本研究探討國小中年級國語文任課教師運用提問教學時所使用的問題層次及言談鷹架策略。本研究使用質量混合法，以9 位專家教師運用國教院研發之「十二年國民教育國小組國語文素養導向教材模組」進行的文本提問教學影片為研究材料。研究者先以量化內容分析法分析教師提問的PIRLS 四層次問題層次與言談鷹架策略的比例，之後再以Nvivo 對師生對話的段落進行第2次的質性分析，了解教師如何根據對話目的轉換問題層次與言談鷹架策略。本研究成果有三：(1)專家教師使用的問題層次比例由高至低依序為層次二、一、三、四；(2)專家教師所運用的言談鷹架策最多的是「澄清╱延伸」，多用於層次一、二的問題；其次是鼓勵學生提供新答案的「高層次思考」，多用於層次三、四的問題；(3)專家教師的提問引導可分為「建構文本細節」、「帶入策略、解決問題」及「發展對文本的評價」三大原則。另外本研究的結論有以下2 點：(1)在專家教師的延伸問題中，不同層次的問題扮演不同的角色；(2)專家教師根據教學原則調整問題層次與言談鷹架策略。本研究可做為國小中年級國語文任課教師以多層次問題進行教學的參考。

This study investigated how expert Chinese language teachers led inquiry-based reading comprehension of texts through multi-level questioning, and how these teachers implemented specific discursive scaffolding strategies in various levels of questioning. The study employed mixed research method, combining quantitative and qualitative content analysis to examine the transcripts of instructional videos from nine expert teachers who used the Literacy-oriented Elementary Mandarin Chinese Textbooks as experimental teaching materials. The results indicated that the most frequently asked questions initiated by the expert teachers during classes were still level one and two questions. Moreover, teachers used clarification and follow-up as the discursive scaffolding strategies when they initiated level one and level two questions, whereas higher order thinking scaffolding strategy such as requesting alternative answers typically was associated with teachers’ level three and four questions. Lastly, there were three different objectives for teachers to use in their questioning strategies, namely “construct details,” “incorporate reading strategies to solve puzzles,” and “develop criticisms.” The teachers flexibly switched questioning levels and discursive scaffolding strategies based on their purpose of dialogue to meet learners’ needs. The study concludes that different levels of questions expert teachers asked played different roles in classroom discussion, and that the teachers adjusted question levels and discursive scaffolding strategies based on their instructional principles. The study serves as a reference for future research in instructional dialogue and questioning.