:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:不同方法設定英文科決斷分數之實務性研究
書刊名:測驗學刊
作者:謝名娟 引用關係謝進昌林世華
作者(外文):Hsieh, Ming-chuanHsieh, Jin-changLin, Sieh-hwa
出版日期:2013
卷期:60:3
頁次:頁519-544
主題關鍵詞:書籤標定法標準設定Yes/No AngoffBookmark methodStandard setting
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(1) 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:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:35
  • 點閱點閱:44
本研究之目的在比較書籤標定法與Yes/No Angoff標準設定方法在設定決斷分數上的差異,並使用TASA 2009年英文科來進行比較研究,研究結果顯示,兩種標準設定方法所做出的決斷分數略有不同,標準設定成員們認為,Yes/No Angoff法執行起來較為簡單,最終決定的決斷分數也較符合預期。然而,執行此方法所需要的會議時間較長;書籤標定法執行所需之時間雖然較短,然需要克服的技術層面較多,尤其在面臨題本難度順序與成員心中期望的難度順序不一致時,往往會影響成員放置書籤的決策。最後,本研究建議,雖Yes/No Angoff法執行上比較簡單,但是在時間與人力負荷考量下,若未來想要進行Yes/No Angoff法進行標準設定時,最好能預估兩天的時間,如此才能將題目充分進行討論,然而,對於題目較多的測驗或面臨人力不足的條件下,則較適合使用書籤標定法,並搭配加強標準設定成員訓練作為配套。
This paper presents a comparison on two prevalent method, bookmark and yes/no Angoff method, for setting cut scores on educational assessments. The comparison is presented through an application with a Grade 6 English Assessment in Taiwan. The implementations for each method are described in detail along with comparative results for the application. It is found that the resulting cutoff points from these two methods are somewhat different. Judges regarded that yes/no Angoff method is easier to implement and the resulting cutoff points are more close to their expectation. Comparatively, there are more difficulties need to be solved for the bookmark procedure, especially when the item difficulty order does not follow judges' expectation. It is found that although the implementation of Yes/No Angoff method is simple, the Bookmark method still has some promising features.
期刊論文
1.鄭明長、余民寧(199401)。各種通過分數設定方法之比較。測驗年刊,41,19-40。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Impara, J. C.、Plake, B. S.(1997)。Standard setting: An alternative approach。Journal of Educational Measurement,34(4),353-366。  new window
3.林惠芬(1993)。通過分數設定方法護理人員檢覈筆試測驗之研究。測驗年刊,40,253-262。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.Andrew, B. J.、Hecht, J. T.(1976)。A Preliminary Investigation of Two Procedures for Setting Examination Standards。Educational and Psychological Measurement,36(1),45-50。  new window
5.Brandon, P. R.(2002)。Two versions of the contrasting-groups standard setting method: A review。Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development,35(3),167-181。  new window
6.Brandon, P. R.(2004)。Conclusions about frequently studied modified Angoff standard setting topics。Applied Measurement in Education,17(1),59-88。  new window
7.Buckendahl, C. W.、Smith, R. W.、Impara, J. C.、Plake, B. S.(2002)。A comparison of Angoff and bookmark standard setting methods。Journal of Educational Measurement,39(3),253-263。  new window
8.Giraud, G.、Impara, J. C.、Buckendahl, C.(2010)。Making the cut in school districts: Alternative methods for setting cutscores。Educational Assessment,6(4),291-304。  new window
9.Green, D. R.、Trimble, C. S.、Lewis, D. M.(2003)。Interpreting the results of three different standard setting procedures。Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,22(1),22-32。  new window
10.Hurtz, G. M.、Auerbach, M. A.(2003)。A meta-analysis of the effects of modifications to the Angoff method on cutoff scores and judgment consensus。Educational and Psychological Measurement,63(4),584-601。  new window
11.Huynh, H.(1998)。On score locations of binary and partial credit items and their application to item mapping and criterion referenced interpretation。Journal of Educational and Behavior Statistics,23(1),35-56。  new window
12.Huynh, H.(2006)。A clarification on the response probability criterion RP67 for standard settings based on bookmark and item mapping。Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,25(2),19-20。  new window
13.Lewis, D. M.、Mitzel, H. C.、Green, D. R.(1996)。Standard setting: A bookmark approach, Paper presented at the Council of Chief State。  new window
14.Nedelsky, L.(1954)。Absolute grading standards for objective tests。Educational and Psychological Measurement,14,3-19。  new window
15.吳宜芳、鄒慧英、林娟如(20100300)。標準設定效度驗證之探究--以大型數學學習成就評量為例。測驗學刊,57(1),1-27。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.Kane, M. T.(1994)。Validating the performance standards associated with passing scores。Review of Educational Research,64(3),425-461。  new window
17.吳毓瑩、陳彥名、張郁雯、陳淑惠、何東憲、林俊吉(20090900)。以常態混組模型討論書籤標準設定法對英語聽讀基本能力標準設定有效性之輻合證據。教育心理學報,41(1),69-89。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.曾建銘、陳清溪(20091200)。2007年臺灣學生學習成就評量結果之分析。教育研究與發展期刊,5(4),1-38。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.Reckase, M. D.、Bay, L.(1999)。Comparing two methods for collecting test-basedjudgments。The meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education。Montreal, Quebec, Canada。  new window
2.Shepard, L, A.(1995)。Implications for standard setting of the National Academy of Education evaluation of the National Assessment of Educational Progress achievement levels。Washington, DC: U.S:Government Printing Office。  new window
3.Yin, P.、Schulz, E. M.(2005)。A comparison of cut scores and cut score variability from Angoff-based and bookmark-based procedures in standard setting。The annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal, Canada,(會議日期: April)。Montreal。  new window
學位論文
1.吳裕益(1986)。標準參照測驗通過分數設定方法之研究(博士論文)。國立政治大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.陳彥名(2006)。臺灣學生學習成就資料庫(TASA)英語聽讀能力標準設定之效度探究(碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學。  延伸查詢new window
3.Pitoniak, M. J.(2003)。Standard setting methods for complex licensure examinations(博士論文)。University of Massachusetts,Amherst, Massachusetts。  new window
4.謝進昌(2005)。以最大測驗訊息量決定通過分數之研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Council of Chief State School Officers(2001)。State student assessment programs annual survey。Washington, DC:Council of Chief State School Officers。  new window
2.Cizek, G. J.(2001)。Conjectures on the rise and call of standard setting: An introduction to context and practice。Setting performance standards: Concepts, methods, and perspectives。Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erihaum Associates。  new window
3.Department of Public Instruction, State of Wisconsin(1997)。Final summary report of the proficiency score standards for the Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS) knowledge and concept examinations for elementary, middle, and high school at grades 4, 8, and 10。Madison, WI:Office of Educational Accountability。  new window
4.Shepard, L. A.、Glaser, R.、Linn, R.、Bohmstedt, G.(1993)。Setting performance standards for student achievement。Stanford, CA:National Academy of Education。  new window
5.Brennan, R. L.(2001)。Generalizability Theory。New York, NY:Springer-Verlag。  new window
6.Cizek, G. J.、Bunch, M. B.(2007)。Standard setting: A guide to establishing and evaluating performance standards on tests。Sage。  new window
其他
1.臺灣學生學習成就評量資料庫(2011)。臺灣學生學習成就評量資料庫建置計畫,http://tasa.naer.edu.tw/1about-1.asp?id=2, 20111126。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Angoff, William H.(1971)。Scales, norms, and equivalent scores。Educational measurement。Washington, DC:American Council on Education。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE