本研究旨在探討國中教師與國二學生對學業表現描述詞判斷的比較。本研究採問卷調查法，抽樣之區域為台南市，共包含兩個階段。第一個階段是蒐集教師回饋所常用的學業表現描述詞，此階段計32位教師填寫221個描述詞。在整理出9個學業表現描述詞(優秀、很棒、很好、不錯、尚可、加油、不佳、落後、太差)後，接著第二階段是請教師與學生對這9個學業表現描述詞做判斷，共回收267份問卷。
研究結果顯示男教師、男學生、女教師、女學生對各學業表現描述詞所代表的分數有一定的共識，然而教師在面對描述較差的學業表現描述詞所對應的分數範圍較學生要寬。因此相對學生來說，教師在描述較差的學業表現描述詞上有較多的描述詞之間是互相重疊的，因此教師可能會選擇一個與學生所想的差距較大的學業表現描述詞。本研究提供國中教師在給予學生學業表現描述詞等回饋時，師生對這些描述詞所對應的意義與差異性，以期待教師給予學生更適當的學業表現描述詞與回饋。

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of role and gender on judging descriptive words of academic performance (AP) by junior high school teachers and eighth-grade students. The research involves two stages, comprises of a set of questionnaire items concerning 9 descriptive words of academic performance (i.e. excellent, great, very good, good, ok, cheer, not good, lag, and too bad) teachers commonly used for stage 1 in the study and a set of questionnaire concerning judging descriptive words of academic performance by teachers and students for stage 2. Thirty two teachers in the stage 1 gave 221 words and 267 teachers and students participate in the stage 2 of study.
Results show that female teachers, male teacher, female students, and male students had a common understanding of descriptive words of AP. However, teachers set a wider range of score on very good, ok, cheer, not good, and lag than students do. Due to teachers’ wider range, there are overlaps among many descriptive words of AP of teachers. In other words, teachers would give many descriptive words with different meanings to students even though they are with the same level of AP. Therefore, students would possibly have an interpretation which was different from teachers’ original meanings. The present findings may be of importance in providing teachers with a better understanding of what teacher’s as a feedback giver and a student’s as a feedback receiver interpret descriptive words of AP and helping teachers to give a more suitable feedback.

Beyth-Marom, R. (1982). How Probable is Probable? A Numerical Translation of Verbal Probability Expressions. Journal of Forecasting, 1, 257-269.
Brown, G. T. L., Harris, L. R., & Harnett, J. (2012). Teacher beliefs about feedback within an Assessment for Learning environment: Endorsement of improved learning over student well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(7), 968-978.
Brun, W., & Teigen, K. H. (1988). Verbal probabilities: Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 41( 3), 390-404.
Budescu, D. V., Weinberg, S., & Wallsten, T. S. (1988). Decisions based on numerically and verbally expressed uncertainties. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14(2), 281-294.
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3-31.
Chang C. H., & Chen L. C. (1977). Sex Differences in Elementary School Achievement as Related to Sex Differences of Teachers. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 21-34.
Chen, C. S. (2006). Comparative Study on the Feedback Behavior of Elementary School Physical Education Teachers with Different Curriculum Value Orientations ( Unpublished master thesis). National Hsinchu University of Education, Hsinchu.
Erev, I. & Cohen, B.L. (1990). Verbal versus numerical probabilities: efficiency, biases, and the preference paradox. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 1-18.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hsieh, H. J. (2008). Teacher follow-up in elementary school English classes (Unpublished master thesis). National Pingtung University of Education, Pingtung.
Hyland, K. (2013). Student perceptions of hidden messages in teacher written feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39, 180-187.
Irving, S., Harris, L., & Peterson, E. (2011). ‘One assessment doesn’t serve all the purposes’ or does it? New Zealand teachers describe assessment and feedback. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(3), 413-426.
Johnson, D. D. (1972). An investigation of sex differences in reading in four English-speaking nations. Technical Report No.209, University of Wisconsin Press.
Lai, Y. Y. (2007). A case study of a teacher’s feedback and students’ responses (Unpublished Master Thesis). National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Lin, Y. L. (2008). A study of Relationship of Student’s Perception of Expert and Novice Teacher Feedback to Students’ Achievement in Junior High School Physical Education (Unpublished Master Thesis). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.
Madon, S., Lee J., Keiper, S., Eccles J., Smith, A., & Palumbo, P. (1998). The Accuracy and Power of Sex, Social Class, and Ethnic Stereotypes: A Naturalistic Study in Person Perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(12), 1304-1318.
Merz, J. F., Druzdzel, M. J., & Mazur, D. J. (1991). Verbal expressions of probability in informed consent litigation, Medical Decision Making, 11, 273-281.
Mory, E. H. (2003). Feedback research revisited. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.). Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 745-783). New York: MacMillan Library Reference.
Mosteller, F.,& Youtz, C. (1990). Quantifying probabilistic expressions. Statistical Science, 5, 2-12.
Pokomy, H., & Pickford, P. (2010). Complexity, cues and relationships: Student perceptions of feedback. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(1), 21-30.
Robertson, W.O. (1983). Quantifying the meaning of words. Journal of the American Medical Association, 249 (19), 2631-2632.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144.
Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189.
Wallsten, T. S., Budescu, D. V., Rapoport, A., Zwick, R., & Forsyth, B. (1986). Measuring the vague meanings of probability terms. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 115(4), 348-365.
Weaver, M. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(3), 379-394.
Windschitl, P. D., & Wells, G. L. (1996). Measuring psychological uncertainty verbal versus numeric methods. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, 2(4), 343-364.
Zwick, R. (1987). Combining stochastic uncertainty and linguistic inexactness: Theory and experimental evaluation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.