Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.5.879

Development of Evaluation Criteria for Online Problem-Based Science Learning  

Choi, Kyoungae (Joongbu University)
Lee, Sunghye (KAIST)
Chae, Yoojung (KAIST)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.37, no.5, 2017 , pp. 879-889 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to develop the evaluation criteria for students' research reports on online science inquiry problems that promote thinking abilities. The steps of developing the evaluation criteria are as follows; First, based on previous study results and literature review, the evaluation categories of the science inquiry contents were determined: 1) knowledge, 2) logical and analytical thinking, 3) critical thinking, 4) science process skills, 5) problem-solving, and 6) creative thinking. Second, evaluation criteria are developed according to the following steps: 1) define each category, 2) identify sub-category, 3) develop evaluation criteria for all categories that could serve as guidelines in the development of scoring rubrics, and 4) expert validation processes were performed. Finally, the usability test for these evaluation categories and criteria were done by being applied to the development of real scoring rubrics for 24 problems included in e-learning contents. Then the users' feedbacks were filed and the implications of this study were discussed.
Keywords
evaluation of thinking abilities; online science inquiry problem evaluation; development of thinking ability-centered evaluation criteria;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 6  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Park, K., Ryu, C., & Choi, J. (2017). An Analysis of Learning Objective Characteristics of Educational Programs of Centers for the University Affiliated Science-Gifted Education Using Semantic Network Analysis. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 27(1), 17-35.   DOI
2 Shin, J., Min, J., Kim, S., & Kwon, S. (2013). The Principles of Effective Higher-Thinking Programs and Limitations of Their Implementation in Schools. The Korean Journal of Thinking & Problem Solving, 9(2), 71-98.
3 Son, J. (2006). A Science Writing Teaching Method Based on Scientific Thinking for Improving Scientific Essay Writing Ability. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 9(2), 333-355.
4 Song, S., Kil, J., & Shim, K. (2015). A Case Study on the Evaluation of Scientific Inquiry Ability of Elementary Scientifically Gifted Students : Observing and Inferring, Designing an Experiment, and Concluding. Journal of Science Education, 39(3), 376-388.   DOI
5 Sung, I., Kwak, B., Park, T., Im, S., Yang, M., Han, S., Kim, J., & Yi, H. (1987). A study of thinking ability development program. KEDI Research Report RR 87-37.
6 Brookhart, S. M. (2010) How to assess higher order thinking skills in your classroom. ASCD product#109111
7 Cho, H. (2014). Theory of Science Education. Seoul: Kyoyookbook..
8 Cho, H., & Choi, K. (2008). Theory and Practice of Science Education (2nd ed). Seoul: Kyoyookbook..
9 Anderson, L. W & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds). (2001). A taxonomy for learning teaching and assessing A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete ed.). New York: Longman.
10 Bloom, B Engelhart, M. D., J, Hill, w. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook Cognitive domain. White Plains, NY: Longman.
11 Cho, Y., Choi, K., & Cho, D. (1997). Focusing on the 6th national curriculum, textbooks, teacher's guide and classroom observations = A study for the elementary science curriculum to enhance creative problem solving abilities. The Journal of Elementary Education, 11(1), 185-211.
12 Davis, G. A., Rimm, S., & Siegle, D. (2011). Education of the Gifted and Talented (6th ed). (Translated by Lee, M., Ryu, J., Lee, Y., Lee, H., and Chae, Y.). Seoul: Bakhaksa.
13 Huh, K., Kim, H., Cho, Y., Im, S.(1990). A Study of Thinking Ability Development Program(IV). KEDI Research Report, RR 90-17.
14 Kim, H. & Song, J. (2003). Middle School Students' Ideas about the Purposes of Laboratory Work. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 23(3), 254-264.
15 Kim, Y. (2002). Thinking & Problem Solving Psychology. Seoul: Parkyoungsa.
16 Kim, Y. & Kim, Y. (2012). The Development of a Free-response Test for the Assessment of Science Process Skills. Biology Education, 40(1), 167-177.   DOI
17 Kim, K., Kim, A., & Cho, S. (1997). Conceptualization of Creative Problem Solving for the Development of Curriculum for School Subjects. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 15(2),129-153.
18 Lee, B., Son, J., & Jung, H. (2006). The development of an online scientific inquiry learning system. The Korean Society of Elementary Science Education, 25(3), 271-280.
19 Lee, J., & Jeong, E. (2013). Development of an Evaluation Tool for Assessing Scientific Thinking Ability Using Science Writing. Teacher Education Research, 52(3), 575-588.   DOI
20 Lee, S., Chae, Y., & Sung, E.(2017). A Comparison study of self-directed learning competency between high-achiever of high school students and gifted learners. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 27(2), 123-137.   DOI
21 Lee, S, Kim, I. (2010). The development of assessment tool about science inquiry performance ability based on science gifted students. Journal of Science and Science Education 26(1), 25-39.
22 Lee, S., You, M., & Choi, B. (2008). The differences of attribution tendency and self-regulated learning strategy between gifted students and general students in elementary School. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 18(3), 425-442.
23 Weisberg, R. W. (2009). Creativity (Translated by Kim, M.). Seoul: Sigma Press.
24 Yang, T. (2003). A comparative study on cognitive and affective characteristics of scientifically gifted and non-gifted students. Graduate School, Incheon National University, Master's thesis.
25 Orpwood, G. (2001). The role of assessment in science curriculum reform. Assessment in Education, 8(2), 135-151.   DOI
26 Lee, S, & Hong, J. (2011). A comparison of psychological, physical and environmental characteristics of the general students and gifted students, and among gifted students' specific gifted areas. The Korea Educational Review, 17(1), 351-371.
27 Lee, Y., Park, J., & Lee, B.(2004). Analysis and Evaluation of the Science Content Relevance in the National Science Curriculum. RRC 2004-1-6, Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation.
28 Lim, B. (2003). Experiences of college students in online inquiry-based learning environment: Implications for design of inquiry on the web. Journal of Educational Technology, 19(3), 69-99.   DOI
29 Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (2004). Internet environments for science education. Lawrence Erlbaum.
30 Ministry of Education. (2015). Elementary education curriculum. Notification No. 2007-74 of MOE. Seoul: MOEHRD.
31 Park, I. (2010). Development and implementation of science programs enhancing creative problem solving skills applying meta-cognition. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ewha Womans University.
32 Park, I. & Kang, S. (2011). Science Teachers' Perceptions on Scientific and Creative Problem Solving. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 31(2), 314-327.
33 Park, I. & Kang, S. (2012). The Development of Assessment Tools to Measure Scientific Creative Problem Solving ability for Middle School Students. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 32(2), 210-235.   DOI
34 Park, H. & Kim, Y. (2013). Correlations between Scientific Knowledge, Science Process Skill, Creativity, and Science Related Attitudes of the Gifted Middle School Students in Science, Biology Education, 41(3), 459-469.   DOI