:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:二度空間視覺化測驗之試題產生算則的驗證與修正
書刊名:教育心理學報
作者:劉子鍵 引用關係林世華梁仁楷
作者(外文):Liu, Tzu-chienLin, Sieh-hwaLiang, Steven
出版日期:1998
卷期:30:1
頁次:頁177-193
主題關鍵詞:認知整合測量模式空間能力線性洛基斯蒂克測驗模式Integrated cognitive assessment modelSpatial abilityLinear logistic test model
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:18
  • 點閱點閱:41
     本研究以「以二度空間視覺化能力」為特定的研究領域,根據林世華、劉子鍵(民 86) 所提出的認知測量整合模式, 以及林世華、劉子鍵和梁仁楷 (民 86) 的研究結果,進 一步地探討下列問題: (一 ) 林世華、劉子鍵和梁仁楷 (民 86) 之研究所採用的受試皆為 師大學生,使得作答反應的變異性不大,有可能因此影響估計模式的配適度。本研究進一步 地加入國中二年級至高中二年級的學生作為研究樣本,使得樣本的涵蓋面擴及國中程度至大 學程度,以蒐集更具代表性的反應組型,並藉此驗證模式的配適程度。(二 ) 經由新樣本的 加入,增加可能的反應組型,藉此來觀察 LLTM 估計結果中各成分之相對重要性的穩定程度 。研究結果有數項發現異於前次研究結果。其中,針對篩選後的 38 題試題就整體樣本 (包 含大生樣本及高國中樣本 ) 的資料進行 Rasch 模式考驗, 結果顯現整體樣本並不符合 Rasch 模式,而是符合 3 參數模式。 此項結果與先前僅以大學生為樣本的分析結果 (林世 華、劉子鍵和梁仁楷,民 86) 大有出入。 進一步針對篩選後的 38 題試題就高國中生樣本 進行研究,卻發現該樣本資料符合 Rasch 模式。 此一結果顯示大學生與高國中生此二組樣 本在組內有相當的一致性,但在組間卻有差異性。 本研究進一步針對篩選後的 9 題,對兩 組樣本進行 LLTM 分析,希望瞭解兩組在各個成分上的表現是否亦有所不同。結果發現兩組 樣本在基本參考之加權值的排序上有明顯的差異。此一差異將造成兩組建構出不同意涵的試 題產生算則。最後,本研究基於研究結果與發現進行討論與建議。
     Based on the integrated cognitive assessment model proposed by Lin and Liu (1997a) and the research findings of Lin, Liu and Liang (1997b), this study aims to investigate the following questions; (1) whether adding subjects coming from lower age levels may increase the degree of model fit of LLTM, and (2) whether the response patterns, due to the new subjects, may enhance the stability of the weights of the LLTM components. Hence, unlike Lin, Liu and Liang (1977b) whose samples were college students only, this study includes additional samples from 8th grader to llth grader students. Compared with Lin, Liu and Liang (1977b), this study shows two significance difference. First, the data from the overall samples does not well fit the Rasch Model, in stead fit 3 pl model; the data from the high school subjects, however, fits the Rasch Model. The result suggests consistency within the same age groups but diversity between different age groups. Second, the LLTM analysis of the two age groups reveals different ranking of component weights. The difference results in constructing two difference item generation algorithms. Some discussions and suggestions are also given in the study.
期刊論文
1.Embretson, S. E.(1983)。Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span。Psychological Bulletin,93(1),179-197。  new window
2.林世華、劉子鍵、梁仁楷(19980400)。認知設計系統的建構與試題輔助產生引擎的運作--以二度空間視覺化測驗為例。師大學報. 教育類,43(1),17-31。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Embretson, S. E.、Wetzel, C. D.(1987)。Component latent trait models for paragraph comprehension tests。Applied Psychological Measurement,11(2),175-193。  new window
4.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
5.劉子鍵、林原宏(19970600)。階層線性模式之理論與應用:以「影響自然科成績之因素的研究」為分析實例。教育與心理研究,20(上),1-21。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.Whitely, S. E.、Schneider, L. M.、Roth, D. L.(1986)。Multiple processing strategies and the construct validity of verbal reasoning test。Journal of Educational Measurement,23(1),13-32。  new window
7.Whitely, S. E.、Schneider, L. M.(1981)。Information structure for geometric analogies: A test theory approach。Applied psychological Measurement,5(3),383-397。  new window
8.Whitely, S. E.(1980)。Modeling aptitude test validity from cognitive component。Journal of Educational Psychology,72,750-769。  new window
9.Embretson, S. E.、Schneider, L. M.、Roth, D. L.(1986)。Multiple processing strategies and the construct validity of verbal reasoning tests。Journal of Educational Measurement,23(1),13-32。  new window
10.Embretson, S. E.(1984)。A general latent trait model for response process。Psychometrika,49,175-186。  new window
11.Carroll, J. B.、Maxwell, S.(1979)。Individual difference in ability。Annual Review of Psychology,30,603-640。  new window
12.Lob man, D. F.(1979)。Spatial ability: a review and re-analysis of the correlational literature. Aptitude Research Project, Report gnostic assessments。Review of Educational Research,64(4),575-603。  new window
13.Fischer, G. H.(1973)。The linear logistic test model as an instrument in educational research。Acta Psychologica,37(6),359-374。  new window
會議論文
1.林世華、劉子鍵(1997)。整合認知心理學、心理計量學與教學的理想模式:結合認知設計系統、反應產生模式、認知診斷評量系統、以及動態評量系統。教育測驗新進發展趨勢學術研討會,南師主辦 。台南:國立台南師範學院。229-236。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Hambleton, R. K.、Swaminathan, H.(1985)。Item response theory: Principles and applications。Kluwer-Nijhoff Publisher。  new window
單篇論文
1.梁仁楷,劉子鍵(1997)。試題產生輔助引擎 1.0 版。  延伸查詢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
2.Sternberg, R. J.(1991)。Cognitive theory and Psychometrica。Advances in educational and psychological testing: theory and applications。Boston:Kluwer。  new window
3.Pellegrino, J. W.、Mumaw, R. J.、Shute, V. J.(1985)。Analysis of spatial aptitude and expertise。Test design: Developments in psychology and psychometrics。New York:Academic Press。  new window
4.Embretson, S. E.(1992)。Implication of a multidimensional latent trait model for measuring change。Best methods for the analysis of change。Washing, D.C.:APA。  new window
5.Embretson, S. E.(1985)。Multicomponent latent trait models for test design。Test design: Developments in psychology and psychometrics。New York:Academic Press。  new window
6.Bejar, I. I.(1993)。A generative approach to psychological and educational measurement。Test Theory for a New Generation of Test。Hillsdale, New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates。  new window
7.Fischer, G. H.、Ponocny, I.(1995)。Extended rating scale and partial credit models for assessing change。Rasch models foundations, recent developments, and applications。New York:Springer-Verlag。  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
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE