DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analysis of the Verbs in the 2009 Revised National Science Curriculum-from the Viewpoint of Cognitive Domain of TIMSS Assessment Framework

2009 개정 과학과 교육과정의 성취기준에 사용된 서술어 분석 -TIMSS 인지적 영역 평가틀을 중심으로-

  • Received : 2016.07.24
  • Accepted : 2016.08.12
  • Published : 2016.08.31

Abstract

In the 2009 revised science curriculum, comprehensive verbs such as 'know (38%)' and 'understand (46%)' are used in more than 80% of the achievement standard. Many readers, such as teachers, textbook makers, etc. have difficulties in interpreting the meaning of achievement standard sentences with these comprehensive verbs. On the other hand, 'Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)' uses more various and specific verbs to express the cognitive domain. In this study, we analyzed the 2009 revised science curriculum achievement standard focusing on the TIMSS cognitive domain assessment framework. We divided achievement standard to 228 sentences and three teachers analyzed the meaning of verbs in achievement standard. There were two main results of this study. First, the verb 'Know' was analyzed into different kinds of meanings, such as 'Describe (27%)', 'Recall/Recognize (25%)' and 'Relate (17%)', etc; and the verb 'Understand' was analyzed into 'Explain (37%)', 'Relate (27%)' and 'Describe (21%)', etc. Second, there appeared to have a disagreement among the three analysts during the process of interpreting the achievement standards when the level and scope of the contents of each grade is not clear. This study concludes that there's a need for continuous discussion on the use of verbs in achievement standard to promote clearer expressions for better understanding.

Keywords

2009 revised science curriculum;achievement standards;verbs;TIMSS;cognitive domain

References

  1. Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (Eds.). (2013). TIMSS 2015 Assessment Frameworks. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education. Boston College. ISBN: 978-1-889938-19-6.
  2. Paik, N. (2014). Review of statements of achievement standards in subject curriculum : Focusing on the national science curriculum of Republic of Korea and the U.S. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(2), 101-131. https://doi.org/10.15708/kscs.32.2.201406.005
  3. Shin, S. (2002). Analysis of Contents of Elementary School Science Curriculum by TIMSS. Graduate School of Education, Seoul National University of Education, Master's thesis.
  4. Tae, J., Yun, E., & Park, Y. (2015). Comparision of Verbs Used in the Learning Objectives in Physics Textbooks of Singapore, USA, & Korea. Journal of Korean Associaion for Science Education, 35(3), 375-382. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.3.0375
  5. Jo, K. (2014). Analysis of Verbs in Achievement Standards and Levels of the 2009 Revised Science National Curriculum in Middle Schools. New Physics: Sae mulli, 64(4), 447-457. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.64.447
  6. Kim, S., Lee, J., Park, J., & Lee, M. (2015). Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study: TIMSS 2015 Main Survey. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation, Report of Research, RRE 2015-11-2.
  7. Kim, M., & Kim, K. (2011). A Content Analysis of Biology Domain of Korean and Singaporean Textbooks Based on the TIMSS Framework. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation, 39(2), 217-234.
  8. Kim, D. (2013). An Alternative on History Education Achievement Standards in Elementary School Social Studies. Studies on History Education, 17(5), 47-84
  9. Ko, Y. (2011). A Comparative Study of Korea and Singapore Elementary Science Textbooks According to TIMSS : Focused on the Revised 2007 Curriculum in 3rd and 4th Grade. Graduate School of Education Seoul National University of Education, Master's thesis. :
  10. Koh, Y., & Kim, H. (2016). Content Analysis of Life Science Area in Science Textbooks According to Korean Elementary Curriculum Change. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(2), 203-219. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.2.0203
  11. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
  12. Choi, J., & Paik, S. (2015). A comparative Analysis of Achievement Standards of the 2007 & 2009 Revised Elementary Science Curriculum with Next Generation Science Standards in US based on Bloom's Revised Taxonomy. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(2), 277-288. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.2.0277
  13. Jo, K. (2013). The Characteristic Verbs in Physics Achievement Standards in the 2009 Revised National Curriculum. Journal of the Research Institute of Curriculum Instruction, 17(4), 1405-1420. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2013.17.4.1405
  14. Lee, H., & Kang, H. (2013). Analysis of Achievement Standards of the Korean language based on Bloom' Revised Taxanomy of Educational Objectives. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 13(4), 305-325.
  15. Lee, M., & Yang, Y. (2004). The Effects of Concurrent Presentation of Content Objectives and Thinking Skills Objectives on The Development of Students' Thinking Skills and Academic Achievements. Korean Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 453-474.
  16. MEST(Ministry of Education, Science and Technology). (2011). 2009 Revised National science curriculum. No 2011-361. MEST.
  17. MEST(Ministry of Education, Science and Technology). (2012). Achievement standards and achievement levels based on the national curriculum revised in 2009 revised national curriculum : Middle school science. No 11-1341000-002308-01. MEST. www.ncic.go.kr
  18. MEST(Ministry of Education, Science and Technology). (2012). Achievement standards and achievement levels based on the national curriculum revised in 2009 revised national curriculum : High school science. No 11-1341000-002327-01. MEST. www.ncic.go.kr

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국연구재단