臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：自然科實作評量的效度探討
書刊名：測驗年刊
作者：桂怡芬／吳毓瑩 引用關係
作者(外文)：Kuei, Yi-fen／Wang Wu, Yuh-yin
出版日期：1998
卷期：45:2
頁次：頁19-36
主題關鍵詞：實作評量；建構效度；概化理論；多特質多方法；因素分析；科學教育；Performance assessment；Construct validity；Generalizability；Multitrait multimethod matrix；Factor analysis；Science education
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(2) 博士論文(3) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:8
  • 點閱點閱:62
　　　　　本研究的目的在探討國小自然科實作評量之效度問題。研究對象對臺北市一所國小六年級的學生四十名(男生二十一名，女生十九名)。研究者於八十四年度上學期對該班學生實施「配製中性溶液」及「四輪車與小山坡」兩次實作評量。效度證據從四個方面來說明:內容分析、內在結構、外在結構、概化程度。所採用的分析技術為:邏輯推理、因素分析、多特質方法相關矩陣、概化係數。研究結果發現:1.工作項目的評量表符合建構效度的內容層面及內在的結構層面:2.實作評量結果與紙筆測驗的相關值平均約為.5，表示二者所測得的是自然科成就的不同面向，且兩位評量者間的一致性極高(r=.95);3.概化研究顯示兩位評量者評定兩個評量項目，得到0.57的概化數，表示若僅有一位評量者時，至少必須要有六個評量項目才能達到良好的概化性。最後研究者提出在實務教學上及未來研究上數點討論方向與建議。
　　　　　 Concept mapping has been used in many subject domains as a useful strategy for learning and instruction. Recently, many researchers tried to apply concept mapping to the assessment of structural knowledge. In this study we combined computer technology and concept mapping to build a concept mapping based learning and assessment system. In this system we implemented two indices for knowledge-structure assessment: the Closeness index (c) of Goldsmith, Johnson, & Acton (1991), and the revised Novak & Gowin's (1984) concept mapping scoring rubrics (N-G). Eighty-five undergranduates participated in this study. They were asked represent their content knowledge about the topic of 'learning theories' in educational psychology through the computerized concept mapping system. The results indicated that both the C and N-G indices were significantly different between the students of high- and low achievement groups. In addition, from the results of multiple regression. We found that the C index accounted for a significant amount of the variances of the achievement scores, but the N-G index did not predict significantly over and above the C index. Based on these results, we concluded that concept mapping along with the C and N-G indices can serve as a valid tool for knowledge structure assessment, yet the scoring rubrics could be revised to improve their validitiy.
期刊論文
1.施惠(19840400)。國民小學自然科學學習成就評量中紙筆測驗與實作測驗之理論與實作探討。國教世紀，19(10)，12-20。  延伸查詢new window
2.Baxter, G. P.、Shavelson, R.、Goldman, S. R.、Pine, J.(1992)。Evaluation of procedure-based scoring for hands-on science assessment。Journal of Educational Measurement，29(1)，1-17。  new window
3.Brennan, R. L.、Johnson, E. G.(1995)。Generalizability of performance assessment。Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice，14(4)，9-12。  new window
4.Dunbar, S. B.、Koretz, D. M.、Hoover, H. D.(1991)。Quality control in the development and use of performance assessments。Applied Measurement in Education，4(4)，289-303。  new window
5.Frechtling, J. A.(1991)。Performance assessment: Moonstruck or the real thing?。Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice，10(4)，23-25。  new window
6.Linn, R. L.(1993)。Educational assessment: Expanded expectations and challenges。Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis，15(1)，1-16。  new window
7.Linn, R. L.(1994)。Performance Assessment: Policy promises and technical measurement standards。Educational Researcher，23(9)，4-14。  new window
8.Linn, R. L.、Baker, E. L.、Dunbar, S. B.(1991)。Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria。Educational Researcher，20(8)，15-21。  new window
9.Messick, S.(1994)。The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments。Educational Researcher，23(2)，13-23。  new window
10.Messick, S.(1995)。Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment。Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice，14(4)，5-8。  new window
11.Moss, P. A.(1992)。Shifting conceptions of validity in educational Measurement: Implications for performance assessment。Review of Educational Research，62(3)，229-258。  new window
12.Moss, P. A.(1994)。Can there be validity without reliability。Educational Researcher，23(2)，5-12。  new window
13.Moss, P. A.(1995)。Themes and variations in validity theory。Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice，14(2)，5-13。  new window
14.Ruiz-Primo, M. A.、Baxter, G. P.、Shavelson, R. J.(1993)。On the stability of performance assessments。Journal of Educational Measurement，30(1)，41-53。  new window
15.Shavelson, R. J.、Baxter, G. P.、Pine, J.(1991)。Performance assessment in science。Applied Measurement in Education，4(4)，347-362。  new window
16.Shavelson, R. J.、Baxter, G. P.、Pine, J.(1992)。Performance assessments: Political rhetoric and measurement reality。Educational Researcher，21(4)，21-27。  new window
17.Shepard, L. A.(1993)。Evaluating test validity。Review of Research in Education，19，405-450。  new window
18.Stiggins, R. J.(1987)。Design and development of performance assessments。Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice，6(6)，33-42。  new window
19.李虎雄、黃長司(19950400)。美國馬里蘭州學校實作評量工具在臺灣施測的可行性。科學教育，179，41-49。  延伸查詢new window
20.張文華、郭重吉(19951000)。科教革新中評量理念的重建。教育研究，45，23-30。new window  延伸查詢new window
21.Stiggins, R. J.(1991)。Facing the challenges of a new era of educational assessment。Applied Measurement in Education，4(4)，263-273。  new window
22.Shavelson, R. J.、Baxter, G. P.、Gao, X.(1993)。Sampling variability of performance assessments。Journal of Educational Measurement，30(3)，215-232。  new window
會議論文
1.吳毓瑩(1997)。效度意義的變遷--從目標功能的考量到價值及社會後果的反省。教育測驗新近發展趨勢學術研討會，台南師範學院主編 。臺南：台南師範學院。85-97。  延伸查詢new window
2.鄒慧英(1997)。實作評量初探--以國小數學科為例。第三屆兩岸心理與教育測驗學術研討會，中國測驗學會 。臺北：台灣師大。  延伸查詢new window
3.Hipps, J. A.(1993)。Trustworthiness and authenticity: alternate ways to judge authentic assessment。Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association，(會議日期: 1993/04/12-16)。  new window
學位論文
1.桂怡芬(1996)。自然科實作評量的效度探討(碩士論文)。國立台北師範學院。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.國立編譯館(1994)。國民小學自然科學教學指引。臺北：台灣書店。  延伸查詢new window
2.教育部國民教育司(1976)。國民小學課程標準。臺北市：正中書局。  延伸查詢new window
3.傅樂成(1984)。中國通史。臺北：大中國圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
4.Airasia, Pieter W.(1991)。Classroom assessment。McGraw-Hill。  new window
5.Shavelson, R. J.、Webb, N. W.(1991)。Generalizability theory: A primer。Newbury Park, CA：Sage。  new window
6.Stiggins, R. J.(1994)。Student-centered classroom assessment。New York：Macmillan College Publishing Company。  new window
7.教育部國民教育司(1993)。國民小學課程標準。台北：教育部。  延伸查詢new window
8.Linn, R. L.、Gronlund, N. E.(1995)。Measurement and assessment in teaching。Prentice-Hall。  new window
9.陳英豪、吳裕益(1992)。測驗與評量。高雄：復文。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.吳毓瑩、桂怡芬(1997)。形成性評量效度的驗證及教師的角色--以自然科平時評量為例。當代師資培育的課程教材教法。臺北：漢文。  延伸查詢new window
2.Bennett, R. E.(1993)。On the meanings of constructed response。Consturction versus choice in cognitive measurement: Issuesin constructed response, performance testing, and portfolio assessment。New Jersey：Hillsdale。  new window
3.Linn, R. L.(1989)。Current perspectives and future directions。Educational measurement。Washington, DC：The American Council on Education：National Council on Measurement in Education。  new window
4.Messick, S.(1989)。Validity。Educational measurement。Washington, DC：The American Council on Education：National Council on Measurement in Education。  new window
5.Messick, S.(1992)。Validity of test interpretation and use。Encyclopedia of educational research。New York：Macmillan。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：744（臺灣：734，外國：10） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2042760 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67853288
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上