우리나라 학생들의 과학 영역 성취 특성 탐색 = Exploration of Features of Korean Students' Performance in Science

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study aimed to analyze achievement characteristics of Korean students in the results of PISA 2018 science domain. To this end, the characteristics of PISA 2009 to PISA 2018 science were analyzed in terms of the percentage of each performance level and the ratio of male and female by achievement level; in addition, the percentage of correct answers by framework subscale was compared with PISA 2015. The results showed that Korea has a higher percentage of students at the lower level of achievement as compared to the high-ranking countries of PISA, and the ratio of students at the higher level of achievement was lower. On average, the difference in achievement between boys and girls was negligible; however, but at the higher achievement level, the ratio of boys continued to be higher than that of girls. In addition, in the PISA science framework, the percentage of correct answers of the questions corresponding to 'personal' of 'contexts', 'evaluate and design scientific enquiry' of 'competencies', 'epistemic' of 'knowledge', and 'high' of 'cognitive demand' increased; similarly, and achievement improved as compared to PISA 2015. Based on these results of the study, we propose a method for improving teaching and evaluation to foster Korean students' scientific competence.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구의 목적은 PISA 2018에서 나타난 우리나라 학생들의 과학 영역 성취의 특징을 분석하는 것이다. 이를 위하여 PISA 2009 ~ PISA 2018 과학 영역에서 우리나라 학생들의 성취 수준별 비율과 성취 수준별 남녀 비율을 살펴보았으며, 평가틀 하위 요소별 정답률을 PISA 2015와 비교하여 살펴보았다. 연구 결과 우리나라는 PISA 주요 성취 상위국에 비하여 하위 성취 수준 학생들의 비율이 높았던 반면, 상위 성취 수준 학생들의 비율은 낮았다. 평균에서 남학생과 여학생의 성취 차이는 거의 없어졌으나, 상위 성취 수준에서 남학생의 비율은 여학생의 비율보다 높은 것이 유지되고 있었다. 또한, 평가틀에서 '맥락'의 '개인적', '역량'의 '과학 탐구의 설계 및 평가', '지식'의 '인식론적' 지식, '인지적 요구'의 '상'에 해당하는 문항의 정답률이 상승하여 PISA 2015에 비해 성취가 향상되었다. 연구 결과를 토대로, 우리나라 학생들의 과학 역량 함양을 위한 교수·학습과 평가의 개선 방안을 제안하였다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Baye, A., 4 : 1-, 2016

2 Meinck, S., 7 : 1-, 2019

3 Wu, M, 56 : 67-, 2011

4 Kjærnsli, M., 33 : 121-, 2011

5 Eliasson, N., 13 : 149-, 2017

6 Lau, K. C., 39 : 2128-, 2017

7 Kim, H., 19 : 849-, 2019

8 Aloisi, C., 23 : 180-, 2017

9 Mikk, J., 14 : 1437-, 2016

10 Chi, S., 40 : 1284-, 2018

11 Kim, H, 12 : 389-, 2018

12 손준종, "전지구적 교육거버넌스로서 PISA의 출현과 국가교육에 대한 영향" 한국교육사회학회 24 (24): 131-160, 2014

13 신현석, "글로벌 거버넌스와 한국의 교육정책: OECD/PISA를 중심으로" 한국교육학회 51 (51): 133-159, 2013

14 "https://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/2018database/"

15 "http://www.law.go.kr/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=199748&efYd=20171219#0000"

16 "http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/international-results/timss-2015/science/student-achievement/"

17 Ministry of Education, "The 2015 Revised National Curriculum"

18 Ministry of Education, "Take Responsibility for Academic Skill Without Missing a Child"

19 Ministry of Education, "Singapore. Science Syllabus Primary"

20 Ministry of Education, "Science Education Master Plan [2020~2024]" 2020

21 Ministry of Education, "Science Curriculum"

22 김현정, "PISA 설문 결과에 나타난 우리나라 과학 수업의 실태 분석" 한국교육과정평가원 22 (22): 85-104, 2019

23 OECD, "PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework" OECD Publishing 2018

24 Jo, S., "OECD Programme for International Student Assessment: PISA 2018 Main Survey Implementation Report" Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation 2018

25 Ministry of Education, "OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA 2018) Results Announced"

26 Ministry of Education and Research in Republic of Estonia, "National curricula"

27 OECD, "Lessons from PISA for Korea, Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education" OECD Publishing 2014

28 Ministry of Education, "British Columbia. BC’s Redesigned Curriculum: An Orientation Guide"

29 Ministry of Science and ICT, "Basic Plan for Science and Technology (2018~2022"

30 Ministry of Education, "Basic Academic Skill Support Improvement Plan" 2019

31 Dong, H. K., "A Study on the Development of National Assessment of Educational Achievement according to the 2015Revised National Curriculum" Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation 2018