한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육 (Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education)

  • 제40권2호
  • /
  • Pages.191-209
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1598-3099(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2733-8436(eISSN)
한국초등과학교육학회 (The Korean Elementary Science Education Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

초등 과학과 과정중심 평가문항 예시 자료의 특징

Characteristics of Process-Focused Assessment Examples in Elementary School Science Education

  • 투고 : 2021.02.28
  • 심사 : 2021.03.23
  • 발행 : 2021.05.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구에서는 과정중심평가의 특징이 배포된 과학과 과정중심평가 예시 문항 자료들에서 어떻게 구현되고 있는지를 분석하였다. 선행연구 리뷰를 통해 과정중심평가의 특징에 대한 분석 관점을 6가지로 추출하였다. 그 분석틀을 이용하여 시도 교육청 및 교육과정평가원에서 개발한 과정중심평가 장학자료의 초등 과학과 평가문항이 과정중심평가의 특징을 어떤 방법으로 반영하고 있는지 기술하였다. 연구 결과, 과정중심 평가의 특징은 초등 과학과 평가 문항 예시 자료들에 형식적으로 반영되어 있는 경우가 많았고, 과정중심 평가의 특징이 초등 과학과 평가 문항에 두드러지게 나타나지 않는 경우도 있었다. 개발된 예시문항들은 기존 과학과 수행평가 문항의 형태와 동일한 유형, 서·논술형 유형, 실험관찰과 유사한 유형으로 구분되었다.

This study analyzed how characteristics of process-focused assessment are implemented in the distributed process-focused assessment examples in elementary school science education. To this end, through a review of previous studies, the analysis perspectives on the characteristics of the process-focused assessment were extracted into six categories. Using the analysis framework, it was described how process-focused assessment examples in elementary school science education developed by metropolitan office of education reflected the characteristics of process-focused assessment. As a result of the study, the characteristics of process-focused assessment were often formally reflected in sample materials. For example, there was a lack of skills on how to effectively integrate instruction and evaluation in practical terms. In many cases, feedback simply induced a recall of a learned concept or simply guides a related scientific concept. In some cases, the characteristics of process-focused assessment did not appear prominently in the sample materials. Also the developed sample materials were divided into the same type as the existing science and performance assessment questionnaire, a narrative·essay type, and a type similar to experimental workbook.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Ban, J. C., Kim, S., Park, C., & Kim, H. (2018). Teachers' perceptions on the teacher by teacher process fortified assessment policy. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 21(3), 105-130. https://doi.org/10.22799/JCE.2018.21.3.005
  2. Cho, S. Y. (2017). Realization plan of connection between the competence-based curriculum, teaching-learning method, and evaluation in high schools. Secondary Education Research, 65(1), 255-281. https://doi.org/10.25152/ser.2017.65.1.255
  3. Cho, T. G., & Kim, S. W. (2007). A study on analysis and alternatives of performance assessment in the elementary schools -Focused on the elementary schools in Pusan metropolitan city. Journal of Educational Evaluation, 20(2), 77-99.
  4. Choi, S. (2018). A study on the practice of process-focused assessment -Focusing on perceptions of Korean language teachers and application methods of Korean language education. Journal of CheongRam Korean Language Education, 68, 129-176. https://doi.org/10.26589/jockle..68.201812.129
  5. Choi, S. H., Lee, D. G., & Kim, D. J. (2017). Teacher-friendly education for process-focused assessment and teacher cognition. Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 33(2), 1-23.
  6. Ham, S. G. (2018). Development of process-focused assessment materials for assessing mathematical subject competency -Focused on the area of polygon section of 1st semester in the 5th grade elementary school mathematics-. Master's thesis, Gyeongin National University of Education.
  7. Hong, S. H., Chan, I., & Kim, T. S. (2017). Elementary school teachers' recognition of process-centered evaluation using consensual qualitative research. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(4), 47-69.
  8. Jeon, K. (2016). Direction and tasks of process-based performance evaluation. (KEDI CP-2016-02-4). Author.
  9. Jeon, S. (2019). The development and application of process-focused assessment for improving scientific communication skills. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 38(1), 16-30. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2019.38.1.16
  10. Jeong, S. (2017). Contextual performance tasks based on backward design for process-focused assessment. Journal of Narrative and Educational Research, 5(3), 249-269. https://doi.org/10.25051/JNER.2017.5.3.010
  11. Jun, H. W., & Lee, H. Y. (2019). An ethnography study on how to conduct process-based evaluation. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 19(8), 123-154.
  12. Jung, M. S., Kim, Y. K., & Boo, J. Y. (2019). An action research on colleague coaching for process-focused assessment in math. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 36(1), 19-49.
  13. Kang, H. Y., Ko, E. S., Lee, D. H., Lee, H., Tak, B., Cho, J. W., & Kim, S. H. (2018). A study on professional development program for mathematics teachers about process-focused assessment. The Journal of Education Research in Mathematics, 28(3), 321-343. https://doi.org/10.29275/jerm.2018.08.28.3.321
  14. Kim, H. (2019). Effectiveness of mathematics education through the process-oriented evaluation -Focusing on geometry and vector subjects-. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 22(4), 369-393. https://doi.org/10.30807/ksms.2019.22.4.002
  15. Kim, J. (2018). The concept and education implication of process-focused assessment. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(20), 839-859.
  16. Kim, M., & Ryu, S. (2019). Development of scientific conceptual understanding through process-centered assessment that visualizes the process of scientific argumentation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(5), 637-654.
  17. Kim, S., Won, H., Min, K., & Son, W. (2015). Formative evaluation that becomes one with teaching and learning. Hakgisa.
  18. Kim, Y. J., Jan, W., & Hong, H. G. (2019). The analysis and implication of student evaluation in 2015 science curriculum using text network analysis (TNA) method: Focused on the connection with process centered evaluation. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 22(3), 225-250. https://doi.org/10.22799/JCE.2019.22.3.009
  19. Ko, H. (2019). The study on the perception, actual condition, and support strategies of process-centered assessment by each teacher. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 19(9), 1137-1164.
  20. Kwon, M. (2018). How should we teach?: Focused on application of process-oriented assessment in elementary mathematics. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(18), 873-896.
  21. Lee, K. H., Kang, H. Y., Ko, E. S., Lee, D. H., Shin, B., Lee, H. C., & Kim, S. H. (2016). Exploration of the direction for the practice of process-focused assessment. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 26(4), 819-834.
  22. LeMahieu, P. G., & Reilly, E. C. (2004). Systems of coherence and resonance: Assessment for education and assessment of education. Year-National Society for the Study of Education, 2, 189-202.
  23. Lim, E. Y., Lee, U. W., Kim, Y., & Shim, H. P. (2018). A study of actual conditions of classroom assessment and survey for teacher-specific assessment. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 21(3), 75-104. https://doi.org/10.22799/JCE.2018.21.3.004
  24. Lim, J., & Choi, W. (2018). A study on characteristics and meanings of 'process-focused evaluation' in the free semester program. The Journal of Korean Education, 45(3), 31-59.
  25. McMillan, H. J. (2011). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective standards-based instruction. Pearson.
  26. MOE & KICE (Ministry of Education & Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation) (2017). How do you assess the process? (KICE ORM 2017-19-1). Author.
  27. Park, J., & Chung, H. (2017). Developing procedure-based assessment model of English and its application to elementary school students' learning of listening and speaking. Teacher Education Research, 56(4), 367-384. https://doi.org/10.15812/ter.56.4.201712.367
  28. Park, J., Jin, K., Kim, S., & Lee, S. (2018). Plan to enhance teacher evaluation expertise to improve process-oriented evaluation. (KICE RRE 2018-5). Author.
  29. Ryu, S., Kwak, Y., & Yang, S. H. (2018). Theoretical exploration of a process-centered assessment model for STEAM competency based on learning progressions. Journal of Science Education, 42(2), 132-147. https://doi.org/10.21796/JSE.2018.42.2.132
  30. Santos, L., & Semana, S. (2015). Developing mathematics written communication through expository writing supported by assessment strategies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88(2), 65-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9557-z
  31. Shepard, L. A. (2009). Commentary: Evaluating the validity of formative and interim assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28(3), 32-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2009.00152.x
  32. Shin, B., & Lee, K. E. (2018). A study on the examination case of a process-focused assessment instrument in a teachers' learning community. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 21(4), 73-98. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2018.21.4.73
  33. Shin, H., Ahn, S., & Kim, Y. (2017). A policy analysis on the procces-based evaluation -Focusing on middle school teachers in Seoul-. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 20(2), 135-162. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2017.20.2.135
  34. Shin, J., & Yang, I. (2017). Problems and improvement of science performance assessment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology, 7(1), 873-883. https://doi.org/10.14257/ajmahs.2017.01.71
  35. Son, J. H. (2018). The effect of backward design reflecting process-focused assessment on science learning achievement and science learning motivation of elementary school students. Journal of Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 11(2), 90-106. https://doi.org/10.15523/JKSESE.2018.11.2.90
  36. Swaffield, S. (2011). Getting to the heart of authentic assessment for Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 433-449. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2011.582838