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

    광합성 문제 해결에 대한 과잉 효능감과 과잉확신: 선다형과 서답형의 비교 연구 = Over-Efficacy in Problem Solving and Overconfidence of Knowledge on Photosynthesis: A Study of Comparison Between Multiple-Choice and Supply-Type Test Formats

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A99932464

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This study aimed to explore the over-efficacy in problem solving and overconfidence of knowledge of students performing assessments in two different test formats: multiple-choice and supply-type. Two hundred and four female middle school students participated in this study. Multiple-choice and supply-type formats of tests on photosynthesis were used, and each item contained scales indicating one`s self-efficacy on problem-solving and confidence of knowledge. The results showed that the correlation coefficients of performance between the two different assessment formats were less than 0.5 and the correlation coefficients between efficacy/confidence and actual performance were less than 0.45. Moreover, students tended to exhibit more over-efficacy and overconfidence in multiple-choice formats. The percentage of over-efficacy and overconfidence was higher in the group that completed the multiple-choice test first followed by the supply-type assessment than in the group that started with the supply-type followed by the multiple-choice assessment. From this study, it can be suggested that more use of supply-type assessment is required in science education. If test administrators require the combination of both multiple-choice and supply-type in an assessment, the supply-type assessment format should come first so that students can maintain the appropriate level of efficacy and confidence. In addition, science educators need to develop new learning programs to enhance students` self-monitoring skills of their problem-solving ability and knowledge.
    번역하기

    This study aimed to explore the over-efficacy in problem solving and overconfidence of knowledge of students performing assessments in two different test formats: multiple-choice and supply-type. Two hundred and four female middle school students part...

    This study aimed to explore the over-efficacy in problem solving and overconfidence of knowledge of students performing assessments in two different test formats: multiple-choice and supply-type. Two hundred and four female middle school students participated in this study. Multiple-choice and supply-type formats of tests on photosynthesis were used, and each item contained scales indicating one`s self-efficacy on problem-solving and confidence of knowledge. The results showed that the correlation coefficients of performance between the two different assessment formats were less than 0.5 and the correlation coefficients between efficacy/confidence and actual performance were less than 0.45. Moreover, students tended to exhibit more over-efficacy and overconfidence in multiple-choice formats. The percentage of over-efficacy and overconfidence was higher in the group that completed the multiple-choice test first followed by the supply-type assessment than in the group that started with the supply-type followed by the multiple-choice assessment. From this study, it can be suggested that more use of supply-type assessment is required in science education. If test administrators require the combination of both multiple-choice and supply-type in an assessment, the supply-type assessment format should come first so that students can maintain the appropriate level of efficacy and confidence. In addition, science educators need to develop new learning programs to enhance students` self-monitoring skills of their problem-solving ability and knowledge.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 이창영, "복수의 답 선택을 허용하고 오답에 감점을 주는 객관식 시험" 한국현장과학교육학회 5 (5): 17-26, 2011

    2 박정, "문항 유형에 따른 과학 능력 추정의 효율성 비교" 한국과학교육학회 22 (22): 122-131, 2002

    3 김명화, "기초학력 진단평가 서답형 문항의 자동채점 가능성 탐색" 한국교육과정평가원 16 (16): 137-160, 2013

    4 이경숙, "객관식시험 지배와 국가개입" 한국교육철학회 (34) : 245-275, 2008

    5 Lipko, A. R., "Using standards to improve middle-school students’accuracy at evaluating the quality of their recall" 15 : 307-318, 2009

    6 Nehm, R. H., "Transforming biology assessment with machine learning : Automated scoring of written evolutionary explanations" 21 (21): 183-196, 2012

    7 Nehm, R. H., "Transforming biology assessment with machine learning : Automated scoring of written evolutionary explanations" 21 (21): 183-196, 2012

    8 Bruttomesso, D., "The use of degrees of certainty to evaluate knowledge" 51 (51): 29-37, 2003

    9 Johnson, D. D., "The evolution of overconfidence" 477 (477): 317-320, 2011

    10 Pajares, F., "Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings" 66 : 543-578, 1996

    1 이창영, "복수의 답 선택을 허용하고 오답에 감점을 주는 객관식 시험" 한국현장과학교육학회 5 (5): 17-26, 2011

    2 박정, "문항 유형에 따른 과학 능력 추정의 효율성 비교" 한국과학교육학회 22 (22): 122-131, 2002

    3 김명화, "기초학력 진단평가 서답형 문항의 자동채점 가능성 탐색" 한국교육과정평가원 16 (16): 137-160, 2013

    4 이경숙, "객관식시험 지배와 국가개입" 한국교육철학회 (34) : 245-275, 2008

    5 Lipko, A. R., "Using standards to improve middle-school students’accuracy at evaluating the quality of their recall" 15 : 307-318, 2009

    6 Nehm, R. H., "Transforming biology assessment with machine learning : Automated scoring of written evolutionary explanations" 21 (21): 183-196, 2012

    7 Nehm, R. H., "Transforming biology assessment with machine learning : Automated scoring of written evolutionary explanations" 21 (21): 183-196, 2012

    8 Bruttomesso, D., "The use of degrees of certainty to evaluate knowledge" 51 (51): 29-37, 2003

    9 Johnson, D. D., "The evolution of overconfidence" 477 (477): 317-320, 2011

    10 Pajares, F., "Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings" 66 : 543-578, 1996

    11 Schunk, D. H., "Self-efficacy and academic motivation" 26 : 207-231, 1991

    12 Bandura, A., "Self-efficacy : The exercise of control" Freeman 1997

    13 Karpicke, J. D., "Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping" 331 (331): 772-775, 2011

    14 Choi, K., "Reconceptualization of scientific literacy in South Korea for the 21st century" 48 (48): 670-697, 2011

    15 Koriat, A., "Reasons for confidence" 6 (6): 107-118, 1980

    16 Marmaroti, P., "Pupils' understanding of photosynthesis : a questionnaire for the simultaneous assessment of all aspects" 28 (28): 383-403, 2006

    17 Dunlosky, J., "Overconfidence produces underachievement : Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’learning and retention" 22 (22): 271-280, 2012

    18 Oskamp, S., "Overconfidence in case-study judgments" 29 (29): 261-265, 1965

    19 Zakay, D., "Overconfidence in a multiple-choice test and its relationship to achievement" 42 (42): 519-524, 1992

    20 Langendyk, V., "Not knowing that they do not know : self‐assessment accuracy of third‐year medical students" 40 (40): 173-179, 2006

    21 Nehm, R. H., "Measuring knowledge of natural selection : A comparison of the CINS, an open-response instrument, and an oral interview" 45 (45): 1131-1160, 2008

    22 Pajares, F., "Mathematics self-efficacy and mathematical problem solving : Implications of using different forms of assessment" 65 (65): 213-228, 1997

    23 de Bruin, A. B., "Improving self-monitoring and self-regulation : From cognitive Psychology to the classroom" 22 (22): 245-252, 2012

    24 Nowell, C., "I thought I got an A! Overconfidence across the economics curriculum" 38 (38): 131-142, 2007

    25 Luszczynska, A., "General selfefficacy in various domains of human functioning : Evidence from five countries" 40 (40): 80-89, 2005

    26 Yates, J. F., "General knowledge overconfidence : cross-national variations, response style, and"reality"" 70 (70): 87-94, 1997

    27 Pallier, G., "Gender differences in the self-assessment of accuracy on cognitive tasks" 48 (48): 265-276, 2003

    28 Ha, M., "Feeling of certainty : Uncovering a missing link between knowledge and acceptance of evolution" 49 (49): 95-121, 2012

    29 Park, J., "Constructive multiple choice testing system" 41 (41): 1054-1064, 2010

    30 Opfer, J. E., "Cognitive foundations for science assessment design : Knowing what students know about evolution" 49 (49): 744-777, 2012

    31 Beggrow, E. P., "Assessing scientific practices using machine-learning methods: How closely do they match clinical interview performance?"

    32 Ha, M., "Applying computerized scoring models of written biological explanations across courses and colleges : Prospects and limitations" 10 : 379-393, 2011

    33 Hong, M. Y., "An analysis of science achievement of the third international mathematics and science study-repeated(TIMSS-R)" 21 (21): 328-341, 2001

    34 Reach, G., "Adjusting insulin doses : From knowledge to decision" 56 (56): 98-103, 2005

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    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
    2018-03-29 학술지명변경 외국어명 : Journal of the Korean Association for in Science Education -> Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education 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
    2007-04-26 학술지명변경 외국어명 : Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education -> Journal of the Korean Association for in Science Education KCI등재
    2007-04-03 학회명변경 영문명 : The Korean Association For Research In Science Education -> The Korean Association for Science Education KCI등재
    2007-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2005-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2002-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    1999-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1.87 1.87 1.69
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.66 1.54 2.133 0.47
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼