標準化紙筆測驗是台灣學生的學習及升學過程中，主要的評量工具，因此，了解學生在解決標準化試題時的閱讀歷程，以及此歷程與解題成就間是否存在著關係，可以讓我們進一步推論學生的問題解決策略。本研究根據布魯姆認知分類修訂版架構，分析生物基測試題，選出代表題型後，進行成就測驗，在學生解題同時，利用眼球追蹤技術，紀錄國一學生解決試題時的閱讀歷程。眼球追蹤資料經過統整後，使用SPSS 19軟體進行歷程分析。此外，依據試題測驗結果的分為高低兩組，進行描述性統計、成對樣本T考驗、同質性檢定與單因子變異數分析（ANOVA）。
結果發現，學生在解決布魯姆認知分類架構下較高階或有圖的試題時，需花費較多的凝視時間及總凝視點數，這表示學生需花費較長的訊息處理歷程來解決這些問題，進一步的相關分析發現，除了了解-敘述題型外，學生在不同題型上的測驗成績與閱讀歷程大致呈正相關，顯示訊息處理時間長短會影響作答結果。而高低組學生的差一分析指出，高分組學生在解題時會將較多的注意力分配於試題中解題資訊所在；此外，高分組的學生通常也會有較多的交互閱讀及回視次數，這表示高分組學生在解決試題時，有較多整合題目所給予的資訊的過程，而這些過程皆可以幫助學生正確解決問題。

Standardized paper and pencil tests are the main tools for assessing students’ learning in Taiwan. For this reason, it’s worth of a further study for the relationship between reading process when students are solving the standardized test problems and their problem-solving achievements. In this study, we used the eye tracking method to collect the 7th grade students’ eye movement patterns when they were solving the national standardized examination on the topic of biology. Stduents’ text performances were also calculated and divided in to high and low achievement groups. We used SPSS to conduct statistical analyses on the eye movement data, including descriptive statistics, Paired-Samples T Test. Moreover, the test of homogeneity, and one-way ANOVA were performed to find the associations, if any, between eye movement data and the outcomes of standarized examination.
The study found that in general students displayed higher fixation time and Number of fixations on test items which were either classified as the higher-order items according to the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy, or items illustrated with graphics. The result indicated that students needed more information processing time for these types of test items. In addition to the hierarchical orders, problem-solving related information also affected the distributions of students' attention. Comparisons between students of high and low performances showed that high-performance students focused more on where the problem-solving related information was. Furthermore, the high-performance students displayed higher frequencies of Inter-scanning and regression. Such findings suggested that high-performance students were better at integrating test information located at different parts of the test item.

中文部分
王秀芬（2012）。國小五年級不同科學探究能力學童的解題歷程與思考類型探討。國立屏東教育大學數理教育研究所碩士論文。
李茂興（譯）（2003）。K. D. Hopkins著。教育測驗與評量（Educational and 　　　psychological measurement and evaluation）。台北市：學富文化。
岳修平（譯）（1998）。E. D. Gagne, C. W. Yekovich, & F. R. Yekovich著。教學心理學。台北市：遠流出版。
林志南(2007)。高雄地區國二學生數形規律之解題歷程分析研究。國立高雄師範大學數學系教學碩士論文。
林頌恩(1997)。專家與生手的解題後設認知研究。科學與教育，1，1-18
教育部（2001）。教育部十二年國民基本教育實施計畫。2012年3月17日，取自http://140.111.34.179/draft/index.html
陳美齡（2011）。國中學生力與運動解題歷程之研究。國立新竹教育大學數理教育研究所碩士論文。
張春興（1992）。教育心理學。台北：東華。
張國樑(2005)。國中生代數文字題之解題歷程分析研究。國立高雄師範大學數學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳學志、賴惠德、邱發忠（2010）。眼球追蹤技術在學習與教育上的應用。科學教育研究，55（4），39-68。
楊金城（2005）。國一學生解數學文字題解題歷程之分析研究。國立高雄師範大學數學系教學碩士班碩士論文。
楊坤原（1999）。問題解決在科學學習成就評量上的應用。科學教育研究月刊，216，3-16。
楊坤原、鄭湧涇（1997）高一學生遺傳學解題表現與解題策略之研究。科學教育月刊，5（4），529-555。
葉連祺、林淑萍（2003）。布魯姆認知領育教育目標分類修訂版之探討。教育研究月刊，105，94-106。
蔡介立、顏妙璇、汪勁安（2005）。眼球移動測量及在中文閱讀研究之應用。應用心理研究，28，91-104。
韓承靜、蔡介立（2009）。眼球軌跡記錄—科學學習研究的明日之星。科學教育月刊，310，2-11。

西文部分
Anderson, J. R. (1996). The architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
Ashmore, A. D., Frazer, M. J., and Casey, R. J. (1979) ).Problem Solving and Problem Solving Netoork in Chemistry.Journal of Chemical Education, 56(6), pp.377-379.
Barnett-Foster, D., & Nagy, P. (1996). Undergraduate student response strategies to test questions of varying format. Higher Education, 32(2), 177-198.
Bransford, J. D. & Stein, B. S. (1984). The ideal problem solver : A guider for improving thinking, learning, and creativity. New York : Freeman.
Chi, M. T., Glazer, R., and Farr, M. J. (eds.). (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Coderre, S.P., Harasym, P., Mandin, H. & Fick, G. (2004). The impact of two multiple-choice question formats on the problem-solving strategies used by novices and experts. BMC Medical Education, 4, 23.
Findlay, J. M., & Gilchrist, I. D. (2003). Active vision: The psychology of looking and seeing.New York: Oxford University Press.
Gagné, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of school learning (2nd ed.). New York: Harper Collins College Publisher.
Grant, E.R., & Spivey, M.J. (2002).Guiding attention produces inferences in diagram-based problem solving. In Diagrammatic representation and inference (pp. 236–248). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Grant, E. R., & Spivey, M. J. (2003). Eye movements and problem solving: Guiding attention guides thought. Psychological Science,14, 462-466.
Groen, M., & Noyes, J. (2010) Solving problems: How can guidance concerning task-relevancy be provided? Computers in Human Behavior. 26, 1318-1326.
Hayes, J. R. (1989). The complete problem solver. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Heller, J. I., & Greeno, J. G. (1997). Information processing analysis of mathematical problem solving. Paper presented at the Applied Problem Solving Conference, Evanston, IL.
He, P., & Kowler, E. (1992). The role of saccades in the perception of texture patterns. Vision Research, 32, 2151–2163.
Hestenes, D. (1987). Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction. American Journal of Physics, 55 (5), 440－454.
Hoffamn, J. E., & Subramaniam, B. (1995). The role of visual attention in saccadic eye movements. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 787-795.
Holsanova, J., Holmberg, N., & Holmqvist, K. (2009). Reading information graphics: the role of spatial contiguity and dual attentional guidance. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1215-1226.
Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology: Research and Development, 45(1), 65-94.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980).A theory of reading: From eye fixation to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: an overview. Theory Into Practice. 41(4), 212-219.
Krulik, S. K., & Rudnick, J. A. (1989). Problem solving: A handbook for senior high school teachers. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ozogul, G., & Reisslein, M. (2011). Teaching With Concrete and Abstract Visual Representations: Effects on Students’ Problem Solving, Problem Representations, and Learning Perceptions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 32–47.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422
Thomas, L. E., & Lleras, A. (2007) Moving eyes and moving thought: On the spatial compatibility between eye movements and cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin& Review, 14(4), 663-668.
Underwood, G. (1998). Eye guidance in reading and scene perception. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Yoon, D., & Narayanan, N. H. (2004). Predictors of success in diagrammatic problem solving. In A. Blackwell, K. Marriott, & A. Shimojima (Eds.), Proceedings of diagrammatic representation and inference: Third international conference, diagrams 2004, Cambridge, UK, March 22–24, 2004, Vol. 2980 (pp. 301–315). Berlin: Springer.