近年來，混成式學習在學校教學或企業訓練情境中，都展現了相當卓越的成效。它結合了線上學習與實體教學的雙面優勢，消彌了學習上雙峰與排擠的人際互動問題〈Thorne, 2003〉。除此之外，教師得以依據壆科知識類型，融合各種教學理論與策略，搭配教學媒體與科技於課程中，延伸並深化學習者的學習經驗。因此，為探討混成式學習在英語教學上的應用成效，本研究以溝通式教學為基礎，發展出一套為期四周的混成式英語閱讀策略課程。並試圖探討〈一〉在混成學習中，具備何種學習風格的學習者將會得到最大的收穫；〈二〉哪些因素將會影響混成課程的實施成敗等研究問題。
     
     研究中，研究者以英語閱讀策略為主題，設計並發展一套為期四週的課程，結合Moodle教學平台，於大學英語課程中實地實施。過程中以參與觀察、深度訪談、以及田野筆記等質化研究方法，蒐集三十二位大二應用外語系學生於混成式課程中的學習態度及觀感。透過詳盡的詮釋分析，得到了幾點研究發現：〈一〉學生的學習風格及對科技的接受度，會直接地影響學習成效。勇於冒險嘗試、對科技使用程度高的學生對混成學習的態度及收穫普遍都較高。〈二〉學習者的資訊素養、電腦網路設備、以及不可預期的機器問題，均是影響混成式學習實施成效的關鍵因素；〈三〉混成式學習的嶄新體驗使得學習者面對英語學習，態度變得更為積極、開放。學習不再只是發生在教室內的行為；學習是終生的，隨時隨地在發生的。

關鍵詞:混成式學習；英語閱讀策略；線上學習；教學設計；高等教育

The objective of the study is to design and develop a blended English reading course in order to introduce an innovative learning experience for higher education EFL learners. Blended learning has been proved that it could be employed to effectively enhance the contexts of learning and training.  Thorne (2003) accentuates that blended learning represents an opportunity to integrate the innovative and technological advances offered by online learning with the interaction and participation offered in the best of traditional learning. However, the concept of blended learning is not well known to EFL educators and learners.  Prompted by these propositions, the researcher attempts to develop a four –week blended English reading course and further implement it investigating the course’s efficacy. Two research questions are derived to explore: (a) what kinds of learners benefit most from the course, and (b) what barriers that might thwart the implementation of the course are.  The overall framework of the research design has twofold phases: (1) the phase of the model development, and (2) the phase of “ADDIE”.  An English teaching practitioner and 32 English majors were invited to participate in the blended English reading course. Through qualitative analyses of participated observation, in-depth interviews, and field notes, three findings were surfaced as follows: (a) students’ learning achievements were primarily influenced by as learning styles and the degrees of technology acceptance; (b) inadequate computer literacy, inadequate available computer resources, and unpredictable machine failure might be the crucial obstacles to the success of thee implementation; (c) learners were more aware of their responsibilities for learning achievement, and positively viewed learning process as life-long learning. Besides, Suggestions for implementing the blended learning were provided for other researchers.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
I. Background 1
II. The motives of the study 6
III. The purposes of the study 7
IV. The research questions of the study 7
V. The limitations of the study 8      

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 9
I. Divergent theories of language learning 9
II. The definitions of blended learning 18
III. Strategies for learning and teaching English reading 19
A. Reading theories 20
B. The characteristic of English reading 22
C. Strategies for reading comprehension 27

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 35
I. Needs analysis 36
II. The model development 39
III. The course development 39
A. The stage of analysis 40
1. Analysis of learning context 40
2. Analysis of learners 41
3. Analysis of content knowledge 43
B. The stage of design 43
C. The stage of development 44
IV. The implementation of the blended English learning 44 course 
V. The evaluation of the course 45
VI. Empirical analysis and interpretation 46 

CHAPTER 4: THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MAGIC MODEL  49 
            AND THE COURSE DESIGN
I. The development of MAGIC model 52
      A. MEANINGFULNESS 55
      B. AUTHENTICITY 56
      C. GUIDANCE 58
      D. INSTRUMENT 59
      E. COLLABORATION 61
II. The course design 67
A. Pre-class: Orientation 70
B. In-Class: Four-week course 72

CHAPTER 5: THE CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 78
I. Research findings 78
A. Learning achievements were influenced by two personal factors 79
1. Learning styles 79
2. The degree of technology acceptance 81
B. The problems that learners encountered were resulted from factors 82
1. Insufficient computer literacy 82
2. Inadequate available computer resources 84
3. Unpredictable machine failures 85
C. The experiences of blended learning help learners to realize 86
1. Learning could be so creatively and easily understood 86
2. Learning is ubiquitous 87
3. Learning turns out to be autonomous 87 
4. Learning is life-long 91
II. The suggestions for the design and implementation 91
A. The suggestions for designing blended English course 91
1. Comprehensive and thorough analysis 92
2. Eclectic and appropriate combination 92
3. Judicious and ingenious technology employment 92
B. The suggestions for implementing a blended English  course 93
1. A well-designed orientation 93
2. A careful examination and checks for machine functions 94
3. The provision of an e-tutor 95
4. The qualified proficiencies of leading a blended course 95

REFERENCES 97


APPENDIXES
Appendix A: THE SNAPSHOTS OF PRE-COURSE REVIEWS 100
Appendix B: THE SNAPSHOTS OF ANIMATION-BASED INSTRUCTION 101
Appendix C: THE SNAPSHOTS OF ONLINE COURSE 102
Appendix D: THE SNAPSHOTS OF MOODLE 103
Appendix E: THE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PRE-LEARNING ANALYSIS 105

VI
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Types of Discourse Markers 32
Table 4.1: The Definitions of Five Ingredients in Magic Model 53
Table 4.2: Bloom’s Taxonomy and Examples 64
Table 4.3: The Instructional Design of the First class 72

VII
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1: Six Phases of the Overall Research 35
Figure 3.2: The Pyramid of Blended Learning 38
Figure 4.1: iLearn Model 51
Figure 4.2: Five Ingredients of Magic Model 54
Figure 4.3: The Structure of English Reading Strategies 69
Figure 4.4: The snapshot of Animation-Based Instruction 71

References

張春興 (1994)。教育心理學。台北市：東華書局。
陳秋蘭，廖美玲 (編) (1999)。嶄新而實用的英語教學:國中國小英語教學指引。台北市：敦煌書局。
資訊工業策進會 (2003)。數位學習最佳指引。台北市：財團法人資訊工業策進會。
Barbian, J. (1998). Blended Works: Here's Proof [Electronic Version]. Retrieved 2003, April 30 from http://www.onlinelearningmag.com/onlinelearning/magazine/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1526767.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education
Brown, H. D. (2002). Principles of language learning and teaching. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education 
Chang (張錦弘). (2005, September 8). 遠距教學授學位 最快95年. United Daily News (聯合報).
Carmen, J. M. (2002). Blended Learning Design: Five Key Ingredients. [Electronic Version] Retrieved 2005, August 8 from http://www.knowledgenet.com/pdf/Blended%20Learning%20Design_1028.PDF
Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning form media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
Hardisty, D., & Windett, S. (1989). CALL. Walton Street, Oxford: Oxford University.
French, D. [et al.].(Eds). (2003). Blended Learning: An Ongoing Process for Internet Integration. Austin, TX: e-Linkages, Inc.
Douglis, F. (2004). Blended Learning: Choosing the Right Blend [Electronic Version]. Retrieved 2004, Jan 7 from http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/blendlearning/.
Dunkel, P. (Ed.). (1991). Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Testing: Research Issues and Practice. New York, NY: Newbury House.
Goodman, K. S. (1970). Reading: A Psycholinguistic guessing game. In Singer, H., & Ruddell, R. B. (Eds.). Theoretical Models and process of Reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Graves, K. (2000). Designing Language Courses. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford, UK: Oxford University.
Hobebein, P. C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments. In Wilson, Brent (Ed.), Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design. NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
Institute for Information Industry (資訊工業策進會). (2003). Best Guidance to Digital Learning. 數位學習最佳指引. 台北市: 財團法人資訊工業策進會.
Mantyla, K. (2001). Blended E-LEARNING. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.
Margaret D., & LeCompte, J. P. (1993). Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Patricia, S. L., & Tilman, J. R. (2005). Instructional Design (3 ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Rossett, A. (ed.) (2002). The ASTD E-Learning Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rosenberg, M. J. (2001). E-Learning: strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and methods in language       
      teaching: A description and analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shih, Ju-Ling. (2001). A Study of Web-Based Higher Education Courses: An Intellectual Autobiography. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University, NY.
Thorne, K. (2003). Blended learning: how to integrate online & traditional learning. Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.
White, C. (2003). Language Learning in Online Education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
Tinzmann, M. B. [et al.]. (1990). What is the Collaborative Classroom? Retrieved 2005, April, 30 from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/rpl_esys/collab.htm. 
Kiser, K. (2002). Is Blended Best? [Electronic Versoin]. E-learning
      Magazine. Retrieved 2005, May, 20 from http://www.elearningmag.com/elearning/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=21259.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). Scorm: Clarity or Calamity. Online Learning Magazine,
      Summer 2002, 14-18.
Merrill, M.D. (1994). Instructional Design Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Nuttall, C. (1996). Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. Second Edition. Oxford: Heinemann.
White, C. (2003). Language Learning in Online Education. Cambridge, UK:   Cambridge University.
Wilson, B. G. (1996). Introduction: What is a constructivist learning environment? In Wilson, B. G. (Ed.), Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design (pp. 3-8). NJ: Educational Technology Publication, Inc.
Zemke, R. (2002). Who Needs Learning Theory Anyway? Training Magazine, 39(9), 86-88.