POLAR於2014年引入亞洲,並結合亞洲學生的特點進行了近10年的本地化研發與應用,形成了一套完善的專業/職業潛能評估體系。POLAR幫助數以萬計的亞洲學生發現和發展個人潛力,為專業探索和職業生涯做好充分準備。POLAR已成為海外升學不可或缺的科學工具。

POLAR評估三個關鍵因素,包括:G因素(底層認知能力(General Aptitudes))、P因素(個人發展特質(Personal Attributes))和S因素(興趣特長(Special Interests))。通過科學分析學生的潛能與興趣,幫助其明確未來的優勢專業領域。基於科學合理的規劃,學生能夠充分挖掘自身潛能和優勢,找到通往Dream School的最佳路徑。
GPS 模型
GPS 評估以借助 IRT 算法、機器學習、大數據分析等先進技術手段,進行數據驅動的精準叠代升級。 評估信效度已經過數據驗證,指標已達到理想的心理測量學標準。項目分析顯示,題總相關 0.73~0.94,各維度內高低分組均有顯著差異(p<0.01);信度分析顯示,內部一致系數 0.71~0.93;效度分析顯示,χ2/df=4.653、CFI=0.940、TLI=0.927、RMSEA=0.059、SRMR=0.048。
G
底層認知能力
(General Aptitudes)
挖掘學生的認知潛能
預測未來的學業表現
5大底層認知能力:圖形推理、空間知覺、數字推理、文字推理、言語理解
個人發展特質
(Personal Attributes)
評估學生的思維和行事特點
定位未來的優勢領域
25項個人發展特質維度,包含:
領導力、社會責任性、心理彈性、
全局思維、社交能力、創造力、
決策能力等
P
S
專業興趣
(Special Interests)
衡量學生個人興趣與專業的關聯度
預測未來的發展動力
54類專業,涵蓋:數學、物理學、
哲學、心理學、金融、計算機科學、醫學、法學等
自適應評估技術
GPS 評估借助國際前沿的自適應評估技術,讓「量身定製」「千人千面」的測評成為現實,為學生提供了個性化、高效、精準的評估體驗和人才發展最優解決方案。
個性化:GPS評估利用自適應技術,根據學生的實際能力,動態調整評估內容和難度,從而為每個學生提供個性化的評估體驗。
高效:自適應技術能夠根據學生的表現和反饋實時調整評估流程,優化評估過程,評估時間更短、結果更精準。
精準:通過持續優化評估題庫、收集和分析評估數據,自適應技術可以更精準地評估學生的底層素養水平,從而為每個學生提供針對性的人才發展建議。
參考文獻

Adamecz, A., Henderson, M., & Shure, N. (2024). Intergenerational educational mobility–The role of non-cognitive skills.Education Economics,32(1), 59–78.

Blustein, D.L. (1997). A context-rich perspective of career exploration across the life roles. The Career Development Quarterly, 45, 260-274.

Blustein, D. L., Schultheiss, D. E. P., & Flum, H. (2004). Toward a relational perspective of the psychology of careers and working: A social constructionist analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 423–440.

Blustein, D. L. (2006). The psychology of working: A new perspective for career development, counseling, and public policy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Brown, D., & Associates (2002). Career Choice and Development (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Campbell, D. P., & Borgen, F. H. (1999). Holland's theory and the development of interest inventories. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55(1), 86-101.

Cardoso, P., Duarte, M. E., Gaspar, R., Bernardo, F., Janeiro, I. N., & Santos, G. (2016). Life Design Counseling: A study on client's operations for meaning construction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 97, 13-21.

Cools, E., & Bellens, K. (2012). The onion model: Myth or reality in the field of individual differences psychology?. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(4), 455-462.

Davies, B., & Ellison, L. (1997). School leadership for the 21st century: A competency and knowledge approach. Psychology Press.

Drew, P. Y., & Watkins, D. (1998). Affective variables, learning approaches and academic achievement: A causal modelling investigation with Hong Kong tertiary students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(2), 173-188.

Holland, J. L. (1959). A theory of vocational choice. Journal of counseling psychology, 6(1), 35.

Hubert, L., & Arabie, P. (1987). Evaluating order hypotheses within proximity matrices.

Hartung, P.J. & Borges, N.J. (2005). Toward Integrated Career Assessment: Using Story to Appraise Career Dispositions and Adaptability. Journal of Career Assessment, 13, 439-451.

Kandemir, M. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2020). The Kaufman domains of creativity scale: Turkish validation and relationship to academic major.The Journal of Creative Behavior,54(4), 1002-1012.

Kaufman, J. C., Pumaccahua, T. T., & Holt, R. E. (2013). Personality and creativity in realistic, investigative, artistic, social, and enterprising college majors.Personality and individual differences,54(8), 913-917.

König, J., Santagata, R., Scheiner, T., Adleff, A. K., Yang, X., & Kaiser, G. (2022). Teacher noticing: A systematic literature review of conceptualizations, research designs, and findings on learning to notice. Educational Research Review, 100453.

Larson, L. M., Wu, T. F., Bailey, D. C., Gasser, C. E., Bonitz, V. S., & Borgen, F. H. (2010). The role of personality in the selection of a major: With and without vocational self-efficacy and interests.Journal of Vocational Behavior,76(2), 211-222.

Leatemia, L. D., van Merrienboer, J. J., & Susilo, A. P. (2022). Development of a questionnaire to measure teachers’ student-centred perspectives based on the Onion Model. BMC Medical Education, 22(1), 1-9.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122.

Maurer, T. J., Wrenn, K. A., Pierce, H. R., Tross, S. A., & Collins, W. C. (2003). Beliefs about ‘improvability’of career‐relevant skills: relevance to job/task analysis, competency modelling, and learning orientation. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 24(1), 107-131.

OECD(2018). OECD education 2030: The future of education and skills[EB/OL].

Peri, K., & Eisenberg, M. J. (2024). Evaluating non-cognitive skills in medical school applicants.BMC Medical Education,24(1), 82.

Pouyaud, J., Bangali, M., Cohen-Scali, V., Robinet, M. L., & Guichard, J. (2016). Exploring changes during life and career design dialogues. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 97, 3-12.

Prediger, D. J. (1982). Dimensions underlying Holland's hexagon: Missing link between interests and occupations?. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 21(3), 259-287.

Salleh, K. M., Khalid, N. H., Sulaiman, N. L., Mohamad, M. M., & Sern, L. C. (2015). Competency of adult learners in learning: application of the iceberg competency model. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 204, 326-334.

Savickas, M. L., Nota, L., Rossier, J., Dauwalder, J. P., Duarte, M. E., Guichard, J., ... & van Vianen, A. E. (2009). Life designing: A paradigm for career construction in the 21st century. Journal of vocational behavior, 75(3), 239-250.

Smith, J. A. (2011).Differences in personality factors and college major choice. Rochester Institute of Technology.

Vedel, A. (2016). Big Five personality group differences across academic majors: A systematic review.Personality and individual differences,92, 1-10.

Webb, D. C., Boswinkel, N., & Dekker, T. (2008). Beneath the tip of the iceberg: Using representations to support student understanding. Mathematics teaching in the middle school, 14(2), 110-113.

Yu-mei Wang, Changsong Xue & Tonghua.(2021).University Student Core Competencies China’s Experience. International Journal of Education.Vol. 13, No. 3.

丁琳. (2012).高中生职业价值观与人格特质对职业兴趣的影响研究——以青岛地区高中生为例. (Doctoral dissertation, 中国地质大学(武汉)).

衡书鹏. (2012). 大学生人格特质、职业价值观与职业兴趣的关系研究.廊坊师范学院学报:自然科学版,12(5), 3.

雷熙, 林洁, & 王彩霞. (2022). 高中生综合素质评价研究的知识图谱与前景展望(1999-2021). 教育测量与评价(1), 13.

王梦, 姜英虹, & 范为桥. (2018). 人格,职业兴趣和职业信心对高中生专业意向影响的比较.心理学通讯,1(3), 7.

帖步霞.普通中学高三学生高考志愿选择与职业价值观关系的调查研究. (Doctoral dissertation, 苏州大学).

张进辅. (2001). 智力理论的最近发展.心理学动态,9(4), 5.