총괄평가 문항 제작에 따른 내용과 편집상의 문제점 및 단원별 평가 내용에 관한 연구 : '수학10-가'를 중심으로 = Analysis of contents and editing issues according to the production of questions of summative evaluation and evaluation content per chapter -focused on 'mathematics 10 -Ga'-

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This thesis is aimed at investigating what content and editing issues it has, how many evaluation contents are distributed per chapter, what evaluation contents are included for tests in common by analyzing 'Mathematics 10-Ga' questions of Summative Evaluation of high school to make sure what needs to be kept in mind for the creation of Summative Evaluation in the future as well as to review whether the content of evaluation are well reflected into the questions according to the objective of educational curriculum.
For this, I collected 1,021 multiple-choice questions out of total 1,096 questions of 'Mathematics 10-Ga' mid-term and a final exam conducted in the first term of 2007 targeted for the 1st graders at 24 academic high schools which are located in nationwide and reviewed the contents and editing issues of the questions per type. In addition, I investigated how the evaluation contents were distributed per chapter and what the evaluation contents were along with the ratio among 1,096 questions including description questions.
The analyzed results can be explained in two aspects.
1. I reviewed the contents and editing issues per type.
In terms of the contents of questions, I reviewed from the perspective of suitability of curriculum contents, level of difficulty and the time consumed, possibility of controversy over correct answer, offer of clue, and mathematical expression. In the suitability of curriculum contents there are no inappropriate questions on the curriculum contents. However, some issues were found in the level of difficulty and time consumed in 13 questions(1.27%), possibility of controversy over correct answer in 10 questions(0.1%), the offer of clue in 71 questions(7.0%) and mathematical expression in 65 questions(6.4%). In final, as several correct answers or no answer could exist depending on the conditions of a clue, more detailed reviewing process would be required and we need to maintain a certain form in mathematical expression for writing a test. In addition, in terms of editing, I reviewed by dividing it into the suitability degree of epilogue, orthography, composition of answer sheet and arrangement plan. Some issues were found in the suitability degree of epilogue in 249 questions(24.4%), orthography in 53 questions(5.2%), composition of answer sheet in 132 questions(13.0%) and arrangement plan in 99 questions(9.7%).
2. I divided the evaluation contents of questions per chapter and reviewed what contents were written for a test.
First of all, when it comes to evaluation contents of questions, the questions came from the operation formula of a set(7%), proposition(7.4%), complex number(8.6%), multinomial expression and operation(6.1%), remainder theorem(6.3%), factorization(5.3%), a divisor and multiple(4.6%), a rational expression and an irrational expression(11.3%), quadratic equation(9.8%), an equation of higher degree and simultaneous equations(13.6%) and dispersion and standard deviation(2.6%). It was found out that most questions came from the quadratic inequality and absolute inequality and relatively, quite less questions came from a dispersion and standard deviation since a number of schools tend to evaluate them in the next term. Furthermore, in consideration of the ratios of other chapters, it was investigated that more focus was put on the later parts of a textbook than the fore parts for the test questions. As a result of this, teachers tend to emphasize the later parts than the fore parts in a class.
Next, I investigated what evaluation contents were taken for a test per chapter. It was found that the questions on the number of the subset took up 23.5% in the category of operation formula of a set the questions on true or false 28.7% in the category of proposition, questions on inverse element and identical element 33.7% in the category of real number, the question of solving () 20% in the category of complex number, the questions on solving a formula by multiplication formula variation 30.9% in the category of multinomial expression and operation, the questions on two multinomial expressions with given greatest common divisor and common multiple as well as finding greatest common divisor and common multiple 28.6% in the category of a divisor and multiple, the questions on using double radical sign 27.9% in the category of a rational expression and an irrational expression, questions on using discriminant 33.6% in the category of quadratic equation, the questions on solving simultaneous equations 32.1% in the category of an equation of higher degree and simultaneous equations, the questions on solving quadratic inequality 16.7% in the category of quadratic inequality and absolute inequality and questions on seeking average, standard deviation and dispersion took up 55.2%, the largest portion in the category of dispersion and standard deviation. Based on the above statistical results, I could understand what evaluation contents per chapter were taken for a test with focused emphasis and found out that teachers tended to focus on the contents which have higher portion of being taken into a test relatively in a class.

In conclusion, when I reviewed the current test questions of high school, I could find the error of question took place due to an omission of condition depending on a question and in the course of producing the test questions, many examiners did not use the consistent form or mode of expression and produced the test questions at discretion. Furthermore, they maintained a pre-existing specific forms of evaluation and set the specific identical evaluation contents. That is, it showed that the examiners tended to modify the pre-existing evaluation questions a bit for a new test rather than produce the new questions creatively.
Therefore, teachers need to use more systematic method in producing the test questions as an expert of evaluation and develop the creative questions for the improvement of the students' ability to think.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• I. 서 론 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성 및 목적 1
• 2. 연구 문제 3
• 3. 용어의 정의 4
• 4. 연구의 제한점 5
• 5. 기대되는 효과 6
• II. 이론적배경 7
• 1. 교육평가의 의미 7
• 2. 교육평가의 기능 8
• 3. 교육평가의 종류 9
• 4. 수학과목에서 평가종류 13
• 5. 교육평가의 단계 15
• 6. 교육평가의 질 판단기준 17
• 7. 문제제작 및 분석 21
• 8. 선행연구고찰 43
• III. 연구 방법 및 절차 45
• 1. 연구 대상 45
• 2. 연구 방법 46
• 3. 연구 절차 47
• IV. 결과분석 49
• 1. 평가문항 검토 및 분석 49
• 2. 평가내용 분석 73
• V. 결론 및 제언 89
• 1. 결론 89
• 2. 제언 92
• 참고문헌 93
• ABSTRACT 95