지질학적 공간 능력 평가 해결 과정에서 문항 형식에 따른 사고 과정 분석

• 영문명: The Problem Solving Thinking Processes on the Geological Spatial Ability Test according to the Item Types
• 발행기관: 한국교원대학교 뇌기반교육연구소
• 저자명: 조준호(Jo, Jun-Ho) 양일호(Yang, Il Ho)
• 간행물 정보: 『Brain, Digital, & Learning』제9권 제4호, 375~385쪽, 전체 11쪽
• 주제분류: 사회과학 > 교육학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2019.12.31

영문 초록

The purpose of this study was to investigate the students problem solving thinking processes according to item types. Students thinking process in problem solving processes of Constructed Response (CR) and Multiple-Choice (MC) were analyzed by using eye tracking method. Through the problem of analogy of block section in geological spatial ability test (GeoSTA), students learn about what kind of thinking they are in the CR and MC. And how they perform. Unlike previous study process inference, which is based on statistical techniques and think aloud method, which are frequently used in previous studies, eye-gaze tracking technique can more qualitatively and quantitatively analyze students thinking processes in the process of solving problems. The results of this study are as follows. First, the students thinking process during solving CR questions appeared similar in most subjects. On the other hand, the MC item had a type (type A) to perform thinking process similar to the CR type, while the other type(type B) solved the problem using partial comparison or erroneous erasure. MC questions can be answered correctly without having to imagine the image of the correct answer. Second, this type of classification in the solution process of the selective items supports the fact that the MC items do not measure the same level of accidents as the CR items. These results suggest that students who have difficulties in solving problems based on visual information can present difficulties and intuitive problem solving strategies through thought process model. In addition, when developing evaluation items, the developer suggests that he or she should select the item format considering the purpose of evaluation, the level of thinking required, the evaluation situation, and the cognitive level of students.

목차

I. Introduction

II. Methodology

III. Results and Discussion

IV. Conclusions and Implications

키워드

Spatial thinking constructed response item multiple-choice item eye-tracking