Journal of the Korean earth science society (한국지구과학회지)

The Korean Earth Science Society (한국지구과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Changes of the Elementary Science Teaching with the Influence of the National Assessment of Educational Achievement

  • Received : 2011.07.04
  • Accepted : 2011.09.15
  • Published : 2011.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, we investigated how elementary science teaching has changed with the introduction of the National Assessment of Educational Achievement (NAEA). Teachers are held accountable for student performance as measured by the mandatory nation-wide standards tests to satisfy the needs of accountability and quality assurance systems. In relation to the teaching of science in the elementary school, professionalism meets potential threats with the advent of national test. Through analysis of the classroom teaching and open-ended interviews, we explored the teacher's concerns about the national test and how their science classes have changed to prepare for this test. According to the results, the national test made elementary teachers accountable for the content of their science classes, limits teachers' autonomy in reconstruction of curriculum, and forced teachers to conduct conclusion-centered lessons even in elementary science classes. In addition, teachers argue that the national test precludes the possibility of differentiated education and differentiated assessment. Based on the results, we suggested a new professionalism in this accountability era, so called 'informed professionalism', which refers to the ability of teachers to interpret and implement curriculum and policy mandates at the local, school and classroom level to generate equitable and improved student outcomes through teaching and learning. We also suggested further research on the teacher professionalism in teaching science contents.

Keywords

References

  1. Barber, M., 2004, The virtue of accountability: System redesign, inspection, and incentives in the era of informed professionalism. Journal of Education, 185, 7-38.
  2. Darling-Hammond, L., 2000, Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8, Retrieved from June 15, 2011, http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1.
  3. Darling-Hammond, L. and Bransford, J. (eds.), 2005, Preparing teachers for a Changing World. Jossey-Bass, CA, USA, 328 p.
  4. Feinman-Nemser, S., 2001, From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1013-1015. https://doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00141
  5. Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A., 2002, Teacher development and educational change. Routledge, NY, USA, 264 p.
  6. Gess-Newsome, J. and Lederman, N.G. (eds.), 1999, Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 320 p.
  7. KEDI, 2010, School accountability policy and use of student academic assessment data. KEDI Research Material RRM 2010-03, 335 p.
  8. KICE, 2008, Research on Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) in Social Studies, Mathematics, Science and English with Focus on Instructional Consulting for Secondary Beginning Teachers. KICE Research Report RRI 2008-3. 348 p.
  9. KICE, 2009, Research on mentoring system to improve teaching professionalism - centering around Korean language, social studies and science subject. KICE Research Report 2009-7, 348 p.
  10. Luke, A. and Woods, A., 2007, Accountability as testing: Are there lessons about assessment and outcomes to be learnt from no child left behind? Literacy Learning: The middle years, 6, 11-19.
  11. Luke, A. and McArdle, F., 2009, A model for researchbased State professional development policy. Asia- Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 37, 231-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660903053611
  12. Munby, H., Russell, T., and Martin, A.K., 2001, Teachers' knowledge and how it develops. In Richardson, V. (ed.), Fourth handbook of research on teaching. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, USA, 877-904.
  13. National Research Council., 2007, Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. National Academy Press, Washington, DC., USA, 348 p.
  14. Niemi, H., 2002, Active learning-a cultural change needed in teacher education and school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 763-780. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00042-2
  15. Schon, D.A., 1983, The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books, NY, USA, 384 p.
  16. Shulman, L.S., 1986, Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
  17. Shulman, L.S., 1987, Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
  18. Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., and Fung, I., 2007, A teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration. New Zealand Ministry of Education, Wellington, New Zealand, 344 p.
  19. Van Esa, E.A. and Sherinb, M.G., 2008, Mathematics teachers' "learning to notice" in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 244-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.005
  20. Wills, J.S. and Sandholtz, J.H., 2009, Constrained professionalism: Dilemmas of teaching in the face of testbased accountability. Teachers College Record, 111, 1065-1114.