• 한국과학교육학회지
• /
• 제10권1호
• /
• pp.77-94
• /
• 1990

The Inquiry Activities the newly developed Korean High Schol Biology Textbooks were evaluated using SIEI(Seientific Inquiry Evaluation Inventory). The textbook evaluated are five Introductory Biology books and five Advanced Biology books developed in 1990. The instrument, SIEI, was developed by Myung Hur in his doctoral study at Columbia University in 1984. The major findings of the study are summarized below. 1. The inquiry activities in the textbooks are focusing on the low level science process skills 2. Students are rarely asked to formulate a hypothesis or to design an experiment. 3. The structure of the Inguiry Activities are mostly competitive, thus inhibiting the inquiry achievement of students. 4. The Inquiry Indices of the textbooks are between 14 and 16, meaning only 14 to 16 percent of the total instructional time are to be devoted to inquiry activities.

• 한국과학교육학회지
• /
• 제19권4호
• /
• pp.528-541
• /
• 1999

제 6차 교육과정에 의해 발행된 4종의 공통과학 교과서의 탐구영역 중 탐구실험을 중심으로 과학탐구 평가표(SIEI)를 사용 하여 탐구 활동을 분석하였다. 공통과학 4종의 교과서의 탐구활동의 평균 횟수는 115.5회로 나타났고, 교과서별 비교에서 B교과서가 147회로 가장 많고, D교과서가 121회, C교과서가 100회, A교과서가 94회로 가장 적어 교과서별로 차이가 나타났다. 탐구활동 영역별 횟수는 관찰이 22회, 실험이 117회, 자료해석이 196회, 조사가 64회.. 토의가 51회, 분류가 4회 그리고 예상이 8회로 개념적 탐구 활동이 탐구실험에 비해 약 2.3배 정도 많이 나타났다. 탐구과제수는 A교과서가 268개, B교과서가 328개, C교과서가 207개 그리고 D교과서가 304개로 C교과서가 가장 적었다. 탐구활동의 구조적 분석 중 경쟁/협동구조의 평가에서 공동과제, 조별결과가 87.1%, 토론구조평가에서 토론이 없는 활동이 83.5%, 탐구자유도 평가에서 문제, 방볍, 답이 모두 제시된 탐구활동이 58.3%, 탐구영역평가에서 교과내용의 증명이나 시범활동이 66.9%로 이들이 각 평가영역에서 가장 높게 나타났다. 공통과학4종의 교과서에 대한 탐구과정을 종합적으로 평가한 탐구피라미드 구조는 모두 형태 I 구조를 나타내었고, 탐구지수는 평균 47.8로 매우 높은 수준이었다.

• 한국과학교육학회지
• /
• 제4권2호
• /
• pp.57-63
• /
• 1984

An inquiry approach in teaching science has been advocated by many science educators for the past few decades, and most elementary and secondary science curricula have incorporated it in varying degrees. It has been proven in recent studies, however, that there exists considerable discrepancy between the expectation of outcomes of the inquiry approach and the actuality. This in part implies that there is a somewhat urgent need for the systematic evaluation of the approach in teaching science. The purpose of this study is to develop a comprehensive instrument for evaluating inquiry teaching approaches embedded in science curricular materials. To develop a more valid and reliable instrument a set of empirical data was used in the developmental procedure, and most of the previous studies regarding inquiry teaching method and inquiry evaluation were consulted. The inquiry evaluation method developed in this study, called the Scientific Inquiry Evaluation Inventory (SIEI), is composed of three parts: (1) analyzing and coding each science process task of inquiry activity; (2) evaluating each inquiry activity as a whole; and (3) evaluating each science laboratory curriculum as a whole. The first part of the instrument consists of twenty science process categories and thirty subcategories grouped into four sections: (1) gathering and organizing data; (2) interpreting and analyzing data; (3) synthesizing results and evaluation; and (4) hypothesizing and designing an experiment. The science process categories are arranged according to the level of difficulty, psychological level of thinking, degree of creativity demand, and the model of the process of scientific inquiry, which is also developed in the study. The second part of the instrument contains four evaluation scales of inquiry activity: (1) competition/cooperation scale; (2) discussion scale; (3) openness scale; and (4) inquiry scope scale. And the last part consists of three methods for evaluating a science laboratory curriculum as a whole: (1) inquiry pyramid; (2) inquiry index; and (3) difficulty index. The instrument is designed to be used by teachers, science curriculum developers and science education evaluators for the purpose of diagnosing the nature and appropriateness of scientific inquiry introduced in secondary science curricular materials, especailly in laboratory work and field work.

• 한국과학교육학회지
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.56-65
• /
• 1993

The purpose of this study is to analyze the inquiry activities of SCIIS and Korea primary school science curricular meterials and to make suggestions for the improvement of inquiry learning based on the analysis The Scientific Inquiry Evaluation Inventory (SIEI: Myung Hur, 1984) was used to evaluate the inquiry activity content of the primary school "Science, Level-6" and "SCIIS, Level-6" textbooks. The results are as follows: 1) The inquiry activities of Korean science textbooks are stressing on gathering and organizing data, but rarely require students to formulate a hypothesis, to design an experiment. 2) The SCIIS textbooks relatively tended to put more weight on interpreting/ analysing data and hypothesizing/ designing experiments. 3)The Korean science textbooks had little concern about establishing hypothesis and designing experiments, interpreting / analysing data. 4) The SCIIS textbooks require students to perform a variety of inquiry skills when compare to Korean science textbooks. 5) Competition / Cooperation Scale checks the level of competition and cooperation among student teams inherent in science curricular materials. The result from each team is incorporated into the formation of a class result. The communication is required to formulate a synthesized class response, enhances cooperation among teams. The SCIIS(84%) is the higher than Korea(50%) in cooperation scale. 6) Korean science textbooks rarely require students to discuss about experiment when compare to SCIIS textbooks. 7) Korean science textbooks provide students with both inquiry problems and experimental procedure, or including answers SCIIS textbooks provide students with both inquiry problems and experimental procedure, or problems only. 8) The Korean textbooks emphasize demonstrating or verifying of the text while the SCIlS emphasize extending the content of the text in inquiry scope scsle. The inquiry pyramid which helps analysis the inquiry activity curriculum as a whole is one of type 1- the course is centered on gathering and organizing data. The SCIIS are better than the Korean science textbook in the light of proportion of interpreting / analysing data and hypothesizing / designing experiments.