本研究基于新课标，聚焦物质结构与性质模块，对高三学生进行学业质量水平的测试和水平划分，描述学生学科能力和学业质量表现现状。主要进行了如下三个子研究。

（1）基于已有学科能力研究基础，本研究从核心知识和活动经验、学科认识方式、研究对象和问题情境、学科能力活动任务四个维度构建了高中化学物质结构与性质模块学生学科能力和核心素养系统构成模型。

通过分析课程标准内容要求和现行中学化学教材，对物质结构与性质模块的知识概念进行结构化整理，得到核心知识和活动经验维度内容，主要包括对原子结构与元素性质、微粒间相互作用与物质性质、不同聚集状态的物质与性质；同时抽提出研究对象和问题情境，主要包括在生命、药物、材料、科研的情境中对物质的结构、功能、性质进行研究的问题，对这些问题的研究又分为在原子、分子、超分子、聚集态等不同尺度上的研究；分析课程标准学业要求和学业质量水平，结合已有学科能力相关研究基础，抽提出包括学习理解、应用实践、迁移创新的“3×3”的学科能力活动任务类型；再从已有研究基础中总结抽提物质结构与性质的核心学科认识方式，主要包括物质构成的微粒、微粒间相互作用、微粒的空间排布、结构—性质—功能的关联等认识角度和思路。

（2）本研究划分了物质结构与性质模块的学业质量水平。利用测试工具对来自4个不同省级行政区各类学校的1849名学生进行了测试，使用单维Rasch软件Winsteps 3.72.0对学生能力值和试题难度值进行估计计算，得到试题难度值（Item Measure），将试题按照难度值降序排列，再结合试题的多维编码体系，从学业要求、核心概念、认识方式、情境素材、核心素养、学科能力任务类型等维度对试题进行编码标注，得到试题编码，探索划分水平的关键因素，最终使用书签法（Bookmark）对物质结构与性质模块的学业质量水平进行划分。本研究发现，问题情境越复杂陌生、问题情境综合度越高、认识角度越多、角度提示越少、认识思路越长的利用物质结构理论模型分析解释或预测物质性质功能的实际问题越难，相应地，能够稳定完成这样学科能力任务的学生水平就越高。本研究将物质结构与性质模块的学业质量划分为3个大水平，5个小水平，其中水平2和水平3各包含两个子水平，从编码的各个维度对各水平的表现进行了特征归纳。本研究划分的水平3-2和3-1主要与课程标准学业质量水平4相对应，本研究划分的水平2-2和2-1主要与课程标准学业质量水平3相对应，本研究划分的水平1主要与课程标准学业质量水平1和水平2相对应。

（3）根据测试结果，利用学生能力值、得分率等数据对学生学业质量表现情况进行描述。从学业质量总水平来看，学生平均能力值为-0.09，总体处于水平2-2，处于水平1的学生有15.58%，这部分学生仅能完成情境熟悉度高、推理路径短的辨识记忆或概括关联类任务，或特定思维路径的推论预测任务；处于水平2的学生超过了一半，占63.55%，说明超过半数的学生能够在不同情境中半自主或被动完成单角度、双角度、多角度的长推理任务，完成多种学科能力活动，或完成自主进行双角度的短程推理任务，其中处于水平2-2的学生占46.46%，接近一半；达到水平3的学生人数占比约为1/5，其中有17.25%的学生达到3-1水平，能够在简单变式或复杂陌生的真实问题情境中，能在提示下或被动调用多个认识角度综合模块主题内或跨模块主题认识方式完成短或长路径推理，完成分析解释、推论预测、复杂推理、系统探究等难度较高的能力活动任务，解决情境问题结合度高的实际问题，仅有3.62%的学生达到最高水平3-2，能够完全自主完成高难度任务。

基于以上研究结果，本研究对物质结构与性质模块的教学、评价提出了建议。

Based on the new curriculum, this study focused on the Structure and Properties of Matter module to test and classify the academic quality level of senior students and describe the current status of students' subject competence and academic quality performance. Three main sub-studies were conducted as follows.

(1) Based on the foundation of existing research on subject competence, this study constructed a systematic composition model of students' subject competence and core literacy in the high school chemical substance structure and properties module from four dimensions: core knowledge and activity experience, subject way of knowing, research objects and problem situations, and subject competence activity tasks.

By analyzing the content requirements of the curriculum standards and the current secondary school chemistry textbooks, the knowledge concepts of the structure and properties of substances module are structured and organized, and the core knowledge and activity experience dimensions are obtained, which mainly include the understanding of atomic structure and elemental properties, interparticle interactions and properties of substances, and substances and properties in different aggregation states; at the same time, the research objects and problem situations are drawn out, which mainly include the understanding of substances in the contexts of life, drugs, materials, and scientific research. In addition, the research objects and problem contexts are divided into different scales, such as atomic, molecular, supramolecular, and aggregated states; analyzing the academic requirements of the curriculum and academic quality level, and combining with the existing research base of subject competence, the "3×3" subject competence activities include learning and understanding, application and practice, and migration and innovation. Then, we summarize and extract from the existing research base the core disciplinary understanding of the structure and properties of matter, mainly including the particles of matter, interactions between particles, spatial arrangement of particles, structure-property-function connection and other understanding perspectives and ideas.

(2) This study delineates the academic quality levels of the Structure and Properties of Matter module. A test tool was used to test 1849 students from various types of schools in four different provincial administrations, and the unidimensional Rasch software Winsteps 3.72.0 was used to estimate and calculate the students' ability values and test difficulty values to obtain the test difficulty values (Item Measure), arrange the test questions in descending order of difficulty values, and then combine the multidimensional coding system of the test questions from academic The questions were coded in terms of academic requirements, core concepts, ways of knowing, contextual materials, core literacy, and subject competence task types to obtain the test codes, explore the key factors for classifying the levels, and finally use the Bookmark method to classify the academic quality levels of the Structure and Properties of Matter module. This study found that the more complex and unfamiliar the problem situation, the more comprehensive the problem situation, the more perspectives there are, the less cues there are, and the longer the cognitive thought process, the more difficult it is to analyze and explain or predict the function of the properties of matter using the theoretical model of the structure of matter, and accordingly, the higher the level of students who can consistently complete such subject competence tasks. In this study, the academic quality of the Structure and Properties of Matter module was divided into three major levels and five minor levels, of which Level 2 and Level 3 each contain two sublevels, and the performance of each level was characterized in terms of each dimension of coding. The levels 3-2 and 3-1 classified in this study mainly correspond to the curriculum standard academic quality level 4, the levels 2-2 and 2-1 classified in this study mainly correspond to the curriculum standard academic quality level 3, and the level 1 classified in this study mainly corresponds to the curriculum standard academic quality level 1 and level 2.

(3) Based on the test results, data such as students' ability values and score rates were used to describe students' academic quality performance. In terms of the overall academic quality level, the average student proficiency value is -0.09, and the overall students are at Level 2-2. 15.58% of the students are at Level 1, and this group of students can only complete the tasks of identification and memory or generalization and association categories with high context familiarity and short reasoning paths, or inference and prediction tasks with specific thinking paths; more than half of the students are at Level 2, accounting for 63.55%, indicating that more than half of the students are able to semi-autonomously or passively complete long reasoning tasks of single, double, or multiple perspectives in different contexts, complete multiple disciplinary competence activities, or complete short-range reasoning tasks of double perspectives autonomously, with 46.46% of students at Level 2-2, nearly half of them; the number of students reaching Level 3 is about 1/5, with 17.25% of them reaching Level 3-1, able to In simple variant or complex unfamiliar real problem situations, they can complete short or long path reasoning with prompting or passively invoke multiple cognitive perspectives to synthesize module intra-thematic or cross-module thematic cognitive approaches, complete tasks of higher difficulty ability activities such as analysis and interpretation, inference and prediction, complex reasoning, and systematic inquiry, and solve practical problems with a high degree of contextual problem integration, with only 3.62% of students reaching the highest level 3- 2 and were able to complete the highly difficult tasks completely on their own.

Based on the above findings, this study makes recommendations for the teaching and evaluation of the Structure and Properties of Matter module.