• Communications of Mathematical Education
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.29-50
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study is a comparison of proficient level and below basic level students' mathematical achievement in the National Achievement Evaluation and Assessment(NAEA). For the purpose, this study compared the proficient level and below basic level students' ratios, students' mathematical achievement of contents area and behavioral area in 6th, 9th, and 11th grades. This study found the change of proficient level and below basic level students' ratios, and the proficient level and below basic level students' characteristics on mathematical achievement of contents area and behavioral area in 6th, 9th, and 11th grades.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.40 no.5
• /
• pp.473-483
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study was to analyze the characteristics of students' academic achievement of middle school science curriculum achievement standards in the 2009 revised national curriculum and to generate implications for curriculum improvement. Based on the results of the 2015-2018 National Assessment of Educational Achievement (NAEA), we analyzed middle school students' mastery of 84 curriculum achievement standards. In the analysis, we used representative item information by achievement level and correct answer rate and checked the validity of the determination of mastery. According to the results of the analysis, 15 of the 84 achievement standards could not determine the degree of achievement. In science, many achievement standards could be mastered only by above-average group students. By achievement level, there were six achievement standards that advanced achievement-level students did not achieve, 38 achievement standards judged to represent mastery by advanced achievement-level students, 23 achievement standards judged to represent mastery by proficient achievement-level students, and two achievement standards judged to represent mastery by basic achievement-level students. By content area, the number of achievement standards corresponding to advanced and proficient levels was similar in the areas of motion and energy and earth and space domains. In the material and life domains, there were more achievement standards corresponding to advanced levels. Accordingly, it is necessary to reinforce customized teaching and learning activities in relation to achievement standards that were under-achieved.

• School Mathematics
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.215-237
• /
• 2006

In this study, we research distinctive features of geometry problem solving of middle school students whose mathematical achievement levels are distinguished by National Assessment of Educational Achievement. We classified 9 students into 3 groups according to their level : advanced level, proficient level, basic level. They solved an atypical geometry problem while all their problem solving stages were observed and then analyzed in aspect of development of geometrical concepts and access to the route of problem solving. As those analyses, we gave some suggestions of teaching on mathematics as students' achievement level.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.57 no.1
• /
• pp.127-137
• /
• 2013

We investigated student's characteristics in each educational achievement level using the results of the NAEA (National Assessment of Educational Achievement) in 2009 and 2010 for Grade 9 students. The analysis of representative items of each educational achievement level revealed that (a) advanced level students could explain the change in phenomena with both the characteristics of matter and the model, (b) proficient level students could explain only simple phenomena with the model, and (c) basic level students did not understand the model and were therefore unable to use it to explain phenomena.

• Communications of Mathematical Education
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.435-453
• /
• 2018

The results analysis of National Assessment of Educational Achievement(NAEA) can provide various implications for teaching and learning in the school field. In this study we analyzed the deviation of NAEA achievement level-based correct-answer rate and the distribution of the responses percentages for three years from 2015 to 2017 focused on multiple-choice items. First we calculated the deviation of correct-answer rate between advanced level and proficient level and between proficient level and basic level, and then we selected the items whose deviation of correct-answer rate is more than the third quartile. We explored what the content areas, behavior areas and achievement standards of each item are and what the achievement standards and characteristics of these questions are. Based on the results of the analysis, we intended to derive implications for appropriate teaching-learning methods at each achievement-level.

• School Mathematics
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.33-54
• /
• 2005

One of the major results of National Assessment of Educational Achievement in 2003 is that the final test results were reported by four levels such as Advanced, Proficient, Basic, and Below Basic. We used it to investigate into the characteristics of students according to achievement levels, and finally we listed them. We think that these results will be a help to instructions according to achievement levels.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.33 no.6
• /
• pp.1186-1201
• /
• 2013

We investigated student's characteristics in each educational achievement level using the results of the NAEA (National Assessment of Educational Achievement) in 2009, 2010, and 2011 for Grade 6 students, and compared the characteristics between elementary and middle school students. The analysis of representative items for each educational achievement level of elementary and middle school students revealed that (a) advanced level students from both elementary and middle school could exactly understand the achievement criteria of the curriculum, (b) proficient level students from both elementary and middle school were understanding the achievement criteria of the curriculum superficially, for example, they could not understand concepts exactly but could memorize terms, and so should have compensational education under situations that ask for short answer or essay type items instead of multiple choice items, and (c) basic level students from both elementary and middle school almost could not understand the achievement criteria of curriculum, and so should have compensational education under situations that only deal with a simple situation. Science concepts treated in science curriculum are hierarchically organized by level of school, and simple compensational education for the students of below basic level will not solve learning deficits in science education. Differentiated education by educational achievement should be largely expanded instead.

• Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.273-288
• /
• 2009

This study analyzed gender differences in variability with the results of National Assessment of Educational Achievement on Mathematics from 2003 to 2006, which subjects are 3rd, 9th and 10th grades. The purpose of the analysis was to explain gender differences in mean of mathematical ability scores from a different angle. The results and conclusions obtained in this study are as follows: First, regardless of grades and mean differences, male assessment scores were consistently more variable than female assessment scores. Second, for same male and female students, scores in later grades were almost consistently more variable than those in earlier grades. Third, for all grades, the ratios of males in an advanced and below-basic levels were generally higher than those of females in the same achievement levels.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.40 no.4
• /
• pp.429-436
• /
• 2020

In this study, we examined students' science academic achievement through an analysis of the national assessment of educational achievement(NAEA) from 2015 to 2018 when the 2009 revised curriculum was applied. This study analyzed achievement average scores by gender and region and also analyzed the trend of the rate of achievement level in order to understand the characteristics of students' academic achievement. In addition, we analyzed the characteristics of the affective aspect using a survey of students' attitudes (confidence, interest, value, and willingness to learn) toward science. The main findings are as follows; First, the average science score shows a tendency to decrease year by year at the middle school level. Second, when analyzed by achievement level, the decline in the advanced group was large, and the rate of the below basic group increased. Third, comparisons of the average achievement scores by gender, female students' scores were generally high and the difference in achievement scores between male and female students tended to increase. Fourth, a characteristic gap was found between regional scales that increased in the advanced group. The results of a questionnaire on students' attitudes show that the four constructs of the students' attitudes had a significant correlation with the average achievement scores. In addition, the mean and positive response rates on the confidence, interest, and value of science in the above proficiency group increased but decreased in the below basic group. These results can be used as basic data for revising the curriculum, improving teaching and learning, and establishing educational policies.

• Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.1-22
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study is to understand Korea students' characteristics as well as to give important information of improving our education using comparative analysis of framework, test booklets, test results between PISA 2009 and NAEA 2009. PISA 2009 was administered on May of 2009 and NAEA was administered on October of same year. The summary of the results of comparing two assessment is as follows First, cut score of NAEA Advance level is bigger than the cut score of level 5, which is considered as high achievement level. The cut score of Basic level of NAEA is also higher than the level 2 of PISA, which is considered as basic achievement level. This phenomenon can show that NAEA achievement level is set little bit higher than the achievement level of PISA in mathematics domain. Second, the percentage of female students on higher level was higher than that of male students. In suburban area, the percentage of high level was small and the percentage of low level was big. Third, students of Advanced level are distributed concentrating in PISA levels 4~6, Proficient achievement level concentrating in PISA levels 3~5, Basic achievement level concentrating in PISA levels 2~4, and below basic achievement levels concentrating in below level 1 and level 3 of PISA. Fourth, the correlation between NAEA 2009 and PISA 2009 achievement scores are significantly positive. However, the correlation of subscales were low. Fifth, analysis of non-equivalent group, 11 items located in 'change and relationship', 'uncertainty', 'connection cluster' domains found to be significantly different. The percent correct showed very big difference. The analysis results presents the implication of mathematics curriculum, teaching and learning methods as well as National Assessment of Educational Achievement.