| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立中正大學 === 外國語文學系碩士在職專班 === 105 === SBSI (Structure-Based Storytelling Instruction) can provide a framework for story composition as well as be a pedagogical tool to develop different aspects of language learning. Researchers have noted the importance of story structure and its implications for both story comprehension and writing. With the provision of the target instructional story structure elements (i.e. Theme, Plot Episode, Resolution, and Ending), SBSI offered a shared language (and thus opportunities) for instructors and learners to brainstorm and create a logical story in the classroom. This study aims to investigate how a group of 16 Taiwanese EFL elementary school students negotiated meaning in dyads to generate a new story based on the instructional story structure. Additionally, students’ perceptions of the SBSI as well as its impact on their English learning were also explored. Sixteen EFL sixth graders, forming eight dyads, took part in the study and were involved in the six-week SBSI. Each week of the instruction required students to experience listening to storytelling, conducting collaborative story writing, and participating in sharing their work. All the participants were interviewed after the whole instruction was carried out. Data sources included three transcripts of dyadic discussions for the story composition tasks, as well as the participants’ responses in the interviews. Two discussion modes (TPRE and non-TPRE) and three categories of negotiation (generating story content, processing language problems, and arranging story structure and task management) based on eight discussion patterns (clarification requesting, joint meaning making, idea eliciting, question raising, idea sharing, language assisting, dictating English phrases or sentences, and organizing work procedures) emerged from the data analysis of the participants’ dyadic discussions. First, the high frequency of TPRE discussion modes revealed that most of the dyads generated their stories following the story developmental sequence. The frequency of using the negotiation categories showed that overall the dyads participated most frequently in generating story content, and the participants’ willingness to collaborate offered a number of chances for them to change the social positions they adopted during such discussions, which further facilitated learning. Additionally, with regard to processing language problems, students’ agency in collaboration resulted in peer scaffolding which was not unidirectional. Instead, both participants could work as experts to help each other and co-construct their language knowledge. Furthermore, in relation to arranging story structure and task management, the instructional story structure served as a critical schema for the dyads to develop and construct their own stories. Finally, most of the participants benefited from the SBSI with regard to their listening, speaking, reading and writing, as well as gaining a more positive perception of learning English. The pedagogical implications of this study and recommendations for future studies are also provided.
|
|---|
