臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在制定、建置高效能之數位學習模式，透過心理學之學習理論（行為主義學習理論、認知主義學習理論和建構主義學習理論），建立一套適合於e化教學之數位學習模式─「診斷導向學習」，並以學習理論觀點切入數位學習議題，從另一種角度(除了時、空)來詮釋數位學習之功能。另外，我們利用數位教材特別製作方法，來驗證目前大量快速產出之數位內容之缺點，並探討數位內容的品質和學習成效及學習理論之關聯。研究中以考試診斷（Q&A）為學習切入點，因為大部份之學生在學習過程中以考試時最為「專注」（和「認知主義學習理論」吻合），並透過「重複」考試達到滿分作為學習之結束點（和「行為主義學習理論」吻合），在考試未達理想時系統將引導學習者進入多媒體之學習情境。
數位教材採具備「診斷性數位學習」、「可重複學習」、「按個人能力學習」、「因人而異之教學」和「同僚互動學習」等特色之創新數位學習平台系統之編寫建置。透過建置許多機制和方法，可以有效診斷每一位學生之程度，再給予適當之補強教學方法，按其學習進度，利用各種學習情境來誘發，提供各種不同種類之學習者作有效之指導，協助學生學習成效，更能完成老師傳統實際作業無法完成之教學程序。因此本研究成果，將可鼓勵並推動各界開發具備診斷導向學習之數位教材，創造「有教無類」和「因人而適教」之學習環境。

The purpose of this research is to establish a diagnosis-oriented e-learning mode based on Psychology’s learning theories, including Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism Learning Theories. In addition, we use special digital teaching materials to show the defects of most rapidly generated digital contents. We also illustrate relations among the quality of digital contents, students’ learning effects, and learning theories. Examination diagnosis is used in the research since examination requires great concentration for students at learning. (This matches up to Cognitivism Learning Theory.) The learning process continues through repetitive tests until a perfect score is achieved for a student. (This matches up to Behaviorism Learning Theory.)
We implement a digital learning platform on which we can develop digital materials with characteristics of diagnosis-oriented e-learning, repeatable learning, individual learning, learning of different levels, and interactive learning with colleagues. Furthermore, we can find every student’s learning level effectively and raise his/her level through many kinds of guidelines Besides that, it can help teachers to finish teaching works which are difficult to do by traditional teaching methods. Hence this research results of the thesis will encourage and push all circles to develop diagnosis-oriented learning materials to create a learning environment for individuals.

第一章　緒論 5
1.1 研究背景 5
1.2 研究動機 7
1.3 研究目的 7
1.4 研究範圍 8
1.5 研究方法 8
1.6 研究流程 8
1.7 章節結構 9

第二章　文獻探討 10
2.1 研究形成的背景資料 10
2.1.1 測驗理論 10
2.1.2 電腦化測驗的發展 23
2.1.3 線上測驗的發展 25
2.2 與研究有關的論文 25

第三章　研究內容 28
3.1 研究方法 28
3.1.1 考試導向學習模式之流程建立 28
3.1.2 研究評估對象 29
3.2 教學系統之建置及考試資料庫之設計 30
3.2.1 學習平台系統之建置概念 31
3.2.2 學習平台系統之編寫建置 32

第四章　實證分析 42
4.1 資料分析 42
4.2 統計分析 43

第五章　結論與建議 42

參考文獻 53

附錄1. 58
表A.1 本研究用班級A 58
表A.2 本研究用班級B 59
附錄2 61
數　位　教　學　平　台 61

[1]Ackerman, T. A. (1989). Unidimensional IRT calibration of compensatory and　noncompensatory multidimensional items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13,　113-127.
[2]Andersen, E. B. (1973). Conditional inference and models for measuring. Copenhagen:Mentalhygiejnisk Forlag.
[3]Andersen, E. B. (1980) Discrete statistical models with social science applications.Amsterdam: North-Holland.
[4]Assessment in a constructivist learning environment. [On-line] http://www.coe.missouri.edu:80tiger.coe.missouri.edu/
[5]Baker, F.B. (1977). Advances in item analysis. Review of Educational Research, 47,151-178.
[6]Baker, F. B. (1985). The basics of item response theory. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
[7]Behaviorism and constructivism. [On-line]. Available: http://hagar.up.ac.za/catts/learner/debbie/Cadvent.htm
[8]Behaviorism. [On-line]. Available: http://sacam.oren.ortn.edu/~ssganapa/disc/behave.html
[9]Beyond constructivism - contextualism. [On-line]. Available: http://tiger.coe.missouri.edu/~t377/cx_intro.html
[10]Black, E. (1995). Behaviorism as a learning theory. [On-line]. Available: http://129.7.160.115/inst5931/Behaviorism.html
[11]Bock, R. D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are　scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37, 29-51.
[12]Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: An application of an EM algorithm. Psychometriks, 46, 443-459.
[13]Bunderson, C.V., Inouye, D.K., and Oslen, J.B.(1988). The four generations of computerized educational measurement. In R. L. Linn(Ed.), Educational measurement. New York:Macmillan.
[14]Burney, J. D. (Undated). Behaviorism and B. F. Skinner. [On-line]. Available: http://www2.una.edu/education/Skinner.htm
[15]Cohen, R. j., Montague, P., Nathanson, L. S., & Swerdlik, M. E. (1988). Psychalogical testing: An introduction to tests and measurement. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
[16]Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
[17]Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
[18]Cynthia Bolt-Lee and Sheila D. Foster, Examination Retakes in Accounting: Increasing Learning by Writing After the Exam., Language and Learning Across the Disciplines.
[19]Conditions of learning (R. Gagne). [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/gagne.html
[20]Constructivist theory (J. Bruner). [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/bruner.html
[21]Curtis J. Bonk, Tatana M. Olson, Robert A. Wisher, and Kara L. Orvis, Learning From Focus Groups: An Examination of Blended Learning. Journal of Distance Education., 2002 VOL. 17, No 3, 97-118
[22]Cunningham, D. J. (1991). Assessing constructions and constructing assessments: A dialogue. Educational Technology, May, 13-17.
[23]Davidson, K. (1998). Education in the internet--linking theory to reality. [On-line]. Available: http://www.oise.on.ca/~kdavidson/cons.html
[24]Dembo, M. H. (1994). Applying educational psychology (5th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group.
[25]Dick, W. (1991). An instructional designer's view of constructivism. Educational Technology, May, 41-44.
[26]Dorin, H., Demmin, P. E., Gabel, D. (1990). Chemistry: The study of matter. (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
[27]Duffy, T. M., Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Constructivism: New implications for instructional technolgy? Educational Technology, May, 7-12.
[28]Embretson, S. E. (Ed.) (1985). Test design: Developments in psychology and psychometrics. Orlando, FL: Academic.
[29]Erik Larsson and Anders Larsson, Student-oriented Examination in a Computer Architecture Course., ITICS’04, June 28-30, 2004, Leeds, United Kingdom.
[30]Ertmer, P. A., Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6 (4), 50-70.
[31]Freedle, R. (Ed.) (1990). Artificial intelligence and the future of testing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[32]Genetic epistemology (J.Piaget). [On-line]. Available: http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/piaget.html
[33]Good, T. L., Brophy, J. E. (1990). Educational psychology: A realistic approach. (4th ed.).White Plains, NY: Longman
[34]Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[35]Guion, R. M., & Ironson, G. H. (1983). Latent trait theory for organizational research. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 31, 54-87.
[36]Gullikson, H. (1987). Theory of mental tests. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (Originally published in 1950 by New York: John Wiley & Sons)
[37]Guttman, L. (1944). A basis for scaling qualitative data. American Sociological Review, 9,139-150.
[38]Hambleton, R. K. (Ed.) (1983). Applications of item response theory. Vancouver, BC: Educational Research Institute of British Columbia.
[39]Hambleton, R. K. (1989). Principles and selected applications of item response theory. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 147-200). New York: Macmillan.
[40]Hambleton, R. K., & Cook, L. L. (1977). Latent trait models and their use in the analysis of educational test data. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14, 75-96.
[41]Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
[42]Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newburry Park, CA: SAGE.
[43]Hulin, C. L., Drasgow, F., & Parsons, C. K. (1983). Item response theory: Application to psychological measurement. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
[44]Information processing theory and instructional technology. [On-line]. Available: http://tiger.coe.missouri.edu/~t377/IPTools.htm
[45]Information process theory of learning. [On-line]. Available: http://tiger.coe.missouri.edu/~t377/IPTheorist.htm
[46]Jonassen, D. H. (1991) Objectivism versus constructivism: do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39 (3), 5-14.
[47]Jonasson, D.H. (Undated). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist design model. [On-line]. Available: http://ouray.cudenver.edu/~slsanfor/cnstdm.txt
[48]Linn, R. L. (Ed.) (1989). Educational measurement (3rd ed.) New York: Macmillan.
[49]Lord, F. M. (1952). A theory of test scores. Psychometric Monograph, No. 7.
[50]Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practional testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbawn Associates.
[51]Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149-174.
[52]Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit model. Psychometrika, 47, 149-174.
[53]McDonald, R. P. (1981). The dimensionality of tests and items. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34, 100-117.
[54]Mislery, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1982). BILOG: Maximum likelihood item analysis and test scoring with logistic models for binary items. Chicago: International Educational Services.
[55]Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: The Danish Institute for Educational Research.
[56]Richardson, M. W. (1936). The relationship between difficulty and the differential validity of a test. Psychometrika, 1, 33-49.
[57]Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometric Monograph, No. 17.
[58]Suen, H. K. (1990). Principles of test theories. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associcites.
[59]Terman, L. M. (1916). The measurement of intelligence. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
[60]Thurstone, L. L. (1929). Theory of attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 36, 222-241.
[61]Tucker, L. R. (1946). Maximum validity of a test with equivalent items. Psychometrika, 11, 1-13.
[62]Wainer, H., & Braun, H. I. (Ed.) (1988). Test validity. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[63]Wainer, H. et al. (1990). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[64]Wainer, H., & Messick, S. (Ed.) (1983). Principals of modern psychological measurement: A Festschrift for Frederic M. Lord. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[65]Weiss, D. J. (Ed.) (1980). Proceedings of the 1979 computerized adaptive testing conference. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
[66]Weiss, D. J. (Ed.) (1983). New horizons in testing: Latent trait test theory and computerized adaptive testing. New York: Academic.
[67]Wright, B. D., & Panchapakesan, N. (1969). A procedure for sample-free item analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29, 23-48.
[68]Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best test design. Chicago: MESA.
[69]Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA Press.
[70]Yu, M. (1991). A two-parameter partial credit model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.