本研究旨在依國中教育會考數學科之試題題型與命題原則，編製一份數學科學習成就測驗試題，透過測驗分析軟體進行試題分析與測驗分析，了解測驗試題之特性與學生的作答情形，做為教師改進命題技巧與補救教學之用。
本研究以新北市某中學八年級第一次段考為例，利用Tester2、ConQuest等測驗分析軟體進行古典測驗理論與試題分析理論之試題分析，探討難度、鑑別度、選項誘答力、學生能力估計值等試題特徵，分析學生作答表現及迷思概念。
整份測驗的信度值為0.86，達良好測驗信度的標準。試題分析部分，以古典測驗理論分析之選擇題平均難度為0.54，屬中間偏易；選擇題平均鑑別度為0.67，鑑別度佳。以試題反應理論分析選擇題平均難度為-0.2，屬難易適中；；在仿會考學生能力估計值方面，各班的平均值介於-0.38~0.62之間，標準差介於1.02~1.45之間在試題類型學生判定類別上，屬C&C’型學力表現落後者將近五成，急需個別之補救教學。本研究依試題分析結果，對教師往後補救教學與命題改進提出相關建議。

The aim of this research is to construct a mathematical achievement test based on the regulated test type and item-constructing principles of mathematical test in the Comprehensive Assessment Program for Junior High School Students. And hence we can understand properties of questions and students’ answering situation, both of which are useful for teachers to improve test-constructing skills and to adopt in remedial teaching.
This study looks into the first term-exam of eight-graders in a certain junior high school in New Taipei City, using analysis programs such as Tester2 and ConQuest to analyze in approaches of classical test theory (CTT) as well as item response theory (IRT) to probe into properties like difficulty index, discrimination index, distraction, estimated value of students’ ability, and so on so as to analyze students’ answering performance and mis-concept.
The credibility of the whole test is 0.86, which is just a standard good credibility. As for the part of test item analysis, the average difficulty of the multiple choices in the classical test theory (CTT) approach is 0.54, which is easy-moderate; the average discrimination value is 0.67, and it’s a good discrimination. If analyzing test items with item response theory(IRT) approach, the average difficulty is -0.2, which belongs to moderate range; in the estimated value of students’ abilities on the semi-Comprehensive Assessment Program for Junior High School Students, the average value of each class lies betwee -0.38 and 0.62, and the Standard Deviation is between 1.02 and 1.45; as for students’ telling test type, it falls into C&C’ type, meaning nearly fifty percent falls behind the academic attainments and are in urgent need of remedial teaching. According to the research results, this study proposes suggestions for teachers in future remedial teaching and improvement of test items.

一、中文部分
王寶墉(1995)。現代測驗理論。台北：心理出版社。
余民寧(2009)。試題反應理論(IRT)及其應用。台北：心理出版社。
余民寧(2011)。教育測驗與評量：成就測驗與教學評量(第三版)。台北：心理出版社。
國中教育會考(2016)。考試內容-試題取材與命題原則。取自http://cap.ntnu.edu.tw/test_3.html/
吳昇勳(2012)。國民中學數學科段考試題分析之研究－以高雄市前鎮區國三為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
吳明隆(2009)。SPSS操作與應用：問卷統計分析實務(二版)。台北：五南。
周文欽、歐滄和、許擇基、盧欽銘、金樹人、范德鑫(1995)。心理與教育測驗。台北：心理出版社。
郭生玉(2004）。教育測驗與評量。 台北：精華書局。
教育部(2008)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要數學領域。台北：作者。
國立臺灣師範大學心理與教育測驗研究發展中心(2014，11月)。104年國中教育會考數學科計分相關問答。飛揚雙月刊，90。取自http://cap.ntnu.edu.tw/fly/103/1039003.html/
國中教育會考(2016)。認識會考-成立背景。取自http://cap.ntnu.edu.tw/background.html/
國家教育研究院(2015)。數學科評量簡介。取自TASA臺灣學生學習成就評量 資料庫：http://tasa.naer.edu.tw/2introduction-1.asp?id=3，2015年10月22日。
張春興、林清山(1991)。教育心理學(再版)。台北：東華書局。
楊雅嵐(2011)。八年級數學科定期評量試題分析之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
蔡元忠(2010)。數學科學習成就測驗試題分析與測驗分析之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
謝豐瑞(2016，3月)。數學科有約-國中教育會考數學科非選擇題評分精神與實務。飛揚雙月刊，96。取自http://cap.ntnu.edu.tw/fly/105/1059602.html/
簡茂發（1991）。心理測驗與統計方法。台北：心理出版社。
簡茂發（1991）。命題方法與試題分析。國教輔導，31（1），2-13。
蕭儒棠、曾建銘、吳慧珉、林世華、謝名娟(2014)。測驗之編製：命題技巧與測驗資料之分析。台北：國家教育研究院。

二、英文部分
Anastasi, A. (1982). Psychological testing (5th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Anderson, W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.)(2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Blooms’ educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.
Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment, Beverly Hills. CA: Sage.
Ebel,R. L. (1972). Essentials of educational measurement(2th ed.).Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ebel,R. L. & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). Essentials of educational measurement(5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1991.
Glaser, R. (1962). Psychology and instructional technology.In R. Glaser(Ed.), Training research and education(pp. 1-26). Pittsburgh：University of Pittsburgh Press.
Gulliksen, H. (1987). Theory of mental tests. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Linacre, J. M. (2006). A user’s guide to WINSTEPS MINISTEP Rasch-model computer programs. Chicago, IL: Winsteps. com.
Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
Haladyna, T. M. (1996). Writing test items to evaluate higher order thinking. New York:Allyn & Bacon.
Mullis, I.V.S., & Martin, M.O. (Eds.). (2013). TIMSS 2015 assessment frameworks. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College. http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/downloads/T15_FW_Chap1.pdf