傳統紙筆測驗與線上電腦化測驗試題參數估計差異之比較

Comparison of Item Parameter Estimation between Traditional Paper-and-Pencil-Based Testing and Online Computer-Based Testing

陳新豐
Sheng-Feng Chen


所屬期刊： 第1卷第3期 「測驗與評量」
主編：玄奘大學
應用心理學系 林邦傑教授
系統編號： vol003_05
主題： 測驗與評量
出版年份： 2005
作者： 陳新豐
作者(英文)： Sheng-Feng Chen
論文名稱： 傳統紙筆測驗與線上電腦化測驗試題參數估計差異之比較
論文名稱(英文)： Comparison of Item Parameter Estimation between Traditional Paper-and-Pencil-Based Testing and Online Computer-Based Testing
共同作者：
最高學歷：
校院名稱：
系所名稱：
語文別： 中文
論文頁數： 24
中文關鍵字： 紙筆測驗;試題反應理論;線上電腦化測驗;試題參數估計
英文關鍵字： paper-and-pencil-based testing, item response theory, computer-based testing, item parameter estimation
服務單位： 屏東教育大學初等教育系
稿件字數： 11112
作者專長： 測驗與評量
投稿日期： 2005/09/30
論文下載： pdf檔案icon
摘要(中文)： 本研究主要是比較傳統紙筆測驗與線上電腦化測驗試題參數估計上之差異，除了比較傳統的試題參數之外，還加入以試題反應理論為基礎的試題參數估計以及受試者能力之估計，利用變異數分析，比較在實際資料中，受試者人數的不同是否亦會造成參數估計上之不同。
經過資料的收集及分析，本研究主要獲致以下的結論。在參數的估計上，難度在紙筆與線上是沒有明顯差異，線上版一(五題一組依序出現)比線上版二(單題隨機出現)還要難，在鑑別度上則是線上版優於紙筆版，線上版一(五題一組依序出現)比線上版二(單題隨機出現)還要差；當人數大致相等時，傳統紙筆測驗與線上電腦化測驗的試題參數估計是一致的，這與文獻上大部分學者的研究有一致的結果。因此本研究發現施測樣本人數因素，對於試題參數估計的穩定性，有決定性的貢獻。
摘要(英文)： This study was a comparison of item parameter estimation between traditional paper-and-pencil-based testing and computer-based testing. In addition to traditional item parameters, item response theory was also applied for item parameter estimation and estimation of subjects’ ability. In addition, variance analysis was used to test for the influence of number of subjects on parameter estimation.
The major findings of this study were: when the number of subjects was close among the different forms, parameter estimations for paper-and-pencil-based tests, and for computer-based tests were quite consistent --- a result similar to other studies. Thus, controlling the number of subjects between groups offers a decisive contribution to the stability of item parameter estimation.
參考文獻： Bugbee, J. & Alan, C.(1996). The equivalence of paper-and-pencil and computer-based testing. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(3),p.282-289.
Englert, C.S., Mando, M., Zhao, Y.(2004).I Can Do It Better on the Computer: The Effects of Technology-enabled Scaffolding on Young Writers’ Composition. Journal of Special Education Technology, 19(1), p.5-21.
Greaud, V. A. & Green, B. F. (1986). Equivalence of conventional and computer presentation of speed tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 10(1), p.23-24.
Mazzeo, J. & Harvey, A. L.(1988). The equivalence of scores from automated and conventional version of educational and psychological tests: A review of the literature.( Report No. CBR 87-8, ETS PR 88-21). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Neal, V. A.(1992).Comparing CompuPass with a paper and pencil version considering gender, computer experience, attitude toward computers, and test-taking anxiety. Texas Woman’s University. M. A.
Parshall, C. G.(1992).Computer testing vs. paper-and-pencil testing: An analysis of examinee characteristics associated with mode effects on the GRE general test.
Stephens, D.(2001). Use of computer assisted assessment: Benefits to students and staff. Education for Information, 19, p.265-275.
Tancock, S.M. , Segedy, J(2004).A Comparsion of Young Chrildrens Technology-Enhanced and Traditional Responses to Texts：An Action Research Project. Journal of Research in Children Education,19(1),p58-65.