(18.210.12.229) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/03/01 05:16
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:劉孟臻
研究生(外文):LIU, MENG-ZHEN
論文名稱:國中基本學力測驗與教育會考英語科試題趨勢分析與比較:以2012至2015考題為例
論文名稱(外文):Analysis and Comparison of the BCT and CAP English Test Trends from 2012 to 2015
指導教授:鄭鼎耀鄭鼎耀引用關係
指導教授(外文):CHENG, TING-YAO
口試委員:鄭鼎耀林怡弟麥喬伊
口試委員(外文):CHENG, TING-YAOLIN, YI-TIJOEL MCCAY
口試日期:2016-06-22
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:亞洲大學
系所名稱:外國語文學系
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:2016
畢業學年度:104
語文別:英文
論文頁數:58
中文關鍵詞:國中基本學力測驗回沖效應國中教育會考英語測驗選擇題
外文關鍵詞:Basic Competence TestWashback EffectComprehensive Assessment ProgramEnglish testMultiple-choice Questions
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:947
  • 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:45
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
於2013年起國中基本學力測驗走入歷史,2014年起由國中教育會考取而代之,其英語科難度提高、題目更靈活,考驗學生閱讀分析統整的能力。整體而言,題目屬於「中間偏難」。
本研究的目的在於: (1)分析基測與會考英文科選擇題,(2)探討其考試趨勢, (3)探討會考英文科選擇題是否反映國中英文教學課綱之內容。
本研究所選材料為2012年至2013年基測英文科選擇題、2014年至2015年會考英文科選擇題來做比較分析以及國民中學生必修科目「英文」課程綱要。首先,使用Microsoft Excel 軟體分析基測與會考英文科選擇題;其次,使用 Microsoft Excel 軟體分析會考的閱讀測驗各題型所占比例;最後,比較會考英文科題目內容以及國中英文教學課綱,並藉此探討試題內容是否能夠反映課綱上之教學重點。
本研究主要發現為:(1) 以往的基測中,單題的第一題皆為看圖選單字,除了2014年首屆會考無此題型,2015年單題的第一題又回到以前的出題模式,偏簡單的直觀題,靠單字拿分的題目越來越少。 (2) 英文閱讀在會考英文科中扮演重要角色,考驗學生對上下文意的理解力。 (3) 在會考英文科之閱讀測驗題目中,文章敘述較長且句型也較複雜,著重於測驗學生理解推論文章言外之意之能力。(4)會考英文科選擇題試題內容無法反映國中英文教學課綱中的課程目標。
總結以上發現,選擇題似乎並非測驗學生英文程度的唯一選擇。會考英文試
題內容無法適度反映教學課綱之教學目標可能造成負面的回沖效應,對英文教學
造成負面影響,本研究之成果或許能為未來之會考英文試題之設計提供些許參
考。

The Comprehensive Assessment Program (CAP) is an important examination for Taiwanese junior high school students entering senior high school. The following study aims to (a) analyze the multiple- choice questions in each section of the Basic Competence Test (BCT) and the CAP English test, (b) explore the English test trends on CAP, and (c) discuss whether the English evaluations of the BCT reflect the content of the official junior high school syllabus for English teaching. Selected materials for data analysis are the multiple-choice questions of the English tests, collected the 2012-2013 BCT and, the 2014-2015 CAP, and the official junior high school English teaching syllabus.
First, in order to examine the content and skill focuses of each test, the data from the 2012-2013 BCT and 2014-2015 CAP are analyzed by Microsoft Excel. The data is then used to look at the different purposes of each section and the percentage of each tests’ focus on these different skills. Finally, the official junior high school syllabus of English teaching is compared with the CAP to see whether the content of these tests reflects the stated purposes of the syllabus.
The major findings indicate that (a) in the previous BCTs, the first question of the test required students to view the figure or sentence and choose the correct vocabulary word to fill the blank. The first CAP examinations in 2014 did not contain these questions, but in 2015, it returned to the single question format for the topic and previous model. By returning to the simple and, intuitive format of selecting a vocabulary word, the test reflects that the isolated knowledge of vocabulary no longer plays the most important role in the English tests of the CAP, (b) instead, reading skills take the predominant role, by testing students’ ability to decipher and understand meaning in context. (c) The CAP employs reading passages containing long and complex sentences that focus on testing students' abilities to understand the article’s overall implications. (d) By focusing strictly on the length of readings that students are able to process, rather than strengthening integrated reading comprehension, the English tests of the CAP may fail to reflect the content of the official junior high school syllabus of English teaching.
Based on these findings, it is clear that the multiple-choice question format is neither the only nor the best way to evaluate learners’ English abilities. Furthermore, the washback effects of the CAP or the impact that test structure has on the teaching style and aims in future classes, may be negative due to the failure of these tests to adequately reflect the content of the official junior high school syllabus of English teaching. These items hold important implications for the design of the English tests of the CAP in the future.

Table of Contents
English Abstract i
Chinese Abstract iii
Acknowledgements v
Table of Contents vi
List of Tables viii
List of Figures ix
Chapter One: Introduction 1
1.1 Background and Motivation 1
1.2 Purposes and Research Questions 3
1.3 Significance of the Study 4
1.4 Definition of Key Term 5
1.4.1 Basic Competence Test (BCT) 5
1.4.2 Comprehensive Assessment Program (CAP) 6
Chapter Two: Literature Review 7
2.1 The Situation of CAP Development 7
2.1.1 The Development from BCT to CAP 7
2.1.2 The Background of the CAP’s Development 8
2.2 The Theory of Language Test 11
2.2.1 The Advantages of the Exam 11
2.2.2 The Orientation and Function of Language Tests 11
2.2.3 The Washback Effect 13
2.3 Research on Junior High School English Testing in Taiwan 15
Chapter Three: Method 19
3.1 Materials 19
3.2 Data Collection 21
3.3 Procedures of Data Analysis 21
3.4 Category of Reading Comprehension Questions 22
3.5 Statistical Word Occurrences 26
3.6 Statistical Grammar Occurrences 26
3.7 The Official Junior High School Syllabus 26
Chapter Four: Results 30
4.1 Reading Questions on the BCT and CAP 30
4.2 Reading Selection Quality Assessment 32
4.3 The Statistics of Vocabulary Occurrence 35
4.4 The Statistics of Grammar Occurrence 36
4.5 The Official Junior High School Syllabus of English Teaching 38
Chapter Five: Conclusion 40
5.1 Summary of Research Findings 40
5.2 Implications of the Study 41
5.3 Limitations of the Study 42
5.4 Suggestions for Future Research 42
References 45
Appendix 1 The Quality Checklist for Reading Test Selections 50
Appendix 2 The Grammar Concept Table of the Single Item 54
Appendix 3 Excerpts from the English Tests of the BCT and CAP 55


List of Tables
Table 2.1.2 The Comparison Chart of the BCT and CAP 10
Table 3.1 The Framework for the Quality Checklist Items 20
Table 3.4 Four Question Types of Reading 23
Table 3.7 Expected Learning Outcomes of the Four Skills 28
Table 4.1 Four Reading Questions by Token from 2012 to 2015 31
Table 4.2.1 The Quality Checklists for Reading Selections 33
Table 4.2.2 The Quality Score of Each Year’s Reading Selections 33
Table 4.3 The Single Item of Vocabulary Occurrence by Token and by Percentage from 2012 to 2015 35
Table 4.4 The Single Item of Grammar Occurrence by Token and by Percentage from 2012 to 2015 37


List of Figures and Chart
Chart 4.1 The Distribution of Four Reading Questions from 2012 to 2015 32
Figure 4.3 Vocabulary Occurrence Distribution by Percentage from 2012 to 2015 36
Figure 4.4 Grammar Occurrence Distribution by Percentage from 2012 to 2015
38
References
Alderson, J. C., &Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics,14,
115-129.
Allen, M. J., & Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Monterey,
CA: Brooks/ Cole.
Babbie. E. (1995). The Practice of Social Research (Seventh Edition). Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Bailey, K. M. (1996). Working for washback: A review of the washback concept
in language testing. Language Testing, 13, 257-279.
Brown, H. D.(2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to
language pedagogy (2nd ed.). New York, Longman.
Brown, H., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment: Principles and
classroom practices. New York: Pearson Education.
Chen, L. M. (2002). Taiwanese junior high school English teachers’ perceptions of the washback effect of the Basic Competence Test in English. (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation), The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Cheng, T. Y. (2008). A multimedia online English test developed for elementary school students in Taiwan, National ChiaYi University, Taiwan.
Cohen, D. K. (1996). Rewarding teachers for student performance. In S. H.

Fuhrman &, J. A. O’ Day (Eds.), Rewards and reform: Creating educational
incentives that work (pp. 60-112). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cunningham, G. K.(1998). Assessment in the classroom : Constructing and
interpreting texts, London: Falmer Press.
Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Johnson, S. M. (1986). Incentives for teachers: What motivates, what matters.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 22(3), 54-79.
Khaniya, T. T. (1990). The washback effect of a textbook-based test. Edinburgh
Working Papers in Applied Linguistics. University of Edinburgh.
Langer, J. A. (1999). Beating the odds: Teaching middle and high school students to

read and write well. Report No. 12014. Albany, NY: University at Albany,
National Research Center on English Learning and Achievement.

Langer, J. A. (2001). Succeeding against the odds in English. English Journal, 91(1),
37-42.
Lin, S. M. (2006). An evaluation of the junior high school English textbooks newly
adopted in 2003. Unpublished Master thesis, National Chengchi University.
Lin, Y. T. (2009). A study on the washback effect of the basic competence English
test on junior high school students in northern Taiwan. (Unpublished master’s
thesis), National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Lowe, P. & Stansfield, C. W. (Eds.). (1988). Second language proficiency
assessment: Current issues. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Regents.
Oller, J. W. (1979). Language tests at school: A pragmatic approach. London:
Longman.
Pearson, I. (1988). Tests as levels for change. In D. Chamberlain & R. J.

Baumgardner(Eds.), ESP in the classroom: Practice and evaluation (pp. 98-107).

London: Modern English.
Powell, A. G., Farrar, E., & Cohen, V. (1985). The shopping mall high school:
winners and losers in the educational marketplace. Boston, MA:

Houghton-Mifflin.

The Ministry of Education (1998). Junior high school students' basic scholastic

ability indicators. Department of Education.
McNamara, T. (2000). Language testing. New York: Oxford University Press.
States Education Examination (2010). Founded background of understanding examination -. Retrieved from
http://www.cap.ntnu.edu.tw/background.html
Mo, C. C. (1987). A study of English reading comprehension and general guidelines
for testing reading. Journal of National Chengchi University, 55, 173-206.
Pan, Y. C. (2009). A review of washback and its pedagogical implications. VNU

Journal of Science, Foreign Languages, 25, 257-263.

Scott, C. (2007). Stakeholder perceptions of test impact. Assessment in Education,

14(1), 27-49.

Wall, D. (1997). Impact and washback in language testing. In C. Clapham, & D.

Corson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language in education: Vol. 7. Language testing
and assessment (pp. 291-302). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.



Chinese
林曉雲、胡清暉、謝鳳秋(2009 年7 月13 日)。101 年起基測擬加考英
聽/郭易老師:訓練英文聽力,精聽跟泛聽技巧兩者必備!。自由時報,
第9版。
范郁涵(2014)。三段式聽力補救教學對中台灣八年級英語低成就國中生英語聽力之效益及回應之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學英語學系,台灣,高雄。
張家銘(2015)。國中教育會考加考英語聽力之調查研究。康寧大學
應用外語學系,台灣,台南。
教育部國中課綱 (2008)。97年國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。取自
http://teach.eje.edu.tw/9CC2/9cc_97.php
教育部國中課綱 (2014)。103年十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。取自
http://12cur.naer.edu.tw/upload/files/96d4d3040b01f58da73f0a79755ce8c1.pdf
教育部國中課綱 (2015)。104年十二年國民基本教育語文領域-英語文課程綱要。取自http://12basic-forum.naer.edu.tw
國中教育會考(2010)。國中教育會考簡介。取自
http://12basic.edu.tw/Detail.php?LevelNo=883
國中教育會考 (2012)。國中教育會考歷屆試題。取自
http://www.cap.ntnu.edu.tw/examination.html
國中教育會考 (2014)。國中教育會考成立背景。取自
http://cap.ntnu.edu.tw/background.html
黃詩琦(2004)。國中基本學力測驗對英語教學的影響(未出版之碩士論文)。
雲林科技大學應用外語系,台灣,雲林。
傅秋英(2007)。學生、家長、國中教育人員對國中基本學力測驗態度及改進意見之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中山大學教育研究所,台灣,高雄。
劉慶剛(2008)。國中英語科能力指標解讀與試題編製原則。取自http://sslxc.com/245226091/。

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔