Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

High School Students' Perceptions on Descriptive Assessment Activity Experiences by Teacher or by Peer

서술형 평가에서의 교사평가와 동료평가 활동 경험에 따른 고등학생들의 인식

  • Received : 2014.08.19
  • Accepted : 2014.09.15
  • Published : 2014.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to figure out the influence on the students' achievement of the cognitive and the affective domains by descriptive items assessment of teacher or peer and to obtain implications by analyzing the students' satisfaction and the reliability of the assessment. For this purpose, two classes of 11th grade students located in a small city were selected and took an exam related to the cognitive and the affective domains before and after the assessment. The assessment activities were carried out during 10 lessons and the teacher gave feedback to the students of the teacher assessment class in the lessons. In the peer assessment class, a small-size student group discussion and feedback were given to the students after the exam. The results show that higher level achievement group students represented relatively positive satisfaction on teacher assessment, and lower level achievement group students represented positive satisfaction on peer assessment. In spite of the same marker list, higher level achievement group students represent relatively high reliability than lower level achievement group students. The lower level achievement group students in the peer assessment class got statistically meaningful improvement of achievement than the students of teacher assessment class. The peer assessment activity was positively influenced on the affective domain of the lower level achievement group students, especially signigicant meaning of statistics was found on the students' perception about science.

이 연구에서는 서술형 문항에 대한 교사평가와 동료평가가 고등학생들의 학업성취도와 정의적 영역에 미치는 효과를 알아보고, 평가에 대한 학생들의 만족도와 신뢰도를 분석하여 시사점을 얻고자 하였다. 이를 위하여 중소도시에 있는 고등학교 2학년 2개반을 선정하여 학업성취도, 정의적 영역의 검사를 사전과 사후에 실시하였다. 서술형 문항의 평가는 10차시 수업 동안 진행되었으며, 교사평가를 실시한 반에서는 학생들이 서술형 문항을 푼 후에 교사가 이에 대한 피드백을 수업 중에 실시하였다. 동료평가를 실시한 반에서는 학생들이 서술형 문항을 푼 후에 소집단 별로 동료평가를 실시하고 피드백을 제공하도록 하였다. 연구 결과, 학업성취도 상위 집단 학생들은 상대적으로 교사평가에 긍정적인 만족도를 나타내었고, 하위 집단 학생들은 동료평가에 긍정적인 만족도를 나타내었다. 한편, 학업성취도 상위 집단 학생들은 교사평가와 학생평가에서 동일한 채점 기준을 제공하였음에도 불구하고 교사평가에 대한 신뢰도가 상대적으로 높은 반면, 하위 집단 학생들은 교사평가에 대한 신뢰도가 상대적으로 낮았다. 학업성취도가 하위인 학생들만 비교한 결과 교사평가를 실시한 학급보다 동료평가를 실시한 학급에서 성취도의 향상이 통계적으로 유의미하게 나타났다. 정의적 영역의 평가 결과에서도 하위 집단 학생들은 동료 평가가 정의적 영역에서 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤으며, 특별히 과학에 대한 인식 영역에서 변화가 통계적으로 유의미하게 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Alexopoulou, E., & Drive, R. (1996). Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction modes in peers and fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1099-1114. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199612)33:10<1099::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-N
  2. Ballantyne, R., Hughies, K., & Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427-441. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000009302
  3. Back, S. K. (2000). The principle of descriptive evaluation. Seoul: Education Science Company.
  4. Blom, D., & Poole, K. (2004). Peer assessment of tertiary music performance. British Journal of Music Education, 21(2), 111-125. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051703005539
  5. Chea, S. J. (2006). A study on concordance of student assessment in problem based learning of medical schools. The Journal of Yeolin Education, 14(1), 331-349.
  6. Cho, H. M. (2004). A theoretical exploration of peer evaluation in the perspective of social constructivism. The Journal of Education, 23, 229-254.
  7. Defina, A. A. (1992). PortFolio assessment. Getting started. New York, NY: Scholastic Professional Books.
  8. Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11, 146-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293860110206
  9. Farr, R., & Tone, B. (1994). Portfolio and performance assessment. NY: Arlex publishing.
  10. Fry, S. (1990). Implementation and evaluation of peer marking in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 15, 177-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293900150301
  11. Green, M. (1994). Children as evaluation understanding from the inside. In B. Cambourne & J. Turbil (Eds.), Responsive evaluation (pp. 83-103). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  12. Ha, B., Lee, Y., Ha, O., & Sin, M. (2000). Development of practical instrument for the measurement of science process skills of elementary school students. Journal of Research in Science & Mathematic education, 26, 33-72.
  13. Hahn, A. J., Kang, H., Kwan, C., Kim, H., & Woo, J. (1997). New elementary science teaching method. Seoul: Education science company.
  14. Hahn, J. S., & Oh, J. S. (2008). Effects of peer rating on the web-based online discussion. Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 87-107. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.24.1.87
  15. Hong, M., & Chung, H. (2006). The development of assessment items with assay & description type test science in biology for high school students. Journal of Science Education Kyungpook National University, 30, 65-100.
  16. http://vassarstats.net/utest.html The logic and computational details of the Mann-Whitney test. chapter 11a. Concepts and Applications of Inferential Statistics. provided by the Department of Mathematics & Statistics at the University of Saskatchewan: ${\copyright}$Richard Lowry 2001-2014.
  17. Hwang, J., Lee, H., & Kwack, D. (2010). An assessement of high school students' performance on science process skills in biology, Research for Subject Matter Education, 14(1), 67-84.
  18. Kang, K. H. (2009). The analysis of results and recognition on pre-service science teachers' peer evaluation in presentation activity. Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 25(3), 261-275.
  19. Kang, H., Gong, Y., Kwon, H., Kim, J., Bae, J., Song, M., Sin, Y., Yang, I., Yun, H., Lee, D., Lee, M., Im, C., Im, H., Jang, S., Jun, Y., & Chae, D. (2010). Elemenatary science education theory. Seoul: Education Science Company.
  20. Kim, M. J. (2005). Peer assessment as a learning method: The effects of assessor and assessee's roles on metacognition, performance, and motivation. Journal of Educational Technology, 21(4), 1-28.
  21. Kim, H. N., Jung, W. H., & Jung, J. W. (1998). National science evaluation system development of affective characteristics. Chungbuk: Science Education Institute of Korea National University of Education.
  22. Kim, J. H. (2010). Descriptive evaluation ROAD VIEW, Seoul: ParkLeeJung Publisher.
  23. Kim, K., Seo, Y., & Lee, Y. (2013). An Application Method Study on Written Performance Assessments in Middle School Informatics according to the Revised Curriculum in 2009. Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 29(4), 187-203.
  24. Kim, S., & Yoo, Y. (2006). Developing descriptive essay problems in mathematics for high school students. Journal of Science Education Kyungpook National University, 30, 1-22.
  25. Kim, Y., & Kim, Y. (2012). The Development of a free-response test for the assessment of science process skill. Biology education, 40(1), 167-177. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2012.40.1.167
  26. Kyungkido Education Office. (2012). Guidebook of descriptive & Essay evaluation. North government office building, Support section of teaching and learning.
  27. Lee, J., You, Y., Sin, E., Jung, J., Im, K., Gu, E., Kim, H., Ham, D., Kwak, J., Park, S., Park, S., Kim, S., & Kim, J. (2011). Descriptive evaluation ROAD VIEW-Science, Seoul: ParkLeeJung Publisher.
  28. Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (1996). The importance of marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assesment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 239-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293960210304
  29. Park, D. S. (2008). Evaluation of education. Seoul: Education Science Company.
  30. Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education. (2010). Reinforcing method of descriptive and assay assessment for students' improvement of scholastic ability in Seoul. Report paper 2007.
  31. Song, H. M. (2006). The analysis of the effect of peer evaluation and the verbal interaction in small groups in solving descriptive questions of metabolism (Doctoral dissertation). Korea National University of Education, Chungbuk.
  32. Topping, K., Smith, F. F., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (1998). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 149-169.
  33. Yang, G. S. (2006). Descriptive and essay assessment source book. Seoul: Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education.
  34. Watson, S. B., & Marshall, J. E. (1995). Effects of cooperative incentives and heterogeneous arrangement on achievement and interaction of cooperative learning groups in a college life science course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 291-299. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320308
  35. Webb, N. M. (1982). Group Composition, Group Interaction, and Achievement in small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(4), 475-484. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.74.4.475
  36. Wen, M. L., & Tsai, A. (2006). University students' perceptions of and attitudes toward online peer assessment. Higher Education, 51, 27-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6375-8

Cited by

  1. 초등학교 과학과 5, 6학년 서술형 평가문항의 행동영역 내용타당도 및 이에 영향을 미치는 요인 분석 vol.36, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.1.0087
  2. A Survey on the Conditions of Middle School Science Evaluation vol.55, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.15812/ter.55.3.201609.389
  3. The Effect of Team Project on Divergent Thinking and Analytical Skills in Pre-Service Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) vol.21, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2017.21.1.15
  4. 중학교 과학에서 서술형 평가의 실태 분석: 문항유형, 단원, 평가목표를 중심으로 vol.42, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2018.42.2.198
  5. 선다형 문제와 서술형 문제의 점수 차이와 이에 대한 학생들의 인식 -고등학교 기하 교과를 중심으로- vol.57, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2018.57.3.197
  6. 자유학기제 과학과 평가에 대한 교사의 인식과 실제 vol.39, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2019.39.1.143
  7. 2015 개정 과학과 교육과정에 제시된 중학교 1학년 성취기준과 과학 1 교과서에 포함된 활동과 평가 문항 분석: 과학과 핵심역량 중심으로 vol.63, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2019.63.3.196