Rasch模式建置國小高年級閱讀理解測驗

The Development of Reading Comprehension Test for 5th and 6th Graders Using the Rasch Model

10.6251/BEP.20121128

林怡君(I-Chun Lin)；張麗麗(Lily Chang)；陸怡琮(I-Chung Lu)

閱讀理解測驗 ； Rasch模式 ； NAEP ； rasch model ； reading comprehension test

教育心理學報

45卷1期（2013 / 09 / 01）

39 - 61

繁體中文

「國小高年級閱讀理解測驗」係根據NAEP閱讀理解評量架構，以Rasch部份給分模式建置適用於高年級一般學童之文本閱讀理解測驗。研究對象係採分層隨機抽樣取得之高屏地區國小五、六年級學童1,052人。測驗共39題，含文學及訊息文本、選擇題及建構反應題，測「尋找和回憶」、「整合和解釋」及「批判和評鑑」三個閱讀理解認知層次。計量分析的結果顯示：Rasch模式建置之測驗符合客觀測量特性（閱讀理解構念為單向度、具性別及年級恆等性）、建構反應題之等級間距適切且呈階層關係、試題難度分配廣且與學童能力相對應、閱讀理解認知層次具階層性、測驗具合理之聚斂與區辨相關且能區辨不同次群體（年級、性別、語文能力）、測驗具理想之分隔信度及評分者信度。本文亦針對測驗應用、Rasch模式應用，以及後續研究提出建議。

The Reading Comprehension Test, based on NAEP reading framework, was developed for 5th and 6th grade students using the Rasch measurement model. The participants of this study were 1,052 5th and 6th graders sampled from Kaohsiung and Pingtung counties using stratified random sampling procedures. The 39-item test, including both multiple-choice and construct-response items, measures three cognitive levels (i.e., locate / recall, integrate / interpret, and critique / evaluate) of literary and informational texts. Results show: a) the underlying trait defined by the reading comprehension test holds the characteristics of an objective measurement (i.e., the construct measured by the test is unidimensional and invariant across genders and grades); b) the rating scales for construct-response items are appropriate in terms of their order and distance; c) items spread reasonably well along the latent continuum and are aligned with various ability levels; d) the three reading cognitive levels show hierarchical structure as expected; e) the test converges and discriminates various measures appropriately; f) the test is able to discriminate group differences by gender, grade, and ability level; and g) the test has satisfactory person separation and rater reliability. Discussions and suggestions regarding test application, the application of the Rasch model, and future research are provided.

1. 高雄師範大學工業科技教育學系（2009）：中文文章適讀性線上分析系統。取自中文文章適讀性線上分析系統：http://140.127.45.25/readingability/Analyze，2009 年4 月5 日。[Department of Industrial Technology, National Kaohsiung Normal University (2009). Analyzing system for readability of Chinese articles. Retrieved April 5, 2009, from http://140.127.45.25/readingability/Analyze]
2. OECD (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow's world (Executive summary). Retrieved from OECD: http://www.oecd.org, 10, 8, 2009.
3. 教育部（2009 ，10 月）：全方位的國民中小學閱讀推動政策。取自教育部全球資訊網：http://www.edu.tw/PDA/news.aspx?news_sn=2798&pages=16&unit_sn =15，2009 年10 月8 日。 [Minstery of Education (2009, October). The full range promotion of elementary and junior high school's reading policies. Retrieved October 8, 2009, from http://www.edu.tw/PDA news.aspx?news_sn=2798&pages=16&unit_sn =15]
4. 教育部（2008）：國民教育社群網-97 年課程綱要。取自國民教育司：http://teach.eje.edu.tw/ 9CC2/9cc_97.php ，2009 年4 月5 日。[Minstery of Education (2008). Taiwan elementary and secondary educator community - curriculum guidelines. Retrieved April 5, 2009, from http://teach.eje.edu.tw/ 9CC2/9cc_97.php]
5. OECD (2010). PISA 2009 results: Learning to learn. Retrieved from OECD: http://www.oecd.org, 7, 8, 2011.
6. Andrich, D., Sheridan, B., & Luo, G. (2007). RUMM2020. Perth, Australia: RUMM Laboratory.
7. Andrich, D.(1988).Rasch models for measurement.Beverley Hills, CA:Sage.
8. Andrich, D.,Hagquist, C.(2004).Detection of differential item functioning using analysis of variance.Second International Conference on Measurement in Health, Education, Psychology and Marketing: Developments with Rasch Models,Perth, Australia:
9. Engelhard, G., Jr.(1993).What is the attenuation paradox?.Rasch Measurement Transactions,6(4),257.
10. Kintsch, W.(1988).The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model.Psychology Review,95,163-182.
11. Linacre, J. M.(2005).A user's guide to WINSTEPS: Rasch-model computer programs.Chicago, IL:Winsteps.com..
12. Master, G. N.(1982).A Rasch model for partial credit scoring.Psychometrika,47(2),149-174.
13. NAGB=National Assessment Governing Board(2008).,Washington, DC:American Institutes for Research.
14. Rasch, G.(1980).Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests (revised and expanded ed.).Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
15. Singh, J.(2004).Tackling measurement problems with item response theory: Principles, characteristics, and assessment, with an illustrative example.Journal of Business Research,57,284-208.
16. Smith, E. V.(2001).Evidence for the reliability of measurement and the validity of measure interpretation: A Rasch measurement perspective.Journal of Applied Measurement,3,205-231.
17. Smith, E. V.(2005).Effect of item redundancy on Rasch item and person estimates.Journal of Applied Measurement,6(2),147-163.
18. Smith, E. V.(Ed.),Smith, R. M.(Ed.)(2004).Introduction to Rasch measurement: Theory, models and applications.Maple Grove, Minnesota:JAM Press.
19. Swaby, B. E. R.(1989).Diagnosis and correction of reading difficulties.Boston, MA:Allyn and Bacon.
20. Wainer, H.(Ed.),Braun, H. I.(Ed.)(1988).Test validity.Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
21. Wilson, M.(Ed.)(1994).Objective measurement: Theory into practice.Norwood, NJ:Ablex Publishing Corporation.
22. Wright, B. D.(1996).Local dependency, correlations and principal components.Rasch Measurement Transactions,10(3),509-511.
23. Wright, B. D.,Linacre, J. M.(1994).Reasonable mean-square fit values.Rasch Measurement Transactions,8(3),370.
24. Yen, W. M.(1993).Scaling performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence.Journal of Educational Measurement,30(3),187-213.
25. 王文中(1996)。幾個有關Rasch 測量模式的爭議。教育與心理研究，19，1-26。
26. 林建平(1994)。Taipei, Taiwan，國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所=National Taiwan Normal University。
27. 林寶貴、楊慧敏、許秀英(1995)。中華國語文能力測驗之編製及相關因素之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，12，1-24。
28. 林寶貴、錡寶香(2000)。中文閱讀理解測驗之編製。特殊教育研究學刊，19，79-104。
29. 邱上真、洪碧霞(1996)。國科會專題研究報告國科會專題研究報告,未出版
30. 邱上真、洪碧霞(1997)。國科會專題研究報告國科會專題研究報告,未出版
31. 柯華葳(1999)。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。中國測驗學會測驗年刊，46，1-11。
32. 柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅(2008)。PIRLS2006 國際報告PIRLS2006 國際報告,未出版
33. 胡永崇(1995)。Changhua, Taiwan，國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所=National Changhua University of Education。
34. 張麗麗、羅素貞(2011)。Rasch 多向度模式檢核「國小數學問題解決態度量表」（MPSAS）之心理計量特性。教育與心理研究，34(3)，153-185。
35. 曾進興編(1995)。語言病理學基礎。台北=Taipei:心理=Psychological Publishing Co.。
36. 楊中芳編、高尚仁編(1991)。中國人、中國心－發展與教學篇。臺北=Taipei, Taiwan:遠流=Yuan-Liou。
37. 董宜俐(2003)。國立台中師範學院教育測驗統計所=National Taichung University。

1. 陳玉葉、康以諾、高台茜(2015)。網路課輔中層次性閱讀教學對偏鄉學童閱讀能力影響之研究。教育科學研究期刊，60(4)，191-221。
2. 許婉儀,張惠環,何德華(2023)。對話者之語言能力與評分嚴苛度對印尼語口語評量成績之影響。教育心理學報，55(1)，25-46。
3. 陸怡琮(2021)。課文本位閱讀策略教學對原住民國小學童閱讀理解與詞彙理解的影響。課程與教學，24(3)，25-53。
4. 鄭英耀、何曉琪、王佳琪(2016)。科學想像力圖形測驗之發展。教育科學研究期刊，61(4)，177-204。
5. 鍾素香、鄭英耀、王佳琪(2015)。「閱讀理解篩選測驗」的再驗證和應用。測驗學刊，62(3)，209-230。
6. (2018)。以PIRLS 架構和Rasch 模式建構閱讀理解測驗。市北教育學刊，60，1-30。