JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
International Comparison Study on the Articulation of the Science Curriculum: Focus on the Concept of Photosynthesis
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
International Comparison Study on the Articulation of the Science Curriculum: Focus on the Concept of Photosynthesis
Lee, Hyonyong; Yeo, Chaeyeong;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The Korean education curriculum is making efforts to improve education to foster competencies that the future society demands through the 2007 and 2009 revised curriculum. The revised curricula focus on enhanced articulation for the quality curriculum. In this study, the curriculum is analyzed for vertical and horizontal articulation. In addition, the study found a problem in Korea's curriculum through international comparison and sought improvement. Furthermore, the study compared internationally articulation of the concept of photosynthesis, of which the results are as follows. First, our science curriculum focuses on vertical articulation and has relatively neglected the problem of horizontal articulation. To compensate for this problem, curriculum design should introduce aspects of 'nature' and 'environment' and should consider the interests and concerns of students, as countries with high horizontal articulation do. Second, the actual education field has a problem with the a lack of continuity and sequence because of concentration of concept in a specific grade or simply repeating the concept across multiple grades. These results have led to alternative proposals that should arrange basis of concept configuration such as 'Big Idea' and should establish the adoption of 'systems' frequently appearing in the other curricula. Finally, there may be mentioned a lack of research on students' learning progression, which can be a common standard of horizontal and vertical articulation. Research on learning progression has been a trend overseas, but there exists no study to fit Korea's situation, so education fields need to conduct the appropriate research on learning progression as part of the commitment to high-quality curriculum.
 Keywords
science curriculum;quality curriculum;articulation;horizontal articulation;vertical articulation;international comparisons;learning progression;photosynthesis;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
Alonzo, A. C., & Steedle J. T. (2009). Developing and assessing a force and motion learning progression. Science Education, 93(3), 389-421. crossref(new window)

2.
American Association for the Advancement of Science[AAAS]. (2001). Atlas of science literacy I. New York: Oxford University Press.

3.
American Association for the Advancement of Science[AAAS]. (2007). Atlas of science literacy II. New York: Oxford University Press.

4.
Bang, D., Park, E., Yoon H., Kim J., Lee Y., Park J., Song J., Dong, H., Shim, B., Lim, H., & Lee, H. (2013). The Design of Integrated Science Curriculum Framework Based on Big Ideas. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(5), 1041-1054. crossref(new window)

5.
Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O., & Orpaz, T. (2010). The 'Life at the poles' study unit: Developing junior high school students' ability to recognize the relations between earth systems. Research in Science Education, 40(4), 525-549. crossref(new window)

6.
Berland L.K., & McNeill, K.L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5), 765-793. crossref(new window)

7.
Briggs, D. C., & Alonzo, A. C. (2012). The psychometric modeling of ordered multiplechoice item responses for diagnostic assessment with a learning progression. In A. C. Alonzo & A. W. Gotwals (Eds.), Learning progressions in science: Current challenges and future directions (pp. 293-316). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, The Netherlands.

8.
Bruner, J. S.(1960). The process of education. Cambridge, N.Y : Harvard University Press.

9.
Chung, Y., & Kang, K. (1998). Students' understanding of photosynthesis and an analysis of their misconceptions. Journal of the Korean Society of Biology Education, 26(1), 1-7.

10.
Duncan, R. G., Rogat, A. D., & Yarden, A. (2009). A learning progression for deepening students'understandings of modern genetics across the 5th-10th grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 655-674. crossref(new window)

11.
Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8(Eds.). Washington, DC.: National Academies Press.

12.
Furtak, E. M. (2012). Linking a learning progression for natural selection to teachers' enactment of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1181-1210. crossref(new window)

13.
Gagne, R, M. (1970). The Conditions of Learning (2nd ed.). New York: Hott, Rinehart and Winston..

14.
Gunckel, K. L., Covitt, B. A., Salinas, I., & Anderson, C. W. (2012). A learning progression for water in socio-ecological systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 843-868. crossref(new window)

15.
Kim, J., Park, S., Choi, J., & Lee, H. (2013). International comparative studies on the sequence and integrity of elementary and secondary school curricula (Research report RRC 2013-3). Seoul: Korea Insritute for Curriculum and Evaluation.

16.
Korean Association for Science Education[KASE]. (2014). Present and future of science education in east asia: focusing on curriculum. Seoul: Seoul National University.

17.
Kwak, Y., Son, J., Kim, M., & Ku, J. (2014). Research on Ways to Improve Science Curriculum Focused on Key Competencies and Creative Fusion Education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(3), 321-330. crossref(new window)

18.
Lee, H., & Liu O. L. (2009). Assessing Learning Progression of Energy Concepts Across Middle School Grades: The Knowledge Integration Perspective. Science & Education, 94(4), 665-688. crossref(new window)

19.
Lee, J., Kim, Y., Paik, S., & Lee, K. (2010). An Analysis of Content-related Issues of Curriculum for the Improvement of Contents in Science Education. Journal of the Science Education, 34(1), 140-154.

20.
Lee, S. (2013). A critical study on the structuralizing process of school-subject knowledge: The case of the 2009 revised science curriculum in Korea. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3), 173-199. crossref(new window)

21.
Lee, Y., Yoon, H., Song, J., & Bang, D. (2014). Analysis of science educational contents of Singapore, Canada and US focused on the integrated concepts. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(1), 21-32. crossref(new window)

22.
Marmaroti, P., & Galanopoulou, D. (2006). Pupils' understanding of photosynthesis: A questionnaire for the simultaneous assessment of all aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 383-403. crossref(new window)

23.
Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development[MEHRD]. (2007). A guide for science curriculum. Seoul; Ministry of Education and Human Resources evelopment.

24.
Ministry of Education and Science Technology[MEST]. (2009). Curriculum and operational practices from around the world(IV) Canada. Busan Metropolitan City Office of Education.

25.
Ministry of Education and Science Technology[MEST]. (2011). 2009 revised national science curriculum. Seoul, Korea: Author.

26.
Mohan, L., Chen, J., & Anderson, C. W. (2009). Developing a multi-year learning progression for carbon cycling in socio-ecological systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 675-698. crossref(new window)

27.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). The Framework for the National Curriculum. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

28.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). The National Curriculum in England Framework document for consultation. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

29.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Education Program 2010. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

30.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Ontario schools kindergarten to grade 12 Policy and Program Requirements. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

31.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). A Framework for K-12 science education. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

32.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Next Generation Science Standards. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

33.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Core curriculum for pre-school education. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

34.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Core curricular upper secondary education. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile. wdi.map.do#

35.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). National Core Curriculum for Basic Education. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

36.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Amendments and additions to national core curriculum basic education. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

37.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Kindergarten Curriculum Framework. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

38.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). MOE corporate brochure. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

39.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Primart school education booklet. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

40.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Secondary school education booklet. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile. wdi.map.do#

41.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Taiwan secondary framework. Retrieved July 28, 2015, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

42.
National Curriculum Information Center[NCIC]. (n. d.). Taiwan primary, lower secondary framework. Retrieved August 5, 2013, from http://ncic.go.kr/mobile.wdi.map.do#

43.
National Research Council[NRC]. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

44.
National Research Council[NRC]. (2006). Systems for state science assessment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

45.
National Research Council[NRC]. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. In R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, & A. W. Shouse (Eds.). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

46.
National Research Council[NRC]. (2012). A Framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

47.
National Research Council[NRC]. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.

48.
Odum, E. P. (1992) Great ideas in ecology for the 1990s. BioScienc, 42(7), 542-545. crossref(new window)

49.
Paik, N. (2006) Specification of presentation form of educational contents in subject curriculum. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24(2), 207-233.

50.
Plummer, J. D., & Krajcik, J. (2010). Building a learning progression for celestial motion: Elementary levels from an earth-based perspective. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), 768-787. crossref(new window)

51.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9(3), 1989-1990.

52.
Shin, N., Koh, E., Choi, C., & Jeong, D. (2014). Using a Learning Progression to Characterize Korean Secondary Students' Knowledge and Submicroscopic Representations of the Particle Nature of Matter. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(5), 437-447. crossref(new window)

53.
Smith, C. L., Wiser, M., Anderson, C. W., & Krajcki, J. (2011). Implication of research on children's learning for standards and assessment: A proposed learning progression for matter and the atomic molecular theory. Focus Article. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 14, 1-98.

54.
Songer, N. B., Kelcey, B., & Gotwals, A.W. (2009). How and when does complex reasoning occur? Empirically driven development of a learning progressions focused on complex reasoning about biodiversity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 610-631. crossref(new window)

55.
Stavy, R., Eisen, Y., & Yakobi, D. (1987). How students aged 13-15 understand photosynthesis. International Journal of Science Education, 9(1), 105-115. crossref(new window)

56.
Stevens, S. Y., Delgado, C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). Developing a Hypothetical Multi-Dimensional Learning Progression for the Nature of Matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 47(6), 687-715.

57.
Tyler, R. W.(1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

58.
Westra, R. H. V. (2008). Learning and Teaching Ecosystem Behavior in Secondary Education. Unpublished Doctoral Paper. University of van Utrecht.

59.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design(Expanded 2nd Ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

60.
Wilson, M. (2009). Measuring Progressions: Assessment structures underlying a learning progression. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 716-730. crossref(new window)