Bloom의 신교육 목표 분류학에 기초한 초등학교 3, 4학년 과학과 7차 교육과정과 2007 개정 과학과 교육과정의 목표체계 비교
Comparison of Instructional Objectives of the 2007 Revised Elementary Science Curriculum with 7th Elementary Curriculum based on Bloom's Revised Taxonomy
2
조회
0
다운로드
21
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purposes of this study were to classify the objectives in elementary science for the 2007 revised national curriculum in accordance with Bloom's Revised Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, and to compare the classified data of 2007 revised curriculum with 7th national curriculum from a view of creative objectives. For the purpose, the frame and manuel was developed to classify the objectives. In this study, elementary science instructional objectives of third- to forth-grade level were classified through the frame. The finding of this study revealed that the objectives, stated in elementary science for the 2007 revised national curriculum, are biased to the ‘conceptional knowledge’, ‘factual knowledge’ and the ‘understand’ cognitive process dimension. And the remaining dimension of the Bloom's revised taxonomy is very scanty. Comparing with 7th national curriculum, the 2007 revised national curriculum's objectives system has not conspicuous improvement in creativity area. It was suggested to improve present objectives system, because of give learners more experience to opportunity about creativity.
Abstract
The purposes of this study were to classify the objectives in elementary science for the 2007 revised national curriculum in accordance with Bloom's Revised Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, and to compare the classified data of 2007 revised curriculum with 7th national curriculum from a view of creative objectives. For the purpose, the frame and manuel was developed to classify the objectives. In this study, elementary science instructional objectives of third- to forth-grade level were classified through the frame. The finding of this study revealed that the objectives, stated in elementary science for the 2007 revised national curriculum, are biased to the ‘conceptional knowledge’, ‘factual knowledge’ and the ‘understand’ cognitive process dimension. And the remaining dimension of the Bloom's revised taxonomy is very scanty. Comparing with 7th national curriculum, the 2007 revised national curriculum's objectives system has not conspicuous improvement in creativity area. It was suggested to improve present objectives system, because of give learners more experience to opportunity about creativity.
참고문헌 (27)
- Anderson, L. W., "교육과정 수업 평가를 위한 새로운 분류학: Bloom 교육 목표 분류학의 개정" (2005), 아카데미프레스
- 초등학교 교육과정 해설 Ⅳ, 수학, 과학, 실과, "교육과학기술부", 교육과학기술부, ~ (2008)
- 교육과학기술부, "창의성과 인성 함양을 위한 교육내용․방법․평가체제 혁신방안", 제3차 교육개혁 대책회의 제1호 안건 (2009), 교육과학기술부
- "교육인적자원부", 2007
- 권재술, "Klopfer의 과학교육 목표 분류의 본질과 문제점", 과학교육논총, 9, pp.67~72 (1984)
- 김상달, "Klopfer의 교육목표 분류에 따른 제7차 교육과정의 중학교 과학 교육목표 분석 -7학년을 중심으로", 한국지구과학회지, 26(7), pp.640~651 (2005), 한국지구과학회
- 김소연, "Bloom의 신 교육 목표 분류학에 기초한 지구과학과 수업 목표 분석", 석사, pp.2009
- 김영신, "Bloom의 신 교육목표분류학에 기초한 초등학교 과학과 수업 목표 분석", 초등과학교육, 26(5), pp.570~579 (2007), 한국초등과학교육학회
- 양일호, "Klopfer의 교육 목표 분류 체계에 의한 초등학교 과학과 지필 평가 문항 분석: 5학년 1학기를 중심으로", 초등과학교육, 27(3), pp.221~232 (2008), 한국초등과학교육학회
- 이혜숙, "Bloom의 신교육 목표 분류학에 기초한 생물 영역의 수업 목표 분석", 석사, pp.2007
- 이혜숙, "Bloom의 신교육 목표 분류틀에 기초한 중학교 생물 영역의 목표 분류", 생물교육, 34(3), pp.365~376 (2006), 한국생물교육학회
- 정진승, "우리나라 교과서 관련 정책에 대한 비판적 고찰", 청소년문화포럼, 16(16), pp.201~231 (2007), (사)한국청소년문화연구소
- 한종하, "과학과 교육론" (1988), 갑을출판사
- 홍정림, "교육과정의 목표 설정 준거에 따른 제 6차 중학교 과학교과서 생물영역 분석", 한국과학교육학회지, 19(2), pp.239~247 (1999)
- Anderson, L. W., "Bloom's Taxonomy: A forty-year retrospective: Ninety-third yearbook of the national society for the study of education" (1994), University of Chicago Press
- Is textbook obsolete in new education? A critical analysis on the value of textbook in an inquiry curriculum, with special reference to the new primary general studies curriculum in Hong Kong, "Angus, C. H.", ~, pp.ERIC #ED 490764 (2004)
- Bloom, B. S., "Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook Ⅰ: Cognitive Domain" (1956), David McKay
- DeVito, B., "Characterizing in two science classrooms by the cognitive processes demonstrated by student and teachers", 석사, pp.2005
- Ferguson, C., "Using th revised taxonomy to plan and deliver team-taught, integrated, thematic units", Theory into Practice, 41(4), pp.238~243 (2002)
- Fleiss, J. L., "Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2nd ed" (1981)
- Guilford, J. P., "The structure of intellect", Psychological Bulletin, 53, pp.267~293 (1956)
- Guilford, J. P., "Intelligence, creativity, and their educational implications" (1968), EDITS
- Klopfer, L. E., "Evaluation of learning in science, in Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of students learning" (1971), McGraw-Hill
- Krathwohl, D. R., "A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview", Theory into Practice, 41(4), pp.212~218 (2002)
- Miller, A. D., "Applying Bloom's revised taxonomy within the framework of teaching for understanding to enhance the frequency and quality of student's opportunities to develop and practice higher-level cognitive processes", 석사, pp.2004
- National Research Council, "National science education standards" (1996), National Academy Press
- Weisberg, R. W., "Creativity: Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, and the arts" (2006), John Wiley & Sons