本研究旨在分析比較五套九年一貫國民中學英語教科書，以作為日後
教科書評鑑、選擇與設計的參考。這五套教科書( H， J， K， L 及N 版
本) 自2002 年至2004 年7 月為止，各出版了一到四冊。這些教科書係特
別為第一屆九年一貫國民中學學生所設計，與下一屆不同的是，本屆學生
在國小階段僅上過一年英語課程，因此其所用的教材稱為「暫行版」教科
書。本研究針對五套民間出版的「暫行版」教科書中活動練習的設計，進
行分類比較與分析。
在2002 年教育部所頒布的九年一貫課程綱要中，明確指出「培養學生
基本的英語溝通能力」是國民中小學英語課程的目標之一。此外，綱要亦
強調，國中階段的教學是聽、說、讀、寫並重。有鑑於此，本研究特別針
對課本活動練習中(1)是否著眼於培養學生基本的英語溝通能力，(2)聽、
說、讀、寫四個技能是否平均分配，(3)聽、說、讀、寫四個技能是否自然
地相互搭配整合等三方面作探討。
本研究首先評估各活動練習的溝通程度，包含研究者本身，本研究共
有三位英語教師參與教科書內各種活動練習的分析。溝通程度的分析係根
據Dubin 和Olshtain 的分類法。此分類法將活動分成1 到7 等級,分別代表
最具溝通程度到最不具溝通程度的活動練習。此外，本研究並計算聽、說、
讀、寫四個技能的數量分配及其整合程度。
根據資料分析結果，本研究的主要發現如下：
1. 整體而言，活動練習的溝通程度並不高，五個版本的活動練習集中在4
到6 等級。
2. 聽、說、讀、寫四個技能分配並不平均，多數版本包含較多聽、說活動
練習，而忽略寫的練習，但若加上習作上的活動練習則多數版本皆能均
衡分配四個技能的練習，達到聽、說、讀、寫並重的目標。
3. 聽、說、讀、寫在活動練習中，大部分能互相搭配整合，五套教科書平
均有61.2%的活動整合了2 個以上的語言技能。
本研究建議日後教科書編寫的活動練習時，應該注意在數量上及活動
的溝通度方面是否足夠；並仔細檢視在語言技能的分配比重上，是否達到
九年一貫課程綱要中所要求的聽、說、讀、寫並重。本研究顯示出第一次
民間出版的國中英語教科書，基本上並未完全達到課程綱要的要求，而本
研究所發現的一些不足之處，可做為下一次設計教材的參考。

The present study aims to investigate the language learning activities in
five sets of junior high school English textbooks published by commercial
publishers, H, J, K, L, and N. Each set of textbook, published between 2002 and
2004, includes four volumes, from Book One to Book Four. They were designed
for the first year of Nine-year Integrated Curriculum in Taiwan.
Since the Nine-year Integrated Curriculum began, it has always been
emphasized that teaching materials should be communicative. The purpose of
this study is to explore if the language learning activities in these textbooks
follow the Curriculum Guidelines in this regard. One primary focus of the study
is to investigate the extent of communicativeness of the language learning
activities in textbooks. The classification adopts Dubin and Olshtain’s (1986)
scale of communicativeness for evaluating learning activities. Activities are
categorized into 7 types, levels 1 to 7, ranging from the most communicative
activities to the least communicative ones. The second focus of this study is to
examine the percentage of different language skills in the language learning
activities. It is aimed at assessing whether or not the four language skills get
balanced in activities. Besides, whether the four skills are integrated with one
another is also examined in this study.
The results reveal that the language learning activities in the junior high
school textbooks mainly fall into the categories of 4, 5, and 6. Among the five
sets of textbooks, Textbook L has the most communicative activities. With
regard to the percentages of four language skills in activities, Textbooks, H, J, K,
and N are found to have put a lot of emphasis on listening and speaking, and not many of their activities actually engage students in writing. In contrast,
Textbook L conforms to the Curriculum Guidelines in balanced emphasis on
four language skills. As for integration of different skills, each series of textbook
has more activities with integrated skills than those with individual ones. 61.2%
of activities in five textbook series integrate more than one skill. Textbook K
has the most activities with an integration of 2 skills, while Textbook L has the
most activities integrating 3 skills.
It is suggested that future textbook writers improve the communicativeness
of activities, and equalize the proportions of listening, speaking, reading, and
writing in activities. It is also suggested that similar investigations be conducted
with the new forthcoming textbooks.

Anderson A., & Lynch, T. (1988). Listening. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Aski, J. M. (2003). Foreign language textbook activities: Keeping
pace with second language acquisition research. Foreign Language
Annals, 36(1), 57-65.
Bygate M. (1987). Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of
communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing.
Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Chen, B. C. (2001). Communicativity and contextualization in EFL
teaching materials: A study of children’s coursebooks in Taiwan.
Master’s thesis, Providence University, Taiwan.
Chen, C. (2000). Senior high school English teachers’ perceptions
of the new English teaching materials and their usage in southern Taiwan.
Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.
Chen, L. C. (2002). Textbook selection for senior high school
students in greater Taipei area. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal
University, Taiwan.
Cheng, D. (2003). The case study in the process of editing and the
content writing of the English textbook in junior high school. Master’s
thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.
Dubin, F., & Olshtain E. (1986). Course design: Developing
programs and materials for language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Edelsky, C., Altwerger, B., & Flores, B. (1991). Whole language:
What’s the difference? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Edge, J., & Samuda, V. (1981). Methodials: The role and design of
material and method. In Richards, David.(ed.), Communicative course
design (pp.50-67). Singapore: Seameo Regional Language Centre.
Ellis, R. (1996). The empirical evaluation of language teaching
material. ELT, 51(1), 36-41.
Field, K. (Ed.). (2000). Issues in modern foreign languages
teaching. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Guariento, W., & Morley, J. (2001). Text and task authenticity in
the EFL classroom. ELT, 55(4), 347-353.
Hawkes, N. (1983). Some aspects of communicative course design.
In K. Johnson, & D. Porter (Eds.), Perspectives in communicative
language teaching (pp. 89-108). London: Academic Press, Inc.
Hsu, D. P. (2001). A comparison of language learning activities in
two sets of junior high school English textbooks. Master’s thesis,
National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.
Hu, S. F. (1998). Research on evaluation criteria of the English
textbooks in junior high school. Unpublished master’s thesis, National
Chung Cheng University, Taiwan.
Huang, S. C., & Huang, S. S. (2000). Implementing the
communicative approach in junior high school classes: Teaching
reflection. Selected papers from the ninth international symposium on
English teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., LTD.
Huang, J. (1998). An evaluation of the new version of junior high
EFL teaching materials based on the communicative theory model.
Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University,
Taiwan.
Huang, L.W. (2003). Vocational high school English teachers’
perceptions and the use of the English textbooks in southern Taiwan.
Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. P. Prides
& J. Holmes (eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). New York: St.
Martin’s Press.
Johnson, K. (1982). Communicative syllabus design and
methodology. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Lally, C. (1998). Back to the future: A look at present textbooks
and past recommendations. Foreign Language Annals, 31(3), 307-314.
Lee, H. L. (2002). Teaching diverse English proficiency in junior
high: designing activities with the spirit of 9-year consecutive
curriculum. Master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taiwan.
Liao, X. Q. (2001). Encouraging student voices in a Chinese
classroom. English Teaching Forum, 39 (4), 37-41.
Lin, S-O. (1997). The motor function of reading to writing: A
classroom application. Proceedings of the fourteenth conference on
English teaching and learning in the Republic of China. Taipei: Crane
Publishing Co., LTD.
Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching: An
introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mitchell, J. T., & Redmond, L. M. (1993). Rethinking grammar and
communication. Foreign Language Annals, 26(1), 13-19.
Oxford, R. (2001). Integrated skills in ESL/EFL classroom.
(Report No. ED-99-CO-0008). Washington, DC: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistic. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED456670)
Paulston, C. B., & Bruder, M. N. (1976). Teaching English as a
second language: Techniques and procedures. Boston: Little, Brown and
Company.
Peter, D., & Richard, K. (1988). The primary language book.
Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Podromou, L. (2002). The great ELT textbook debate. English
Modern Teacher, 11(4), 25-33.
Potts, P. J. (1985). The role of evaluation in a communicative
curriculum, and some consequences for material design. In J. C.
Alderson et al(Eds.), Lancaster practical papers in English language
education: Evaluation (pp. 19-44). Oxford: Pergamon Institute of
English.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language
teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Lockhart, C. (1996). Reflective teaching in
second language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rogers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and methods in
Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Savignon, S. J. (2002). Communicative curriculum design for the
21st century. English Teaching Forum, 40(1), 2-7.
Savignon, S. J. (2002). Communicative language teaching:
Linguistic theory and classroom practice. In S. J. Savignon(Ed.),
Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in
teacher education(pp.1-27). London: Yale University Press.
Scarcella, R. C., Andersen, E. S., & Krashen, S. D. (Eds.). (1990).
Developing communicative competence in a second language. Boston:
Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Skierso, A. (1991). Textbook selection and evaluation. In M.
Celce-murcia(Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language
(2nd ed.) (pp. 432-453). Boston: Heinle & Heile Publishers.
Stern, H.H. (1970). Perspectives on second language teaching.
Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Tai, C.Y. (2002). Application of a multiple intelligence models in
English instruction in junior high school: Implication of an alternative
Englsih instruction model in the nine-year education program. Master’s
thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.
Tribble, C. (1996). Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tsai, Y. J. (2002). Culture and English teaching: How do secondary
school English teachers conceptualized and instruct culture. Master’s
thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.
Wang, C. (2002). Innovative teaching in foreign language contexts:
The case of Taiwan. In S. J. Savignon(Ed.), Interpreting communicative
language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher
education(pp.131-153). London: Yale University Press.
Wang, C., & Savignon, S. J. (2001). Communicative language
teaching in EFL contexts: Learner attitudes in Taiwan. Proceedings of
the eighteenth conference on English teaching and learning in the
Republic of China. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., LTD.
Wang, H. R. (2000). Setting criteria for the evaluation and selection
of English textbooks: A case study of the junior high school in Tao Yuan.
Unpublished master’s thesis, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taiwan.
Wilkins, D. (1983). Some issues in communicative language
teaching and their relevance to the teaching of language in secondary
schools. In K. Johnson, & D. Porter (eds.), Perspectives in
communicative language teaching (pp. 25-46). London: Academic Press,
Inc.
Williams, E. (1983). Communicative reading. In K. Johnson, & D.
Porter (Eds.), Perspectives in communicative language teaching (pp.
171-188). London: Academic Press, Inc.
Woodward, T. (2001). Planning lessons and courses: Designing
sequences of work for the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Wu, S. T. (2002). An evaluation of the current set of junior high
school English textbooks. Master’s thesis, National Chengchi University,
Taiwan.
Yalden, J. (1983). The communicative syllabus: Evolution, design
& implementation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Yalden, J. (1987). Principles of course design for language teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yang, A. & Cheung, C. (2003). Adapting textbook activities for
communicative teaching and cooperative learning. English Teaching
Forum, 41(3), 16-23.
Yeh, C. W. (2003). The content analysis of senior high school
English textbooks. Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal
University, Taiwan.
Hurfurt, D., & Harries, E. (2004/4/10)。〈專訪Prof. David Nunan〉。
《康軒通訊》，第2 期，5-10。康軒文教事業股份有限公司。
Krause, A, & Cossu, G. (2002-2004)。《國民中學第一,二,三,四冊
Go SuperTeens!1-4 習作（暫行版）》。台北市：台灣培生教育出版
股份有限公司。
Krause, A, & Cossu, G. (2002-2004)。《國民中學第一,二,三,四冊
Go SuperTeens!1-4 學生本（暫行版）》。台北市：台灣培生教育出
版股份有限公司。
Quick, J. (2002-2004)。《國中英語Go SuperTeens!1-4 聽力練習
第一,二,三,四冊（暫行版）》。台北市：台灣培生教育出版股份有限
公司。
石素錦(1999)。〈你是選用教材的高手嗎﹖〉。《敦煌英語教
學雜誌》，第21 期，18-20。台北市敦煌書局股份有限公司。
石素錦、康維英(2001)。〈溝通式教學與任務導向教學理論與
實務〉。《2001 國際應用英語教學研討會論文集》。台北市文鶴出
版有限公司。
田超英、林佳芳、舒若蘭等編(2002-2004)。《Hot English 國民
中學英語課本1 上,1 下,2 上,2 下》。台北市：佳音事業有限公司。
田超英、林佳芳、舒若蘭等編(2002-2003)。《Hot English 國民
中學英語讀寫評量本1 上,1 下,2 上》。台北市：佳音事業有限公司。
田超英、林佳芳、謝嘉盈等編(2004)。《Hot English 國民中學
英語讀寫評量本2 下》。台北市：佳音事業有限公司。
田超英、林佳芳、舒若蘭等編(2003)。《Hot English 國民中學
英語聽力評量本1 下,2 上》。台北市：佳音事業有限公司。
林佳芳、蘇冬蘭、蘇盈臻等編(2004)。《Hot English 國民中學
英語聽力評量本2 下》。台北市：佳音事業有限公司。
田超英、林佳芳、郜一如等編(2004)。《國民中學英語課本1
上(九年一貫標準版)》。台北市：佳音事業有限公司。
李宗月(1999)。〈教材選擇的不二法門〉。《敦煌英語教學雜
誌》，第21 期，21-23。台北市敦煌書局股份有限公司。
余光雄(2001)。〈論語言能力及其分級檢定測驗〉。《第十八
屆中華民國英語文教學研討會論文集》。台北市文鶴出版有限公司。
林家媛、黃小芳等編(2002-2004)。《HESS 國民中學英語課本
第一,二,三,四冊（教育部審定暫行版）》。台北縣：何嘉仁實業股份
有限公司。
林家媛、黃小芳等編(2002-2004)。《HESS 國民中學英語習作
第一,二,三,四冊（教育部審定暫行版）》。台北縣：何嘉仁實業股份
有限公司。
林素娥(2000)。〈教材選擇的不二法門〉。《敦煌英語教學雜
誌》，第21 期，21-23。台北市敦煌書局股份有限公司。
林耀福、歐鴻章等編(2002-2004)。《國民中學英語第一,二,三,
四冊（暫行版）》。台南市：南一書局企業股份有限公司。
林耀福、歐鴻章等編(2002-2004)。《國民中學英語第一,二,三,
四冊習作（暫行版）》。台南市：南一書局企業股份有限公司。
施玉惠(2000)。〈國小英語教材之評審：資格審vs 選用審〉。
《第十七屆中華民國英語文教學研討會論文集》。台北市：文鶴出
版有限公司。
施玉惠(2002)。〈溝通式教學法：針對九年一貫英語新課程〉。
《英語教學》，第25 卷，第3 期，5-21。台北市英語教學雜誌社。
徐慰筠、彭大明、羅清玉編(2002)。《國中英語（暫行版）1
上》。台北縣：康軒文教事業有限公司。
徐慰筠、彭大明、羅清玉編(2002)。《國中英語習作（暫行版）
1 上》。台北縣：康軒文教事業有限公司。
殷彩鳳(1999)。〈教材選對，效果加倍：談選用教材的基本原
則〉。《敦煌英語教學雜誌》，第21 期，15-17。台北市敦煌書局股
份有限公司。
張武昌(1998)。〈介紹新編國中英語教材：已必修第一冊為例〉。
《外國語文教育之趨勢》。教育部人文及社會學科教育指導委員會。
張強仁(1998)。〈新編國中英語之特色、教法與可斟酌之種種〉。
《英語教學》，第22 卷，第4 期，39-49。台北市英語教學雜誌社。
彭道明、羅清玉、楊毓琳編(2003)。《國中英語（暫行版）1
下, 2 上》。台北縣：康軒文教事業有限公司。
彭道明、羅清玉、匡德勳等編(2004)。《國中英語（暫行版）
2 下》。台北縣：康軒文教事業有限公司。
彭道明、羅清玉、楊毓琳編(2003)﹚。《國中英語習作（暫行
版）1 下, 2 上》。台北縣：康軒文教事業有限公司。
彭道明、羅清玉、匡德勳等編(2004)。《國中英語習作（暫
行版）2 下》。台北縣：康軒文教事業有限公司。
盧貞穎﹙2001﹚。〈溝通式英語教學〉。《敦煌英語教學雜誌》，
第29 期，13-16。台北市敦煌書局股份有限公司。
譚雪屏、樊志虹、舒若蘭等編(2002)。《Hot English 國民中學
英語聽力評量本1 上》。台北市：佳音事業有限公司。