探討教師科技導入評量的信念、評量的實務、與學生表現間關聯性的系列研究

AbstractThis series of studies aimed at not only investigating the components and features of teachers’ beliefs about technology-based assessments (TBAs), but also revealing the relationship between teachers’ beliefs about TBAs and their assessment practices and estimating the effects of teachers’ practice and beliefs about TBAs on students’ performances.On the basis of these purposes, three studies that combined the qualitative data analysis, a structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis that combines both confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and path analysis, and the two-level hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) were conducted. In the study 1, the main components and features of teachers’ beliefs and practice about TBAs were investigated and analyzed based on the qualitative data from 40 technology-experienced science teachers. In the study 2, I developed a specific questionnaire from the result of the study 1 to elicit another 494 high school science teachers’ beliefs about TBAs and conducted a confirmatory factor analysis to ensure unobserved beliefs could be identified by the questionnaire to take the study 1 a step further. Besides, the study 2 specified the possible relationships among teachers’ beliefs about, attitudes toward, and intention to use TBAs by conducting a SEM analysis. Finally, a HLM analysis was conducted to estimate the effects of teachers’ practice and beliefs about TBAs on students’ performances. The same 494 science teachers in the study 2 and their 1,774 students from eighth and 11th grades from 32 secondary schools participated in the study 3.Based on the definitions of teachers’ beliefs systems and the literature review, this series of studies adapted both the elements and hierarchical structure of the technology acceptance model (TAM) and decomposed theory of planned behavior (DTPB) to form the coding scheme of the study 1 to explore the substantial components of science teachers’ TBAs beliefs and portraying the features of science teachers’ TBAs beliefs as comprehensive as possible. And then I modified TAM and DTPB based on the result of the study1 to form a prosed model to be examined in the study 2. Finally, on the basis of the study 2, I conducted a hierarchical linear modeling analysis to investigate the relationships among teachers’ beliefs about TBAs, their usage of TBAs, and their students’ performances on a TBA.The analysis of qualitative data in the study 1 showed that 10 components were substantial in the behavioral, control, and normative beliefs. While 34 teachers perceived TBAs as useful tools and identified a variety of usefulness, nearly 40% of the participants indicated the difficulties in using TBAs and their beliefs of ease of use were mainly negative. Also, teachers’ control beliefs about TBA focused on the external components such as time, supporting personnel, and infrastructure rather than the personal factors. In their normative beliefs, teachers tended to view school policies and parents’ opinions as constraints, whereas they also realized the benefits of using TBAs for learning. Furthermore, based on their usage of TBAs, teachers were identified and characterized as three groups: frequent, occasional, and non-users. Although some frequent users did not teach in resource-rich schools and faced constraints similar to those encountered by the occasional users, they seemed to actively look for more supports and solutions to overcome the lack of resources and the disapproval from the school administration.To take the study 1 a step further, the questionnaire in the study 2 was developed from the result of the study 1 to elicit the teachers’ beliefs about TBAs and then I conducted a CFA to ensure unobserved beliefs could be identified by the questionnaire. The results of CFA showed that all of the items developed in the study 2 were validated as being adequate indicators for measuring teachers’ beliefs about TBAs. Furthermore, the results of SEM analysis suggested that with the exception of teachers who had never used TBAs previously, teachers’ beliefs about usefulness, ease of use, and compatibility were significant predictors of attitude, which could explain the intention of teachers to use TBAs. However, perceived behavior control and subjective norms beliefs did not influence teachers’ intention.On the basis of the study 2, I utilized a HLM technique to investigate the relationships between science teachers’ beliefs about TBAs, their usage of TBAs, and their students’ performances on a TBA in the study 3. The results of the study 3 showed that there was significant variation between schools in terms of student performances. The results also showed that both of the variables at the student level, such as students’ inquiry‐related laboratory engagement and their PCs experience had significant positive effects on their learning performances. However, none of the variables at the school level, such as teachers’ TBA hours and teachers’ intentions to use TBA, had significant effects on students’ learning performances.Finally, the relationship between students’ inquiry‐related laboratory engagement and their learning performances could be moderated by two different variables at the school level in different ways. In one way, Average PCs usage at the school level would positively moderate the relationship between students’ inquiry‐related laboratory engagement and their learning performances. In another way, the TBA hours at the school level would negatively moderate the relationship between students’ inquiry‐related laboratory engagement and their learning performances. The results highlight the role of teachers’ practice and its impact on students’ performances.