Wiggins & McTighe의 이해 측면에 따른 생명과학Ⅰ평가 문항의 분석
Analysis of Summative Evaluation Questions for Life Science I based on the Understanding Aspects of Wiggins & McTighe
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study is to analyze the Life Science Ⅰ summative evaluation questions in aspects of Wiggins & McTighe's understanding. For this purpose, we collected evaluation questions for Life Science I conducted regularly from 2019 to 2022 in 12 high schools in Metropolitan D. There were a total of 4,289 collected summative evaluation questions. Based on the understanding aspect analysis framework, the summative evaluation questions were classified into frequencies by year and unit, and the statistical differences in the understanding aspect frequency by year and unit were analyzed. The results of this study are as follows. First, the Life Science I summative evaluation questions are focused only on some aspects of understanding. Second, there was no change in the evaluation strategy for Life Science I. Based on this, it will expected that the evaluation of life sciences conducted in the 2022 revised science curriculum will be evaluated on more diverse aspects rather than focusing only on the aspects of explanation and application. In addition, it will expected that not only the basic concepts will be acquired, but also an evaluation that is appropriate for the characteristics of the unit and changes over time.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to analyze the Life Science Ⅰ summative evaluation questions in aspects of Wiggins & McTighe's understanding. For this purpose, we collected evaluation questions for Life Science I conducted regularly from 2019 to 2022 in 12 high schools in Metropolitan D. There were a total of 4,289 collected summative evaluation questions. Based on the understanding aspect analysis framework, the summative evaluation questions were classified into frequencies by year and unit, and the statistical differences in the understanding aspect frequency by year and unit were analyzed. The results of this study are as follows. First, the Life Science I summative evaluation questions are focused only on some aspects of understanding. Second, there was no change in the evaluation strategy for Life Science I. Based on this, it will expected that the evaluation of life sciences conducted in the 2022 revised science curriculum will be evaluated on more diverse aspects rather than focusing only on the aspects of explanation and application. In addition, it will expected that not only the basic concepts will be acquired, but also an evaluation that is appropriate for the characteristics of the unit and changes over time.
참고문헌 (33)
- Anderson, L. W., "Bloom's Taxonomy: A Forty-year Retrospective: Ninety-third Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education" (2004), University of Chicago Press
- Bell, B., "The characteristics of formative assessment in science education", Science Education, 85, pp.536~553 (2001)
- Berlak, H., "Toward a New Science of Educational Testing and Assessment", pp.1~22 (1992), State University of New York Press
- Black, P., "Road maps for learning : A guide to the navigation of learning progressions", Measurement : Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 9, pp.71~123 (2011)
- Bransford, J., "How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School" (2000), National Research Council
- Brookhart, S. M., "Classroom assessment : Tensions and intersections in theory and practice", Teachers College Record, 106, pp.429~458 (2004)
- Chung, Q., "An analysis on the biology testing items of the National Entrance Examination for the university from 1969 to 1992", Biology Education, 4, pp.275~285 (1994)
- Gipps, C., "Beyond Testing: Towards a Theory of Educational Assessment" (1994), The Falmer Press
- Jung, H., "Exploring the Implications of Gadamer's hermeneutic understanding on process-based evaluation : Focusing on the linguisticality of understanding", The Journal of Educational Research, 38, pp.1~23 (2023)
- Kim, Y., "Appropriateness of inquiry activities presented in Life Science I of the 2015revised science curriculum", Brain, Digital, & Learning, 13, pp.51~71 (2023)
- Kim, Y., "The study of differences of class objects for science teacher and students recognize in middle school", Journal of Science Education, 29, pp.45~56 (2005)
- Lee, D., "An analysis of paper and pencil test items of Life Science I in high school", Journal of Science Education, 38, pp.670~690 (2014)
- Lee, H., "Analysis of primary and secondary biology instructional objectives on 7th science curriculum : Based on Bloom's revised taxonomy", Biology Education, 36, pp.52~62 (2008)
- Lee, M., "Comparative analysis of Life Science items of Korean scholastic aptitude test and regular high school examinations", Biology Education, 46, pp.346~354 (2018)
- Lim, S., "An analysis of alignment between instructional objectives, students' acquired knowledge, and evaluation items in"stimulus and reaction"unit in science class of middle schools", Biology Education, 39, pp.95~105 (2011)
- Ministry of Education, , 2015
- Ministry of Education, , 2022
- Pellegrino, J. W., "Proficiency in science : Assessment challenges and opportunities", Science, 340, pp.320~323 (2013)
- Pellegrino, J. W., "The Future of Assessment", pp.7~52 (2008), Routledge
- Popham, W. J., "Assessment literacy for teachers : Faddish or fundamental?", Theory Into Practice, 48, pp.4~11 (2009)
- Siegel, M. A., "Preparing for the plunge : Preservice teachers’ assessment literacy", Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, pp.371~391 (2011)
- Songer, N. B., "Assessment and science education : Our essential few priority?", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, pp.683~690 (2013)
- Widodo, A., "Conceptual change views and the reality of classroom practice", Paper presented at the Third European Symposium on Conceptual Change (2002)
- Widodo, A., "Constructivist views of teaching and learning in practice: Teachers’views and classroom behaviour", Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (2002)
- Wiggins, G., "Understanding by Design" (2005), Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)
- Wiggins, G., "The Understanding by Design Guide to Creating High-quality Units", Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), ~ (2011)
- Wiliam, D., "Towards a philosophy for educational assessment", Paper presented to the Annual Conference of the British Education Research Association (1994)
- Willis, J., "Conceptualising teachers’ assessment literacies in an era of curriculum and assessment reform", The Australian Educational Researcher, 40, pp.241~256 (2013)
- Yang, D., "Comparison of textbook objectives and paper test items based on physics I ‘Space-Time and the Universe’", Journal of Science Education, 44, pp.38~49 (2020)
- Yi, J., "A new model development of backward design : Focusing on improved model", Journal of Research in Education, 45, pp.87~114 (2012)
- Zoller, U., "Science education for global sustainability : What is necessary for teaching, learning, and assessment strategies?", Journal of Chemical Education, 89, pp.297~300 (2012)
- Zoller, U., "Second International Handbook of Science Education (Vol 1)" (2012), Springer