本研究源於研究者對於素養導向與自主探究的教育趨勢之下，國語文教師如何在國語文課中培養學生運用閱讀進行探究之好奇，因此研究者運用概念導向閱讀教學框架（Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction）來發展一套教學方案，帶領高中生進行主題探究，並檢視實施歷程中，學生主題探究與閱讀動機的表現，以及研究者的成長。

本研究採用行動研究法，研究場域為臺北市一所實驗教育的高中語文選修課，共 4 位學生。本研究共分為兩期：行動期與調整期。在研究過程中，研究者以參與式觀察、檔案文件分析、訪談之方式蒐集資料，並對資料進行整理與分析。

本研究的結論如下：

一、根據本教學方案實施歷程，在觀察與個人化階段，使學生有連結個人生活經驗的機會是關鍵；在搜尋與檢索階段，幫助學生釐清「哪些是與探究主題相關」的問題是讓學生展開搜尋的關鍵；在理解與統整階段，使學生討論各自所讀，並提供寫作的鷹架是關鍵；在與他人溝通階段，教師設計真實的溝通情境是關鍵。
二、實施歷程中，學生的主題探究表現為：（一）學生能提出觀察並提問，不過觀察記錄的表現較弱；（二）學生能用關鍵字搜尋資料並判斷其與探究主題的關聯性，不過找到新關鍵字來搜尋資料的表現較弱；（三）學生皆能理解並整合文本，且能完成一份連貫的書寫報告；（四）大部分學生能口頭分享成果並與聽眾溝通。
三、實施歷程中，學生的閱讀動機表現為：（一）學生皆因內在動機而閱讀；（二）學生皆因服從而閱讀，大部分學生因社會理由而閱讀；（三）學生皆因願意挑戰複雜文章而閱讀，皆沒有逃避閱讀的情形。另外大部分學生因相信其能成功閱讀而閱讀。
四、 研究者的收穫與成長分別為（一）在教學觀念上，了解CORI是心法，沒有固定的方法；（二）在教學設計上，反思CORI教室在線上時應運用科技工具使協作更順暢；（三）在教師信念上，對閱讀素養能力再理解。

研究者根據上述結論，提出對於運用概念導向閱讀教學進行教學或研究之建議，以供實務工作者或未來研究者參考。

This study originates from the researcher's curiosity about how Mandarin teachers can foster students to do thematic inquiry with reading in the Mandarin class. To achieve this, the researcher adopts the Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction to develop an instructional program, guiding high school students in conducting thematic inquiries. Additionally, the study evaluates the students' performance in thematic inquiry and reading motivation throughout the implementation process, while also reflecting on the researcher's own growth.

This research study utilized an action research approach. Research field is in a Mandarin elective course of an experimental education of Taipei City. This course had 4 students. This study had two periods: the action period and the adjustment period. During the process, the researcher collected data by participant observation, documents, interviews, and then analyzed data.

The conclusions of this study are as follows:
1. According to the process of instructional program：(1)In the phase of Observe and Personalize, the key is having students opportunities to connect with their personal life experiences; (2)In the phase of Search and Retrieve, the key is helping students to clarify "what is related to the theme of inquiry";(3) In the phase of Comprehend and Integrate, the key is having students opportunities to discuss what they have read and providing a scaffold for writing; (4)In the phase of communicating to others, the key is to design an authentic context for communicating.
2. Performance of thematic inquiry:(1) Students can do observations and ask questions, but the performance of recording is poor; (2) Students can use keywords to search for information and judge its relevance to the theme of inquiry, but the performance of finding new keywords to search for information is poor (3) All students can comprehend and integrate the text, also write a coherent report; (4) Most of the students can share the results orally and communicate with the audience.
3. Performance of reading motivation: (1) Students all read because of intrinsic motivation; (2) Students all read because of compliance, and most students read for social reasons; (3) students all read because of the willing to challenge complex texts and have no reading work avoidance. In addition, most students read because of the beliefs of successful reading.
4. The growth of researcher: (1) For thinking of instruction, understanding that CORI is more like a mindset, rather than a method; (2) For designing instruction, teachers should use digital tools to build a smooth collaboration when CORI Classroom is online; (3) For teacher beliefs, researcher re-understood reading literacy.

Based on the above conclusions, the researchers put forward suggestions on the use of concept-oriented reading teaching for teaching or research, for the reference of practitioners or future researchers.

Geoffrey E. Mills（2008）行動研究法：教師研究者的指引〔蔡美華譯〕。學富文化。（原著出版年：2000）
Linda B. Gambrell & Janice F. Almasi（2004）。鮮活的討論！培養專注的閱讀〔古瑞勉譯〕。心理。（原著出版年：1996）
Mortimer J. Adler, & Charles Van Doren（2003）。如何閱讀一本書〔郝明義、朱衣譯〕。台灣商務。（原著出版年：1972）
宋幸眞（2014）。概念導向閱讀教學對國小四年級學生自然與生活科技領域學習成效之影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺南大學。
宋曜廷、劉佩雲、簡馨瑩（2003）。閱讀動機量表的修訂及相關因素研究。測驗學刊，50（1）, 47-71。
巫采蓉（2018）。國中圖書教師閱讀課教學對七年級學生閱讀理解與資訊素養能力學習成效之影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。中興大學。
沙寶鳳（2017）。概念導向閱讀教學應用在國中區域地理教學之行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。南臺科技大學。
林吟燕（2016）。概念導向閱讀教學融入國中小閱讀課程影響學生閱讀投入之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺灣師範大學。
林佳誼（2013）。CORI教學模式對國小學童自然領域自律學習成就及自我效能之探討〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺南大學。
林建平（1995）。國小學童的閱讀動機、理解策略與閱讀成就之相關研究。臺北市立師範學院學報，26，267-294。
林美惠（2012）。應用不同閱讀教學策略對改善國小五年級學童科學文本閱讀理解之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。新竹教育大學。
林菁（2018）。國小探究式資訊素養融入課程之研究：理論與實踐。教育資料與圖書館學，55（2），103-137。
林瑞棻（2014）。以團體探究法提昇國小六年級低成就學童閱讀理解與態度之行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。嘉義大學。
邱瓊儀（2012）。探究式教學應用於國民小學讀報教育之行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。淡江大學。
侯秋玲（2006）。看見語文教育的可能性—探究取向語文課程之協同探究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺灣師範大學。
柯華葳（2013）。閱讀是新世紀必要的學習管道。人文與社會科學簡訊，14（4），4-11。
柳雅梅、黃秀霜（2007）。平衡閱讀教學對國小學童英文閱讀能力及閱讀動機之影響。師大學報， 52（1），133-157。
洪振方（2003）。探究式教學的歷史回顧與創造性探究模式之初探.。高雄師大學報，15（3），641-662。
洪麗卿、劉美慧、陳麗華（2020）。國中社會領域教科書[跨科活動]之分析——素養導向設計的觀點。教科書研究，13（3），1-32。
紀懷超、張淯翔（2021）。從學術高塔到普及大眾—尋找台灣味田野書寫的甘苦談。取自https://blog.geogsoc.org.tw/igct-gsct-joint-conference-2020-looking-for-taiwan-taste-roundtable/
范信賢（2016）。核心素養與十二年國民基本教育課程綱要：導讀《國民核心素養：十二年國教課程改革的DNA》。教育脈動電子期刊，5，1-7。
唐淑華（2018）。青少年閱讀素養之培育：談不同學科領域的文本引導。學富文化。
國家教育研究院（2015）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。取自http://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15-1000-79 44,c639-1.php?Lang=zh-tw
張羽芳（2017）。圖書教師實施概念導向閱讀教學之問題研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺灣師範大學。
張芬芬 （2010） 。質性資料分析的五步驟：在抽象階梯上爬升。初等教育學刊，87-120。
張美玲（2011）。問題導向學習對六年級學童的閱讀學習與批判思考之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。新竹教育大學。
張瀚中（2010）。在探究教學情境探討新移民子女科學文本閱讀理解與策略之個案研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。嘉義大學。
教育部（2014）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。教育部
教育部（2018）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要語文領域－國語文。教育部
莊佳霖（2020）。Educoco社群平臺融入問題導向學習對七年級學生閱讀動機與閱讀理解能力之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。淡江大學。
許芳瑜（2013）。概念導向閱讀教學運用在國小五年級社會學習領域對學生閱讀動機及學習成效的影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺南大學。
許懷文（2016）。概念導向閱讀教學應用於國小三年級綜合活動領域之研究-以「水」主題為例〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺中教育大學。
陳乙豪（2018）。翻轉教育下的新可能─團體探究教學法。臺灣教育評論月刊，7（8），13-20。
陳向明（2002）。社会科學質的硏究。五南。
陳昭珍、林吟燕、陳雅萍、高榛澧、張羽芳、梁鴻栩（2017）。概念導向閱讀教學 （CORI）對國中生閱讀投入影響之研究。圖書資訊學研究，12（1）。
陳海泓。（2013）。概念導向閱讀教學對國小五年級學生閱讀理解策略運用能力的影響。區域與社會發展研究。12（4），62-93。　
陳海泓。（2015）。CORI 融入社會領域教學對國民小學五年級學生閱讀成效的影響。教育科學研究期刊，60（1），99-129。
陳毓凱、洪振方（2007）。兩種探究取向教學模式之分析與比較。科學教育月刊，（305），4-19。
陳靖玟（2014）。國小四年級社會學習領域、藝術與人文領域及閱讀課之協作教學行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺中教育大學。
陳慧妮（2021）。概念導向閱讀教學（CORI）融入高中歷史課程對學生學習動機及學習成就影響之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。靜宜大學。
陳慧玲（2015）。概念導向閱讀教學融入自然與生活科技領域對國小五年級學生閱讀動機與閱讀理解之影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺中教育大學。
陳懷萱（2021）。打開感官。洪伯邑，陳懷萱，黃舒楣，黃書緯，呂欣怡，陳怡伃。田野敲敲門：現地研究基本功。國立臺灣大學出版中心。
陳麗夙（2014）。概念導向閱讀教學融入社會學習領域對國小四年級學生閱讀理解策略運用能力及閱讀理解能力之影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺南大學。
曾炫鈞（2010）。閱讀策略融入Big6模式在國小四年級學童閱讀理解學習之行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。嘉義大學。
黃秉紳（2017）。專題導向學習提昇國小五年級學童國語文領域閱讀動機與閱讀理解之行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。屏東教育大學。
黃茂在、吳敏而（2016）。科學素養與課程統整。教育脈動，（5），1-16。
黃郁婷（2016）。以Big6模式發展數位閱讀教學方案應用於國小六年級國語學習領域之行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺北教育大學。
黃薰瑤（2019）。概念導向閱讀教學應用在國小英語補救教學之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。政治大學。
廖弘民、蔡雅薰（2020）。探究式學習與實踐方法探討。載於陳昭珍、蔡雅薰（編），探究式教學法理論與實踐（141-162頁）。台北市：元照。
蔡清田（2000）。教育行動研究。五南。
謝品寬（2011）。概念取向閱讀教學對國小學童在閱讀動機及閱讀理解之影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺南大學。
鍾佩玲（2016）。概念導向閱讀教學應用於國小社會領域之行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺北市立大學。
鐘崑榕（2015）。國中公民科政治議題應用概念導向閱讀理解教學之行動研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。臺灣師範大學。
Alexander, P. A., & Fox, E. (2004). A historical perspective on reading research and practice. Theoretical models and processes of reading, 5, 33-68. https://doi.org/10.1598/0872075028.2
Almasi, J. F. (1995). The nature of fourth graders’ sociocognitive conflicts in peer-led and teacher-led discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(3), 314–351. https://doi.org/10.2307/747620
Ames, C. (1984). Competitive, cooperative, and individualistic goal structures: A cognitive-motivational analysis. In R. E. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 1). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Baker, L., & Wigfield, A. (1999). Dimensions of children’s motivation for reading and their relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(4), 452–477. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.34.4.4
Baker, L., Dreher, M. J., & Guthrie, J. T. (2000). Why teachers should promote reading engagement. In Baker, L., Dreher, M. J., & Guthrie, J. T. (Eds.) Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp.1-16). Guilford Publications.
Banchi, H., & Bell, R. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and children, 46(2), 26.
Barrow, L. H. (2006). A brief history of inquiry: From Dewey to standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(3), 265-278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9008-5
Blessinger, P., & Carfora, J. M. (2015). Innovative approaches in teaching and learning: An introduction to inquiry-based learning for multidisciplinary programs. In Blessinger, P., & Carfora, J. M. (Eds.) Inquiry-based learning for multidisciplinary programs: A conceptual and practical resource for educators pp.4. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Interactive learning environments and the teaching of science and mathematics. In Marjorie Gardner & James G. Greeno & Frederick Reif & Alan H. Schoenfeld & Andrea A. diSessa (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp.111-139). Routledge.
Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.
Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, P. D., Bravo, M. A., & Barber, J. (2006). Reading and writing in the service of inquiry-based science. In Douglas, Rowena, Worth, Karen, Klentschy, Mike (Eds. ) Linking science and literacy in the K-8 classroom(pp.221-244). National Science Teachers Association.
Cervetti, G., & Pearson, P. (2012). Reading, writing, and thinking like a scientist. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(7), 580-586. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.00069
Chall, Jeanne S. (1983) Stages of Reading Development. McGraw-Hill
Chu, S. K. W., Tse, S. K., & Chow, K. (2011). Using collaborative teaching and inquiry project-based learning to help primary school students develop information literacy and information skills. Library & Information Science Research, 33(2), 132-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2010.07.017
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (Eds.). (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. Teachers College Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Instrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Pleum Press.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. D C Heath. https://doi.org/10.1037/10903-000
Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. (1999). Teaching information & technology skills: The big6 [TM] in Elementary Schools. Professional Growth Series. Linworth Publishing.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Hattie, J. (2020). The distance learning playbook, grades K-12: Teaching for engagement and impact in any setting. Corwin Press.
Gambrell, L. B., Mazzoni, S. A., & Almasi, J. F. (2000). Promoting collaboration, social interaction, and engagement with text. In Linda Baker, Mariam Jean Dreher, John T Guthrie (Ed. ) Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp.119-139). Guilford Publications.
Glynn, S. M. (1994). Teaching science with analogies: A strategy for teachers and text-book authors (Reading Research Report No. 15). Athens, GA: Universities of Georgia and Maryland, National reading Research Center.
Grant, S. G. (2013). From inquiry arc to instructional practice. Social Education, 77(6), 322-326.
Guba, E.G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. ECTJ 29, 75-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777
Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Classroom contexts for engaged reading: An overview. In Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (Eds.). Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction (pp.1-24). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Guthrie, J. T., & Anderson, E. (1999). Engagement in reading: Processes of motivated, strategic, knowledgeable, social readers. Engaged reading: Processes, practices, and policy implications (pp.17-45). Teachers College Press.
Guthrie, J. T., & McCann, A. D. (1996). Idea circles: Peer collaborations for conceptual learning. In Gambrell, Linda B., Ed.; Almasi, Janice F. (Eds.) Lively discussions! Fostering Engaged Reading (pp.87-105). International Reading Association.
Guthrie, J. T., & Taboada, A. (2004). Fostering the cognitive strategies of reading comprehension. In Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (Eds.). Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction (pp.87-112). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (3rd. ed., pp. 403-422). New York, NY: Longman.
Guthrie, J. T., Klauda, S. L., & Ho, A. (2013). Modeling the relationships among reading instruction, motivation, engagement, and achievement for adolescents. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(1), 9-26.
Guthrie, J. T., Mason-Singh, A., & Coddington, C. S. (2012). Instructional effects of Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction on motivation for reading information text in middle school. Adolescents’ engagement in academic literacy (pp.155-215).
Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., & Klauda, S. L. (2007). Contributions of concept-oriented reading instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42(4), 237-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701621087
Guthrie, J. T., Van Meter, P., McCann, A., Wigfield, A., Bennett, L., Poundstone, C., ... Mitchell, A. (1996). Growth of literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 306-325.
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Klauda, S. L. (Eds.). (2012). Adolescents’ engagement in aca- demic literacy. University of Maryland.
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (2004). Scaffolding for motivation and engagement in reading. In Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (Eds.) Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction (pp.55-86). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Davis, M. H., Scafiddi, N. T., & Tonks, S. (2004). Increasing Reading Comprehension and Engagement Through Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.403
Kemmis, S. (1988). The action research. Educational research, methodology, and measurement: An international handbook. Elsevier Science Ltd.
Lepper, M. R. (1988). Motivational considerations in the study of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 5(4), 289–309. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0504_3
Martin-Hansen, L. (2002). Defining inquiry. The science teacher, 69(2), 34.
Meece, J. L., & Miller, S. D. (1999). Changes in elementary school children’s achievement goals for reading and writing: Results of a longitudinal and an intervention study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(3), 207-229.
Michaels, S. (2015). The source web seminar: Connections between practices in NGSS, Common Core math and Common Core ELA. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/3nbvKicxK9Q
Minstrell, J. (2000). Implications for teaching and learning inquiry: A summary. In J. Minstrell & E. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 471-496). American Association for the Advancement of Science.
National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/4962
O'Flahavan, J. F. (1989). Second-graders' social, intellectual, and affective development in varied group discussions about narrative texts: An exploration of participation structures. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013b), Trends Shaping Education 2013, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/22187049
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematics, and financial literacy. https:/ doi.org/10.1787/9789264255425-en
Pearson, P. D., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. science, 328（5977）, 459-463. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182595
Perencevich, K. C. (2004). How the CORI framework looks in the classroom. In Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Perencevich, K. C. (Eds.). Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction (pp. 25-53). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Swan, E. A. (2003). Concept-oriented reading instruction: Engaging classrooms, lifelong learners. Guilford Press.
Taboada, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Growth of cognitive strategies for reading instruction. In J. T. Guthrie, A. Wigfield, & K. C. Perencevich (Eds.), Motivating reading comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction (pp. 273-306). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tuner, J. C. (1995). The influence of classroom contexts on young children’s motivation for literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 410-441. https://doi.org/10.2307/747624
Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, art and custom (Vol. 2). J. Murray.
Wigfield, A. (1997). Reading motivation: A domain-specific approach to motivation. Educational psychologist, 32(2), 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3202_1
Wigfield, A. (2000). facilitating children’s reading motivation. In Baker, Dreher, Guthrie. (Eds.) Engaging young readers : promoting achievement and motivation (pp. 140–158). The Guilford Press.
Wigield, A., & Guthrie, J.T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420–432.
Wigfield, A., Mason-Singh, A., Ho, A. N., & Guthrie, J. T. (2014). Intervening to improve children’s reading motivation and comprehension: Concept-oriented reading instruction. In Allan Wigfield, Amanda Mason-Singh, Amy N. Ho, John T. Guthrie (Ed. )Motivational interventions (Vol. 18, pp. 37-70). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.