No description available.

No description available.

本研究主要的目的是在探討年級、性別、文章程度對兒童摘取大意能力 (包括摘取大意過程與成果) 的影響，並對兒童在摘取大意過程與成果各 項工作上的答錯情形作錯誤分析，以作為教學上的參考o 摘取大意過程是 指找出文章中重覆的訊息，辨認文章的主題句及刪掉文章中的不重要訊息 。摘取大意成果是指寫出文章的大意。研究對象來自台北市四所國小及台 北縣二所國小四、六年級學生共720人o 研究結果敘述如下：一、兒童摘 取文章大意的能力，因年級不同而有顯著差異o 年級愈高，愈能正確完成 摘取大意過程與成果各項工作o二、兒童摘取文章大意的能力，不因性別 不同而有顯著差異o三、在摘取大意過程與成果各項工作上，四、六年級 學生犯錯類型相似，皆是不能分辨文章的主題句與支持主題句的細節o四 、本研究四年級程度文章的刪掉不重要訊息題目位置的安排可能並不適當 ，造成題目難度出了問題，因此不能測出學生刪掉不重要訊息的能力o 但 由學生在六年級、國中程度文章題目的作答仍可反應出年級的差別o 。 依據研究結果，本研究提出對大意教學上及未來研究上的建議o

What is the role of reading comprehension strategy practices in Grades 4 and 5 learners’ reading literacy achievement in the South African Progress in International Literacy (PIRLS) 2006 study? Herein lies the main question of this study. South Africa’s participation and perpetually poor performance in more than one international study highlights literacy as a serious problem in South Africa. The results of literacy studies such as SACMEQ II 2000, the 1999 MLA study, and in particular, the South African PIRLS 2006 study, revealed the predicament in which South African primary education finds itself. The results of these studies emphasise the consistently poor reading literacy achievement by South African primary school learners. The findings that emanated from the South African Progress in International Literacy (PIRLS) 2006 study, showed considerable differences between the various groups of learners in South Africa. The following examples will indicate the differences in reading literacy achievement. The South African Grade 4 learners achieved an average score of 253 (SE=4.6). The Grade 5 learners achieved an average score of 302 (SE=5.6). Both these scores fall far below the fixed international average of 500 (Howie et al. 2007, p. 23). However, in an analysis of the eleven official languages in the PIRLS 2006 study, learners from the Afrikaans language group achieved the highest scores with the Grade 5 girls achieving an average of 427 (SE=11.6). The aim of the study was to identify the effective reading comprehension strategies used at a primary school where the highest scores in South Africa were achieved, then to determine the role that reading comprehension strategies played in literacy achievement as uncovered in the PIRLS 2006 study. This research was conducted at an Afrikaans speaking school in Gauteng where the learners achieved the highest scores in PIRLS 2006. Based on a review of the literature, the study focused on five reading comprehension strategies, namely, identifying main ideas; making inferences; questioning; mental imagery and summarising. These reading comprehension strategies were underpinned by the processes of comprehension outlined for PIRLS 2006 and the PIRLS 2006 model of Contexts for the Development of Reading Literacy was used as a conceptual framework for this study. A profile of Afrikaans Grade 4 and 5 teachers was compiled based on the analysis of the PIRLS 2006 Afrikaans teacher questionnaire data. Teacher profiles consisted of teachers’ biographical information such as age and gender, and their academic and professional background. The practice of reading comprehension strategies was tested on data from a case study of one Grade 4 and one Grade 5 Afrikaans teacher. The findings of the study showed that the use of teaching reading comprehension strategies are essential for learners to achieve any standard of reading literacy. A high standard of reading literacy mainly stems from teachers who perform reading comprehension strategy practices that will mirror the orchestration of instructional strategy activities and comprehension assessment activities. It appears that effective teachers of reading comprehension operate as conductors to guide learners during the reading comprehension process into a constant reader-text-activity dynamic, which enables readers to bring vocabulary and strategy knowledge to the act of reading. The role that reading comprehension strategy practice plays on learners’ reading literacy achievement is illustrated in PIRLS 2006. Copyright / Dissertation (MEd)--University of Pretoria, 2011. / Science, Mathematics and Technology Education / unrestricted