• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.19 no.9
• /
• pp.92-100
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this study is to analyze the 2019 Revised Nuri Curriculum and the 2015 Revised Curriculum for the comparative analysis of disaster safety education contents in the national level curriculum. The main results of this study are as follows: First, the content of disaster safety education for preschoolers in the 2019 Revised Nuri Curriculum was clarified as 'Knowing how to react in case of accident, fire, disaster, abuse, kidnap etc.' in 'Living safety' category of physical exercise and health sections. Second, in the 2015 Revised Curriculum, disaster safety education contents for elementary school students were found to have the difference between school year in same elementary school curriculum. For first and second graders, 'Disaster safety' was cleary presented in one of major categories of 'Living safety', which was newly created at the creative activity in the Revised 2015 Curriculum. On the other hand, for third to sixth graders, safety education is dispersed in the related subjects such as physical education, science, practical courses or in the creativity activity. Third, the safety contents in the Revised 2015 Curriculum for middle school and high school were also found to be dispersed in social studies, physical education, science, technology-home economics and creativity activity. The results of this study showed that the contents of disaster safety education in the national curriculum did not have continuity and systemicity from kindergarten to high school. Therefore, efforts should be made to ensure continuity and systemicity of disaster safety education contents when the national curriculum is revised in the future.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.289-309
• /
• 2022

In recent years, astronomy has been snowballing: including Higgs particle discovery, black hole imaging, extraterrestrial exploration, and deep space observation. Students are also largely interested in astronomy. The purpose of this study is to discover what needs to be improved in the current astronomy curriculum in light of recent scientists' researches and discoveries. We collected keywords from all papers published from 2011 to 2020 in four selected journals-ApJ, ApJL, A&A, and MNRAS- by R package to examine research trends. The curriculum contents were extracted by synthesizing the in-service teachers' coding results in the 2015 revised curriculum document of six subjects (Science, Integrated Science, Earth Science I, Earth Science II, Physics II, Convergence Science). The research results are as follows: first, keywords that appear steadily in astronomy are 'galaxies: formation, galaxy: active, star: formation, accretion, method: numerical.' Second, astronomy curriculum includes all areas except the 'High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena' area within the common science curriculum learned by all students. Third, it is necessary to review the placement of content elements by subject and grade and to consider introducing new concepts based on astronomy research keywords. This is an exploratory study to compare curriculum and the field of scientific research that forms the basis of the subject. We expect to provide implications for a future revision of the astronomy curriculum as a primary ground investigation.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.277-288
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this study is to find the point for improvement through the comparative analysis of the 2007 & 2009 revised science curriculum, and the NGSS of the United States with Bloom's revised taxonomy. The results of the analysis confirmed that the revised curriculum in 2009 compared to the revised curriculum in 2007 has expanded the type of cognitive process and knowledge, which promote a higher level thinking. However, the revised curriculum in 2009 has been biased to the type of specific cognitive process and knowledge in cognitive process dimension and knowledge dimension as compared to the NGSS of the United States. In the revised curriculum in 2009, the type of cognitive process such as 'analyze,' 'evaluate,' 'create,' and the type of knowledge such as 'meta-cognitive knowledge' have been treated inattentively. In addition, through comparative analysis, it was identified that the type of cognitive process and knowledge that were neglected in achievement standards were not dealt with in the learning objective of teachers' guides, either. The revised curriculum should consist of achievement standards in comparison to the previous curriculum to reflect better the goals of science education. Therefore, it is necessary to create an achievement standards including various types of cognitive processes and knowledge by improving the method of statement of achievement standards of science curriculum.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.41 no.5
• /
• pp.401-414
• /
• 2021

The purpose of this study is to explore the cognitive achievement characteristics by group of achievement levels in the PISA 2018 science domain compared to the results of the PISA 2015, and to compare and analyze the 'epistemic' knowledge in the revised curriculum 2009 and in the revised curriculum 2007. The average correctness rates in PISA 2015 and PISA 2018 were analyzed by sub category of the evaluation frame in the PISA scientific domain. In the competencies domain, especially, the average correct answer rates of 'evaluating and designing scientific inquiry' were the lowest in medium and lower groups, but the rates rose in all achievement groups compared to PISA 2015, which is encouraging. Although the answer rates were low for both 'living system' knowledge and 'epistemic' knowledge in the knowledge domain, the average answer rates of the upper and middle groups increased in 'epistemic' knowledge compared to PISA 2015. The changes in the curriculum experienced by students participating in PISA were analyzed in relation to the 'evaluating and designing scientific inquiry' competency and 'epistemic' knowledge, which increased in average correct answer rates. In terms of understanding science, the "What is science?" unit that explicitly presents epistemic knowledge, and nature of model in inquiry activities, were explicitly presented in the revised curriculum 2009. In terms of understanding the process of justifying scientific knowledge, the number of inquiry activities increased, scientific explanations based on experimental results strengthened, and the "Science and Human Civilization" unit was introduced to help students to understand STS while simultaneously conducting arguments. These findings confirm the educational performance of groups by achievement level in the PISA 2018 scientific domain and suggest that the direction of education relates to epistemic knowledge in Korea's Science curriculum.

• Journal of Science Education
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.43-63
• /
• 2019

The types of inquiry activities included in Life Science II textbooks under the 2015 revised science curriculum were extracted and compared with those of six major and five different publishing companies. The fact that the number of investigation discussions and presentations (IP) increased and the expressions (EX) were included in each unit was interpreted as sufficient to transform the classroom instruction in the 2015 revised science curriculum into student-centered activities. The type of inquiry activities in student-centered activities such as experiment observation, simulation activities, investigation discussions, and presentations accounted for about 41% more than the 27% of 2009 revised science curriculum. However, since data interpretation type is still the largest, it is necessary to reduce the types of data interpretation and to increase the number of types of simulation activities and expressions in order to expand students' creativity and thinking ability when textbook development is needed in the future. In addition to the development of biotechnology, teachers need to reconstruct diverse science materials for each textbook and then use them for students to induce balanced thinking, and try to expand expressive power, creativity, logic, and critical thinking skills.

• Education of Primary School Mathematics
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.377-394
• /
• 2022

Criticism has been raised that the way of teaching weights in the 3rd and 4th graders of elementary school is different between the 2015 revised math curriculum and the 2015 revised science curriculum, causing confusion among elementary school teachers and students. This study tried to confirm the social recognition that should be considered in the process of didactic transformation which means transformation from knowledge to used into knowledge to taught and to compare the variations of didactic transformations differently according to didactic intentions. The research analyzes and synthesizes the root of the meaning of weight, weight in the international standard system of units SI, weight implemented in Korean mathematics curriculum and textbooks, Singaporean mathematics curriculum and textbooks, USA mathematics curriculum and textbooks, and Korean science curriculum and textbooks. Through this analysis, a pedagogical perspective on how to define and teach weight in elementary school as knowledge to be taught was derived.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.4
• /
• pp.651-658
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to analyze the invention-related content of foreign science curricula and investigate the perception of science educators about the degree of relevance between science curriculum and invention. For the analysis of foreign science curricula, we investigated the programs of 10 nations, including the US, Canada, UK, Japan, Australia, Singapore, New Zealand, France, Finland and China. To analyze the relevance between Korean science curriculum and invention, we examined common topics such as science, integrated science, and science inquiry experiment, and investigated that the elements related to invention education were included in each 'achievement standard' and 'teaching and evaluation methods'. Science educators including science teachers were asked to evaluate the degree of relevance of invention education. The results were as follows. First, science curricula in many countries contained invention-related content. Second, science educators recognized that invention education was related to science curriculum, but the systematic connection was insufficient. Third, because it is mainly limited to the results of designing and device design, they recognized that the relevance of invention education, which focuses on various processes such as problem design, inventive techniques and intellectual property, was not revealed. Therefore, it is necessary to be process-oriented when developing invention education teaching-learning methods and related materials in science education for the future.

• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.40 no.3
• /
• pp.295-310
• /
• 2021

For the continuous growth and development of students, continuity of learning content according to the school level is essential. However, research on the continuity of kindergarten education and elementary school science curriculum is relatively insufficient. In this respect, it is necessary to precede the analysis of the continuity between the science-related learning content presented in kindergarten education and the science curriculum in elementary school. In this study, the 2015 science curriculum was organized into 14 small sections, and the core contents of science education in kindergartens and elementary schools were presented as correspondence. As a result, it was possible to classify learning contents presented only in kindergarten, learning contents presented only in elementary schools, and learning contents showing a clear continuity between kindergarten and elementary school. This study is meaningful in that it presents implications for the continuity between the science curriculum of the kindergarten curriculum and the elementary school curriculum.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.44 no.3
• /
• pp.249-262
• /
• 2024

The purpose of this study is to analyze the achievement standards of the 2015 revision and 2022 revision of the science curriculum using the TIMSS 2023 science cognitive domain analysis framework. The subject of the study is the achievement standards for all elementary school areas in the 2015 and 2022 revised science curriculum. Three field teachers and one elementary science education expert who majored in elementary science education participated in the research analysis. The results of this study are as follows. First, in the 2022 revised movement and energy field, the ratio of the 'knowing' area was about 16% higher than the 2015 revision, and the ratio of the 'reasoning' area also increased by about 5.8%. Second, in the material field, the proportion of TIMSS 2023 cognitive domains was in the order of 'knowing', 'applying', and 'reasoning' regardless of grade group and curriculum revision period. Third, in the field of life sciences, the proportion of TIMSS 2023 cognitive domains differed depending on grade group and curriculum revision period. Fourth, in the Earth and Space field of the 2022 revision, similar to the other three fields, the proportion of the 'Knowing' field increased and while the 'Applying' field decreased. However, in the 2022 revision, the 'reasoning' area in all three other fields increased, but decreased only in the earth and space fields. Fifth, the 2015 revised integrated unit and the 2022 revised science and society field only covered the elements of 'recognizing' and 'presenting examples' in the 'knowing' area, 'making relationships' and 'explaining' in the 'applying' area and 'Synthesize' in the 'reasoning' area. In the 2022 revised elementary school science field, the proportion of the 'knowing' section was 52.5%, the proportion of the 'applying' section was 33.8%, and the proportion of the 'reasoning' section was 13.7%. In conclusion, in the 2022 revised elementary science achievement standards, the ratio of the 'applying' and 'reasoning' areas was low because the reliance on the 'knowing' area was too high.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.97-111
• /
• 2020

In the 2015 revised curriculum, 'Integrated Science' was established to increase convergent thinking and designated as a common subject for all students to learn, regardless of career. In addition, the 2015 revised curriculum introduced 'competence' as a distinctive feature from the previous curriculum. In the 2015 revised curriculum, competencies are divided into core competencies of cross-curricular character and subject competencies based on academic knowledge and skills of the subject. The science curriculum contains five subject competencies: scientific thinking, scientific inquiry, scientific problem solving, scientific communication, scientific participation and life-long learning. However, the description of competencies in curriculum documents is insufficient, and experts' perceptions of competencies are not uniform. Therefore, this study examines the perceptions of science subjects in science high school teachers by deciding that comprehension of competencies should be preceded in order for competency-based education to be properly applied to school sites. First, we analyzed the relationship between achievement standards and subject competencies of integrated science through the operation of an expert working group with a high understanding of the integrated science achievement standards. Next, 31 high school science teachers examined the perception of the five subject competencies through a descriptive questionnaire. The semantic network analysis has been utilized to analyze the teachers' responses. The results of the analysis showed that the three curriculum competencies of scientific inquiry, scientific communication, scientific participation and life-long learning ability are similar to the definitions of teachers and curriculum documents, but in the case of scientific thinking and scientific problem solving, there are some gaps in perception and definition in curriculum documents. In addition, the results of the comprehensive analysis of teachers' perceptions on the five competencies show that the five curriculum competencies are more relevant than mutually exclusive or independent.