Professional Documents
Culture Documents
334
334
*
ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ
ﺫﻛﺎﺀ ﺟﻤﻌﻲ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ ﺗﻘﺼﻲ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﺎﺋﺺ
ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻜﻮﻣﺘﺮﻳﺔ :ﺍﻟﻌﻨﻮﺍﻥ
____________________________________________
٢٠١٢/١٠/٢ :
ﺳﻠﻄﻨﺔ ﻋﻤﺎﻥ- ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ ﻣﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ٢٠١٢/٥/٧
٢٠١٢/٧/٩ :
:ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺪﺭ
ﺗﻐﺮﻳﺪ،ﺣﺠﺎﺯﻱ
____________________________________________ :ﺍﻟﻤؤﻟﻒ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻲ
( ﻣﺸﺎﺭﻙ. ﺃﺣﻤﺪ)ﻡ،ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻳﻔﻴﻴﻦ :ﻣؤﻟﻔﻴﻦ ﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ
1 ﻉ,8 ﻣﺞ
:ﺍﻟﻌﺪﺩ/ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺪ
:
ﻧﻌﻢ :ﻣﺤﻜﻤﺔ
2014 :ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﻼﺩﻱ
ﻳﻨﺎﻳﺮ :ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺮ
1 - 14 :ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺤﺎﺕ
489412 :MD ﺭﻗﻢ
ﺑﺤﻮﺙ ﻭﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ :ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﻮﻯ
EduSearch :ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎﺕ
_____________________________________________
ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ، ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ، ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻳﺔ، ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ،ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻥ :ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻴﻊ
Estimating Psychometric Characteristics of Collective Intelligence Test According to
ﺍﻟﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ،ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ
Latent Trait Theory
http://search.mandumah.com/Record/489412
Taghreed Hijazi* & Ahmad Alshreffen :ﺭﺍﺑﻂ
Al Yarmouk University, Jordan
_____________________________________________
This Study Investigated the psychometric characteristics of vocabulary intelligence test according to latent
trait theory, by administering the test to randomly selected 246 students between 5-9 years old distributed
over Kg2 and 1st , 2nd and 3rd Primary grade from the government schools in Irbid city. The
Dichotomous model was used to analyze data. The final form of the test consisted of 16 items fit the model
with mean square infit/outfit statistics about 1, and standardized information weighted fit statistics about
zero. Item difficulty parameters ranged from -2.16 to 2.13 logit with a mean of zero logit. The values of
person reliability and item reliability were 0.81, 0.92 respectively. The test has multiple validity indicators.
Keywords: dichotomous model, latent trait theory, item parameter, intelligence test.
*taghreedah@yahoo.com
١
٢٠١٤ ١ ﻋﺪﺩ٨ ﳎﻠﺪ (١٥ -١) ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺑﻮﺱ- ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ
*
____________________________________________
٢٠١٢/١٠/٢ : ٢٠١٢/٧/٩ : ٢٠١٢/٥/٧
____________________________________________
:
_____________________________________________
This Study Investigated the psychometric characteristics of vocabulary intelligence test according to latent
trait theory, by administering the test to randomly selected 246 students between 5-9 years old distributed
over Kg2 and 1st , 2nd and 3rd Primary grade from the government schools in Irbid city. The
Dichotomous model was used to analyze data. The final form of the test consisted of 16 items fit the model
with mean square infit/outfit statistics about 1, and standardized information weighted fit statistics about
zero. Item difficulty parameters ranged from -2.16 to 2.13 logit with a mean of zero logit. The values of
person reliability and item reliability were 0.81, 0.92 respectively. The test has multiple validity indicators.
Keywords: dichotomous model, latent trait theory, item parameter, intelligence test.
*taghreedah@yahoo.com
١
ﻭﻳﻌﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻳﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺇﱃ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻳﻌﺘـﱪ ﺍﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴــﻲ ﻣـﻦ ﺃﻫــﻢ ﻣﻨﺘﺠـﺎﺕ ﻋﻠــﻢ
ﻃﻮﻳﻞ ،ﻓﻘﺪ ﺣﺎﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﰊ ﺍﳌﺴـﻠﻢ ﺍﺑـﻦ ﺍﳉـﻮﺯﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ،ﻳﺴﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﰲ ﳎـﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﻌـﺪﺩﺓ ﻛﺎﻟﻜﺸـﻒ،
ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﰲ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻭﻧﻘﻴﻀـﻬﺎ ،ﻓـﺄﻟﻒ ﻛﺘـﺎﺑﲔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻒ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑـﻮﻱ ﻭﺍﳌﻬـﲏ .ﻭﻗـﺪ ﺣـﺎﻭﻝ
ﺃﲰـﻰ ﺃﺣـﺪﳘﺎ "ﺍﻷﺫﻛﻴـﺎﺀ" ،ﻭﺃﲰـﻰ ﺍﻵﺧـﺮ "ﺃﺧﺒــﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤــﺎﺀ ﻣﻨــﺬ ﺍﻟﻘــﺪﻡ ﻓﻬــﻢ ﺃﺣــﺪﻯ ﺃﻫــﻢ ﺍﻟﻈــﻮﺍﻫﺮ
ﺍﳊﻤﻘﻰ ﻭﺍﳌﻐﻔﻠﲔ" .ﻛﻤﺎ ﺣﺎﻭﻝ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﳉﻮﺯﻱ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺒﲔ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﻷﺳﺎﺳــﻴﺔ ﺍﻟــﱵ ﻳﻌﺘﻘــﺪ ﺃــﺎ ﲤﻴــﺰ ﺍﻹﻧﺴــﺎﻥ ﻋــﻦ
ﺍﻟـﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻭﻣﻈـﺎﻫﺮﻩ ﻋﻨــﺪ ﺍﻷﻧﺒﻴـﺎﺀ ،ﻭﺍﻟـﻮﺯﺭﺍﺀ ،ﻭﺍﳋﻠﻔــﺎﺀ، ﺍﻟﻜﺎﺋﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﳊﻴﺔ ،ﺃﻻ ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ .ﻭﻣـﻊ ﺃﻥ ﻟﻜـﻞ ﻋـﺎﱂ
ﻭﺍﻟﻘﻀـﺎﺓ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺸـﻌﺮﺍﺀ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻌـﻮﺍﻡ ،ﻭﻏـﲑ ﺫﻟـﻚ )ﺣﺴـﺎﻥ، ﻓﻜﺮﺗــﻪ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺳــﺨﺔ ﻭﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣــﻪ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﺑــﺖ ﻋــﻦ ﺍﻟــﺬﻛﺎﺀ
.(١٩٩٠ﻭﻣﻊ ﺇﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ، ﻭﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﻪ ،ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥ ﲝﺚ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﱂ ﻳﻘـﺪ ﺇﱃ
ﻭﰲ ﺗﻘﻴﻴﻢ ﻣﻮﺍﻃﻦ ﺍﻟﻀﻌﻒ ﻭﺍﻟﻘـﻮﺓ ﻟـﺪﻯ ﻛـﻞ ﻓـﺮﺩ، ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﺑﻴﻨﻬﻢ ،ﻓﺎﻻﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺣﻮﻝ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﻪ ﻭﺗﻌﺮﻳﻔـﻪ
ﻭﻓﻬﻢ ﻭﺗﻘﻴﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﻔﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﳋﺎﺻﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﳌﻮﻫﻮﺑﲔ ﺃﻭ ﻭﺗﻄــﻮﺭﻩ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣــﻞ ﺍﳌــﺆﺛﺮﺓ ﻓﻴــﻪ ،ﻭﻳــﱪﺯ ﺍﻻﺧــﺘﻼﻑ ﰲ
ﺫﻭﻱ ﺍﻹﻋﺎﻗــﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴــﺔ ،ﺑــﺪﺃﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳــﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴــﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺳﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﻴـﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﺸـﻒ ﻋﻨـﻪ
ﺍﳊﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﻟﻠﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺃﻭﺍﺧﺮ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺳﻊ ﻋﺸـﺮ ﻭﺃﻭﺍﺋـﻞ ﻟﺪﻯ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ.
ﺍﻟﻘﺮﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﰲ ﺑﺮﻳﻄﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﻭﻓﺮﻧﺴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻳﺪ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ
ﻭﻳﻌــﻮﺩ ﻏﻤــﻮﺽ ﻣﻔﻬــﻮﻡ ﺍﻟــﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻌــﺪﺩ ﺍﳌﻌــﺎﱐ
ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﺲ ﻏﺎﻟﺘﻮﻥ ﻭﺃﻟﻔﺮﺩ ﺑﻴﻨﻴﻪ )ﺯﻳﻔﺮﺕ.(٢٠٠٤ ،
ﺍﳌﺮﺗﺒﻄﺔ ﺑـﻪ ،ﻓﺎﻟـﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻳـﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺜﻼﺛـﺔ ﻋﻨﺎﺻـﺮ ﻫـﻲ:
ﻭﻗﺪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻋﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴـﻲ ﺑﻴﻨﻴـﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﺷـﺘﺮﺍﻙ ﺍﻟﻮﺭﺍﺛﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺟﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻮﻛﻴﺔ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻭﺟـﻮﺩ
ﻣـﻊ ﺯﻣﻴﻠـﻪ ﺳــﻴﻤﻮﻥ ﺃﻭﻝ ﺍﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ﻓــﺮﺩﻱ ﻟﻠـﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻋــﺎﻡ ﺍﲡﺎﻫــﺎﺕ ﻭﻧﻈﺮﻳــﺎﺕ ﳐﺘﻠﻔــﺔ ﰲ ﻋﻠــﻢ ﺍﻟــﻨﻔﺲ ﺃﺩﻯ
،١٩٠٥ﻭﻗﺪ ﺃﺟﺮﻳﺖ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻼﺕ ﻋﺪﺓ ،ﻛﺎﻥ ﺃﻭﳍﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻠﻤــﺎﺀ ﺍﱃ ﻭﺿــﻊ ﺗﺼــﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺗﻌﺮﻳﻔــﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﺒﺎﻳﻨــﺔ
ﺍﻟﻌﺎﱂ "ﺗﲑﻣﺎﻥ" ﰲ ﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳـﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﺤـﺪﺓ ﺍﻷﻣﺮﻳﻜﻴـﺔ ﰲ ﻟﻠــﺬﻛﺎﺀ ،ﻛ ـﻞﹲ ﺣﺴــﺐ ﻣﻨﻈــﻮﺭﻩ ﻭﺍﻓﺘﺮﺍﺿــﺎﺗﻪ ،ﻓــﲑﻯ
ﺟﺎﻣﻌــﺔ ﺳــﺘﺎﻧﻔﻮﺭﺩ ،ﻭﻋــﺮﻑ ﺑﻌــﺪ ﺫﻟــﻚ ﲟﻘﻴــﺎﺱ ﺍﻟــﺒﻌﺾ ﺑــﺄﻥ ﺍﻟــﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻗــﺪﺭﺓ ﻋﺎﻣــﺔ ﻋﻠــﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﻓــﻖ
ﺳﺘﺎﻧﻔﻮﺭﺩ -ﺑﻴﻨﻴﻪ ).(Anastasi & Urbina, 1997 ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﻴﻒ ﻣﻊ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻗﻒ ﺍﳌﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ،ﻭﻳﺮﻯ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻢ ﺍﻵﺧﺮ
ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻫـﻮ ﺍﻟﻘـﺪﺭﺓ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻟـﺘﻌﻠﻢ ،ﰲ ﺣـﲔ ﻳـﺮﻯ
ﻭﻳــﺮﻯ ﻛــﻞ ﻣــﻦ ﺟﻮﺗﻔﺮﻳﺪﺳــﻮﻥ ﻭﺳﺎﻛﻠﻮﻓﻴﺴــﻜﻲ
ﺁﺧﺮﻭﻥ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟـﺘﻔﻜﲑ ﺑـﺎﺮﺩﺍﺕ.
) (Gottfredson & Saklofske, 2009ﺃﻧﻪ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻫﻨـﺎﻙ
ﻓﻔﻲ ﻋﺎﻡ ١٩٣٨ﻗـﺪﻡ ﺛﲑﺳـﺘﻮﻥ ﻧﻈﺮﻳـﺔ ﺗﺸـﲑ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ
ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﳛﻈﻰ ﺑﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜﲔ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭﺍﺕ
ﺍﻟــﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻳﺘــﺄﻟﻒ ﻣــﻦ ﻋــﺪﺩ ﻣــﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴــﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴــﺔ
ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ،ﻓﻔﻲ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟـﻨﻔﺲ ﻛـﺎﻥ ﺍﻟـﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺃﻛﺜـﺮ
ﺍﳌﺘﺮﺍﺑﻄــﺔ ﻭﺍﳌﺘﻘﺎﺭﺑـــﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘـــﺪﺭﺍﺕ ،ﻭﰎ ﻓـــﺮﺯ ﻫـــﺬﻩ
ﺍﳌﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﰎ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻭﺩﺭﺍﺳﺘﻬﺎ .ﻓﺎﻟـﺬﻛﺎﺀ
ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴــﺎﺕ ﰲ ﳎﻤﻮﻋــﺎﺕ ،ﰲ ﻛــﻞ ﳎﻤﻮﻋــﺔ ﻳﻮﺟــﺪ
ﻳﺘﻨﺒﺄ ﺑﻜﺜﲑ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻮﻛﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ & (Herrnstein
ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺭﺋﻴﺴﻲ ﳝﻴﺰ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻋﻦ ﻏﲑﻫﺎ
) Murray, 1994ﻭﻳﺆﺛﺮ ﰲ ﻛﺜﲑ ﻣﻦ ﺟﻮﺍﻧﺐ ﺍﳊﻴﺎﺓ ﻣﺜﻞ
ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ،ﻭﻗﺪ ﺻﻨﻔﺖ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣـﻞ ﰲ ﺳـﺒﻊ
ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻴﺔ ) ،(Eysenck, 1997ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺍﻓﻌﻴﺔ (Collins
ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺎﺕ ،ﻫﻲ :ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﳌﻜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻘـﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻹﺩﺭﺍﻛﻴـﺔ،
) ،& Messick, 2001ﻭﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﳌﻬﻨـﺔ & (Ackerman
ﻭﺍﻟﻘــﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﺩﻳــﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻘــﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﻮﻳــﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻄﻼﻗــﺔ
) .Kanfer, 2004ﻭﺗﺴـــﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﺒـــﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟـــﺬﻛﺎﺀ
ﺍﻟﻠﻔﻈﻴـﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺘـﺬﻛﺮ ،ﻭﺍﻟـﺘﻔﻜﲑ ﺍﳌﻨﻄﻘـﻲ (Hashmi,
ﺑﺎﻹﺿــﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﱃ ﻗﻴــﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻘــﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣــﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻘــﺪﺭﺍﺕ
) .Tirmizi, & Shah; 2010ﺃﻣﺎ ﺟﻴﻠﻔﻮﺭﺩ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺍﻓﺘﺮﺽ
ﺍﳋﺎﺻﺔ ،ﰲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺮﻑ ﺍﱃ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻭﺗﻮﺯﻳﻌـﻪ ،ﻭﰲ
ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻳﺘﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﻋﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﻀﻢ ﺃﻛﺜـﺮ
ﺗﺸــﺨﻴﺺ ﺃﺳــﺒﺎﺏ ﺿــﻌﻒ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺼــﻴﻞ ،ﻭﰲ ﺇﺭﺷــﺎﺩ
ﻣﻦ ١٢٠ﻋـﺎﻣﻼ ﻣﻔﺼـﻼ ﻭﺩﻗﻴﻘـﺎ ﻛـﻞ ﻣﻨـﻬﺎ ﻳﻘـﺎﺱ
ﺍﻟﻄﻠﺒﺔ ﺗﺮﺑﻮﻳﺎﹰ ﻭﻣﻬﻨﻴـﺎﹰ & (Aiken, 2003; Anastasi
ﺑﺎﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﻌﲔ .ﺃﻣﺎ ﻫﺎﴰﻲ ﻭﺯﻣﻼﺅﻩ (Hashmi et al.,
).Urbina, 1997
) 2010ﻓﻘــﺪ ﺃﺷــﺎﺭﻭﺍ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﻛــﻞ ﻓــﺮﺩ ﻟﺪﻳــﻪ ﻗــﺪﺭﺍﺕ
ﻭﻗﺪ ﺗﻌـﺪﺩﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟـﱵ ﺗﻘـﻴﺲ ﺍﻟـﺬﻛﺎﺀ ،ﻭﻗـﺪ ﻣﺘﻨﻮﻋــﺔ ﻭﳏــﺪﻭﺩﺓ ،ﻣﺜــﻞ :ﺍﻟﻘــﺪﺭﺓ ﻋﻠــﻰ ﺍﻟــﺘﻔﻜﲑ،
ﺻﻨﻔﺖ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻃﺮﻳﻘـﺔ ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺋﻬـﺎ ﺍﱃ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺴـﻤﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻬـﻢ ﻭﻏﲑﻫـﺎ ،ﻭﻣـﻦ ﺍﻟﻀـﺮﻭﺭﻱ
ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﺮﺩﻳـﺔ ﻭﺃﺧـﺮﻯ ﲨﺎﻋﻴـﺔ ،ﰲ ﺣـﲔ ﺻـﻨﻔﺖ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩ ﰲ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﺖ ﺍﳌﻨﺎﺳﺐ،
ﺣﺴﺐ ﳏﺘﻮﺍﻫﺎ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻟﻐﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺃﺩﺍﺋﻴـﺔ ،ﻭﺷـﺒﻪ ﻭﰲ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ.
ﺃﺩﺍﺋﻴــﺔ ،ﻛﻤــﺎ ﺻــﻨﻔﻬﺎ ﺍﻟــﺒﻌﺾ ﺍﻵﺧــﺮ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭﺍﺕ
ﻣﺘﺤﻴﺰﺓ ﺛﻘﺎﻓﻴﺎﹰ ،ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣـﻦ ﺃﺛـﺮ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓـﺔ.
٢
٢٠١٤ ﳎﻠﺪ ٨ﻋﺪﺩ ١ ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ -ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺑﻮﺱ
ﳏﺎﻭﻟــﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻐﻠــﺐ ﻋﻠــﻰ ﺗﻠــﻚ ﺍﳌﺸــﻜﻼﺕ ،ﻭﻣــﻊ ﺑــﺪﺀ ﻭﻗﺪ ﺗﺰﺍﻳﺪ ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﺼـﺮ ﺍﳊـﺪﻳﺚ ﺑﺎﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭﺍﺕ
ﺍﻟﺪﻋﻮﺓ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺍﳌﻮﺿـﻮﻋﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴـﻲ، ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﳉﻤﺎﻋﻴـﺔ ،ﺍﻟـﱵ
ﻇﻬﺮﺕ ﺍﲡﺎﻫﺎﺕ ﺣﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﺗﺘﻤﺜـﻞ ﰲ ﻧﻈﺮﻳـﺔ ﺍﻟﺴـﻤﺎﺕ ﺗﺴــﻌﻰ ﺍﱃ ﺍﻟــﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﰲ ﺑﻌــﺾ ﺍﻷﺑﻌــﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﻴــﺔ
ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ ) ،Latent Trait Theory (LTTﻭﺍﻟﱵ ﺃﻃﻠﻖ ﻛﺎﻻﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﻮﻱ )ﺃﺑﻮ ﺟﺮﺍﺩ.(٢٠٠٨ ،
ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻧﻈﺮﻳـﺔ ﺍﻻﺳـﺘﺠﺎﺑﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻘـﺮﺓ )(IRT
ﻭﻧﻈﺮﺍ ﳌﺎ ﺗﺘﻄﻠﺒﻪ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻳﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻭﻗﺖ ﻭﺟﻬـﺪ
.Item Response Theory
ﻛــﺒﲑﻳﻦ ﻓﻘــﺪ ﻇﻬــﺮﺕ ﺍﳊﺎﺟـﺔ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴــﺔ
ﻳﻼﺣﻆ ﳑﺎ ﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﺃﻥ ﲰﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻗﺪ ﺣﻈﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﳉﻤﺎﻋﻴــﺔ؛ ﺣﻴــﺚ ﺍــﺎ ﺗــﻮﻓﺮ ﺍﻟﻮﻗــﺖ ﻭﺍﳉﻬــﺪ ،ﻭﺫﻟــﻚ
ﻛﺒﲑ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜﲔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﲔ ،ﻛﻤـﺎ ﺷـﻐﻠﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳـﺎﺕ ﺑﺘﻄﺒﻴﻘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﳎﻤﻮﻋـﺔ ﻣـﻦ ﺍﻷﻓـﺮﺍﺩ ،ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺧـﻼﻑ
ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺣﻴﺰﺍﹰ ﻛﺒﲑﺍﹰ ،ﺳﻮﺍﺀ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻫﺪﻓﺖ ﺇﱃ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻳﺔ .ﻭﻗﺪ ﻻﻗﻰ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ
ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣـﻞ ﺍﳌـﺆﺛﺮﺓ ﻓﻴـﻪ ،ﺃﻡ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻄـﻮﻳﺮ ﳒﺎﺣﺎ ﻛـﺒﲑﺍ؛ ﳌـﺎ ﺗﺘﻤﻴـﺰ ﺑـﻪ ﻣـﻦ ﺳـﻬﻮﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴـﻖ،
ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﻟﻠﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻣﻬﺎ .ﻭﻗﺪ ﺍﻋﺘـﱪﺕ ﻣﻬﻤـﺔ ﻭﺍﺗﺴﺎﻉ ﺣﺠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻄﺒﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬـﺎ،
ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻣـﻦ ﺍﳌﻬـﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺼـﻌﺒﺔ ﻟﻜﻮـﺎ ﲰـﺔ ﻭﺳــﻬﻮﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺼــﺤﻴﺢ ﻭﻣﻮﺿــﻮﻋﻴﺘﻬﺎ .ﻭﻗــﺪ ﺃﺷــﺎﺭﺕ
ﺍﻓﺘﺮﺍﺿــﻴﺔ ،ﻟــﺬﺍ ﻇﻬــﺮﺕ ﺍﳊﺎﺟــﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺇﳚــﺎﺩ ﻣﻘــﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ) (Cronbach, 1960ﺇﱃ ﻛﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭﺍﺕ
ﻓﻌﺎﻟﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ،ﻓﺎﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺍﺳـﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺍﳉﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺒﺌﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺃﻥ
ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺃﻭ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺳﻌﺖ ﺇﱃ ﺑﻨﺎﺀ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﻣﻌﻈــﻢ ﻫــﺬﻩ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺗﺘﻀــﻤﻦ ﳎﻤﻮﻋــﺔ ﻣــﻦ
ﻟﻠﺬﻛﺎﺀ ،ﺍﻋﺘﻤـﺪﺕ ﰲ ﺍﺧﺘﻴـﺎﺭ ﻓﻘﺮﺍـﺎ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻣﻌـﺎﻳﲑ ﺍﳌﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﻐﻄﻲ ﺟﻮﺍﻧﺐ ﳐﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻣـﻦ ﺍﻟﻘـﺪﺭﺓ
ﻣﻨﺒﺜﻘــﺔ ﻋــﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳــﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳــﻴﻜﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴــﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴﺔ .ﻭﻇﻬﺮ ﺟﺪﻝ ﻛﺒﲑ ﺣـﻮﻝ ﻋـﺪﺩ ﻫـﺬﻩ ﺍﳉﻮﺍﻧـﺐ
ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻱ ،ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﺈﺣﺼـﺎﺋﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﻣﻌﲎ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﳑﺎ ﺃﺩﻯ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻌﺪﺩ ﺍﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟـﺬﻛﺎﺀ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻭﻣﻨـﻬﺎ ﻣﺘﻌﻠـﻖ ﺑﺎﳋﺼـﺎﺋﺺ ﺍﻟﺴـﻴﻜﻮﻣﺘﺮﻳﺔ، ﺍﳉﻤﺎﻋﻴــﺔ ﺍﻟــﱵ ﺍﺧﺘﻠﻔــﺖ ﰲ ﻋــﺪﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣــﻞ ﺍﻟــﱵ
ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺗﻌﺮﺿﺖ ﳉﻮﺍﻧـﺐ ﻧﻘـﺪ؛ ﻟﻌﺠﺰﻫـﺎ ﺗﻘﻴﺴﻬﺎ ،ﻓﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻘﻴﺲ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﻋﻮﺍﻣـﻞ ،ﻭﻣﻨـﻬﺎ ﻣـﺎ
ﻋﻦ ﺗﻔﺴـﲑ ﺑﻌـﺾ ﺍﻟﻘﻀـﺎﻳﺎ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴـﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴـﻲ، ﻳﻘﻴﺲ ﺃﺭﺑﻌﺔ ،ﻭﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻘـﻴﺲ ﲬﺴـﺔ....ﺍﱁ ،ﻣﺜـﻞ
ﻓﻈﻬﺮﺕ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴـﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨـﺔ )Latent (LTT ﺍﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭ ﻭﻛﺴــﻠﺮ ،ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭ ﺍﻭﺗــﻴﺲ ﻟﻴﻨــﻮﻥ ،ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭﺍﺕ
Trait Theoryﻛﻨﻈﺮﻳــــﺔ ﺑﺪﻳﻠــــﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻈﺮﻳــــﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻌﺮﻓﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﻟﻴﻔﻮﺭﻧﻴﺎ ،ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﺗـﻞ،
ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻴﺔ ،ﻭﻗﺪﻣﺖ ﺣﻠﻮﻻﹰ ﳌﻌﻈﻢ ﺍﳌﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻭﻏﲑﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ.
ﻋﺠﺰﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻴﺔ ﻋـﻦ ﺗﻔﺴـﲑﻫﺎ؛ ﻟـﺬﻟﻚ
ﻭﻳﺸﲑ ﻋﻄﻮﻑ ) (١٩٨١ﺃﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺗـﺆﺩﻱ ﺩﻭﺭﺍ
ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜﺎﻥ ﰲ ﺩﺭﺍﺳـﺘﻬﻤﺎ ﺇﱃ ﻣﻌـﺎﻳﲑ ﻣﻌﺘﻤـﺪﺓ
ﺣﻴﻮﻳــﺎ ﰲ ﺍﻟﱪﻧــﺎﻣﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤــﻲ ﻭﻋﻤﻠﻴــﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻋــﺪﺍﺩ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ ﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻣﻬﻤﺎ ﺑـﺎﻟﺮﺑﻂ
ﻟﻸﺳﺎﻟﻴﺐ ﻭﺍﳌﻨﺎﻫﺞ .ﺃﻣﺎ ﻋﻄﻴﺔ ) (١٩٩٣ﻓﲑﻯ ﺃﻧـﻪ ﰲ
ﺑﲔ ﻗﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩ ﻭﺑﲔ ﺃﺩﺍﺋـﻪ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺓ ،ﺣﻴـﺚ ﲢـﺪﺩ
ﺿﻮﺀ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺘﺠﻤﻊ ﻟﺪﻳﻨﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎﺕ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ
ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳـﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗـﺔ ﺑـﲔ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻔـﺮﺩ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺍﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ
ﺍﻟﻄﻠﺒﺔ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻞ ﺍﳌﻨﺎﻫﺞ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﻈﻢ ﺍﳌـﺪﺍﺭﺱ
ﻣﻌﲔ ﻭﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﻜﻤﻦ ﻭﺭﺍﺀ ﻫـﺬﺍ
ﲤﻴﻞ ﻻﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺟﺰﺀﺍ ﻣـﻦ
ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻭﺗﻔﺴــﺮﻩHambleton & Swaminathan, ) ،
ﺭﻭﺗﲔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤـﻞ ﺍﻟﺘـﻮﺟﻴﻬﻲ .ﻭﻳﺸـﲑ ﻫـﺎﴰﻲ ﻭﺯﻣـﻼﺅﻩ
،(1985; Lord, 1980ﻭﻗــﺪ ﺷـﻜﻠﺖ ﻫــﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳــﺔ
) (Hashmi et al., 2010ﺃﻥ ﺍﳍــﺪﻑ ﻣــﻦ ﺗﻄــﻮﻳﺮ
ﺇﻃﺎﺭﺍ ﻟﻠﺘﻮﺟﻪ ﺍﳊﺎﱄ ﻭﺍﳌﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ ﰲ ﺍﺧﺘﻴـﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺍﺕ
ﺍﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟــﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻫــﻮ ﲢﺴــﲔ ﻗــﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﳌــﺘﻌﻠﻢ ﻋﻠــﻰ
).( Anastasi, 1982
ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻢ.
ﻭﺗﻘﻮﻡ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺮﺍﺿـﺎﺕ
ﻭﻗﺪ ﻭﺟﻬﺖ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻹﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟـﺬﻛﺎﺀ
ﺍﻷﺳﺎﺳـــــــﻴﺔ ،ﻫـــــــﻲ :ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳـــــــﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻌـــــــﺪ
ﻭﺍﻟﻘـــﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴـــﺔ ﺿـــﻤﻦ ﻧﻄـــﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳـــﺔ
) ،(Unidimensionalityﻭﺍﻻﺳـــــﺘﻘﻼﻝ ﺍﳌﻮﺿـــــﻌﻲ
ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻲ ،ﻓﻘﺪ ﺃﺷـﺎﺭ ﻟﻮﻳـﺪ
) ،(Local Independenceﻭﻭﺗﲑﻳــﺔ ﻣــﻨﺤﲎ ﺧﺎﺻ ـﻴﺔ
) (Loyd, 2004ﺃﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟـﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﺟﻬـﺖ ﻗﺼـﻮﺭﺍﹰ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘـــﺮﺓ ) .(Item Characteristic Curveﻓﻴﻌﺘـــﱪ
ﰲ ﺍﳋﺼﺎﺋﺺ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻜﻮﻣﺘﺮﻳﺔ ،ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﻋﻠـﻰ
ﺍﻓﺘﺮﺍﺽ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ﺷﻴﺌﺎ ﻣﺮﻏﻮﺑﺎ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻋﻨﺪ ﲨﻴـﻊ
ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻔﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﻤـﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ
ﻣﻄــﻮﺭﻱ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭﺍﺕ؛ ﻭﺫﻟــﻚ ﻷﺟــﻞ ﺗﻄــﻮﻳﺮ ﻋﻤﻠﻴــﺔ
ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻳﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﻋﻠﻴﻬـﺎ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ .ﻭﰲ
٣
) ،Modelsﻭﻳﺴﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺬﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﻋﲔ ﻣﻌﻠﻤـﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺴـﲑ ﻟــﺪﺭﺟﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺗﻌﺰﻳﺰﻫــﺎ ،ﻭﺍﳌﻘﺼــﻮﺩ
ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ ﲤﺜﻞ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ،ﺃﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻤـﺘﲔ ﲤﺜـﻞ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺮﺍﺽ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋـﺎﻣﻼﹰ ﻭﺍﺣـﺪﺍﹰ ﺳـﺎﺋﺪﺍﹰ ﻋﻠـﻰ
ﺍﺣﺪﺍﳘﺎ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﻭﲤﺜﻞ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻴﻴﺰ، ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ ،ﲝﻴﺚ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺔ
ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺒــﺎ ﻣــﺎ ﺗﺴــﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﻧﻈﺮﻳــﺔ ﺍﻟﺴــﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨــﺔ ﺍﻟــﱵ ﻳﻘﻴﺴــﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭ .ﻭﻳﻘﺼــﺪ ﺑﺎﻻﺳــﺘﻘﻼﻝ
ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻠﻮﺟﺴـﱵ ﺫﺍ ﺍﳌﻌﻠﻤـﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺣـﺪﺓ ﻭﺍﳌﺴـﻤﻰ ﺍﳌﻮﺿــﻮﻋﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜــﻮﻥ ﺍﺳــﺘﺠﺎﺑﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻔــﺮﺩ ﻟﻠﻔﻘــﺮﺍﺕ
ﺑﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ )(Rasch Model؛ ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﳌﺎ ﻳﺘﻤﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻣـﻦ ﺍﳌﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻠﺔ ﺍﺳـﺘﻘﻼﻻﹰ ﺇﺣﺼـﺎﺋﻴﺎﹰ
ﺃﻧﻪ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﺘﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻣـﻊ ﻫـﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻤـﻮﺫﺝ ﻓـﺎﻥ ) (Statistically Independentﻋﻨــﺪ ﻣﺴــﺘﻮﻯ ﻗــﺪﺭﺓ
ﻣﻌﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟـﱵ ﺗﺘﻤﺜـﻞ ﰲ ﺩﺭﺟـﺔ ﺻـﻌﻮﺑﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻌﲔ .ﻭﺣﱴ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺮﺍﺽ ﺻﺤﻴﺤﺎﹰ ﳚﺐ ﺃﻥ ﻻ
ﳝﻜــﻦ ﺗﻘــﺪﻳﺮﻫﺎ ﺑﺸــﻜﻞ ﻣﺴــﺘﻘﻞ ﻋــﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨــﺔ ﺗﺆﺛﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﳌﻔﺤﻮﺹ ﻋـﻦ ﻓﻘـﺮﺓ ﻣـﺎ ﰲ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ
ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻗـﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓـﺮﺍﺩ ﳝﻜـﻦ ﺗﻘـﺪﻳﺮﻫﺎ ﺳــﻠﺒﺎﹰ ﺃﻭ ﺇﳚﺎﺑ ـﺎﹰ ﰲ ﺍﺳــﺘﺠﺎﺑﺘﻪ ﻟﻠﻔﻘــﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺧــﺮﻯ ﰲ
ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﻋـﻦ ﺩﺭﺟـﺔ ﺻـﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ،ﻭﰲ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ .ﺃﻣﺎ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﺎﻻﻓﺘﺮﺍﺽ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺚ ﻓﻬﻮ ﻳﻮﻓﺮ
ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺘﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﺣﺘﻤـــﺎﻻﺕ ﺇﺟﺎﺑـــﺔ ﺍﳌﻔﺤﻮﺻـــﲔ ﻋـــﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـــﺮﺓ ﰲ
ﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻳﺆﻟﻒ ﳎﻤﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﳛﺼﻞ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﳌﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﺇﺟﺎﺑـﺔ ﺻـﺤﻴﺤﺔ ،ﻭﻛـﻮﻥ
ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫـﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﺣﺼـﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻛﺎﻓﻴـﺎ ﻟﺘﻘـﺪﻳﺮ ﺍﳌﻨﺤﲎ ﺗﺮﺍﻛﻤﻴﺎﹰ ﺻﺎﻋﺪﺍﹰ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻳﺸـﲑ ﺑﻮﺿـﻮﺡ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ
ﻗﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﺆﻟﻒ ﳎﻤﻮﻉ ﺍﻷﻓـﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﻟـﺬﻳﻦ ﺃﺟـﺎﺑﻮﺍ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﺇﺟﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﺇﺟﺎﺑـﺔ ﺻـﺤﻴﺤﺔ ﻳـﺰﺩﺍﺩ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻳـﺎﺩ
ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﺍﺟﺎﺑﺔ ﺻﺤﻴﺤﺔ ﺍﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻛﺎﻓﻴـﺎ ﻟﺘﻘـﺪﻳﺮ ﻗﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﳌﻔﺤﻮﺹ ،ﻭﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﺓ ﺗﻮﺻﻒ ﻫـﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻨﺤﻨﻴـﺎﺕ
ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺘﻬﺎ ).(Masters, 1982 ﰲ ﳕﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺼﻤﻤﺔ ﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﲰـﺔ ﻭﺍﺣـﺪﺓ
ﺑﺪﻻﻟﺔ ﻣﻌﻠﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ ،ﺃﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻤﺘﲔ ﺃﻭ ﺛﻼﺙ ﻣﻌـﺎﱂ ﺃﻭ
ﻭﳝﻜﻦ ﺗﺼﻨﻴﻒ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻃﻮﺭﺕ ﻣـﻦ ﳕـﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ،
ﺃﻛﺜﺮ .ﺃﻣﺎ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﺴـﺮﻋﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻓﺘﻔﺘـﺮﺽ ﳕـﺎﺫﺝ
ﺗﺒﻌــﺎ ﻟﺘــﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﻓﻘــﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻘﻴــﺎﺱ ﺇﱃ ﳕــﺎﺫﺝ ﺧﺎﺻــﺔ
ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ ﺃﻥ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﺮﻋﺔ ﻻ ﻳﻠﻌـﺐ
ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎﺋﻲ ) ،(Dichotomousﻭﺗﺴﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ
ﺩﻭﺭﺍﹰ ﰲ ﺍﻹﺟﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻦ ﻓﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ;(Acton, 2003
ﺗﺄﺧﺬ ﺍﻹﺟﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺻﻔﺮﺍ ﺃﻭ ﻭﺍﺣـﺪﺍ ،ﻭﳕـﻮﺫﺝ
& Albert & Ghosh, 2000; Hambleton
ﺳﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﺪﻳﺮ ) (RatingScaleﻷﻧـﺪﺭﻳﺶ ،ﻭﻳﺴـﺘﺨﺪﻡ
).Swaminathan, 1985
ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧـﺎﺕ ﻣـﺄﺧﻮﺫﺓ ﻣـﻦ ﺳـﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـﺪﻳﺮ.
ﻭﳕـــﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺘﻘـــﺪﻳﺮ ﺍﳉﺰﺋـــﻲ ) (Partial Creditﺍﻟـــﱵ ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﻨﺒﺜﻖ ﻋﻦ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨـﺔ ﳎﻤﻮﻋـﺔ
ﺗﺴﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﺘﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻻﺟﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻋـﺪﺓ ﻣــﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻤــﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟــﱵ ﺍﺳــﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﰲ ﺑﻨــﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﻘــﺎﻳﻴﺲ
ﺧﻄــﻮﺍﺕ ،ﺑﺎﻻﺿــﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﱃ ﳕــﺎﺫﺝ ) (Binomial Trial ﻭﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﳝﻜـﻦ ﻣـﻦ ﺧﻼﳍـﺎ ﺍﳊﺼـﻮﻝ ﻋﻠـﻰ
ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﺟﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻋﺪﺓ ﳏـﺎﻭﻻﺕ ﻣﺆﺷـــﺮﺍﺕ ﺇﺣﺼـــﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻘـــﺮﺓ ،ﻻ ﺗﻌﺘﻤـــﺪ ﻋﻠـــﻰ
ﻣﺴـــﺘﻘﻠﺔ ) .(Wright & Masters, 1982ﻭﻗـــﺪ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ ﺍﳌﻔﺤﻮﺻﲔ ﻭﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﻢ ،ﻭﻻ ﺗﻌﺘﻤﺪ ﻋﻠـﻰ
ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜﺎﻥ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﳊﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺘﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﺻــﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﻓﻘــﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻘﻴــﺎﺱ ) Crocker & Algina,
ﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎﺋﻲ ﰲ ﲢﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻧﻈـﺮﺍ ﳌﻨﺎﺳـﺒﺘﻪ ﻟﻼﺟﺎﺑـﺎﺕ ،(1986ﻭﻣـــﻦ ﻫﻨـــﺎ ﺃﻋﻄﻴـــﺖ ﺃﳘﻴـــﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺗﻐـــﲑ
ﻋﻦ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ. ) (Invarianceﰲ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﲔ ﳐﺘﻠـﻒ
ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ،ﻭﻭﺻﻔﺖ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻷﳘﻴﺔ ﺑﺄﺎ ﺃﻛﱪ
ﻭﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﲝﺜﺖ ﰲ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ،ﺩﺭﺍﺳـﺔ ﺃﺑـﻮ
ﺍﻟﺼــﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻬﻤــﺔ ﰲ ﻧﻈﺮﻳــﺔ ﺍﻟﺴــﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨــﺔ
ﺟﺮﺍﺩ ) (٢٠٠٨ﺍﻟﱵ ﻫـﺪﻓﺖ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳـﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﳕـﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ
).(Lord, 1980
ﰲ ﺗﻄﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﺗـﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟـﺚ ﻟﻠـﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺼـﻮﺭﺓ )ﺃ(،
ﻭﺍﱃ ﻋﻤــﻞ ﻣﻌــﺎﻳﲑ ﳐﺘﻠﻔــﺔ ﺗﻔﺴــﺮ ﻣــﻦ ﺧﻼﳍــﺎ ﻭﻗﺪ ﻃﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﱪ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺎﺿﻴﺔ ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﳕﺎﺫﺝ
ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﻟﻸﻓﺮﺍﺩ ،ﻭﰎ ﺗﻄﺒﻴـﻖ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ ،ﻭﲣﺘﻠﻒ ﻫـﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻤـﺎﺫﺝ ﰲ
ﻋﻴﻨـﺔ ﻣﻜﻮﻧـﺔ ﻣـﻦ ٢٤٠ﻃﺎﻟﺒـﺎﹰ ﻭﻃﺎﻟﺒـﺔ ﻣـﻦ ﻃﻠﺒـﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺮﻳﺎﺿﻲ ﳌـﻨﺤﲎ ﺧﺎﺻـﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺓ،
ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺱ ﺍﳌﻔﺘﻮﺣﺔ .ﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳـﺔ ﺇﱃ ﻭﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺷﻴﻮﻋﺎ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻠﻮﺟﺴـﺘﻴﺔ
ﺣﺬﻑ ﻓﻘﺮﺗﲔ ﻣﻦ ﻓﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺼـﻨﻴﻒ؛ ﻟﻌـﺪﻡ ) (Logistic Modelsﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤـــﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟـــﱵ ﺗﺴـــﺘﺨﺪﻡ
ﻣﻼﺀﻣﺘــﻬﺎ ﻟﻨﻤــﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ .ﻭﻗــﺎﻡ ﻣﺴــﻌﻮﺩ )(٢٠٠٤ ﺍﳌــﻨﺤﲎ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌــﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻛﻤــﻲ (Normal Ogive
٤
٢٠١٤ ﳎﻠﺪ ٨ﻋﺪﺩ ١ ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ -ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺑﻮﺱ
ﺑــﺮﺍﻣﺞ ﻧﻈﺮﻳــﺔ ﺍﻟﺴــﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨــﻪ؛ ﺃﺷــﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﺘــﺎﺋﺞ ﺑﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ﻟﺘﻄﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺭﺳـﻢ
ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ٤٠ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﺭﻳﺎﺿـﻴﺎﺕ ،ﻭ ٤٧ﻓﻘـﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺮﺟـﻞ ،ﺃﺷـﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺠﻬـﺎ ﺇﱃ ﺣـﺬﻑ ٥ﻓﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ﻣـﻦ
ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺀﺓ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ. ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻷﺻﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺒـﺎﻟﻎ ﻋـﺪﺩﻫﺎ ٧٤ﻓﻘـﺮﺓ،
ﻭﲢﻘﻴﻖ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﻼﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﰲ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻪ ﺍﳉﺪﻳﺪﺓ
ﻭﺃﺟﺮﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻳﺮﻯ ) (1996ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺑﻌﻨـﻮﺍﻥ"ﺍﳋﺼـﺎﺋﺺ
ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺘﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ،ﻭﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﻣﻌـﺎﻳﲑ
ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻜﻮﻣﺘﺮﻳﺔ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﻋﺪﺍﺩﻱ ﺑﺎﺳـﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ
ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ﺑﻌـﺪ ﺍﻟﺘـﺪﺭﻳﺞ ،ﻛﻤـﺎ ﰎ ﺍﻗﺘـﺮﺍﺡ ﺻـﻮﺭﺓ ﻣـﻦ
ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ" .ﻭﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻏﺮﺽ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻗـﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺣـﺚ
ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺍﻟﺰﻱ ﺑـﲔ ﺍﻟﺜﻘـﺎﻓﺘﲔ
ﺑﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﻋﺪﺍﺩﻱ ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﻦ ٥٠
ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﻭﺭﻭﺑﻴﺔ .ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﺟﺮﻯ ﻛﲑﺗﺲ )(Curtis, 2001
ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻃﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﳌﺮﺣﻠـﺔ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳـﻄﺔ ﳑـﻦ
ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺪﻑ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺍﻷﺷـﺨﺎﺹ ﻏـﲑ ﺍﳌﻄـﺎﺑﻘﲔ
ﻳﺪﺭﺳﻮﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ،ﺣﻴـﺚ ﰎ ﺍﺧﺘﻴـﺎﺭ ﻣﺪﺭﺳـﺘﲔ
ﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ﰲ ﺗﻘـﺪﻳﺮ ﻣﻌـﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ،ﰎ ﺗﻄﺒﻴـﻖ
ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻄﺘﲔ ﰱ ﴰﺎﱄ ﻣﺪﻳﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﻳﺎﺽ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜـﺔ
ﻣﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻳﺘﻜﻮﻥ ﻣـﻦ ٢٥ﻓﻘـﺮﺓ ﺗﻘـﻴﺲ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻫـﺎﺕ ﳓـﻮ
ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴـﺔ ﺍﻟﺴـﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ ،ﻭﰎ ﺍﺧﺘﻴـﺎﺭ ٥ﻓﺼـﻮﻝ ﺩﺭﺍﺳـﻴﺔ
ﺍﳌﺴﺎﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﳉﺎﻣﻌﻴـﺔ ،ﻭﺫﻟـﻚ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻋﻴﻨـﺔ ﺗﺘﻜـﻮﻥ ﻣـﻦ
ﺑﻮﺍﻗﻊ ٣٠ﻃﺎﻟﺒـﺎ ﰱ ﻛـﻞ ﻣﺪﺭﺳـﺔ ،ﻭﻗـﺪ ﺑﻠـﻎ ﺣﺠـﻢ
٥١٣٦١ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻭﻃﺎﻟﺒـﺔ .ﺃﺷـﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﺘـﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳـﺔ ﺇﱃ
ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺔ ١٤٧ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﺒﻌﺎﺩ ٣ﻃﻼﺏ ﻟﻌﺪﻡ
ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ١٧ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺇﺑﻘـﺎﺀ
ﺍﻟﺘﺰﺍﻣﻬﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﺎﺕ .ﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ
ﺍﻷﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﻏﲑ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﲔ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻳﺆﺩﻱ ﺇﱃ ﻧﻘﺼـﺎﻥ
ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒــﺎﺭ ﺍﳌــﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﺗﺘﺤﻘــﻖ ﻓﻴــﻪ ﺍﳋﺼــﺎﺋﺺ
ﰲ ﺗﺒﺎﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺍﻟﺴـﻤﺔ .ﺃﻣـﺎ
ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻜﻮﻣﺘﺮﻳﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ .ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ
ﻃﻨﻄﺎﻭﻱ ) (٢٠٠٠ﻓﻘـﺪ ﺍﺳـﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﳕـﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ﰲ
ﺃﺷـﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﺭﺍﺳـﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺷـﻲ ) (El- korashy, 1995ﺇﱃ
ﺗﻄﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳌﺼـﻔﻮﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﺘﺎﺑﻌـﺔ ﻟـﺮﻳﻔﻦ ،ﺣﻴـﺚ
ﺣﺬﻑ ٢٤ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻼﺋﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻤـﻮﺫﺝ ﻣـﻦ ﺃﺻـﻞ٨٠
ﺗﻮﺻﻠﺖ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﲤﺎﺛﻞ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﰲ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ
ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ،ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ،ﻻﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ
ﰲ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ،ﻭﺗﺮﺗﻴﺒـﻬﺎ ﰲ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ
ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺃﻭﺗﺲ -ﻟﻴﻨﻮﻥ ﻟﻠﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﳌﺘﻘﺪﻡ
ﺍﻷﺻﻠﻲ ،ﻭﻗـﺪ ﺑﻠـﻎ ﻋـﺪﺩ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟـﱵ ﱂ ﺗﻼﺋـﻢ
ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ) ،(Jﺣﻴﺚ ﰎ ﺗﻄﺒﻴـﻖ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﻋﻴﻨـﺔ
ﺍﻟﻨﻤـﻮﺫﺝ ١١ﻓﻘـﺮﺓ ،ﻭﺑﻠـﻎ ﻋـﺪﺩ ﻓﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ﰲ
ﻣﻜﻮﻧﺔ ﻣﻦ ٥٩٩ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻭﻃﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﻣـﻦ ﻃﻠﺒـﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻮﻳـﺔ
ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ٤٩ﻓﻘﺮﺓ .ﻭﰲ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺃﺟﺮﺍﻫﺎ
ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻭﻃﻠﺒﺔ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻳﺖ .ﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ
ﺗﻮﻟﻮﻣﺘﺰﻭﺟﻠــﻮ ) (Touloumtzoglou, 1999ﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴــﻞ
ﺃﻥ ﳕـﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ﺃﻛﺜـﺮ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴـﺔ ﰱ ﺇﻋﻄـﺎﺀ ﺗﻘـﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ
ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺪﺭﻳﺞ ،ﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳـﺪ ﻣﻌـﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﻔﻘـﺮﺍﺕ ﰲ
ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺛﺎﺑﺘﺔ ﻟﺘﺪﺭﳚﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻔﺮﺩﺍﺕ ﻭﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ
ﻣﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻫﺎﺕ ﳓﻮ ﺍﻟﻔﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺼﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺘﻜـﻮﻥ
ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳـﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﻴـﺎﺱ .ﻭﺍﺳـﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﻋـﻼﻡ
ﻣﻦ ٢٠ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ،ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻠﻮﻏـﺎﺭﻳﺘﻤﻲ
) (١٩٨٥ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻠﻮﻏﺎﺭﻳﺘﻤﻲ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻱ ﺍﳌﻌﻠﻤﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ
ﺫﻱ ﺍﳌﻌﻠﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺣﺪﺓ ،ﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺠﻬﺎ ﺇﱃ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ١٨
ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻴﻘﻈﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺘﻜـﻮﻥ ﻣـﻦ ٢٢
ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ .ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﻗـﺎﻡ ﻓﺘﺤـﻲ ) (1999ﺑﺈﻋـﺎﺩﺓ
ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻣﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﻭﻳﻬـﺪﻑ ﺇﱃ ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ ﻣـﺪﻯ ﻗـﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻔـﺮﺩ
ﺗﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﺗﻞ ﻏﲑ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﻴﺰ ﺛﻘﺎﻓﻴﺎ ﻟﻠﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ
ﻋﻠــﻰ ﺇﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗــﺎﺕ ،ﺣﻴــﺚ ﰎ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘــﻪ ﻋﻠــﻰ ١٢٦
ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱏ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ،ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﻣﻜﻮﻧﺔ ﻣـﻦ
ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻭﻃﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ ﰲ ﺃﻗﺴـﺎﻡ ﳐﺘﻠﻔـﺔ
١٠١٥ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎﹰ ﻭﻃﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻃﻠﺒـﺔ ﺍﳌﺮﺣﻠـﺔ ﺍﻹﻋﺪﺍﺩﻳـﺔ.
ﺑﻜﻠﻴــﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻴــﺔ ﰲ ﺟﺎﻣﻌــﺔ ﺍﻷﺯﻫــﺮ ،ﻭﺃﺷــﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﺘــﺎﺋﺞ
ﻭﺗﻮﺻﻠﺖ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﲢﺮﺭ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺻـﻌﻮﺑﺔ
ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ١٧ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ.
ﻣﻔﺮﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﻦ ﺑـﺎﻗﻲ ﻣﻔـﺮﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒـﺎﺭ ،ﻭﲢـﺮﺭ
ﻣﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻭﺃﺳﺌﻠﺘﻬﺎ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﻗﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ
ﻫــﺪﻓﺖ ﻫــﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳــﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻘﺼــﻲ ﺍﳋﺼــﺎﺋﺺ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ،ﻭﲢﺮﺭ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﻗﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻔﺮﺩﺍﺕ
ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻜﻮﻣﺘﺮﻳﺔ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺫﻛﺎﺀ ﲨﻌﻲ ﻣﺼﻮﺭ ﻟﻸﻃﻔﺎﻝ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ .ﻭﺃﺟﺮﻯ ﻓﺎﻥ ) (Fan, 1998ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﳌﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻣﺪﻯ
ﺍﻷﺭﺩﻧــﻴﲔ ﰲ ﺳــﻦ ) (٩- ٥ﺳــﻨﻮﺍﺕ ﻃﻮﺭﺗــﻪ ﻣﻠﻜــﺎﻭﻱ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﻘﻴﺎﺱ )ﺗﻘﻮﱘ ﺗﻜﺴـﺎﺱ ﻟﻠﻤﻬـﺎﺭﺍﺕ
) ،(١٩٧٩ﻭﺫﻟــﻚ ﻭﻓـــﻖ ﺍﻟﻨﻤــﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺜﻨـــﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﻟﺘـــﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﺍﻷﻛﺎﺩﳝﻴﺔ( ،ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ ٤٨ﻓﻘـﺮﺓ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘـﺮﺍﺀﺓ ،ﻭ٦٠
) (Dichotomousﻛﺄﺣـــﺪ ﳕـــﺎﺫﺝ ﻧﻈﺮﻳـــﺔ ﺍﻟﺴـــﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻘــﺮﺓ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺮﻳﺎﺿــﻴﺎﺕ ،ﻭﺫﻟــﻚ ﻋﻠــﻰ ١٩٣٢٤٠ﻃﺎﻟﺒــﺎ
ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ ﺍﳌﻨﺒﺜﻘﺔ ﻋـﻦ ﳕـﻮﺫﺝ ﺭﺍﺵ ) ،(Raschﺇﺫ ﲤﺜﻠـﺖ ﻭﻃﺎﻟﺒﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺻﻮﻝ ﳐﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺼﻒ ﺍﳊﺎﺩﻱ ﻋﺸـﺮ.
ﻣﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺑﺎﳊﺎﺟﺔ ﺇﱃ ﻭﺟـﻮﺩ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﻗﻴـﺎﺱ ﰒ ﲢﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻹﺟﺎﺑﺎﺕ ﺑﺎﺳـﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﺮﻧـﺎﻣﺞ BILOGﺃﺣـﺪ
٥
٦
٢٠١٤ ﳎﻠﺪ ٨ﻋﺪﺩ ١ ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ -ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺑﻮﺱ
٧
ﺟﺪﻭﻝ . ٣
Eigenvalue
ﻳﺘﻀﺢ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٣ﺃﻥ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ ﳌﺘﻮﺳﻄﺎﺕ 1
ﻭﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ ﳌﺘﻮﺳﻄﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٣
ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ ﻭﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﻟﻜﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﺪﺭﳚﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻭﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ
ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ
ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ
ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺀ ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﻡ
ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ
ZSTD ZSTD
MNSQ MNSQ
٠,١- ٠,٩٥ ٠,١- ٠,٩٠ ٠,٨٦ ٢,٤٠ ٢٠,٠ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ
٠,٨ ١,٣٢ ٠,٦ ٠,٣٩ ٠,٤٢ ١,٣٢ ٢,٣ ﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ
٨
ﲟﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺗﺒﲔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﲬﺲ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﻗﺪﺭﺍﻢ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻘﺒﻮﻟﺔ ،ﺍﻻ ﺃﻥ
ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ،ﺣﻴﺚ ﺍﺎ ﺗﻘﻊ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑﺎﻢ ﻟﻠﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﻴﺪﺓ ﻋﻦ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ
ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ،ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺫﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺭﻗﺎﻡ ،١٢ ،١١ ،٧ ،٢ ﻗﺪﺭﺍﻢ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻘﺒﻮﻟﺔ ﻭﻏﲑ ﻣﺘﻮﻗﻌﺔ؛ ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻛﺎﻥ
،١٤ﻭﺑﺬﻟﻚ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺑﺼﻮﺭﺗﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ١٦ ﻫﺆﻻﺀ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﲔ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ.
ﻓﻘﺮﺓ .ﻭﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻏﲑ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﲔ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ
ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﺒﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺬﻳﻦ ﱂ ﺗﺘﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺍﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑﺎﻢ
ﻏﲑ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﲤﺖ ﺇﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻟﻠﺤﺼﻮﻝ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﻣﻊ ﺗﻮﻗﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ،ﻭﺇﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﺮﺓ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ
ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻣﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ
ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﺪﻯ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ،ﰎ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ
ﻭﻗﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ .ﻭﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٥ﻳﺒﲔ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ
ﻣﻌﻠﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﻟﻜﻞ ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ،ﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ
ﻣﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ.
ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﰲ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﻫﺎ ،ﻭﻗﻴﻢ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﺕ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ
ﻳﺘﺒﲔ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٥ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺗﺮﺍﻭﺣﺖ ﺑﲔ ٦ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ ) ،(Infit ZSTDﻭﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ
ﻛﺤﺪ ﺃﺩﱏ ﻭ ١٥ﻛﺤﺪ ﺃﻋﻠﻰ ،ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﻟﻠﺘﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ ) ،(Outfit ZSTDﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﻗﻴﻢ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﺕ
ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺮﺍﻭﺣﺖ ﻗﻴﻢ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻟﻜﻞ ﻣﻌﻠﻤﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ
ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﻟﻠﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺑﲔ ٠,٦٠-ﻭ ٣,١١ﻟﻮﺟﻴﺖ، ﻟﻠﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ .ﻭﻳﺒﲔ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٤ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻄﺎﺕ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﺑﻴﺔ
ﻭﲟﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﻗﺪﺭﻩ ١,٧٩ﻟﻮﺟﻴﺖ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﺑﻠﻎ ﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻑ ﻭﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻳﺔ ﻟﻜﻞ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﻌﺎﱂ
ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ١,٨٥ﻟﻮﺟﻴﺖ .ﺃﻣﺎ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ،ﻭﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﰲ ﻣﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻫﺬﻩ
ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺑﻠﻎ ،٠,٠٧ﻭﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻤﺔ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ ،ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﻗﻴﻢ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ
ﺇﱃ ﺩﻗﺔ ﲢﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺔ، ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ ) (MNSQﳍﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﱂ.
ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﻔﺘﺮﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﻗﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ
ﻳﺘﻀﺢ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٤ﺃﻥ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ ﳌﺘﻮﺳﻄﺎﺕ
ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺩﻗﺔ ﻛﻠﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﺃﻗﻞ .ﻭﻳﺒﲔ
ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ ﻳﻘﺘﺮﺏ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺣﺪ ،ﻭﺃﻥ
ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٦ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺔ
ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ ﳌﺘﻮﺳﻄﺎﺕ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ.
ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ ﻳﻘﺘﺮﺏ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺮ ،ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﺎ
ﻳﻔﺘﺮﺿﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻛﻮﺿﻊ ﻣﺜﺎﱄ .ﻭﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠﻖ
ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٤
ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ ﻭﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﻟﻜﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ،ﻭﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ
ﳍﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﱂ
ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ
ﺍﳋﻄﺄ
ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺀ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺀ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﻡ
ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ
ZSTD ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ ZSTD ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ
٠,١- ٠,٩٧ ٠,٠ ٠,٩٩ ٠,٢٥ ٠,٠٠ ١٤٧,٥ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ
١,٠ ٠,٣٠ ٠,٤ ٠,٠٧ ٠,٠٧ ٠,٩١ ٢٠,٠ ﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ
ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٥
ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ
ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ
ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ
ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺀ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺀ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ
ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﳋﺎﻡ
ZSTD ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ ZSTD ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ
ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳـــــــــﻂ
٠,١- ٠,٩٤ ٠,٠ ١,٠٠ ٠,٧٤ ١,٧٩ ١٢,٨
ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ
٠,٧ ٠,٤٦ ٠,٦ ٠,٢١ ٠,١٧ ١,٨٥ ١,٩ ﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ
٢,٨ ٣,٥٤ ٢,٤ ١,٥٥ ١,٠٧ ٣,١١ ١٥,٠ ﺃﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻼﻣﺔ
١,٣- ٠,٢١ ٠,٦٤ ٠,٦٤ ٠,٥٥ ٠,٦٠- ٦,٠ ﺃﺩﱏ ﻋﻼﻣﺔ
ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ٠.٠٧
٩
ﺟﺪﻭﻝ .٦
ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ
ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ
ﺍﳋﻄﺄ
Outfit Infint ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ
ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ
ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳋﺎﻡ Raw
Model Measure
ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ Score
Error
ZSTD MNSQ ZSTD MNSQ
٠,١- ٠,٩٤ ٠,٠ ١,٠٠ ٠,٢٥ ٠,٠٠ ١١٩,٧ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﳊﺴﺎﰊ
٠,٧ ٠,١٧ ٠,٣ ٠,٠٤ ٠,٠٨ ٠,٩٩ ١٩,٦ ﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ
١,٥ ١,٢٨ ٠,٨ ١,٠٧ ٠,٥١ ٢,١٣ ١٤٦,٠ ﺃﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻼﻣﺔ
١,١- ٠.٦٧ ٠,٤- ٠,٩٣ ٠,١٨ ٢,١٦- ٦٤,٠ ﺃﺩﱏ ﻋﻼﻣﺔ
ﺟﺪﻭﻝ٧
ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ،ﻭﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ
ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ
ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ
ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ
ﻣﻊ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ
ﻣﻊ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ﻣﻊ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ﻣﻊ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻛﻜﻞ
ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻛﻜﻞ
٠,٥١ ٠,٤٧ .٩ ٠,٥١ ٠,٤٥ .١
٠,٥٦ ٠,٥٠ .١٠ ٠,٥٠ ٠,٤٨ .٢
٠,٥٥ ٠,٥٢ .١١ ٠,٤٣ ٠,٣٩ .٣
٠,٤٣ ٠,٤٢ .١٢ ٠,٥٠ ٠,٤٨ .٤
٠,٤٨ ٠,٤٦ .١٣ ٠,٤٤ ٠,٤١ .٥
٠,٤٠ ٠,٣٧ .١٤ ٠,٤٣ ٠,٤٠ .٦
٠,٣٩ ٠,٣٦ .١٥ ٠,٥٨ ٠,٥٤ .٧
٠,٣٦ ٠,٣٣ .١٦ ٠,٤٥ ٠,٣٨ .٨
،(Analysisﻭﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻴﺔ ) Corelational ﻳﺸﲑ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٦ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﻗﻴﻢ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺗﺮﺍﻭﺣﺖ
،(Techniquesﻭﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻴﺔ ) Experimental ﻣﻦ ٢,١٦-ﺇﱃ ٢,١٣ﻟﻮﺟﻴﺖ ،ﻭﲟﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﻳﺴﺎﻭﻱ ﺻﻔﺮ
.(Cronbach, 1971) (Techniquesﻭﺇﻥ ﺃﻛﺜﺮﻫﺎ ﻟﻮﺟﻴﺖ ،ﻭﺍﻻﳓﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ٠,٩٩ﻟﻮﺟﻴﺖ .ﺃﻣﺎ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ
ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻣﺎ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺗﺸﻤﻞ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﳌﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﻓﻘﺪ
ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻴﺔ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ ﰲ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺻﺪﻕ ﺍﳌﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﺑﻠﻐﺖ ٠,٢٦ﻭﻫﻲ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﺩﻗﺔ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ
ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﻠﻲ ) Factor ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ ،ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﻔﺘﺮﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ
،(Analysisﻭﻣﺼﻔﻮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ،ﻭﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﳌﺘﻌﺪﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺩﻗﺔ ﻛﻠﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ
ﺍﻻﳓﺪﺍﺭ ﻭﲢﻠﻴﻞ )،(Multitraite-Multimethod ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﰲ ﻗﻴﺎﺳﻬﺎ ﺃﻗﻞ.
ﺍﻹﺟﺮﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻭﻣﻦ .(Regression )Analyses
ﻭﻗﺪ ﰎ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﻗﻴﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﱂ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺑﺼﻮﺭﺗﻪ
ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺼﺪﻕ
ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ،ﻭﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻣﺆﺷﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﳉﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ
ﺍﳌﻨﻄﻘﻲ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﺋﻤﺔ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻱ
ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺿﻤﻦ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﳌﻄﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﳋﺎﺭﺟﻴﺔ.
ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﲢﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺔ ﺍﳌﺮﻏﻮﺏ ﻗﻴﺎﺳﻬﺎ ،ﻭﻫﻲ
ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺮﺍﻭﺡ ﻣﺪﻯ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﻦ ٢,١٣ﺍﱃ
ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻠﻔﻈﻲ ﻭﻣﻜﻮﻧﺎﺗﻪ )ﺃﺑﻌﺎﺩﻩ( ،ﻭﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ
٢,١٦-ﻟﻮﺟﻴﺖ ،ﻭﲟﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﻳﺴﺎﻭﻱ ﺻﻔﺮ ﻟﻮﺟﻴﺖ،
ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻭﲢﻜﻴﻤﻬﺎ .ﻭﻟﺘﻌﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﻠﻲ
ﻭﺧﻄﺄ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﺮﺍﻭﺡ ﻣﻦ ٠,١٨ﺍﱃ ، ٠,٥١ﻭﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ
ﻹﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻦ ﺻﺤﺔ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺮﺍﺽ
ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻱ ﻳﺴﺎﻭﻱ .٠,٢٥
ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮﻱ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺑﻨﻴﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻪ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ،
ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﻠﻲ ﳌﺼﻔﻮﻓﺔ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺕ ﺩﻻﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﺪﻕ ﻭﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ
ﺍﳋﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺋﻤﺔ ،ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺎﻟﻎ ﻋﺪﺩﻫﺎ ١٦ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﺇﻥ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻬﺘﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻄﻮﺭﻭ ﺍﳌﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ ﻫﻮ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ .ﻭﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٧ﻳﺒﲔ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺻﺪﻕ ﺑﻨﺎﺋﻬﺎ ) ،(Construct Validityﻭﻣﻊ ﺗﻌﺪﺩ
ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﻋﻼﻣﺔ ﻛﻞ ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻭﻋﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﻭﺍﻹﺟﺮﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ ﰲ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺻﺪﻕ
ﺟﻬﺔ ،ﻭﻋﻼﻣﺔ ﻛﻞ ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﻘﺎﻳﻴﺲ ،ﺇﻻ ﺃﻧﻪ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺗﺼﻨﻴﻔﻬﺎ ﰲ ﺛﻼﺙ
ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ. ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﺭﺋﻴﺴﺔ ﻫﻲ :ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﳌﻨﻄﻘﻲ ) Logical
١٠
٢٠١٤ ﳎﻠﺪ ٨ﻋﺪﺩ ١ ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ -ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺑﻮﺱ
ﻛﻤﺎ ﰎ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻦ ﺩﻻﻻﺕ ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺗﺴﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻲ ﻳﺘﺒﲔ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٧ﺃﻥ ﲨﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻳﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ
ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺑﺈﳚﺎﺩ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺎﺕ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ،٠,٣٠ﻭﺫﺍﺕ ﺩﻻﻟﺔ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺗﻨﺘﻤﻲ ﻟﻪ ،ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻟﺪﻻﻟﺔ ،٠,٠١ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻳﺪﻝ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ١٦
ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ؛ ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺟﻞ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻣﺪﻯ ﺗﺘﺸﺎﺭﻙ ﰲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺗﻌﱪ ﻋﻨﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ
ﻣﺴﺎﳘﺔ ﻛﻞ ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﻘﻴﺲ ﲰﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ،ﻭﺗﻌﺪ ﻫﺬﻩ
ﻳﻘﻴﺴﻪ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺗﻨﺘﻤﻲ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ،ﻭﰲ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻣﺆﺷﺮﺍﹰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ.
ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻛﻜﻞ ،ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺃﻣﺎ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻴﺔ ﻓﻘﺪ ﲤﺖ ﲝﺴﺎﺏ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ
ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻭﺍﻷﺩﺍﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻲ ،ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲑﺳﻮﻥ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﻘﻘﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺓ
ﺣﺬﻑ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ) Corrected Item ﻛﻜﻞ ﻭﺃﺑﻌﺎﺩﻫﺎ ،ﻭﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﻷﺑﻌﺎﺩ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﺎ
ﻭﺗﺮﺍﻭﺣﺖ ﻗﻴﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ،(Total Correlation ﺑﺒﻌﺾ ،ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻟﻺﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺃﻓﺮﺯﺎ
ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ 16ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ،ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺳﺎﺱ
ﺑﲔ ،٠,٣٦ -٠,٥٨ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺗﺮﺍﻭﺣﺖ ﻗﻴﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺃﻥ ﻛﻞ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻷﺑﻌﺎﺩ ﻳﻘﻴﺲ ﺑﻌﺪﺍﹰ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺑﻌﺎﺩ
ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ .ﻭﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٨ﻳﺒﲔ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ
ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻛﻜﻞ ﺑﲔ ,٠,٣٣ -٠,٥٤ﻭﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ )ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ( ﺑﺼﻮﺭﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ.
ﲨﻴﻌﻬﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺩﻻﻟﺔ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺔ ،٠.٠١ = ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٨
ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻷﺑﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻋﻴﺔ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ
ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻭﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﺃﻛﱪ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭ
ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﻭﺑﲔ ﻛﻞ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻭﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻛﻜﻞ
ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻷﺩﺍﺓ ﻛﻜﻞ .ﻭﻳﻮﻓﺮ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺩﻟﻴﻼﹰ
ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺪﻯ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﰲ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ **
٠,٧٧٣ *
٠,١٥٠ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ
ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻭﻣﺎ ﻳﻘﻴﺴﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪ ،ﻭﻳﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻣﺆﺷﺮﺍﹰ ﻋﻠﻰ **
٠,٧٤٣ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ
ﺍﻻﺗﺴﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻜﻮﻧﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﻴﺎﺱ؛ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﻥ * ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﻝ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ٠.٠٥
** ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﻝ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ٠.٠١
ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﱄ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﻳﻘﺪﻡ ﺩﻟﻴﻼ
ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﻘﻴﺴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺓ ﻫﻲ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺘﺒﲔ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ٨ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﻟﺔ
ﻳﻘﻴﺴﻪ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻲ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻋﺎﻡ. ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ،ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻷﺑﻌﺎﺩ
ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﺃﻗﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻷﺑﻌﺎﺩ
ﻭﺣﺴﺐ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﳊﺼﻮﻝ ﻋﻠﻰ
ﻭﺍﳌﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻲ .ﻭﻣﻌﲎ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻻ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ
ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺮﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻭﺻﻌﻮﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ،
ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺕ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﻠﺼﺪﻓﺔ ،ﻭﺗﺪﻝ ﻫﺬﻩ
ﰎ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﳋﺎﺹ ﺑﺎﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ،ﻭﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ
ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺕ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺟﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺃﺑﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻏﲑ
ﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﳋﺎﺹ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ .ﻭﻳﺸﲑ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ
ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻠﺔ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﻋﻦ ﺑﻌﺾ ،ﳑﺎ ﻳﺸﲑ ﺍﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺃﺷﻜﺎﻝ
ﺣﺴﺐ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺩﻗﺔ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ
ﺍﻟﺬﻛﺎﺀ ﺗﺘﺪﺍﺧﻞ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺑﻴﻨﻬﺎ ،ﺃﻭ ﺃﺎ ﺗﻈﻬﺮ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﻭ
ﻣﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﻤﺔ .ﻭﳝﻜﻦ
ﺑﺂﺧﺮ ﻣﺘﺮﺍﻓﻘﺔ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﺎ ﻣﻊ ﺑﻌﺾ.
ﲢﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﺪﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ
ﺍﻟﻔﺼﻞ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ )(Person Separation (Gp ﻭﰎ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ
) Indexﻭﻗﺪ ﺑﻠﻐﺖ ﻗﻴﻤﺘﻪ ،2.05ﻭﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﻔﺼﻞ ﺑﺼﻮﺭﺗﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ،ﻭﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺃﻏﻠﺐ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ
ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ) (Item Separation Index) (Giﻭﻗﺪ ﺩﺍﻟﺔ ﺍﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺒﲔ ﰲ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ) ٩ﺍﳌﻠﺤﻖ(.
ﺑﻠﻐﺖ ﻗﻴﻤﺘﻪ 3.36ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﰎ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻛﻤﺎ ﰎ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺗﺴﺎﻕ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﺪﺭﺟﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ
ﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﻴﺎﺱ ﺑﺼﻮﺭﺗﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ١٦ﻓﻘﺮﺓ ،ﻭﻟﻠﺒﻌﺪﻳﻦ،
):(Wright & Masters, 1982 ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﻛﺮﻭﻧﺒﺎﺥ ﺃﻟﻔﺎ ،ﻭﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﲨﻴﻊ
ﺃﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻟﻎ ﻋﺪﺩﻫﻢ ٢٤٦ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎﹰ ﻭﻃﺎﻟﺒﺔ ،ﻭﻗﺪ
G2
R ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﻴﻢ ﺃﻟﻔﺎ ﻟﻠﺒﻌﺪ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ،٠,٨٥ﻭﻟﻠﺒﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﱐ
1 G2
.٠,٨٧ﻭﻟﻼﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻛﻜﻞ ،٠,٩٠ﻭﺗﺸﲑ ﺃﻟﻔﺎ ﻟﻠﻌﻼﻣﺔ
ﺣﻴﺚ ) (Gﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﻔﺼﻞ (R) ،ﺇﱃ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﻧﺲ
ﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﻭﻗﺪ ﺑﻠﻐﺖ ﻗﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺜﺒﺎﺕ ﻟﻸﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻲ ،ﻭﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﻴﻢ ﺃﻟﻔﺎ ﻟﻸﺑﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻋﻴﺔ ﺃﻗﻞ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ
٠.٨١ﻭ ٠.٩٢ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﱄ. ﻟﻠﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ.
١١
١٢
(Eds.). Generalized linear models: A Bayesian Gottfredson, L., & Saklofske, D. H. (2009).
perspective (pp. 173-193). NewYork: Intelligences: foundations and issues in
Marcel- Dekker. assessment. Canadian Psychology, 50 (30),
183- 195.
Anastasi, A. (1982). Psychological testing
(5thed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing Hambleton, R. K., and Swaminathan, H.
Co. (1985). Item response theory principles and
applications. Boston: Kluwer, Nijhoff
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological Publishing.
testing. (7th ed.). New Jersey: Prentic-Hall,
Inc. Hashmi, M. A., Tirmizi, S.H., & Shah, A.F.
(2010). Development and validation of
Anderson, J. (1990). Cognitive Psychology and its intelligence test for grade six students
Implications (3rd ed.). New York: W. H. (Age group 11-12 years). Journal of
Freeman and Company. Educational Research, 13(2), 19-29.
Collins, J. & Messick, S. (2001). Intelligence and Hattie, J. (1985). Methodology review:
personality: Bridging the gap in theory and Assessing unidimensionality of tests and
measurement. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum. items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9,
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to 139-164.
classical and modern test theory. New York: Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1994). The Bell
CBS College Publishing. Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in
Cronbach, L. (1960). Essential of psychological American Life. New York: Free press.
testing. New York: Harper and Bros. Loyd, R. (2004). Emotional intelligence and
Cronbach, L. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. stress coping in dental undergraduates, a
Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement qualitative study. Educational Psychological
(2nd ed., pp. 443–507). Washington, DC: Research, 197(4), 209-265.
American Council on Education. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for
Curtis, D. (2001). Misfit: People and their partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 2, 149-
problems, what might it all mean? 174.
International Education Journal, 2(4), 91-99. Touloumtzoglou, J. (1999). Pilot study of the
El-Korashy, A. (1995). Applying the Rasch visual arts attitude scale (from A and from
model to the selection of items for a B). Retrieved October 18, 2011 from:
mental ability test. Educational and http://ehtl.flinders.edu.au/education/publicatio
Psychological Measurement, 55(5), 753-763. ns/JOURNALS/touloumtzoglou999/BEGIN.
Eysneck, H. (1997). Personality and Wright, B. D., & Master, G.N. (1982). Rating
experimental psychology: the unification scale analysis. Rasch measurement. Chicago:
of psychology and possibility of a MESA Press.
paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. (1979). Best test
Psychology, 73, 1224-1237. design. A handbook for Rasch measurement.
Fan, X.(1998). Item response theory and Chicago: MESA Press.
classical test theory: an empirical
comparison of their item/ person
statistics. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 58 (3), 357-373.
١٣
١ ﻣﻠﺤﻖ
١ﺟﺪﻭﻝ
ﻗﻴﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ
Q23 Q21 Q20 Q19 Q18 Q17 Q16 Q15 Q14 Q13 Q12 Q11 Q10 Q9 Q8 Q7 Q6 Q5 Q4 Q2
Q2
٠,٠٢ Q4
** **
٠,١٧ ٠,٢٠ Q5
* **
٠,٠٥ ٠,١٥ ٠,١٨ Q6
** ** **
٠,١٩ ٠,١٨ ٠,٢٠ ٠,١١ Q7
* * ** *
٠,٠٥ ٠,١٥ ٠,١٥ ٠,٢٠ ٠,١٥ Q8
** * **
٠,١٢٠ ٠,١٨ ٠,١٢ ٠,١٦٠ ٠,٢٤ ٠,٠٥ Q9
** **
٠,١٨ ٠,٢٠ *
٠,١٣ *
٠,١٥ **
٠,٢١ **
٠,٣٢ **
٠,١٨ Q10
* ** ** ** * *
٠,١٥ ٠,٢١ ٠,١٩ ٠,١٠ ٠,٢٣ ٠,١٢ ٠,١٦ ٠,١٤ Q11
** * * ** ** * **
٠.٠٢٦ ٠.٢٣ ٠.١٢٣ ٠.١٥٦ ٠,١٣٦ ٠,٢٠٩ ٠,٢٠ ٠,١٤ ٠,٢١ Q12
** ** ** **
٠.٠١- ٠.٠٧ ٠.١٨ ٠.٠٩ ٠.٠٣ ٠.٢٠ ٠.٠٦٧ ٠.١٧ ٠.٠٥ ٠.٢١ Q13
** * * ** ** *
٠,١٩ ٠,٠١- ٠,١٤ ٠,١١ ٠,١٥ ٠,١٧ ٠,١٧ ٠,٠٨١ ٠,١٥ **
٠,١٩ ٠,٠٩ Q14
** * ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
٠,٠٨ ٠,٢٧ ٠,١٦ ٠,٢١ ٠,١٧ ٠,١٨ ٠,٢٦ ٠,١٩ ٠,١٩٢ ٠,٢٠ ٠,٢٨ ٠,١٠ Q15
* * ** ** ** ** ** * * **
٠,٠٤ ٠,٠٢ ٠,٠٤ ٠,١٣ ٠,١٦ ٠,٢١ ٠,٢١ ٠,١٧ ٠,٢١ ٠,٢٧٤ ٠,١٣ ٠,١٥ ٠,٢٨ Q16
* ** ** ** ** ** ** **
٠,١٢ ٠,١٥ ٠,٢٥ ٠,١١ ٠,١٨ ٠,١٩ ٠,١٣ ٠,١٨ ٠,١٠ ٠,٣٠٣ ٠,٢٧٦ ٠,٠٠ ٠,١٦ ٠,٠٥ Q17
** * * ** * * ** **
٠,٠٧ ٠,١٠ ٠,٢٤ ٠,١٣ ٠,١١ ٠,١٦ ٠,١٧ ٠,١٣ ٠,١٠ ٠,١٢ ٠,١٥٥ ٠,٠٦٩ ٠,٢٥ ٠,٠٢ ٠,١٨ Q18
** * ** ** * ** ** ** ** **
٠,٠١ ٠,٣٠ ٠,١٤ ٠,٢٥ ٠,٢٢ ٠,١٦٢ ٠,٢٨ ٠,١٨ ٠,٢١ ٠,١٠ ٠,١٩ ٠,١٩ ٠,١٠٠ **
٠,٢٤ **
٠,٢٩ **
٠,٢٠ Q19
** ** ** * * ** * ** * ** **
٠,٠٩ ٠,٢٠ ٠,١٠ ٠,١٨ ٠,١٨ ٠,١٢ ٠,١٥ ٠,١٠ ٠,١٤ ٠,٢٩ ٠,١٤٩ ٠,٠٦ ٠,١٨ ٠,١٥٦ ٠,١١ ٠,١٨ ٠,٢٠ Q20
** * ** ** * ** ** ** ** ** * * **
٠,١٩ ٠,١٥ ٠,١١٠ ٠,١١ ٠,٢٧ ٠,٢٣ ٠,٠٦ ٠,١٤ ٠,٢٨ ٠,٢٣ ٠,٣٠ ٠,٢٢ ٠,٢١ ٠,١٥ ٠,١٤٤ ٠,٢٤ *
٠,١٥ **
٠,٢٧ Q21
* ** * ** ** ** * ** ** * * ** ** **
٠,٠٥ ٠,١٦ ٠,١٧ ٠,١٦ ٠,١٨ ٠,٠٨ ٠,١٨ ٠,٣٢ ٠,١٦ ٠,٠٢ ٠,٢٣ ٠,٢٢ ٠,١٤٢ ٠,١٤ ٠,٢٠ ٠,١٩٤ ٠,٢٤ *
٠,١٦ ٠,٠٨ Q23
* ** ** ** ** ** * * ** ** ** **
٠,١٥ ٠,١٩ ٠,٠٧ ٠,١٧ ٠,٠٦ ٠,٢١ ٠,٠٩ ٠,١٢ ٠,٢١ ٠,١٧ ٠,١٤ ٠,٠٩ ٠,١٤ ٠,٢٦ ٠,١٧ ٠,١٧ ٠,١٢٤ ٠,٢١ **
٠,٢٠ *
٠,١٦ Q24
.(0,01≥) **ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﻝ ﺍﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻟﺪﻻﻟﺔ
.(0.05≥) * ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﻝ ﺍﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻟﺪﻻﻟﺔ
١٤
٢٠١٤ ﳎﻠﺪ ٨ﻋﺪﺩ ١ ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺑﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ -ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺑﻮﺱ
ﻣﻠﺤﻖ ٢
ﺟﺪﻭﻝ.٩
ﻗﻴﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﲔ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺑﺼﻮﺭﺗﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ
Q21 Q20 Q19 Q18 Q17 Q16 Q15 Q14 Q13 Q10 Q9 Q8 Q6 Q5 Q4 Q2
٠,٠١٥ Q4
** **
٠,١٧٢ ٠,١٩٨ Q5
* **
٠,٠٤٩ ٠,١٤٩ ٠,١٧٧ Q6
* * ** *
٠,١٥٣ ٠,١٤٥ ٠,١٩٨ ٠,١٥٠ Q8
* **
٠,١٢٠ ٠,١١٥ ٠,١٦٠ ٠,٢٤٢ ٠,٠٥٢ Q9
** ** * ** ** **
٠,١٨١ ٠,١٩٥ ٠,١٤٨ ٠,٢١٣ ٠,٣٢٣ ٠,١٨٣ Q10
** ** **
٠,١٨٢ ٠,٠٨٨ ٠,٠٢٩ ٠,٠٦٧ ٠,١٧١ ٠,٠٥٢ ٠,٢١٢ Q13
** * ** * **
٠,١٩٠ ٠,١٠٥ ٠,١٥٠ ٠,١٧١ ٠,٠٨١ ٠,١٤٩ ٠,١٨٥ ٠,٠٨٩ Q14
** ** ** ** ** ** **
٠,٠٧٩ ٠,٢٦٤ ٠,١٧٤ ٠,١٧٨ ٠,٢٦٢ ٠,١٩٢ ٠,٢٠١ ٠,٢٨٠ ٠,٠٩٩ Q15
** ** ** ** * * **
٠,٠٤٣ ٠,٠١٦ ٠,٠٣٧ ٠,٢١٢ ٠,٢٠٧ ٠,١٦٩ ٠,٢٧٤ ٠,١٣٢ ٠,١٤٥ ٠,٢٧٩ Q16
* ** ** ** **
٠,١١٦ ٠,١٥٣ ٠,٢٥٣ ٠,١١١ ٠,١١٣ ٠,١٨١ ٠,٠٩٥ ٠,٢٧٦ ٠,٠٠٠ ٠,١٩٥ ٠,٠٥١ Q17
** * * ** **
٠,٠٧١ ٠,٠٩٧ ٠,٢٣٩ ٠,١٢٥ ٠,١١١ ٠,١٣٣ ٠,٠٩٥ ٠,١١٦ ٠,٠٦٩ ٠,٢٥٣ ٠,٠٢٠ ٠,١٨٠ Q18
** * ** ** * ** ** ** ** **
٠,٠١٤ ٠,٢٩٦ ٠,١٣٦ ٠,٢٥١ ٠,٢٢٢ ٠,١٦٢ ٠,٢١٠ ٠,١٠٢ ٠,١٩١ ٠,١٠٠ ٠,٢٣٧ ٠,٢٩٤ ٠,١٩٥ Q19
** ** ** * ** * * ** **
٠,٠٩٤ ٠,٢٠٣ ٠,١٠٢ ٠,١٧٨ ٠,١٨٣ ٠,١١٥ ٠,١٥٠ ٠,٢٩٣ ٠,١٤٩ ٠,٠٦٢ ٠,١٥٦ ٠,١١٤ ٠,١٨٤ ٠,١٩٩ Q20
** * ** ** * ** ** ** * ** * **
٠,١٨٨ ٠,١٤٥ ٠,١١٠ ٠,١١٠ ٠,٢٧٣ ٠,٢٣٣ ٠,٠٦٣ ٠,١٣٩ ٠,٢٩٩ ٠,٢٢٠ ٠,٢١٠ ٠,١٤٤ ٠,٢٣٦ ٠,١٥٢ ٠,٢٦٨ Q21
**ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﻝ ﺍﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻟﺪﻻﻟﺔ ) ≥ .(٠,٠١
* ﺍﻻﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﻝ ﺍﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻟﺪﻻﻟﺔ ) ≥ .(٠,٠٥
١٥