhamHeights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Smith, F. (1985). Reading without nonsense.New York: Teachers College Press.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in readingcomprehension. California: Rand Corporation.
Stoller, F. L. (2002). Prompting the acquisition of knowledge in a content-basedCourse: Content-based instruction in higher education settings. AlexandriaV.A.: TESOL.
Tang, G. (1992). The effect of graphicrepresentation of knowledge structures on ESL reading comprehension. Studiesin Second Language Acquisition, 14(2), 177-195. Taylor,E. B. (1889). Primitive culture. NewYork: Henry Holt.
Tessier, L., & Tessier, J. (2015).Theme-Based Courses Foster Student Learning and Promote Comfort with LearningNew Material. Journal for Learningthrough the Arts, 11(1), 1-22.
Tomalin, B., & Stempleski, S. (2013). Cultural Awareness-resource Books ForTeachers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tomlinson, B., & Masuhara, H. (2004).Developing Cultural Awareness Integrating culture into a language course. Modern English Teacher, 13(1), 5-12.
Torrens, P. M. (2001). Where in theworld? Exploring the factors driving place location knowledge among secondarylevel students in Dublin, Ireland. Journal of Geography, 100(2),49-60.
Tracey, D., & Morrow, L. (2006). Lenses on reading: An introduction totheories and models . NY: Guilford.
Tsai, F.-O. (2012). The effects of a world-heritages-based-webquest prpject on Englishlearning for tourism students In southern Taiwan. (Unpublished master’s thesis) , National Kaohsiung NormalUniversity, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.   
United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (Ed.) (2005) The criteria for Selection. http://whc.unesco.org/en/criteria/
Van Meter, P. (2001). Drawingconstruction as a strategy for learning from text. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 93(1), 129.
Vijayah, T. (2011). Digitizing worldviewsand intangible cultural heritages. FourthWorld Journal, 10(2), 31-35.
Wesche, M., & Skehan, P. (2002).Communicative teaching, content-based instruction, and task-based learning. Handbook of applied linguistics,207-228.
Yang, C. C. R. (2009). Theme-based teachingin an English course for primary ESL students in Hong Kong. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 6(2), 161-176.
 
張武昌 (Chang,W. C) (2006)。台灣的英語教育：現況與省思。教育資料與研究雙月刊，69，129-144。
張文馨 (Chang, W. H)（2019）。任務導向教學對南台灣七年級學生英文閱讀表現及合作學習之效益研究。國立高雄師範大學英語學系碩士論文，高雄市。
洪蘭(Hung, D. L.) (2011). 培養世界觀的深度. 天下雜誌，12(12, 2011).