本研究採行動研究法，探究以繪本運用品德教育六E教學模式進行國小二年級負責品德教學活動之可行性與實施成效。研究者以任教班級23位學生為研究對象，實施十五周的品德教學活動。分析學生作品、教學實錄、教師札記、學生回饋與家長回饋等質性資料，歸納研究重要發現如下： 一、以繪本在低年級發展負責品德教育教學具可行性。 二、結合繪本與六E教學模式在品德教學上發展之教學模式與具體方法為：品德核心價值概念與繪本分析、倫理環境營造、同儕楷模學習、多元方式引起情意關注、繪本共讀討論、繪本事件分析、解釋與澄清價值觀、行動體驗、反思期許。 三、負責品德教育課程對於學生的品德認知與理性思考的開展有明顯成效。 四、多元教學方法受到低年級學生喜愛且有助於品德認知、情意、行動之學習表現。 / This study adopts action research method to understand the feasibility and implementation effectiveness of using picture books and 6E character teaching model (6E) in the character curriculum on the theme of “responsibility” for Grade-2 elementary school students. The research participants were 23 Grade-2 elementary school students in the researcher’s class, and a 15-week curriculum was conducted. Qualitative data analysis approach was employed to analyze students’ learning worksheets, teaching records, teacher’s daily notes, students’ feedback and parents’ feedback. The results are as follows: 1.It is feasible to use picture books in the character curriculum in the low-grade elementary school students. 2.This study concludes that the practicable teaching methods of using 6E teaching model and picture books in character curriculum are: Core value analysis, picture books analysis, ethical environment building, peer role model learning, concerns arousing, picture books reading and discussing, event analysis, core values interpretation and clarification, action experience and reflective expectations. 3.The character curriculum of responsibility improves students’ moral cognition and rational thinking remarkably. 4.The low-grade elementary school students like multiple teaching activities, which contribute to their moral cognition, affect, and behavior.

本研究主要為探討不同背景變項之台灣地區北、中、南之公私立大學學生對大學教師優質教學內涵及大學教師優質教學模式之看法，除作現況分析及差異比較外，並依據大學學生所填答之課程學群的分類，找出適合該課程學群之優質教學模式。 研究中除蒐集、整理、閱讀相關文獻外，並依據文獻資料編製「大學教師優質教學內涵現況之調查問卷」及「大學教師優質教學模式現況之調查問卷」，對台灣地區北、中、南各公私立大學實施調查研究，總共回收824份有效樣本，而後根據資料分別進行描述分析、t考驗、變異數分析、積差相關分析、多元逐步迴歸分析等統計分析後有以下幾項發現： 一、大學教師優質教學內涵中，以「大學教師教學之師生互動」得分最高，以「大學教師教學之準備活動」得分最低。 二、大學教師優質教學模式中，以「講述教學模式」得分最高，以「協同教學模式」得分最低。 三、 大學學生不同背景變項在大學教師優質教學內涵上之差異 1. 女學生在大學教師優質教學內涵上之得分，顯著高於男學生之得分。 2. 第一類科系學群（文法傳播）學生及第五類科系學群（教育）學生在大學教師優質教學內涵之得分，顯著高於第三類科系學群（理工）學生及第四類科系學群（農醫）學生的得分。 3. 大學二年級學生及大學四年級學生在大學教師優質教學內涵之得分，顯著高於大學一年級學生的得分。 4. 修習第一類課程學群（文法傳播）學生及第五類課程學群（教育）學生在大學教師優質教學內涵上之得分，顯著高於修習第三類課程學群（理工）學生及第四類課程學群（農醫）學生的得分。 5. 課程性質在大學教師優質教學內涵上之得分，沒有顯著差異。 6. 其他課程（如通識）及外系課程在大學教師優質教學內涵上之得分，顯著高於本系課程及共同科目的得分。 7. 選修課程在大學教師優質教學內涵上的得分，顯著高於必修課程的得分。 8. 晚上時段課程在大學教師優質教學內涵上的得分，顯著高於下午、上午時段課程的得分。 四、 大學學生不同背景變項在大學教師優質教學模式上之差異 1. 女學生在「討論教學模式」、「講述教學模式」、「個案教學模式」、「角色扮演模式」、「探究教學模式」此五種教學模式之得分，皆顯著高於男學生的得分。 2. 第五類科系學群（教育）及第一類科系學群（文法傳播）在「討論教學模式」、「講述教學模式」、「個案教學模式」、「踏查教學模式」、「角色扮演模式」、「合作學習模式」、「探究教學模式」的得分，均顯著高於第三類科系學群（理工）及第四類科系學群（農醫）的得分。 3. 二年級及四年級大學學生在「討論教學模式」、「講述教學模式」、「個案教學模式」、「探究教學模式」四種模式中之得分，顯著高於一年級學生之得分。 4. 第五類課程學群（教育）及第一類課程學群（文法傳播）在「討論教學模式」、「講述教學模式」、「個案教學模式」、「踏查教學模式」、「角色扮演模式」、「合作學習模式」、「探究教學模式」的得分，均顯著高於第三類課程學群（理工）及第四類課程學群（農醫）的得分。 5. 偏實務課程在「討論教學模式」、「個案教學模式」、「踏查教學模式」、「角色扮演模式」、「協同教學模式」、「合作學習模式」、「探究教學模式」中的得分，皆顯著高於偏理論課程的得分。 6. 其他課程（如通識）在「討論教學模式」中得分較高;外系課程在「講述教學模式」中得分較高;本系課程在「踏查教學模式」、「協同教學模式」中得分較高。 7. 選修課程在「講述教學模式」、「合作學習模式」、「探究教學模式」中的得分，顯著高於必修課程及旁聽課程。 8. 晚上時段課程在「討論教學模式」、「講述教學模式」、「個案教學模式」、「協同教學模式」之得分，皆顯著高於下午時段課程及上午時段課程。 五、整體大學教師教學內涵與大學教師優質教學模式有低度至中度正相關。 六、「講述教學模式」為五大類課程學群所共有最能預測大學教師優質教學內涵之教學模式。 最後，本研究依據上述研究結果，形成結論並提出建議，以供教育行政機關、學校單位、大學教師、大學學生及未來相關研究之參考。 / The main purpose of this study is to investigate the viewpoints of various university students background for the effective teaching contents and effective teaching models of university teachers in Taiwan. In addition to understanding the current situation and difference, the study also based on the classification of curriculum to find out the suitable effective teaching models. According to the literature review, the study forms a self-made questionnaire in the topic of “ The questionnaire for current effective teaching contents of university teachers ” and “ The questionnaire for current effective teaching models of university teachers ”.The questionnaire are sent to all the samples ( including the public and private universities in Taiwan ) and 824 surveys that returned from the samples are identified to be valid. The conclusion is through statistic analysis of research sources, including description analysis, t-test, one-way ANOVA, correlation analysis, and stepwise multiple regression analysis. The main finding of the study are as follows : 1. The point of “ the interaction between teacher and students in class ” is highest, whereas the point of “ the preparation of the teaching in class ” is lowest in “ The questionnaire for current effective teaching contents of university teachers ”. 2. The point of “ The lecture teaching model ” is highest, whereas the point of “ The collaboration teaching model ” is lowest in “ The questionnaire for current effective teaching models of university teachers ”. 3. The difference of university students’ various background in “ The questionnaire for current effective teaching contents of university teachers ” are as follows : (1) The point of female university students is significantly higher than that of male university students. (2) The points of the university students studying in the first classification of department ( Liberal Arts, Law and Communication ) and the fifth classification of department ( Education) are significantly higher than those of the university students studying in the third classification of department ( Science and Engineering ) and the fourth classification of department ( Agriculture and Medicine). (3) The points of the second grade students and the fourth grade students are significantly higher than those of the first grade students. (4) The points of the university students studying in the first classification of curriculum ( Liberal Arts, Law and Communication ) and the fifth classification of curriculum ( Education) are significantly higher than those of the university students studying in the third classification of curriculum ( Science and Engineering ) and the fourth classification of curriculum ( Agriculture and Medicine). (5) The difference shown in the character of the curriculum is not significant. (6) The points of the other curriculum (liberal education) and the minor curriculum of one’s department are significantly higher than those of the major curriculum of one’s department and the common curriculum. (7) The point of the elective curriculum is significantly higher than that of the required curriculum. (8) The point of the curriculum after 6:00 p.m.is significantly higher than that of the curriculum in the morning and afternoon. 4. The difference of university students’ various background in “ The questionnaire for current effective teaching models of university teachers ” are as follows : (1) The point of female university students in “ The discussion teaching model ”、 “ The lecture teaching model ”、“ The case-study teaching model ”、“ The role-playing teaching model ”、 “ The inquiry teaching model ” is significantly higher than that of male university students. (2) The points of the university students studying in the fifth classification of department (Education) and the first classification of department ( Liberal Arts, Law and Communication) in “ The discussion teaching model ”、“ The lecture teaching model ”、“ The case-study teaching model ”、“ The field-study teaching model ”、“ The role-playing teaching model ”、“ The cooperative learning model ”、“The inquiry teaching model ” are significantly higher than those of the university students studying in the third classification of department ( Science and Engineering ) and the fourth classification of department ( Agriculture and Medicine). (3) The points of the second grade students and the fourth grade students in “ The discussion teaching model ”、“ The lecture teaching model ”、“ The case-study teaching model ”、“ The inquiry teaching model ” are significantly higher than those of the first grade students. (4) The points of the university students studying in the fifth classification of curriculum (Education) and the first classification of curriculum (Liberal Arts, Law and Communication) in “ The discussion teaching model ”、“ The lecture teaching model ”、 “ The case-study teaching model ”、“ The field-study teaching model ”、“ The role-playing teaching model ”、“ The cooperative learning model ”、“ The inquiry teaching model ” are significantly higher than those of the university students studying in the third classification of curriculum ( Science and Engineering ) and the fourth classification of curriculum ( Agriculture and Medicine). (5) The point of the practical curriculum in “ The discussion teaching model ”、“ The case-study teaching model ”、“ The field-study teaching model ”、“ The role-playing teaching model ”、“ The collaborative teaching model ”、“ The cooperative learning model ”、“ The inquiry teaching model ” is significantly higher than that of the theoretical curriculum. (6) The point of the other curriculum ( liberal education ) in “ The discussion teaching model ” is higher than others ; the point of the minor curriculum of one’s department in “ The lecture teaching model ” is higher than others , and the point of the major curriculum of one’s department in “ The field-study teaching model ” and “ The collaborative teaching model ” is higher than others. (7) The point of the elective curriculum in “ The lecture teaching model ”、“ The cooperative learning model ”、“ The inquiry teaching model ” is significantly higher than that of the required curriculum and the non-credit earning curriculum. (8) The point of the curriculum after 6:00 p.m. in “ The discussion teaching model ”、 “ The lecture teaching model ”、“ The case-study teaching model ”、“The collaborative teaching model ” is significantly higher than that of the curriculum in the morning and afternoon. 5. The positive correlation between “ The questionnaire for current effective teaching contents of university teachers ” and “ The questionnaire for current effective teaching models of university teachers ” is from low to middle. 6. “ The lecture teaching model ” is the most common and the prediction of the five classification of curriculum is highest . Eventually, the study draw a conclusion from the overcome of the study and provide further suggestion for the reference of educational administration department, university administrational units, university teachers, university students and further study.

本論文探討三種不同的教學模式對於92位較低成就的國中學生的聽力及閱讀理解的影響，採取量化及質性並行的研究。實驗的自變項為三種事前教學輔助，分別為：一、獨立回答學習單的問題；二、老師給予單字及背景知識的教學；三、學生分成小組回答問題，而依變項為學生在聽力及閱讀理解測驗所得的成績。本實驗除了以聽力及閱讀理解測驗驗證事前教學模式的功效，也以學習態度問卷收集相關的資料。教學流程為學生接受15分鐘的教學輔助，然後收聽30分鐘英語學習雜誌，學生接受10次教學，實驗進行十週。實驗結果發現三組學生經歷不同教學模式後，他們的閱讀成績有顯著的差異，其中「學生分成小組回答問題」對閱讀能力幫助最大，而「獨立回答學習單的問題」優於「老師給予單字及背景知識的教學」。另外，「學生分成小組回答問題」能有效提昇聽力及閱讀成績，「學生獨立回答學習單的問題」也對學生的聽力及閱讀有幫助，但未達顯著水準。本研究建議老師在教學前，將學生分為小組討論並回答學習內容相關的問題，以提升學生的學習及理解力。 / The present study aimed to examine the effects of three different kinds of teaching modes on the listening and reading comprehension of 92 less-proficient junior high school students in Taiwan. Comprehension tests and questionnaires were employed to collect related data, which were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. The independent variables were the three different kinds of teaching modes; the dependent variables were students’ scores on the listening and reading comprehension tests. There were three experimental classes learned in three kinds of modes for 15 minutes before they listened to a 30-minute English learning magazine’s teaching program. One class read a worksheet and finished the tasks on their own. Another received vocabulary and background knowledge instruction from the researcher. The other class discussed in small groups and answered pre-questions. The experiment took 10 class periods in 10 consecutive weeks. The results are found that the teaching mode including a) studying the handouts and completing the tasks in the individual mode, and b) small group discussion to answer pre-questions are beneficial to lower-proficient EFL junior high school students’ listening and reading comprehension. The latter pre-activity exalted reading comprehension to a significant level, and it also contributed to significant improvement in both listening and reading comprehension. However, receiving vocabulary and background knowledge instructions in a teacher-centered class did not effectively facilitate the participants’ performance. To sum up, the results showed that teachers could ask students to have small group discussion on pre-questions of extra-curriculum learning materials in regular class periods to enhance their listening and reading comprehension.