世界大不同：學生眼中的學科能力測驗

Differences in the World: How Students Perceive Scholastic Achievement Test

10.29457/SJH.200512.0009

蔡蔚群(Wei-Chun Tsai)

學科能力測驗 ； 基礎知識 ； 標準化測驗 ； 客觀測驗 ； 學科結構 ； 歷史教學 ； 大考中心 ； Scholastic Achievement Test ； factual knowledge ； standardized test ； objective test ； structure of the discipline ； history teaching ； College Entrance Examination Center

東吳歷史學報

14期（2005 / 12 / 01）

253 - 285

繁體中文

大考中心主辦之學科能力測驗與指定科目考試，決定了每年十多萬考生的前途，也主導了高中教學的方向，考試機構宣稱的測驗目標是否落實，有賴外界嚴密、持續不斷的檢驗。本文以九十四學年度學科能力測驗社會考科歷史試題為本，訪談三位剛考完試的高三學生，逐題詢問其答題過程與判斷依據，從學習者的角度判斷試題優劣，及其與歷史教學實務、理念的契合程度。透過訪談得知：學生答題時處處顯露出對史實的不確定感、錯置名詞背後的歷史情境，或以非歷史、特異的思考邏輯回答問題，顯示測驗目標與實施結果存有極大落差，反映出命題者忽視歷史教學實務與理念，也讓我們必須重新評估選擇題在歷史教學上的價值。

Scholastic Achievement Test and Department Required Test held by College Entrance Examination Center not only decide the future of more than a hundred thousands students, but also lead the way of high school teaching directions. Test Institutes declared that fulfilling the objectives of a test relies on severely consecutive reviews by all aspects. This paper is based on the Social Studies/History Test of 2005 Scholastic Achievement Test by interviewing three students who have just finished the Test, inquiring them separately about their answering process and judgment while answering each question, and looking forward to judge if the questions are appropriate and if the questions correspond to history teaching practices and ideals from learners' viewpoints. Through the interviews we found students feel uncertain on historical facts, misunderstand historical contexts behind terminologies, and answer questions ahistorically and illogically, that indicate there is indeed a big gap between test objectives and results, reflecting testers ignore history teaching practices and therefore activate us to re-evaluate the existence of mutiple-choice tests on history teaching.

1. Bransford, John編、鄭谷苑、郭俊賢譯(2004)。學習原理：心智、經驗與學校。台北:遠流。
2. Bransford, John,Brown, Ann,Cocking, Rodney (eds)(2000).How People Learn: Brian, Mind, Experience and School.Washington, D. C.:National Academies Press.
3. Bruner, Jerome(1977).The Process of Education: A Landmark in Educational Theory.Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press.
4. Donovan, Suzanne,Bransford, John (eds)(2005).How Students Learn: History in the Classroom.Washington, D. C.:National Academies Press.
5. Gardner, Howard、李心瑩譯(2000)。再建多元智慧－21世紀的發展前景與實際應用。台北:遠流。
6. Gardner, Howard、陳瓊森、汪益譯(1995)。超越教化的心靈－追求理解的認知發展。台北:遠流。
7. Gardner, Howard、魯燕萍譯(2000)。學習的紀律－所有學習中的人都應該知道的事。台北:台灣商務印書館。
8. Giordano, Gerard(2005).How Testing Came to Dominate American Schools: The History of Educational Assessment.N.Y.:Peter Lang Publishing.
9. Hoffmann, Banesh(2003).The Tyranny of Testing.New York:Dover Publications.
10. Holt, Tom(1995).Thinking Historically: Narrative, Imagination, and Understanding.N.Y.:College Entrance Examination Board.
11. Hsiao, Yi-Mei,Rosalyn Ashby,Peter Gordon,Peter Lee (eds)(2005).Understanding History: Recent Research in History Education.London:RoutledgeFalmer.
12. Iggers, Georg(1997).Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to the Postmodern Challenge.Middletown, Connecticut:Wesleyan University Press.
13. Lazear David、郭俊腎、陳淑惠譯(2000)。落實多元智慧教學評量。台北:遠流。
14. Mansilla, Veronica Boix,Miller, William,Gardner, Howard,Sam Wineburg,Pam Grossman (eds)(2000).Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Challenges to Implementation.N.Y.:Teachers College Press.
15. Van Loon、Hendrik Willem、吳奚真譯(1996)。人類的故事。台北:協志工業叢書。
16. Wineburg, Sam(2004).Crazy for History.Journal of American History,90(4),1401-1414.
17. Wineburg, Sam(2001).Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past.Philadelphia:Temple University Press.
18. Wineburg, Sam(2005).What Dose NCATE Have to Say to Future History Teachers? Not Much.Phi Delta Kappan,86(9),658-665.
19. 大學入學考試中心(2004)。九十四學年度學科能力測驗簡章。台北:大學入學考試中心。
20. 大學入學考試中心(2004)。九十三學年度學科能力測驗試題與解析。台北:大學入學考試中心。
21. 林慈淑(2003)。年齡、知識或觀念－試探兒童對多元歷史記述的反應。東吳歷史學報，10，307-346。
22. 管美蓉(2005)。九十四學年度學科能力測驗試題淺析－社會考科（歷史）。選才，126，11-12。
23. 蔡蔚群(2004)。從幾個實例看認知經驗對歷史教學內容的影響。社會新天地，7，27-37。
24. 蔡蔚群(2004)。考試能否檢驗教學的成果？。清華歷史教學，15，97-118。