:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:DINA與G-DINA模式參數不變性探討
書刊名:測驗統計年刊
作者:楊智為 引用關係卓淑瑜郭伯臣 引用關係陳亭宇
作者(外文):Yang, Chih-weiCho, Shu-yuKuo, Bor-chenChen, Ting-yu
出版日期:2011
卷期:19(上)
頁次:頁1-15
主題關鍵詞:認知診斷模型DINA模式G-DINA模式參數不變性Cognitive diagnosis modelsDINA modelG-DINA modelInvariance of parameter
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(3) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:29
摘要 所謂的「因材施教」即是說明教師必須先瞭解每一位學生的長處與短處,才 能夠設計教學方針,實施補救教學。然而,一般傳統的紙筆測驗,僅提供學生在 團體中的量尺分數,並無法顯現出學生是否精熟某種概念的訊息。 為了進一步幫助學生或教師對於測驗的結果有更多的瞭解,進而施行更有效 率的學習,認知診斷模型可以提供解決的方案,而其中又以DINA 模式最簡單 也最容易解釋,目前國外已有許多學者投入模式的開發與實際應用的研究。同樣 地,參數不變性在認知診斷評量的測驗設計上著實具有相當重要地位,也就是可 以研究如何以認知診斷模型來估計試題參數的潛在基本特徵與其分佈變化。 本研究透過模擬樣本資料的實驗設計,探討在不同樣本人數、不同認知屬性 分佈之下,分別以DINA 模式與 G-DINA 模式估計來進行探討,當資料符合 DINA 模型時,有很明顯的參數不變性,若資料型態為未知時,建議採用G-DINA 模式來進行分析。
Abstract "Teaching students in accordance with their aptitude" means that teachers must understand each student's strengths and weaknesses so that they can design principles of teaching and remedial education. However, the general tradition written test is only supply scale score of each student in a group, but it cannot display if the students good at some kinds of skills. In order to help students and teachers to know about the test results for having more efficiency learning, the "cognitive diagnosis models" could provide the solutions. The DINA model is the simplest and easiest to explain among these models. Many foreign scholars are involved in the development and practical application research at the present time. Similarly, invariance of parameter is really important to the designing of cognitive diagnosis assessment, it means we can research how to use cognitive diagnosis models to estimate the potential basic features and the distributive changes of the item parameters. This paper adopt simulated data from design of experiment to explore that to estimate the parameters with DINA model and G-DINA model respectively so that we can compare with the existence of invariant in different sample size, and cognitive attribute distributions. The results show that the DINA and G-DINA model are invariant when the DINA model fits the data and the G-DINA model estimations get better accuracies when we don’t know about the data.
期刊論文
1.DeCarlo, L. T.(2011)。On the analysis of fraction subtraction data: The DINA model, classification, latent class sizes, and the Q-matrix。Applied Psychological Measurement,35(1),8-26。  new window
2.de la Torre, J.、Lee, Y. S.(2010)。A note on the invariance of the DINA model parameters。Journal of Educational Measurement,47(1),115-127。  new window
3.de la Torre, J.(2011)。The generalized DINA model framework。Psychometrika,76(2),179-199。  new window
4.de la Torre, Jimmy(2009)。DINA model and parameter estimation: A didactic。Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics,34(1),115-130。  new window
5.Tatsuoka, Kikumi K.(1985)。A probabilistic model for diagnosing misconceptions by the pattern classification approach。Journal of Educational Statistics,10(1),55-73。  new window
6.de la Torre, J.(2009)。A cognitive diagnosis model for cognitively based multiple-choice options。Applied Psychological Measurement,33(3),163-183。  new window
7.Junker, B. W.、Sijtsma, K.(2001)。Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory。Applied Psychological Measurement,25(3),258-272。  new window
8.de la Torre, J.、Douglas, J. A.(2006)。Higher-order latent trait models for cognitive diagnosis。Psychometrika,69(3),333-353。  new window
9.Leighton, J. P.、Gierl, M. J.、Hunka, S. M.(2004)。The attribute hierarchy method for cognitive assessment: A variation on Tatsuoka's rule-space approach。Journal of Educational Measurement,41(3),205-237。  new window
10.Rupp, A.、Templin, J.(2008)。The effects of q-matrix misspecification on parameter Estimates and classification accuracy in the DINA model。Educational and Psychological Measurement,68(1),78-96。  new window
11.Cheng, Y.(2009)。When cognitive diagnosis meets computerized adaptive testing: CD-CAT。Psychometrika,74(4),619-632。  new window
12.Henson, R. A.、Douglas, J.(2005)。Test construction for cognitive diagnosis。Applied Psychological Measurement,29(4),262-277。  new window
13.Tatsuoka, K. K.(1983)。Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconception based on item response theory。Journal of Educational Measurement,20(4),345-354。  new window
14.de la Torre, J.、Douglas, J.(2008)。Model evaluation and multiple strategies in cognitive diagnosis: An analysis of fraction subtraction data。Psychometrika,73(4),595-624。  new window
15.Huebner, Alan(2010)。An Overview of Recent Developments in Cognitive Diagnostic Computer Adaptive Assessments。Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation,15,(3)1-(3)7。  new window
研究報告
1.von Davier, M.(2005)。A general diagnostic model applied to language testing data。Princeton, NJ:Educational Testing Service。  new window
學位論文
1.洪祥堯(2009)。資訊科技融入國小六年級圓形圖單元教學與評量之行動研究(碩士論文)。亞洲大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.Hartz, Sarah McConnell(2002)。A Bayesian framework for the unified model for assessing cognitive abilities: Blending theory with practicality(博士論文)。University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign。  new window
圖書
1.Hambleton, R. K.、Swaminathan, H.(1985)。Item Response Theory: Principles and Applications。Boston, Massachusetts:Kluwer-Nijhoff。  new window
2.余民寧(2009)。試題反應理論(IRT)及其應用。心理出版社。  延伸查詢new window
3.DiBello, L. V.、Stout, W. F.、Roussos, L. A.(1995)。Unified congnitive/ psychometric diagnostic assessment likelihood-based classification techniques。Cognitively diagnostic assessment \\ P. D. Nichols ; D. F. Chipman ; R. L. Brennan (Eds.)。Hillsdale, NJ。  new window
4.Hartz, S.、Roussos, L.、Stout, W.(2002)。Skills diagnosis: Theory and practice。Princeton, NJ:Educational Testing Service。  new window
其他
1.Doornik, J. A.(2003)。Object-oriented matrix programming using Ox (Version 3.1),London, England。  new window
2.(2002)。No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110 Stat. 1425。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE