摘要
如何科学地确定合格标准是基于标准的教育考试关注的重要问题。我国传统上是以60分作为合格标准的划界分数,而国外发达国家大多是在考后通过专门标准设置的过程,再确定合格标准的划界分数。我国大规模教育考试传统上以60分作为合格标准划界分数,主要是因为在命题阶段采取了命题质量控制方法,使得刚合格考生的得分在60分附近。本研究以某市高等数学统考课程考试为例,在考前以传统60分合格标准为目标,在命题阶段采取命题质量控制方法,使得刚合格考生的得分在60分附近,而考后通过Angoff标准设置方法专门确定合格标准的划界分数,对比这两种方法过程和决策结果,进行了深入分析和探讨。研究结论表明:考前命题阶段的合格分数调整方法与Angoff标准设置方法在本质上具有相通之处,但两者结果却相差较大,基于标准的教育考试在考后通过专门的标准设置方法来设定合格标准更为科学和全面。
How to set scientifically the pass criterion is the important problem which the standards-based education examination focuses on.Traditionally,the score 60 is regarded as the cut score of pass criterion in china,but in developed countries,it is set by the special standard setting process which is executed after examination.The main reason why the score 60 is regarded as the cut score of pass criterion of the large-scale education examination in china lies in the item-developing quality control methods that regulates the score of the lowest level examinee who can pass the examination to the neighborhood of the score 60.The paper takes the unified examination of the higher mathematics course for example,before the examination,the item-developing quality control methods aimed at the traditional cut score 60 of the pass criterion and regulated the score of the lowest level examinee who can pass the examination to the neighborhood of the score 60.After the examination,the cut score of the pass criterion is set by Angoff standard setting method.The analysis and discussion is done deeply through comparing the two method,process and decision result.The research result shows that the pass-score regulation in the item-developing process before the examination and Angoff standard setting method after examination have something in common in essence,but their results have large difference.For the standard-based education examination,setting the cut score of the pass criterion by the special standard setting method and process is more scientific and more all-sided.
出处
《教育科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2012年第5期15-21,共7页
Education Science
基金
上海市教育科学2012年度市级项目"大规模教育考试试题难度模糊综合评判研究"(B12138)成果
