| Abstract: | 本研究目的旨在嘗試發展一套評量技術,以用來協助教師了解學生的學習困難與診斷學習缺陷所在,進而研擬有效的補救教學策略,增進學生的學習成果。 本研究隨機抽取一班受試學生共計24名,接受研究者彙編的測驗,該測驗已經過試題概念分析。接著,本研究亦提出下列實施本評量技術的過程說明,以幫助使用者達到分析測驗評量資訊的目的,增進對學生學習成果的了解,進而提出適當的補救措施:(1)針對教師自編成就測驗進行概念分析,列出自編測驗的每道試題所能測量到的概念,將它列成一份「試題-概念矩陣」表。(2)開始進行教師自編成就測驗的評量,並將學生的原始作答反應資料,經批改後,轉換成二元化的作答反應資料矩陣(註:標準答案的二元化資料,即為全部登錄為「1」的向量資料)。(3)依序將每位學生的二元化作答反應資料向量,轉變成一個二元化的「對角線矩陣」。(4)將每位學生的二元化「對角線矩陣」乘上「試題-概念矩陣」,以獲得一個「個別的試題概念矩陣」。(5)將「個別的試題概念矩陣」代入公式,求出每位學生的支配矩陣,並將支配矩陣中的元素除以本測驗的概念總數,以轉換成一個百分比值的距離指標矩陣。(6)根據上述的距離指標矩陣資料,畫出每位學生的概念結構圖。(7)依照上述(3)到(6)的步驟,畫出標準答案的概念結構圖。(8)將每位學生的概念結構圖,拿來與標準答案的概念結構圖做對映比較,以檢討及分析每位學生在概念結構上的學習缺陷。 本研究復根據上述評量技術的發展過程,擬定三項研究問題進行探討,並且獲致下列的研究結論:(1)不同學習類型學生的概念結構品質確實有所不同。其中,「學習穩定型」學生比「學習異常型」學生的概念結構品質較為優良。(2)不同學習類型學生的概念結構圖並不完全相似。相較之下,學習類型愈相近者,其概念結構較為相似;學習類型愈不相近者,其概念結構則愈不相似。(3)不同學習類型學生的概念結構與(教師的)標準答案的概念結構之相似程度並不完全相同。其中,以半專家型(即「學習穩定型」)學生比生手型(即「學習異常型」)學生的概念結構,更接近專家型(及教師的標準答案)教師的概念結構,或者說是與教師的概念結構更相似。 最後,本研究針對研究成果的涵義及限制,提出補充說明及解釋,同時,亦提出對未來研究和對教育實務的建議事項。
The purpose of this research is to develop a process of an assessment technique and to diagnose the learning defects of students in order to improve their learning outcomes. 24 elementary school children are used as subjects in this research. The test items are composed from the published research. And such items are analysed to construct a two-way table of item-concept matrix for approaching this assessment technique. The assessment process is described and the research is conducted under the following three questions. There are three findings to be summarized as follows: (1) The qualities of concept structures in this assessment vary in students whose learning-style are different. In the meantime, the quality of "stable learning-style student" is better than that of "aberrant learning-style student". (2) The figures of concept structures in this assessment are not the same in students whose learning-style are different. Under comparison, the more similar of students` learning-style are, the more similar are their concept structures, and vice versa. (3) The concept structures of semi-expert students (ex., "stable learning-style students") are more similar to experts` (ex., "teachers") concept structures than those of novices (ex., "aberrant learning-style students") are. Finally, discussions, implications, and conclusions of these findings are proposed. And several suggestions for future research and educational practice are proposed too. |
