本研究針對台灣EFL低成就學生之段落寫作，比較「直接訂正法」與「語意重述法」兩種寫作回饋之成效。本研究對象為台北市某高職學生，共56名學生全程參與這項從2009年9月到2010年1月的研究。進行修改寫作時，教師對實驗組使用「語意重述法」，學生比較原稿與老師保留學生原意但改寫成符合英文語法的段落，並將發現的文法錯誤記錄並自行訂正；對照組則運用「直接訂正法」，學生審視老師直接在上面訂正的原稿。經過看圖英文段落寫作的前測與後測、實驗組與對照組後測結果比較、以及針對實驗組的訪談，研究結果如下：(1)整體性評量上，「語意重述法」對學生改進寫作較為有效；(2)兩組中程度較差之低成就學生進步程度均優於程度較好之低成就學生，尤其實驗組之程度較差者進步程度猶勝於對照組的；(3) 「直接訂正法」對減少學生文法錯誤之功效優於「語意重述法」；(4)絕大多數參與者認為「語意重述法」有助增進寫作能力。論文最後討論此研究在教學上的意涵與提出對之後研究的建議。 / This study aimed to compare the efficacy of “direct correction” with that of “reformulation” on Taiwan EFL low-achievers’ paragraph writing. Fifty-six students in a vocational high school in Taipei City participated in this study from Sep. 2009 through Jan. 2010. When conducting revision activities, the teacher implemented the “reformulation” technique in the experimental group. The students compared the originals with the reformulated versions given by the teacher, and detected, recorded, and corrected all the grammatical errors mainly on their own. The control group received the “direct correction” treatment, examining their originals with the teacher’s corrections on them. With the pre-test and the post-test on a paragraph-length English picture description, the comparison of the post-test results between the experimental and control groups, and interviews with the experimental group, the results are as follows: First, in holistic rating, “reformulation” was more helpful than “direct correction” in improving the participants’ writing performance. Second, the low-achievers with lower proficiency benefited more from “reformulation” than those with better proficiency. Third, “direct correction” was more effective than “reformulation” in reducing the participants’ grammatical errors. Fourth, the majority in the experimental group were positive of “reformulation” as a way to improve writing. Finally, some implications for pedagogy and suggestions for future studies were made.

教師回饋在學生的寫作過程中是很重要的，所以如何給予有效的回饋是個值得探討的議題。這個研究是在評估老師的書面回饋對於高中生多次文稿英文寫作練習的成效。桃園市某所國立高中的高三學生，一班共36位 (男生27位，女生9位) 參與這項為期從2007年九月到2008年一月的研究。教師回饋的方式是在第一次文稿上給予代號批改及評語，在第二次文稿上直接寫上正確答案及評語，在第三次文稿上直接給予答案並附上評語。老師不會在每次的文稿上評分，而學生在繳交改寫的文稿時要附上心得單。這項研究包含敘述文體的前測及後測、兩份參與者對教師回饋的問卷、及參與者的訪談。研究結果如下：第一，這種教師回饋對於整體的寫作品質上的進步有所貢獻。第二，雖然這樣的教師回饋對於整體的寫作正確度上沒有明顯的改善，但在時態及標點符號方面卻有正向的影響。第三，參與者對於這樣的教師回饋抱持著正面的態度。最後，討論此研究在教學上的意涵及對未來研究的建議。 / Teacher feedback is important in students’ writing process, so how to give effective teacher feedback is an issue worth investigation. The present study assessed the effect of teacher written feedback on high school students’ multi-draft English writing practice. A class of 36 seniors (27 boys and 9 girls) in a national senior high school in Taoyuan City participated in this study from Sep. 2007 through Jan. 2008. The teacher feedback was to give coded correction and comments on Draft 1, to offer direct correction and comments on Draft 2, and to provide direct correction and comments on Draft 3. Grades were assigned randomly and the participants had to submit cover sheets in revision. The study included the pre-test and the post-test on narrative writing, two questionnaires on the participants’ perceptions of the teacher feedback, and interviews. The results are as follows: First, this teacher feedback contributed to significant improvement in the overall writing quality. Second, this teacher feedback yielded no significant difference in the overall writing accuracy, but it had some positive effect on tense and punctuation. Third, the participants took a positive attitude toward this teacher feedback. Finally, some implications for teaching and suggestions for future research were discussed.