設計並建置一個用於高等教育環境中的學習成效評量導引系統

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：26

、訪客IP：3.145.180.189

姓名

張惠茹(Hui-ju Chang) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

資訊管理學系

論文名稱

設計並建置一個用於高等教育環境中的學習成效評量導引系統
(Designing and Developing an Approach for Improving the Consistency of Learning Assurance Evaluation in Higher Education)

相關論文

★ 專案管理的溝通關鍵路徑探討─以某企業軟體專案為例	★ 運用並探討會議流如何促進敏捷發展過程中團隊溝通與文件化：以T銀行系統開發為例
★ 專案化資訊服務中人力連續派遣決策模式之研究─以高鐵行控資訊設備維護為例	★ 以組織正義觀點介入案件指派決策之研究
★ 應用協調理論建立系統軟體測試中問題改善之協作流程	★ 應用案例式推理於問題管理系統之研究 -以筆記型電腦產品為例
★ 運用限制理論於多專案開發模式的人力資源配置之探討	★ 應用會議流方法於軟體專案開發之個案研究：以翰昇科技公司為例
★ 多重專案、多期再規劃的軟體開發接案決策模式：以南亞科技資訊部門為例	★ 會議導向敏捷軟體開發及系統設計：以大學畢業專題為例
★ 一種基於物件、屬性導向之變更影響分析方法於差異化產品設計	★ 會議流方法對大學畢業專題的團隊合作品質影響之實驗研究
★ 實施敏捷式發展法於大學部畢業專題之行動研究 – 以中央大學資管系為例	★ 建立一個用來評核自然語言需求品質的線上資訊系統
★ 結合本體論與模糊分析網路程序法於軟體測試之風險與風險關聯辨識	★ 在軟體反向工程中針對UML結構模型圖之線上品質評核系統

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

對於AACSB認證中的學習目標而言，商管高教組織通常會使用學生的成績來判斷課程來確保學生的學習成效(Assurance of Learning)是否達成，而學生的成績則仰賴評量人員對於學生的表現進行評量才能得到，也就是說學生的分數品質對於學習成效的判定具有重大且關鍵的影響。但是，當課程的測驗題型採用建構反應試題(Constructed-response item)這種題型時，評量人員須依靠本身經驗及專業能力進行評量，由於評量者效應的存在，特別是共構課程有不同科系教師執教的情況下，評量的一致性便成為一個重要的課題。因此，本研究旨在透過教育訓練的角度，提出一個評量導引架構：LBR評量訓練循環模式(Learning , Behavior and Reaction Circular Training and Assessment Model)。同時透過此架構的三個分數品質指標(嚴格度、集中度、準確度)，協助組織能從不同角度掌握評量分數的品質。在實務應用上，本研究依據所提出的架構，實作出一個應用系統以幫助組織訓練並導引評量人員，使其了解組織所制定之評量準則後在進行評量時能符合組織的標準。本研究亦將LBR評量訓練循環模式應用於中央大學100學年度企業概論期中考的評量中，來展示系統功能與使用情形。最後，針對現有的運用與研究限制進行討論，並提出未來研究的可能方向。

摘要(英)

As for the assurance of learning of AACSB accreditation, the higher-educational organizations of business and management usually use the students’ scores of classes to determine whether they achieve the standards or not. Organizations can get the results after raters evaluate the performances of students. That is, the quality of evaluation of students plays an important role when judging the assurance of learning. However, raters have to score the constructed-response-item tests by their own experiences and professional skills. Owing to the existence of rater effect, the evaluation consistency becomes an important issue when the shared courses taught by different professors in different departments. Therefore, this research aims to propose a rating guidance framework, named LBR (Learning, Behavior and Reaction) circular training and assessment model. Through the three quality indicators (Harshness, Accuracy, Centrality), LBR can assist organizations to handle the quality of scores from different dimensions. This research also implements a system as a real use of LBR to train and guild the raters. After training by LBR, the result of raters’ rating will much more meet the goals of the organization. Finally, discussion and suggestions are presented for the future research.

關鍵字(中)

★ 高等教育
★ 商管教育品質認證
★ 評量者一致性
★ 評量者訓練
★ LBR評量訓練循環模式

關鍵字(英)

★ Quality accreditation of Business education
★ LBR circular training and assessment model
★ Raters training
★ Evaluation consistency
★ Higher education

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vi
表目錄 vii
第一章緒論 1
1-1 研究背景 1
1-2 研究動機與問題 2
1-3 研究目的 3
1-4 研究範圍與預期結果 3
1-5 研究架構 4
第二章文獻探討 5
2-1 AACSB 6
2-2 評量者一致性 8
2-2-1 類型 8
2-2-2 評量者效應 9
2-2-3 評量者效應類型 10
2-2-4 評量者效應分類 12
2-3 評鑑模式 12
2-3-1 Kirkpatrick 四階層模式 13
2-3-2 Brinkerhoff 六階段評鑑模式 15
2-3-3 ROI模式 16
2-3-4 CIPP 模式 18
2-3-5 小結 19
2-4 評量者訓練 19
2-4-1 參考架構訓練 19
2-4-2 評量者誤差訓練 20
2-4-3 績效構面訓練 21
2-4-4 行為觀察訓練 21
2-4-5 小結 22
2-5 評量者評量資料分析 22
第三章研究方法 25
3-1 概念說明 25
3-2 研究架構 27
3-3 架構細部說明 30
3-3-1 學習循環 31
3-3-2 行為循環 31
3-3-3 反應循環 33
3-4 學習循環之實作 33
第四章訓練導引系統設計 35
4-1 開發軟體及系統建置環境 35
4-2 訓練導引系統設計 37
4-2-1 系統使用案例分析 37
4-2-2 類別圖 42
4-2-3 活動圖 44
4-2-4 循序圖 46
第五章系統展示與個案說明 49
5-1 個案背景介紹 49
5-2 個案步驟 50
5-2-1前置作業 50
5-2-2 評量者進行導引練習及檢測(學習循環) 53
5-2-3 評量者實際進行評量並分析評量數據(行為循環) 55
5-2-4 評量者進行回饋(反應循環) 55
5-2-5 第二次循環 55
5-3 個案結果 56
第六章結果討論 57
6-1 訓練結果 57
6-2 信效度分析 63
6-2-1 信度分析 64
6-2-2 建構效度 64
6-2-3 內部效度 64
6-2-4 外部效度 65
6-2-5 結論效度 65
6-3 研究貢獻 65
6-4 研究限制 66
第七章結論與未來展望 67
7-1 結論 67
7-2 未來展望 67
參考文獻 68

參考文獻

中文部分
[1] 杜佳靜(2009),高等商管教育的新刺激－AACSB International,品質月刊,45卷12期,28-31頁。
[2] 何俐安（2006）,探討人力資源發展成果—談組織評鑑教育訓練之模式,研習論壇月刊，67，31-41頁。
[3] 周行一、張逸民、畢文玲（2008）,國際商管教育認證對臺灣商管教育的影響─從政大商管學院申請AACSB認證經驗談起,評鑑雙月刊，11，33-37頁。
[4] 張火燦(1998),策略性人力資源管理,揚智文化,台北市。
[5] 張世彗、藍瑋琛(2005),特殊教育學生鑑定與評量(第三版),心理出版社。
[6] 郭生玉(2004),教育測驗與評量,精華書局,台北市。
[7] 教育部高教司(2011),100學年度大學校院一覽表, 2012年2月8日,取自http://ulist.moe.gov.tw/。
[8] 教育部統計處(2011),各級學校概況表(80~100 學年度), 2012年2月8日,取自http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/b0013/b.xls。
[9] 郭昭佑(2006),當評鑑遇上教育—教育評鑑意涵探究,教育行政與評鑑學刊,第二期, 19-42頁。
[10] 蔡錫濤(2001),評鑑訓練的焦點與模式,人力資源發展月刊,126,1-12 頁
[11] 藍珮君(2010),以多面向Rasch 測量模式分析TOCFL 口語測驗評分者訓練效果,第九屆海峽兩岸心理與教育測驗暨2010 NAER 「永續教育發展-創新與實踐」國際學術研討會,國立台灣師範大學,2010年10月21-23日
英文部分
[1] AACSB International(2011a),About us , 2012年3月6日,取自http://www.aacsb.edu/about/default.asp。
[2] AACSB International (2011b), Business Accreditation Standards, 2012年3月7日,取自http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/business/standards/。
[3] AACSB International (2012), Eligibility Procedures and Accreditation Standards for Business Accreditation, 2012年6月28日,取自http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/standards-busn-jan2012.pdf
[4] Alderson, J. C., Clapham, C., and Wall, D. (2002), Language Test Construction and Evaluation., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[5] Anastasi, A. (1988), Psychological testing (6th ed.), New York: Macmillan.
[6] Bernardin, H. J. and Pence, E. C.(1980), Effects of rater training. New response sets and decreasing accuracy, Journal of Applied Psychology,65,pp.60-66
[7] Bernardin, H. J. and Buckley, M. R. (1981), Strategies in rater training. ,Academy of Management Review, 6,pp.205–212.
[8] Bonk, W. J. and Ockey, G. J. (2003), A many-facet Rasch analysis of the second language group oral discussion. ,Language Testing, 20(1), pp.89-110.
[9] Brinkerhoff, R. O. (1998), An Integrated Evaluation Model for HRD. ,Journal of Training & Development,42,pp. 66-88
[10] Chen, C.Y. and Chen, P.C.(2009), A holistic approach to managing software change impact, Journal of Systems and Software, 82(12),pp.2051~2067
[11] Cooper, E. C. R. and Urbana, L. O.(1977), Evaluating Writing: Describing, Measuring, Judging.,IL:National Council of Teachers of English.
[12] Day, D. V. and Sulsky, L. M. (1995), Effects of frame-of-reference training and information configuration on memory organization and rating accuracy., Journal of Applied Psychology, 80,pp.158–167.
[13] Drucker,P. F. (1959), Landmarks of tomorrow, New York: Harper Business
[14] Drucker,P. F. (1973), Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices., New York :Harper & Row
[15] Drucker,P. F. (1999),Management Challenges of the 21st Century., New York: Harper Business
[16] Eckes, T. (2009),Many-facet Rasch measurement. In S. Takala (Ed.), Reference supplement to the manual for relating language examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages; Learning, teaching, assessment (Section H). ,Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe/Language Policy Division.
[17] Engelhard, G.(1992), The measurement of writing ability with a Many-faceted Rasch model., Applied Measurement in Education, 5(3), pp.171-191.
[18] Engelhard, G. (1994), Examining Rater Errors in the Assessment of Written Composition with a Many-Faceted Rasch Model. , Journal of Educational Measurement, 31(2), pp.93-112.
[19] Feldman, J. M.(1981), Beyond attribution theory. Cognitive process in performance appraisal. , Journal of Applied Psychology,66,127-148
[20] Feldman, J. M.(1994) , On the synergy between theory and application social cognition and performance appraisal, In R. S. Wyer and T. K. Srull(Eds),Handbook of social cognition 2nd ed. 2, Hillsdale NJ. Erlbaum.
[21] Fleiss, J. L. (1971), Measuring nominal scale agreement among many rater., Psychological Bulletin, 76, 378-382.
[22] Hoyt, W. T. and Kerns, M. D. (1999) , Magnitude and moderators of bias in observer ratings: A meta-analysis. ,Psychological Methods, 4, pp.403–424.
[23] Kirkpatrick, D. L.(2006), Evaluating training programs: The four levels.,2012年3月20日,取自 http://astd2006.astd.org/PDF’’s/ Handouts%20-%20SECURED/M102.pdf.
[24] Kitchenham, B.,Pickard, L.and Pfleeger, S.L.(1995), Case studies for method and tool evaluation , IEEE Software,12(4),pp52-62
[25] Lerner, J. S. and Tetlock, P. E.(1999), Accounting for the effects of accountability., Psychological Bulletin, 125,pp.255-275
[26] Linacre, J. M.(1989) ,Many-facet Rasch measurement.,Chicago: MESA Press.
[27] Linacre, J. M.(2002), What do Infit and Outfit, Mean-square and Standardized mean?, Rasch Measurement Transactions,25(4),pp878
[28] Lumley, T. and McNamara, T.F. (1995), Reader characteristics and reader bias: Implications for training, Language Testing, 12, pp.54-71.
[29] Lunz, M. E., Wright, B. D. and Linacre, J. M.(1990), Measuring the impact of judge severity on examination scores., Applied Measurement in Education, 3(4),pp.331-345
[30] Luoma, S. (2005), Assessing Speaking. ,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[31] Myford, C. M. and Wolfe, E. W. (2003)., Detecting and measuring rater effects using many-facet Rasch measurement: Part I. ,Journal of Applied Measurement, 4(4), pp.386-422.
[32] Noonan, L. E. and Sulsky, L. M. (2001), Impact of frame-of-reference and behavioral observation training on alternative training effectiveness criteria in a Canadian military sample., Human Performance, 14,pp.3–26.
[33] Park, T. (2004), An investigation of an ESL placement test of writing using many-facet Rasch measurement. , Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 4(1), pp.1-21.
[34] Phillips, J.(1997), Return on investment, Huston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company.
[35] Pollitt, A. and Hutchinson, C. (1987), Calibrating graded assessments: Rasch partial credit analysis of performance in writing., Language Testing, 4, pp.72-92.
[36] Popham , W. (2000), Modern educational measurement (3rd. ed.) , Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
[37] Rasch, G. (1960), Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests.Copenhagen: Institute of Educational Research ,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
[38] Roberts, A. (1990) , Evaluating Training Programmes.,International Trade Forum, 26 (4), pp.18-23.
[39] Saal, F.E., Downey, R.G. and Lahey, M.A (1980), Rating the Ratings: Assessing the Psychometric Quality of Rating Data, Psychological Bulletin, 88(2), pp.413-428.
[40] Schleicher, D. J. and Day, D. V. (1998), A cognitive evaluation of frameof- reference training: Content and process issues., Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73,pp.76–101.
[41] Scullen, S. E., Mount, M. K. and Goff, M. (2000), Understanding the Latent Structure of Job Performance Ratings.,Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), pp.956-970.
[42] Stufflebeam, D. L. (1974) , Evaluation Perspectives and Procedures., Evaluation in Education ,Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
[43] Stufflebeam, D. L. and Shinkfield, A. J. (1985), Systematic evaluation ,Dordrecht : Kluwer-Nijhoff.
[44] Sulsky, L. M. and Day, D. V. (1992). ,Frame training and cognitive categorization: An empirical investigation of rater memory Issues, Journal of Applied Psychology,77,pp.501–510.
[45] Tetlock, P. E. (1983), Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions., Social Psychology Quarterly, 46,pp.285-292.
[46] Thornton III G. C. and Zorich S.(1980) , Training to Improve Observer Accuracy. ,Journal of Applied Psychology, 65,pp.351-354
[47] Weigle, S.C. (1998), Using FACETS to model rater training effects. ,Language Testing,15(2), pp.263–67.
[48] Woehr, D. J. and Huffcutt, A. I.(1994), Rater training for performance appraisal : A quantitative review, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,67,pp.189-205
[49] Wolfe, E.W. (2004), Identifying rater effects using latent trait models, Psychology Science, 46, pp.35-51

指導教授

陳仲儼(Chung-yang Chen)

審核日期

2012-7-23

推文