한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제28권7호
  • /
  • Pages.697-712
  • /
  • 2008
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지

An Analysis of Structural Features, Contents, and Cognitive Levels of Questions of Korea and Secondary Textbooks in the Evolution Unit

  • 발행 : 2008.11.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The purpose of this study was to seek strengths and weaknesses from analyzing Korea and U.S. science textbooks in terms of general structural features, contents, cognitive levels of questions and the purpose of questions used in science textbooks. This provided insight into improvement of textbooks that can effectively assist teaching and learning. To investigate organization of unit in textbooks in-depth, the evolution unit was selected and scrutinized as one example. The results showed that the number of pages, activities, vocabulary words, and vocabulary lists are considerably different between Korean and the U.S. Commonly, U.S. textbooks were more laden with information and lacking in coherence than those of the Korean textbooks. The findings on the cognitive levels of questions showed that the majority of questions in both nations are concerned with knowledge. However, the difference between the two nations is great in the ratios of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation questions. Questions are concentrated in review section (45% of Korean and 60.6% of U.S.) in textbooks. It suggested that well-planned questions in a review section can provide the basic guidance for strength in a science classroom.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Andre, T. (1976). Does answering higher-level questions while reading facilitate productive learning? Review of Educational Research, 49, 280-318
  2. Abraham, M. R., Grzybowski, E. B., Renner, J. W., & Marek, E. A. (1992). Understanding and misunderstandings of eighth graders of five chemistry concepts found in textbooks. Journal of Research of Science Teaching, 29, 105-120 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290203
  3. Ashner, M. J. (1961). Asking questions to trigger thinking. NEA Journal, 50, 44-46
  4. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: cognitive domain. New York: David Mckay
  5. Carner, R. L. (1963). Levels of questioning. Education, 83, 546-550
  6. Carl, J. R. Jr. (1967). An assessment of the cognitive content of review questions in selected secondary general biology textbooks. Unpublished Dissertation, The University of Alabama
  7. Chai, J. Y. & Jin, R. (2004). Discourse Structure for Context Question Answering. Retrieved April 20, 2007, from www.cse.msu.edu/~rongjin/publications/HLTQAWorkshop04.pdf
  8. Chambliss, M, J., & Calfee, R, C. (1989). Designing science textbooks to enhance student understanding. Educational Psychologist, 24(3), 307-322 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2403_5
  9. Chiang-Soong, Betty. (1988). An Analysis of the Most Used Science Textbooks in Secondary Schools in the United States, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Iowa. Crooks, K. B. (1961). Suggestions for teaching the scientific method. American Biology Teaching. 23, 154-159
  10. Dahlgren, M. & Orberg, G. (2003). Questioning to learn and learning to question: Structure and function of problem-based learning scenarios in environmental science learning. Higher Education, 41, 263-282 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004138810465
  11. Davis, O. L., and Hunkins, F. P. (1966). Textbook questions: What thinking processes do they foster? Peabody Journal of Education, 43(5), 285-292 https://doi.org/10.1080/01619566609537358
  12. Edwards, S., & Bowman, M. (1996). Promoting student learning through questioning: A study of classroom questions. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 7(2), 3-24
  13. Elder, L. and Paul, r. (1997) Crinical thinking: Crucial distinctions for questioning. Journal of Developmental Education, 21(1), 24-25
  14. Eltinge, E. M. (1998). Linguistic content analysis of the Holt, Rinehart and Winston series of high school biology textbooks: A Longitudinal study focusing on the use of inquiry. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Iowa State University
  15. Fraenkel, J. R. (1966). Ask the right questions. Clearing House, 40, 397-400 https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.1966.11476985
  16. Gall, M. D. (1970). The use of questions in teaching. Review of Educational Research, 40(5), p. 707-721 https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543040005707
  17. Glaubman, R and Glaubman, H. (1997). Effects of self-directed learning, story comprehension, and self-questioning in kindergarten. Journal of Educational Research, 90(6), 361-374 https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1997.10544594
  18. Holliday, W. G. (1981). Selective attentional effects of textbooks study questions on student learningin science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18. 283-289 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660180402
  19. Hugang (2004). A study on the current status of the Korean textbooks and its improvement strategies. Korea Textbook Research Foundation. 80-110
  20. Kleinman, G. (1965). Teacher's questions and student understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3, 307-317 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660030410
  21. Koufetta-Menicou C and Scaife J A, (2000). Teachers' questions - types and significance in science education. School Science Review, 81(296), 79-84
  22. Leonard, W.H. (1987). Does the presentation style of questions inserted into text influence understanding and retention of science concepts? Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 24(1), 27-37 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660240104
  23. Lowery, L.F., & Leonard, W. H. (1971). Development and method for use an instrument designed to assess textbook questioning style. School Science and Mathematics, 78(5), 393-400 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1978.tb09384.x
  24. Lumpe, A. T., & Beck, J. (1996). A profile of high school biology textbooks using scientific literacy recommendations. The American Biology Teacher, 58(3), 147-153 https://doi.org/10.2307/4450103
  25. Martin, D. J. (2000). Elementary science methods: constructivist methods. Baltimore: Thomson Learning
  26. Meyer, L., Crummey, L., & Greer, E. (1988). Elementary science textbooks: Their contents, text characteristic, and comprehensibility. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(6), 435-463 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660250603
  27. Ministry of Education (1999). 50 Years of the Ministry of Education History. Seoul: MOE
  28. Park, D. Y. (2005). Differences between a standards-based curriculum and traditional textbooks in high school earth science. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(5), 540-547 https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-53.5.540
  29. Park, D. Y. (2005).Differences between a standards-based curriculum and traditional textbooks in high school earth science. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(5), 540-547 https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-53.5.540
  30. Park, K., & Leung, K. S. F. (2005). Chapter 2-5: A Comparative Study of the Mathematics Textbooks of China, England, Japan, Korea, and the United States. New ICMI Study Series, 9, 227-238
  31. Pizzini, E. L., Shepardson, D. P., & Abell, S. K. (1992). The questions level of select middle school science textbooks. School Science and Mathematics, 92(2), 74-79 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1992.tb12145.x
  32. Sanders, N. M. (1966). Classroom questions: What kinds? New York: Harper & Row
  33. Sewall, G. T. (2002). Textbooks and the United nations: The international system and what American students learn about it. An Education Report of the United Nations Association of the United States of America (UNA-USA), New York
  34. Shepardson, D. P., & Pizzini, E. L., (1991). Questioning level of juniorhigh school science textbooks and their implications for learning textual information. Science Education, 75(6), 673-682 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730750607
  35. Shymansky, J. A., Yore, L. D., & Good, R. (1991). Elementary school teachers' beliefs about and perceptions of elementary school science, science textbooks, and supportive instructional factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28 (5), 437-454 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280507
  36. Stake, R.E., & Easley, J. A. (1978). Case studies in science education. Urban: University of Illinois, Center for Instruction Research and Curriculum Evaluation
  37. Stern, L. S., & Roseman, J. E. (2004). Can middle-school textbooks help students learn important ideas? Findings from project 2061's curriculum evaluation study: Life science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(6), 538-568 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20019
  38. Tolman, M., & Hardy, G. (1995). Discovering elementary science: Method, content, and problemsolving activities.Boston MA: Allyn & Bacon
  39. Tyson, H. (1997). Overcoming structural barriers to good textbooks. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Education Goals Panel. Retrieve from http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/negp/Reports/tyson.htm
  40. Ulerick, S. L. (1989). Using textbooks for meaningful learning science. NARST News, 31. 15-16
  41. Valverde, G.A., Bianchi, L. J., Wolfe, R.G., Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2002). According to the book: Using TIMSS to investigation the translation of policy into practice through the world of textbooks. Dordrecht: Kluwer
  42. Weiss, I. R. (2001). Report of the 2000 national survey of science and mathematics education. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute
  43. Wilson, J. T., & Koran, J. J. (1976). Review of research on mathematic behavior: Implications for teaching and learning science. Science Education, 60, 391-400 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730600315
  44. Wixson, K. K. (1983). Postreading questionsanswer interactions and children's learning from text. Journal of Educational psychology, 30, 413-423
  45. Workshop on Pragmatics in Question Answering (HLT-NAACL). Retrieve April 23, 2007, from www.cse.msu.edu/~rongjin/publications/HLTQAWorkshop04.pdf
  46. Yore, L. D. (1991). Secondary science teachers' attitudes toward and beliefs about science reading and science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(1), 55-72 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280106