Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association (한국가정과교육학회지)

Korea Home Economics Education Association (한국가정과교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Strengthening the Instruction-Assessment Alignment: Development of Items for Essay-Type Assessment Based on the Achievement Standards

수업과 평가 일체화를 위한 성취기준 중심 가정과 서술형 평가 문항개발 연구

  • 양지선 (이화여자대학교 교육대학원) ;
  • 이경숙 (경상대학교 사범대학 부설고등학교)
  • Received : 2020.08.31
  • Accepted : 2020.09.29
  • Published : 2020.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop items of an essay response assessment that could align with the instructions and assessments in the high school home economics curriculum. The contents of the study were as follows. First, to establish an assessment plan, 14 achievement standards were analyzed in the assessment area, and the elements of the questions were developed including the content elements of a total of 29 questions. Second, to develop the assessment tools, preliminary questions suited to the structure of essay questions were developed, and the method of presenting data and scoring criteria to be utilized in the questions was selected. Third, to prepare the answers and the scoring criteria tables, the answers to the sample questions for each score were prepared in form of a scoring criteria table, and the objectives of the assessment, the scoring items, and the scores for each item were reviewed. Fourth, the developed questions and answers were revised and supplemented by teachers of the professional learning community through preliminary and mutual review on the components of the questions, the embodiment of the assessment objectives, the implementation of the assessment intent, and the grading. This study can be used as a foundational study for the development of essay-type questions and scoring criteria in essay assessment in the field of education. Furthermore, the results of this study could help teachers enhance their learners' ability to apply knowledge in the future.

본 연구는 교육과정, 수업, 평가의 일체화를 강조하고 있는 교육의 변화 속에서 2015 개정 가정과 교육과정에서 수업과 평가를 연계할 수 있는 서술형 평가 문항을 개발하는 것에 목적을 두었으며 연구의 내용은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 평가계획 수립 단계에서는 평가기준에 제시된 평가 영역 중 서술형 평가에 적합한 14개의 성취기준이 분석되었으며 총 29개 문항의 내용요소를 포함하여 문항요소를 개발하였다. 둘째, 평가도구 개발 단계에서는 서술형 문항의 구조에 알맞은 문항을 사전개발하고, 문항에서 활용할 자료, 채점기준의 제시 방법을 각 문항에 맞게 선택하였다. 셋째, 답안 및 채점기준표 작성 단계에서는 채점기준과 부분점수별 예시 답안을 채점기준표로 작성하고 평가목표와 채점 항목, 항목별 배점을 검토하였다. 넷째, 전문가 검토 및 수정·보완 단계에서는 개발된 문항과 답안들은 전문적 교과학습공동체 교사들과 함께 문항 구성요소, 평가목표의 구체화, 출제 의도의 구현 여부, 채점 결과에 대하여 예비검토와 상호검토를 거쳐 수정·보완하였다. 본 연구는 서술형 평가 문항과 채점기준 개발을 위한 기초 연구로 활용될 수 있으며, 이를 통해 교사의 평가 전문성에 대한 인식변화를 도모하고 추후 학습자의 지식 적용능력을 높이기 위한 서술형 문항개발 연구에 도움이 될 수 있을 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Aleksandrzak, M. (2011). Problems and challenges in teaching and learning speaking at advanced level. Glottodidactica, 37(1), 37-48. https://doi.org/10.14746/gl.2011.37.3
  2. American Federation of Teachers, National Council on Measurement in Education, & National Education Association (1990). Standards for teacher competence in educational assessment of students. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 9(4), 30-32. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1990.tb00391.x
  3. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests (Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Becker, A. (2011). Examining rubrics used to measure writing performance in US intensive English programs. The CATESOL Journal, 22(1), 113-130.
  5. Bloom, B. S., Madaus, G. F., & Hastings, J. T. (1981). Evaluation to improve learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  6. Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development (ASCD).
  7. Cho, M. K. (2007). A Study on the development of open-ended tasks and assessment rubrics for elementary school mathematics. The Mathematical Education, 46(2), 207-226.
  8. Cizek, G. J., Fitzgerald, S. M., & Rachor, R. E. (1996). Teachers' assessment practices: Preparation, isolation, and the kitchen sink. Educational Assessment, 3(2), 159-179. doi:10.1207/s15326977ea0302_3
  9. Daniel, L. G., & King, D. A. (1998). Knowledge and use of testing and measurement literacy of elementary and secondary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 91(6), 331-344. doi:10.1080/00220679809597563
  10. Doolittle, E. P. (2000). Section IV: Supply items. Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University. Retrieved from http://www.aui.ma/personal/-A.Cads/services/facdev/2002/assessment4.pdf
  11. Downing, S. M. (2005). The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: The consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 10(2), 133-143. doi:10.1007/s10459-004-4019-5
  12. Downing, S. M. (2006). Selected-response item formats in test development. In S. M. Downing & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 287-301). NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  13. Earl, S., McConnell, M., Middleton, I., & Ellington, H. (1998). Assessing student performance. Aberdeen: Robert Gordon University. Retrieved from http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/celt/pgcerttlt/assessing/assess1.htm
  14. Finson, K., Ormsbee, C., & Jensen, M. (2011). Differentiating science instruction and assessment for learners with special needs, K-8. Thousand Oaks: Corwin, A SAGE Company.
  15. Gronlund, N. E. (1988). How to construct achievement tests (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
  16. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications.
  17. Guskey, T. R. (2007). Multiple sources of evidence: An analysis of stakeholders' perceptions of various indicators of student learning. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(1), 19-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2007.00085.x
  18. Hatch, J. A. (2010). Rethinking the relationship between learning and development: Teaching for learning in early childhood classrooms. The Educational Forum, 74(3), 258-268. doi:10.1080/00131725.2010.483911
  19. Hong, J. Y., Kim, M. K., Noh, S. S., & Kwon, J. R. (2008). A case study on the development of descriptive problems in grade 4 mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 18(3), 335-352.
  20. Huot, B. A. (1990). Reliability, validity, and holistic scoring: What we know and what we need to know. College Composition and Communication, 41(2), 201-213. doi:10.2307/358160
  21. Jin, B. S. (2007). 현장연구노트: 사회과 서술형 평가 문항 작성의 실제 [Field study note: Item development of descriptive assessment in social studies]. Living and Education, 7, 92-108.
  22. Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130-144. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002
  23. Kim, S. (2002). A study on the teacher's competence for classroom assessment. Journal of Education Evaluation, 15(1), 67-85.
  24. Kim, S. (2007). Teacher assessment literacy and student assessment training for teachers. Journal of Education Evaluation, 20(1), 1-16.
  25. Kim, S. H. (2013). Analysis on current status of descriptive test items in the Korean language curriculum: On the base of descriptive items in academic high schools. Korean Language Education, 140, 479-508.
  26. Kim, S. N., Im, H. J., Sohn, H. K., & Kwon, J. K. (2013). A study on the improvement of the methods of student evaluation. Seoul: Korean Educational development Institute.
  27. Lee, S. K., & Lee, H. J. (2011). The development and application of the descriptive evaluation questionnaire on the clothing and textiles section of the middle school Technology & home economics textbook. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 23(3), 69-90.
  28. Lee, Y. J. (2012). A study on the development of test tools and scoring methods for Korean language essay test. Korean Language Education Research, 45, 413-449. doi:10.20880/kler.2012..45.413
  29. Legg, S. M. (1998). Reliability and validity. In W. Wolcott & S. M. Legg (Eds.), An overview of writing assessment: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 124-142). Urbana, Ill: National Council of Teachers of English.
  30. Linn, R. L., & Miller, M. D. (2005). Measurement and assessment in teaching (9th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.
  31. Marso, R. N., & Pigge, F. L. (1992). A summary of published research: Classroom teachers' knowledge and skills related to the development and use of teacher-made tests. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, CA: San Fransico.
  32. McMillan, J. H. (2014). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective instruction (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
  33. Ministry of Education (1992). Middle school curriculum. Seoul: Author.
  34. Ministry of Education (1997). Elementary and secondary school curriculum: National common basic education curriculum. Seoul: Author.
  35. Ministry of Education (1998). 수행평가의 이해 [Understanding of performance assessment]. The Press release, Seoul: Author.
  36. Ministry of Education (2018). 서.논술형 평가 정책 관련 정리 자료 [Organizational data on descriptive and essay-type assessment policies]. Sejong: Author.
  37. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2009). General guidelines of elementary and secondary school curriculum. Seoul: Author.
  38. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2011a). 2009 개정 총론 해설서 [2009 revised General guidelines of elementary and secondary school curriculum]. Seoul: Author.
  39. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2011b). Practical Arts (Technology, Home Economics) curriculum. Seoul: Author.
  40. Myford, C. M., & Wolfe, E. W. (2003). Detecting and measuring rater effects using many-facet Rasch measurement: Part I. Journal of Applied Measurement, 4(4), 386-422.
  41. National Forum (2017). Expanding our understanding of assessment and feedback in Irish higher education. National Forum Insight.
  42. Park, E. A., Park, S. H., Son, M. J., Lee, C. H., Seo, M. H., Kim, J. Y., ...Yeon, J. Y. (2013). A study on developing operational plans for implementing achievement Standards-based assessment in high schools. Seoul: Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation.
  43. Park, E. A., Seo, M. H., Kim, J. Y., Kang, M. Y., Ahn, Y. M., & Kim, J. H. (2014). A study on the operational plans for empowering teachers' competency in ASA(Achievement Standards-based Assessment). Seoul: Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation. doi:10.23000/TRKO201800022978
  44. Park, H. Y., Kim, S. S., Kim, K. H., Lee, M. J., Kim, K. K., & Kim, J. Y. (2019). Substantializing methods of restricted and extended response essay assessment through enforcing the instruction-assessment alignment. Jincheon: Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation.
  45. Popham, W. J. (1978). Criterion-referenced measurement. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
  46. Randall, C., & Lester, F. (1992). How to evaluate progress in problem solving. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  47. Saddler, D. R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 77-84. doi:10.1080/0969595980050104
  48. Scriffiny, P. L. (2008). Seven reasons for standards-based grading. Educational Leadership, 66(2), 70-74.
  49. Seo, M. H., Park, E. A., Chon, K. H., Kang, M. K., Sung, K. H., Choi, J. S.,...Lee, H. S. (2014). 2014년 고등학교 보통교과 성취평가제 운영 현황 및 개선 방안 [Current status and improvement plan of the achievement evaluation system for common high schools in 2014]. Seoul: Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation.
  50. Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education (2018). 2018 주요업무계획 [2018 Major work plan]. Seoul: Author.
  51. Son, M. J., Seo, M. H., Park, J. I., Kim, Y. H., & Lee, H. S. (2015). Analysis of implementing achievement standards-based assessment in high schools and the directions for its improvement. Seoul: Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation. doi:10.23000/TRKO201800023003
  52. Stiggins, R. J. (1991). Assessment literacy. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(7), 534-539.
  53. Stiggins, R. J. (1995). Assessment literacy for the 21st century. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(3), 238-245.
  54. Stiggins, R. J. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324-328. doi:10.1177/003172170508700414
  55. Stiggins, R. J., & Bridgeford, N. J. (1985). The ecology of classroom assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22(4), 271-286. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1985.tb01064.x
  56. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  57. Wang, S. S., & Jeong, K. H. (2001). Research and development of the achievement and assessment standards, and of exemplary test items of Practical Arts at the primary school level. Seoul: Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation.
  58. Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  59. Wiseman, C. S. (2012). A comparison of the performance of analytic vs. holistic scoring rubrics to assess L2 writing. Iranian Journal of Language Testing, 2(1), 59-92.
  60. Yu, H. J. (2002). Research on the development and practice of performance assessment task for the growth of the mathematical power. School Mathematics, 4(3), 513-537.
  61. Zane, T. W. (2009). Performance assessment design principles gleaned from constructivist learning theory (part 1). Teach Trends, 53(1), 81-88. doi:10.1007/s11528-009-0242-5