探討量化素養的意涵與評量中學生量化素工具之開發

The detection of the Meaning of Quantitative Literacy and the Development of the Instruments to Assess High School Students’ Quantitative Literacy

郭慧玲(Hui-Ling Kuo)

指導教授 ： 譚克平

國立臺灣師範大學/理學院/科學教育研究所/碩士(2002年)

摘要

本研究的主要目的是透過國外量化素養的文獻探討後，試著發展出一套適合評量我國中學生量化素養的工具，在工具效化的階段，初步以410位台北地區的高一學生為施測對象。本研究進行的方式是，先採用內容分析法對國外量化素養之相關文獻作探討，再透過一份自編的評量量化素養工具與一份學生背景相關問卷蒐集資料，並進行量的分析，以下是本研究主要的發現：
一、透過文獻探討得知量化素養的意涵為個人能合理地應用量化技能，去處理或解決日常生活中與量有關的問題，而大多數學者認為所應包含的量化技能有解釋資料、估算、測量和解決日常生活中不確定性的問題。

二、本研究透過量化素養的相關文獻探討後，以四個面向來設計評量中學生的量化素養的工具(分別為量化素養中量化技能、量化素養中能力指標、量化素養中實踐情境和以不同方式呈現量化素養的題目)。本研究樣本的中學生，在量化技能中的解釋資料方面表現最好，而在估算方面表現較差；在能力指標中的量化資料詮釋上表現最好，表現較差是在量化資料的產生；在衣食住行育樂五個實踐量化素養的情境中，學生在衣方面表現最優，在行方面則表現較不理想；最後，在以文字、圖形和表格三種方式呈現量化素養的題目時，中學生在表格和圖形方面都表現不錯，而在文字方面表現較差一點。

三、在進行量化素養工具的施測過程中有些特別的發現。首先，是在施測時間方面，由於量化素養的評量並非測驗學生的作答速度，所以試題之數量要配合作答的時間，才不會使學生的答題表現受到影響；再者，是在設計量化素養的題目時，一定要留意編寫題目的情境是否是中學生在日常生活中常遇到的情形，需讓學生在答題時有身歷其境的感覺，這才符合量化素養的基本精神；最後，還有一點發現就是，若要更進一步瞭解中學生的量化素養，除了紙筆測驗外，還可再加上一些實作評量的試題，或將題目設計成兩階段式評量，可瞭解學生選擇該選項的原因。

四、由學生的背景相關問卷與量化素養的答題表現發現，愈認為學習數學是很容易的學生，他們在量化素養題本中的表現反而偏低，與部分國外學者的觀點一致，數學不好並不代表就不具有量化素養。

五、本研究除了探討整體中學生在量化素養四個面向的答題表現外，亦從學生的性別深入分析，結果發現男女生在量化素養各方面的表現上，大多沒有顯著差異，除了量化素養的能力指標「能透過估算的方法產生量化資料」外，程度相當的男女生在該量化素養的能力指標之表現有顯著差異。此結果與國外的量化素養文獻有些不同，因為量化素養是一般大眾都應具備的基本能力之一，理論上來說，不會因性別不同而有能力上的差別，就像閱讀和書寫的能力，並不會因為男女而有所不同。

並列摘要

There are two purposes of this research. The first is to define the meaning of quantitative literacy and the second is to develop the most suitable instrument to assess high school students’ quantitative literacy in our country. On the validity of instrument stage, initially there are 410 high school students involved in this research. They are all chosen from senior high schools in Taipei . After I went through the foreign literature on this subject by content analysis, information gathered from the research include students’ performance in quantitative literacy and questionnaires of students’ background. On this study, quantitative analysis is the primary means for data analysis. On the following are the results we get from this research.

1.Quantitative literacy empowers people to use quantitative skills to solve and handle quantitative problems they meet on their daily life. Most scholars are of the view that quantitative skills should include data interpretation, estimation, measurement and uncertainty.

2.There are four aspects of designing the quantitative literacy instrument---the quantitative skills, indicators, practice contexts of quantitative literacy and different ways to present quantitative literacy problems. Students chosen on this research receive the highest grade on data interpretation; otherwise they get the lowest one in calculation. In addition, students do the best on data explanation and show the worst on data generation. In the topic of practice contexts, students perform well on clothing and do the worst on transportation. And the last but not the least, we can not recognize much difference from their performance on words, graphs, and tables.

3.After researching the instrument of quantitative literacy, I obtain some critical findings. Because of not assessing students’ speed of answering questions, the quantity of questions should not be many. It is not expected to affect students’ performance of quantitative literacy, when they are on test. Moreover, when questions of quantitative literacy are being created, we have to pay much attention to the questions we make. The questions should be the living examples. When students are on test, they’ll experience like they are on daily life. . Except the paper-and-pen tests, we can also add some questions of further performance assessment. if we want to further understand the quantitative literacy of high school student. Or we also can realize why they choose this or that answer, if they take the two-tier test.

4.According to the results of students’ performance in quantitative literacy and questionnaires of students’ background, some discoveries are made. The more easily students learn mathematics, the lower grades they’ll get on the performance of quantitative literacy. That’s the same conclusion with some foreign professors. People who does not perform well on math may have better performance on quantitative literacy.

5. Finally, boys and girls only had difference in one of quantitative literacy indicators: “use estimating techniques to generate data”. Boys’ performance is
better than girls’. This result is not as the same as some foreign literature. They think quantitative literacy is one of basic skills everyone must have. Generally, there is no difference between boys and girls in quantitative literacy, just like reading and writing.

參考文獻

鄒聖馨（2000）：國小數學科統計課程設計之研究─真實解讀計劃（AEP）。台北

陳芷羚（2002）：探討中學生機率概念與判斷偏誤關係之研究。台北市：國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。

Richardson ,R. M.& McCallum, W. G.（2002）.The Third R in Literacy. Retrieved June

Briggs, W. L.（2001）. What mathematics should All college students know ?

Burrill, G..（1990）.Statistics and Probability. Mathematics teacher,83(2)