本研究主要目的在根據閱讀歷程中的主要成份，設計出一個具適性化閱讀理解策略學習環境；並探討此適學習環境對國小五年級學童閱讀理解能力、策略運用之影響。研究中的適性式的閱讀理解策略學習環境是根據ASOIM模型為系統架構以及整合式閱讀理解策略輔助系統為基礎，並配合自行發展的閱讀策略表現測驗加以開發設計。本研究以台北縣二重國小五年級學童129名為對象，並以班級為單位隨機分派從事實証研究。
研究結果顯示：
1.本學習系統在國小學童整體性的閱讀策略表現有顯著的幫助。
2.閱讀歷程中的專注、選擇、組織、整合、及監控等成份，可以做為適性化閱讀理解策略學習系統的依據，對於提昇國小學童的閱讀能力和策略運用上也有幫助。
3.適性化閱讀理解策略學習環境與傳統非適性閱讀理解策略學習環境兩者的比較在本研究中並未達到顯著的效果，但可以發現到適性閱讀理解策略學習環境在時間使用的效率上會較傳統的非適性式電腦閱讀理解策略學習環境更加的節省。
4.電腦閱讀理解策略習環境較傳統紙筆式閱讀理解策略學習，對於提升國小學童的閱讀能力和策略運用上有不錯的效果。

The purpose of this thesis is to develop a web-based adaptive learning environment for reading comprehensive strategies, and explore the learning impact of the environment on how fifth graders use their reading comprehension abilities and strategic applications. This environment is built based on the ASOIM model, integrated strategies-based reading comprehension system, and the self-developed reading comprehension performance tests. The targeted study group were 129 fifth graders in elementary school. They were randomly assigned to their groups.
The findings were as follows:
1) The system has proved to have significant help to elementary students about overall reading comprehension performances.
2) The elements of the reading processes including attention, selecting, organizing, integrating, and monitoring can be the sources for the learning environment. The results of which are helpful for the improvement of elementary students’ reading comprehension and strategic applications.
3) Though the research does not have significant findings on the differences between the adaptive and non-adaptive reading comprehensive strategic system, the research shows that the adaptive method is more time efficient
4) In comparison to the adaptive and the paper-and-pen reading comprehensive strategic training, the former proves to be of significant help to raise elementary students reading comprehension abilities and strategic applications.

【中文部份】
朱經明（1995）。閱讀障礙與電腦輔助教學。特殊教育與復健學報，4期，頁153-161。
宋曜廷、張國恩、陳茹玲、黃楷升（2005）。網路適性閱讀環境的建立與應用-子計畫三：具多重策略的閱讀理解輔助系統之建立與應用(3/3)。國科會輔助研究計劃，NSC 93-2520-S-003-004。
何東墀、胡永崇（1996）。後策認知策略教學對國小閱讀障礙兒童閱讀理解成效之研究。特殊教育學報，11，173-210。
李連珠（1991）。台灣幼兒書寫發展初探。八十學年度師範學院教育學術討論文發表會論文，台中
汪榮才（1992）。學習障礙兒童之後設認知歷程與教學。台南師院學報，第二十五期，61-70頁。
周台傑、詹文宏（1995）﹕後設認知閱讀策略對國小閱讀障礙兒童閱讀理解能力之研究。特殊教育與復健學報，4，109-152
林建平（1994）。整合學習策略與動機的訓練方案對國小閱讀理解困難兒童的輔導效果。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。
林建平（1997）。學習輔導：理論與實務。台北：五南
林清山（民79）。教育心理學—認知取向，台北：遠流。
林蕙君（1995）。閱讀能力、說明文結構對國小高年級學生的閱讀理解及閱讀策略使用之影響研究，新竹師院國民教育研究所論文集，第1集，頁57-85。
林寶山（1992）。凱勒教學模式之應用，輯於何福田編，從學習心理談教學策略，40-54，省教育廳。
邱上真、洪碧霞（1996 ）。國語文低成就學生閱讀表現之追蹤研究（ I ） - 成分技能取向之國語文成就測驗的編製。國科會專題研究 計畫成果報告。
柯華威（1999）。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗－-國民小學四、五、六年級。台北：行政院國家科學委員會特殊教育工作小組印行。
柯華葳(1994)。語文科的閱讀教學。輯於李詠吟主編(民83)。學習輔導︰學習心理學的應用。台北市︰心理出版社。頁307-350。
洪朝富，符懋應，陳韋宏，楊順昌，張崇源，彭守正，劉彥廷（2000）。在World Wide Web 上的適性教學環境架構。遠距教育，13/14，105-110 頁。
胥彥華（1989）。學習策略對國小六年級學生閱讀效果之研究。國立臺灣師教育學院特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
張國恩，蘇宜芬，宋曜廷（2000）。閱讀理解輔助系統之設計及其應用效果研究—以閱讀障礙學生為例【I】：統整式教學策略的設計。國科會輔助研究計劃，NSC89-2614-S-003-003。
張莉珍（2003）。故事構圖策略與摘要策略對增進國小六年級低閱讀能力學生閱讀理解之比較研究。中原大學教育研究所碩士論文。
許永洲（1989）。以專家系統觀念為基礎之學習路徑指導系統研究。臺中商專學報，21，373-382 頁。
連啟舜 (2002)。國小高年級學童閱讀理解能力與批判思考表現之關係，國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文
陳年興，曾建翰（1997）。全球資訊網上Web Title 之製作。遠距教育，2，12-21 頁。
陳淑絹（1996）。「指導─合作學習」教學策略增進國小學童閱讀理解能力之實徵研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。。
曾文良。適性式學習環境在氧化還原網站之應用研究，中國化學會化學會誌， 61(1)，115-126。
黃嶸生（2002）。整合式閱讀理解策略輔助系統對國小學童閱讀能力和策略運用的效果。國立台灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
楊芷芳（1994）。國小不同後設認知能力兒童的閱讀理解能力與閱讀理解策略之研究。國中台中師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
溫嘉榮，邱乾輝（1991）。電腦輔助教學理論與程式設計實務。台北：松岡。
蔡天民，王美芬 (2002) 。概念構圖對國小學童自然科學習成就、學習態度概念改變之研究。科學教育研究與發展季刊，2002專刊。
鍾雅婷（2000）。學習策略教學對國小六年級學童閱讀理解成效之研究。屏東師範學院/國民教育研究所碩士論文。
魏靜雯（2004）。心智繪圖與摘要教學對國小五年級學生閱讀理解與摘要能力之影響。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
蘇宜芬（1992）。後設認知訓練課程對國小低閱讀理解能力學生的閱讀理解能力與後設認知能力之影響。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導系教育心理學報，25，245-267

【英文部份】
Alexander,P. A., & Jeffon, J. L. (2000).Learning from text:A Mnltidimentional and developmental perspective. In Pearson P. D., Barr R., Kamil M. L., & Mosenthal, P. (Eds.),Handbook of reading research(pp.295). New York; N.J.: Longman.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson, M. Kamil, R. Barr, & P. Rosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research(pp. 353-394). New York: Longman.
Brown, A. L., & Smiley, S. S. （1977）. Rating the importance of structural units of prose passages：A problem of metacognition development. Child Development, 48. 1-8.
Bruning, R, Schraw, G., & Ronning (1995). Cognitive psychology and instruction. Second Edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Brusilovsky, P. (1996) Methods and techniques of adaptive hypermedia.In P. Brusilovsky and J. Vassileva (eds.), Spec. Iss. on AdaptiveHypertext and Hypermedia, User Modeling and User-AdaptedInteraction 6 (2-3), 87-129.
Brusilovsky, P., Bra, P. D., Eklund, J., Hall, W., & Kobsa, A.(1999). Adaptive hypermedia (panel): purpose, methods, and techniques. In Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Conference on Hypertext andhypermedia: returning to our diverse roots,199-200.
Dede, C. (1986). A review and synthesis of recent intelligent computer127 assisted instruction. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,24,329-353.
Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61, 239-264.
Duchastel, P., Brien, R. & Imbeau, J. (1988). Models of learning in ICAI. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 17(2), 165-171.
Frick, T. W. (1992). Computerize adaptive mastery tests as expert system.. Journal Educational Computing Research, 8(2), 187-213.
Gagne, E. D.,（1985）Cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston, MA：Little, Brown and Company.
Gagne, R.M. & Dick, W. (1983). Instructional Psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 34, 261-295
Garner, R. (1988). Verbal-report data on cognitive and metacognitive strategies. In Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 63-76). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Goodman, K., (1973). Psycholinguistic universals in reading process. In F. Smith (Ed.),Psycholinguistics and reading (pp21-27). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Hallahan, D. P., Kauffman, J. M., & Lloyd, J. W. (1999). Introduction to learning disabilities (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Kao, M. T. (1996). Scaffolding in hypermedia assisted instruction: An example of integration. Report.
Koslow, R. E. (1987). Sex-related difference and visual spatial mentalimagery as factors affecting symbolic motor skill acquisition. Sex Poles, 17, 521-527.
Lorch, R.F., Jr., & van den Broek, P. (1997). Understanding reading comprehension: Current and future contributions of cognitive science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 213-246. [Selected for includion in: P.K. Smith & A.D. Pellegrini (Eds.), Major Writings in the Psychology of Education: The School Curriculum.]
Lysynchuk, L., Pressley, M. & Vye, N. (1990). Reciprocal teaching improves standardized reading-comprehension performance in poor comprehenders. The Elementary School Journal, 90(5), 469-484.
MacArthur, C., & Haynes, J.(1995). Student Assistant for Learning from Text(SALT): A hypermedia reading aid. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 150-159.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E. (1997). Best practices in promoting reading comprehension in students with learning disabilities: 1976 to 1996. Remedial and Special Education, 18, 197-213.
Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text: The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 357-371.
Mayer, Richard E. (1991). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive Approach. 林清山譯. 教育心理學: 認知取向, 313-350.
Mercer, C. D., & Mercer, A. R.（1993）. Teaching students with learning problems（3rd ed.）. New York：Macmillan Publishing Company.
Montali, P. & Lewandowski, L.(1996). Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking cmputer for aerage and less skilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 271-279.
Nwana, H. S. (1993). An Approach to Developing intelligent Tutors in Mathematics. Computers Education, 20(1), 27-43.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L.（1984）. Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
Paris, S., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36, 89-101.
Patel, A.（1998）.A computer based intelligent assessment system fornumeric disciplines. Information Services and Use,18（1-2）,53-63.
Pressley, M. (2000). Comprehension instruction in elementary school: A quarter-century of researchprogress. In B. M. Taylor, F. F. Graves, & P. Van Den Broek (Eds.), Reading for meaning: Fosteringcomprehension in the middle grades. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Pressley, M. ,Johnson, C. J., Symons, S., McGoldric, J. A., & Kurita, J. A. (1989). Strategies that improve children’s memory and comprehension of text. Elementary School Journal, 90, 3-32.
Rosa Mar´ıa Carro, Estrella Pulido & Pilar Rodr´ıguez, (1999) Dynamicgeneration of adaptive Internet-based courses. Journal of Network andComputer Applications. 22, 249–257.
Rosegrant, T.（1985）. Using the microcomputer as a tool for learning to read and write. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18（7）, 113-115.
Rosenshine, B. & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research.Review of Educational Research, 64, 479-531.
Rumelhart, D.E.1977. “Toward an Interactive Model of Reading” in Dornics.(Ed.), Attention and Performance IV, Academic Press.
Sears, S., Carpenter, C., & Burstein, N. (1994). Meaningful Reading instruction for learners with special needs. The Reading Teacher, 47(8), 632-638
Spodek, B. (1985). Early childhood education's past as prologue: Roots of Contemporary concerns. Young Children, 40, 3-7.
Stanovich, K.E. (1980). Toward an Interactive-Compensatory Model of Individual Differences in the Development of Reading Fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 15, 10-29.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Sung, Hwang, Su, & Chang (2003). The Design and Application of a Computer Assisted Reading Comprehension System with Multiple Strategies. Paper presented at the ED-MEDIA 2003-World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, June, 23-28, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Taylor, B., Harris, L. A., & Pearson, P. D.（1995）. Reading difficulties：Instruction and assessment（2 nd ed.）. New York：McGraw-Hill.
Tregaskes, M. R.（1987）. Metacognitive strategies:Their effects on reading comprehension of sixth grade social studies students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University.
Weinstein, C. E., & Underwood, V. L. (1985). Learning strategies: The how of learning. In J. W. Segal, S. F. Chapman, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills (pp. 241-258). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.