Browse > Article

The Analysis of Characteristic Achievement of TIMSS 2011 G8 High-Performing Countries According to the Mathematics Cognitive Attributes  

Park, Ji Hyun (Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation)
Kim, Soojin (Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation)
Publication Information
Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics / v.25, no.3, 2015 , pp. 303-321 More about this Journal
Abstract
This research purposes to find out the mathematical cognitive characteristics of Korean students and compare it with that of TIMSS 2011 high-achieving countries based on the Cognitive Diagnostic Theory. Based on framework and questions of TIMSS 2011, we select cognitive attributes. Using the data of 8th grade students' mathematical achievement in TIMSS 2011, we compare and analyze the top 15-countries students' cognitive traits. As a result, cognition domain of TIMSS 2011 is reclassified as 9 cognitive attributes. we could distinguish between easy attributes and difficult attributes that students in each country relatively think. Especially, Students of Korea relatively think Recall/Recognize, Compute, Classify/Measure and Represent are easy. On the other hand, relatively they have difficulties in Retrieve, Implement, and Generalize. Based on this research result, It is necessary to establish an educational measures for each attributes which students have difficulties.
Keywords
mathematics cognitive Attributes; mathematics cognitive domain; Q matrix; TIMSS;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 강옥기, 박교식, 강문봉(1991). 교육의 본질 추구를 위한 수학 교육 평가 체제 연구(II) : 수학과 평가 모형 및 예시 도구 개발. 한국교육개발원. RR91-19-05
2 교육과학기술부(2011). 수학과 교육과정. 교육과학기술부 고시 제2011-361호[별책 8호].
3 김수진, 박지현, 김현경, 진의남, 이명진, 김지영, 안윤경, 서지희(2012). 수학.과학 성취도 추이 변화 국제비교 연구: TIMSS 2011 결과 보고서. 한국교육과정평가원. 연구보고 RRE 2012-4-3.
4 김수진, 박지현(2013). TIMSS 2011 공개문항 분석 자료집 - 수학 -. 한국교육과정평가원. 연구자료 ORM 2013-48-1.
5 김선희, 김수진, 송미영(2008). 수학 평가 결과의 분석을 위한 인지 진단 이론의 활용. 학교수학, 10(2). 259-277.
6 김희경, 김부미(2013). 인지진단모형을 활용한 수학 학업성취 결과 분석 - 2011년 국가수준 학업성취도 평가 자료를 중심으로- 학교수학, 15(2), 289-314.
7 박찬호(2012). 다층 구조를 이루는 이분문항 자료의 급내상관계수 추정 방안 비교. 교육평가연구, 26(2), 459-476.
8 송미영, 임해미, 최혁준, 박혜영, 손수경(2013). OECD 국제 학업성취도 평가 연구: PISA 2012 결과 보고서. 한국교육과정평가원. 연구보고 RRE 2013-6-1.
9 이봉주, 조윤동, 김미경(2010). 2010년 국가수준 학업성취도 평가 결과 분석-수학-. 한국교육과정평가원. 연구보고 RRE 2011-3-4.
10 이현숙, 고호경(2014). 인지진단모형을 적용한 TIMSS 8학년 수학 기하영역의 성차 분석. 학교수학, 16(2), 387-407.
11 조지민, 동효관, 옥현진, 임해미, 정혜경, 손수경, 배제성(2012). OECD 국제 학업성취도 평가 연구 : PISA 2012 본검사 시행 보고서. 한국교육과정평가원. 연구보고 RRE 2012-3-1.
12 Chipman, S. F., Nichols, P. D., & Brennan, R. L. (1995). Introduction. In P. D. Nichols, S. F. Chipman, and R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively Diagnostic Assessment (p.1-18).
13 Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. De la Torre, J. (2008). An Empirically based method of Q-matrix validation for the DINA model: development and applications. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45(4), 343-362.   DOI
14 Ministry of Education (MOE) (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. NZ: Ministry of Education.
15 DiBello, L., Stout, W., & Rousses, L. (1995). Unified cognitive/psychometric diagnostic assessment likelihood-based classification techniques. In P. D. Nichols, S. F. Chipman, and R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively Diagnostic Assessment. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16 Hartz, S. (2002). A Bayesian framework for the Unified Model for assessing cognitive abilities: blending theory with practice. Doctoral thesis, The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
17 Hartz, S., Roussos, L., & Stout, W. (2002). Skills Diagnosis: Theory and Practice. User Manual for Arpeggio software. Princeton, NJ: ETS.
18 Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Ruddock, G. J., O'Sullivan, C. Y., & Preuschoff, C. (2009). TIMSS 2011 Assessment Framework. MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
19 Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Foy, P. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International Results in Mathematics. MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
20 OECD (2013). PISA 2012 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Mathematics, Reading, Science, Problem Solving and Financial Literacy, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264190511-en
21 Park, C. (2008). A Multilevel IRT Model for Group-Level Diagnostic Assessment with Application to TIMSS. Doctoral dissertation, the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
22 Tatsuoka, K. K. (1983). Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 20(4), 345-354.   DOI
23 Tatsuoka, K. K. (1995). Architecture of knowledge structure and cognitive diagnosis: A statistical pattern recognition and classification approach. In P. D. Nichols, S. F. Chipman, & R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively Diagnostic Assessment. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24 Tatsuoka, K. K. (1990). Toward integration of item response theory and cognitive error diagnoses. In N. Frederiksen, R. L. Glasser, A. M. Lesgold, and M. G. Shafto (Eds.), Diagnostic monitoring of skills and knowledge acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.