• Communications of Mathematical Education
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.97-111
• /
• 2018

This study is to establish the domains and the standards of instructional evaluation on the teacher knowledge dealing with the knowledge of 'teaching and learning methods and assessment'. Especially, in this study, the instruction assessment standards are developed focused on the six types of mathematics competencies such as problem solving, communication, reasoning, creativity and collaboration, information and handling, attitude and practice which were emphasized in the mathematical curriculum revised in 2015. By the result, seventh evaluation domains such as an instruction involving problem-solving activity, an instruction involving reasoning activity, instruction involving communication activity, instruction on information and handling activity, instruction involving learners' achievement level and attitude, instruction involving the development of assessment method and tool, instruction applying on assessment result were new established. According to those domains, the 19 instructional evaluation standards were developed totally. This study is limited to consider the domain of 'teaching and learning methods and assessment' among the domains of teacher knowledge, while dealing with the elements of mathematics competencies in the standards. However, instructional evaluation standards reflecting these competencies should be developed in the other diverse domains of teacher knowledge.

• Korean Medical Education Review
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.212-228
• /
• 2023

Systems thinking, a linking domain of health systems science (HSS), is an approach that investigates specific problems from a holistic perspective. It supports improving patients' health, fulfilling their health needs, and anticipating issues that threaten patient safety within the healthcare system. It also helps solve problems through critical thinking and ref lection. This study aimed to develop an curriculum on systems thinking, explore the effectiveness of the course, and investigate the applicability of HSS education at individual universities. In this study, the ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation) model was utilized to design, develop, implement, and evaluate an elective course on systems thinking. In the design process, learning outcomes and goals were developed, and educational content, teaching-learning methods, and student evaluation methods were linked. In the development process, class materials and evaluation materials were prepared. In the implementation process, the course was implemented, and the evaluation process analyzed the results of learning performance and curriculum assessments. The evaluation found the following results. First, the students in the study realized the importance of systems thinking and experienced the need for systems thinking through non-medical and medical situations. Second, the students were very satisfied with the learning activities in the course (mean=4.84), and the results of the self-competence evaluation, conducted before and after the course, also showed a significant improvement. This study confirmed the effectiveness of the elective course, and its results can serve as a reference for developing an HSS curriculum.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.40 no.5
• /
• pp.515-529
• /
• 2020

'Scientific inquiry experiments', which was newly created subjects in the 2015 revised curriculum, was expected in the aspect of learning science and developing core competences through science practices. Based on changed view of evaluation, assessments of a practice-centered subject 'Scientific inquiry experiments' should be try to conducted in various ways, but many challenges were reported. In this study, through analysis of current status of assessment of the subject, we intended to find the way of conducting and supporting 'Scientific inquiry experiments'. We collected assessment materials and explanatory description about them from 25 teachers who taught 'Scientific inquiry experiments' in 2018 and 2019. And we analyzed the cases with framework which were consisted with three main categories: elements, standards, methods of assessments. Also, we investigated how the results of assessment were utilized. For the validity, we requested verification of the results of our data analysis to experts of science education and science teachers. From them, we also collected their opinions about our analysis. As a result of the study, teachers assessed some elements of inquiry skills such as 'analysis and interpreting the data', 'conducting inquiry' more than others which were closely related to what subject-matter the teachers used to organized inquiry program with. In the aspect of domain of assessments, though cognitive domain and affective domain as well as skills were evaluated, we also found that the assessment of those domains had some limitation. In terms of standard of assessment, the goals of assessment were presented in most cases, but there were relatively few cases which had the specific criteria and the stepwise statements of expected performance of students. The time and subject of the assessment were mainly post-class and teachers, and others such as in-class assessments, peer-assessments were used only in specific contexts. In all cases, the results of assessments used for calculating students' grade, but in some cases, we could observe that the results used for improving teaching and feedback for students. Based on these results, we discussed how to support the assessments of 'Scientific inquiry experiments'.