本研究主要探討圖形組織作為英語閱讀教學中的任務並研究其對台灣中等教育英語學習者閱讀理解的影響。此外，本研究亦探討獨自或配對完成圖形組織任務之於學習者對閱讀理解的影響。這項研究包含47名來自苗栗縣同一所國中三個班級的八年級學生，三個班級被隨機分成比較組、實驗組A和實驗組B。比較組的學生接受傳統的英語閱讀教學，而實驗組A和實驗B的學生則接受採用圖形組織作為個人或配對任務的英語閱讀教學。本研究使用對抗平衡設計，以降低實驗順序對結果可能產生的不利影響。在這項研究中，我們使用了三種工具來收集學生的定量數據：（一）選擇題、（二）排序任務和（三）圖形組織任務。在實驗之前和之後，使用預測，兩個後測和一個延遲後測來測量參與者的閱讀理解。我們採用單因子變異數分析來比較三組的選擇題得分，排序任務得分和圖形組織任務得分。結果顯示，三組在後測I的排序任務中存在顯著差異，F (2,44)= 4.887, p = .012。先單獨後成對完成圖形組織任務的實驗組，在後測I的排序任務中勝過比較組。但除了這一差異之外，三組學生在其他任務都沒有顯著差異。此外，比較兩個實驗組之間在三項任務的表現，成對完成圖形組織任務的學生在閱讀理解測驗的後測中並未表現的獨自完成圖形組織的學生好。

The present study focuses on graphic organizers as a teaching task in English reading instruction. It sets out to investigate the effect of the use of graphic organizers on reading comprehension of secondary EFL learners in Taiwan. In addition, the present study also attempts to explore the role of pair-work in contributing discourse structure graphic organizers and its impact on learners’ comprehension of text. Forty-seven eighth grade EFL learners coming from three classes in same junior high school located in Miaoli County participated in this study. The three classes were randomly classified as one comparison group and two experimental groups, A and B. Students in the comparison group were taught reading in the traditional approach while students in experimental groups A and B were trained to comprehend passages by filling in graphic organizers independently or in pairs. A counterbalance design was adopted to reduce the chances of the order of treatment adversely influencing the results. Three instruments were used to collect quantitative data in this study: a) the multiple-choice task, b) the sequencing task and c) the graphic organizer task. A pretest, two posttests, and a delayed posttest were used to measure the participants’ reading comprehension before and after the instruction. One-way ANOVA tests were used to compare the multiple-choice task mean scores, the sequencing task mean scores and the graphic organizer task mean scores for the three groups. The results indicated that there was found to be a significant difference between the comparison group and one of the experimental groups in the Posttest I sequencing task, F (2,44)= 4.887, p = .012. The group of students who started by working on the graphic organizer task individually, then in pair, outperformed the comparison group in Posttest 1 sequencing task. Other than that one difference, there was no significant difference in any other tasks among the three groups. As for two experimental groups, it seemed that students filling in the graphic organizers in pairs did not always outperform than students working alone.

ABSTRACT (Chinese) i
ABSTRACT (English) ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES x
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the study 1
1.2 Aims of the study 7
1.3 Significance of the study 7
1.4 Definition of key terms 8
1.5 Structure of the study 8
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 10
2.1 The curriculum reform and ELT in Taiwan 10
2.2 L2 reading comprehension instruction 15
2.3 Use of graphic organizers in L2 reading instruction 19
2.3.1 Graphic organizers 19
2.3.2 Issues regarding the implementation of graphic organizers in the classroom 23
2.3.3 Effects of graphic organizers in L1 and L2 contexts 24
2.4 The role of pair and group work on reading comprehension teaching and learning 27
2.4.1 Sociocultural theory in language teaching and learning 27
2.4.2 Group discussion and reading comprehension 29
2.5 Conclusion of literature review 32
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 36
3.1 Participants 36
3.2 Materials 37
3.2.1 Rationales for the text selection 37
3.2.2 Test materials and teaching materials 40
3.3 Instruments 41
3.3.1 Reading comprehension test: the multiple-choice task 42
3.3.2 Reading comprehension test: the sequencing task 42
3.3.3 Reading comprehension test: the graphic organizer task 43
3.5 Procedures 48
3.5.1 Data collection procedures 48
3.5.2 Graphic organizer instruction 48
3.5.3 Two experimental phases 49
3.6 Data Analysis 55
3.7 Chapter Summary 55
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS 57
4.1 Results of reading comprehension test among the groups 57
4.1.1 Results of the multiple-choice task 59
4.1.2 Results of the sequencing task 62
4.1.3 Results of the graphic organizer task 65
4.2 Performance in the reading comprehension tests across time in each group 69
4.2.1 The comparison group’s performance across time 70
4.2.2 The Pair-Indiv group’s performance across time 74
4.2.3 The Indiv-Pair group’s performance across time 76
4.3 Additional findings 80
4.4 Qualitative observations 83
4.4 Summary of the results 85
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 88
5.1 The effect of graphic organizer instruction versus traditional method to teach reading 88
5.2 The effect of graphic organizer instruction with or without pair works 94
5.3 The blank boxes in the graphic organizer task 95
5.4 Limitations of this study 97
5.5 Pedagogical implications 99
5.6 Suggestions for future studies 101
Appendix A Problem/Solution Expository Texts 111

REFERENCES
Adcock, H. (2002). Pharmageddon: Is it too late to tackle growing resistance to anti-infectives? Pharmaceutical journal, 269(7221), 599-600.
Akhondi, M., Malayeri, F. A., & Samad, A. A. (2011). How to teach expository text structure to facilitate reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 64(5), 368-372. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/41000932
Allen, J., Möller, K. J., & Stroup, D. (2003). "Is this some kind of soap opera?": A tale of two readers across four literature discussion contexts. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(3), 225-251. doi:10.1080/10573560308215
Alvermann, D. E. (1981). The compensatory effect of graphic organizers on descriptive text. Journal of Educational Research, 75(1), 44-48. doi:10.1080/00220671.1981.10885354
Alvermann, D. E., & Boothby, P. R. (1986). Children's transfer of graphic organizer instruction. Reading Psychology, 7(2), 87-100. doi:10.1080/0270271860070203
Amen IV, H. J. (2011). Read to Reach 2. Seoul, Korea: Neungyule Education, Inc.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectivestives: Complete edition. New York, NY: Longman.
Anderson, N. J. (1999). Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. Handbook of reading research, 1, 255-291.
Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H., & Ostertag, J. (1989). Teaching text structure to improve reading and writing. The Reading Teacher, 43(2), 130-137. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/20200307
Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Baker, L. (2002). Metacognition in comprehension instruction. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 77-95). New York: Guilford Publications.
Bernhardt, E. B. (1991). Reading development in a second language: Theoretical, research, and classroom perspectives. Norwood, NJ Ablex Pub. Corp.
Bernhardt, E. B. (2011). Understanding advanced second-language reading. New York, NY: Routledge.
Bromley, K., Irwin-DeVitis, L., & Modlo, M. (1995). Graphic organizers: Visual strategies for active learning. New York: Scholastic Professional Books.
Bromley, K., Irwin-DeVitis, L., & Modlo, M. (1999). 50 Graphic Organizers for Reading, Writing & More: Reproducible Templates, Student Samples, and Easy Strategies to Support Every Learner: Scholastic Professional Books.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching: Pearson Longman.
Brown, J. D. (1988). Understanding research in second language learning: A teacher's guide to statistics and research design. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In Jack C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2-27).
Carrell, P. L. (1984). The effects of rhetorical organization on ESL readers. TESOL quarterly, 18(3), 441-469.
Carrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure. TESOL quarterly, 19(4), 727-752.
Carrell, P. L. (1992). Awareness of text structure: Effects on recall. Language learning, 42(1), 1-18.
Chen, H.-C., Chern, C.-L., & Wu, A. M. C. (2016). Becoming Reflective Readers: A Case Study of Group Discussion in Reading. English Teaching & Learning, 40(1).
Chen, H.-L. S., & Huang, H.-Y. (2017). Advancing 21st century competencies in Taiwan. National Taiwan Normal University, 1-21.
Chen, I.-C., & Liu, W.-T. (2016). The effect of the use of graphic organizers on EFL sixth graders’ English reading comprehension in Taiwan. 國立虎尾科技大學學報, 33(1), 85-109.
Chu, H. C. J., Swaffar, J., & Charney, D. H. (2002). Cultural representations of rhetorical conventions: The effects on reading recall. TESOL quarterly, 36(4), 511-541.
Dickson, S. V., Simmons, D. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1995). Text organization and its relation to reading comprehension: A synthesis of the research (Technical Report NO.17). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED386864.pdf
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In James P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 29-56).
Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(2), 202-224.
Durkin, D. (1993). Teaching them to read (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Egan, M. (1999). Reflections on effective use of graphic organizers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(8), 641-645.
Ellis, E. (2004). Q&A: What’s the big deal with graphic organizers. Retrieved from http://docshare01.docshare.tips/files/14022/140226323.pdf
Finlay, S.-J., & Faulkner, G. (2005). Tête à tête: Reading groups and peer learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 6(1), 32-45.
Flesch, R. (1979). How to Write Plain English: A Book for Lawyers and Consumers. New York: Harper & Row.
Geva, E. (1983). Facilitating reading comprehension through flowcharting. Reading Research Quarterly, 18(4), 384-405. doi:10.2307/747375
Goldenberg, C. (2011). Reading instruction for English language learners. In Michael L. Kamil, P. David Pearson, Elizabeth Birr Moje, & P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 4, pp. 684-710): Routledge.
Grabe, W. (2004). 3. Research on teaching reading. Annual review of applied linguistics, 24, 44.
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. New York Cambridge University Press.
Griffin, C. C., Malone, L. D., & Kameenui, E. J. (1995). Effects of graphic organizer instruction on fifth-grade students. The Journal of Educational Research, 89(2), 98-107.
Hall, T., & Strangman, N. (2002). Graphic organizers. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum.
Hudson, T. (2007). Teaching second language reading: Oxford University Press Oxford.
Institute for the Advancement of Research in Education. (2003). Graphic organizers: A review of scientifically based research. Charleston, WV: Institute for the Advancement of Research in Education.
Jiang, X. (2012). Effects of discourse structure graphic organizers of EFL reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 24(1), 84-105.
Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2007). Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(1), 34-55.
Joyce, C. (2008). Sequencing. ARBs: Assessment Resource Banks. Retrieved from https://arbs.nzcer.org.nz/sequencing
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological review, 95(2), 163.
Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Arguelles, M. E., Tejero Hughes, M., & Ahwee Leftwich, S. (2004). Collaborative strategic reading: “Real-world” lessons from classroom teachers. Remedial and special education, 25(5), 291-302.
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, L.-F. (2007). The responses of Taiwanese adolescent girls to selected American short stories for young adults. (Doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Li, C.-C. (2012). The evolution and vision of Taiwan’s English education. [The Evolution and Vision of Taiwan's English Education]. Taiwan Education Review(674), 31-40.
Li, Y.-C. (2017). A comparison of English reading comprehension questions on the BCT and the CAP using revised Bloom’s taxonomy. (Master). National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.
Lin, M.-C. (2017). A preliminary study on the competence-based English language teaching cases for 12-Year Basic Education[十二年國教英語文素養導向教學案例之初探]. In Y.-S. Hung (Ed.), The 36th Forum of Curriculum and Instruction in 2017 “Adaptive Learning & Cross-area Connection” (pp. 55-97). New Taipei, Taiwan: National Academy for Educational Research.
Lin, M.-C. (2018). From skill to competence of English language teaching: The contextualized communicative approach. Jiaoyu Yanjiu Yuekan= Journal of Education Research(294), 72-90.
Liu, M.-Z. (2016). Analysis and comparison of the BCT and CAP English test trends from 2012 to 2015. Asia University, Taiwan.
Loewen, S., & Plonsky, L. (2016). An A–Z of Applied Linguistics Research Methods. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Manoli, P., & Papadopoulou, M. (2012). Graphic organizers as a reading strategy: Research findings and issues. Creative education, 3(03), 348.
Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Meyer, B. J. F. (1985). Prose analysis: Purpose, procedures and problems. In B. B. J. Black (Ed.), Understanding expository text (pp. 269–285). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Meyer, B. J. F., & Freedle, R. O. (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. American Educational Research Journal, 21(1), 121-143. doi:10.3102/00028312021001121
Meyer, B. J. F., & Poon, L. W. (2001). Effects of structure strategy training and signaling on recall of text. Journal of educational psychology, 93(1), 141.
Meyer, B. J. F., & Rice, G. E. (1984). The structure of text. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook on Reading Research (pp. 319-352). New York: Longman.
Ministry of Education. (2011). The plan to implement twelve-year education. Retrieved from http://12basic.edu.tw/Detail.php?LevelNo=38
Ministry of Education. (2014). General guidelines of the twelve-year curriculum. Retrieved from https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15-1000-7944,c639-1.php?Lang=zh-tw
Ministry of Education. (2018). Curriculum guidelines of English education of 12-year basic education. Retrieved from https://www.naer.edu.tw/ezfiles/0/1000/img/114/173173199.pdf
Mohan, B. A., & Lo, W. A. Y. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL quarterly, 19(3), 515-534.
Moore, D. W., & Readence, J. E. (1984). A quantitative and qualitative review of graphic organizer research. The Journal of Educational Research, 78(1), 11-17. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/27540086
Murphy, P. K., Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., Hennessey, M. N., & Alexander, J. F. (2009). Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis. Journal of educational psychology, 101(3), 740.
Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia‐Pacific Region. TESOL quarterly, 37(4), 589-613.
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pearson, P. D., & Fielding, L. (1991). Comprehension instruction. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. B. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2). New York: Longman.
Porkaew, K. (2013). Expository text structure and reading comprehension. Thammasat Review, 16(3), 267-276.
Praveen, S. D., & Rajan, P. (2013). Using graphic organizers to improve reading comprehension skills for the middle school ESL students. English Language Teaching, 6(2), 155-170.
Pulido, D. (2003). Modeling the role of second language proficiency and topic familiarity in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. Language learning, 53(2), 233-284.
Pyle, N., Vasquez, A. C., Lignugaris/Kraft, B., Gillam, S. L., Reutzel, D. R., Olszewski, A., . . . Pyle, D. (2017). Effects of expository text structure interventions on comprehension: A meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(4), 469-501.
RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension: Rand Corporation.
Research Center for Psychological and Educational Testing. (2019). The statistical table of grade levels and percentage of population in every subject of 108 year Comprehensive Assessment Program for Junior High School Students. Retrieved from https://cap.rcpet.edu.tw/index.html
Shen, F.-Y. (2013). Using group discussion with Taiwan's EFL college ctudents: A comparison of comprehension instruction for book club, literature circles, and instructional conversations. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 58-78.
Shen, F.-Y. (2014). English reading: Effective comprehension strategy instruction. NCUE Journal of Humanities, 9, 61-82.
Shiau, A. J. (2010). Using reciprocal teaching to develop thinking in a senior high EFL classroom in Taiwan (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Simmons, D. C., Griffin, C. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1988). Effects of teacher-constructed pre-and post-graphic organizer instruction on sixth-grade science students’ comprehension and recall. The Journal of Educational Research, 82(1), 15-21.
Spiegel, G. F., & Barufaldi, J. P. (1994). The effects of a combination of text structure awareness and graphic postorganizers on recall and retention of science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 913-932.
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Cognitive theory. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Storch. (2001). How collaborative is pair work? ESL tertiary students composing in pairs. Language teaching research, 5(1), 29-53.
Storch, N. (1999). Are two heads better than one? Pair work and grammatical accuracy. System, 27(3), 363-374.
Storch, N. (2004). Using activity theory to explain differences in patterns of dyadic interactions in an ESL class. Canadian modern language review, 60(4), 457-480.
Tang, G. (1992). The effect of graphic representation of knowledge structures on ESL reading comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14(2), 177-195.
Taylor, B. (1992). Text structure, comprehension, and recall. In S. Jay Samuels & A. E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (Vol. 2, pp. 220-235). Newark, Del.: International Reading Association.
Trabasso, T., & Bouchard, E. (2002). Teaching readers how to comprehend text strategically. In C. C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 176-200). New York: Guilford Publications.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard university press.
Wang, Y. H. (2003). The effects of group discussion on EFL reading comprehension instruction. (Unpublished Master ). National Kaohsiung Normal University,
Wells, H. (2011). Read to Reach 3. Seoul, Korea: Neungyule Education, Inc.
Wertsch, J. V. (1979). From social interaction to higher psychological processes. A clarification and application of Vygotsky’s theory. Human development, 22(1), 1-22.
Yeh, H.-N. (2016). Prospects of English textbooks for elementary and high schools in view of draft curriculum guidelines for twelve-year basic education. Jiaoke Shu Yanjiu= Journal of Textbook Research, 9(3), 143.