:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:從認知負荷觀點分析國小二至四年級數與計算成就測驗
書刊名:教育研究與發展期刊
作者:洪碧霞 引用關係蕭嘉偉楊佩馨
作者(外文):Hung, Pi-hsiaHsiao, Chia-weiYang, Pei-hsin
出版日期:2008
卷期:4:4
頁次:頁151-167
主題關鍵詞:數學成就認知負荷成份編碼試題難度跨年級量尺Mathematics achevementCognitive loadComponent codingItem difficultyVertical scale
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(5) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:5
  • 共同引用共同引用:25
  • 點閱點閱:26
認知取向的試題難度分析可統整認知負荷與試題統計資訊,本文由學生認知負荷的關懷出發,希望提出有效預測二至四年級數學成就測驗試題難度參數的成份,描述數學成就測驗不同難度層次的認知負荷特徵,同時藉由基礎水準學生和未達基礎水準學生試題答對比率的差異討論,提供基礎水準定義和補救教學實務的具體參考資訊。研究中所使用的資料庫是南臺灣學生數學成就測驗(STASA-MAT)二至四年級有關數與計算的42題試題。研究中以運算種類數、未知數表徵轉換、和除法加權三個成份預測數與計算試題難度,認知負荷成份可預測約53%的試題難度參數變異。基礎層次試題總認知負荷指標二至四年級依序為1.40、1.89和1.75,每增加一個認知負荷,難度參數大致提昇0.4個單位。針對基礎層次測驗,未達基礎水準學生答對率在0.45左右,基礎水準學生平均答對率在0.80以上。整體而言,數與計算問題解決所涉及四則運算的種類數、未知數的位置和除法應用,明顯與學生的解題表現有關,補救教學介入設計應先掌握學生的認知負荷現況,斟酌認知成份循序累增原則,以利學生數學意義的內化和自動化。
The item difficulty component analysis approach is based on cognition psychology and psychometric theory. It can be applied to strengthen the construct validity. Also, the cognitive components usually demonstrate stronger communication power for the practitioners. In this study, a cognitive loading perspective is adopted to interpret the item difficulty parameter. The 42 items of numerical operation of the Southern Taiwan Assessment of Student Achievement on Mathematics (STASA-MAT) for 2nd to 4th graders were used for this analysis. A common metric was used to construct the item map for these items to exhibit the cognitive developmental features. Three components are proposed to predict the item difficulty parameters. They are number of operator types, representation transformation, and division application. The results suggest that cognitive loading components can predict around 53% of the difficulty variance. The implications of these results for basic level definition and intervention design are discussed.
期刊論文
1.Dimitrov, D. M.(2007)。Least squares distance method of cognitive validation and analysis for binary items using their item response theory parameters。Applied Psychological Measurement,31(5),367-387。  new window
2.Dimitrov, D. M.、Raykov, T.(2003)。Validation of Cognitive Structures: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach。Multivariate Behavioral Research,38(1),1-23。  new window
3.劉子鍵、林世華、梁仁楷(19980200)。二度空間視覺化測驗之試題產生算則的驗證與修正。教育心理學報,30(1),177-193。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.林世華、葉嘉惠(19990700)。數字系列完成測驗試題認知成分分析之研究。教育心理學報,31(1),139-165。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.Pawley, D.、Ayres, P.、Cooper, M.、Sweller, J.(2005)。Translating Words into Equations:A cognitive load theory approach。Educational Psychology,25(1),75-97。  new window
6.Riley, M. S.,、Greeno, J. G.(1988)。Developmental analysis of understanding language about quantities and of solving problems。Cognition and Instruction,5(1),49-101。  new window
7.Embretson, S. E.、Wetzel, C. D.(1987)。Component latent trait models for paragraph comprehension tests。Applied Psychological Measurement,11(2),175-193。  new window
8.Embretson, S. E.(1995)。A measurement model for linking individual learning to process and knowledge: Application to mathematical reasoning。Journal of Educational Measurement,32(3),277-294。  new window
9.Gorin, J. S.(2006)。Test design with cognition in mind。Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,25(4),21-35。  new window
10.Fischer, G. H.(1973)。The linear logistic test model as an instrument in educational research。Acta Psychologica,37(6),359-374。  new window
11.Davis-Dorsey, J.、Ross, S. M.、Morrison, G. R.(1991)。The role of rewording and context personalization in the solving of mathematics word problems。Journal of Educational Psychology,83,61-68。  new window
12.Paas, F.、Renkl, A.、Sweller, J.(2003)。Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments。Educational Psychologist,38(1),1-4。  new window
13.洪碧霞、林素微、林娟如(20061200)。認知複雜度分析架構對TASA-MAT六年級線上測驗試題難度的解釋力。教育研究與發展期刊,2(4),69-86。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.丁振豐(19970600)。認知分析與心理計量分析對解平衡桿問題認知發展層次與解題運作成份測量之比較。初等教育學報,10,81-125。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.Sweller, John(1994)。Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design。Learning and Instruction,4(4),295-312。  new window
16.Lewis, A.B.,、Mayer, R.E.(1987)。Students’ miscomprehension of relation statements in arithmetic word problems。Journal of educational psychology,79,361-367。  new window
17.Sweller, J.,、Chandler, P.(1994)。The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra。Cognition and Instruction,2(1),59-89。  new window
研究報告
1.洪小婷(2008)。二年級數與空間工作記憶薄弱學生數學問題理解電腦化輔具介入效益的探討。  延伸查詢new window
2.洪碧霞、林素微、林柏宏(2007)。南部五縣市資優學生鑑定數學成就測驗題庫擴充之研究(STASA-MAT)。  延伸查詢new window
3.Katz, I. R., Lipps, A. W.、Trafton, J. G.(2002)。Factors affecting difficulty in the generating examples item type。  new window
學位論文
1.李岳勳(2004)。國小電腦化空間感測驗難度來源之成份分析(碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,台南。  延伸查詢new window
2.郭秀緞(2006)。以認知負荷理論探討數學問題設計與後設認知策略教學對國小高年級學生數學解題之影響(博士論文)。國立高雄師範大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.尤彥喬(2004)。國小三年級學童除法文字題解題情形及策略轉變之研究。  延伸查詢new window
4.葉渝芳(2007)。自我解釋鷹架對多重表徵動畫學習之影響。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.蘇春萍(2005)。具體-表徵-抽象教學對不同工作記憶能力的數學學習困難學生學習未知數計算之研究。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.謝如山、謝名起、謝名娟(譯)、C. Riedesel, E. Schwartz、H. Clements(原作者)(2002)。數學科教材教法。台北。  延伸查詢new window
2.Gitomer, D. H.、Rock, D.(1993)。Addressing process variables in test analysis。Test theory for a new generation of tests。Hillsdale, NJ。  new window
3.Snow, R. E.、Lohman, D. F.(1984)。Implications of cognitive psychology for educational measurement。Educational measurement (3rd ed.)。New York。  new window
圖書論文
1.Embretson, S. E.(1994)。Applications of cognitive design systems to test development。Cognitive assessment: a multidisciplinary perspective。New York, NY:Plenum Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE