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

    지식의 외현화에 대한 평가도구로서 개념도와 언어기반진단의 비교 = The Comparative Study of Concept map and Language Based Diagnosis as Assessment Tools for Knowledge Representation

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A101959524

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity of concept map as a assessment tool for knowledge representation and compare concept map and language based diagnosis. The study focuses on the differences between drawing concept map and using natural language when the students represent their knowledge and internal conceptual structure. For this purpose, this study included 25 undergraduate students. During 10 weeks learning activities, the students were asked to draw two concept maps and write two answers about learning and instruction theory and instructional design. The concept maps were rated with a rubric. The learner``s descriptive answers were compared with the expert model. The similarities between the expert’s answers and the students’ answers were calculated by the T-MITOCAR program which is a language-based diagnosis tool. The result indicated that the correlations between concept map scores and the indices of T-MITOCAR were very low. This means the knowledge representation using concept map and writing with natural language is very different method. In the group interview for the causal chain analysis, learners answered difficulty and overburden to draw concept map because of lack of understanding about drawing process of concept map, and few opportunities to see well-drawn concept map examples. From now on, the development of language based diagnosis tools such as DEEP, SMD, T-MITOCAR, CmapTools, ACSMM, KU-Mapper, ALA-Mapper, ALA-Reader, KNOT and the researches for the validity verification of the tools are exploring. Because of the problems of graders`` subjectivity, objectivity of measurement and the effectiveness of the time for scoring, this research suggested the succeeding research to develop and verify language based diagnosis tools of Korean version.
    번역하기

    The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity of concept map as a assessment tool for knowledge representation and compare concept map and language based diagnosis. The study focuses on the differences between drawing concept map and using ...

    The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity of concept map as a assessment tool for knowledge representation and compare concept map and language based diagnosis. The study focuses on the differences between drawing concept map and using natural language when the students represent their knowledge and internal conceptual structure. For this purpose, this study included 25 undergraduate students. During 10 weeks learning activities, the students were asked to draw two concept maps and write two answers about learning and instruction theory and instructional design. The concept maps were rated with a rubric. The learner``s descriptive answers were compared with the expert model. The similarities between the expert’s answers and the students’ answers were calculated by the T-MITOCAR program which is a language-based diagnosis tool. The result indicated that the correlations between concept map scores and the indices of T-MITOCAR were very low. This means the knowledge representation using concept map and writing with natural language is very different method. In the group interview for the causal chain analysis, learners answered difficulty and overburden to draw concept map because of lack of understanding about drawing process of concept map, and few opportunities to see well-drawn concept map examples. From now on, the development of language based diagnosis tools such as DEEP, SMD, T-MITOCAR, CmapTools, ACSMM, KU-Mapper, ALA-Mapper, ALA-Reader, KNOT and the researches for the validity verification of the tools are exploring. Because of the problems of graders`` subjectivity, objectivity of measurement and the effectiveness of the time for scoring, this research suggested the succeeding research to develop and verify language based diagnosis tools of Korean version.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 고옥란, "중학교 생물 개념 평가도구로서 개념도 활용의 가능성" 29 (29): 11-19, 2001

    2 서수현, "쓰기 평가의 기준 설정에 관한 연구" 고려대학교 대학원 2004

    3 조정일, "생물 개념 이해의 평가 도구로서 개념도의 타당도, 신뢰도 그리고 현실 적용 가능성에 대한 연구" 한국과학교육학회 22 (22): 398-409, 2002

    4 이용숙, "교육에서의 질적연구" 교육과학사 1999

    5 권창미, "교수.학습 상황에서 개념도 활용의 효과: 메타분석" 대한사고개발학회 4 (4): 31-47, 2008

    6 박인우, "개념학습을 위한 개념도의 문제점과 개선 방안 탐색" 한국교육공학회 22 (22): 117-137, 2006

    7 소연희, "개념도 제시 유형이 개별/소집단 학습활동, 자기결정성 및 경쟁정도에 따라 사회과 과제흥미와 과제수행에 미치는 효과" 한국교육심리학회 23 (23): 219-237, 2009

    8 김민정, "개념도 작성의 어려움에 대한 지원 방법의 고안과 효과검증" 한국교육공학회 25 (25): 1-27, 2009

    9 Miller, M. D., "Validation methods for direct writing assessment" 3 (3): 285-296, 1990

    10 Novak, J. D., "The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them" IHMC 2006

    1 고옥란, "중학교 생물 개념 평가도구로서 개념도 활용의 가능성" 29 (29): 11-19, 2001

    2 서수현, "쓰기 평가의 기준 설정에 관한 연구" 고려대학교 대학원 2004

    3 조정일, "생물 개념 이해의 평가 도구로서 개념도의 타당도, 신뢰도 그리고 현실 적용 가능성에 대한 연구" 한국과학교육학회 22 (22): 398-409, 2002

    4 이용숙, "교육에서의 질적연구" 교육과학사 1999

    5 권창미, "교수.학습 상황에서 개념도 활용의 효과: 메타분석" 대한사고개발학회 4 (4): 31-47, 2008

    6 박인우, "개념학습을 위한 개념도의 문제점과 개선 방안 탐색" 한국교육공학회 22 (22): 117-137, 2006

    7 소연희, "개념도 제시 유형이 개별/소집단 학습활동, 자기결정성 및 경쟁정도에 따라 사회과 과제흥미와 과제수행에 미치는 효과" 한국교육심리학회 23 (23): 219-237, 2009

    8 김민정, "개념도 작성의 어려움에 대한 지원 방법의 고안과 효과검증" 한국교육공학회 25 (25): 1-27, 2009

    9 Miller, M. D., "Validation methods for direct writing assessment" 3 (3): 285-296, 1990

    10 Novak, J. D., "The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them" IHMC 2006

    11 Ifenthaler, D., "The measurement of change: Learning-dependent progression of mental models" 2 (2): 317-336, 2005

    12 Spector, J., "The DEEP methodology for assessing learning in complex domains" Syracuse University 2004

    13 Jonassen, D. H., "Structural knowledge: Techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge" Erlbaum 1993

    14 Wasserman, S., "Social network analysis: methods and applications" Cambridge University Press 1994

    15 Ifenthaler, D., "Relational, structural, and semantic analysis of graphical representations and concept maps" 2007

    16 Ifenthaler, D., "Relational structural and semantic analysis of graphical representations and concept maps" 58 (58): 81-97, 2008

    17 Ifenthaler, D., "Practical solutions for the diagnosis of progressing mental models, In Understanding models for learning and instruction. Essays in honor of Norbert M. Seel" Springer 43-61, 2008

    18 Dummer, P., "Planning and assessing navigation in model-centered learning environments. Why learners often do not follow the path laid out for them, In Methods and technologies for learning" WIT Press 327-334, 2005

    19 Schvaneveldt, R. W., "Pathfinder associative networks: studies in knowledge organization" Ablex Publishing Corp 1990

    20 Schvaneveldt, R., "Network structures in proximity data, In The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory" Academic Press 249-284, 1989

    21 Rupp, A. A., "Modeling learning trajectories with epistemic network analysis: A simulation-based investigation of a novel analytic method for epistemic games" 2010

    22 Pirnay-Dummer, P., "Model inspection trace of concepts and relations: A heuristic approach to language-oriented model assessment" 2007

    23 O’Connor, D. L., "Measuring team cognition: Concept mapping elicitation as a means of constructing team shared mental models in an applied setting, In Concept maps: Theory, methodology, technology" Public University of Navarra 1 : 487-493, 2004

    24 Novak, J. D., "Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept maps a facilitative tools in schools and corporations" Erlbaum 1998

    25 Novak, J. D., "Learning how to learn" Cambridge Press 1984

    26 Pirnay-Dummer, P., "Highly integrated model assessment technology and tools" 58 (58): 3-18, 2010

    27 Burry-Stock, J. A., "Expert science teaching educational evaluation model instruments. U. S. Department of Education" 1995

    28 Seel, N. M., "Epistemology, situated cognition, and mental models: Like a bridge over troubled water" 29 (29): 403-427, 2001

    29 Hollenbeck, K., "Determining the exchangability of concept map and problem-solving essay scores" 31 (31): 51-68, 2006

    30 Clariana, R., "Deriving and measuring group knowledge structure from essays : The effects of anaphoric reference" 57 : 725-737, 2009

    31 Kim, M. K., "Cross-validation study of methods and technologies to assess mental models in a complex problem solving situation" 28 : 703-717, 2012

    32 McClure, J. R., "Concept map assessment of classroom learning : Reliability, validity, and logistical practicality" 36 (36): 475-492, 1999

    33 Johnson, T. E., "Comparative study of mental model research methods: Relationships among ACSMM, SMD, MITOCAR & DEEP methodologies" 2006

    34 Kirschner, P. A., "Cognitive load theory" 12 : 1-10, 2002

    35 Narayanan, V. K., "Causal mapping: An historical overview, In Causal mapping for research in information technology" Idea Group Inc 1-19, 2005

    36 김동식, "CSCL에서 스캐폴딩의 유형이 공유 정신 모형에 미치는 영향" 한국교육공학회 22 (22): 1-34, 2006

    37 Camp, R., "Assessing writing skill" College Entrance Examination Board 1987

    38 Kim, H., "An investigation of the effects of model-centered instruction in individual and collaborative contexts: The case of acquiring instructional design expertise" Florida State University 2008

    39 Taricani, E. M., "A technique for automatically scoring open-ended concept maps" 54 : 65-62, 2006

    40 Clariana, R. B., "A comparison of pair-wise, list-wise, and clustering approaches for eliciting structural knowledge in information systems courses" 36 : 287-302, 2009

    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

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2027 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2021-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2018-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2015-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2011-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2009-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2007-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2002-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    1999-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 3.7 3.7 3.26
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    2.89 2.68 3.751 0.75
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼