科學多重文本閱讀理解評量之發展與研究

林小慧(Lin Shiao-Hui)

指導教授 ： 曾玉村

國立中正大學/教育學院/教育學研究所/博士(2015年)

摘要

本研究主要目的係在發展「科學多重文本閱讀理解評量」，並建立一組評鑑閱讀理解能力之「多重文本閱讀理解評量規準」。全評量共有2 個科學題本，依序為「核四廠續建與停建爭議」包含11 題選擇題及8 題建構題、「氣候變遷與中國長江三峽大壩的關係」包含10 題選擇題及9 題建構題，全評量共計21 題選擇題及17 題建構題。研究者透過項目分析、評定量尺與部分給分模式比較、多面向Rasch 測量模式、Cronbach’s α 、個別項目信度、建構信度、驗證性因素分析及抽取變異比等統計方法來分析處理實證資料。分析結果顯示，首先評分者嚴苛度的卡方考驗達顯著水準，多面向Rasch 測量模式之適配度指標達適配範圍，評分者內及評分者間之Cronbach’s α 值均 > .7 ，表示評分者一致性尚稱良好。其次，題本之Cronbach’s α 、個別項目信度及建構信度尚在可接受範圍內。最後，根據驗證性因素分析結果顯示，實證資料尚且支持「科學多重文本閱讀理解評量」四因素之假設模式，兩者適配尚稱符合。本研究初步發現「科學多重文本閱讀理解評量」可分為「提取訊息」、「概化訊息」、「解釋訊息」以及「整合訊息」四個分評量，而四個分評量分數所表徵之一級潛在因素，可以被「科學多重文本閱讀理解評量」解釋的百分比分別為「核四廠續建與停建爭議」.68 、.35 、.81 、.73 ；「氣候變遷與中國長江三峽大壩的關係」.60 、.66 、.80 、.80 。

關鍵字

多面向Rasch 測量模式 ； 部分給分模式 ； 評定量尺模式 ； 評分者嚴苛度 ； 評分者一致性 ； 多重文本閱讀理解評量規準 ； 科學多重文本閱讀理解評量 ； 驗證性因素分析

並列摘要

This study developed and examined the reliability and validity of Scientific Multiple Reading Comprehension Assessment (SMRCA) with 21 close-ended items and 17 open-ended items categorized into 4 subscales: retrieve information, generalize information, interpret information, and intergate information. Item analysis, the comparison of the rating scale and the partial credit models, many-facet Rasch measurement (MFRM) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) are used to determine Cronbach’s α, individual item reliability, composite reliability, and rater consistency of the SMRCA. The analysis shows that the chi- square test of rater sevirity was significant, and the indicator infit and outfit of MFRM was goodness-of-fit among the range from .7 to 1.3. Moreover, the Cronbach’s α of the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability was bigger than .7, and showed the rater consistency good. Furthermore, the Cronbach’s α, individual item reliability, composite reliability of the items also were acceptable range. Finaly, Second-order confirmatory factor analysis shows that there was an acceptable goodness-of-fit among the SMRCA. The SMRCA accounted for .68, .35, .81, and .73 of the variance associated with the first test of 4 subscales, and .60, .66, .80, and .80 of the variance associated with the second test of 4 subscales.

並列關鍵字

partial credit ； rating scale model ； rater sevirity ； rater consistency ； multiple reading comprehension assessment rubric ； scientific multiple reading comprehension assessment ； modelsmany-facet Rasch measurement ； confirmatory factor analysis

參考文獻

van den Broek, P. (1990). The causal inference maker: Towards a process model of inference generation in text comprehension. In D. A. Balota, G. B. F. d'Arcais & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 423-445). Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.

Angoff, W. H. (1971). Scales, norms, and equivalent scores. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 508-600). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Bennett, R. E., & Ward, W. C. (1993). Construction Versus Choice in Cognitive Measurement: Issues in Constructed Response, Performance Testing, and Portfolio Assessment: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Berk, R. A. (1986). A consumer’s guide to setting performance standards on criterion-referenced tests. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 137-172.