• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.63 no.4
• /
• pp.289-306
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this study is to compare the contents of chemistry textbooks developed according to the 2015 revised curriculum with the contents of the 2009 revised curriculum to research the change in "the development and use of models". To do this, we analyzed 8 kinds of Chemistry I textbooks and 6 kinds of Chemistry II textbooks from the 2015 revised curriculum and compared them with 4 kinds of Chemistry I textbooks and 4 kinds of Chemistry II textbooks from the 2009 revised curriculum. The scope of the analysis was the explanations of the textbooks related to aqueous electrolysis experiments. In order to compare the contents regarding electrolytes when the same experiments are interpreted with different models, we analyzed contents of 4 kinds of middle school science textbooks from the 2015 revised curriculum and 9 kinds of middle school science textbooks from the 2009 revised curriculum. As a result of the analysis, the same experiment was explained by different models according to the grade level and unit, and all explanations were limited to a single model. Also, the tendency to limit the kinds of electrolytes for controlled experimental results is more pronounced in the 2015 revised curriculum than in the 2009 revised curriculum. From this results, we suggest that efforts are needed to reflect the "development and use of models" in chemistry textbooks developed according to the 2015 revised curriculum.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.183-192
• /
• 2021

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.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.6
• /
• pp.981-992
• /
• 2017

This research compares the subjects of "Integrated Science" and "Converged Science" in the 2015 Revised National Curriculum, through core concepts. The content priorities and levels of integration of each core concept were evaluated through an analytical framework, and visualized using two-dimensional visualization matrix of the content priorities and the levels of integration. The results show that "Integrated Science" had fewer core concepts, higher in priorities and slightly lower levels of integration than "Converged Science". This can be an evidence that "Integrated Science" is excellent in rigor and not so much inferior in relevance. And also, through visualization of analysis results, the characteristics of integrated subjects could easily be understood and compared.

• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.41 no.2
• /
• pp.173-185
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study is to present a reflective review of the earth and universe units from the revised elementary curriculum of 2007-2015 and suggest changes in the 2022 revised curriculum. For this purpose, we conducted an FGI with earth science educators and elementary school teachers regarding the content elements and system, the achievement standards and inquiry activity composition, and the vertical and horizontal curriculum connectivity. Free response and weighted hierarchical analysis items were incorporated into the FGI to ensure logical consistency of the inductively derived improvement. This analysis revealed that the composition of units by grade group had been unevenly distributed among each of the "earth systems" until the 2015 revised curriculum was finalized. Furthermore, the basic concept was still insufficient. We suggest that achievement standards centered on the learning content and skills must state specific scientific core competencies, and inquiry activities should include rigorous critical thinking, student written responses, and student inquiry and analysis. In the hierarchical analysis items, FGI emphasized the inclusion of essential content elements rather than reduction of content elements, understanding-oriented concept learning rather than interest-centered phenomenon learning, basic concept division learning before integration between subjects, and expanding vertical-horizontal connectivity rather than repeating and advancing learning. There is a limit to the generalizing the suggestions proposed in this study to the common opinion of elementary earth science experts. However, since the main vision of the 2022 revised curriculum is to gather opinions through educational entities' participation in a variety of educational subjects, it is suggested that our results should be incorporated as one of the opinions proposed for the 2022 curriculum revision.

• Journal of Science Education
• /
• v.44 no.1
• /
• pp.15-37
• /
• 2020

Unlike Korean science curriculum's continued push for "relevance of contents" to reduce the burden of learning on students, IB DP (International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme) is chosen in many countries and the number of IB world schools continues to grow, although it contains not only a large amount of learning but a substantial amount of content that requires quantitative calculations. Through this study, we suggest implications for Korean science curriculum and textbook, by comparing the constructions of chapters, the achievement standards, the learning contents, and the formulas of physics textbook, focusing on the 'relativity' unit of the 2015 revised national curriculum and IB DP, and by analyzing the questions of college scholastic ability test (CSAT) and external assessment (EA).

• Journal of Science Education
• /
• v.45 no.1
• /
• pp.1-10
• /
• 2021

In this study, we analyzed the relationship between the physical science domain of TIMSS 2019 and the Korean science curriculum. Twelve subjects are presented in the physical science domain of the TIMSS 2019 4th grade evaluation framework. Research group consisting of elementary and middle school teachers and science education experts, a total of 12, participated to analyze in which grade these subjects were included in the Korea 2009 revised and 2015 revised science curriculum. As a results of analyzing whether the achievement standards of the TIMSS 2019 evaluation framework and Korean science curriculum are consistent, the subjects pertinent to chemistry like 'chemical changes in everyday life,' 'heat transfer,' and 'electricity and simple electrical circuits' appeared not covered at all until the 4th grade curriculum in Korea. Given that the TIMSS 2019 evaluation framework is an international achievement standard, we are proposing to improve the Korean curriculum as follows: first, for the development of the next science curriculum, there is a need for science curriculum organized from the 1st grade of elementary school to connect the content and scope of chemistry in elementary, middle, and high schools as a whole including the Nuri curriculum. Second, as an alternative to the problem of suitability of learning volume and level of learning, it is possible to think of a method to readjust the grade of dealing with related concepts by lowering the difficulty or simplifying the concept. Third, it is necessary to discuss about introducing essential concepts and standard terms into Korea science curriculum according to international trends.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.64 no.6
• /
• pp.371-378
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between the eight topics in TIMSS 2019 8th grade chemistry domains and the Korea 2009 Revised Science Curriculum and the 2015 Revised Science Curriculum. For this purpose, four elementary and four secondary teachers participated in physics, chemistry, biology and earth science majors, and two science education experts participated in analyzing in which grades the content elements of the TIMSS 2019 science framework are covered in the Korean science curriculum. The study also analyzed whether the content of the Korean science curriculum matches the 246 items of 8th grade in the TIMSS 2019 assessment and reflects in which grades the eight topics are covered. The results of this study are as follows. First, among the TIMSS 2019 evaluation topics, topics not covered at all in the Korean middle school curriculum were periodic table, matter and energy in chemical reactions, the role of electrons in chemical bonds. Second, the topic of "the periodic table as an organizing principle for the known elements" needs to be introduced in the Korean middle school curriculum, and topics such as "familiar exothermic and endothermic reactions" and "factors affecting the reaction rates" need to be discussed in consideration of the flow of international curricula. Third, the next science curriculum should be structured so that the sequence of chemistry contents and scope, especially core concepts to be included in the elementary, secondary, and higher education curriculum is linked to continuity.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.112-122
• /
• 2021

The goal of this study is to explore ways to restructure Convergence Elective Courses in science in preparation for the high school credit system, ahead of the 2022 revised science curriculum. This study started from the problem that the 2015 revised science curriculum has not guaranteed science subject choice for students with non-science/engineering career aptitudes. To this end, a survey was conducted by randomly sampling high schools across the country. A total of 1,738 students responded to the questionnaire of 3 science elective courses such as Science History, Life & Science, Convergence Science. In addition, in-depth interviews with 12 science teachers were conducted to examine the field operation of these three courses, which will be classified and revised as Convergence Elective subjects in the 2022 revised curriculum. According to the results of the study, high school students perceive these three courses as science literacy courses, and find these difficult to learn due to lack of personal interest, and difficulties in content itself. The reason students choose these three courses is mainly because they have aptitude for science, or these courses have connection with their desired career path. Teachers explained that students mainly choose Life & Science, and both teachers and students avoid Science History because the course content is difficult. Based on the research results, we suggested ways to restructure Convergence Electives for the 2022 revised curriculum including developing convergence electives composed of interdisciplinary convergence core concepts with high content accessibility, developing convergence electives with core concepts related to AI or advanced science, developing module-based courses, and supporting professional development of teachers who will teach interdisciplinary convergence electives.

• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.43 no.3
• /
• pp.353-364
• /
• 2024

The purpose of this study is to analyze the achievement standards for grades 3-4 of the 2022 revised science curriculum and identify the goals of science education for grades 3-4 of the 2022 revised curriculum, as well as provide implications for the development of the science textbooks for grades 3-4 and the direction of teaching for teachers in the field. For this purpose, 57 achievement standards of the Science Department 2022 revised curriculum for grades 3-4 were analyzed as to their knowledge dimensions and cognitive processes according to Bloom's Taxonomy of the New Educational Objectives. In cases where an achievement standard is a double sentence or combines two or more knowledge dimensions or cognitive process dimensions, we separated the sentences after having consulted with a group of experts and divided the achievement standards into 57 sentences. We then analyzed the frequency of the categorization of concepts and descriptors by comparing them with the previously studied elementary science standards from the 2015 revised curriculum. The main findings of the study are as follows. First, in the knowledge dimension, the "factual knowledge" accounted for 50 items (86%), compared to "conceptual knowledge" (10%), and "procedural knowledge" (4%), and "metacognitive knowledge" was not analyzed at all. Second, in terms of the cognitive processes, "Understanding" was the highest at 60% with 34 items. It was followed by "applying" with 11%, "creating" with 19%, "evaluating" with 15%, and "analyzing" and "remembering" with 6%. Third, when analyzing the descriptors, "I can explain" was the highest with 9%, followed by "comparison" with 6%, and "practice" and "classification" with 5%. Fourth, compared to the 2015 revised curriculum, "conceptual knowledge" was reduced and "factual knowledge" was overwhelmingly increased. Fifth, in the cognitive process dimension, "understanding,' has increased significantly, while the other cognitive process dimensions have decreased. Conclusions and implications based on these findings are as follows: the focus of the Science Department for grades 3-4 in the 2022 revised curriculum is heavily weighted toward the "factual knowledge," with "understanding" dominating the cognitive process dimensions. As a result, many concepts and applications have been reduced. Based on the results of the comparison of the descriptors with the results of the 2015 revised curriculum, the implications for the development of the science textbooks for grades 3-4 of the 2022 revised curriculum were discussed, and so were the implications of the curriculum for the field.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.151-161
• /
• 2020

The 'core concepts', 'generalized knowledge', and 'skills' are newly introduced in the 'contents system' of the 2015 revised national curriculum, and the 'skills' are not clearly defined in the science curriculum. There is a problem of uniformly presenting 'skills' in all 'areas' of science subjects. In this study, it was intended that the teachers' clear understanding of the 'skills' and the philosophy of the revised curriculum would be applied to the school classrooms through the critical problem recognition and consideration of 'skills' newly introduced in the 'contents system' of the 2105 revised science curriculum. First, we reviewed 'science and engineering practice' in the NGSS, which was a reference to the introduction to the curriculum, and identified the problems of 'skills' presented in the science curriculum. It also analyzed critically by comparing 'skills' and 'practices' with other subjects and previous curriculum. Based on this critical analysis, we suggested the following. First, introduce 'skills' items that can implement scientific key competencies, and clearly define each item. Second, present 'skills' that are appropriate according to the subject, 'area', 'core concept', and grade(group) and describe in detail how to apply 'skills' and, third, present 'skills' directly in 'achievement standards'.