43 (2) 20 21 14 19 20 21 1 11 14 2009 12 10
44 No.39, 2010 2005 2008 19 2009 20 2 2009 21 20 21 2 20 21 20 8 31 21 11 12 20 6 21 5 1 2 3 20 21 8 1 2 2 1 21 3.1 3.1.1 1 20 20 8 31 1. (5) 2. 3. AO 4. AO 10 5. AO 8 6.
(2) 45 2 21 21 11 12 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Wigfield & Eccles 2000 2 3.1.2 A 2 2 3 1082 M 2 335 3 356 N 2 194 3 197 2 2007 10 (1995) 6 36 5 3.1.3 (1995) 5 1 5 α.88.81.86.70.70 F (2,968) = 18.743 p <.001; F (2,981) = 6.922 p<.001; F (2,986)=24.283 p<.001; F (2,988)= 13.380 p<.001 Bonferroni p<.05
46 No.39, 2010 3 AO 296 9 11 261 25 21 285 0 19 19 76 42 62 249 14 54 0 24 3 14 17 10 52 3 8 6 3.2 AO 3.2.1 AO 8 AO AO AO AO 1 2 3 3 AO Web 2008 AO AO 39 296 3 3.2.2 AO
(2) 47 1 AO AO 9 1 2 274 1 261 2 285 76 62 54 52 249 3.3 AO 2000 AO AO 2000 12 2007 19 AO 76% 1) 2009a 2009b 2 1 AO 5 / 2 1 2001 13 2007 19
48 No.39, 2010 2 AO 2) 3) 1 3 4 AO 2 1 AO 2001 13 2002 14 2003 15 1 AO AO 3 4 2003 15 AO AO 2 5 / 2 AO 5 / 2
(2) 49 AO 3.4 3.4.1 2008 4 2009 4 SSH SPP 3.4.2 2008 1,624 2009 1,598 4 1 2 3 4 3.4.3 2008 98.0% 2009 98.5% 40% 2008 6 25.4% 2008 25.1% 2009 4 1 70% 69.6% 71.1% 14.0% 13.6% 2008 2008 56.2% 4 5 2008 2009 % 2008 43.6% 2009 46.0% 2008 85.8% 2009 77.8%
50 No.39, 2010 4 2008 85.8% 46.2% 27.9% 19.7% 16.5% HP 16.4% 16.1% 10.7% 10.1% 5.2% 4.8% 5 2009 77.8% 37.2% 28.9% 28.7% 25.5% 18.2% 14.7% 11.0% 11.0% 6.9% HP 6.7% 5.3% 2.8% 2.4% 1.5% 1.3% 2008 46.2% 2009 37.2% 3.4.4 3.5 3.5.1 (2006) (admission studies) (2008) 1924 13 1963 38 ETS 2008 6 1973 80 2008 2007
(2) 51 3.5.2 (2008) 60 1 2 1 1977 52 1987 62 20 1999 1 2006 18 1980 55 3.5.3 10 AO 1999 11 4 AO AO AO 2008 2003 2009 21 21 42 2009 2009 21 2 2009 10 3.5.4 2 1 (2009) 2009
52 No.39, 2010 1 2006 2007 1 2 2007 19 (2008) (2009) 3.5.5 22 (2010) 5 1 S. Kuhn, 1962 1971 (2009) (transdisciplinary) (Gibbons et al., 1994) 2 (peer review) 1999 2 3.5.6
(2) 53 2009 3.6 3.6.1 4 14 20 168 4 1,000 20 15,000 2 3 2009 3.6.2 2007 3.6.3 168 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 163 4 2009 3 (1) (2) (3) AO
54 No.39, 2010 3 (4) 3.7 AO 21 4 AO 2009 CBT OSCE
(2) 55 p ( ) 4 v ( ) h ( ) i ( ) 1 3 (2009) 4 p (h : i ) G 3.8 1 1 1 2 4) I II 38 41 2 4 1 1962 37 LIS non verbal Lord 1952 27 1951 26 3 Gulliksen Lord 1958 33 Lord 1 1959 34 Lord 1962:1 2 5)
56 No.39, 2010 D 3 16 5 SAT53-2 1962:40 LIS 2 1963 38 2 1964 39 3 4 1 3 5 1 4 20 21 1) 2008 1 55 2 45 3 38 4 38 2) 2000 12 AO 3) 2001 13 2007 19 4) 1 (2008) 5) LIS Lord (Indou) (Samejima) LIS 1962:1 20 II 21 (1999).. (2009).. (2005). 16 AO. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. & Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, London: Sage [1997].
(2) 57,. (1995). 3,. (1962). LIS,. (2008).,, 18, 43 49. (2009)., 7, 102 105. (2006). 1,, 16, 187 195. (2007). 46,, 80, 165 186. (2008).,,, 6, 88 91. (2009a).,, 2, 136 154. (2009b).,, 1 284. (2009). AO,, 20,. Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, IL: The University of Chicago Press [1971].,. (2006)., 06, 29, 15 23. (2008).,, 18, 177 178. (2008). 18,, 3, 335 348. (2009)., 2008:, 31, 3 11. (2009).,, 19, 53 59. (2008).,, 18, 1 6. (2007). 2004,, 17, 221 228. (2008).,, 27 34. (1973).,,,, 117 135. (2003).,,, 12 14 ( [A], 12301014,,, 301 313. (2009). 19,, 38, 77 91. (2008).,, 18, 13 18. (2009). 19 AO,, 4, 161 171. Wigfield, A. & Eccles, J.S. (2000). Expectancy value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68 81. (2007)., 11,, 1 9.
58 No.39, 2010 TowardSolutionstoCommonProblems in Admission Studies Conducted by Researchers of Admission Centers of Universities (2) Abstracts from Oral Reports in Admission Studies Seminars by Researchers of Admission Centers Held in Fiscals 2008 and 2009 SHIINA Kumiko TOYAMA Sayaka DEMEZHAN Adlet KIMURA Takuya YOSHIMURA Osamu KURAMOTO Naoki T. KANAZAWA Yusuke Abstract Researchers of admission centers of universities are faced with a diversity of applicant selection systems and are expected to do various tasks: design the selection system, analyze examination data, conduct of public relations activities, and so on. Since 2002, researchers of admission centers of national universities have reported their studies on admissions and exchanged opinions at periodic gatherings. These gatherings have continued and been funded by the National Center for University Entrance Examinations since 2007. This article contains most of the abstracts from oral reports of the gatherings held in fiscals 2008 and 2009. Some deal with problems that arose from the admissions of each university, and others try to grasp the national tendency of admissions. These two streams should be complementary to each other to improve the quality of studies on admissions. Key words: admission studies, admission center Research Division, National Center for University Entrance Examinations Graduate School of Education, Tohoku University Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences, Tsukuba University Admission Center, Nagasaki University Center for the Advancement of Higher Education, Tohoku University Center for Statistics and Information, Rikkyo University