Browse > Article

Assessment Study on Educational Programs for the Gifted Students in Mathematics  

Kim, Jung-Hyun (Un-Cheon Middle School)
Whang, Woo-Hyung (Department of Mathematics Education, Korea University)
Publication Information
Communications of Mathematical Education / v.24, no.1, 2010 , pp. 235-257 More about this Journal
Abstract
Contemporary belief is that the creative talented can create new knowledge and lead national development, so lots of countries in the world have interest in Gifted Education. As we well know, U.S.A., England, Russia, Germany, Australia, Israel, and Singapore enforce related laws in Gifted Education to offer Gifted Classes, and our government has also created an Improvement Act in January, 2000 and Enforcement Ordinance for Gifted Improvement Act was also announced in April, 2002. Through this initiation Gifted Education can be possible. Enforcement Ordinance was revised in October, 2008. The main purpose of this revision was to expand the opportunity of Gifted Education to students with special education needs. One of these programs is, the opportunity of Gifted Education to be offered to lots of the Gifted by establishing Special Classes at each school. Also, it is important that the quality of Gifted Education should be combined with the expansion of opportunity for the Gifted. Social opinion is that it will be reckless only to expand the opportunity for the Gifted Education, therefore, assessment on the Teaching and Learning Program for the Gifted is indispensible. In this study, 3 middle schools were selected for the Teaching and Learning Programs in mathematics. Each 1st Grade was reviewed and analyzed through comparative tables between Regular and Gifted Education Programs. Also reviewed was the content of what should be taught, and programs were evaluated on assessment standards which were revised and modified from the present teaching and learning programs in mathematics. Below, research issues were set up to assess the formation of content areas and appropriateness for Teaching and Learning Programs for the Gifted in mathematics. A. Is the formation of special class content areas complying with the 7th national curriculum? 1. Which content areas of regular curriculum is applied in this program? 2. Among Enrichment and Selection in Curriculum for the Gifted, which one is applied in this programs? 3. Are the content areas organized and performed properly? B. Are the Programs for the Gifted appropriate? 1. Are the Educational goals of the Programs aligned with that of Gifted Education in mathematics? 2. Does the content of each program reflect characteristics of mathematical Gifted students and express their mathematical talents? 3. Are Teaching and Learning models and methods diverse enough to express their talents? 4. Can the assessment on each program reflect the Learning goals and content, and enhance Gifted students' thinking ability? The conclusions are as follows: First, the best contents to be taught to the mathematical Gifted were found to be the Numeration, Arithmetic, Geometry, Measurement, Probability, Statistics, Letter and Expression. Also, Enrichment area and Selection area within the curriculum for the Gifted were offered in many ways so that their Giftedness could be fully enhanced. Second, the educational goals of Teaching and Learning Programs for the mathematical Gifted students were in accordance with the directions of mathematical education and philosophy. Also, it reflected that their research ability was successful in reaching the educational goals of improving creativity, thinking ability, problem-solving ability, all of which are required in the set curriculum. In order to accomplish the goals, visualization, symbolization, phasing and exploring strategies were used effectively. Many different of lecturing types, cooperative learning, discovery learning were applied to accomplish the Teaching and Learning model goals. For Teaching and Learning activities, various strategies and models were used to express the students' talents. These activities included experiments, exploration, application, estimation, guess, discussion (conjecture and refutation) reconsideration and so on. There were no mention to the students about evaluation and paper exams. While the program activities were being performed, educational goals and assessment methods were reflected, that is, products, performance assessment, and portfolio were mainly used rather than just paper assessment.
Keywords
Special Class; The gifted education; Curriculum for the Gifted in mathematics; Assessment articles and indicators for teaching and learning program for mathematical gifted students;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 홍은자 (2004). 초등수학 영재 교수-학습 프로그램 분석. 서울교육대학교 석사학위논문.
2 황동주 (2005). 수학 영재 판별의 타당도 향상을 위한 수학 창의성 및 문제 해결력 검사 개발과 채점 방법에 관한 연구. 단국대학교 박사학위논문.
3 황유진 (2002). 수학 영재교육 프로그램 평가에 대한 연구. 전남대학교 석사학위논문.
4 중학교 교육과정해설서 (III) 수학, 과학, 기술.가정.
5 한국교육개발원 (2009). 제6기 영재교육 담당교원 심화연수 연수교재 TM2008-7-2.
6 허미경 (2004). 영재교육 프로그램의 운영 및 효과에 대한 평가. 이화여자대학교 석사학위논문.
7 송준기 (2004). 영재교육 프로그랩 평정척도 개발 및 적용. 계명대학교 박사학위논문.
8 구자억.조석희.김홍원.서혜애.장영숙.황동주.임희준 (1999). 영재교육과정 개발 연구: 초.중학교 영재교육과정 시안 개발을 위한 기초 연구. CR 99-20. 한국교육개발원.
9 박성익.조석희.김홍원.이지현.윤여홍.진석언.한기순 (2004). 서울: 교육과학사.
10 서혜애.조석희.이은아.한석실.윤초희 (2003). 영재교육기관 평가체제 개발연구. 연구보고 CR2003-27. 한국교육개발원.
11 송진희 (2008). 수학영재교육에서 효율적인 프로그램 평가에 관한 연구. 서울시립대학교 석사학위논문.
12 전경원 (2000). 한국의 새천년을 위한 영재교육학. 서울: 학문사.
13 교육과학기술부 (2008). 새 정부의 영재교육 정책방향과 현안 : 과학영재교육을 중심으로. 교육인적자원부 고시 제 2006-75호 및 제 2007-79호.
14 황 일 (1991). 수학 영재교육 방안에 대한 소고. 건대학술지 제35집.
15 Carolyn M. CalIahan 편저, 황윤세.강현석.정정희.전명남 공역 (2008). 영재교육 프로그램 평가, 서울 : 학지사.
16 서울시 교육청 영재교육평가 수학영재교육 프로그램 수정틀.2009.
17 유연정 (2008). 수학영재 프로그램을 위한 학생 평가도구 개발.건국대학교 석사학위논문.
18 조석회.김양분 (1994). 일반 학교에서의 효율적인 심화 학습 프로그램 운영 방안 연구, 연구보고 RR94-11. 한국교육개발원.