頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 落實在職與職前教師數學形成性評量設計能力之研究=The Study of Developing Preservice and Inservice Teacher's Ability in Design of Formative Assessment in Mathematics |
---|---|
作 者 | 林宜臻; | 書刊名 | 國教學報 |
卷 期 | 16 2004.11[民93.11] |
頁 次 | 頁73-121 |
分類號 | 310.3 |
關鍵詞 | 形成性評量; Design of formative assessment; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本研究目的在於1.研發形成性評量試題。2.探討如何有效落實形成性評量設計能力,以改進教學方法。本研究結合來自現場教師及筆者教育學程學生,共同研發國小低﹑中﹑高年段及國中階段形成性評量試題。本研究根據評量設計者以[與生活連結]﹑[能形成概念]﹑[能促進思考]﹑[提供修正機會]﹑[過於強調熟練]等項目,自評接受形成性評量課程前所設計題目與接受形成性評量課程後所設計題目的資料共934份進行分析,進而探討形成性評量課程對於評量設計者之影響,作為日後提升形成性評量設計能力之參考。本研究利用平均數差異之t檢定(雙尾)考驗﹑卡方改變顯著性考驗的「McNemar檢定」等統計方法加以分析,其結論如下:1.在職及職前教師接受研習課程前後所設計的題目有顯著改變。2.在職與職前教師間的試題設計,並不因在職或職前而有所不同。3.除[過於枝節]的項目沒有顯著改變,自評者對於[與生活連結]﹑[能形成概念]﹑[能促進思考]﹑[提供修正機會]﹑[過於強調熟練]等項目之認同,在接受形成性評量試題設計課程之前後有改變。4.修正後試題[與生活連結]達81.4%﹑[能形成概念]者達91.5%﹑「能促成思考」者達93.4%﹑[提供修正機會]達83.5%;認為修正後的試題不會[過於強調熟練] 者達98.9%,認為修正後的試題仍然[過於枝節]者只有0.7%。5.修正後的試題仍然未能[與生活連結],國小中年級佔23.7%,國中佔22.1%較為嚴重,無論是國小中年級或國中階段[與生活連結]偏低的主題是[圖形與空間](53.2%﹑64.5%),容易[與生活連結] 主題是[統計與機率]( 94.7%﹑91.2%)。 本研究根據研究結論提出如下之建議1.形成性評量設計之際,增加[與生活連結]﹑[能形成概念]﹑[能促進思考]﹑[提供修正機會]﹑[過於枝節]﹑[過於強調熟練]等自我評量觀點。2.將已設計完成之形成性評量試題,提供教育相關人員參考與應用。 |
英文摘要 | The purpose of the larger study is : (1) Research and development of formative assessment questions for mathematics teaching that promote students’ thinking skills, and (2) Explore ways to develop teachers’ professional ability to design formative assessment questions. This paper reports on the self-appraisal of pre-service and in-service teachers before and after they attend workshops or courses to revise their math questions. At the beginning of the course or workshop, teachers appraised the math questions that they had previously designed according to several dimensions given by the researcher. During the course of study, they learnt about the design of formative assessment, and revised their original questions. Finally, they appraised their own revised questions along the same dimensions as before. The self-appraisals of 934 pairs of original and revised questions were collected and statistically analyzed using t tests and x2 tests. The data showed significant differences in the appraisals given to the original and revised questions for both in-service and pre-service teachers, with no differences between the two sets of respondents. The dimensions showing significant differences in self-appraisals were: “relationship to everyday life.” “assists with concept formation,” “improves thinking,” “offers opportunity to revise,” “too concerned with mastery.” The paper suggests that these five dimensions be given to teachers for self-evaluation as they attempt to develop formative assessment questions. It is also suggested that the completed questions should be offered to other teachers and educators for reference. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。