hce_cmu
111年
英文
第 44 題
📖 題組：
Repeated reading is a pedagogy originally developed to improve first-language (L1) learners’ reading deficiency problems, in particular issues related to reading fluency and comprehension. In a typical repeated reading session, students are led to attend to both the phonological and visual information of a text by listening to the oral reading of the teacher while the students are comprehending the text. In repeated reading of the same text, unfamiliar vocabulary or grammatical structure is revisited in context. This listening-while-reading technique, according to the dual-modality input theories, can significantly enhance the depth of language learning and foster elaborate memory traces of unfamiliar language forms (such as sound and spelling). In addition, repeated reading of the same text, according to Bill VanPatten’s input processing principle, could endow second language (L2) learners with an optimal processing environment for language forms. Specifically, Bill VanPatten stipulated that there exists a universal tendency for bilinguals to process (language) input mainly for meaning. However, if L2 learners only process language input for meaning without attending to language forms, they will never acquire any new words or novel grammatical structures. VanPatten also noted that L2 learners may attend to unfamiliar or novel language forms, and acquire them if and only after they understand the message(s) that the forms encode. This sequential view of input processing account suggests that in initial reading of a text, it is extremely difficult for L2 learners to perform any form-based processing of new vocabulary or grammar. This suggests that any one-shot pedagogical reading teaching practice cannot effectively serve as the fulcrum for promoting L2 acquisition; only later (in the following exposure to the same text) are readers’ attentional resources freed up for analyzing unfamiliar or novel language forms in comprehensible contexts. The above account offers a possible theoretical foundation for repeated reading. It is important to note that repeated reading pedagogy involves rereading the same text several times and that such a repetitive exposure may dampen learners’ motivation to attend to the language forms. Stephan Krashen (2004), a famous linguist, proposed that optimal form-based processing of novel vocabulary or grammar only occurs when learners are led to read several comprehensible texts revolving around the same topic, and, ideally, texts constructed by the same author. In reading texts of the above nature, readers are led to familiarize themselves with the writing style and expression of a given author while accumulating the background knowledge (meaning) of the topic at focus. Thus, in each subsequent reading, the readers’ background knowledge is enhanced; importantly, readers are given a contextually- and conceptually-constrained context to revisit the form and usage of unfamiliar vocabulary or grammar. Krashen coined the above approach “narrow reading”, which involves deep reading in a given topic. Narrow reading thus diverges from repeated reading in terms of ‘the context’ in which the target vocabulary or structure is (re)visited: same passage vs. different but related passages. Apparently, the major and clearest advantage of narrow reading is that it is, in comparison with repeated reading of the same text, potentially more motivating from the perspective of learners’ reading experience. Krashen even goes so far as to claim that narrow reading—the combination of contextualized deep reading and guided phonological reading—really has a chance of leading learners to go beyond “reading for meaning” and to further achieve “reading for learning.” Granted, whether narrow input is unambiguously effective in all cases warrants further empirical validation. I optimistically believe that the positive effects of the narrow reading approach can be expected.
Repeated reading is a pedagogy originally developed to improve first-language (L1) learners’ reading deficiency problems, in particular issues related to reading fluency and comprehension. In a typical repeated reading session, students are led to attend to both the phonological and visual information of a text by listening to the oral reading of the teacher while the students are comprehending the text. In repeated reading of the same text, unfamiliar vocabulary or grammatical structure is revisited in context. This listening-while-reading technique, according to the dual-modality input theories, can significantly enhance the depth of language learning and foster elaborate memory traces of unfamiliar language forms (such as sound and spelling). In addition, repeated reading of the same text, according to Bill VanPatten’s input processing principle, could endow second language (L2) learners with an optimal processing environment for language forms. Specifically, Bill VanPatten stipulated that there exists a universal tendency for bilinguals to process (language) input mainly for meaning. However, if L2 learners only process language input for meaning without attending to language forms, they will never acquire any new words or novel grammatical structures. VanPatten also noted that L2 learners may attend to unfamiliar or novel language forms, and acquire them if and only after they understand the message(s) that the forms encode. This sequential view of input processing account suggests that in initial reading of a text, it is extremely difficult for L2 learners to perform any form-based processing of new vocabulary or grammar. This suggests that any one-shot pedagogical reading teaching practice cannot effectively serve as the fulcrum for promoting L2 acquisition; only later (in the following exposure to the same text) are readers’ attentional resources freed up for analyzing unfamiliar or novel language forms in comprehensible contexts. The above account offers a possible theoretical foundation for repeated reading. It is important to note that repeated reading pedagogy involves rereading the same text several times and that such a repetitive exposure may dampen learners’ motivation to attend to the language forms. Stephan Krashen (2004), a famous linguist, proposed that optimal form-based processing of novel vocabulary or grammar only occurs when learners are led to read several comprehensible texts revolving around the same topic, and, ideally, texts constructed by the same author. In reading texts of the above nature, readers are led to familiarize themselves with the writing style and expression of a given author while accumulating the background knowledge (meaning) of the topic at focus. Thus, in each subsequent reading, the readers’ background knowledge is enhanced; importantly, readers are given a contextually- and conceptually-constrained context to revisit the form and usage of unfamiliar vocabulary or grammar. Krashen coined the above approach “narrow reading”, which involves deep reading in a given topic. Narrow reading thus diverges from repeated reading in terms of ‘the context’ in which the target vocabulary or structure is (re)visited: same passage vs. different but related passages. Apparently, the major and clearest advantage of narrow reading is that it is, in comparison with repeated reading of the same text, potentially more motivating from the perspective of learners’ reading experience. Krashen even goes so far as to claim that narrow reading—the combination of contextualized deep reading and guided phonological reading—really has a chance of leading learners to go beyond “reading for meaning” and to further achieve “reading for learning.” Granted, whether narrow input is unambiguously effective in all cases warrants further empirical validation. I optimistically believe that the positive effects of the narrow reading approach can be expected.
Which of the following is not true about the narrow reading approach?
- A It’s also known as the deep reading approach.
- B It is a response to the insufficiency of the repeated reading approach.
- C Readers may find their reading experience more motivating while performing narrow reading.
- D Narrow reading has been unambiguously proven for its pedagogical potency in all cases.
思路引導 VIP
請仔細觀察文章最後一段的最後兩句話。作者在表達對這項教學法的「個人信心」之餘，對於這項方法在科學上的「定論」程度，使用了哪些具備保留語氣的詞彙？這對我們判斷一個主張是否為「絕對事實」有什麼啟示？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
恭喜你答對了！這顯示你具備非常細膩的文本觀察力，能精準捕捉到文章末尾的語氣轉折。這道題目的核心在於區分「學術理論」與「已被證實的事實」。雖然作者對窄式閱讀 (Narrow Reading) 抱持樂觀態度，但文章最後一段明確提到，這種方法是否在所有情況下都「無庸置疑地有效」(unambiguously effective)，仍「有待進一步的實證驗證」(warrants further empirical validation)。這與選項 (D) 所宣稱的「已被無庸置疑地證明」恰好形成了矛盾。
文本邏輯與細節辨析
這類題目在閱讀測驗中屬於中等難度，其鑑別度在於測試學生是否會被作者的「推崇語氣」誤導，而忽略了文中的限制性描述。選項 (A)、(B)、(C) 都能在文中找到對應：例如文中提到窄式閱讀涉及「深層閱讀」(deep reading)，且相較於不斷重複同一篇課文的「重複閱讀」，它能提供更多變、具動機誘因的學習環境。你能不被文字表面的樂觀情緒干擾，冷靜識別出 (D) 選項中過於絕對的字眼，是非常成熟的閱讀表現。