國中基本學力測驗自然科之性別差異和差別試題功能(DIF)分析

Investigation of the Gender Differences and Differential Item Functioning in Science Basic Competence Test for Junior High School Students

10.7108/PT.200812.0013

盧雪梅(Sheue-Mei Lu)；毛國楠(Kuo-Nan Mao)

自然科成就性別差異 ； 自然科性別DIF ； 國中基本學力測驗 ； Basic Competence Test for Junior High School Students ； gender differences in science achievement ； science gender DIF

測驗學刊

55卷4期（2008 / 12 / 31）

725 - 759

繁體中文

本研究分析2001至2005年度「國民中學學生基本學力測驗」自然科之性別差異和差別試題功能(DIF)。自然科整體表現的性別差異分析結果顯示：全體受試並無顯著的性別差異出現，低成就組（後10%）女生的表現較佳，高成就組（前10%）男生的表現較佳。分科表現的性別差異分析結果顯示，全體受試的女生在健康教育表現較佳，男生在物理和地球科學表現較佳，男女生在生物和化學則無顯著的差異；低成就組女生在健康教育的表現較佳，其餘科目則無顯著的性別差異出現；高成就組女生在健康教育的表現較佳，男生在物理的表現較佳，其餘科目則無顯著的性別差異出現。在性別DIF分析上，本研究採Mantel-Haenszel法評估DIF，分析結果顯示，在分析的575題中計52題出現DIF，DIF 出現率約為9%，在探討之試題特徵中以科目對DIF量數影響最明顯，其中健康教育、化學和生物DIF題有利女生居多；地球科學和物理DIF題則有利男生居多。研究者對DIF試題的內容進行進一步審視，初步並未發現和測驗目標無關的因素，也就是說，雖出現DIF現象但尚不構成試題偏誤。篇末根據研究發現提出建議供相關人員參考。

This research investigated gender differences and differential item functioning (DIF) on Science parts of the Basic Competence Test for Junior High School Students (BCTEST) from 2001 to 2005 administrations. Results based on overall science performances indicated that there were no visible gender differences among total groups. However, females performed slightly better than males among low-achieving groups (bottom 10%); males performed slightly better than females among high-achieving groups (top 10%). Results based on performance of subjects indicated that females outperformed males on Health Education, males outperformed females on Physics and Earth Science, and there were no visible gender differences on Biology and Chemistry among total groups. In addition, there were no visible gender differences among low-achieving and high-achieving groups with only a few exceptions. The exceptions were that females outperformed males on Health Education among both low-achieving and high-achieving groups, and males outperformed females on Physics among high-achieving groups. In the study of gender DIF, Mantel-Haenszel procedure was used. The results of DIF analyses showed that total 52 (about 9%) of the 575 items across test administrations were categorized as DIF. Among the factors explored in the study, including subject, cognitive demands and types of attachment materials, the subject was the most salient factor that affected the performance of the DIF measures. The DIF items from Health Education, Chemistry and Biology subjects tended to favor females; however, the DIF items from Earth Science and Physics subjects tended to favor males. The follow up review and judgment were conducted for these DIF items, and no construct irrelevant factors were found. That is, though these items displaying DIF, they were not biased items. Implications based on the findings of this study were proposed for educators, test developers and researchers.

1. 余民寧、謝進昌(2006)。國中基本學力測驗之DIF的實徵分析以－91年度兩次測驗為例。教育學刊，26，241-276。
   連結：
2. 盧雪梅(2000)。Mantel-Haenszel DIF程序之第一類錯誤率和DIF嚴重度分類結果研究。測驗年刊，47(1)，57-71。
   連結：
3. American Educational Research Association,American Psychological Association,National Council on Measurement in Education(1999).Standards for educational and psychological testing.Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.
4. Burkam, D. T.,Lee, V. E.,Smerdon, B. A.(1997).Gender and science learning early in high school: Subject matter and laboratory experiences.American Educational Research Journal,34,297-331.
5. Camilli, G.,Shepard, L. A.(1994).Methods for identifying biased test items.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
6. Clauser, B. E.,Mazor, K. M.(1998).Using statistical procedures to identify differentially functioning test items.Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,17(1),31-44.
7. Cohen, J.(1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. Dorans, N. J.,Holland, P. W.,P. W. Holland(Eds.),H. Wainer(Eds.)(1993).Differential item functioning.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Dorans, N. J.,Kulick, E.(1986).Demonstrating the utility of the standardization approach to assessing unexpected differential item performance on the Scholastic Aptitude Test.Journal of Educational Measurement,23,255-368.
10. Fairness review guidelines
11. Hamilton, L. S.,Snow, R. S.(1998).Exploring differential item functioning on science achievement tests (CSE Technical Report No.483).
12. Harris, A. M.,Carlton, S. T.(1993).Patterns of gender differences on mathematics items on the SAT.Applied Measurement in Education,6,137-151.
13. Hedges, L. V.,Nowell, A.(1995).Sex differences in mental test scores, variability and numbers of high-scoring individuals.Science,269,41-45.
14. Holland, P. W.,Thayer, D. T.,H. Wainer(Eds),H. I. Braun(Eds)(1988).Test validity.Hillsdale NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Holland, P. W.,Wainer, H.(Eds.)(1993).Differential item functioning.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16. Joint Committee on Testing Practices(1988).Code of fair testing practices in education.Washington, DC:Joint Committee on Testing Practices.
17. Mantel, N.,Haenszel, W.(1929).Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease.Journal of the National Cancer Institute,22,719-748.
18. Miller, T. R.,Spray, J. A.(1993).Logistic discriminant function analysis for DIF identification of polytomously scored items.Journal of Educational Measurement,30,107-122.
19. Mullis, I. V. S.,Martin, K. D.,Gonzalez, E. J.,Chrostowski, S. J.(2004).TIMSS 2003 International mathematics report: Findings from IEA's trends in international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth gradesTIMSS 2003 International mathematics report: Findings from IEA's trends in international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth grades,Chestnut Hill, MA:TIMSS International Study Center, Boston College.
20. Mullis, I. V. S.,Stemler, S. E.,D. F. Robitaille(Eds.),A. E. Beaton(Eds.)(2002).Secondary analysis of the TIMSS data.New York:Kluwer Academic.
21. Reckase, M. D.(1979).Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implication.Journal of Educational Statistics,4,207-230.
22. Roussos, L.,Stout, W.(1996).Simulation studies of effects of small sample size and studied item parameters on SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel Type I error performance.Journal of Educational Measurement,33,215-230.
23. Shealy, R.,Stout, W.(1993).A model-based standardization approach that separates true bias/DIF from group ability differences and detects test bias/DTF as well as bias/DIF.Psychometrika,58,159-194.
24. Swaminathan, H.,Rogers, H. J.(1990).Detecting differential functioning using logistic regression procedures.Journal of Educational Measurement,27,361-370.
25. Willingham, W. W.,Cole, N. S.(Eds.)(1997).Gender and fair assessment.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. Willingham, W. W.,Cole, N. S.,Lewis, C.,Leung, S. W.,W. W. Willingham(Eds.),N. S. Cole (Eds.)(1997).Gender and fair assessment.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27. Willingham, W. W.,Cole, N. S.,W. W. Willingham(Eds.),N. S. Cole(Eds.)(1997).Gender and fair assessment.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28. Zenisky, A. L.,Hambleton, R. K.,Robin, F.(2004).DIF detection and interpretation in large-scale science assessment: Informing item writing practices.Educational Assessment,9(1&2),61-78.
29. Zwick, R.,Thayer, D. T.,Wingersky, M.(1993).A simulation study of methods for assessing differential item functioning in computerized adaptive tests.ETS Research Report No. 93-11.
30. 王振世、中國測驗學會主辦(1997)。不同計分方式對DIF呈現的影響。第三屆海峽兩岸心理與教育測驗學術研討會，台北市:
31. 自由時報(2005/08/06)
32. 吳裕益、洪碧霞、徐綺穗、葉千綺(1993)。台灣省教育廳專案研究報告台灣省教育廳專案研究報告,未出版
33. 邱美虹、張秋男主編(2005)。國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查2003。台北市:國立台灣師範大學科學教育中心。
34. 聯合報(2005/08/06)
35. 張美玉、羅珮華、張秋男主編(2005)。國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查2003。台北市:國立台灣師範大學科學教育中心。
36. 歷年大專校院學生人數－按3大分類科系及性別分（百分比）
37. 簡茂發、李虎雄、江永明、朱玲玲、李秀玉、吳美麗、卓娟秀、林靜雯、唐書志、莊玉梅、曹博盛、曾文雄、陳文典、陳昭地、陳義勳、陳麗巧、黃長司、黃萬居、張武昌、張敏雪、蕭志明、鍾靜(1999)。教育部八十六、八十七年度國民教育階段學生基本學習成就評量研究研究報告。
38. 簡茂發、李虎雄、陳昭地、林保平、曹博盛、王淑真、鄭再添、張敏雪、陳文典、陳義勳、蕭志明、莊玉梅、黃長司、黃萬居、朱玲玲、鄭美雪、曾文雄、吳美麗、李秀玉、卓娟秀、張武昌(1995)。教育部八十四年度國民教育階段學生基本學習成就評量研究研究報告教育部八十四年度國民教育階段學生基本學習成就評量研究研究報告,台北市:國立台灣師範大學中等學校研習中心。
39. 簡茂發、李虎雄、陳昭地、林保平、曹博盛、楊瑞智、王淑真、鄭再添、張敏雪、唐書志、陳文典、陳義勳、莊玉梅、蕭志明、黃長司、黃萬居、朱玲玲、鄭美雪、曾文雄、吳美麗、李秀玉、卓娟秀、張武昌(1996)。教育部八十五年度國民教育階段學生基本學習成就評量研究研究報告教育部八十五年度國民教育階段學生基本學習成就評量研究研究報告,台北市:國立台灣師範大學中等學校研習中心。

1. 陳薇安(2016)。中文版意志量表之施測者間信度探討及關聯性分析。國立臺灣大學職能治療學系學位論文。2016。1-90。 
2. 陳順利(Shun-Li Chen);黃毅志(Yih-Jyh Hwang)(2015)。解除Coleman等人報告書的魔咒：學校中的班級因素對學業成績之影響。教育科學研究期刊。60(2)。111-138。