淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-0908201114094700
中文論文名稱 寫週記學英文︰紙本與電子對話週記對提升EFL大學生寫作品質影響
英文論文名稱 Teaching and Learning English through Dialogue Journal: The Impact of Paper- and Electronic-based Journals on the Writing Quality Improvement of EFL University Freshmen
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 英文學系博士班
系所名稱(英) Department of English
學年度 99
學期 2
出版年 100
研究生中文姓名 張聖恩
研究生英文姓名 Chang Sheng-En
學號 894010213
學位類別 博士
語文別 英文
口試日期 2011-06-15
論文頁數 240頁
口試委員 指導教授-黃月貴
委員-王藹玲
委員-李利德
委員-程玉秀
委員-張雅慧
中文關鍵字 對話週記  紙本週記  電子郵件週記  寫作能力  寫作品質  寫作焦慮  全民英檢寫作測驗 
英文關鍵字 dialogue journal writing (DJW)  paper-based journal  e-mail journal  writing proficiency  writing quality  writing anxiety  GEPT writing test 
學科別分類
中文摘要 本研究旨在探討︰「對話週記」對提升台灣大學生英文寫作品質之效能影響。師生或同儕間的日誌或週記在近年來已逐漸被應用於語文教學,然而之前的研究多處於全英語環境、學生年齡層較低、小規模個案實驗、或涉及文法批改,因此對話週記對提升本地大學生英文寫作品質之研究實屬必要。
本研究進行於九十八學年度,對象為台北市某私立大學80位修習「大一英文」的新鮮人,分配成兩個實驗組和一個對照組,為擴大其研究範圍,兩個實驗組分別以「紙本」和「電子郵件」的方式進行,在一學年內撰寫24篇週記和老師進行文字溝通,而對照組則不需寫週記,全體學生在實驗開始和結束時各進行一次全民英檢寫作模擬測驗以供分析。在質性分析方面︰研究者比較兩組的週記內容,並透過問卷調查及課後訪問,以歸納出同異點和寫作特性。在量性分析方面︰以SPSS(t-test和ANOVA)對前後測和各組差異進行統計分析;以ESL Composition Profile分析寫作品質,以T-unit Analysis查驗寫作量和正確度變化;以SLWAI第二語言寫作焦慮量表(身體焦慮、逃避行為、認知焦慮)、TAS考試焦慮量表、自製問卷調查焦慮變化。
而研究結果顯示︰(一)實驗組寫作分數稍有提升,寫作品質之「內容」和「組織」顯著提升,寫作長度及速度增加;(二)紙本組、電郵組進步幅度相似,但前者的寫作品質和參與程度稍高;(三)實驗組身體焦慮及電郵組考試焦慮均下降;(四)實驗組練習寫作機會及興趣增加。結果證明透過對話週記這類功能性語言的持續練習,將有效改進台灣新鮮人的某些寫作品質,建議可將它當成回家作業或課外活動輔助一般教學,然而每週篇幅不宜過長,題目、內容也該較有彈性,以免增加師生們額外負擔產生反效果。
英文摘要 This study aims to investigate the impacts of paper and electronic “dialogue journals” on Taiwanese university students’ writing quality improvement. The popularity of dialogue journal writing has gradually risen in recent years, with past studies mostly focusing on an EFL setting, relatively young learners, small-scale cases, or grammar correction. So it is valuable for teachers to examine its role in Taiwan’s university English education.
This study was conducted in the Academic Year 2009-2010. The participants were 80 freshmen from two “Freshman English” courses at a private university in Taipei City. They were divided into two experimental groups (“Paper-based” group and “E-mail” group) and one control group (“Non-journal” group). All the journal writers had to compose 24 entries throughout the academic year-long project. For qualitative analysis, the researcher studied their entries through content analysis, questionnaire survey, and interview to search for similarities and differences. For quantitative analysis, statistical significance tests on their writing test scores were calculated through SPSS (t-test & ANOVA). The researcher also measured their writing improvement and anxiety change through ESL Composition Profile, T-unit Analysis, two anxiety scales, and a questionnaire survey.
After a year of practice, the study results showed that: (a) The writers’ GEPT scores slightly improved, and their writing quality significantly improved in terms of “Content” and “Organization.” (b) The “Paper-based” group outperformed the other groups and had better participation and writing attitudes. (c) Paper and online journal writers’ “somatic anxiety” and online journal writers’ test anxiety slightly reduced. (c) Such practice successfully increased the writers’ weekly practice volume as well as opportunity for functional language use. The results prove that such practice is able to improve Taiwanese university freshmen’s overall writing scores slightly and certain writing qualities significantly. The researcher recommends it as an extracurricular activity to enhance regular instruction. However, the length of each entry should not be too long, and topic selection should be more flexible, so as not to increase teachers’ and students’ burden or even cause a negative reaction.
論文目次 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHINESE ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………..i
ENGLISH ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………….…ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………..iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………...v
LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………….....….viii
LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………….…..ix

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION…………...………………………………………...1

1.1 Research Background……………………………………………………………...1
1.2 Statement of the Problems…………………………………………………………3
1.2.1 Poor JCEE results…………………………………………………………4
1.2.2 Writing proficiency decline……………………………………………….5
1.2.3 Three major problems…………………………………………………….6
1.3 Purpose of the Study……………………………………………………………..10
1.4 Research Questions………………………………………………………………11
1.5 Significance of the Study………………………………………………...………12
1.6 Definitions of Key Terms…………………………………...……………………14

CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE……….……………………….…17

2.1 Writing Instruction Evolution…………………………………………………...17
2.1.1 A historical perspective…………………………………………………17
2.1.2 An expressive approach…………………………………………………20
2.1.3 Promotion of fluency……………………………………………………23
2.2 Dialogue Journal Writing (DJW)………………………………...………………27
2.2.1 What is a dialogue journal?......................................................................27
2.2.2 A brief development………………………………………….………….31
2.2.3 Major theoretical foundations…………………………...………………35
2.2.4 Some special characteristics…………………………………………….39
2.2.5 Purposes and functional language use…………………………………..43
2.3 Dialogue Journal Writing in Practice…………………………………………….45
2.3.1 A Comparison of traditional and journal writing………………………..45
2.3.2 Qualities that make a difference…………………………………………48
2.3.3 Benefits and a few drawbacks………………………………...…………51
2.3.4 Staton, Shuy, and Peyton’s reports………………………………………56
2.3.5 Dialogue journal studies in Taiwan………………………………...……58
2.4 Other Key Issues…………………………………………………………,,,…….63
2.4.1 EFL writing apprehension……………………………………………….64
2.4.2 Reducing anxiety through teacher feedback…………………………….67
2.4.3 Raising students’ “voice”………………………………………..………70
2.5 Computer-assisted writing………………………………………………………..76
2.5.1 Technology in the writing class………………………………………….76
2.5.2 Traditional and computer-assisted writing……………………….…...…79
2.5.3 Computer-assisted writing in Taiwan…………………………....………83

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY………………………………………………....…87

3.1 Research Design………………………………………………………………….87
3.1.1 Different perspectives……………………………………………………87
3.1.2 Theoretical framework……………………………………...…….……..89
3.2 Participants……………………………………………………………………….90
3.2.1 The participants’ selection and grouping…….….………………………90
3.2.2 The participants’ proficiency…………………………………………….92
3.3 Instruments……………………………………………………………………….93
3.4 Procedures…………………………………………………………………,,,….101
3.4.1 The pilot study………………………………………………………….101
3.4.2 The current study……………………………………………………….103
3.5 Data Collection and Analysis…………………………………………………...107
3.5.1 Data collection………………………………………………………….107
3.5.2 Quantitative data analysis………………………………………………109
3.5.3 Qualitative data analysis………………………………………………..113

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS…………………………………………………………....118

4.1 Writing Test Results…………………………………………………………….118
4.1.1 GEPT writing tests……………………………………………………..118
4.1.2 ESL Composition Profile……………………………………………....119
4.1.3 Writing length and speed improvement…………………………….….121
4.1.4 T-unit analysis……………………………………………………….…124
4.2 Differences between Two Journal Types…………………………………….….126
4.2.1 Significant difference in certain categories…………………………….126
4.2.2 The writers’ participation and attitudes……………………………...…130
4.3 Writing and Test Anxiety Results……………………………………………….132
4.3.1 Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory (SLWAI)…………….…132
4.3.2 Test Anxiety Scale (TAS)………………………………………………135
4.4 Opportunity for Practice and Functional Language Use……………………….137
4.4.1 Questionnaire Survey Results………………………………………….137
4.4.2 Functional Language Use………………………………………………139
4.5 Special Characteristics of Dialogue Journal………………………………….…140
4.5.1 Char. 1: Power balanced relationship……………………………..……141
4.5.2 Char. 2: Writing as communication…………………………………….143
4.5.3 Char. 3: Genuine communicative purposes…………………………….144
4.5.4 Char. 4: Being problem-solving…………………………………..……145
4.5.5 Char. 5: Taciturn students’ participation in discussion…………………146
4.5.6 Char. 6: Students’ audience awareness…………………………………148
4.5.7 Char. 7: Optimized individual freedom to write and learn……………..148
4.5.8 Char. 8: A channel to vent emotions………………………………..….150

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION…………………………………………………....…154

5.1 Writing Score and Quality Improvement………………………………….……154
5.1.1 Significant improvement in writing quality…………………………....154
5.1.2 Positive responses from the questionnaire……………………………..157
5.1.3 Benefits confirmed in the interviews…..…………………..……….….158
5.2 Major Learning Factors...……………………………………………………….159
5.2.1 Affective, social, and pedagogical factors………….……………..……160
5.2.2 Char. 9: A platform for schoolwork discussion..……………………….163
5.2.3 Char. 10: Students’ imitation of teacher’s writing…………..………….164
5.3 Paper VS. Online Dialogue Journal………………………………………....….166
5.3.1 Improvement in “Content” and “Organization”……..…....……...……166
5.3.2 Different length but different speed………...………………………….168
5.3.3 Different writer participation and attitudes…………………………….168
5.3.4 Char. 11: Writer responsibility for conversation continuance……….…170
5.4 A Non-threatening Writing Environment……………………………………….172
5.4.1 Writing anxiety reduction………………………………………………172
5.4.2 Char. 12: Writers’ concern for grammar errors……………………...…175
5.4.3 Proper teacher feedback………………………………………………..176
5.4.4 Test anxiety reduction…………………………………………………..177
5.5 Opportunity for Functional Language Use………………………………...……179
5.5.1 More writing practice……………………………………………..……179
5.5.2 Rich language functions……………………………………………..…181

CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSION………………………………………………..……188

6.1 Summary of the Study……………………………………………………..……188
6.2 Pedagogical Implications……………………………………………………….192
6.2.1 Sufficient supplementary practice……………………………..…….…192
6.2.2 Meaningful, expressive, and communicative writing……...….…….…193
6.2.3 Lower writing and test anxiety………………………………………....194
6.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research………………………………195
6.3.1 Limitations and recommendations……………………………………..195
6.3.2 Future research suggestions………………………………………..…..200

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………..….203

APPENDICES………………………………………………………………...……225

Appendix A English Dialogue Journal Writing Guideline…………………..……..225
Appendix B GEPT Practice Writing Tests and Grading Rubrics…………..………228
Appendix C ESL Composition Profile…………………………………..…………230
Appendix D Guidelines for T-units, Clauses, Word Counts, and Errors..………….231
Appendix E Second Language Writing Anxiety Inventory…..…………………….233
Appendix F Test Anxiety Scale………………..……………………………...……234
Appendix G Questionnaire…………………..……………………………………..235
Appendix H The Writers’ Participation……..…………………………….………..237

LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………….…viii

Table 1.1 The Results of the English Composition Section of the JCEE……………..5
Table 2.1 Shift of Focus in ESL Writing Instruction…………………………………19
Table 2.2 Four Stages in Writing Development………………………………...……22
Table 2.3 Wang’s 8 Dialogue Journal Characteristics………………………….…….42
Table 2.4 The Main Purposes of Dialogue Journal Writing………………………….43
Table 2.5 15 Common Functions and 6 Uncommon Functions…………………...…45
Table 2.6 A Comparison of Traditional Academic Writing and Dialogue Journal Writing……………………………………………………………………………….46
Table 2.7 Benefits for Teachers and Students………………………………………..52
Table 2.8 Benefits and Drawbacks of Dialogue Journal Writing…………………….55
Table 2.9 Comparison of Classroom Talk and Dialogue Journals………………...…57
Table 2.10 15 Taiwanese Studies on Dialogue Journal Writing……………………...60
Table 2.11 Extended ESL Composition Profile Criteria for “Voice”……………...…71
Table 2.12 Benefits and Drawbacks of Computer-assisted Writing………………….77
Table 3.1 The Distribution of the Participants………………………………………..91
Table 3.2 The Instruments for the Four Research Questions……………………….100
Table 3.3 The Timetable of this Study (Fall 2009 & Spring 2010)…………………104
Table 3.4 The Selected Participants for T-unit Analysis…………………………….111
Table 3.5 10 Research Issues for Qualitative Data Analysis………………………..114
Table 4.1 One-way ANOVA Results of the GEPT………………………………….118
Table 4.2 t-test Results of the GEPT………………………………………………..119
Table 4.3 One-way ANOVA Results of the ESL Composition Profile……………..120
Table 4.4 t-Test Results of the ESL Composition Profile………………………..…120
Table 4.5 One-way ANOVA Results of the Number of Sentences…………………121
Table 4.6 t-Test Results of the Number of Sentences………………………………122
Table 4.7 One-way ANOVA Results of the Number of Words……………………..123
Table 4.8 t-Test Results of the Number of Words…………………………………..123
Table 4.9 5-Point Likert Scale on Writing Speed………………………………..…124
Table 4.10 T-unit Analysis Results of the Participants with Highest and Lowest Scores………………………………………………………………………………125
Table 4.11 One-way ANOVA Results of the Six Profile Categories……………….127
Table 4.12 Tamhane's Post-Hoc Test on “Content”…………………………………128
Table 4.13 Tamhane's Post-Hoc Test on “Organization”……………………………128
Table 4.14 t-Test Results of the Six Profile Categories……………………………..129
Table 4.15 One-way ANOVA Results of the SLWAI……………………………….132
Table 4.16 t-Test Results of the SLWAI…………………………………………….133
Table 4.17 One-way ANOVA Results of the Three SLWAI Categories…………….134
Table 4.18 t-Test Results of the Three SLWAI Categories………………………….135
Table 4.19 One-way ANOVA Results of the TAS…………………………………..136
Table 4.20 t-Test Results of the TAS………………………………………………..136
Table 4.21 Section 2 Results of the Questionnaire Survey………………………....138
Table 4.22 The Answers for the 4 Research Questions……………………………..153
Table 5.1 The Participants’ Overall Participation in the Project……………………169
Table 5.2 Pre- and Post-TAS Scores…………………………………………….…..177

LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………….…….ix

Figure 2.1. A Sample Dialogue Journal Entry…………………………………….….28
Figure 2.2. A Triangular Model of Dialogue Journal Writing…………………….….30
Figure 3.1. A sample dialogue journal entry from P6 of the “Paper-based” group.….94
Figure 3.2. A sample dialogue journal entry from E18 of the “E-mail” group………94
Figure 3.3. Two photo files attached to the above e-mail entry of E18 in the “E-mail” group…………………………………………………………………………………95
Figure 3.4. The researcher’s response to the e-mail entry from E18……………...…95
Figure 3.5. Qualitative Research Process…………………………………….…….115
Figure 4.1 Sentence number improvement of the three groups……………….……122
Figure 4.2 Word count improvement of the three groups……………………….….124
參考文獻 REFERENCES
Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. (Eds.). (2004). Theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca University.
Atkinson, D. (1999). TESOL and culture. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 625–654.
Barton, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (1994). Testing in America’s schools: Policy information report. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Center. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 366 616)
Berlin, J. A. (1984). Writing instruction in nineteenth-century American colleges. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP.
Berlin, J. A. (1987). Rhetoric and reality. Writing instruction in American colleges, 1900-1985. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Berlin, J. A. (1988). Rhetoric and ideology in the writing class. College English, 50, 477-494.
Betancourt, F., & Phinney, M. (1988). Sources of writing block in bilingual writers. Written Communication, 5(4), 461-478.
Blanchette, J. (2001). Questions in the online learning environment. Journal of Distance Education, 16, 2.
Brookes, A., & Grundy, P. (1990). Writing for study purposes: A teacher’s guide to developing individual writing skills. New York: Cambridge.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Burns, A. (2004). Teaching English from a global perspective: What are the implications in SE Asia? The Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Cazden, C. (1983). Adult assistance to language development: Scaffolds, models, and direct instruction. In R. P. Parker & F. A. Davis (Eds.), Developing literacy: Young children's use of language. pp. 3-18. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1: 1-47.
Chan, F.-W. (2005). Effects of dialogue journal writing on the writing fluency of EFL junior high school students in Taiwan. Master’s thesis, Tunghai University.
Chang, C.-L. (2005). Influences of e-mail on junior high school students’ English composition. The Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Chang, S.-E. (2002, August 15). Reform language-teaching methods. The Taipei Times. Retrieved from http://www.taipeitimes.com/
Chang, S.-E. (2003, July 29). Not making the grade in English. The Taipei Times. Retrieved from http://www.taipeitimes.com/
Chang, S.-E. (2005, June 16). Taiwan is lagging in English proficiency. The Taipei Times. Retrieved from http://www.taipeitimes.com/
Chang, S.-E. (2006a, January 22). Take steps to reduce the nation's English gap. The Taipei Times. Retrieved from http://www.taipeitimes.com/
Chang, S.-E. (2006b, December 10). Language education is more than empty talk. The Taipei Times. Retrieved from http://www.taipeitimes.com/
Chen, Y.-M. (1996). Dialogue journal writing as communication: A descriptive study of a junior-high-school class. Master’s thesis, Providence University.
Cheng, Y.-S. (2004). A measure of second language writing anxiety: Scale development and preliminary validation. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 313-335.
Chiang, S.-L. (1996). The Effects of the dialogue writing instruction method on the use of writing strategy and writing performance of elementary students. Master’s thesis, National Hualien Teachers College.
Chien, C.-N. (2009). Developing an English program: What should EFL freshman students study? The Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Chow, C.-H. (2001). Implementing journal writing in a freshman writing curriculum. Selected papers from the 10th International Symposium on English Teaching.
Curran, C. (1976). Counseling learning in second languages. Apple River, IL: Apple River Press.
Daiute, C., & Dalton, B. (1988). Let's brighten it up a bit': Collaboration and cognition in writing. In B. Rafoth & D. Rubin (Eds.), The Social Construction of Writing. NJ: Ablex.
Daly, J. A. (1977). The effects of writing apprehension in message encoding. Journalism Quarterly, 54, 566-572.
Daly, J. (1985). Writing apprehension. In M. Rose (Ed.), When a writer can't write. New York: Guilford. 43-82.
Daly, J. A., & Miller, M. D. (1975). The empirical development of an instrument of writing apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 9, 242–249.
Elbow, P. (1998a). Writing with power (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Elbow, P. (1998b). Writing without teachers (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1997). Second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Faigin, S. (1985). Basic ESL literacy from a Freirean perspective: A curriculum unit for farmworker education. Master’s thesis, University of British Columbia. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 274 196)
Faigley, L. (1986). Competing theories of process: A critique and a proposal. College English, 48(6), 527-542.
Faigley, L., Daly, J., & Witte, S. (1981). The role of writing apprehension in writing performance and competence. Journal of Education Research, 75, 16-21.
Ferris, D. (1995a). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33-53.
Ferris, D. (1995b). Teaching ESL composition students to become independent self-editors. TESOL Journal, 4(4), 18-22.
Ferris, D., & Hedgcock, J. S. (1998). Teaching ESL composition: purpose, process, and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1-10.
Ferris, D., & Helt, M. (2000). Was Truscott right? New evidence on the effects of error correction in L2 writing classes. Paper presented at AAAL Conference, Vancouver, BC.
Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161-148.
Ferris, D. (2002). Treatment of error in second language writing classes. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ferris, D. (2004). The “grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime . . .?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49-62.
Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help L2 writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In K. Hydland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues,, pp. 81-104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Flowerdew, J. (2005). A multimethod approach to research into processes of scholarly writing for publication. In P. K Matsuda & T. J.Silva (Eds.), Second language writing research: Perspectives on the process of knowledge construction. 65-77. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: The Seabury Press.
Garmon, M. A. (1998). Using dialogue journals to promote student growth in a multicultural education course. Remedial and Special education, 19(1), 32-45.
Garmon, M. A. (2001). The benefits of dialogue journals: What prospective teachers say. Teacher Education Quarterly, Fall 2001.
Goodwin, A. A., Hamrick, J., & Stewart, T. C. (1993). Instructional delivery via electronic mail, TESOL Journal, 24-27.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics, 3, Academic Press, 41-58.
Hairston, M. (1982). The winds of change: Thomas Kuhn and the revolution in the teaching of writing. College Composition and Communication 33(1): 76-88.
Helms-Park, R., & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: an empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 245–265.
Hirvela, A., & Belcher, D. (2001). Coming back to voice: The multiple voices and identities of mature multilingual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(1–2), 83–106.
Ho, C.-H. (2004). A study of the application of weekly dialogue journals in an EFL junior-high classroom. Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Hsu, R.-R. (2007). A study of the effects of dialogue journal writing and guided writing on Taiwanese high school students' writing proficiency and writing apprehension. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Huang, Y.-K. (1997). A fluency first experiment: Teaching reading and writing the whole language way. The Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Hunt, K. W. (1965). Grammatical structures written at three grade levels. National Council of Teachers of English.
Hunt, K. W. (1970). Do sentences in the second language grow like those in the first? TESOL Quarterly, 4(3), 195-202.
Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hymes, D.H. (1971). On communicative competence. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Jacobs, H. L., Zinkgraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfiel, V. F., & Hughey, J. B. (1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Johnstone, B. (1996). Linguistic individual: Self-expression in language and linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jones, P. (1991). What are dialogue journals? In J. K. Peyton, & J. Staton (Ed.), Writing our lives: Reflections on dialogue journal writing with adults learning English. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Regents Prentice Hall and Center for Applied Linguistics.
Kazemek, F. E. (1988). Necessary change: Professional involvement in adult literary programs. Harvard Educational Review, 58(4), 464-487.
Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20-34.
Kroll, B. (1991). Teaching writing in the ESL context. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (2nd ed.). 243-263. New York: Newbury House.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman.
Liang, T.-L. (1996). Cooperative learning on the Internet: The intercultural e-mail classroom connection. The Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on English Teaching, 233-242. Taipei: Crane.
Liaw, M.-L. (1996). Communicative devices used by EFL students in e-mail writing. Tunghai University.
Lee, H.-Y. (2007). Effects of student-teacher dialogue journals. Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Lee, S. Y., & Krashen, S. (1997). Writing apprehension in Chinese as a first language. ITL: Review of Applied Linguistics, 115-116, 27-37.
Lee, S. Y., & Krashen, S. (2002). Predictors of success in writing in English as a foreign language: Reading, revision behavior, apprehension, and writing. College Student Journal, 36(4), 532-543.
Leki, I. (2005). The challenges of teaching EFL writing. The Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Li, C.-C. (2004). Trends in Asia ELT: Theory and practice. The Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Liao, M.-T., & Wong, C.-T. (2008). Effects of dialogue journals on students’ writing fluency, motivation, anxiety, and reflection. The Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Lin, C.-J. (1995). Discussion-Kid: A dialog-based computer assisted teaching environment. Master’s thesis, National Central University.
Lin, G.-Y. (2010). The study of teachers’ beliefs in teaching writing in senior high schools in Taiwan. Master’s thesis, Tamkang University.
Lin, Y.-F. (2003). The effect of oral-written dialogue journals on speaking in EFL students. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Lin, Y.-Y. (2007). An exploratory study of English multimedia writing: Implementing weblogs in a college composition class. Master’s thesis, National Tsing Hua University.
Lin, S.-H., & Liao, M.-T. (2009). Effects of the Interactive Journal Writing on English Writing for Junior High School Students. The Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Lu, K.Y. (2003). Effect of e-mail exchanges on EFL senior high school students' writing. Master’s thesis, National Tsing Hua University.
Luo, W.-L. (2008). Effects of dialogue journals on English learning and writing of EFL third graders in Taiwan. Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Lund, C. (1998). The presence of others: Voice, audience and e-mail. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://leahi.kcc.hawaii.edu/org/icon98/paper/lund.html.
MacGowan-Gilhooly, A. (1991) Fluency First: Reversing the traditional ESL sequence, Journal of Basic Writing, 10(1), 73-87.
MacGowan-Gilhooly, A. (1996). Fluency first: Reversing the traditional ESL sequence. In B. Leeds (Ed.), Writing in a second language: Insights from first and second language teaching and research. London: Longman.
Macrorie, K. (1980). Searching writing. New Jersey: Hayden.
Macrorie, K. (1984). Writing to be read. (3rd ed.). Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.
Matsuda, P. K. (2001). Voice in Japanese written discourse: implications for second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(1–2), 35–53.
Matsuda, P. K. (2003). Process and post-process: A discursive history. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(1), 65-83.
Matsuda, P. K., & Silva, T. (2005). Second language writing research: Perspectives on the process of knowledge construction (Eds.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Matsuda, P. K., & Tardy, C. M. (2007). Voice in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 235-249.
Morroy, R. (1985). Teacher strategies: Linguistic devices for sustaining interaction in dialogue journal writing. Washington, DC: Georgetown University.
Moussavi, S. A. (2002). An encyclopedic dictionary of language testing (3rd ed). Taiwan: Tung Hua Book Company.
Murray, D. (1985). A writer teaches writing (2nd Ed.). Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
Newman, E. (1996). No more test anxiety. Los Angeles: Learning Skills Publications. 1-14.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1998). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific region. TESOL Quarterly 37(4), 589-613.
Peyton, J.K. (1993). Dialogue Journals: Interactive Writing To Develop Language and Literacy. ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics Washington DC.
Peyton, J. K., & Staton, J. (1988). The social construction of written communication. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Peyton, J. K., & Staton, J. (1991). Writing our lives: Reflections on dialogue journal writing with adults learning English (Eds.), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Regents Prentice Hall and Center for Applied Linguistics.
Peyton, J. K., & Staton, J. (1993). Dialogue journals in the multilingual classroom: building language fluency and writing skills through written interaction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Peyton, J. K., Staton, J. & Gutstein, S. (1984). What is dialogue? Dialogue, 2(1), 1.
Peyton, J. K., Shuy, R. W., Staton, J, Reed, L., & Morroy, R. (1984). Dialogue writing: Analysis of student-teacher interactive writing in the learning of English as a second language. National Institute of Education, Washington, DC.
Polio, C. G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accuracy in second language writing research. Language Learning, 47(1), 101-143.
Porte, G. (1996). The etiology of poor second language writing: The influence of perceived teacher preferences on second language revision strategies. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 61-78.
Powell, B. (1984). A comparison of students' attitudes and success in writing. Journal of Negro Education, 53(2), 114-123.
Prior, P. (2001). Voices in text, mind, and society: sociohistoric accounts of discourse acquisition and use. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(1-2), 55–81.
Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly 25, 3:407-30.
Ramanathan, V., & Atkinson, D. (1999). Individualism, academic writing, and ESL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 45–75.
Reeves, L. L. (1997). Minimizing apprehension in the learner centered classroom. The English Journal, 86: 38-45.
Richards, C. J. (2002). 30 years of TEFL/TESL: A personal reflection. The Proceedings of the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching in the Republic of China.
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (Eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Rivers, W. M., & Temperley, M. S. (1978). A practical guide to the teaching of. English as a second or foreign language. New York: Oxford University Press
Rorschach, E., & MacGowan-Gilhooly, A. (1993). Fluency first in ESL. City College of New York.
Russell, M., & Haney, W. (1996). Testing writing on computers: Results of a pilot study to compare student writing test performance via computer or via paper-and-pencil. Paper presented at the Mid-Atlantic Alliance for Computers and Writing Conference.
Sarason, I. G. (1978). The test anxiety scale: Concept and research. In C. D. Spielberger & I. G. Sarason (Eds.), Stress and anxiety, pp. 193-216. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Sarason, I. G., & Sarason, B. R. (1990). Test anxiety, In H. Leitenberg (Ed.), Handbook of social and evaluation anxiety. New York: Plenum Press.
Scovel, T. (1978). The effect of affect on foreign language learning: A review of the anxiety research. Language Learning, 28, 129–142.
Shuy, R. W., (1988). Sentence level language functions. In J. Staton, R. W. Shuy, J. K. Peyton, & L. Reed (Eds.), Dialogue journal communication: Classroom, linguistic, social, and cognitive views. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Shuy, R. W., (1988). Discourse level language functions: Complaining. In J. Staton, R. W. Shuy, J. K. Peyton, & L. Reed (Eds.), Dialogue journal communication: Classroom, linguistic, social, and cognitive views. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Spack, R., & Sadow, C. (1983). Student-teacher working journals in ESL freshman composition. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 575-593.
Stapleton, P. (2002). Critiquing voice as a viable pedagogical tool in L2 writing: returning the spotlight to ideas. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(3), 177–190.
Staton, J. (1987). Dialogue journals: ERIC digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills Urbana IL.
Staton, J. (1988). Preface: A brief history and acknowledgement. In J. Staton, R. W. Shuy, J. K. Peyton, & L. Reed (Eds.), Dialogue journal communication: Classroom, linguistic, social, and cognitive views. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Staton, J. (1991). Creating an attitude of dialogue in adult literacy instruction. In J. K. Peyton, & J. Staton (Ed.), Writing our lives: Reflections on dialogue journal writing with adults learning English (Eds.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Regents Prentice Hall and Center for Applied Linguistics.
Staton, J., & Peyton, J. (1986). History of dialogue journals and dissertation abstracts. Unpublished.
Staton, J., & Peyton, J. (1990). A history of dialogue journals (Preface). Dialogue, Back Issues from 1982-1989. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Staton, J., & Shuy, R. W., (1988). Taking our way into writing and reading: Dialogue journal practice. In J. K. Peyton & J. Staton (Eds.), The social construction of written communication. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Staton, J., Peyton, J. K., & Gutstein, S. (1989). Dialogue in content area instruction: Promise and practice. Dialogue, 6(2).
Staton, J., Shuy, R. W., & Peyton, J. K. (1982a). Analysis of dialogue journal writing as a communicative event, Volume I. Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, D.C.
Staton, J., Shuy, R. W., & Peyton, J. K. (1982b). Analysis of dialogue journal writing as a communicative event, Volume II. Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, D.C.
Staton, J., Shuy, R. W., Peyton, J. K., & Reed, L. (1988). Dialogue journal communication: Classroom, linguistic, social, and cognitive views. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Stowe, J. E. (1990). English language instruction in the schools in transition: The case of Taiwan in the 1980s. Doctoral dissertation, Teacher’s College, Columbia University, New York.
Sullivan, N. (1993). Teaching writing on a computer network. TESOL Journal 3, 34-35.
Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environment: A computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 24(4), 491-501.
Sun, I.-L. (2006). A study of the application of weekly dialogue journals in parenthood. Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Tarone, E. (1990). On variation in interlanguage: A response to Gregg. Applied Linguistics, 11, 392-400.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369.
Truscott, J. (1999). The case for “the case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes”: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 111-122.
Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255-272.
Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y.-P. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292-305.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, (Eds. & Trans.). Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Wang, A.-L. (1997). Bridging the cultural gap through computer-mediated cross-cultural communications: A case study of Chinese college students in Taiwan. Doctoral dissertation, New York University.
Wang, A.-L. (2008). Raising college students’ real voice through online dialogue journal writing. Crane Publishing Co.
Wang, B. (2003). A study of the effects of student-teacher dialogue journals on EFL writing in high schools in Taiwan. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470-481.
Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31: 57–71.
Weissberg, B. (2005). Talking about writing: Cross-modality research and second language speaking/writing connections. In P.K. Matsuda & T. Silva (Eds.), Second language writing research: Perspectives on the process of knowledge construction (pp. 93–104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wible, D. (2005). Language learning and language technology: Toward foundations for interdisciplinary collaboration. Crane Publishing Co.
Widdowson, H. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford University Press.
Wong, C.-T. (2007). Effects of dialogue journal writing on writing proficiency, reflection, anxiety, and motivation of senior high school students. Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Wu, M.-H. (2007). The effects of audiotaped dialogue journals on reducing students’ English speaking anxiety: A case study of university students at Tamkang. Master’s thesis, Tamkang University.
Xu, F., & Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and curricular reform in China: A case study. TESOL Quarterly, 38(2): 301-323.
Yang, C.-C. (2007). Effects of interactive journal writing on English learning of high and low English achievers in junior high school. Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Yang, H.-H. (2009). Effects of problem-posing dialogue journal writing on problem-posing skills, audience awareness, and peer response of ESL senior high students. Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
王才康(2001)。考試焦慮量表在大學生中的測試報告。中國心理衛生雜誌,15(2)︰96-99。
林春仲(2007)。教育落伍 學英文攏是假。聯合報。
http://udn.com/NEWS/main.html
李振清(2006a)。從英語閱讀中領會寫作所需的語感。英語充電站7。
http://cc.shu.edu.tw/~cte/gallery/ccli/abc/0_abc_index.htm
李振清(2006b)。藉閱讀與語感培養英語寫作知能。英語充電站8。
http://cc.shu.edu.tw/~cte/gallery/ccli/abc/0_abc_index.htm
李振清(2008a)。教育國際化趨勢中的英語文新展望。英語充電站100。
http://cc.shu.edu.tw/~cte/gallery/ccli/abc/0_abc_index.htm
李振清(2008b)。大學指考翻譯與作文彰顯的英語文能力培養之道。英語充電站114。http://cc.shu.edu.tw/~cte/gallery/ccli/abc/0_abc_index.htm
李振清、王毓芝(2008)。從大學指考探討高中生英文寫作能力的問題。英語充電站123。
http://cc.shu.edu.tw/~cte/gallery/ccli/abc/0_abc_index.htm
彭森明(2005)。臺灣高等教育整合資料庫:92 學年度高等教育師生問卷調查 - 大一新生調查分析報告。教育研究與評鑑中心。
彭森明(2006)。臺灣高等教育整合資料庫:94 學年度高等教育師生問卷調查 - 大一新生調查分析報告。教育研究與評鑑中心。
葉純純(2004)。英文日誌在寫作課堂的應用。英語教育電子月刊,10。http://ejee.ncu.edu.tw/teacherarticle/10-6engdiary.htm.
張一慈、Patrick Cowsill(2003)。全民英檢一路通—中級寫作模擬試題冊。文鶴出版有限公司。
張一慈、Patrick Cowsill(2004)。全民英檢一路通—中級寫作能力測驗。文鶴出版有限公司。
廖柏森(2006)。大學生英文作文零分。聯合報。
http://udn.com/NEWS/main.html
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2012-08-15公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2012-08-15起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信