한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제41권3호
  • /
  • Pages.183-192
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

2015개정 과학과 선택과목 수업 및 평가에 대한 교사들의 인식 탐색

Exploration of High School Science Teachers' Perceptions on Instruction and Assessment of Science Elective Courses in the 2015 Revised Curriculum

  • 투고 : 2021.01.26
  • 심사 : 2021.06.22
  • 발행 : 2021.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구에서는 2015 개정 교육과정 적용 2년차를 맞이하여 고등학교 과학과 선택과목의 수업과 평가 구현 실태를 조사함으로써 과학과 교육과정의 안착 및 개선 방안을 도출하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 244명의 고등학교 과학과 교사들을 대상으로 설문조사를 진행하였으며, 9명의 과학 교사들과 심층 면담을 수행하여 교육과정 운영에 대한 심층적인 답변을 구하였다. 주요 연구결과를 살펴보면, 설문조사에서 과학 교사들은 개정 교육과정에서 교과역량 신장과 학생들의 참여를 높이기 위한 수업을 고민하고 있지만, 여전히 강의 위주 수업을 가장 자주 활용하는 것으로 나타났다. 평가 측면에서는 과정중심평가와 관련된 문항들에서 교사들은 긍정적인 변화가 있다고 응답하였다. 과학과 선택과목 운영의 어려움으로 교사들은 '담당해야 하는 과목의 수 증가', '업무 과다', '다양한 교수학습 및 평가 등을 고려한 수업의 재구조화에 대한 부담'을 가장 많이 선택하였다. 심층 면담을 통해 교사들은 통합과학에 비해 과학I 선택과목에서는 탐구실험 등과 같은 학생참여형 수업을 덜 강조하며, 과학II 과목의 경우 주로 3학년 때 하므로 학생참여형으로 진행하기 어렵다고 주장하였다. 또한, 과학과 선택과목에서 과정중심평가를 하려면 시간 확보가 필요하며, 수능에 실험이 안 나와서 실험에 대한 과정중심평가도 할 필요가 없다고 응답하였다. 연구결과를 토대로 과학과 선택과목에서 과정중심평가 안착을 위한 지원방안, 학교현장의 학생참여형 수업이나 과정중심평가의 방향성과 원인에 대한 심층 분석의 필요성 등을 제안하였다.

As part of the second-year monitoring study on the implementation of the 2015 revised science curriculum, this study investigated high school science teachers' perception and realization of instruction and assessment of elective courses to derive measures to settle and improve the science curriculum. A total of 244 high school science teachers responded to the survey questionnaire, and 9 teachers participated in interviews. In survey results, science teachers are contemplating ways to increase students' science competencies and their participation in classes, but still, lecture-oriented classes are most often used in their teaching. Regarding assessment, teachers responded that there were positive changes in all of the questions related to process-based assessment (PBA). Regarding the difficulty of managing science elective courses, teachers most often selected increased numbers of subjects being covered, overload of work, and the burden of restructuring classes considering various ways of teaching and assessment. Through in-depth interviews, teachers argued the difficulty for Science I courses to emphasize student participatory classes compared to integrated science, and the difficulty to implement student participatory classes for Science II courses, which are mainly placed in the third grade. Teachers also argue that it is necessary to secure time to implement PBA in science elective courses, and that there is no need to implement PBA for the science experiment since there are no tests on the SAT. Based on the results of the study, discussed in the conclusion are support plans for the settlement of PBA in elective courses, and the need for in-depth analysis of the direction and cause of student participatory classes and PBA at the school.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Bovill, C. and Bulley, C.J. (2011) A model of active student participation in curriculum design: exploring desirability and possibility. In Improving Student Learning 18: Global theories and local practices: institutional, disciplinary and cultural variations. Oxford: The Oxford Centre for Staff and Educational Development.
  2. Choi, S., Shin, C., Hwang, E., Lee, S., Kin, E., Yoo, J., Jung, M., & Song, J. (2015). General manual for the operation of the Free Learning Semester. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute [KEDI].
  3. Choi, J., & Woo, A. (2020). Effect of science practice-based class on improving middle school students' science core competency. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 24(1), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2020.24.1.11
  4. Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., Appleton, J. J., Berman, S., Spanjers, D., & Varro, P. (2008). Best practices in fostering student engagement. Best Practices in School Psychology, 5, 1099-1120.
  5. Jeon, S. (2019). The development and application of process-focused assessment for improving scientific communication skills. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 38(1), 16-30. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2019.38.1.16
  6. Hong, S., Chang, I., & Kim, T. (2017). Elementary school teachers' recognition of process-centered evaluation using consensual qualitative research. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(4), 47-69.
  7. Kang, H., Lee, S., Lee, I., Kwak, Y., Shin, Y., Lee, S. Y., & Ha, J. (2020). Qualitative inquiry on factor for improving elementary and secondary students' positive experiences about science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 39(2), 183-203. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2020.39.2.183
  8. Kim, M., & Ryu, S. (2019). Development of scientific conceptual understanding through process-centered assessment that visualizes the process of scientific argumentation. Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education, 39(5), 637-654.
  9. Kwak, Y. (2019). Exploration of support plans for 2015 integrated science curriculum through the performance evaluation of implemented teacher training programs. Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education, 39(2), 197-205. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2019.39.2.197
  10. Kwak, Y., Shin, Y., Kang, H., Lee, S., Lee, I., Lee, S. Y., & Ha, J. (2020). Qualitative inquiry on ways to improve science instruction and assessment for raising high school students' positive experiences on science. Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education, 40(2), 197-205.
  11. Kwak, Y., & Shin, Y. (2019). Analysis of enacted curriculum through classroom observation of integrated science teaching in 2015 revised curriculum. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(3), 337-346. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2019.39.3.337
  12. Kwak, Y. (2020). Trend analysis of curriculum application status of 2015 revised integrated science and scientific laboratory experiment curriculum. Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 13(1), 53-63. https://doi.org/10.15523/JKSESE.2020.13.1.53
  13. Lee, H., Baek, J., & Kwak, Y. (2020). Middle school science teachers' perceptions of implementation and challenges on process-based assessment emphasized in the 2015 revised curriculum. Journal of Science Education, 44(2), 133-144. https://doi.org/10.21796/JSE.2020.44.2.133
  14. Ministry of Education [MOE], & Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation [KICE] (2017). Performance assessment focusing on the process: What should I do? Sejong: MOE.
  15. Park, J., Cho, J., Jin, K-A., Kim, S., Lee, J., Pae, J-K., Kim, H., Park, J., Lee, S., Bae, H., Lee, S., Lee, D., & Kim A. (2018). Development and administration of training programs for process-fortified assessment by teacher. (KICE Research Report CRE 2018-4). Jincheon: Author.
  16. Jin, K-A., Son, M., Si, K., Shin, H-J., Suh, B-E., Kwon, G., Chon, K. H., & Kim, T. H. (2018). Exploring student assessment strategies in light of high school reform policies. (KICE Research Report RRE 2019-12). Jincheon: Author.
  17. Lee, I., & Kwak, Y. (2020). Exploration of the status of course completion and ways to raise selection rates of general elective courses in the 2015 revised science curriculum. Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education, 40(2), 217-226. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2020.40.2.217
  18. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2014). Key point about overview of 2015 integrated national curriculum(draft). Press release(2014.9.24.).
  19. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2015a). The general explanation of 2015 revised national curriculum. Notification No. 2015-74 [issue 1]. Sejong: Author.
  20. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2015b). Overview of elementary and secondary school curriculum (MOE Notification No. 2015-74[supplement 1]). Sejong: Author.
  21. Shin, H., Ahn, S. & Kim, Y. (2017). A policy analysis on the process-based evaluation- focusing on middle school teachers in Seoul. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 20(2), 135-162. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2017.20.2.135
  22. Shin, Y., & Kwak, Y. (2019). Analysis of realities of organization and implementation of Integrated Science of the 2015 revised curriculum. Journal of Science Education, 43(1), 64-78. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2019.43.1.64