NAEA 2020과 PISA 2018의 과학 영역 평가틀 비교 연구
Comparative Study of Science Domain Evaluation Framework between NAEA 2020 and PISA 2018
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
NAEA aims to improve the curriculum, teaching & learning methods and provide clinics for underprivileged students by evaluating the degree of achievement of Korean students in school and student units. PISA has similar but different characteristics in that it measures students’ levels of literacy as future citizens of society, on a country-by-country basis and lays the groundwork for the establishment of education policies in participating countries. This study attempted to draw implications for NAEA improvement by in-depth comparison and analysis of the science domain evaluation frameworks of both of these evaluations. First, it is necessary to develop questions testing knowledge related to the understanding of the process of scientific inquiry and the formation of scientific knowledge in NAEA, similar to the ‘Procedural knowledge’ and ‘Epistemic knowledge’ of PISA. Second, it is necessary to improve the evaluation framework through restructuring in consideration of the layers, relevance, and independence between sub-levels in the ‘Competency’ of NAEA. Third, it is necessary to continue research to develop items that can properly evaluate competency related to inquiry by making the most of the advantages of computer-based evaluation. Finally, it is necessary to review ‘Context’ of NAEA so that the most suitable situation for each item can be presented.
Abstract
NAEA aims to improve the curriculum, teaching & learning methods and provide clinics for underprivileged students by evaluating the degree of achievement of Korean students in school and student units. PISA has similar but different characteristics in that it measures students’ levels of literacy as future citizens of society, on a country-by-country basis and lays the groundwork for the establishment of education policies in participating countries. This study attempted to draw implications for NAEA improvement by in-depth comparison and analysis of the science domain evaluation frameworks of both of these evaluations. First, it is necessary to develop questions testing knowledge related to the understanding of the process of scientific inquiry and the formation of scientific knowledge in NAEA, similar to the ‘Procedural knowledge’ and ‘Epistemic knowledge’ of PISA. Second, it is necessary to improve the evaluation framework through restructuring in consideration of the layers, relevance, and independence between sub-levels in the ‘Competency’ of NAEA. Third, it is necessary to continue research to develop items that can properly evaluate competency related to inquiry by making the most of the advantages of computer-based evaluation. Finally, it is necessary to review ‘Context’ of NAEA so that the most suitable situation for each item can be presented.
참고문헌 (39)
- Ainsworth, S., "The function of multiple represen-tations", Computers & Education, 33((2-3)), pp.131~152 (1999)
- Alozie, N. M., "An analysis of the supports and constraints for scientific discussion in high school project based science", Science Education, 94(3), pp.395~427 (2010)
- The Policy Impact of PISA: An Exploration of the Normative Effects of International Benchmarking in School System Performance, "Breakspear, S.", OECD, 1787~, pp.Education Working Papers, No. 71 (2012)
- Chang, H. Y., "Students’ representational competence with drawing technology across two domains of science", Science Education, 102(5), pp.1129~1149 (2018)
- Chin, C., "Problem-based learning : Using ill-structured problem in biology project work", Science Education, 90(1), pp.44~67 (2006)
- Cho, H., "Theory and Practice of Science Education" (2009), Kyoyookbook
- OECD International Student Assessment Questionnaire Kit: PISA 2015 Science, Collaborative Problem Solving, "Cho, S.", KICE, ~, pp.ORM 2018-14 (2018)
- OECD Programme for International Students Assessment: An analysis of PISA 2018 Result: PISA 2018, "Cho, S.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2019-11 (2019)
- Relation Analysis of Cognitive Achievement and Context Variables about PISA 2018 Top-performing Countries, "Choi, I.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2021-4 (2021)
- De Cock, M., "Representation use and strate choicein physics problem solving", Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 8, pp.020117~ (2012)
- A Study on the Development of National Assessment of Educational Achievement according to the 2015 Revised National Curriculum, "Dong, H.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2018-4 (2018)
- 동효관, "TIMSS 2011과 NAEA 2011에 나타난 우리나라 학생들의 과학 학업 성취 특성", 교육평가연구, 26(5), pp.1091~1114 (2013), 한국교육평가학회
- Driver, R., "Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms", Science Education, 84(3), pp.287~312 (2000)
- Duschl, R. A., "Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science", Science &Education, 22(9), pp.2109~2139 (2013)
- 한채린, "수학 학습 평가틀 비교 분석 -NAEP 2015, TIMSS 2015, PISA 2015를 중심으로-", 수학교육, 54(3), pp.261~282 (2015), 한국수학교육학회
- A Study on Improving the National Assessment System of Educational Achievement, "Jeong, E. Y.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2008-2 (2008)
- Kelly, G. J., "Teaching Scientific Inquiry: Recommendations for Research and Implementation", pp.99~117 (2008)
- A Study on the Features of Educational Achievement and Development of the National Assessment of Educational Achievement (NAEA) 2013, "Kim, D. Y.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2013-4 (2013)
- 김현정, "PISA 과학 영역의 특징과 평가틀에 대한 논의", 현장과학교육, 12(4), pp.389~398 (2018), 한국현장과학교육학회[DOI]
- Improvement of National Assessment of Educational Achievement Scoring System and Strategies for Enhancing the Utilization of the NAEA Results, "Kim, H.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2019-3 (2019)
- 김현정, "대학수학능력시험 과학탐구 영역 평가 틀의 행동 영역에 대한 고찰", 현장과학교육, 10(1), pp.83~94 (2016), 한국현장과학교육학회[DOI]
- A Study on Evaluation Methods for National Level Educational Achievement, "Kim, M. S.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 1998-8 (1998)
- 김미영, "우리나라, 싱가포르, 대만의 과학 교과서 비교 연구 - 생명 영역을 중심으로 -", 한국과학교육학회지, 30(4), pp.498~518 (2010), 한국과학교육학회
- Kim, Y. H., "Analysis of Assessment Results in the 2020 National Assessment of Educational Achievement(NAEA): Scinece", KICE ORM 2021-52, ~ (2021)
- Klein, P., "Assessment of representational competence in kinematics", Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 13, pp.010132~ (2017)
- A Study on Improving the Process of Developing, Implementing, and Scoring the National Assessment of Educational Achievement (NAEA), "Lee, C. H.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2010-6-1 (2010)
- Introducing the Computer-Based Test for the National Assessment of Educational Achievement: A Developmental Study for the eNAEA, "Lee, J.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2020-5 (2020)
- Advancing the Test Tools for Electronic National Assessment of Educational Achievement (eNAEA), "Lee, J.", KICE, ~, pp.RRE 2021-2 (2021)
- A Study on the Development Plan for the National Level Academic Achievement Evaluation System According to the Application of the 2015 Revised Curriculum, "Lee, M.", KICE, ~, pp.CRE 2017-8 (2017)
- 이신영, "PISA 2015와 비교한 PISA 2018 과학 영역의 성취수준별 인지적 성취 특성과 교육과정 상 인식론적 지식 함양을 위한 교육 탐색", 한국과학교육학회지, 41(5), pp.401~414 (2021), 한국과학교육학회
- Lehrer, R., "Seeding evolutionary thinking by engaging children in modeling its foundations", Science Education, 96(4), pp.701~724 (2012)
- ., "Science National Curriculum", Ministry of Education, ~ (2015)
- National Academy Press, ".", 1996
- NGSS Lead States, "Next Generation Science Standards" (2013), National Academy Press
- OECD, "PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework" (2019), OECD Publishing
- OECD, "PISA 2018 Results (Volume Ⅰ):What Students Know and Can Do" (2019), OECD Publishing
- Pande, P., "Representational competence : towards a distributed and embodied cognition account", Studies in Science Education, 53(1), pp.1~43 (2016)
- 임해미, "국가수준 학업성취도 평가와 국제 학업성취도 평가의 연계를 통한 우리나라 학생들의 수학 성취 특성 분석", 수학교육학연구, 22(1), pp.1~22 (2012), 대한수학교육학회
- Schwarz, C. V., "Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling : Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), pp.632~654 (2009)