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

李田英(民77 )學習成就之性別差異。 台北師院學報, 1 期， 119-13。 頁。
吳敏而(1989) 摘取文章大意的教材教法。台南師院77 學年度國語文學術研討會宣讀。
吳敏而(民79 )國語科大意教學怎能大意。 七十八年國民小學課程研究學術研討會專輯。 台灣省國民學校教師研習會出版。
汪榮才(民68 )教師行為、學生制握信念與學業成就。 台南師專學報， 12期， 111-132頁。
周何總主編(民76 )國語活用辭典。 台北:五南圖書出版公司。
林國樑編著(民75 )語文教學研究(修訂七版) 。 台北:童年書店。
黃昆輝(民68 )國民小學國語文教學績效之調查研究。 國立台灣師範大學教育研究所集刊， 21 輯，193-249 頁。
張春興、陳李網(民66 )國小男女生學業成績的性別差異與其教師，性別差異的關係。 教育心理學報, 10 期， 21-34 頁。
陳誕(民71 )國小教師之性別與其教學成績及學生學業成績之性別差異的關係。 國科會補助研究論文。

Asher, S.R., & Markell, R.A.(1974). Sex differences in comprehension of high-and-low-interest reading material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66(5), 680-687.
Aulls, M.W.(1978). Developmental and remedial
reading in the middle grades. Boston: Allyn
and Bacon.
Aulls, M.W.(1986). Actively teaching main idea
skills. In J.F. Baumann(Ed.), Teaching main
idea comprehension (PP.92-132). Newark. DE:
International Reading Association.
Bank, B.J., Briddle, B.J., & Good, T.L.(1980).
Sex roles, classroom instruction and
reading achievement. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 72(2), 119-132.
Baumann, J. F. (1984). The effectiveness of a
direct instruction paradigm for teaching
m a i n ide a corn pre hen s ion. ~R e a din g Res ear c h
Quarterly, 20(1), 93-115.
Baumann, J.F.(1986). The direct instruction of
maln idea comprehension ability. In J. F.
Baumann(Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehension
(PP.133-178). Newark, DE:International
Reading Association.
Brown, A.L., & Day, J.D.(1983). Macrorules for
summarizing texts: The development of expertise.
Journal of Verbal Learning and
Verbal Behavior, 22(1), 1-14.
Brown, A.L., Day, J.D., & Jones, R.D. (1983).
The development of plans for summarizing
texts. Child Development, 54 (4), 968-979.
Brown, A.L .. & Smiley, S.S. (1977). Rating the
importance of structure units of prose passage:
A problem of metacognitive development.
Child Development, 48(1). 1-8.
Cunningham, J. W., & Moore, D. W. (1986). The
confused world of main idea. In J. F.
Baumann (Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehension
(PP.1-17). Newark. DE: International
Reading Association.
Duffelmeyer, F.A .. & Duffelmeyer, B.B. (1989,
February). Are IRI passages suitable for
assessing main idea comprehension? The Reading
Teacher, PP.358-363.
Hare, V.C., & Bingham, A.B.(1986). Teaching st-
udents maln idea comprehension:Alternatives
to repeated exposures. In J. F. Baumann
(Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehension
(PP.179-194). Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
Hare, V.C., Rabinowitz, M., & Schieble, K.M.
(1989). Text effects on main idea compre hension.
Reading Research Quarterly, 24(1),
72-88.
Herman, M.C.(1975). Male-female achievement in
eight learning areas: A compilation of selected
assessment results. (Eric ED 072461)
Hidi, S., & Anderson, V.(1986). Producing written
summaries: Task demands, cognitive
operations, and implication for instruction.
Review of Educational Research, 56
(4), 473-493.
Johnson, N.S. (1983). What do you do if yor
can't tell the whole story? The development
of summarization skills. In K.E. Nelson
(Ed.), Children's Language (Vol.4, PP.315-
381) .
Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T.A. (1978). Toward a
model of text comprehension and production.
Psychological Review, 85(5), 363-394.
Lee, T.T.(李田英)(1987). The relationships of
achievement, instruction. and family background
to elementary school science achievement
in the Republic of China. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation. Ohio State
University. (Eric ED 282724)
Leinhardt, G., Seewald, A.M., & Engel, M.
(1979). Learning what's taught: Sex differences
in instruction. Journal of Educati-
0nal Psychology, 2l(4) , 432-439.
Lewis, J., & Hoover. H.D. (1983). Sex differences
on standardized academic achievement
text: A longitudinal study. Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association. (Eric ED
233077)
Meyer, B.J.F.(1975). The organization of prose
and its effects on memory. Amsterdam: NorthHolland.
Meyer, B.J.F.(1985). Prose analysis: Purposes,
procedures, and problems. In B. K. Britton
& J.B. Black(Eds.), Understanding expository
text (PP.11-64, 269-304). Hillsdale, NJ:La
wrence Erlbaum Associates.
Otto, W., Barrett, T.C., & Koenke, K. (1969).
Assessment of children's statements of the
main idea in reading. In J.A. Figurel(Ed.),
Reading and realism (PP.692-697). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Pearson, P.O., & Johnson, D.O. (1978). Teaching
reading comprehension. New York: Holt, Rinehart
& Winston.
Stahl. S.A., Jacobson, M.G., Davis, C.E .. & Davis,
R.L.(1989). Prior Knowledge and difficult
vocabulary in the comprehension of
unfamiliar text. Reading Research Quarterly,
24(1),27-43.
Will iams, J.P.(1984). Categorization, macrostructure,
and finding the main idea. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 76(5), 874-879.
Williams, J.P.(1986). Research and instructional
development on main idea skills. In J.F.
Baumann(Ed.), Teaching main idea comprehens
ion (P P . 1 3 3 - 1 7 8). New ark, 0 E: I n t ern a t i 0 n-a 1
.Reading Association.
Williams, J.P., Taylor, M.B., & deCani, J.S.(l
984). Constructing macrostructure for expo-
sitory text. Journal of Educational Psychology,
76(6), 1065 - 1075.
Williams, J.P., Taylor, M.B., & Ganger, S.
(1981). Text va ri at ions at the 1 evel of the
individual sentence and the comprehension
of simple expository paragraphs. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 73(6), 851-865.
Williams, M., & stevens, V.M.R.(1972). Unders tanding
paragraph structure. Journal of
Reading, 15(7), 513-516.
Winograd, P.N.(1984). Strategic difficulties in
summarizing texts. Reading Research Quarterly,
19(4), 404-425.