DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

선다형 문제와 서술형 문제의 점수 차이와 이에 대한 학생들의 인식 -고등학교 기하 교과를 중심으로-

Difference of the scores of multiple-choice and descriptive problem and students' perceptions of the difference - Focused on high school geometry course -

  • 투고 : 2018.01.22
  • 심사 : 2018.06.22
  • 발행 : 2018.08.31

초록

Descriptive problems can be used to grow student's ability of thinking logically and creatively, because it shows if the students had a reasonable way of thinking. Rate of descriptive problems is increasing in middle and high school exams. However, students in middle and high schools are generally used to answering multiple-choice or short-answer questions rather than describing the solving process. The purpose of this paper is to gain a theoretic ground to increase the rate of descriptive problems. In this study, students were to solve some multiple-choice problems, and after a few weeks, to solve the problems of same contents in the form of descriptive problems which requires the students to write the solving process. The difference of the scores were measured for each problems to each students, and students were asked what they think the reason for rise or fall of the score is. The result is as follows: First, average scores of 7 of 8 problems used in this study had fallen when it was in descriptive form, and for 5 of them in the rate of 11.2%~16.8%. Second, the main reason of falling is that the students have actual troubles of describing the solving process. Third, in the case of rising, the main reason was that partial scores were given in the descriptive problems. Last, there seems a possibility gender difference in the reason of falling. From these results, followings are suggested to advance the learning, teaching and evaluation in mathematics education: First, it has to be emphasized enough to describe the solving process when solving a problem. Second, increasing the rate of descriptive problems can be supported as a way to advance the evaluation. Third, descriptive problems have to be easier to solve than multiple-choice ones and it is convenient for the students to describe the solving process. Last, multiple-choice problems have to be carefully reviewed that the possibility of students' choosing incorrect answer with a small mistake is minimal.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. The Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2011). 2009 reformed mathematics curriculum, Ministry of Education and Science Technology #2011-33, Seoul: MOST.
  2. Ministry of Education (2015a). General outline of 2015 revised curriculum-high school, Seoul: Ministry of Education.
  3. Ministry of Education (2015b). 2015 revised mathematics curriculum. Ministry of Education #2015-74, Seoul: Ministry of Education.
  4. Kim, D.Y.(2011). Actual conditions and recognition on the descriptive answer form assessment in elementary mathematics education. Master's thesis, Seoul National University of Education.
  5. Kim, M.J.(2009). On the understanding and status of description style assessment in mathematics. Master's thesis, Konkuk University.
  6. Kim, Y.K. (2012). A study on the recognition of students and actual conditions about descriptive evaluation in mathematics. Master's thesis, Kyung Hee University.
  7. Kim, H.J. & Kim, H.C. (2013). A study on the perceptions of high school students on the level-differentiated classes and level-differentiated evaluations. The Journal of Curriculum and Instruction Studies 6(1), 1-22.
  8. Noh, S., Kim, M.K., Cho, S.M., Jeong Y., & Jeong, Y. (2008). A study of teacher’s perception and status about descriptive evaluation in secondary school mathematics. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society 11(3), 377-397.
  9. Park, J.Y. & Min, K.S. (2009). A comparison of the short-answer and the multiple-choice Items in the constructive multiple-choice Test. Journal of Educational Evaluation 22(2), 451-459.
  10. Paik, S.H. & Ryu, H.J. (2014). High school students' perceptions on descriptive assessment activity experiences by teacher or by peer, Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education 34(6), 593-599. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.6.0593
  11. Busan metropolitan city office of education (2017). Efforts to spread the process-based evaluation and the descripitive evaluation, Busan metropolitan city office of education press realese dated May 29, 2017.
  12. Lee, Y.M. & Seong, T.J. (2005). The effect of 'don't know' option and different weighton the quality of item and test, Journal of Education Evaluation 18(3), 135-153.
  13. Lee, A. R. & Kim, S. A. (2014). Development and Application of Mathematics Descriptive Problems for Students' Affective Characteristics. Master's thesis, Dongguk University.
  14. Lee, H.J. (2017). Perceptions of science teachers and students in middle school on the problems according to the extended enforcement of descriptive evaluation. Master's thesis, Gyeongsang National University.
  15. Lim, J. H. & Ryu, K. H. (2017). A Study on the Improvement of paper-and-pencil evaluation in elementary school and middle school, Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction 17(22), 279-304.
  16. Chang, S.J. & Kim, S.M. (2014). The defects of questions of descriptive assessment in elementary school mathematics and the suggestions for its improvement-focusing on the questions produced by Gyeonggi Provincial Office of Education, Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea 18(2), 297-318.
  17. Jeon, S.S. & Kim, B.K. (2012). Effects of types of assessment tools on elementary school students’ concept formation on magnetic field,. School Science Journal 6(3), 192-203. https://doi.org/10.15737/ssj.6.3.201210.192
  18. Hwang, J.W. & Boo, D.H.(2017). An analysis of errors in describing solving process for high school geometry and vectors, The Mathematical Education 56(1), 63-80. https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2017.56.1.63
  19. NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.