閱讀理解成長測驗之編製研究

The Development of Progress Monitoring Test of Reading Comprehension

10.6251/BEP.201806_49(4).0003

蘇宜芬(Yi-Fen Su)；洪儷瑜(Li-Yu Hung)；陳柏熹(Po-Hsi Chen)；陳心怡(Hsin-Yi Chen)

成長曲線 ； 能力值 ； 國小學生 ； 複本測驗 ； 閱讀理解 ； Ability value ； Elementary school students ； Equivalent test ； Growth curve ； Reading comprehension

教育心理學報

49卷4期（2018 / 06 / 01）

557 - 580

繁體中文

本研究主要目的為編製適用於小學四、五、六年級學生的多複本閱讀理解測驗，提供一套可瞭解閱讀理解能力發展情形的工具，也可用於閱讀低成就學生的補救教學成效評估，作為介入反應之決定。題目型式為測量文章理解的題組。每套複本都有四個題組，每個題組都有一篇文章及10個閱讀理解題目。四個題組的文章分別是短記敘文、短說明文、長記敘文、長說明文。40道題目中有兩題是不計分的，主要用以確認受試者是否認真作答。每個題組中的題目所測量的閱讀理解成份為字彙觸接、字面理解、摘取大意、及推論理解。在信度考驗方面，四、五、六年級每個複本的Cronbach's α信度及折半信度多 .8以上。在效度方面，以「國民小學閱讀理解篩選測驗版本A」為效標，所測得的效標關聯效度介於 .59～.75之間。本測驗除了提供百分等級常模外，也提供能力值轉換常模，以便於繪出學生的閱讀理解能力成長曲線及計算成長係數。本研究也對於教育應用上的建議與限制提供說明。

The purpose of this study was to develop a set of equivalent tests for reading comprehension progress monitoring for grades four to six. The reading comprehension equivalent tests can also be used as tools for evaluating instructional effects of remedial intervention. In this test, there were six alternate-forms for each grade. Four testlets were included in each alternate-form. Each testlet had one passage and ten test items. The four passages in one alternate-form included one short narrative, one short expository, one long narrative, and one long expository texts. There were 200-300 characters in short passages, and 400-500 characters in long passages. The test items were designed to measure lexical access, literal comprehension, summarization, and inferential comprehension. There were forty items in total in one alternate-form. Regarding reliability, the Cronbach's α coefficients and split-half coefficients of all alternate-forms were mostly above .80. Using ＂Reading Comprehension Screening Test for Elementary School Students-Version A＂ as criterion, the criterion validity coefficient were .67 (p ＜ .001), .59 (p ＜ .001), .75 (p ＜ .001) for grades 4, 5, and 6 respectively. In addition, based on the data collected from six time-points in 2011 school year, the growth model analysis revealed that the reading comprehension abilities of the fourth, fifth, and sixth graders increased from the beginning to the end in one school year. In order for teachers to monitor students' progress, this test provided not only the norm of percentile rank, but also the norm of ability value (theta score). Using the ability values between two time-points, a growth coefficient could be calculated. Several suggestions and one limitation for educational application were provided.

1. Bloom, B.,Englehart, M.,Furst, E.,Hill, W.,Krathwohl, D.(1956).Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals.New York:Longmans, Green.
2. Burns, M. S.,Griffin, P.,Snow, E. C.(1999).Starting out right: A guide to promoting children's reading success.Washington, DC:National Reasearch Council.
3. Chall, J.(1996).Stages of reading development.Orlando, FL:Harcourt Brace& Co..
4. Embretson, S. E.(1991).A multidimensional latent trait model for measuring learning and change.Psychometrika,56(3),495-515.
5. Gagn'e, E. D.(1985).The cognitive psychology of school learning.Boston, MA:Little, Brown, and Company.
6. Hu, L.,Bentler, P. M.(1999).Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structureanalysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives.Structural Equation Modeling,6,1-55.
7. Kameenui, E.,Fuchs, L.,Francis, D.,Good, R., III,OConnor, R.,Simmons, D.,Tindal, G.,Torgesen, J.(2006).The adequacy of tool for assessing reading competence: A framework and review.Educational Researcher,35(4),4-10.
8. Keenan, J.,Betjemann, R.,Olson, R.(2008).Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential dependence on decoding and oral comprehension.Scientific Studies of Reading,12(3),281-300.
9. Kintsch, W.(1993).Information accretion and reduction in text processes: inference.Discourse Processes,16,193-202.
10. Magliano, J. P.,Graesser, A. C.(1991).A three-pronged method for studying inference generation in literary text.Poetics,20,193-232.
11. Pressley, M.,Afflerbach, P.(1995).Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Associates.
12. Taylor, B.,Harris, L. A.,Pearson, P. D.,Garcia, G.(1995).Reading difficulties: Instruction and assessment.New York, NY:McGraw-Hill.
13. Trabasso, T.,Suh, S.(1993).Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inference and mental operations in working memory.Discourse Processes,16,3-34.
14. van den Broek, P.,Fletcher, C. T.,Risden, K.(1993).Investigations of inference processes in reading: A theoretical and methodological integration.Discourse Processes,16,169-180.
15. 王木榮、董宜俐(2006)。國民小學閱讀理解測驗。台北=Taipei, Taiwan:心理=Psychological Publishing。
16. 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。
17. 柯華葳(1999)。閱讀理解困難篩選測驗。測驗年刊，42(2)，1-11。
18. 柯華葳、詹益綾(2006)。國民小學（二至六年級）閱讀理解篩選測驗。台北=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部特殊教育小組=Department of Student Affairs and Special Education, Ministry of Education。
19. 柯華葳、詹益綾(2006)。國民中學閱讀推理測驗。台北=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部特殊教育小組=Department of Student Affairs and Special Education, Ministry of Education。
20. 洪儷瑜、陳心怡、陳柏熹、陳秀芬(2014)。詞彙成長測驗。台北=Taipei:中國行為科學社=Chinese Behavioral Science Corporation。
21. 張雅如、蘇宜芬(2003)。國小學童推論理解測驗之編製與研究。中國心理學會第四十二屆年會，Taipei, Taiwan:

1. 曾玉村,張菀芯(2020)。兒童局部與整體連貫性推論能力發展研究。教育心理學報，51(3)，369-386。
2. 洪儷瑜,王宣惠(2023)。提升一般與閱讀困難中學生的學科學習：證據本位教學在普通課室之實踐。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，16(2)，59-91。
3. 柯華葳(2019)。以學與教為經為緯的教育心理學。中華心理學刊，61(4)，417-438。
4. 蘇宜芬,張祐瑄(2023)。國小六年級數學低成就學生是否伴隨閱讀能力落後在數學文字題解題歷程的表現差異。當代教育研究季刊，31(1)，41-73。
5. 周業太,李奕璇,宋曜廷(2021)。中文閱讀能力適性診斷評量編製研究。教育心理學報，53(2)，285-305。
6. (2022)。摘要策略教學對七年級低成就學生摘要能力與閱讀理解能力的影響研究。教育學刊，59，1-33。