用辯論來訓練台灣大學生英語溝通能力之個案研究

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	李汶珊 Lee, Wen-Shan
論文名稱：	用辯論來訓練台灣大學生英語溝通能力之個案研究 The Effect of Debate on Oral Communication Skills among University Students in Taiwan: A Case Study
指導教授：	鍾乃森 Dr. Nathan B. Jones
口試委員:
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	人文社會學院 - 外國語文學系 Foreign Languages and Literature
論文出版年：	2005
畢業學年度：	93
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	152
中文關鍵詞：	英文辯論、溝通能力、人格特質
外文關鍵詞：	Debate, Communication Skills, Personality, public speaking
相關次數：	點閱：2 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

英語辯論一直被認為是學習英語演講很有效的方式之一，學生可從中獲益良多，特別是思維辨証與語言表達。然而，至今國內利用英語辯論來訓練大學生口語溝通能力的研究報告仍舊不多。
本論文旨在探討英語辯論運用於教學對增進英語口語溝通能力的成效、以及學生的人格特質與其英語口語學習的關聯性。本研究以二十一位國內大學英語系大三學生為研究對象，這二十一位參與者以隨機的方式分成控制組和實驗組。控制組在課程的前六週先參與由一位大學教授帶領的英語討論工作坊，利用討論的方式來訓練學生的英語演講能力。而同時實驗組在前六週則先參與由筆者（即研究者）所帶領的英語辯論工作坊，同樣地來訓練學生的英語演講能力。六週後，兩組學生互換原先所參與的工作坊，也就是控制組參與英語辯論工作坊；實驗組參與英語討論工作坊，並進行第二階段為期六週的口語訓練。整個訓練課程共為期十二週。在參與此課程之前，所有的參與者均接受了麥布二氏人格類型量表評量，以了解其人格類型，同時亦接受了密西根英語能力測驗，以了解其語文能力。本研究資料的收集採用多元方式進行，並使用質化和量化的研究方法加以分析。其分析的資料包括學生的即席演講前測、中測和後測的成績、學生的學習日誌、訪談資料以及問卷調查。
研究結果分析顯示，控制組和實驗組在經過六週於第一階段口語訓練結束後，兩組的中測成績，相較於其前測成績，皆無明顯的進步，但是這兩組的學生在十二週後於第二階段口語訓練結束時，兩組學生的後測成績相較於其前測成績則皆有明顯的進步。而且從訪談和回收的問卷中，就學生的觀點而言，他們認為在課堂上不斷地辯論演練，不僅可以幫助他們增進其英語演講的能力，更可幫助他們增加批判思考、組織、溝通與摘錄的能力。此外，不同學生的人格特質也會影響學生對不同口語訓練活動的喜愛與態度。最後，根據本研究的研究成果，亦編寫了大學英文系英語辯論課程大綱及其相關教學活動以供授課教師參考。

Debate is highly regarded as an effective method to teach students’ public speaking skills, and students benefit from it. However, few if any studies have been published about the use of debate to teach oral communication skills for undergraduate English majors in Taiwan.
This thesis examines the effects of debate on oral communication skills and the relationship between students’ personalities and their language learning. In a class of 21 students, all of the participants were divided into two groups randomly. One group was a control group for the first six weeks, which was taught by a university professor using a discussion format to teach speech, whereas the other group was an experimental group, which was taught by the researcher using a debate format to teach students’ public speaking skills. After six weeks, the two groups switched instruction to receive the other treatment. The whole study was conducted for 12 weeks. Before the treatment, students took the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to identify their personality preferences, and the Michigan Test of English Language Proficiency to identify their language ability proficiency levels. The data analyzed in this study consisted of three impromptu speeches, student journals, semi-structured oral interviews and five questionnaires.
The results showed that both groups did not make much progress between the pre-test and the midterm test at the end of the first treatment, but both groups made much progress between the pre-test and the post-test by the end of the second treatment. Moreover, from the students’ viewpoints, frequent debate in class increased not only their public speaking skills, but also other skills, such as critical thinking skills, organization skills, communication skills and note-taking skills. In addition, personality types influenced learners’ preferences and attitudes toward different oral task-based activities. The thesis closes by offering a proposed syllabus of a debate class for university English majors in Taiwan.

中文摘要……………………………………………………………………………..i
ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………….ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………iv
LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………….viii
LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………. x

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1    Background………………………………………………………………..1
1.2    Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………3
1.3    Research Questions………………………………………………………..3
1.4    Scope of the Study………………………………………………………....4
1.4.1    Participants……………………………………………………...4
1.4.2    Setting…………………………………………………………..5
1.4.3    Instruments and Procedures…………………………………….6
1.4.4    Data Analysis…………………………………………………...7
1.5    Definition of Terms………………………………………………………..8
1.5.1    Case Study……………………………………………………....8
1.5.2    Debate…………………………………………………………..9
     1.6 Organization of the Thesis………………………………………………..13

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
     2.0 Overview………………………………………………………………….14
     2.1 Communicative Language Teaching……………………………………...14
     2.2 Learner Needs in Language Learning…………………………………….16
     2.3 Public Speaking Ability in ESL/EFL Learning…………………………...17
     2.4 Debate Used in the First Language Context………………………………18
     2.5 Debate Used in Foreign Language Learning……………………………...20
     2.6 Personality and Foreign Language Learning……………………………...22
     2.7 Summary…………………………………………………………………..27




CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
     3.0 Overview…………………………………………………………………..28
     3.1 Participants………………………………………………………….……..28
     3.2 Setting and Research Procedures…………………………………………..31
     3.3 The Research Instruments………………………………………………….33
          3.3.1 The Michigan Test of English Language Proficiency……………..33
          3.3.2 The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator………………………..………..33
          3.3.3 Pre-test, Midterm test and Post-test……………………………….34
          3.3.4 Questionnaires……………………………………………………..34
          3.3.5 Student Journals…………………………………….……………..35
          3.3.6 Interviews……………………………………………………….....35
     3.4 Research Design……………………………………………..……………..36
          3.4.1 The Debate Workshops………………………………………….....36
          3.4.2 The Discussion Workshops………………………………………...42
     3.5 Data Analysis…………………………………………………………….....46
          3.5.1 The Analysis of the MBTI…………………………………………47
          3.5.2 The Analysis of the MTELP…………………………………….....47
          3.5.3 The Analysis of the Pre-test, Midterm test and Post-test……….....47
          3.5.4 The Analysis of Questionnaires……………………………………49
          3.5.5 The Analysis of Interview Data and Student Journals…………….50
     3.6 Summary……………………………………………………………………50

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
     4.0 Overview……………………………………………………………………51
     4.1 Research Question 1: Speaking Performance in Both
Debate and Discussion Workshops…………………………………………52
     4.2 Research Question 2: Oral Language Learning and
Language Proficiency……………………………………………………....57
          4.2.1 Students’ Outcome of the MTELP…………………………………57
          4.2.2 Results between Language Proficiency and Public
Speaking Skills…………………………………………………....59








     4.3 Research Question 3: Personality and Oral Language Learning……………60
          4.3.1 Students’ Personality Types, Language Proficiency and
               Public Speaking Skills…………………………………………......60
          4.3.2 Teamwork and Personality…………………………………………64
          4.3.3 Personality and Perceptions of More Enjoyable Workshops………66
          4.3.4 Personality and Perceptions of More Helpful Workshops…………67
     4.4 Research Questions 4: Students’ Perceptions of Debate Workshops…….....69
         4.4.1 Students’ Attitudes toward Participation in Debate Workshops……..69
              4.4.1.1 Students’ General Perceptions of Debate Workshops….…...69
              4.4.1.2 Learning and Improvement in Debate Workshops…..……...75
              4.4.1.3 Opinions about Participating in Debate…………………….78
              4.4.1.4 Students’ Recommendation for Debate Workshops………...82
              4.4.1.5 Willingness for Participating in Debate Workshops Again…83
              4.4.1.6 Reasons for Not Selecting Debate as One of
                    the Activities in the Second Semester………………………83
         4.4.2 Benefits and Disadvantages from Participating in
Debate Workshops………………………………………………….86
     4.5 Summary……………………………………………………………………88

CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
     5.0 Overview…………………………………………………………………. .92
     5.1 Review of the Results ……………………………………………….……. 93
        5.1.1 Research Question One……………………………………………... 93
        5.1.2 Research Question Two…………………………………………..… 94
        5.1.3 Research Question Three…………………………………………… 95
        5.1.4 Research Question Four…………………………………………… 100
             5.1.4.1 Students’ Opinions about Debate Workshops………..…… 100
             5.1.4.2 Benefits from Participating in Debate Workshops…….…. .108
             5.1.4.3 Disadvantages of Debate Workshops…………………...… 109
     5.2 Proposed Syllabus……………………………………………………...….111
     5.3 Contributions and Implications of the Study………………………...……121
     5.4 Limitations of the Study………………………………………….……….122
     5.5 Recommendations for Future Research…………………………….…….122






REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………..124

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Background Questionnaire…………………………………………....139
Appendix B: Topics for Pre-test, Midterm test and Post-test……………………….141
Appendix C: Debate Questionnaire…………………………………………………142
Appendix D: Evaluation Questionnaire I……………………………...…………….145
Appendix E: Evaluation Questionnaire II…………………………………………...147
Appendix F: Follow-up Questionnaire……………………………………...………149
Appendix G: Questions of Interview………………………………………...….…..150
Appendix H: Flowing the Debate…………………………………………………...151
Appendix I: Cross-Examination Ballot……………………………………….…….152

                                

REFERENCES

Allan, M. (1985). Teaching English with video. Avon: Longman.
Allen, M., Berkowits, S., Hunt, S. & Louden, A. (1999). A meta-analysis of the impact of forensics and communication education on critical thinking. Communication Education, 48, 18-30.
Allwright, R. (1993). Language learning through communication practice. In C. J. Brumfit & K. Johnson (Eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching (pp.23-45). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Altschuler, L. (2001). “Ask the expert”: Oral presentations that work. TESOL Journal, 10 (4), 31-32.
Aries, E. (1976). Interaction patterns and themes of male, female and mixed groups. Small Group Behaviour, 7(1), 7-18.
Bailey, K. (1983). Competitiveness and anxiety in adult second language learning: Looking at and through the Diary studies. In H. W. Seliger & M. H. Long (Eds.), Classroom, oriented research in second language acquisition (pp. 1-15). New York: New Bury House.
Bailey, K. & Savage, L. (1994). New ways in teaching speaking. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Bailey, K. (1998). Approaches to empirical research in TESOL. TESOL Matters, 8(6), 3.
Basturkmen, H. (2001). Descriptions of spoken language for higher level learners: The example of questioning. ELT Journal, 55, 4-13.
Bayne, R. (1995). The Myers-Briggs type indicator: A critical review and practical guide. London: Chapman & Hall.
Bellon, J. (2000). A research-based justification for debate across the curriculum. Argumentation and Advocacy, 36, 161-175.
Bialystok, E. (1981). The role of conscious strategies in second language proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 65, 24-35.
Briggs-Myers, I & Myers, P. (1987). Myers-Briggs type indicator: Report form. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychology Press
Briggs-Myers, I. & Myers, P. (1995). Gifts differing: Understanding personality type. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychology Press.
Brooks, J. (1984). Current problems in college debate. Debate Issues, 18, 14-16.
Brown, G. & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Longman.
Busch, D. (1982). Introversion-extroversion and the EFL proficiency of Japanese students. Language Learning, 32, 109-132.
Byrne, D. (1986). Teaching oral English. London: Longman.
Byron, S., Goldstein, L., Murphy, D. & Roberts, E. (1993). Interdisciplinary dimensions of debate. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 16, 31-52.
Carnegie, D. (1956). How to develop self-confidence & influence people by public speaking. New York: Pocket Books.
Chambers, E. (1992). Work-load and the quality of student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 17(2), 141-153.
Chang, S. J. (2000). No more English-Savvy dummies or fluent fools: A communicative approach of teaching English conversation. English Teaching & Learning, 25(1), 40-59.
Chang, S. J. (2002). A preliminary study of English conversation instruction at universities in Taiwan. English Teaching & Learning, 27 (2), 17-50.
Chen, H. J. (1999). How many words do they know? Assessing Taiwanese college EFL students’ receptive and productive vocabularies. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 83-97). Taipei: The Crane Publishing.
Chi, F. M. (1996a). Combination of speaking and writing in English teaching: From discussion to debate. Taipei: National Science Council. (NSC No. 852418- HI-94003).
Chi, F. M. (1996b). Westerners perceptions of beliefs and attitudes for Taiwanese English learners. English Teaching & Learning, 20(3), 23-30
Chi, F. M. (2000). Introduction to the method of English debate. National Editing and Translation Association Journal, 13 (4), 35-41.
Chi, F. M. (2002). A collaborative tale with two Taiwanese EFL college groups. English Teaching & Learning, 27(1), 21-39.
Chou, M. C. & Kai, I. H. (1996). The difficulties and problems of applying language-learning simulations in the large EFL conversation class. In Papers from the 12th Conference on English Teaching and Language in the Republic of China (pp. 177-201). Taipei: Crane.
Chui, C. J. (1991). Conducting a training program in English oral presentation to high-technology industry professional. English Teaching & Learning, 15(3), 46-55.
Cloninger, S. (2000). Theories of personality: Understanding persons. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Davis, M. S. (1985). Teacher as a tool in the language classroom: Let’s play, motivate and learn! OMLTA Journal, 28-33. Retrieved May 30, 2004, from ERIC Database (ED259573).
Densin, N. K. (1970). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Chicago: Aldine.
Devito, A. J. (1985). Review of Myers-Briggs type indicator. In O. K. Buros (Ed.), The ninth mental measurement yearbook (pp. 1030-1032). Lincoln: The Buros Institute.
Donley, K. M. (2000). Film for fluency. English Teaching Forum, 38 (2), 24-27.
Dornyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and Researching Motivation. England: Pearson Education Limited.
Douglas, D. (1994). Quantity and quality in speaking test performance. Language Testing, 11, 125-144.
Ehrman, M. E. (1990). Owls and doves: Cognition, personality, and learning success. In J. E. Alatis, (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on language and linguistics 1990 (pp. 413-437). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R. (1989). Effects of sex differences, career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies. The Modern Language Journal, 73(1), 3-13.
Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. The Modern Language Journal, 74(3), 311-327.
Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R. (1995). Cognition plus: Correlates of language learning success. The Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 67-89.
Eken, A. N. (2003). “You have got mail”: A film workshop. ELT Journal 57(1), 51-59.
Ellis, R. (1997). The study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ericson, F. & Murphy, F. (1987). The Debater’s Guide. Illinois: Southern Illinois University.
Ferris, D. (1998). Students’ views of academic aural/oral skills: A comparative needs analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 289-318.
Ferris, D. & Tagg, T. (1996a). Academic oral communication needs of EAP learners: What subject-matter instructors actually require. TESOL Quarterly, 30(1), 31-58.
Ferris, D. & Tagg, T. (1996b). Academic listening/speaking tasks for ESL students: Problems, suggestions, and implications. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 297-320.
Ferst, P. & Linehan, A. (1997). From speech bubbles to soap bubbles. Modern English Teacher, 6(2), 32-35.
Flowerdew, J. (1995). Research of relevance to second language lecture comprehension: An overview. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp. 7-29). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Flowerdew, J. & Miller, L. (1992). Student perceptions, problems, and strategies in second language lecture comprehension. RELC Journal, 23(2), 60-80.

Fryar, M., Thomas, D. & Goodnight, L. (1993). Basic Debate. Illinois: National Textbook Company.
Gareis, E. (1997). Movies in the language classroom: Dealing with problematic content. TESOL Journal, 6(4), 20-23.
Gay, L.R. & Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Goetz, J. & LeCompte, M. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Goodnight, L. (1993). Getting started in debate. Illinois: National Textbook Company.
Goodwin, J. (2003). Students’ perspectives on debate exercises in content area classes. Communication Education, 52(2), 157-163.
Green, A. C. (1997). Collaborative grouping and personality theory. In A.S. Horning & R. A. Sudol (Eds.), Understanding literacy: Personality preference in rhetorical and psycholinguistic contexts (pp. 91-103). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Her, H. (1993). Why we need debate class? English Teaching & Learning, 18(2), 16-27.
Hettich, P. (1990). Journal writing: Old fare or nouvelle cuisine? Teaching of Psychology, 17(1), 36-39.
Hill, B. (1982). Intercollegiate debate: Why do students bother? Southern Speech Communication Journal, 48, 77-88.

Hill, B. (1991). Making the most of satellites and interactive video. London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.
Huang, L. (2002). Debate as a pathway to academic discussion. TESOL Journal, 11(4), 30-31.
Huang, Y. (1995). Developing your students’ communicative competence: Some practical ideas fro the classroom teachers. In Selected papers from the ninth conference on English teaching and learning in the Republic of China (pp.178-187). Taipei: Crane.
Hunt, S. K. (2003). Encouraging student involvement: An approach to teaching communication. Communication Studies, 54(2), 133-136.
Hwang, C. H. (1982). Studies in Chinese personality: A critical review. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 15, 227-242.
Hwang, C. H. & Hwang, C. E. (1992). Chinese university students on the MBTI. Psychological Testing, 39, 285-295.
Hyland, K. (1991). Developing oral-presentation skills. English Teaching Forum, 29(2), 35-37.
Ing, R. O. (1987). The teaching of public speaking. In Papers from the Fourth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 221-232). Taipei: Crane.
Ing, R. O. (1997). General guidelines for the teaching of discussion and debate. English Teaching & Learning, 22(1), 68-76.
Jensen, G. & Ditiberio, J. (1994). Personality and the teaching of composition. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1990). Social skills for successful group work. Educational Leadership, 47, 29-33.
Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Katchen, J. E. (1989). A course outline for teaching English speech. In A Collection of Papers Presented in the Sixth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 287-300). Taipei: Crane.
Katchen, J. E. (1993). Using music to generate student oral production of descriptive stories. English Teaching & Learning, 18(2), 72-82.
Kember, D., Jamieson, Q. W., Pomfret, M. & Wong, E. T. (1995). Learning approaches, study time and academic performance. Higher Education, 29, 329-343.
Kember, D., Ng, S., Tse, H. & Wong, T. T. (1996). An examination of the interrelationships between workload, study time, learning approaches and academic outcomes. Studies in Higher Education 21(3), 347-358.
Kember, D. (2004). Interpreting student workload and the factors which shape students perceptions of their workload. Studies in Higher Education, 29(2), 165-184.
King, J. (1997). Coping with ESL students’ oral presentation problems. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 199-211). Taipei: Crane.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis. London: Longman.
Lang, L. (1999). “To open our mind more freely”: Educational drama and the common curriculum framework for English language arts. English Quarterly, 31(3), 48-62.
La Palio, L. R. (1981). Time study of students and house staff on a university medical service. Journal of Medical Education, 56, 61-63.
Larson, C., Dansereau D., O’Donnell, A., Hythecker, V., Lambiotte, J. & Rocklin, T. (1984). Verbal ability and cooperative learning: Transfer of effects. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(4), 289-295.
Lazaraton, A. (2001). Teaching oral skills. In M. Celce-Murcia, (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 54-64). United States: Heinle & Heinle.
Lee, J. F. & VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative language teaching happen. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Liang, F. (1993). Discussions on overall foreign language teaching. In Selected Papers from the Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 65-78). Taipei: Crane.
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G.. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage.
Littlewood, W., Liu, N. & Yu, C. (1996). Hong Kong tertiary students; attitudes and proficiency in spoken English. RELC Journal, 27 (1), 70-88.
Lockhart, C., & Ng, P. (1995). Analyzing talk in ESL peer response groups: Stances, functions, and content. Language Learning, 45, 605-655.
Long, M. H. (1983). Linguistic and conversational adjustment to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 177-193.
Long, M. & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 27-56.
Lucas, S. E. (2001). The art of public speaking. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Macdonald, A. F. (1981). Integrating skills through formal debate in the upper level ESL classroom. Exercise Exchange, 25(2), 21-26.
Macaro, E. (1997). Target language, collaborative learning and autonomy. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Marefat, F. (2002). The impact of diary analysis of teaching/learning writing. RELC Journal, 33(1), 101-121.
Markee, N.P. (1997). Managing curricular innovation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mason, A. (1995). By dint of: Student and lecturer perceptions of lecture comprehension strategies in first-term graduate study. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp. 199-218). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher , 17, 13-17.
Matlon, R. J. & Keele, L. M. (1984). A survey of participants in the National Debate Tournament, 1947-1980. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 20, 194-205.
McCaulley, M. H. (1976). Psychological types in engineering: Implications for teaching. Engineering Education, 66, 729-736.
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Mitchell, I. A. (1978). Extroverted/Introverted personality and oral language communication. Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 3427A.

Moder, C. L. & Halleck, G.. B. (1995). Solving the puzzle with role plays. TESOL Journal, 4(3), 16-19.
Moeller, T. G. (1985). Using classroom debate in teaching developmental psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 12(4), 207-209.
Murphy, J. M. (1991). Oral communication in TESOL: Integrating speaking, listening, and pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 51-75.
Murphey, T. (2003). Motivating positive change with near peer role modeling. In Selected Papers from the Twelfth International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 113-126). Taipei: Crane.
Myers, I., McCaulley, M., Quenk, N. & Hammer, A. (Eds). (1998). MBTI manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Myres, I. B. & Myres, P. B. (1980). Gifts differing. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists.
Naiman, N., Frohlich M., Stern, H. & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner. Toronto: The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (Ed.) (1992). Collaborative language learning and teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ostler, S. E. (1980). A survey of academic needs for advanced ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 14(4), 489-502.
Pally, M. (2000). Sustaining interest/ advancing learning: Sustained content-based instruction in ESL/EFL: Theoretical background and rationale. In M. Pally (Eds.), Sustained content teaching in academic ESL/EFL (pp.1-18). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Peng, Q. (2000). Debate and Innovation: Speech and debate in oral communication class. Foreign Language World, 78 (2), 39-44.
Pernecky, M. (1997). Debate for the economics class and others. College Teaching, 45(4), 136-138.
Pines, H. A. & Julian, J. W. (1972). Effects of task and social demands on locus of control differences in information processing. Journal of Personality, 40, 407-416.
Porter, A., Goldstein, L., Leatherman, J. & Conrad, S. (1990). An ongoing dialogue: Learning logs for teacher preparation. In J. Richards & D. Nunan (Eds), Second language teacher education (pp. 1-25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Punch, K. F. (1998). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage.
Rebscher, M. (1998). A real-life business role play. TESOL Journal, 7(3), 38-39.
Richards, J.C. (2002). 30 years of TEFL/TESL: A personal reflection. In Selected Papers from the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching (pp. 141-161). Taipei: Crane.
Rosen, E. (1993). Role playing in a large class. TESOL Journal, 2(3), 33.
Rossier, R. (1976). Extroversion-introversion as a significant variable in the learning of oral English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California.
Scovel, T. (1978). The effect of affect on foreign language learning: A review of the anxiety research. Language Learning, 28, 129-142.
Shie, J. S. (2001). Components of TESOL role plays. English Teaching & Learning, 26(2), 77-88.
Shie, J. S. (2002). Designing role plays for the language class. English Teaching & Learning, 27(1), 67-83.
Slavin, R. E. (1983). Cooperative learning. New York: Longman.
Smith, J. (1986). Old-fashioned debates help hone students’ thinking skills. American School Board Journal, 173(5), 43.
Stempleski, S. & Tomalin, B. (1990). Video in action. London: Prentice Hall International.
Stevick, E. W. (1980). Teaching language: A way and ways. Cambridge: Newbury House Publishers.
Stewart, T. (2003). Debate for ESOL students. TESOL Journal, 12(1), 9-15.
Strong, M. (1983). Social styles and the second language acquisition of Spanish-speaking kindergartners. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 241-258.
Suter, R. (1976). Predictors of pronunciation accuracy in second-language learning. Language Learning, 26, 233-253.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren’t enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 50(1), 159-164.
Swain, M. (1995). Three function of output in second language learning. In G. Gook & B. Seidhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sy, B. M. (1994). Radio play production: An integrated language learning activity. English Teaching & Learning, 18(3), 78-88.
The Hiyoshi Review Public Committee. (2000). Language, culture and communication. Special Issue on Foreign Language Education Research. No. 24. Keio University.
Tsui, A. B. (1996). Reticence and anxiety in second language learning. In K. M. Bailey & D. Nunan (Eds.), Voices from the language classroom (pp. 145-167). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tsui, C. J. (1990). English communication skills needs of professionals in Taiwan’s high-technology industry. Hsinchu, Taiwan: National Chiao-Tung University.
Ur, P. (1981). Discussions that work: Task-centered fluency practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wenden, A. (1985). Learner strategies. TESOL Newsletter, 19, 1-7.
Widdowson, R. (1994). Contest, community, and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 705-716.
Williams, D., McGee, B. & Worth, D. (2001). University student perceptions of the efficacy of debate participation: An empirical investigation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 37, 198-209.
Willig, C. (2001). Introducing qualitative research in psychology: Adventures in theory and method. Buckingham: Open University press.
Wood, S. & Rowland-Morin, P. A. (1989). Motivational tension: Winning vs. pedagogy in academic debate. National Forensic Journal, 7, 81-97.
Wu, Y. H. (1988). A study of the willingness in oral participation in class. In Papers from the Fifth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 49-59). Taipei: The Crane Publishing.
Yan, L. & Kember, D. (2003). Influence of the curriculum and learning environment on group learning approaches outside the classroom. Learning Environments Research, 6, 285-307.
Yang, K. S. (1965). Psychological studies on Chinese national character: A literature review. Thought and Word, 2, 3-19.
Yi, C. C. (1990). Dynamic speaking activities. English Teaching & Learning, 15(2), 61-71.
Yu, C. (1990). Dynamic speaking activities. English Teaching & Learning, 15(2), 61-71.

全文公開日期本全文未授權公開 (校內網路)
全文公開日期本全文未授權公開 (校外網路)

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文