대한수학교육학회지:수학교육학연구 (Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics)

  • 제27권2호
  • /
  • Pages.291-312
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 2288-7733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8357(eISSN)
대한수학교육학회 (The Korea Society of Educational Studies in Mathematics)
권호 표지

예비초등교사들의 평가전략에 대한 인식 조사

Recognition of Assessment Strategies of Pre-Service Elementary Teachers

  • 투고 : 2017.04.10
  • 심사 : 2017.05.17
  • 발행 : 2017.05.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

최근 평가 관련 연구들에서 평가가 학생들의 학습 향상을 도와야 한다는 형성적 목적에 주목함에 따라, 교수-학습과 평가의 통합이 강조되고 있으며, 다양하고 적절한 평가전략 및 평가 도구가 필요해지고 있다. 교육현장에서 다양한 평가전략 및 평가 도구가 활용되기 위해서는 교사들이 직접 경험하고 각각의 장단점 및 학습자에게 미치는 영향에 대해 반성해보는 것이 필요하다. 본 연구는 예비초등교사들을 대상으로 여섯 가지 평가전략(피드백의 활용, 평가 기준의 제시, 평가의 모범사례 제시, 자기평가, 동료평가, 지필평가)을 경험하도록 하고, 각각에 대해 어떻게 인식하는지 조사하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 예비초등교사들은 한 학기 강좌가 진행되는 동안 각각을 경험하였으며, 학기말 설문지를 통해 각 평가전략에 대한 의견을 제시하였다. 조사결과, 예비교사들은 평가에 대한 인식에 따라 인지적, 정의적 영역의 향상에 도움이 된 평가전략을 다르게 제시함을 확인하였다. 이러한 결과는 교수-학습에서 다양한 평가전략 사용이 필요하다는 점, 평가의 형성적 목적을 포함하여 평가의 목적에 대한 예비교사들의 인식의 확장이 필요함을 시사한다.

According to the current research of educational assessment, formative assessment which focuses on improving students' learning has been emphasized. Consequently, integration between instruction and assessment is crucial and various assessment strategies are required. In order to use different assessment strategies in classrooms, teachers should experience strategies and reflect their strengths and weaknesses. In this study, pre-service elementary teachers experienced six assessment strategies (feedback, providing assessment standard, providing exemplary cases, self assessment, peer assessment, and written assessment), and their perceptions toward each strategy were investigated. During one semester, pre-service teachers experienced each of them and they answered questionnaire at the end of the semester. From the results, it is found that pre-service teachers presented different strategies that were most helpful in their cognitive and affective domain according to their perception of assessment. The results imply that different assessment strategies should be applied in instruction and teachers should extend their perception of assessment purposes.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 교육과학기술부(2011). 수학과 교육과정. 교육과학기술부.
  2. 교육부(2015). 수학과 교육과정. 교육부.
  3. 김효선, 오영열(2014). 서술형 수학 쓰기 수업이 초등학생의 문제해결 및 수학적 성향에 미치는 효과. 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 E <수학교육 논문집>, 28(1), 131-154.
  4. 이봉주(2007). 수학 문제해결 과정에서 학생의 자기평가 사례 연구. 중등교육연구, 55(2), 1-25.
  5. 정상권, 이경화, 유연주, 신보미, 박미미, 한수연 (2012). 수학적 과정 중심 평가에 대한 교사들의 인식 조사. 수학교육학연구, 22(3), 401-427.
  6. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2012). Assessment for learning in the classroom. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp.11-32). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  7. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
  8. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
  9. Brookhart, S., Andolina, M., Zuza, M., & Furman, R. (2004). Minute math: an action research study of student self-assessment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57, 213-227. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000049293.55249.d4
  10. Butler, R. (1988). Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation: The effects of taskinvolving and ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1988.tb00874.x
  11. Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 474-482. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.79.4.474
  12. Gardner, J. (2012). Quality assessment practice. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp.103-121). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  13. Harlen, W. (2012). On the relationship between assessment for formative and summative purposes. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp.87-102). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  14. Harlen, W., & James, M. (1997). Assessment and learning: Differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(3), 365-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594970040304
  15. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112 https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  16. Morgan, C., & Watson, A. (2002). The interpretative nature of teachers’ assessment of students’ mathematics: Issues for equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(2), 78-110. https://doi.org/10.2307/749645
  17. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
  18. Oliveira, H. & Hannula, M. S. (2008). Individual prospective mathematics teachers: Studies on their professional growth. In K. Krainer & T. Wood (Eds.), The International Handbook of Mathematics Teacher Education, Vol 3, Participants in Mathematics Teacher Education (pp.13-34). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
  19. Santos, Pinto (2009). Lights and shadows of feedback in mathematics learning. In Proceedings of the 33rd Conference of International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 5, 49-56.
  20. Santos, L., & Semana, S. (2015). Developing mathematics written communication through expository writing supported by assessment strategies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88, 65-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9557-z
  21. Shepard, L. A. (2000). The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176145
  22. Swaffield, S. (2011). Getting to the heart of authentic assessment for learning. For the learning of mathematics, 18(4), 433-449.
  23. Tanner, H., & Jones, S. (1994). Using peer and self-assessment to develop modelling skills with students aged 11 to 16: A socio-constructive view. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27(4), 413-431. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273381
  24. Watson, A. (2000). Mathematics teachers acting as informal assessors: Practices, problems and recommendations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41, 69-91. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003933431489
  25. Wiliam, D. (2007). Keeping learning on track: classroom assessment and the regulation of learning. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.) Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp.1053-1098). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  26. Wiliam, D., & Thompson, M. (2007). Integrating assessment with instruction: What will take to make it work? In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.) The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning (pp.53-82). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.