中文部分
王前龍（民89）。從九年一貫課程綱要之實施要點談國民小學「學校本位課程發展」的基本做法。載於教育部台灣省國民學校教師研習會主編，九年一貫課程的教與學，273-281。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
江永明（民86）。建構主義教學實例。教育資料與研究，18，7-16。余民寧（民86）。教育測驗與評量-成就測驗與教學評量。台北：心理出版社。
余昭 (民70)。人格心理學。台北：三民書局。
李坤崇（民88）。多元化教學評量。台北：心理出版社。
吳元良（民85）。不同數學課程、性別、社經地位的國小學生在數學態度及其成就上比較之研究。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。吳幸收（民87）。建構式教學法在兒童電腦課程中的實驗。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。吳裕益、陳英豪（民83）。測驗與評量。高雄：復文圖書出版社。
吳毓瑩（民85）。評量的蛻變與突破-從哲學思潮與效度理論談起。教育資料與研究，13，2-15。吳毓瑩（民86）。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。載於台南師範學院主編，教育測驗新近發展趨勢學術研討會論文集，85-97。台南：國立台南師範學院。
吳璧純（民85）。從變異與選擇建構論的觀點看另類評量。教育研究，49，46-61。吳璧純（民86）。建構主義取向的教學─師生交互猜測、相互成長的活動。教育資料與研究，18，17-20。林清山（民81）。心理與教育統計學。台北：台灣東華出版社。
周筱亭（民84）。數學新課程的趨勢。國民小學新課程標準的精神與特色，107-135。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
周筱亭（民89）。從課程標準到課程綱要─以數學學習領域為例。九年一貫課程的教與學，33-46。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
洪志成（民79）。建構主義初探：兼論其在教育上的啟示。台灣省第一屆教育學術論文集，1-14。台北：國立台北師範學院。
胡志偉（民86）。國小教師對建構數學的看法。教育資料與研究，18，21-25。桂怡芬（民85）。自然科實作評量的效度探討。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。桂怡芬、吳毓瑩（民86）。自然科實作評量的效度探討。載於台南師範學院主編：教育測驗新近發展趨勢學術研討會論文集，29-50。台南：國立台南師範學院。
高石城（民88）：數學新課程對學生數學解題能力與數學態度影響之研究。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。高毓婷（民90）。多元評量對國中數學學習的影響與研究。國立台灣師範大學數學研究所碩士論文（未出版）。徐美英（民89）。TIMSS數學實作評量在台灣之適用探討。國立台中師範學院教育測驗統計研究所碩士論文（未出版）。馮朝霖（民85）。「後現代的多元主義：中型（或局部）的理論建構」評論。教育改革－從傳統到後現代，547-549。台北：師大書苑。
陳怡如 (民88)。實作評量在國小數學科之應用研究。國立臺中師範學院教育測驗統計研究所碩士論文（未出版）。陳英豪、吳裕益（民84）。測驗與評量（第二版）。高雄市：復文出版社。
陳華傑（民89）。不同評量模式的評量效果。國立台灣師範大學物理研究所碩士論文（未出版）。陳濱興（民90）。國小數學解題實作評量與後設認知之相關研究。國立臺中師範學院教育測驗統計研究所碩士論文（未出版）。許慧玉（民90）。卷宗評量與紙筆測驗對國小四年級學生數學概念、數學溝通能力及數學學習態度之實驗研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。許健將（民90）：建構主義者式的教學理念與教學實務。國立中興大學教育學程中心。民90年9月23日，取自http://www.hs.ntnu.edu.tw/~chem/discus /maker. htm
郭生玉（民79）。心理與教育測驗。台北：精華書局。
教育部（民64）。國民小學課程標準。台北：正中書局。
教育部（民82）。國民小學課程標準。台北：台捷。
教育部（民89）。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北：教育部。
連瑞琦 (民88)) 。實作評量對國小學生數學成就與態度的影響。南華管理學院教育社會學研究所碩士論文（未出版）。國立編譯館（民89）。國民小學數學第11冊（六上）。台北：台灣書局。
張春興（民78）。張氏心理學辭典。台北：東華書局。
張春興 (民89 )。心理學(第二版)。台北：東華書局。
張靜嚳 (民84)。何謂建構主義？建構與教學，3。民91年6月17日，取自：http://www.bio.ncue.edu.tw/c&t/issue1-8/v3-1.htm。張麗麗（民89）。檔案評量模式之建構及其實施成效與信、效之探討：以國小寫作檔案為例。（國家科學委員會報告 NSC 88-2413-H-153-016 ）。屏東：國立屏東師範學院。
張麗麗（民90a）。數學實作評量與檔案評量工作坊手冊。（國家科學委員會專題計畫未出版手冊）。屏東：國立屏東師範學院。
張麗麗（民90b）。真實評量。國立屏東師範學院初等教育系講義（未出版）。
張麗麗（民91a）。評量改革的應許之地，虛幻或真實？－談實作評量之作業與表現規準。教育研究月刊，93，76-86。張麗麗（民91b）。從分數的意義談實作評量效度的建立。教育研究月刊，98，76-86。張麗麗（民91c）。檔案評量信度與效度的分析─以國小寫作檔案為例。教育與心理研究，25，1-34。曹宗萍、周文忠（民87）。國小數學態度量表編製之研究。發表於87學年度教育學術研討會。台北：教育部。
曾志華（民84）。淺談社會建構論在數學教育上的應用。教師之友，36（5），45-49。曾惠敏（民87）。國小分數概念實作評量之發展及其相關研究。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
甯自強（民76）。根本建構主義認知言的另一種架構。師友月刊（12月），30-32。
寧自強（民82）。建構式教學法之教學觀─由根本建構主義的觀點來看。國教學報，5，33-41。
黃世傑（民84）。教學、主動、建構。建構與教學，1。民91年6月17日，取自：http://www.bio.ncue.edu.tw/c&t/issue1-8/v1-1.htm
黃幸美（民85）。國小數學建構教學的評量方法。教育研究雙月刊，49，62-67。黃幸美（民86a）。數學科新課程學習評量之探討。國民小學數學新課程學習評量方法初探，15-21。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
黃敏晃（民84）。國小數學新課程下評量改革的一些想法。國民小學數學新課程學習評量方法初探，166-177。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
鄒慧英（民86）。實作評量的品管議題-兼談檔案評量之應用。教育測驗新近發展趨勢學術研討會論文集，73-84。台南：國立台南師範學院。
路君約（民81）。心理測驗。台北：中國行為科學社。
楊銀興（民89）。傳統評量與新式評量之比較及國小教師對實施新式評量相關問題覺知情形之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。楊龍立(民86)：建構主義教學的檢討。教育資料與研究，18，1-5。劉錫麒（民82）。數學思考教學研究。台北：師大書苑。
蕭雅慧、張靜嚳（民90）。於雙環教學中用學習記錄表引導學生反思。中華民國第十六屆科學教育學術研討會短篇論文彙編，267-274。台北：國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
鍾靜（民89）。落實小學數學新課程之意圖與學校本位的進修活動。九年一貫課程的教與學，58-74。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
鍾靜、翁嘉聲（民89）。不同數學教學取向下學生數學學習態度之研究。發表於國立新竹師範學院八十九學年度師範學院教育學術研討會。新竹：國立新竹師範學院。
譚寧君（民81）。兒童數學態度與解題能力之分析探討。國立台北師範學院學報，5，621-677。
英文部分
Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological testing (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Angoff, W. H. (1988). Validity: An evolving concept. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp.19-32). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
American Psychological Association. (1954). Technical recommendations for psychological tests and diagnostic techniques. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 201-238.
American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1966). Standards for educational and psychological tests and manuals. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1974). Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Arter, J. (1999). Teaching about performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(2), 30-43.
Arter, J., & McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring rubrics in the classroom: Using performance criteria for assessing and improving student performance. Experts in Assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Baxter, G. P., Shavelson, R. J., Goldman, S. R., & Pine, J. (1992). Evaluation of procedure-based scoring for hands-on science assessment. Journal of Educational Measuremant, 29(1), 1-17.
Bond L. (1995). Unintended consequences of performance assessment: Issues of bias and fairness. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 14(4), 21-24.
Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1993). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking learning and creativity(2th ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman.
Brennan, R. L. (1992). Elements of generalizability theory (Rev. ed. ). Iowa City, IA: American College Testing.
Brennan, R. L., & Johnson, E. G. (1995). Generalizability of performance assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 14(4), 9-12,27.
Brennan, R. L. (2001). Generalizability theory. New York: Springer.
Brown, W. L. (1996). The reliability and validity of mathematics performance assessment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 400 292)
Brualdi, A. (1999). Traditional and modern concepts of validity. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 380 496)
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 36, 1067-1077.
Collison, J. (1992). Using performance assessment to determine mathematical dispositions. Arithmatic Teacher, 39(6), 40-47.
Crehan, K. (1991). Performance assessment: Comparative advantages. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Arizona Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 338710)
Dunbar, S. B., Koretz, D. M., & Hoover, H. D. (1991). Quality control in development and use of performance assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 4(4), 289-303.
Fredericksen, J. R., Collins, A.(1989). A system approach to educational testing. Educational Researcher, 189, 27-32.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Karns, K., Hamlett, C. L., & Katzaroff M. (1999). Mathematics performance assessment in the classroom: Effects on teacher planning and student problem solving. American Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 609-646.
Gronlund, N.E. (1993). How to make achievement tests and assessments (5rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gulliksen, H. (1987). Theory of mental test. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (Originally published in 1950 by New York: John Wiley & Sons)
Hambleton, R. K., (2000). Advances in performance assessment methodology. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(4), 291-293.
Herman, J. L., & Klein, D. C. D. (1997). American students’ perspectives on alternative assessment: Do they know it’s different? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(3), 339-352.
Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winter, L. (1992). A practice guide to alternative assessment. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp.129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Jiang, Y. H. (1997). Error sources influencing performance assessment reliability or generalizability: A meta analysis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 409 342)
Kane, M., Crooks, T., & Cohen, A. (1999). Validating measures of performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(2), 5-17.
Krulik, S., & Rudnick, J. A.（1989）. Problem solving: A handbook for senior high school teachers. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Lehman, M. F. (1995). Assessing mathematics performance assessment: A continuing process. NCRTL Craft Paper 95-7. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 392 773)
Linn, R. L. (1993). Educational assessment: Expanded expectations and challenges. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(1), 1-16.
Linn, R. L. (1994). Performance assessment: Policy promises and technical
measurement standards. Educational Researcher, 23(9), 4-14.
Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (1995). Measurement and Assessment in Teaching (7th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Dunbar, S. B.（1991）. Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria. Educational Research, 20(8), 15-21.
Maarten, W. S., Yvonne, F. B., & Jacobijn, A. C. S.(1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modelling cognitive processes. London: Academic Press.
Madden, N. A., Slavin, R. E., & Simons, K. (1999). Math Wings: Effects on student mathematics performance. Report No. 39. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 431 631)
Mayer, R. E. (1997). 教育心理學－認知取向（林清山譯）。台北：遠流出版社。（原著出版於1987年）。
Mayer, R. E. (1992). Thinking , problem solving, cognition(2nd ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Messick, S. (1980). Test validity and the ethics of assessment. American Psychologist, 35, 1012-1027.
Messick, S. (1988). The once and future issues of validity: Assessing the meaning and consequences of measurement. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp.19-32). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement, 13 —104. New York: Macmillan.
Messick, S. (1992). Validity of test interpretation and use. In M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research (6th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 1487-1495). New York: Macmillan.
Messick, S. (1994a). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. (ETS RR-94-45). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 380 496)
Messick, S. (1994b). Alternative modes of assessment, uniform standards of validity. Paper presented at a Conference on Evaluating Alternatives to Traditional Testing for Selection. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 380 504)
Messick, S. (1994c). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13-23.
Messick, S. (1995). Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 14(4), 5-8.
Messick, S. (1996). Validity of performance assessments. In G. W. Phillips (Ed.), Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment, 1-18. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 399 300)
Miller, M. D. & Linn, R. L. (2000). Validity of performance-based assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(4), 367-378.
Moss, P. A. (1992). Shifting conceptions of validity in educational measurement: implications for performance assessment. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 229-258.
Moss, P. A. (1994). Can there be validity without reliability? Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics（NCTM） (1989). Curriculum and
evaluation standards for school mathematics. Retrieved June 17, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://standards.nctm.org.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Retrieved June 17, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://standards.nctm.org.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Retrieved June 17, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://standards.nctm.org.
National Council of Teacher of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Retrieved June 17, 2002, from the World Wide Web: http://standards.nctm.org.
Popham, W. J.(1993). Consequential validity: Right concern-wrong concept. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16(4), 9-13.
Phillips, G. W. (1996). Foreword. In G. W. Phillips (Ed.), Technical issues in large-scale performance assessment. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 399 300)
Poya, J. (1980). 怎樣解題（張憶壽譯）。台北：長僑出版社。（原著出版於1957年）。
Roeber E. D. (1990). Performance assessment: A national perspective. Policy Briefs Numbers 10 & 11. Special Double Issue. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 370 980)
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.
Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Gao, X. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30(3), 215-232.
Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Pine, J.（1992）. Performance assessment: Political rhetoric and measurement reality. Educational Researcher, 21(4), 22-27.
Shavelson, R. J., & Webb, N. W. (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Shepard, L. A. (1993). Evaluating test validity. Review of Research in Education, 19, 405-450.
Shepard, L. A., Flexer, R. J., Hiebert, E. H., Marion, S. F., Mayfield, V., & Weston, T. J. (1996). Effects of introducing classroom performance assessments on student learning. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 15(3), 7-18.
Shepard, L. A. (1997). The centrality of test use and consequences for test validity. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16(4), 5-8.
Stevens, J. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social science. Hillsdale, N. J. : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stiggins, R. J. (1995). Sound performance assessments in the guidance context. ERIC Digest. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 388 889)
Telese, J. A. (1993). Effects of alternative assessment from the student’s view. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 361 378)
Telese, J. A., & Kulm, G. (1995). Performance-based assessment of at-risk students in mathematics: The effects of context and setting. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 382 685)
Yalow, E. S., & Popham, W. J. (1983). Content validity as the crossroads. Educational Researcher, 12, 10-15.