利用Rasch模式評估高中物理素養試卷過程：教師發展素養試題之啟示

Using Rasch Model to Evaluate Physics Competence Tests and its Implications for Teachers' Development of Competency-based Items

林淑梤(Shu-Fen Lin)；張仁壽(Jen-Shou Chang)；吳隆枝(Lung-Chih Wu)；黃建彰(Chien-Chang Huang)；趙臨軒(Ling-Hsien Chao)；許程迪(Chen-Din Sheu)；曾博淵(Po-Yuan Tseng)；賴彥良(Yan-Liang Lai)；李俊穎(Chun-Ying Lee)

Rasch模式 ； 物理素養 ； 評量 ； 試題反應理論 ； assessment ； Item Response Theory ； physics competence ； Rasch model

教育實踐與研究

34卷1期（2021 / 06 / 01）

121 - 154

繁體中文

十二年國民基本教育將核心素養視為本次課程改革的重點，評量與課程目標一致才能有效推動改革。本文目的為介紹教育部國民及學前教育署普通型高級中等學校物理學科中心試題組教師與科教研究者共同合作發展與效化物理素養試卷後，運用Rasch模式中多向度部分給分模式，檢驗試題的品質、判讀Wright map的意義，呈現發展和施測物理素養試題所遇到的問題與解決策略，作為未來發展素養試題之參考。試題組團隊挑選42題物理素養試題，形成難易度相當的A、B兩卷。利用分層與便利取樣，向全臺19校，1119位高三學生進行施測。Rasch分析結果呈現兩卷幾乎所有試題與多向度部分模式都能適配，且兩卷各向度的平均難度值均在0附近。但Wright map（能力與難度對應圖）呈現少數題目偏易，且缺乏高難度試題，恐較難有效評量高能力的學生。此研究在實務上建議建立全國統一的科學素養評量架構，未來並應多發展建構反應試題、以評量「評估及設計探究能力」和高難度的試題，並且善用Wright map增加教師對素養試題難度的敏感度並增進對學生能力的理解。評量設計探究能力和高難度的試題，並且善用Wright map增加教師對素養試題難度的敏感度與學生能力的了解。

Core competencies are the focus of the 12-year basic education curriculum reform. The purposes of the study were to introduce the development and validation of two physics competence tests through the cooperation of the seed teachers in the physics curriculum center, K-12 Education Administration, Ministry of Education, with a science education researcher, and to investigate strategies for developing competency items based on the analysis of multidimensional partial credit model, one of the Rasch models, and the interpretation of Wright maps. Forty-two physics competence items were selected and divided into test A and test B with a similar difficulty level. Stratified and convenience sampling was adopted. Two tests were administered to 1119 Grade 12 students from 19 public senior high schools in Taiwan. The results showed that most of the items in the two tests fit the multidimensional partial credit model, and the average of item difficulty for test A and test B were approximately 0. However, based on the Wright maps, some items were easier, and there was a lack of items with higher difficulty to assess students with higher ability. The study intends to inspire practical educators to build a national assessment framework for scientific literacy and to develop constructed-response items, items assessing the competence of evaluating and designing scientific inquiry, and items with high difficulty. The use of Wright maps may enhance teachers' sensitivity to item difficulty and their understanding of students' ability.

1. 林小慧, H. -H.,林世華, S. -H.,吳心楷, H. -K.(2018)。科學能力的建構反應評量之發展與信效度分析：以自然科光學為例。教育科學研究期刊，63(1)，173-205。
   連結：
2. 林春煌, C. -H.(2019)。素養導向教學與評量—以高中物理克卜勒行星定律為例。中等教育，70(3)，114-122。
   連結：
3. 林蓓伶, P. -L.,潘昌志, C. -C.,蘇少祖, S. -Z.,陳柏熹, P. -H.(2018)。十二年國教國中階段自然科學領域素養導向評量試題之開發與初探。教育科學研究期刊，63(4)，295-337。
   連結：
4. 張貴琳, K. -L.(2013)。青少年線上閱讀素養評量工具之發展。教育實踐與研究，26(2)，29-66。
   連結：
5. 陳彥君, Y. -C.,洪素蘋, S. -P.(2019)。中學生現代公民核心素養之測驗編製。教育實踐與研究，32(2)，39-79。
   連結：
6. Adeleke, A. A.,Joshua, E. O.(2015).Development and validation of scientific literacy achievement test to assess senior secondary school students’ literacy acquisition in physics.Journal of Education and Practice,6(7),28-42.
7. Bybee, R. W.(1997).Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices.Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.
8. Bybee, R. W.,McCrae, B.,Laurie, R.(2009).PISA 2006: An assessment of scientific literacy.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,46(8),865-883.
9. DeVellis, R. F.(2017).Scale development: Theory and applications.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
10. Gonzalez, E.,Rutkowski, L.(2010).Principles of multiple matrix booklet designs and parameter recovery in large-scale assessments.IEA-ETS Research Institute Monograph,3,125-156.
11. Hurley, B. P.,Henry, M. P.(2015).Using a disciplinary literacy framework to teach high school physics: An action research study.I.E.: Inquiry in Education,7(1),Article 3.
12. Kind, P. M.(2013).Conceptualizing the science curriculum: 40 years of developing assessment frameworks in three large‐scale assessments.Science Education,97(5),671-694.
13. Körhasan, N. D.,Gürel, D. K.(2019).Student teachers’ physics knowledge and sources of knowledge to explain everyday phenomena.Science Education International,30(4),298-309.
14. Kuo, C. Y.,Wu, H. -K.,Jen, T. H.,Hsu, Y. -S.(2015).Development and validation of a multimedia-based assessment of scientific inquiry abilities.International Journal of Science Education,37(14),2326-2357.
15. Masters, G. N.(1982).A Rasch model for partial credit scoring.Psychometrika,47(2),149-174.
16. McCoubrie, P.(2004).Improving the fairness of multiple-choice questions: A literature review.Medical Teacher,26(8),709-712.
17. National Research Council=NRC(1996).National science education standards.Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
18. Nunnally, J. C.(1978).Psychometric theory.New York, NY:McGraw-Hill.
19. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development=OECD(2017).PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving.Paris, France:Author.
20. Reckase, M. D.(1979).Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications.Journal of Educational Statistics,4(3),207-230.
21. Stelmack, J.,Szlyk, J. P.,Stelmack, T.,Babcock-Parziale, J.,Demers-Turco, P.,Williams, R. T.,Massof, R. W.(2004).Use of Rasch person-item map in exploratory data analysis: A clinical perspective.Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development,41(2),233-241.
22. Wilson, M.(2005).Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Wu, M.,Adams, R.(2007).Applying the Rasch model to psycho-social measurement: A practical approach.Melbourne, Australia:Educational Measurement Solutions.
24. 大學入學考試中心（2020）。111 大考素養導向命題方向與試題示例。取自https://www.ceec.edu.tw/files/file_pool/1/0K126642312488077919/20200504.pdf [College Entrance Examination Center. (2020). Guideline and item examples for literacy-oriented items in 2022 college entrance examination. Retrieved from https://www.ceec.edu.tw/files/file_pool/1/0K126642312488077919/20200504.pdf]
25. 大學入學考試中心（2019）。大學入學考試素養導向命題簡介（稿）。取自https://www.ceec.edu.tw/files/file_pool/1/0J254620993850057887/1080529%E5%A4%A7%E5%AD%B8%E5%85%A5%E5%AD%B8%E8%80%83%E8%A9%A6%E7%B4%A0%E9%A4%8A%E5%B0%8E%E5%90%91%E5%91%BD%E9%A1%8C%E7%B0%A1%E4%BB%8B.pdf [College Entrance Examination Center. (2019). Introduction of literacy-oriented item development for college entrance examination (Draft). Retrieved from https://www.ceec.edu.tw/files/file_pool/1/0J254620993850057887/1080529%E5%A4%A7%E5%AD%B8%E5%85%A5%E5%AD%B8%E8%80%83%E8%A9%A6%E7%B4%A0%E9%A4%8A%E5%B0%8E%E5%90%91%E5%91%BD%E9%A1%8C%E7%B0%A1%E4%BB%8B.pdf]
26. 王文中, W.(1996)。幾個有關 Rasch 測量模式的爭議。教育與心理研究，19，1-26。
27. 王文中, W.(1997)。測驗的建構：因素分析還是 Rasch 分析？。調查研究，3，129-166。
28. 余民寧, M. N.(2020).量表編制與發展：Rasch 測量模型的應用.新北=New Taipei:心理=Psychological Publishing.
29. 余民寧, M. N.(2009).試題反應理論及其應用.台北=Taipei:心理=Psychological Publishing.
30. 佘曉清, H. -C.,黃莉郁, L. -Y.,蘇怡蓓, Y. -B.(2017)。台灣學生科學素養的表現。PISA 2015 臺灣學生的表現，台北=Taipei:
31. 洪碧霞, B. -X.,吳裕益, Y. -Y.,林哲彥, Z. -Y.,葉千綺, Q. -X.(1992).大學入學考試題目分析時 IRT 模式選擇之初探.台南=Tainan:臺南師範學院測驗發展中心=Test Development Center in National University of Tainan.
32. 教育部（2018）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校—自然科學領域。台北：作者。[Ministry of Education. (2018). Guidelines for the 12-year basic education curricula: Natural science. Taipei: Author.]
33. 郭伯臣, B. -C.,吳慧珉, H. -M.,陳俊華, C. -H.(2012)。試題反應理論在教育測驗上之應用。新竹縣教育研究集刊，12，5-40。
34. 陳柏熹, P. -H.(2011).心理與教育測驗：測驗編製理論與實務.新北=New Taipei:精策教育=Besteam Education.
35. 陳泰然（2015）。12 年國教自然科學領域課綱：科教老師自我實現的契機。取自https://slidesplayer.com/slide/11196843/ [Chen, T. -J. (2015). Guidelines for the 12-year basic education curricula: Natural science: An opportunity for science education teachers’ self-fulfillment. Retrieved from https://slidesplayer.com/slide/11196843/]
36. 盧政良, C. -L.,林蓓伶, P. -L.,何興中, H. -C.(2019)。2018 全國高中物理探究實作競賽初賽試題測驗分析研究。物理教育學刊，20(2)，21-35。
37. 盧姮倩（2013 年 4 月 18 日）。類 PISA 喊卡家長轟浪費 8 個月北市教局：浪費什麼？。ETtoday 新聞雲。取自 https://www.ettoday.net/news/20130418/194386.htm [Lu, H. -G. (2013, April 18). Stop PISA-type tests. Parents complained: Wasting 8 months. Department of education, Taipei city government said: What be wasted? Retrievd from ETtoday Cloud Web site: https://www.ettoday.net/news/20130418/194386.htm]