한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제42권6호
  • /
  • Pages.597-610
  • /
  • 2022
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

과학탐구실험의 '역사 속의 과학 탐구'에서 과학교사의 평가 실태와 평가 지향 조사

Science Teachers' Actual and Preferred Cases of Assessment in 'Scientific Inquiries in History' of Science Inquiry Experiment

  • 투고 : 2022.09.28
  • 심사 : 2022.11.28
  • 발행 : 2022.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구에서는 과학탐구실험 1단원 '역사 속의 과학 탐구'에서 과학교사들이 실행한 평가 사례와 교육과정에 따라 구성한 전형적인 가상의 상황에서 지향하는 평가 사례를 조사하였다. 서술형 문항으로 구성된 설문지를 개발하여 '역사 속의 과학 탐구'를 가르친 경험이 있는 70명의 과학교사들을 대상으로 설문을 실시하였다. 설문에 참여한 교사 중 8명과 면담을 실시하였다. 교사들이 응답한 평가 사례를 평가 영역과 평가 방법의 측면에서 분석하였고, 평가 실태와 평가 지향의 결과를 비교하였다. 연구 결과, 평가 실태에서 평가 영역은 탐구 능력이 가장 많았고 교육과정에서 제시한 핵심 개념인 '과학의 본성'과 '과학자의 탐구 방법'을 평가한 사례는 적었다. 평가 방법은 보고서에 크게 치우치고 다양한 평가 방법이 활용되지 못했다. 평가 지향에서는 핵심 개념을 평가한 사례가 다소 증가하였으나 절대적인 빈도는 여전히 적은 수준에 머물렀다. 평가 지향의 평가 방법은 측정 방법의 평가가 줄고 수행 방법의 평가가 증가하였고 실태에서는 나타나지 않았던 비형식 방법의 평가가 나타나기도 하였으나 여전히 다양한 평가 방법이 활용되지 못하였다. 면담에 참여한 교사들의 의견을 바탕으로 설문 결과에 대한 원인을 분석하였다. 연구 결과를 바탕으로 과학탐구실험에서 NOS를 적극적으로 할 수 있는 방안을 논의하였다.

In this study, we investigated actual cases of assessment science teachers conducted and the cases they preferred in a typical situation based on the curriculum in the context of 'Scientific Inquiries in the History' of Scientific Inquiry Experiment. A questionnaire composed of descriptive questions was developed and a survey was conducted with 70 science teachers with experience in teaching 'Scientific Inquiries in History'. Interviews were conducted with eight of them. The assessment cases were analyzed in terms of the assessment areas and assessment methods, and the results were compared. The analyses of the results revealed that 'scientific inquiry ability' accounted for the highest ratio of the assessment areas in the actual cases of assessment. There were few cases that assessed the core concepts presented in the curriculum, 'the nature of science' and 'scientists' inquiry methods'. The assessment methods were greatly biased toward the report method and various assessment methods were not used. In preferred cases of assessment, the ratio of cases that assessed the core concept increased slightly, however the frequencies remained at a low. As for the assessment methods in preferred cases of assessment, the measurement methods decreased, the performance methods increased, and the informal methods which were not shown in the actual cases appeared. However various assessment methods were still not used. The causes of the survey results were analyzed based on the opinions of the teachers who participated in the interviews. Based on above results, plans to actively conduct NOS assessments in Scientific Inquiry Experiment are discussed.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2021년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 인문사회분야 중견연구자지원사업의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2021S1A5A2A01061452)

참고문헌

  1. Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: A yearlong case study of a fourth-grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1025-1049. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10119
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A project 2061 report. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  3. Baek, J., Byun, T., Lee, D., & Shim, H.-P. (2020). An investigation on the assessment tool and status of assessment in the 'Scientific Inquiry Experiment' of the 2015 Revised Curriculum. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 40(5), 515-529.
  4. Baek, S.-G. (2000). Principles of performance assessment. Seoul: Kyoyookbook.
  5. Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one's conception of the nature of science: A follow-up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563-581. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<563::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-N
  6. Byun, T., Baek, J., Shim, H.-P., & Lee, D. (2019). An investigation on the implementation of the 'Scientific Inquiry Experiment' of the 2015 Revised Curriculum. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(5), 669-679.
  7. Cho, H.-M. (2001). An assessment tool from the view point of constructivism. The Journal of Education, 18, 183-197.
  8. Hanuscin, D. L. (2013). Critical incidents in the development of pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science: A prospective elementary teacher's journey. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(6), 933-956. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9341-4
  9. Hanuscin, D. L., Lee, M. H., & Akerson, V. L. (2011). Elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Science Education, 95(1), 145-167. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20404
  10. Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
  11. Kim, C.-J. (2012). Portfolio instruction and portfolio assessment. Seoul: Kyoyookbook.
  12. Kim, K., Noh, J-a., Seo, I., & Noh, T. (2008). The effects of explicit and reflective instruction about nature of science using episodes from the history of science in 'Composition of Material' unit of middle school science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(1), 89-99.
  13. Kim, K-M., & Kim S-W. (2002). A study of weight of assessment domains in science education focused on the teacher's view points. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 22(3), 540-549.
  14. Kim, M., Shin, H., & Noh, T. (2020). An exploration of science teachers' NOS-PCK: Focus on Science Inquiry Experiment. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 40(4), 399-413.
  15. Kwak, Y. (2020). Trend analysis of curriculum application status of 2015 revised integrated science and scientific laboratory experiment curriculum. Journal of Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 13(1), 53-63. https://doi.org/10.15523/JKSESE.2020.13.1.53
  16. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire: Toward Valid and Meaningful Assessment of Learners' Conceptions of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
  17. Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners' understandings about scientific inquiry - The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65-83.
  18. McComas, W. F., & Nouri, N. (2016). The nature of science and the next generation science standards: Analysis and critique. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 555-576.
  19. Ministry of Education(MOE). (2015). 2015 Revised Science National Curriculum. Seoul: Ministry of Education.
  20. National Research Council (NRC) (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press
  21. Noh, T., Lee, J., Kang, S., & Kang, H. (2015). Secondary school science teachers' actual and preferred types of assessment. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(4), 725-733. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.4.0725
  22. OECD. (2017). Pisa 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving. OECD Publishing.
  23. Shim, B. K., & Yoo, M. H. (2020). An analysis of science core competencies reflected in the performance assessment of 2015 revised curriculum Integrated Science and Scientific Inquiry Experiments. School Science Journal, 14(4), 481-500.
  24. Song, J., Kang, S., Kwak, Y., Kim, D., Kim, S., Na, J., ... Joung, Y. (2019). Contents and features of 'Korean Science Education Standards (KSES)' for the next generation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(3), 465-478.
  25. Supprakob, S., Faikhamta, C., & Suwanruji, P. (2016). Using the lens of pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science to portray novice chemistry teachers' transforming NOS in early years of teaching profession. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 1067-1080. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00158K
  26. Thomas, L., Deaudelin, C., Desjardins, J., & Dezutter, O. (2011). Elementary teachers' formative evaluation practices in an era of curricular reform in Quebec, Canada. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 381-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2011.590793
  27. Wang, J.-R., Kao, H.-L., & Lin, S.-W. (2010). Preservice teachers' initial conceptions about assessment of science learning: The coherence with their views of learning science. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 522-529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.06.014
  28. Yun, D., Ko, E., & Choi, A. (2018). Identifying and applying components of five scientific core competencies in the 2015 science curriculum. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(24), 1301-1319.