印尼語TEAL創意互動教學測驗與評量

Large Class Assessment of Indonesian Language Proficiency

10.6360/TJGE.201912_(24).0003

何德華(D. Victoria Rau)

大班教學測驗與評量 ； 口試 ； 印尼語 ； 個案研究 ； 線上測驗題庫建立 ； Indonesian language ； large classroom assessment ； online multiple choice question items ； oral exam ； case studies

通識教育學刊

24期（2019 / 12 / 01）

79 - 131

繁體中文

臺灣現有的印尼語外語教學仍處於起步階段，為配合認識東南亞國家文化及語言，有必要檢視印尼語教學策略，創新教學方法，以提高學習成效。本研究目的在於以教學實踐理念，尋求改善「初級印尼語」大班通識課程原有的線上測驗與口語評量機制，以期滿足多元背景學習者的評量需求。透過行動研究與個案分析，尋求改善以科技增進主動學習（Technology Enhanced Active Learning）的外語評量模式。教學研究結果奠定了下列三項大班外語教學的評量機制。第一、線上測驗題庫的建立：利用Kahoot系統所蒐集的學生答題結果可作為項目難易度和鑑別度分析的資料。如此一來，成就測驗之題目來源和範圍雖仍固定來自同一本教科書，但題目組合卻能依照學生程度彈性調整，增加筆試的效度。第二、口試對話：學生二人一組搭檔對話之音檔，由助教按照評分機制輪流給不同學生評分，並上傳至教學平台。此機制除了降低評分者來自學生的人情壓力，也提供授課老師、助教和學生三角驗證口試結果的機會，增加口試的信度。第三、滿足多元背景學習者的評量需求，驗證不同背景學生仍應使用同樣的戲劇表演方式作為溝通式教學的評量機制，且應開放學生自組演戲團隊，善用新住民和華裔學生帶給本地學生多元豐富的語言與文化資源。

In response to Taiwan government's New Southbound Policy, there has been an interest in studying Southeast Asian languages and cultures, including Indonesian. However, Indonesian L2 education in Taiwan is still in its infancy. There is a need to evaluate the current curriculum design and teaching methods to enhance innovative language teaching and learning. This study aims to improve the large class assessment of Beginning Indonesian, offered by the General Education Center at a national university in Taiwan. Using the data collected from in-class formative assessment in language comprehension and production, student feedback, distribution of facilitative and discriminatory indices of test items, and videos of student role-plays, the researcher examined how to improve the validity and reliability of the written and oral assessment methods and to meet the needs of the students from various backgrounds in an Indonesian as a second language course held in a TEAL (Technology Enabled Active Learning) classroom. The results of this action research demonstrate how to create an inventory of valid and reliable online multiple choice question items by using Kahoot to collect learners' self-assessment data and how to increase the interrater reliability in oral exams by rotating the graders and uploading sound files for accountability. Finally, by comparing three case studies, our findings show how learners from different backgrounds could benefit from the class design and multiple ways of assessment.

1. Bonwell, C.,Eison, J..(2005).Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom.
2. Chapelle, C. A.,Douglas, D.(2006).Assessing language through computer technology.New York:Cambridge University Press.
3. Coombe, C.(Ed.),Davidson, P.(Ed.),O’Sullivan, B.(Ed.),Stoynoff, S.(Ed.)(2012).The Cambridge guide to second language assessment.New York:Cambridge University Press.
4. Duff, P. A.(2008).Case study research in applied linguistics.New York:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Hatch, E.,Lazaraton, A.(1991).The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics.Boston, MA:Heinle & Heinle.
6. He, A. W.(2006).Toward an identity theory of the development of Chinese as a heritage language.Heritage Language Journal,4,1-28.
7. Hinkel, Eli(Ed.)(2011).Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning.New York:Routledge.
8. Lazaraton, A.(2002).A qualitative approach to the validation of oral language tests.New York:Cambridge University Press.
9. Li, W.(Ed.)(2011).The Routledge applied linguistics reader.London:Routledge.
10. Min, H. T.(2005).Training students to become successful peer reviewers.System,33(2),293-308.
11. Oguru, S.,Moloney, R.(2012).Misplaced Heritage Language Learners of Japanese in Secondary Schools.Heritage Language Journal,9(2),70-84.
12. Rafferty, E.,Barnard, E.,Suharni, L.(2014).Let’s speak Indonesian: Ayo berbahasa Indonesia.Honolulu:University of Hawai’i Press.
13. Rafferty, E.,Barnard, E.,Suharni, L.(2014).Let’s speak Indonesian: Ayo berbahasa Indonesia.Honolulu:University of Hawai’i Press.
14. Rau, D. V.(1999).Validity and reliability of grammar proficiency test and evaluation of the effectiveness of freshman English composition class.Journal of Humanities, Liberal Arts College of Providence University,11,155-184.
15. Wallace, M. J.(1998).Action research for language teachers.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
16. Weger-Guntharp, H.(2006).Voices from the margin: Development a profile of Chinese heritage language learners in the FL classroom.Heritage Language Journal,4,29-46.
17. Wolff, J. U.,Oetomo, D.,Fietkiewicz, D.(1992).Beginning Indonesian through self-instruction.Ithaca, NY:Cornell University, Southeast Asia Program.
18. Wood, D.,Bruner, J. E.,Ross, G.(1976).The role of tutoring in problem solving.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,17(2),89-100.
19. Young, R.(Ed.),He, A. W.(Ed.)(1998).Talking and testing: Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency.Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
20. 何德華(2009).華語教學研究方法與論文寫作.台北:正中書局.
21. 徐立庭(2018)。嘉義，國立中正大學語言學研究所。
22. 張琇瑩(2011)。高雄，國立高雄師範大學華語文教學研究所。
23. 張慧欣(2019)。嘉義，國立中正大學語言學研究所。
24. 陳祈雯(2017)。南投，國立暨南國際大學東南亞學系。

1. 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。
2. 楊孟蒨,張惠環,何德華(2020)。The Effectiveness of Integrating App Creation with Teaching and Learning L2 Indonesian。語文與國際研究，23，115-143。