iLMS知識社群(Sites)師生部落格(Blogs)朝陽首頁(Homepage)登入
位置: 徐碧霙 > 新聞英文
by 徐碧霙 2010-07-19 23:14:27, 回應(0), 人氣(1642)
博碩士論文 etd-0628110-131036 詳細資訊 姓名 邱婉菁(Wan-Ching Chiu) 電子郵件信箱 ilisachiou@yahoo.com.tw 畢業系所 應用外語研究所(Department and Gr
(全文...)
by 徐碧霙 2010-07-19 23:09:34, 回應(0), 人氣(1736)
博碩士論文 etd-0629110-151949 詳細資訊 姓名 鄭曉薇(Shiao-wei Cheng) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開 畢業系所 應用外語研究所(Department and Graduate Institute of Applied Foreign Languages) 畢業學位 碩士(Master) 畢業時期 98學年第2學期 論文名稱(中) 學生在英文演說課對教師評量,自我評量,同儕評量以及電子檔案評量的看法之研究 論文名稱(英) A Study of Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher, Self, Peer, and E-portfolio Evaluation in an English Speech Class 檔案 etd-0629110-151949.pdf 本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。 論文使用權限 校內外均一年後公開 論文語文/頁數 英文/115 統計 本論文已被瀏覽 11 次,被下載 0 次 摘要(中) 許多研究顯示教室評論活動對於學生的學習動機及表現有很大的影響。本研究旨在分析與描述台灣大學生對於英文演說課程中教師評論,自我評論,同儕評論及電子化檔案評論的看法。研究對象為台中縣朝陽科技大學應用外語系演說課的56名大學生。學期中學生們一共有六次的演講機會,並且在演講的過程中會將學生的表現錄下來然後上傳到電子化檔案進行教師評論,自我評論,同儕評論。研究工具為一份學生對於教師評論,自我評論,同儕評論及電子化檔案評論的看法問卷。以量化的分析來探討台灣大學生對於教師評論,自我評論,同儕評論及電子化檔案評論的看法以及這些活動能幫助學生口說能力的有利因素。結果顯示學生對教師評論,自我評論,同儕評論及電子化檔案評論抱持著相當正面的看法。他們認為這些評論活動可以增強他們的英文口語技巧。藉由探討演說課的學生對於師評論,自我評論,同儕評論及電子化檔案評論的看法,本研究嘗試擴展老師對於這些活動的認知,期待鼓勵未來相關研究的繼續探討。 摘要(英) Many studies showed that classroom evaluation could have a powerful impact on students’ performance and motivation. This study aimed to investigate students’ perceptions toward teacher, self, peer and e-portfolio evaluation in an English speech class. Fifty-six undergraduate students were recruited in English speech class. Students were asked to present six English speeches in the semester. During the period, students’ oral presentations were videotaped and uploaded to their electronic portfolio for teacher evaluation, self evaluation and peer evaluation. A questionnaire was applied to investigate the data of students’ perceptions toward teacher, self, peer and e-portfolio evaluation. t test was conducted in this study to examine the differences between students’ perceptions toward teacher evaluation, self evaluation, and peer evaluation. The results show that students showed positive attitude toward teacher, self, peer and e-portfolio evaluation. They considered that these evaluations can help them improve their oral skills. This study attempted to explore students’ perceptions toward teacher, self, peer and e-portfolio evaluation in an English speech class. It is hoped to offer some insights for teachers into how these activities can be integrated into English speech class. 關鍵字(中) 教師評論 自我評論 同儕評論 電子檔案評論 關鍵字(英) teacher evaluation self evaluation peer evaluation e-portfolio evaluation 論文目次 CHINESE ABSTRACT…………………………………………………… iENGLISG ABSTRACT…………………………………………………… iiACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………... iiiTABLE OF CONTENTS…………………..……………………………. ivLIST OF TABLE…………………………………………………………... vLIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………. viCHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION……………………………………. 1Background of the Study…………………………………………………... 1Statement of the Problems………………………………………………. 4Purposes of the Study……………………………………………………… 7Research Questions……………………………………………………… 8Definition of the Terms………………………………………………….. 8Significance of the Study………………………………………………... 11CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………… 14Traditional Assessment………………………………………………….. 14Alternative Assessment………………………………………………….. 16Comparison of Traditional Assessment And Alternative Assessment…... 17Student Centered Teaching Method……………………………………… 18Evaluation and Assessment……………………………………………….. 20Advantages of Teacher Evaluation…………………………………. 21  Limitations of Teacher Evaluation………………………………….. 22  Advantages of Self Evaluation……………………………………... 23  Limitations of Self Evaluation……………………………………… 24  Advantages of Peer Evaluation…………………………………….. 25  Limitations of Peer Evaluation……………………………………. 26  Advantages of Portfolio……………………………………………. 27  Limitations of Portfolio………………………………………………. 29  Advantages of e-portfolio Assessment……………………………….. 29Studies of Evaluations in Taiwan………………………………………... 30Assessment in Oral Class………………………………………………… 33Summary…………………………………………………………………... 34CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY……………………………….. 35Purposes of the Study……………………………………………………… 35Participants and Setting……………………………………………………. 36Procedure of the Study…………………………………………………... 40Instruments………………………………………………………………… 45Data collection……………………………………………………………..47A Questionnaire of Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher, Self, Peer, and e-portfolio Evaluation in an English Speech Class………. 47  Students’ Oral Production Evaluation………………………………. 48Data analysis………………………………………………………………. 49Questionnaire Analysis……………………………………………….. 49Students’ Oral Production Evaluation……………………………… 51CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS…………………………………………… 52Analysis of the Questionnaire…………………………………………… 52  Reliability of the Questionnaire……………………………………. 52Analyzed of the Students’ Performances…………………………….……. 53Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher Evaluation……………………….. 54  Learners’ Attitudes Toward Teacher Evaluation…………………… 56  Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher Evaluation of Perceived Effects………………………………………………………………... 57  Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher Evaluation of the Usefulness... 58Students’ Perceptions Toward Self Evaluation…………………………… 58  Learners’ Attitudes Toward Self Evaluation………………………..... 60  Students’ Perceptions Toward Self Evaluation of Perceived Effects… 61  Students’ Perceptions Toward Self Evaluation of Reviewed Ability… 62  Students’ Perceptions Toward Self Evaluation of the Usefulness……. 63Students’ Perceptions Toward Peer Evaluation…………………………... 63  Learners’ Attitudes Toward Ppeer Evaluation……………………… 65  Students’ Perceptions Toward Peer Evaluation of Perceived Effects... 66  Students’ Perceptions Toward Peer Evaluation of Reviewied Ability... 67  Students’ Perceptions Toward Peer Evaluation of the Usefulness .…. 68  The Comparison of Teacher, Self, and Peer Evaluation........................ 69Teacher Evaluation vs. Self Evaluation…………………………………... 69  Learners’ Attitudes Toward Teacher and Self Evaluation……………. 69  Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher and Self Evaluation   of Perceived Effect………………………………………………..... 70  Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher and Self Evaluation of the  Usefulness………………………………………………………….. 71Teacher Evaluation vs. Peer Evaluation…………………………………. 71  Learners’ Attitudes Toward Teacher and Peer Evaluation………........ 71  Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher and Peer Evaluation of   Perceived Effects…………………………………………..…………. 72  Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher and Peer Evaluation of the  Usefulness……………………………………………………………. 73Self Evaluation vs. Peer Evaluation……………………………………... 74  Learners’ Attitudes Toward Self and Peer Evaluation……………….. 74  Students’ Perceptions Toward Self and Peer Evaluation of Perceived  Effects……………………………………………….………………. 74  Students’ Perceptions Toward Self and Peer Evaluation of the  Usefulness……………………………………………………………. 75  Students’ Perceptions Toward Self and Peer Evaluation of Reviewed   Abilities………………………………………………………………. 76Students’ Perceptions Toward e-portfolio Evaluation……………………. 77Summary of the Results………………………………………………….. 79  The Summary of Teacher Evaluation………………………………... 79  The Summary of Self Evaluation………………………………...…... 80  The Summary of Peer Evaluation…………..………………………... 82  The Summary of e-portfolio Evaluation……………………………... 83CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS………………………………………………………….. 85Conclusion…………………………………………………………………. 85  Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher Evaluation………………….. 86    Learners’ attitudes toward teacher evaluation…………………... 86    Students’ perceptions s toward teacher valuation of perceived    effect………………………………………………………….... 86    Students’ perceptions toward teacher evaluation of the     usefulness………………………………………………………. 87  Students’ Perceptions Toward Self Evaluation……………………… 87    Learners’ attitudes toward self evaluation………………………. 87    Students’ perceptions toward self evaluation of perceived     effects………………………………….……………………... 87    Students’ perceptions toward self evaluation of reviewed     ability……………………………………………………..…... 88    Students’ perceptions toward self evaluation of the     usefulness…………………………………………..………….... 88  Students’ Perceptions Toward Peer Evaluation……………………... 89    Learners’ attitudes toward peer evaluation……………………… 89    Students’ perceptions toward peer evaluation of perceived     effects…………………………………………….…………….. 89    Students’ perceptions toward peer evaluation of reviewed     ability………………………………..………………………….. 90    Students’ perceptions toward peer evaluation of the     usefulness…………………………………………………...…. 90  Students’ Perceptions Toward e-portfolio Evaluation………………. 91Theoretical Contribution………………………………………………… 92  Summative Assessments……………………………………………... 93  Formative Assessment………………………………………………... 93Educational Practice……………………………………………………….. 93Limitations………………………………………………………………… 94Suggestions………………………………………………………………... 96REFERNCES……………………………………………………………… 97Appendixes A: English speech evaluation form…………………………... 106Appendixes B: Questionnaire……………………………………………... 108LIST OF THE TABLESTable 1 Traditional Assessment and Alternative Assessment (Brown, 2003).. 18Table 2 Timetable of the English Speech Class… … … … … … … … … … … … 42Table 3 Reliability to Teacher, Self, Peer and E-portfolio Evaluation… … … 53Table 4 Descriptive Statistics of English Oral Skills at Pre-and Post Test… ... 54Table 5 T-test with English Oral Skills at Pre-and Post test… … … … … … .. 54Table 6 Examples of each Subscale in Teacher Evaluation… … … … … … … .. 55Table 7 Descriptive Statistics of Learners’ Attitudes Toward TeacherEvaluation… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …56Table 8 Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacherevaluation of Perceived Effects… … … … … … … … … … … … … …57Table 9 Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Perceptions Toward TeacherEvaluation of the Usefulness… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .58Table 10 Examples of Each Subscale in Self Evaluation… … … … … … … … .. 59Table 11 Descriptive Statistics of Learners’ Attitudes Toward SelfEvaluation… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …60Table 12 Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Perceptions Toward SelfEvaluation of Perceived Effects… … … … … … … … … … … … … … ...61Table 13 Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Perceptions Toward SelfEvaluation of Reviewed Ability… … … … … … … … … … … … … … ...62Table 14 Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Perceptions Toward SelfEvaluation of the Usefulness… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … ...63Table 15 Examples of Each Subscale in Peer Evaluation… … … … … … … … . 64Table 16 Descriptive Statistics of Learners’ Attitude Toward PeerEvaluation… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …65Table 17 Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Perceptions Toward PeerEvaluation of Perceived Effects… … … … … … … … … … … … … … ...66Table 18 Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Perceptions Toward PeerEvaluation of Reviewed Ability… … … … … … … … … … … … … ....67Table 19 Descriptive Statistics of Students’ Perceptions Toward PeerEvaluation of the Usefulness… … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … ..68Table 20 Descriptive Statistics of Teacher, Self, and Peer Evaluations… … … . 69Table 21 T-test with Learners’ Attitudes Toward Teacher and SelfEvaluation… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …70Table 22 T-test with Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher and SelfEvaluation of Perceived Effects… … … … … … … … … … … … ...… …70Table 23 T-test with Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher and SelfEvaluation of the Usefulness… … … … … … … … … … … … … ...… .71Table 24 T-test with Students’ Learner’ Attitudes Toward Teacher and PeerEvaluation… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …72Table 25 T-test with Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher and PeerEvaluation of Perceived Effects… … … … … … … … … … … … … … ...73Table 26 T-test with Students’ Perceptions Toward Teacher and PeerEvaluation of the Usefulness… … … … … … … … … … … … … … …73Table 27 T-test with Learners’ Attitudes Toward Self and Peer Evaluation… 74Table 28 T-test with Students’ Perceptions Toward Self and Peer Evaluationof Perceived Effects… … … … … … … … … … .… … … … … … … … .75Table 29 T-test with Students’ Perceptions Toward Self and Peer Evaluationof the Usefulness… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … ..… … … …76Table 30 T-test with Students’ Perceptions Toward Self and Peer Evaluationof Reviewed Abilities… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .76Table 31 Descriptive Statistics of E-portfolio Evaluation… … … … … ..… .… ... 78Table 32 Descriptive Statistics of Teacher Evaluation… … … … … … .… … … .. 80Table 33 Descriptive Statistics of Self Evaluation… … … … … … … … … … … . 81Table 34 Descriptive Statistics of Peer Evaluation… … … … … … … … … … … . 82Table 35 Descriptive Statistics of e-portfolio Evaluation… … … … … … … … ... 84LIST OF THE FIGURESFigure 1 Procedure of the study… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … . 41Figure 2 Paired sample t test with teacher evaluation and self evaluation onlearners’ attitudes, student s’ perceived effects, and student’sperceptions on usefulness… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …50Figure 3 Paired sample t test with teacher evaluation and peer evaluation onlearners’ attitudes, students’ perceived effects, and student’sperceptions on usefulness… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …50Figure 4 Paired sample t test with self evaluation and peer evaluation onlearners’ attitudes, students’ perceived effects, student’s perceptionson usefulness, and students’ reviewed abilities… … … … … … … … ...51 參考文獻 ReferencesAndrade, H. G., & Boulay, B. A. (2003). Role of rubric-referenced self-assessment in learning to write. Journal of Educational Research, 97(1), 21-32.Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., & Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427-441.Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Educational: Principle, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-75.Brindley, C., & Scoffield, S. (1998). Peer assessment in undergraduate programs. Teaching in higher education, 3(1), 79-89.Brown, H. D. (2003). Language assessment: principle and classroom practices. New York: Pearson Longman ESL.Bond, D. (1995). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in higher education, 15, 101-113.Campbell, A. P. (2003). Weblogs for use with ESL classes. The internet TESL journal,9(2), Retrieved August 20th, 2009, from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Campbell-Weblogs.html Chang, C. C. (2003). Diagnosing English learning for junior high school students by portfolio assessment. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Kashsiung Normal University, Taiwan.Brindely, G., & Chapelle, C. A. (Eds.). (2002). Assessment. An introduction to applied linguistics, London: Arnold, 267-288. Chen, K. C. (2004). Implementing Electronic Portfolio Assessment: A Case Study of A Third Grade Elementary English Class. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of National Taipei University of Education, Taiwan.Chen, B. L. (2003). A comparative study of teacher evaluation and peer evaluation on the English writing on senior high school students. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.Chen, S. W. (2009). Oral communication strategies used by English major college students in Taiwan- A case of Chaoyang University of Technology. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Chaoyang University of Technology, Taiwan.Chen, Y. M. EFL instruction and assessment with portfolio: A case study in Taiwan. Retrieved May, 19, 2010, from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/March06_ymc.pdf. Chi, T. Y. (2005). A study on implementing writing portfolio in EFL classroom in senior high. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.Chiu, C. Y. (2009). Exploring college students’ feedback preferences in an intermediate English writing class. Proceedings of 2009 Taiwan TESOL conference hosted by National Formosa University.Crooks, T.J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 438-481.Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in education and training international, 37(4), 347-355.Davies, P. (2002). Using students reflection self-assessment for awarding degree classifications. Innovations in Education an Teaching International, 39(4), 307-319. DeNishi, A., Randoloph, W. A., & Blencoe, A. G. (1983). Potential problems with peer ratings. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 457-464.Dochy, F., & Segers M. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 23(3), 331-350.Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: a meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287-322.Fallows, S., & Chandramohan, B. (2001). Multiple approaches to assessment: reflections on use of tutor, peer and self assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 229-245.Fujita, T. (2001). Peer, self, and instructor assessment in an EFL speech class. Rikkyo Language Center, 3,203-213.Garrison, C., & Ehringhaus, M. (2007). Formative and summative assessments in the classroom. Retrieved May 9, 2010, fromhttp://www.nmsa.org/Publications/WebExclusive/Assessment/tabid/1120/Default.aspxHsieh, Y. F. (2000). Implementation of portfolio assessment in a sixth grade classroom. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. Feedback in Second Language Writing. England, Cambridge University Press. Johnson, K. E. (2002). Teacher-constructed teaching portfolios: Learning through assessment. Perspectives, 31(2), 7-19.Johnson, A. (2004). Creating a writing course utilizing class and student blogs. The internet TESL journal, 10(8). Retrieved August 20th, 2009, from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Johnson-Blogs/Kitsantas, A., & Baylor, A. (2001). The impact of the instructional planning self-reflection tool on preservice teacher performance, disposition, and self-efficacy beliefs regarding systematic instructional planning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 97-106.Kwok, L. (2008). Students perceptions of peer evaluation and teachers’ role in seminar discussions. Electronic journal of foreign language teaching, 5(1), 84-97.Lai, C. L. (2004). A study of EFL vocational high school students’ perceptions of peer evaluation and feedback to peers’ speaking performance. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Ming Chuan University, Taiwan.Lin, J. Y. (2009). Portfolio assessment in an EFL junior high school classroom- an action research. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Ming Chuan University, Taiwan.Liu, Z. F.., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M. (2002). Alternatives to instructor assessment: A case study of comparing self and peer assessment under a network innovative assessment procedure. International Journal of Media, 29(4), 395-403.Lo, S. C. (2007). Attitudes and Responses to Portfolio Assessment and Writing Autonomy of Senior High EFL Students. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer-, and teacher –assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms. Language Testing, 26(1), 75-100.McEnery, J. M., & Blandchard, P. N. (1999). Validity of multiple ratings of business student performance in a management simulation. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10, 155-172.Milton, J. (2001). Self and peer assessment. Retrieved, December 14, 2009, from http://www.lts.rmit.edu.au/renewal/assass/faq2.htm Nakamura, Y. (2002). Teacher assessment and peer assessment in practice. Educational studies, 44.National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. 1999. Retrieved, May 9, 2010, from http://www.intime.uni.edu/model/center_of_learning_files/definition.html Nippold, M. A., Hesketh, L. J., Duthie, J. K., & Mansfield, T. C. (2005). Conversations versus expository discourse: A study of syntactic development in children, adolescents, and adults. Journal of speech, language, and hearing research, 48, 1048-1064.O’Donnell, A. M., & Topping, K. (1998). Peers assessing peers: possibilities and problems. Education and Training International, 32(4), 323-335.Olina, Z., & Sullivan, H. (2002). Effects of classroom evaluation strategies on student achievement and attitudes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 61-75.Olina, Z., & Sullivan, H. (2004). Student self-evaluation, teacher evaluation and learner performance. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 5-22.Ozogul, G., Olina, Z., & Sullivan, H. (2008). Teacher, self and peer evaluation of lesson plans written by preservice teachers. Education Tech Research, 56, 181-201.Reese-Durham, N. (2005). Peer evaluation as an active learning technique. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(4), 338-345.Satio, H. (2000). Peer, self, and instructor rating of group presentations in EFL classroom: A pilot study. The Journal of Rikkyo University Language Center, 2, 76-86. Satio, H. (2003). Rater training effects on peer assessment of EFL individual presentations: An intern report. Hokusei Journal, 43(1), 11-22.Scheeler, M. C., Macluckie, M., & Albright, K. (2010). Effects of immediate feedback delivered by peer tutors on the oral presentation skills of adolescents with learning disabilities. Remedial and special education, 31(2), 77-86.Shimura, M. (2006). Peer and instructor assessment of oral presentation in Japanese university EFL classroom: A pilot study. Waseda Global Forum, 3, 99-107.Sluijsmans, D., Dochy, F., & Moerkerke, G. (1999). Creating a learning environment by using self-, peer- and co-assessment. Learning Environments Research, 1 (3), 293-319.Smith, H., Cooper, A., & Lancaster, L. (2002). Improving the quality of undergraduate peer assessment: A case for student and staff development. Innovations in education and teaching international, 39(1), 71-81.Su, K. W. (2002). The study of the current situation of portfolio assessment application in Taipei City Elementary schools and the teachers’ attitude toward it. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Tai-chung Teachers College, Taiwan.Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., Chiou, S. K., & Hou, H. T. (2005). The design and application of a web-based self- and peer- assessment system. Computers and Education 49, 187-202.Sung, S. Y. (2001). The effects of a portfolio project on the English learning of senior high school students. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of National Kaoshiung Normal University, Taiwan.Topping, K. (1998). Peer-assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of educational research, 68(3), 249-276.Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment & evaluation in higher education, 25(2), 149-167.Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers and Education 49, 1161-1174.Tuzi, F. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computes and composition, 21(2), 217-235.Wilggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessment to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Wilcox, B. & Tomei, L. (1999). Professional portfolios for teachers: A guide for learners, experts, and scholars. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.Yeh, H. N. (2000). Implementation of English portfolio assessment in primary and Journal of Caves English Teaching (CET), 30, 11-14. 口試委員 李金玲 - 召集委員 洪伯毅 - 委員 徐碧霙 - 指導教授 口試日期 2010-06-21 繳交日期 2010-06-29 [
(全文...)
by 徐碧霙 2009-06-17 22:56:10, 回應(12), 人氣(1084)

(全文...)
by 徐碧霙 2009-05-01 12:05:15, 回應(0), 人氣(844)
你知道新聞英文裡 常聽到的 APEC 代表什麼意思嗎?
(全文...)
by 徐碧霙 2009-04-29 12:21:53, 回應(0), 人氣(1356)
博碩士論文 etd-1224108-031425 詳細資訊 姓名 王麗掬(Li-Jyu Wang) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開 畢業系所 應用外語研究所(Applied Foreign Langu
(全文...)
by 徐碧霙 2009-04-29 12:20:32, 回應(0), 人氣(1425)
  博碩士論文 etd-1226108-113230 詳細資訊 姓名 陳芳萱(Fang-Hsuan Chen) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開 畢業系所 應用外語研究所(App
(全文...)
by 徐碧霙 2009-04-29 12:19:39, 回應(0), 人氣(1076)
博碩士論文 etd-0109108-102333 詳細資訊 姓名 林銘輝(Ming-huei Lin) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開 畢業系所 應用外語研究所(Applied Foreign Lan
(全文...)
by 徐碧霙 2009-04-29 12:18:34, 回應(1), 人氣(1134)
博碩士論文 etd-0111108-155715 詳細資訊 姓名 電子郵件信箱 perngchyiyuan@yahoo.com.tw 畢業系所 應用外語研究所(Applied Foreign Languages Department)
(全文...)
Prev1234Next