在五年級國語課實施差異化教學：教師適應與學習成效的個案研究

Teacher Adaptation to and Effectiveness of a Differentiated Instruction Program in Fifth-Grade Literacy Classes : A Case Study

本個案研究蒐集質性及量化等多元資料，描述兩位五年級教師在班上國語課實施 11 週（每週 5 節，共 55 節）差異化教學的經驗，兩位老師任教的兩班為介入組，學生共 45 位。在研究團隊密集的協助下，介入組兩位教師嘗試以彈性能力分組、不同難度的學習單，以及差異化的提問等方式，在教學中加入差異化教學的元素。本研究目的有三：一、報告兩位老師的適應歷程；二、以另外兩位老師任教班級的 45 名學生為對照組，藉標準化的語文成長測驗及期末成績，分析差異化教學的整體成效，及成效是否會因學生程度而異。三、研究以問卷、訪談、觀察等方式，了解介入組同學，包括一名特殊需求學生，對差異化教學的反應。研究結果指出：一、介入的初期，兩位教師雖有研究團隊密集的協助，仍然遭遇許多困難與挫折，直到中期，教師熟悉了差異化教學的執行方式、覺察到自己提問技巧的提升、且更能關注學生的差異，才逐漸脫離困境。兩位師教師也發現學生學習品質及參與學習活動的動機都有提升，這樣的覺察與發現，讓教師更願意投入這種新型態的教學。二、量化分析結果指出，接受差異化教學的學生，不論原來的程度為何，其詞彙能力後測均顯著優於對照組，但兩組的閱讀理解能力及期末考分數沒有顯著差異。三、問卷、訪談及課室觀察的結果顯示，學生喜歡差異化教學的設計，認為自己學習更為投入、主動，介入組唯一的特殊教育學生，參與學習活動的情況則有明顯改善。

"Purpose: The purpose of this case study is threefold: 1. to qualitatively describe the adaptation processes of two fifth-grade teachers who implemented a differentiated instruction (DI) program in their respective literacy classes, 2. to evaluate whether the effectiveness of the DI program depended on the students’ literacy abilities by comparing the standardized literacy pre- and posttest scores of the intervention and contrast groups, and 3. To describe the students’ responses to the DI program using multiple sources. Methods: Four teachers and the four classes they teach participated in the study. Two were assigned to a contrast group, which has a total of 45 students, and taught using their original approach. The other two served as an intervention group, which also has 45 students, and implemented an 11-week literacy DI program. Each teacher taught five 40-minute literacy class sessions per week, resulting in a total of 55 intervention sessions. The adaptation process of the teachers in the intervention group was described, and comparisons of the dependent measures of the experimental and contrast groups were conducted using analysis of covariance. Results/Findings: Although the teachers in the intervention group were intensively assisted by the researchers, they initially encountered various technical difficulties and felt frustrated. By the middle and final phases, the teachers noticed that their questioning skills had improved and that they had more capacity to acknowledge individual differences among their students. They also discovered positive changes among their students, and they gradually overcame their frustrations. Their discoveries and new awareness made the teachers more willing to invest in adoption of this new teaching method. In other words, the teachers’ motivation to implement DI was reinforced by the progress of their students, the improvement of their own teaching skills, and their increased ability to accommodate students’ individual differences. Regarding the program’s effectiveness, the results of analysis of covariance indicated that the students in the intervention group outperformed those in the contrast group in vocabulary growth regardless of the students’ literacy pretest scores. However, no significant between-group differences were found in the mean scores in reading comprehension and on the school’s final exam. Finally, the data from the questionnaires, interviews, and classroom observations indicated that the students exhibited a positive attitude toward DI. The teachers also reported that the students, including one student with ADHD and learning disabilities, were more willing to participate in learning activities. Conclusions/Implications: 1. The literature has suggested that a teacher requires 2 years to master DI. The findings of this study indicate that, despite the teachers’ initial frustration, intensive teaching support—including detailed lesson plans, worksheets, and peer coaching—helps shorten the time required for teachers’ adaptation. 2. The effectiveness of the DI program is demonstrated by the students’ vocabulary growth, and both the teachers and students exhibited a positive impression of DI. These findings provide support for the promotion of DI."