科學想像力圖形測驗之發展

Development of the Scientific Imagination Test-Figural

王佳琪(Chia-Chi Wang) ； 鄭英耀(Ying-Yao Cheng) ； 何曉琪(Hsiao-Chi Ho)

《教育科學研究期刊》 61卷4期 (2016/12) Pp. 177-204

https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2016.61(4).07

摘要

本研究旨在科學想像力歷程模式的基礎下，發展適用於國小五、六年級的科學想像力圖形測驗。研究對象包含預試樣本558 位學生，正式樣本698 位學生。本測驗共有A、B、C、D 四項作業，每項作業均包含科學想像力歷程中的漫想力、聯想力、奇想力等三個向度，用以測量學生之科學想像力。經以Rasch部分給分模式分析，三向度的量表具有良好的模式資料適配度。所有的作業在男、女學生並無明顯的差異試題功能，且漫想力、聯想力、奇想力之信度分別是 .88、 .88 以及 .87。最後，本研究針對「科學想像力圖形測驗」的發展與應用，提出未來研究之建議。

關鍵字

科學想像力圖形測驗 ； 科學想像力歷程 ； Rasch部分給分模式

並列摘要

This study developed the Scientific Imagination Test-Figural (SIT-Figural) for 5th and 6th graders on the basis of the scientific imagination process. A total of 1,256 students who completed the SIT-Figural constituted Sample 1 (n = 558) and Sample 2 (n = 698). The SIT-Figural, which was designed to measure the students' scientific imagination, comprised four tasks, A, B, C, and D–which covered three dimensions of the scientific imagination process, namely brainstorming, association, and transformation (or elaboration). The Rasch partial credit model was used to assess the model–data fit. A differential item functioning analysis was conducted to assess the consistency of the ratings provided by male and female students. The results revealed that the three dimensions of the SIT-Figural exhibited an acceptable model–data fit. The three subtests had person separate reliabilities of .88, .88, and .87. Finally, suggestions for future revisions and applications of the SIT-Figural have been proposed in this paper.

並列關鍵字

Rasch partial credit model ； scientific imagination process ； Scientific Imagination Test-Figural

參考文獻

王佳琪、鄭英耀、劉昆夏、何曉琪（2011）。以Rasch分析檢驗「多向度幽默感量表」之信效度。測驗學刊，58（4），691-713。【Wang, C.-C., Cheng, Y.-Y., Liu, K.-S., & Ho, H.-C. (2011). Validation of the multidimensional sense of humor scale using Rasch analyses. Psychological Testing, 58(4), 691-713.】

許育齡、梁朝雲、林志成（2013）。教師發揮教學設計想像力的心理與環境因素探究。當代教育研究季刊，21（2），113-148。【Hsu, Y.-L., Liang, C.-Y., & Lin, C.-C. (2013). The influences of individual psychology and school environment on the teachers' imaginative capability of instructional design. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 21(2), 113-148.】

趙子揚、黃嘉莉、宋曜廷、郭蕙寧、許明輝（2016）。教師情境判斷測驗之編製。教育科學研究期刊，61（2），85-117。【Chao, T.-Y., Huang, J.-L., Sung, Y.-T., Kuo, H.-N., & Shiu, M.-H. (2016). Construction of the teacher situational judgment test. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 61(2), 85-117. 】

趙小瑩、王文中、葉寶專（2007）。正負向情感及身體激起量表之發展與試題反應分析：焦慮症與憂鬱症三角模式的再探討。測驗學刊，54（1），223-258。【Chao, H.-Y., Wang, W.-C., & Yeh, B.-Z. (2007). Development and item response analysis of the positive, negative, and physiological hyperarousal scales. Psychological Testing, 54(1), 223-258.】

劉昆夏、鄭英耀、王文中（2010）。創意產品共識評量之信、效度析論。測驗學刊，57（1），59-84。【Liu, K.-S., Cheng, Y.-Y., & Wang, W.-C. (2010). Consensual assessment for creative products: A review of reliability and validity. Psychological Testing, 57(1), 59-84.】