此研究主要探討五位台灣新進學者以英文投稿學術期刊之經驗以及在學術寫作上能力表現。藉由深度訪談了解這些參與者寫作過程，寫作諮詢及修改的幫助，以及學術閱讀的角色。參與者的寫作能力則藉由Swales 1990 年的 CARS 模型來分析是否研究報告引言中的修辭結構與CARS 模型吻合。
寫作過程：幾位參與者在寫作前使用母語，另外有一位用母語書寫整篇研究報告然後再翻譯成英文。輔助者：幾位參與者覺得即使是英語為母語的專業編修者也只能提供有限的幫助。其中一位覺得編修者只有著重在非常基本的寫作層面而似乎不關心通篇文章的連貫性。但是如果編修者的背景是在理工方面則對於通篇文章則較有影響力。指導者的角色也是歧異很大，有些會重新組織段落或是重寫這些參與者的文章，有些則是要求請英語為母語的專業編修者修改，有些甚至要求參與者以中文書寫之後再翻譯成英文。閱讀：有些參與者提到閱讀的重要性與跟寫作的相關性，但是沒有人提及理解假設(Comprehension Hypothesis)，也就是沒有察覺從大量的閱讀中習得學術語言用法。然而，閱讀被視為寫作者可以立即取得制式語彙的來源。
已發表的研究報告中顯示這些參與者已經習得部分Swales 模型中的要素，但不是全部，而且在這些參與者之間還有很大的變化。在三種語步 (move)中，第一語步最廣為使用，第二語步相對來說很少被使用，第三語步則是作為引導至下一個文章段落的連貫用法。其中第三語步中的第二言步 (step) 全部被五位學者省略。此研究暗示性的証明多閱讀的人較能習得學術寫作風格。

This study explores five novice Taiwanese scholars’ experiences of writing for scholarly publication and their actual competence in academic writing. On the basis of in-depth interviews, subjects’ composing processes, their use of post-writing helpers, and the role of academic reading were investigated.  Writing competence was evaluated by an analysis of published research papers, using Swales’ (1990) CARS model to determine if the rhetorical structures, as displayed by moves and steps, were consistent with the prototypes of the CARS model.  
Composing process: Several subjects reported relying on their first language in prewriting, and one subject wrote the entire first draft in the first language and then translated. 
Helpers: Several subjects felt that professional editors, even when they were native speakers of English, provided only limited help. One subject felt that editors focused only on low-level aspects of writing, and did not appear to be concerned about the overall coherence of the paper. In other cases, the copy-editor had a background in science and had a more profound impact on the paper.  Advisors’ roles varied a great deal, from rewriting and reorganization, to simply telling the writer to find a copy-editor, to asking the writer to submitting a version in Chinese first for their review, and asking the writer to translate the paper later.  
Reading: Some subjects mentioned reading, but none mentioned it in terms of the Comprehension Hypothesis, not in terms of “acquiring” or absorbing academic language from massive amounts of reading. Rather, reading was used as a source of prefabricated chunks of language that the writers could use immediately in their own papers.  
Analysis of introductions to published papers showed that subjects had acquired some aspects of the Swales model, but not all, and there was considerable variability among the subjects. Of the three major Moves described by Swales, Move 1 (establish a territory) was widely used but Move 2 (preparing for the present study) was comparatively rare. Move 3 (introducing the study) was only presented briefly as a transition to the next section. Move 3 Step 2--Announcing Principal findings (APFs) was omitted by all five writers. 
There was some suggestive evidence that those who read more had acquired more of the academic writing style.

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………	ii
Abstract……………………………………………………………	iv
List of Tables……………………………………………………	x
List of Figures…………………………………………………	xi
List of Appendices………………………………………………	xii
	
CHAPTER ONE  INTRODUCTION……………………………………	1
Statement of the Problem………………………………………1
The Academic environment in Taiwan…………………………	3
English writing instruction in Taiwan……………………	4
Purpose of the study……………………………………………	5
Research questions………………………………………………	6
Definition of Key Terms………………………………………	7
Novice scholars…………………………………………………	9
Significance of the study……………………………………	9
Organization of the Study……………………………………	11
	
CHAPTER TWO   REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE…………………	12
Overview of the Chapter………………………………………	12
Academic writing and EAP……………………………………	13
Writing for publication in L2………………………………  13
 Theoretical perspectives..........................................	14
L2 language acquisition............................	14
The Comprehension Hypothesis..........................................	15
The role of formal instruction...........................................	15
Reader responsibility vs. writer responsibility.....................................	16
	
Academic experiences and literacy in L2............... 17
NNS scholars educated in NS countries and
 working in NS countries..............................	17
NNS scholars educated in NS countries and
 working in NNS countries..............................18
NNS scholars educated in NNS countries and 
working in NNS countries.............................	18
Textual features studies………………………………	19
NNS RA writing: problems……………………………….....................	20
Strategies used by NNS writers………………………………	22
RA selection and criterion………………………………	24
Swales’ Genre Analysis………………………………	26
CARS model………………………………....................	26
Empirical studies on the CARS model………………………	31
	
CHAPTER THREE METHOD...........................................	33
Research methodology..................................	33
Selection of the participants.....................................	34
Participants.......................................	34
Educational Background................................	36
Data collection.......................................	37
Data sources..........................................	37
Overall procedure.................................	38
The initial interview: background information.......	38
Initial interviews..................................	39
Analysis of documentary data.........................	39
Follow-up interviews........................................	39
NNS EAP practitioners’ perceptions and ratings………	40
Data Analysis........................................	41
	
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS...........................................	42
Profiles of the five scholars........................................	42
Case Study One: Lin...............................................	42
Background of Lin...................................	42
Composing process of writing for publication..........	43
Advisor-advisee relationship...................................	44
Difficulties and coping strategies when writing up a paper for scholarly publication..........................................	45
Case Study Two: Wu..................................................	47
Background of Wu....................................................	47
Composing process of writing for publication..........	48
	Advisor-advisee relationship..........................................	49
Difficulties and coping strategies when writing up a paper for scholarly publication.............................	50
Case Study Three: Wang............................	53
Background of Wang.............................................	53
Composing process of writing for publication.....	54
Advisor-advisee relationship..........................	55
Difficulties and coping strategies when writing up a paper for scholarly publication....................................	56
Case Study Four: David...........................................	59
Background of David................................................	59
Composing process of writing for publication..........	59
Advisor-advisee relationship........................................	60
Difficulties and coping strategies when writing up a paper for scholarly publication...................................	62
Case Study Five: Tony...........................	63
Background of Tony.............................	63
Composing process of writing for publication...................................	65
Advisor-advisee relationship........................	67
Difficulties and coping strategies when writing up a paper for scholarly publication....................  	68
	
Results of the move analysis.........................................	70
Results of moves and steps in the Introduction section..........................	74
Move1: Establishing a Territory...................	82
Move2: Preparing for the present study............................................	88
Move3: Introducing the present study.............................................	93
	
CHAPTER FIVE CROSS-CASE ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION....................	                   99
Discussion of the Findings in Terms of the Research Questions.....................	99
Research Question One.............................	99
Internal factors involved in writing for publication..	100
Writers as context...............................	100
Overview of the scholars...........................	100
Composing processes of the NNS novice scholars	
and their perceptions..............................	102
External factors involved in writing for publication..	112
 Advisors as context.................................	112
 Copy-editors as context.........................	113
 Gate-keeping discourse.........................	114
Research Question Two.................................	117
Limitations of the study......................	119
Implications of the study..........................	120
Theoretical implications..............................	120
Pedagogical implications of the findings..............	121
Genre analysis........................................	122
The role of reading..............................................	123
The role of EAP courses..........................	124
CONCLUSION........................................	126
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................	129
APPENDICES.......................................................................................................	146

LIST OF TABLES



Table 1	Proficiency levels of academic writers in Taiwan……………….....	10
Table 2	Basic information of the five research articles..................................	75
Table 3	Move analysis of Lin’s work..............................................................	76
Table 4	Move analysis of Wu’s work.............................................................	77
Table 5	Move analysis of Wang’s work..........................................................	78
Table 6	Move analysis of David’s work.........................................................	79
Table 7	Move analysis of Tony’s work...........................................................	80
Table 8		Results of move analysis....................................................................	81
Table 9	Background of the Five Novice Scholars..........................................	101
Table 10	The five scholars’ proficiency level and performance.......................	103
Table 11	Reading factors involved in writing for publication..........................	108
Table 12	Writing factors involved in writing for publication...........................	109
Table 13	Raters’ perceptions of scholars’ problems of writing forpublication..........................................................................................	110
Table 14	Novice scholars’ self-perceived difficulties when writing forpublication.........................................................................................	111
Table 15	External factors involved in writing for publication.........................	116

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1	Swales’ four -move model of RA Introduction.............................	27
Figure 2	A CARS Model for article introduction........................................	28
Figure 3	Textual analysis of a research article introduction based uponthe CARS model............................................................................	72

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A	Sample Interview Questions.......................................................	146
Appendix B	Sample of Lin’s research article introduction…………….........	150
Appendix C	Sample of Wu’s research article introduction………….............	154
Appendix D	Sample of Wang’s research article introduction………….........	159
Appendix E	Sample of David’s research article introduction…………........	171
Appendix F	Sample of Tony’s research article introduction………………..	176

References

Anthony, L. (1999).  Writing research article introductions in software engineering:
How accurate is a standard model?  IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication, 42, 1.

Bazerman, C.  (1988).  Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the
Experimental Article in Science.  University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Belcher, D.  (1994).  The apprenticeship approach to advanced academic literacy:
Graduate students and their mentors.  English for Specific Purposes, 13, 23–34.

Belcher, D. & Braine, G.  (1995).  Academic Writing in a Second Language: Essays
on Research & Pedagogy.  Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Belcher, D. & Connor, U. (Eds.).  (2001). Reflections on Multiliterate Lives.
Clevedon:  Multilingual Matters Ltd. 


Benson, P. J. & Heidiish, H. P.  (1995).  The ESL Technical Expert: Writing
Processes and Classroom Practices. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (eds.), Academic
Writing in a Second Language: Essays in Research and Pedagogy.  Norwood, 
NJ: Ablex.

Berman, R. A. & Slobin, D. I. (1994). Reading events in narrative: A crosslinguistic
developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bhatia, V. K. (1993).  Analyzing genre: Language use in professional settings.
London: Longman.

Brown, H. D. (2000).  Principles of language learning and teaching.  (4th ed.)  New York: Longman.

Burgess, S. (2002).  Packed houses and intimate gatherings: Audience and rhetorical
structure.  In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 196-215).  London:
Longman/Pearson Education.

Burrough-Boenisch, J. (2003).  Shapers of published NNS research articles.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 223–243.

Canagarajah, A. S. (1996). Nondiscursive requirements in academic publishing,
material resources of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge
production. Written Communication, 13 (4), 435-472.

Candlin, C. N. & Hyland, K. (1999).  Writing: Texts, processes, and practices.
London: Longman.

Carson, J. & Leki, I. (Eds.) (1993).  Reading in the composition classroom: Second
language perspectives.  Boston: Heinle and Heinle.

Casanave, C. P.  (1998).  Transitions: The balancing act of bilingual academics.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 175–203.

Casanave, C. P.  (2002).  Writing Games: Multicultural Case Studies of Academic
Literacy Practices in Higher Education.  New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum 
Associates.

Casanave, C. P. (2003). Controversies in second language writing. Ann Arbor, MI:
University of Michigan Press.

Casanave, C. P. & Vandrick, S.  (2003).  Writing for Scholarly Publication: Behind
the Scenes in Language Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Connor, U.  (1996).  Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of
second-language writing.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Connor, U. & Kaplan, R. B. (Eds.).  (1987).  Writing across languages: Analysis
of L2 text.  Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley. 

Cooper, K.  (1985).  Aspects of article introductions in IEEE publications.
Unpublished Master’s dissertation, University of Aston, Birmingham, U.K.

Crookes, G. (1986).  Towards a validated analysis of scientific text structure.
Applied Linguistics, 7, 57–70.

Currie, P.  (1998).  Staying Out of Trouble: Apparent Plagiarism and Academic
Survival.  Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 1–18.

Curry, M. M. & Lillis, T.  (2004).  Multilingual scholars and the imperative to
publish in English: Negotiating interests, demands, and rewards.  TESOL
Quarterly, 38, 663–688.

Dudley-Evans, T.  (1995).  Common-core and specific approaches to the teaching
of academic writing.  In D. Belcher & G. Braine (eds.)  (1995).  Academic
Writing in a Second Language: Essays in Research and Pedagogy.  Norwood,
NJ: Ablex.

Ellis, R.  (1994).  The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Feng, H.  (2001).  Writing an academic paper in English: An exploratory study of 
six Taiwanese graduate students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia
University.

Flowerdew, J.  (1999 a).  Writing for scholarly publication in English: The case of
Hong Kong.  Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 123–145.

Flowerdew, J. (1999b).  Problems in writing for scholarly publication in English:
The case of Hong Kong.  Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 243–264.

Flowerdew, J.  (2000).  Discourse community, legitimate peripheral participation,
and the nonnative-English-speaking scholar.  TESOL Quarterly, 34, 127–150.

Flowerdew, J. (Ed.).  (2002).  Academic Discourse.  London: Pearson Education.

Flowerdew, J. & Dudley-Evans, T.  (2002).  Genre analysis of editorial letters to
international journal contributors.  Applied Linguistics, 23, 463–489.

Flowerdew, J., Li, D., & Miller, L.  (1998).  Attitudes towards English and
Cantonese among Hong Kong Chinese university lecturers.  TESOL
Quarterly, 32, 201–231.

Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (Eds.).  (2001). Research perspectives on English for
academic purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gall, M. Borg, W., & Gall, J.  (1998).  Educational Research: An introduction (6th
ed.).  White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers.

Geertz, C.  (1973).  The Interpretation of cultures.  New York: Basic Books.

Gosden, H.  (1995).  Success in research article writing and revision: A
social-constructionist perspective. English for Specific Purposes, 14, 37–57.

Gosden, H.  (1996). Verbal reports of Japanese novices’ research writing practices in
English.  Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 109–128.

Grabe, W.  (1991).  Current developments in second language reading research.
TESOL Quarterly, 25, 375-406.

Gupta, R.  (1995).  Managing general an specific information in introduction.
English for Specific Purposes, 14, 59–75.

Hinds, J.  (1987).  Reader responsibility versus writer responsibility: A new
typology.  In U. Connor & R. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis
of L2 text (pp. 141–152).  Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Hinds, J.  (1990).  Inductive, deductive, quasi-inductive: Expository writing in
Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and Thai.  In U. Connor & A. Am. Johns (Eds.),
Coherence in writing: Research and pedagogical perspectives (pp. 87–109).
Alexandrai, VA: TESOL.

Hopkins, A., & Dudley-Evans, T.  (1988).  A genre-based investigation of the 
discourse sections in articles and dissertations.  English for Specific Purposes, 
7, 113–121.

Huff, A. (1999).  Writing for Scholarly Publication. London: SAGE publications.

Indrasuta, J. (1988).  Narrative styles in the writing of Thai and American students.
In A. C. Purves (ed.), Writing across languages and cultures issues in contrastive
rhetoric, 206-226.  Newbury Park, Sage.

Jiang, S.  (2001).  English academic writing and reading: Case studies of 
	Taiwanese graduate students’ second language research paper composing in an
American university.  Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.

Johanson, R. E. (2001). The role of interaction in academic writing: A collective case
study of five Taiwanese doctoral students in a graduate school of education. 
Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.

Johns, A.  M. (1990).  L1 composition theories: Implications for developing theories of
L2 composition.  In B. Kroll (ed.), Second Language Writing.  Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Johns, A. M.  (1997).  Text, role and context: Developing academic literacies.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Johns, A. M.  (2003). Academic writing: A European perspective.  Journal of Second 
Language Writing, 12, 313–316.

Johns, A. M. & Dudley-Evans, T.  (1991). English for specific purposes:
International in scope, specific purpose.  TESOL Quarterly, 25: 2, 297–311.

Johnson, D. M.  (1992).  Approaches to research in second language learning.
London: Longman.

Kanoksilapatham, B.  (2003).  A corpus-based investigation of scientific research
articles:  Linking move analysis with multidimensional analysis.  Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University.

Kay, H. & Dudley-Evans, T.  (1998).  Genre: What teachers think.  ELT journal,
52, 4, 308–314.

Krashen, S.  (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition.  New York: Prentice-Hall.

Krashen, S.  (1984). Writing: Research, theory, and applications.  Oxford:
Pergamon Institute of English.

Krashen, S.  (1985). The input hypothesis.  London: Longman. 

Krashen, S. (2002). The comprehension hypothesis and its rivals.  Selected papers from the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching/Fourth Pan-Asian Conference. (pp. 395-404). English Teachers Association/ROC.  Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.

Krashen, S. (2004a). Applying the comprehension hypothesis: Some suggestions. Selected papers from the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching/Fourth Pan-Asian Conference. (pp. 50-59). English Teachers Association/ROC.  Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.

Krashen, S.  (2004b). The power of reading: Insights from the research.  Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kroll, B.  (Ed.) (1990).  Second language writing: Research insights for the
classroom.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kroll, B.  (Ed.).  (2003).  Exploring the dynamics of second language writing.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kuhn, T.  (1970).  The Structure of Scientific Revolution.  (2nd Ed.).  Chicago:
Chicago University Press.

Kuo, C. H.  (1999).  The use of personal pronouns: role relationships in scientific
journal articles.  English for Specific Purposes, 18, 121–138.

Kuo, C. H. (2001).  Academic Competence: Designing an EAP Course for Ph.D.
Students.  Proceedings of the Eighteenth Conference on English Teaching and 
Learning in the Republic of China.

Kuo, C. H.  (2002).  Phraseology in Scientific Research Articles.  Selected Papers
from the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching/ Fourth
Pan-Asian Conference.

Lau, H. H. (2003b). The structure of academic journal abstracts written by Taiwanese
PhD students. Taiwan Journal of TESOL. Taipei: National Chengchi University.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991).  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral
Participation.  Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.

Lightbown, P. & Spada, N.  (1990).  Instruction and the development of questions
in L2 classroom.  SSLA, 15, 205-224.

Merriam, S. B.  (1998).  Qualitative research and case study applications in
education.  San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Mirahayuni, N. K. (2002).  Investigating textual structure in native and non-native
English research articles: strategy differences between English and Indonesian
writers. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of New South Wales.
	
Nwogu, K.  (1997).  The medical research paper: Structure and functions.  English
for Specific Purposes, 16,2,119-138.

Paltridge, B.  (2002). Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published
advice and actual practice.  English for Specific Purposes, 21, 125–143.

Parkhurst, C.  (1990).  The composition process of science writers.  English for
Specific Purposes, 9, 169–180.

Pecorari, D.  Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic
second-language writing.  Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 317–345.

Posteguillo, S.  (1999).  The schematic structure of computer science research
articles.  English for Specific Purposes, 18, 2, 139-158.

Prior, P.  (1998).  Writing/Disciplinarity: A Sociohistoric Account of Literate
Activity in the Academy.  New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Raimes, A.  (1991).  Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing.  TESOL Quarterly, 25, 407-430.

Richards, K.  (2003). Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL. New York: Palgrave.

Schneider, M. & Fujishima, N. K. (1995).  When practice doesn’t make perfect: The
case of a graduate ESL student.  In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Eds.), Academic
writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy (pp. 3–22).
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Seliger, H. W. & Shohamy, E. (1989).  Second Language Research Methods.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shanahan, T. & Lomax, R. G.  (1986). An analysis and comparison of theoretical models of the reading-writing relationship.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 116-212.

Sharwood-Smith, M.  (1981).  Consciousness raising and the second language learner.  Applied Linguistics, 2, 159-169.

Silva, T. & Matsuda, P. K.  (2001).  Landmark essays on ESL writing. New Jersey:
Hermagoras Press.

Sionis, C.  (1995).  Communication strategies in the writing of scientific research
articles by non-native users of English.  English for Specific Purposes, 14,
99–113.

Slaouti, D.  (2002).  The World Wide Web for academic purposes: old study skills
for new?  English for Specific Purposes, 21, 105–124.

Spack, R.  (1997).  The acquisition of academic literacy in a second language.
Written Communication 14 (1), 3–62.

Stake, R. E.  (1995).  The art of case study research.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Stotsky, S.  (1983).  Research on reading/writing relationship: A synthesis and
suggested directions.  Language Arts, 60, 627-643.

Swales, J.  (1981).  Aspects of Article Introduction.  Birmingham: The University
of Aston.

Swales, J.  (1990a).  Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J.  (1990b).  Non-native speaker graduate engineering students and their 
	introductions: global coherence and local management.  In U. Connor & A. M.
Johns (eds.), Coherence in Writing: Research and Pedagogical Perspectives, pp.
187–207.  TESOL, Alexandria.

Swales, J.  & Najjar, H.  (1987).  The writing of research article introductions.
Written Communication, 4, 175-192.
Tsao, F. (1983).  Linguistics and written discourse in particular languages: English
and Mandarin.  In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Annual review of applied linguistics, III
(pp. 99-117).  Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Yao, C. K. (1991).  Writing in English for academic purposes: Case studies of four
Taiwanese graduate students.  Unpulibhsed doctoral dissertation, University of 
Minnesota.

Yin, R. K.  (2003).  (2nd Ed.).  Applications of case study research.  London:
Sage.

Yin, R. K.  (2003). (3rd Ed.). Case study research: Design and methods.  London:
Sage.

Yorio, C.  (1976).  Discussion of “explaining sequence and variation in second language acquisition.” Language Learning, 4, 59-63.

姚崇昆 (1993)。台灣研究生中英學術性論文寫作過程之研究–從社會互動觀點探討  行政院國家科學委員會專題研究。 

劉賢軒(1999)。〈英文學術期刊論文中的解釋過程〉。《第十六屆中華民國英語文教學國際研討會論文集》，頁375-384，台北市：文鶴出版有限公司。

劉賢軒  (2001)  ＜學術期刊論文的情態表達：台灣博士生的「謹言慎行」＞。  《第十八屆中華民國英語文教學研討會論文集》。  台北市：  文鶴出版有限公司。

劉賢軒(2003a)。〈章類分析與學術英文教學：台灣博士生的摘要改進問題〉，《英語教學》，第二十七卷第四期，頁65-77，國立台灣師範大學。