A COMPARISON OF READING DEVELOPMENT BY LEARNERS OF JAPANESE IN INTENSIVE DOMESTIC IMMERSION AND STUDY ABROAD CONTEXTS
A COMPARISON OF READING DEVELOPMENT BY LEARNERS OF JAPANESE IN INTENSIVE DOMESTIC IMMERSION AND STUDY ABROAD CONTEXTS
复制标题
日语学习者在国内强化沉浸和出国留学背景下的阅读发展比较
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2004
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Dan Dewey
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dan Dewey
为了探讨语境在阅读发展中的作用，本研究对15名日本留学生和15名日本国内留学生的阅读理解和过程进行了比较。前后测中只有一项阅读理解的自我评估有显著差异。另外两个理解的措施自由回忆和词汇知识的差异并不显着。自我评估的措施表明，SA学生感到更自信的阅读第二语言比他们的IM同行。在阅读过程中，有声思维协议显示出显着的差异，随着时间的推移，在监测理解量（IM比SA少）和响应和反应文本内容的情感或情绪（IM比SA多）。在即时通讯的背景下，办公时间与教师的互动影响学生监测理解更少，更有效地和更频繁地对文本的情感反应。在阅读措施和接触的语言和文化的收益方面的变化是更大的SA比IM。受控IM设置和开放SA环境导致变异性差异。本文讨论了为获取特定于任何给定环境的收益而设计的各种新措施的必要性，并给出了新措施的具体建议。自由对手稿的广泛反馈;芭芭拉F。自由，G。感谢理查德·塔克和伊莎贝尔·贝克为撰写本论文提供的建议;感谢米德尔伯里学院语言学院院长迈克尔·卡茨办公室通过贝克研究奖学金为本研究提供的大量数据收集工作;感谢我在卡内基梅隆大学的前同事在本研究中提供的持续投入;感谢两位SSLA匿名审稿人对本论文的投入和建议。
To investigate the role of context in reading development, a comparison of reading comprehension and processes was conducted between learners of Japanese as a second language in study abroad (SA; n = 15) and intensive domestic (in the United States) immersion (IM; n = 15) contexts. A significant difference was found between contexts in pretest to posttest gains on only one measure of reading comprehension, a self-assessment. Differences on the two other measures of comprehension—free-recall and vocabulary knowledge—were not significant. The self-assessment measure indicated that SA students felt more confident reading the second language than their IM counterparts. In terms of reading processes, think-aloud protocols showed significant differences in changes over time in the amount of monitoring understanding (less for IM than SA) and responding and reacting to text content affectively or emotionally (more for IM than SA). In the IM context, office-hour interaction with teachers influenced students to monitor comprehension less and more efficiently and to respond affectively to text more often. Variability in terms of gains on reading measures and contact with language and culture outside of class was greater for SA than for IM. The controlled IM setting and the open SA context contributed to differences in variability. The need for a variety of new measures designed to capture gains specific to any given context is discussed and specific suggestions for new measures are given.I wish to thank the following individuals for their help: Joe Collentine and Barbara F. Freed for extensive feedback on the manuscript; Barbara F. Freed, G. Richard Tucker, and Isabel Beck for advising on the dissertation that led to this manuscript; the Office of Michael Katz, Dean of the Language Schools at Middlebury College, for facilitating much of the data collection for this study through the Baker Research Fellowship; my former colleagues at Carnegie Mellon University for ongoing input throughout this study; and the two anonymous SSLA reviewers of this paper for their input and suggestions.