RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    수준별 개별학습을 실현하는 교육과정 = Value and Technical Quality of the Suggested Framework for Organization and Implementation of Curriculum Differentiation by the National Commission

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A19678998

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This article examined the framework for organization and implementation of curriculum differentiation which is the major innovation of the 7th National Curriculum revision. The framework was examined in terms of two question: (1) whether it is valued to students and directed to the intentions of the revisionists; and (2) whether it is sufficiently developed and tested to be practically usable. Three different ways of curriculum differentiation, (1) Level Based Differentiated Curriculum(LBDC), (2) Enrichment and Supplement Differentiated Curriculum(ESDC), and (3) Subject Selection Differentiated Curriculum(SSDC) were not consistently related to the intended goals. LBDC, ESDC, and SSDC turned out to be a new way of student placement according to their academic achievement. Thus they were not much different from between class ability grouping within a grade More fundamental drawbacks were found: (1) the conceptualization of LBDC, ESDC, and SSDC was not clear enough to guide practice; (2) no justification to divide the levels of different ways of curriculum differentiaion was provided; (3) no sound reasons why a certain way of curriculum differentiation were applied to a specific subject matter was given; and (4) no signs of considering the capacity for implementation of LBDC, ESDC, and SSDC in the field were not provided. In conclusion, the innovation of LBDC, ESDC, and SSDC was found to be minimally valued to students comparing to loudable valued goals of creativity and to be poorly developed and, therefore, lack of practicality in the field. On the basis of the conclusion, some ways to clarify the intented goals of the framework and relate them to it were suggesed. More clear notion and corresponding resources related to how the framework could be used in practice were also given.
    번역하기

    This article examined the framework for organization and implementation of curriculum differentiation which is the major innovation of the 7th National Curriculum revision. The framework was examined in terms of two question: (1) whether it is valued ...

    This article examined the framework for organization and implementation of curriculum differentiation which is the major innovation of the 7th National Curriculum revision. The framework was examined in terms of two question: (1) whether it is valued to students and directed to the intentions of the revisionists; and (2) whether it is sufficiently developed and tested to be practically usable. Three different ways of curriculum differentiation, (1) Level Based Differentiated Curriculum(LBDC), (2) Enrichment and Supplement Differentiated Curriculum(ESDC), and (3) Subject Selection Differentiated Curriculum(SSDC) were not consistently related to the intended goals. LBDC, ESDC, and SSDC turned out to be a new way of student placement according to their academic achievement. Thus they were not much different from between class ability grouping within a grade More fundamental drawbacks were found: (1) the conceptualization of LBDC, ESDC, and SSDC was not clear enough to guide practice; (2) no justification to divide the levels of different ways of curriculum differentiaion was provided; (3) no sound reasons why a certain way of curriculum differentiation were applied to a specific subject matter was given; and (4) no signs of considering the capacity for implementation of LBDC, ESDC, and SSDC in the field were not provided. In conclusion, the innovation of LBDC, ESDC, and SSDC was found to be minimally valued to students comparing to loudable valued goals of creativity and to be poorly developed and, therefore, lack of practicality in the field. On the basis of the conclusion, some ways to clarify the intented goals of the framework and relate them to it were suggesed. More clear notion and corresponding resources related to how the framework could be used in practice were also given.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    해외이동버튼