±¹¹® ÃÊ·Ï
* ÇöÀç ÄÁÅÙÃ÷ Á¤º¸¸¦ Áغñ Áß¿¡ ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.
* ÇöÀç ÄÁÅÙÃ÷ Á¤º¸¸¦ Áغñ Áß¿¡ ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.
[´Ý±â]
¿µ¹® ÃÊ·Ï
The objective of this research check the contents validity of the evaluation question item that the teacher make directly in writing studies accomplishment evaluation, it presents the impr...
[´õº¸±â]
The objective of this research check the contents validity of the evaluation question item that the teacher make directly in writing studies accomplishment evaluation, it presents the improvement plan about making evaluation question item in accomplishment evaluation on writing studies.
The writing evaluation only must be it will be able to reflect the writing accomplishing standard which corresponding grade it knows, there must be it will be able to reflect an essential quality performance characteristic, meta characteristic and situation characteristic. It is the method which raises the contents validity of the evaluation question item.
The writing is performance, the evaluation must are come true from the writing performance scene which it become accomplished the knowledge, function, strategy, and attitude(relation of performance characteristic). It is a tool of thinking and studying, the evaluation focus must let in the knowledge regarding the method and application ability(relation of meta characteristic). And writing plentifully receives the effect of task situation, the evaluation task must be proper the set of the level and scope(relation of situation characteristic).
In order to examine actual condition of making the question item, 56 evaluation question items are analyzed, they are generalization evaluation question item and performance evaluation from 1 grade to 6 grades 2005 in Pusan city S elementary school. Also, in addition formation collected in the depths direct conversation of the evaluation charge teacher relates with question item making questions. The result with after words is same.
First, from the writing evaluation question item of the S elementary school, corresponding grade the reflection ratio of the writing accomplishing standard only did in 42% of the whole. Also the accomplishing standard which is reflected is preponderated in some accomplishing standard. And it presented with the writing evaluation question item, the question item which does not belong in the writing area actually was many.
Second, from the writing evaluation question item of the S elementary school, reflection ratio of performance characteristic only did in 25% of the whole. 75% of the whole question items was a choice answer and simple answer, the remainder 25% was the performance answer question item.
Third, from the writing evaluation question item of the S elementary school, the reflection ratio of meta characteristic appeared with 55% of the whole. As a result of the most evaluation question item applies untouched the activity data of textbook, meta characteristic is not considered. And the textbook dependence degree appeared more highly generalization evaluation than performance evaluation.
Fourth, with the object only the performance evaluation question item, it tried to question reflection ratio of a situation characteristic. The result the question item where the level and scope are suitable in the whole 11 question item appeared with 7 question items(64% of the whole performance evaluation question items).
When it tried to put together, during 1 years it was proper from the S elementary school and it will can be evaluated the accomplishing standard which it writes only did in 5 things which correspond to 10% from in whole 50. Consequently with the evaluation question item that the teachers of the S elementary school draw up it appeared with the fact that it will not be able to evaluate writing studies accomplishment properly. With the causes, it is the like of unconcern of the item maker against an writing accomplishing standard, preference consideration against easy possibility of evaluation question item drawing up than writing accomplishing standard, evaluation question items depending on textbook.
This research presented the some branch improvement program agai
[´Ý±â]
¸ñÂ÷
¥°. ¸Ó¸®¸»
¥±. ¾²±â Æò°¡ÀÇ ³»¿ë ¹üÁÖ
¥². ¾²±âÀÇ Æ¯¼º°ú Æò°¡ÀÇ Å¸´çµµ
¥³. Æò°¡ ¹®Ç× ÀÛ¼º ½ÇÅÂÀÇ ºÐ¼®
¥´. Æò°¡ ¹®Ç× ÀÛ¼ºÀÇ °³¼± ¹æ¾È
¥µ. ¸ÎÀ½¸»
Âü°í¹®Çå
ABSTRACT