摘 要

本研究以電腦軟體應用丙級技術士檢定的術科試題為例，探討評估樣品實作評量試題難度的方法，研究目的有二：
一、分析試題難度與測驗元素數量的相關情形。
二、根據研究結果，建構乙套可行之實作評量的試題難度評估方法，以作為教師教學與研究之參考。
本研究之教學實證採準實驗研究法，以高職二、三年級學生為樣本，方便取樣選取94名曾參加丙級檢定的三年級學生。實驗初期以「文書編輯測驗元素實作題」進行文書編輯應用測驗作為研究基礎；另取樣即將參加丙級檢定之157名二年級學生，進行十八週之「文書編輯軟體應用教學」。於課程結束後，以「電腦丙檢術科第二站題庫」進行測驗，並填寫「試題難度調查問卷」，來瞭解實作評量應用於文書編輯技能測驗的實際情況。
研究結論如下：
一、電腦丙檢術科中30題文書編輯實作試題的難度值相近。
二、實作試題難度值與測驗元素個數呈高度負相關。
三、實作試題難度值與測驗元素預試的難度平均值零相關。

Abstract

The objective of this work was to study and evaluate the difficulty estimation methodology of work sample performance assessment by examining items of computer software application skill test (CSAST) for level-3 technician. Two major purposes of this study were,
1. To analyze the relationship between the difficulty of items and numbers of test components.
2. To develop the difficulty estimation methodology for items of article edit skills for a practical performance assessment to help teachers’ instruction and research.

The quasi-experimental approach was adopted in this study and samples of study were based on 2nd and 3rd year of senior high school students. First of all, 94 3rd year students who had taken the level-3 CSAST were chosen based on sample of conveniences to take work sample performance test with “article edit skill test components”. Secondly, 157 2nd year students who planned to take the level-3 CSAST were sampled and trained with “article edit software” course for 36 hours. More over, those 157 students continued to take all 30 CSAST items and answer the questionnaires of “difficulty estimation”. All test results were evaluated and analyzed statistically to understand the impact of work sample performance assessment to article edit skill test.

Three conclusions are resulted from above tests and analyses were,
1. 30 CSAST items showed the similar difficulty.
2. A significantly negative correlation was observed between “difficulty of work sample performance items” and “numbers of test components”.
3. A zero correlation was observed between “difficulty of work sample performance items” and “pretest difficulty of test components”.

王寶墉(1995)。現代測驗理論。台北：心理出版社。
吳清山、林天祐(1997，3月)，實作評量，教育資料與研究雙月刊，15期，檢索於2004, 5月，從： http://www.nioerar.edu.tw/basis3/15/gi17-1.htm
施能仁(1994)。商業計算機技術士技能檢定規範研議。技術及職業教育，21，56-59。
陳　陹(1980)。工業職業學校在校學生技能檢定問題之研究。台北：師友圖書公司。
張波鋒(1993)。加強技能檢定與落實職業證照制度研究。研考報導，24，64-69。
梁琬菁(2000)。自然科「新式題型」之初探-以國小四年級為例。國立台中師範學院碩士論文。
黃燈淵(2003)。高職實施在校生技能檢定對較學影響之研究─以台南縣市高職電機科為例。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文。
蕭錫錡(1993)。從技術士證照的特質談職業教育應有的理念。技術及職業教育，17，24-27。
蕭錫錡(1994)。技能檢定學術科試題命制的理論與實際。行政院勞工委員會職業訓練局編印。
簡茂發(1999)。多元化評量之理念與方法。教師天地，99，11-17。
職業訓練局(1994)。技術士技能檢定工作手冊。行政院勞工委員會職業訓練局編印。
職業訓練局(2003)，技能檢定學術科測驗參考資料，台北：行政院勞工委員會職業訓練局，檢索於2003, 12月，從：http://www.labor.gov.tw/iiw/exambank/exambank.html
Chase, C. I. (1978). Measurement for educational evaluation (2nded.). Reading MA:Addison-Wealey.
Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). Essentials of educational measurement (5thed.). Ennlewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Guion, R. M., & Ironson, G. H. (1983). Latent trait theory for organizational research. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 31, 54-87.
Gullikson, H. (1987). Theory of mental tests. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (Originally published in 1950 by New York: John Wiley & Sons)
Hambleton, R. K., & Cook, L. L. (1977). Latent trait models and their use in the analysis of educational test data. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14, 75-96.
Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newburry Park, CA: SAGE.
Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149-174.
Rasch, G. (1980). Probability models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (Original edition publised in 1960).
Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best test design. Chicago: MESA Press.
Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA Press.