臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

摘 要
本研究目的係探討電腦化動態評量對增進國小三年級學習障礙學生整數四則問題解題之可行性，以及學生在電腦化動態評量的解題表現情形。
本研究以南投縣國小三年級資源班中學習障礙學生48位為研究對象，先施予「整數四則問題解題測驗」複本甲測驗，再配對分組後隨機分派為實驗組(一)、實驗組(二)、控制組，進行準實驗前後測設計，實驗組(一)學生接受「電腦化動態評量數學解題系統」介入處理、實驗組(二)學生接受「人工化動態評量數學解題系統」介入處理、控制組則不接受任何介入處理，實驗後三組均施予「整數四則問題解題測驗」複本乙後測，資料分析採用t檢定、單因子變異數及描述統計方法。其研究結論如下：
一、電腦化動態評量數學解題系統可以提昇國小學習障礙學生整數四則問題解題能力。
二、電腦化動態評量與人工化動態評量對國小學習障礙學生，在整數四則問題解題表現上，沒有顯著差異，惟有電腦化動態評量較人工化動態評量在作答反應時間方面顯著減少。
三、國小學習障礙學生在電腦化動態評量解題正確反應表現方面，以關鍵字、簡化問題、列出直式運算步驟等協助效果較佳。在解題提示量方面，以語音提示、關鍵字提示為多。在整數四則問題解題錯誤題型方面，以兩步驟題文字題、多餘訊息文字題、除法的預備經驗等題目比例較高。在解題潛能發展區方面，每位受試都不相同，平均大約可以提昇原來能力的34%解題潛能。
研究者並根據上述研究結果，對特殊兒童數學教學與未來研究方向提出若干建議。
關鍵字：電腦化動態評量、學習障礙、整數四則

Effect of Computerized Dynamic Evaluation on Learning of the Four Integer Arithmetic Operations by Learning-Disabilities Third Grade Elementary School Students
Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to find out the possibility of computerized dynamic evaluation, which designed to improve the third grade elementary learning-retarded students in the four basic operations of integer arithmetic, and their performance tested by the computerized dynamic evaluation.
The 48 LD research subjects are come from the third grade resource classes of Nantou county elementary schools. Firstly, they are tested by the duplicate A of 「problem solving test for the four basic operations of integer arithmetic」, and then randomized into experiment group （Ⅰ）, experiment（Ⅱ）, and control group. It is a quasi-experiment design, the experiment group（Ⅰ）is treated with the computerized dynamic evaluation of the mathematic problem-solving system, the experiment group（Ⅱ）is treated with the artificial dynamic evaluation of the mathematic problem-solving system, while the control group did not receive any intervention. After the experiment, all the three groups are to be implemented with the post-duplicate B of 「problem solving test for the four basic operations of integer arithmetic」. finally, the information is analyzed by the T-test, one-way ANOVA and the descriptive statistic research. The consequences of the study are as following:
1. The computerized dynamic evaluation of the mathematic problem-solving system is sure to enhance the ability of learning-retarded students in the four basic operations of integer arithmetic.
2. There is no significant difference between the computerized dynamic evaluation and the artificial dynamic evaluation in the performance in the four basic operations of integer arithmetic, but computerized dynamic evaluation takes significantly less answering time than artificial dynamic evaluation.
3. In the correct reacting performances of the computerized dynamic evaluation, the elementary LD students have better performance in the key-word、simplified questions and listing the straight form steps. Oral hints and keyword hints were most common kinds of problem-solving hints. Two-step word problems, extra information word problems, and division preparation experience were the problem types that most commonly led to errors. With regard to problem solving potential development zone, while the testes all displayed different zones, their problem solving potential was an average of 34% above their original problem solving ability.
According to the results of the study, the researcher offers some suggestions for the special children teaching and the future study orientation.
Keywords: computerized dynamic evaluation、learning-disabilities、
the four basic of integer

目 錄
第一章 緒論……………………………………………………………………………… 1
第一節 研究動機與目的…………………………………………………………… 1
第二節 研究問題與假設…………………………………………………………… 4
第三節 名詞界定…………………………………………………………………… 6
第四節 研究範圍與限制…………………………………………………………… 7
第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………………………………… 9
第一節 學習障礙學生之數學問題相關研究……………………………………… 9
第二節 數學解題策略……………………………………………………………… 13
第三節 動態評量在學習障礙兒童之研究………………………………………… 23
第四節 電腦在教育測驗上的應用………………………………………………… 31
第三章 研究方法………………………………………………………………………… 38
第一節 研究樣本…………………………………………………………………… 38
第二節 研究設計…………………………………………………………………… 39
第三節 研究工具…………………………………………………………………… 42
第四節 研究程序…………………………………………………………………… 51
第五節 資料處理方法……………………………………………………………… 54
第四章 研究結果與討論………………………………………………………………… 55
第一節 研究結果…………………………………………………………………… 55
第二節 討論………………………………………………………………………… 70
第五章 結論與建議……………………………………………………………………… 73
第一節 主要發現與結論…………………………………………………………… 73
第二節 建議………………………………………………………………………… 76
參考文獻
一、 中文部分………………………………………………………………………… 79
二、 英文部分………………………………………………………………………… 82
附錄
附錄一 整數四則問題解題測驗(複本甲)……………………………………………89
附錄二 整數四則問題解題測驗(複本乙)……………………………………………91
附錄三 動態評量提示系統說明…………………………………………………… 93
附錄四 「電腦化動態評量數學解題系統」程式設計之畫面…………………… 95
附錄五 動態評量數學解題之紀錄紙………………………………………………101
圖 次
圖2-1 數學問題的解題歷程……………………………………………………… 16
圖2-2 電腦化測驗的層次圖……………………………………………………… 33
圖3-1 電腦化動態評量系統之軟體架構圖……………………………………… 45
圖3-2 電腦化動態評量軟體開發流程…………………………………………… 49
圖3-3 動態評量的介入提示與計分流程圖……………………………………… 50
圖3-4 研究實施程序……………………………………………………………… 53
圖4-1 電腦化動態評量提示量比較圖…………………………………………… 65
圖4-2 在無提示下解題正確百分比比較圖……………………………………… 66
圖4-3 三年級數學解題電腦化動態評量結果百分比…………………………… 66
圖4-4 整數四則問題解題錯誤題型百分比比較圖……………………………… 67
圖4-5 整數四則問題解題之潛能發展區………………………………………… 69
表 次
表3-1 研究樣本之來源資料分析………………………………………………… 38
表3-2 研究對象「整數四則問題解題測驗」分數差異顯著性考驗摘要表……… 39
表3-3 實驗設計………………………………………………………………………40
表3-4 測驗內容分析…………………………………………………………………43
表3-5 實驗進度表……………………………………………………………………52
表4-1 不同組別的學生在「整數四則問題解題測驗」(複本乙)表現之單因子
變異數分析摘要表………………………………………………………… 56
表4-2 不同組別的學生在「整數四則問題解題測驗」(複本乙)表現之事後比較
摘要表……………………………………………………………………… 57
表 4-3 電腦化動態評量組前後測「整數四則問題解題測驗」表現之平均數、
標準差及T檢定…………………………………………………………… 57
表 4-4 人工化動態評量組前後測「整數四則問題解題測驗」表現之平均數、
標準差及T檢定…………………………………………………………… 58
表 4-5 控制組前後測「整數四則問題解題測驗」表現之平均數、標準差及T檢定 58
表 4-6 不同組別的學習障礙學生在動態評量提示系統中整體解題表現之 T檢定 60
表 4-7 不同組別的學習障礙學生在「整數四則問題解題測驗」(複本乙)整體得分
之 T檢定………………………………………………………………………60
表 4-8 不同組別的學習障礙學生在「動態評量提示系統」中單步驟題解題表現
之 T檢定………………………………………………………………………61
表 4-9 不同組別的學習障礙學生在「整數四則問題解題測驗」(複本乙)單步驟題
得分之 T檢定…………………………………………………………………61
表 4-10 不同組別的學習障礙學生在「動態評量提示系統」中多步驟題解題表現
之 T檢定…………………………………………………………………… 62
表 4-11 不同組別的學習障礙學生在「整數四則問題解題測驗」(複本乙)多步驟題
得分之 T檢定…………………………………………………………………62
表 4-12 不同組別的學習障礙學生在「動態評量提示系統」中解題作答反應時間
之 T檢定………………………………………………………………………63
表 4-13 三年級學障生數學解題電腦化動態評量結果表……………………………64
表 4-14 三年級學障生數學解題錯誤題型……………………………………………68

參考文獻
一、中文部分
王文科(民88)。教育研究法(增訂新版)。台北：五南。
王瑋樺(民90)。國小三年級數學學習障礙學生加法文字題解題歷程與補救教學之研究。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
朱經明(民89)。國小數學障礙兒童在動態評量中學習潛能與錯誤類型之分析。行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究Nsc88-2614-s-142-003。
何榮桂(民86)。從「測驗電腦化與電腦化測驗」再看網路化測驗。測驗與輔導，144，2972-2974。
何榮桂(民87.10.19)。談電腦化測驗。中央日報，12版。
吳國銘(民83)。國小學童在動態評量中數學學習歷程與遷移效益之探討。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
吳裕益(民84)。電腦在測驗上的應用。教育實習輔導季刊，5，10-13。
吳德邦、吳順治(民80)編譯。解題導向的數學教學策略。台北：五南。
呂玉琴(民77)譯，Carpenter,J.P.(1985)著：加減法文字題的解題層次及其數學的表徵。國民教育，29（1、2)，53-63。
林秀娟(民82)。動態評量結合試題反應理論在空間視覺學習潛能評量之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
林素微(民85)。國小六年級學童數學解題彈性思考動態評量測量之研究。台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
林清山(民79)。教育心理學：認知取向。台北市：遠流。
林漢杰(民85)。電腦焦慮與自我覺察對電腦化測驗的影響之探討。高雄醫學院行為科學研究所碩士論文。
施淑娟(民88)。數學解題的學習與教學。學生輔導，62，50-62。
胡永崇(民84)。教育評量的意義與重要性質。國教天地，109，5-16。
孫扶志(民85)。認知策略教學對國小數學低成就學童文字題解題能力之實驗研究。台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
秦麗花(民83)。國小數學學習障礙兒童數學解題補救教學實施成效之比較研究。國民教育研究集刊，1，225-265。
秦麗花(民88)。學障兒童適用性教材之設計。台北：心理出版社。
張淑怡(民84)。加減問題之解題活動類型：一個國小低年級兒童的個案研究。國立高雄師範大學數學教育研究所碩士論文。
教育部(民87)。身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定原則鑑定基準。
教育部(民88)。特殊教育統計年報。台北：教育部。
教育部教育研究委員會(民85)。身心障礙學生鑑定及就學輔導工作手冊。台北：教育部教育研究委員會。
許家吉(民84)。電腦化動態圖形歸類測驗發展之研究。國立台南師院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
陳志信(民82)。電腦化測驗的優點及可能的問題。學生輔導通訊，24，72-75。
陳易芬(民82)。教育測量電腦化。測驗與輔導，116，2371-2374。
陳東陞(民82)。數學科學習困難學生補救教學的實施(下)。研習資訊，10（6），42-44。
陳家弘(民87)。建構教學對國小四年級數學學習障礙學生解四則運算問題之研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
陳麗玲(民82)。國小數學學習障礙學生計算錯誤類型分析之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育系碩士論文。
黃桂君(民86)。動態評量的模式特質與難題省思。載於中華民國特殊教育學會主編「身心障礙教育的革新與展望─開發潛能再創新機」，221-237。
楊瑞智(民83)。國小五、六年級不同能力學童數學解題的思考過程。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
溫玲玉、洪銘建(民85)。電腦在測驗與評量上的應用。商業職業教育，66，38-42。
劉亞平(民87)。教育改革的關心程度問卷與線上測驗之研究。國立台南師範學院資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
歐滄和(民85)。微電腦在現代測驗上的應用。測驗統計簡訊，9，1-13。
二、英文部分
American Psychiatric Association(1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders(4th ed). Washington DC: Author.
Babbit, B. C.(1990). Error patterns in problem solving. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Council for Learning Disabilities(12th,Austin,TX,October,1990).
Babbit, B. C. & Miller, S. P. (1993). Using hypermedia to improve the mathematics problem-solving skills for students with learning disabilities. Joural of Learning Disabilities, 29(4), 391-402.
Barkley, R.A. (1998) Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity A Handbook for Diagnosis and Treatment(2nd ed.). N.Y: The Guilford Press.
Bender, W. N. (1992). Learning disabilities: Characteristics, identivication, and teaching strategies(2nd ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Bryant,D.P.& Bryant,B.R.& Hammill,D.D.(2000). Characteristics behavior of students with LD who have teacher-identified math weaknesses. Journal of Learning Disabilities,33(2),168-177.
Bunderson,C.V.,Inouye,D.I.,& Olsen,J.B.(1989). The four generations of computerized educational measurement. In R.L. Linn(Ed.). Educational measurement (3rd ed.,pp.367-407). New York: American council on Education.
Campione J. C. & Brown, A. L. (1987). Linking dynamic assessment with school achievement. In C. S. Lidz (Ed.), Dynamic assessment: An instructional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp.82-115). New York: The Guilford Press.
Cawley, J. F., Parmar, R. S., Yan, W. F., & Miller, J. H. (1996). Arithmetic computation abilities of students with learning disabilities: implication for instruction. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 11(4), 230-237.
Davidson,M.S.(1984). Computer assisted instruction in arithmetic for specific learning disabilities students in the elementary school. DAI-A,46,3A,674.
Day,J.D., & Hall,L.K.(1988). Intelligenced-related differences in learning and transfer and enhancement of transfer among mentally retarded persons. American Journal on Mental Retardation,93(2), 125-137.
Enright,B.,& Beattle,J.(1989). Problem solving step by step in math. Teaching Exception Children,22,1-5.
Ferriaris, M.(1991). An approach to the use of computer in instructional testing. In L.Dann. S.H. Irvine, & J.M. Collis (Eds.), Advances in computer-based human assessment (pp.219-236).Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fleischer, J. E. (1994). Diagnosis and assessment of mathematics learning disabilities. In G. R. Lyon (Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities (pp. 441-458). Baltimore: Brookes.
Fleischner, J.E, & Marzola, E.S (1988). Arighmetic In K.A. Kauale, S.R. Forness, & M.B. Bender (Eds.), Handbook of learnning disabilities
(Vol.II): Methods and interventions,(pp89-110). Boston,MA: college
-Hill Publication.
Gallomore,R.& Tharp,R.(1990). Teaching mind in society: Teaching, schooling, and literate discourse. In L.C.Moll(Ed.).Vygosky and Education.(pp.175-205). Cambridge University Press.
Gerber, M. M., Semmel, D.S., & Semmel, M. L.(1994). Computer-based dynamic assessment of multidigit mulitplication. Exception Children, 61(2), 114-125.
Gross, J. (1993). Special education needs in the primary school: A practical guide. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Haywood,H.C.,Brown,A.L.,& Wingenfeld,S.(1990). Dynamic Approach to Psychoeducational Assessment. School Psychology Review,19(4),
411-422.
Hegarty, M., Maryer, R. E., & Monk, C.A. (1995). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems：A comparison of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(1), 18-32.
Hembree,R.(1992). Experiments and relational studies in problem solving: A mate-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Eduation. Vol.23.No.3 ,242-273.
Howell, S. C. & Barnhart, R. S. (1992). Teaching word problem solving at the primary level. Introduction to learning disabilities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kilpartrick, J. (1985). A restrospective accout of the past 25 years reseach and learning mathematical problem solving. In E. Silver
(Ed.),Teaching and learning Mathematical Problem Solving:Multiple Research Perspectives(pp.1-16).LEA,Hillsdale,New Jersey.
Lick. C. M. & Little. T. H.(1987). Computers and mildly handicapped individuals. In Jimmy Lindsey (Ed.). Computer and exceptional individuals. 2nd ed(pp.179-200).Austin.TX:Pro-ed.
Majsterek, D. J., & Wilson, R. (1989). Computer-assisted instruction for students with learning disabled students. Learning Disabilities Focus, 5, 18-27.
Mann,P.H.,Suiter,P.A.,& McClung,R.M.(1992). A guide for educational mainstreamed students. Boston,MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Marrshall,S.P.,Pribe,C.A.,& Smith,J.D.(1987). Schema knowledge structure for representing and understanding arithmetic story problems. Arilington,VA:Office of Naval Research.
Mayer, R. E. (1993). Understanding individual differences in mathematical problem solving: Towards a research agenda. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 16(winter), 6-18.
Meltzer, L. J. (1993). Strategy use in students with learning disabilities: The challenge of assessment. In L. J. Meltzer(Ed.), Strategy assessment and instruction for student with learning disabilities(pp. 93-140). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.
Mercer, C. D., & Mercer, A. R. (1998). Teaching students with learning problems(5th ed.). New York: Merrl.
Miller, S. P. & Mercer, C. D. (1993). Using date to learn about concrete-semiconcrete-abstract instruction for students with math disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,8(2), 230-237.
Montague, M. (1996). Assessing mathematical problem solving. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 11(4),238-248.
Muth, K.D.(1991). Effects of cuing on middle-school students'' information. Journal of Education Psychology, 83(1),173-174.
Nesher,P.,& Hershkovitz,S.(1994). The role of schemes in two-step problems: Analysis and research findings. Educational Studies in Mathematics,26,1-23.
Okolo. C. M.(1992). Computer and individuals with mild disabilities. In Jimmy P. Lindsey(Ed). Computer and exception individuals.2nd ed(pp.
111-141).Austin.TX:Pro-ed.
Sowder, L. (1998). Children’s solution of story problems. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 7, 227-238.
Straetmaans, G. J. M. & Eggen, T. J. H. M.(1998). Computerized adaptive testing: What it is and how it works. Educational Technology, 38(1), 45-52.
Swanson, H. L.(1996). Classification and dynamic assessment of children with learning disabilities. In E. L.Meyen et al. (Eds.), Strategies for teaching exceptional children in inclusive settings (pp. 191-208). Denver: Love pubishing Company.
Torgensen, J. K. (1984). Instructional uses of microcoputers with elementary aged mildly handicapped children. Special Services in the schools, Fall vol 1(1), 37-38.
Tzuriel, D., & Haywood, H. C. (1992). The development of interactive
-dynamic approaches to assessment of learning potential. In H. C. Haywood, & D. Tzuriel (Eds.), Interactive assessment (pp.3-37). New York：Spring-Verlag.
Vaughn, S. & Wilson, C.(1994). Mathematics assessment for students with learning disabilities. In G. R. Lyon(Ed.), Frames of reference for the assessment of learning disabilities(pp.459-472). Baltimore: Brookes.
Zentall & Ferkis (1993). Mathematical problem solving for youth with ADHD, with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 16(winter), 6-18.