(3.230.154.160) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/08 00:08
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:陳梅琼
研究生(外文):Chen, Mei-chiung
論文名稱:國中英語學力指標之測試分析
論文名稱(外文):Test Analysis of English Learning Ability Indicators for Junior High School
指導教授:朱蘊鑛 博士鄭鼎耀 博士
指導教授(外文):Dr. Chu, Yunn-kuangDr. Cheng, Ting-yao
口試委員:林怡弟林哲彥穆馬速
口試委員(外文):Lin, Yi-tiLin, Jer-yanMassoud Moslehpour
口試日期:2013-01-11
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:亞洲大學
系所名稱:外國語文學系碩士班
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2013
畢業學年度:101
語文別:英文
論文頁數:176
中文關鍵詞:學力指標題庫效度難度鑑別力信度
外文關鍵詞:Competency indicatorTest libraryValidityDifficultyDiscriminationReliability
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:210
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
摘 要

本研究針對「台中市某國中一年級英語學習成效三次段考評量試題」作試題分析,主要是在建立符合我國教育現況之國中英語學力指標,並蒐集符合學力指標的試題然後作試題分析,最後希望能提供受測學校英語授課教學策略之建議及研發一套可以鑑定國中英語學力指標的題庫。
在本文裡所制定的學力指標共有六大項目,分別是:1) 學生具有基本的英語聽力能力。2)學生能熟記各個單字及其字義。3) 學生能熟記各種句型及其用法。4) 學生具備基本的會話能力。5) 學生具備基本的英語學習精通程度。6) 學生具備基本的閱讀能力,而根據蒐集到的三次段考試題,經編列雙向細目表後,再將施測後的結果進行統計分析,就試題的效度、難度、鑑別力、信度作探討,最後將具有指標性的試題彙整成國中英語之題庫。

本研究作成以下結論:
1.三份試題在量的分析方面有良好的統計特性,包括難易度、鑑別度、猜測度、正答力和誘答力等。由試題的統計分析的結果,可得出三次段考都能符合預計的目標,試題的平均難度為0.6763,平均鑑別度更高達0.4601。
2.本研究試題的另一個統計特性為三份試題的平均信度達0.9143,亦具有良好專家效度。
3.三次段考試題中有很多的題目其鑑別力達0.6以上,數據顯示國一學生英語程度有很明顯的M型現象外,更可以認真探討其他的形成因素。
4.本研究以雙向細目表及(測驗分析)學力指標來進行量的分析,發現所有題目涵蓋大部分的教學目標與教材內容。建立「國中英語科試題雙向細目表」,具體規畫學力指標和試題分配比例,有助國中英語建立標準化的組題架構。
最後基於上述結論,本研究針對教育工作者、測驗編製者及未來從事相關研究者,提出相關建議以供後續研究者參考。


關鍵詞:學力指標、題庫、效度、難度、鑑別力、信度。

This study analyzed the testing items based on the “Three Sectional Exams of English for Students in a Junior High School in Taichung” in order to establish the junior high school English competency indicators that meet the educational conditions in Taiwan. Moreover, the testing items that meet the competency indicators for analysis were developed. Finally, suggestions were provided to English teaching, and a test library that can assess the junior high school English competency indicators was developed.
The proposed competency indicators include: 1) students have basic English listening capability; 2) students can memorize the words and their meanings; 3) students can memorize various sentence patterns and usage; 4) students have basic speaking capabilities; 5) students have basic English learning proficiency; 6) students have basic reading capability. According to the collected testing items of the three sectional exams and the preparation of the two-way specification table, this study conducted statistical analysis of the test results and discusses the testing items in terms of validity, difficulty, discrimination and reliability before summarizing the testing items with the most indicativeness into a junior high school English test library.

The conclusions of this study are as follows:
1. The three exams have good statistical characteristics in quantitative analysis including difficulty, discrimination, predictability, positive answer and distraction. According to the statistical analysis results of the testing items, all three sectional exams meet the expected objectives, as the average difficulty is 0.6763, and the average discrimination is 0.4601.
2. Another statistical characteristic of the testing items is that the average reliability is up to 0.9143, indicating a very good expert validity.
3. Many testing items in the three sectional exams have discrimination up to 0.6 and above, suggesting the apparent M-shaped distribution of junior high school students in English proficiency. Other causes need to be further explored in a serious manner.
4. This study used a two-way specification table and (test analysis) competency indicators for quantitative analysis, and found that the testing items cover most of the teaching objectives and materials. The establishment of the “Junior High School English Test Two-way Specification Table” and the specific planning of the competency indicators and testing item distribution ratios can help junior high schools to establish the standardized structure of the test.

Finally, based on the above conclusions, suggestions were offered to educators, test compilers, and future researchers.


Keywords: Competency indicator, Test library, Validity, Difficulty, Discrimination, Reliability


Table of Contents

Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………..I
List of Table …………………………………………………………………………III
List of Figures. …………………………………………………………………....V

Chapter One Introduction…………………………………………………………. 1
Background and Motivation……………………………………………………….1
Research Purposes, Significance and Hypotheses……………………… 5
Definition of Terms…………………………………………………………….….7

Chapter Two Literature Review……………………………………………..…….13
Test Analysis Theoretical Basis……………………………………………...13
Analysis of Single-Choice Items………………………………………….. .19
English Teaching and Assessment in Taiwan…………………………..….30
Item Analysis………………………………………………………..……………. .34
Test Analysis…………………………………………………………………..…...41

Chapter Three Research method and Design………………………………..….54
Research Procedures…………………………………………………………..…...55
Research Subjects…………………………………………………………………...58
Research Tools……..………………………………………………………………..59
Item Analysis Method……………………………………………..………………..67

Chapter Four Results and Discussion…………………………………………….73
Validity analysis…………………………………………………………………….73
Difficulty and discrimination level analysis………………………… .73
Item Selection Analysis…………………………………………………………..83
Reliability Analysis…………………………………………………….……….116
Test library analysis…………………………………………………………….117

Chapter Five Conclusions and Suggestions…………………………………..126
Research Conclusions…………………………………………………….……...126
Suggestions……………………………………………………………………......129

References………………………………………………………………………….......135
Appendices……………………………………………………………………….........141














References
Barker, J. L. (2007). On the mortality of language learning methods. Speech Nov. 8
2001, Retrieved May 31, 2007, from http://www.didascalia be/ mortality.htm
Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The
Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.
Bloom B. S. (1989). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain. New
York: David Mckay Co. Inc.
Carmines, E. G. & Zeller,R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Chase, C. I. (1978). Measurement for educational evaluation (2nd ed. ). Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Chang, C. H., Lin, C. S. (1985).Educational Psychology. Taipei: Dong Hua.
Chang, S. J. (2005). I say A, you say Apple. Taipei: Gobooks Press.
Chen, F. S. (1994). The Application of Bloom’s Cognitive Teaching Objectives in
the Teaching of History. Humanities and Social Sciences Teaching Newsletter,
5 (2), 74-117.
Cheng, Ting-Yao. (2009). A Multimedia Online English Test Developed for
Elementary School Students in Taiwan. Doctor Dissertation, Graduate Institute
of Elementary and Secondary Educational, National Chiayi University.
Chen, S. C. (2007). Linguist vitality in Taiwan. In Cheng, Chin-Chun, et al (Eds),
Multilingualism and Language Policy. Taipei: Academia Sinica, pp.19-39.
Chen, T. D.(2004).A Study of Competency Indicators of Probability Theory.
Chen, W. H.(2003). A Compilation of the 9-year Social Science Basic Competency
Test –a case of senior students in primary schools. Master’s thesis,
Graduate Institute of Educational Measurement and Statistics, National
Taichung University of Education.
Chen, Y. H., Wu, Y. Y. (1994). Testing and Evaluation. Kaohsiung: Fu Wen Books.
Chen, Y. H., Wu, Y. Y. (1997). Testing and Evaluation. Kaohsiung: Fu Wen Books.
Chou, H. Y. (trans) (2003). Testing and Evaluation: Didactical Applications.
Taipei: Hong Yeh Culture.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.
Psychomertrika, 16,297-334
Cronbach, L. J. (1990). Essentials of psychological testing (5th ed. ). New York:
Harper & Row.
De Carlo, J. E. (1995). Perspectives in whole language. US: Allyn & Bacon.
Dechant, E. (1993). Whole-language reading: A comprehensive teaching guide. US:
Technomic.
Ebel, R. L. & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). Essentials of educational measurement (5thed.)
Ennlewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-hall.
Edelsky, C. (1992). Language arts topics and educational issues: Information
sheets. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 359-486)
Gronlund, N. E. (1993). How to make achievement tests and assessments
(5thed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods .New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gullikson, H. (1987). Theory of mental tests. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates. (Originally published in 1950 by New York: John Wiley
&Sons)
Guo, S. Y. (1990). Psychology and Research Methods in Education. Taipei City: Jing
Hua Books.
Guo, S. Y. (1990). Psychology and Educational Testing. TaipeiCity: Jing Hua Books.
Guo, S. Y. (2001). Psychology and Educational Testing. Jing Hua Books.
Guttman, L. (1944). A basis for scaling qualitative data. American Sociological
Review, 9, 139-150.
Haladyan, T. M. (1999). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items 2nd
ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item
response theory. Newburry Park, CA: SAGE.
Hopkins, K. D. Stanley, J. C. & Hopkins, B. K. (1990).Educational and
psychological measurement and evaluation (7th ed. ).Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Hresko, W.; Herron, S and Peak, P. (2006). Tewl-2: Test of early written language.
Retrieved March 25, 2006, from
http://ags.Pearsonassessments.com/group.Asp?nGrouplnfoID=a19195
Hsieh, W. C. (2002). A Discussion of American Educational Reform trends and
Domestic Educational Reform Status. Journal of Educational Research, 97,
5-12.
Hsu, C. L. (2005). Descriptive Statistical Analysis of the Competency Indicator
Test.
Hsu, T. W., Liu, H.C., Shih, S. J., Shih, C. L.(2000). A Report on the Compilation
of the Establishment of the Learning Progress Indicator Test Library of
Mathematics for Primary Schools. Journal of Research on Measurement and
Statistics, Volume 8, pp. 37-70.
Kelly, T.L. (1939). Journal of Educational Psychology. The Selection of Upper and
Lower Groups for the Validation of Test Items.30,17-2-4.
Language Training and Testing Center. (2007). 2007 Year Report. Retrieved April
20, 2007, from http:// www. lttc.ntu.edu.tw/annualreport.htm.
Lin, B. J. (1988). How to Detect Testing Item Deviation. National Education
Research Bimonthly, Issue 3, pp. 37-39.
Liu, H. C., Hsu, T. W., Hu, F. R., Guo, B. C. (1993). The Method to Establish a
Mathematics Test Library –a case study of the vocational high school
curriculum. Test Statistics Brief, Issue 54, pp.8-37.
Lord, F. M. & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ministry of Education. (2003).Teaching and Learning Field of the 9-year System
Curriculum Guidelines. Taipei, National High School Student Basic
Competency Test Promotional Working Committee, Ministry of Education,
website:www.bctest.ntnu.edu.tw
Newman, J. M. (1985). Whole language: Theory in use. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Noll, V. H., Scannell, D. P. & Craig, R. C. (1979). Introduction to educational
measurement (4thed). Boston, MA: Coefficient alpha and the reliability of
composite measurements. Psychometrika, 32, 1-13.
Richardson, M. W. (1936). The relationship between difficulty and the differential
validity of a test. Psychometrika, 1, 33-49.
Robertson, C. & Salter, W. (2006). The phonological awareness test. Retrieved
January 10, 2006, from http://www.linguisystems. com/sample1/6-0191-7. pdf
Rost, M. (2005). L2 Listening. Handbook of research in second language teaching
and learning. NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Sun, R. H. (April 22nd, 2005). 10-year Great Plan- sampling more than 10 thousand
students for learning evaluation. United Daily News, Edition 8.
Terman, L. M. (1916). The measurement of intelligence. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin.
Thurstone, L. L. (1929). Theory of attitude measurement. Psychological
Bulletin, 36, 222-241.
Tucker, L. R. (1946). Maximum validity of a test with equivalent items.
Tung, H. C. (2006). Historical developments of the English tests used in joint
college entrance examination in the past fifty years. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Kaohsiung Normal University.
Nited Daily News. (2005). GEPT Banned by Ministry of Education. p3.Taipei
Psychometrika, 11, 1-13.
Wang, W. C., Lu, J. B. et al. (1999).Educational Examinations and Evaluation.
Taipei: Wu Nan Books.
Wastson, D. J. (1989). Defining and describing whole language. The Elementary
School Journal, 90(2), 129-142.
Weaver, C. (1990). Understanding whole language: from principles to practice.
Portsouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wu, Y. Y. (1988). A Comparative Study of Nine Score-Setting Methods. Journal of
Primary Education, Issue 1, 47-120.
Yu, M. N. (1992a). Introduction to Item Response Theory (1)the Developmental
Trends of Testing Theories. Research and Study Information, 8(6), 13-18.
Yu, M. N. (1992b). Introduction to Item Response Theory (2 )Basic Concepts and
Assumptions. Research and Study Information, 9(1), 5-9.
Yu, M. N. (1992c). Introduction to Item Response Theory (5) Model and Data
Fitness Testing. Research and Study Information, 9(4), 6-10.
Yu, M. N. (1994). Introduction to Item Response Theory (11) Establishment of a
Test Library. Research and Study Information, 10(4), 9-13.
Yu, M. N. (1995). Educational Testing and Evaluation –Achievement Tests and
Teaching Evaluation. Taipei: Hsin Li Publishing.
Yu, M. N. (1997). Educational Testing and Evaluation. TaipeiCity: Hsin Li
Publishing.
Yu, M. N. (2002). Educational Testing and Evaluation –Achievement Tests and
Teaching Evaluation. Taipei: Hsin Li Publishing.
Zheng, L. Y. (2007). Cognitive psychology. Taipei: Wu Nan.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔