Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Over-Efficacy in Problem Solving and Overconfidence of Knowledge on Photosynthesis: A Study of Comparison Between Multiple-Choice and Supply-Type Test Formats

광합성 문제 해결에 대한 과잉 효능감과 과잉확신: 선다형과 서답형의 비교 연구

  • Received : 2013.08.19
  • Accepted : 2014.01.23
  • Published : 2014.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the over-efficacy in problem solving and overconfidence of knowledge of students performing assessments in two different test formats: multiple-choice and supply-type. Two hundred and four female middle school students participated in this study. Multiple-choice and supply-type formats of tests on photosynthesis were used, and each item contained scales indicating one's self-efficacy on problem-solving and confidence of knowledge. The results showed that the correlation coefficients of performance between the two different assessment formats were less than 0.5 and the correlation coefficients between efficacy/confidence and actual performance were less than 0.45. Moreover, students tended to exhibit more over-efficacy and overconfidence in multiple-choice formats. The percentage of over-efficacy and overconfidence was higher in the group that completed the multiple-choice test first followed by the supply-type assessment than in the group that started with the supply-type followed by the multiple-choice assessment. From this study, it can be suggested that more use of supply-type assessment is required in science education. If test administrators require the combination of both multiple-choice and supply-type in an assessment, the supply-type assessment format should come first so that students can maintain the appropriate level of efficacy and confidence. In addition, science educators need to develop new learning programs to enhance students' self-monitoring skills of their problem-solving ability and knowledge.

이 연구는 과잉효능감과 과잉확신이 선다형과 서답형 평가에서 어떻게 나타나는지에 조사하였다. 이 연구를 위하여 204명의 여자중학교 학생들이 참여하였다. 선다형과 서답형으로 된 광합성 개념에 대한 검사도구를 사용하였으며, 각 문항마다 자신의 효능감과 확신을 척도로 나타나게 하였다. 연구결과 선다형과 서답형의 상관관계는 0.5가 채 되지 않았으며, 학생들이 생각하는 자신의 문제 해결 능력(효능감)과 실제 능력 간의 상관관계 역시 0.45가 되지 않았다. 학생들은 선다형 문제 해결 과정에서 지식에 대한 확신을 높이는 경향을 보였다. 선다형 문항을 먼저 수행한 집단에서는 그렇지 않은 집단에 비하여 과잉효능감과 과잉확신의 비율이 더 높게 나타났다. 이 연구 결과는 학생들을 평가하는 과정에서 서답형의 사용을 늘릴 것을 제언한다. 또한 두 형태의 검사도구를 동시에 사용하게 될 경우 선다형 검사도구를 사후에 사용하여 학생들이 적절한 수준의 효능감과 확신을 유지할 수 있도록 해야 될 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
  2. Beggrow, E. P., Ha, M., Nehm, R. H., Pearl, D., & Boone, W. J. (in press). Assessing scientific practices using machine-learning methods: How closely do they match clinical interview performance? Journal of Science Education and Technology.
  3. Bruttomesso, D., Gagnayre, R., Leclercq, D., Crazzolara, D., Busata, E., d'Ivernois, J. F., Casiglia, E., & Baritussio, A. (2003). The use of degrees of certainty to evaluate knowledge. Patient Education and Counseling, 51(1), 29-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00226-4
  4. Choi, K., Lee, H., Shin, N., Kim, S. W., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Reconceptualization of scientific literacy in South Korea for the 21st century. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 670-697. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20424
  5. de Bruin, A. B., & van Gog, T. (2012). Improving self-monitoring and self-regulation: From cognitive Psychology to the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 22(4), 245-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.01.003
  6. Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. A. (2012). Overconfidence produces underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students' learning and retention. Learning and Instruction, 22(4), 271-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.08.003
  7. Ha, M., Haury, L. D., Nehm, R. H. (2012). Feeling of certainty: Uncovering a missing link between knowledge and acceptance of evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 49(1), 95-121. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20449
  8. Ha, M., Nehm, R. H., Urban-Lurain, M. & Merrill, J. E. (2011). Applying computerized scoring models of written biological explanations across courses and colleges: Prospects and limitations. CBE-Life Science Education, 10, 379-393.
  9. Hong, M. Y., Park, C., & Kim, S. (2001). An analysis of science achievement of the third international mathematics and science study-repeated(TIMSS-R). Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 21(2), 328-341.(in Korean)
  10. Johnson, D. D., & Fowler, J. H. (2011). The evolution of overconfidence. Nature, 477(7364), 317-320. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10384
  11. Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772-775. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1199327
  12. Kim, M, H., Noh, E. H., & Sim, J. H. (2013). The application of automatic scoring program to supply-type items of basic competency test. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 16(1), 137-160.(in Korean)
  13. Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1980). Reasons for confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(2), 107-118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.6.2.107
  14. Langendyk, V. (2006). Not knowing that they do not know: self-assessment accuracy of third-year medical students. Medical education, 40(2), 173-179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02372.x
  15. Lee, C. Y. (2011). Objective Test Allowing Multiple Choice for the Correct Answer with Penalty for Incorrect Choices. School Science Journal, 5(1), 17-26. (in Korean) https://doi.org/10.15737/ssj.5.1.201102.17
  16. Lee, K. S. (2008). The dominance of objective examinations and the state intervention in Korea. Philosophy of Education, 34, 245-275.(in Korean)
  17. Lipko, A. R., Dunlosky, J., Hartwig, M. K., Rawson, K. A., Swan, K., & Cook, D. (2009). Using standards to improve middle-school students' accuracy at evaluating the quality of their recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15, 307-318. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017599
  18. Luszczynska, A., Gutierrez-Dona, B., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). General selfefficacy in various domains of human functioning: Evidence from five countries. International Journal of Psychology, 40(2), 80-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207590444000041
  19. Marmaroti, P., & Galanopoulou, D. (2006). Pupils' understanding of photosynthesis: a questionnaire for the simultaneous assessment of all aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 383-403. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500277805
  20. Nehm, R. H., & Schonfeld, I. S. (2008). Measuring knowledge of natural selection: A comparison of the CINS, an open-response instrument, and an oral interview. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1131-1160. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20251
  21. Nehm, R. H., Ha, M., & Mayfield, E. (2012). Transforming biology assessment with machine learning: Automated scoring of written evolutionary explanations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 183-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9300-9
  22. Nehm, R. H., Ha, M., & Mayfield, E. (2012). Transforming biology assessment with machine learning: Automated scoring of written evolutionary explanations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 183-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9300-9
  23. Nowell, C., & Alston, R. M. (2007). I thought I got an A! Overconfidence across the economics curriculum. The Journal of Economic Education, 38(2), 131-142. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.38.2.131-142
  24. Opfer, J. E., Nehm, R. H., & Ha, M. (2012).Cognitive foundations for science assessment design: Knowing what students know about evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(6), 744-777. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21028
  25. Oskamp, S. (1965). Overconfidence in case-study judgments. Journal of consulting psychology, 29(3), 261-265. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022125
  26. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543-578. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066004543
  27. Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1997). Mathematics self-efficacy and mathematical problem solving: Implications of using different forms of assessment. The Journal of Experimental Education, 65(3), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1997.9943455
  28. Pallier, G. (2003). Gender differences in the self-assessment of accuracy on cognitive tasks. Sex Roles, 48(5-6), 265-276. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022877405718
  29. Park, C., & Hong, M. Y. (2002). A relative effectiveness of item types for estimating science ability in TIMSS-R. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 22(1), 122-131.(in Korean)
  30. Park, J. (2010). Constructive multiple choice testing system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 1054-1064. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01058.x
  31. Reach, G., Zerrouki, A., Leclercq, D., & d'Ivernois, J. F. (2005). Adjusting insulin doses: From knowledge to decision. Patient Education and Counseling, 56(1), 98-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2004.01.001
  32. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133
  33. Yates, J. F., Lee, J. W., & Bush, J. G. (1997). General knowledge overconfidence: cross-national variations, response style, and "reality". Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 70(2), 87-94. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1997.2696
  34. Zakay, D., & Glicksohn, J. (1992). Overconfidence in a multiple-choice test and its relationship to achievement. The Psychological Record, 42(4), 519-524.

Cited by

  1. 합리적 문제해결을 저해하는 인지편향과 과학교육을 통한 탈인지편향 방법 탐색 vol.36, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.6.0935
  2. 초등 과학 교과서에 제시된 ‘생태계 속 생물의 역할’과 관련된 과학 용어 분석 vol.45, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2017.45.1.30
  3. 과학적 사고의 걸림돌 동기기반추론 -과학기술 분야 학문후속세대들의 사례를 중심으로- vol.38, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2018.38.5.635