수준별 교육과정 운영에 관한 국내외 연구성과의 메타분석

서지정보

ㆍ발행기관 : 한국교원교육학회 ㆍ수록지정보 : 한국교원교육연구 / 17권 / 1호
ㆍ저자명 : 최호성

목차

I. 서론
II. 교육과정 차별화 기제로서의 수준별 교육과정
III. 수준별 교육과정 운영 효과의 분석
1. 메타분석의 이해와 적용
2. 수준별 교육과정 운영에 대한 국내의 연구
3. James Kulik & Chen-Lin Kulik의 메타분석
4. Robert Slavin의 최선 증거 종합 접근
5. Gamoran & Berends(1987) 및 Vaughn(1990)의 종합
V. 논의 및 결론
참고문헌
ABSTRACT

한국어 초록

제7차 교육과정에서 초중등학교의 수준별 교육과정이 도입된 이래， 교육이론가나 실천가들 간에는 과연 수준별 교육과정이 과연 학생의 전인적 발달에 가치로운 것인지에 대한 논의가 활발하였다． 물론， 이 물음은 다 학문적 · 다차원적 접근에 의해 해결되어야 하겠지만， 본 연구에서는 수준별 교육과정이 학습자와 교수-학습 사태에 미치는 효과에 대한 미시적 분석에 초점을 맞추고 있다． 본 연구는 국내외에서 진행된 수준별 교육과정 운영 효과에 대한 메타분석 결과들을 고찰하여， 수준별 교육과정이 학습자의 인지적 및 정의적 측면에 미치는 효과에 대해 종합적인 결론을 도출해 보려 하였다． 이를 위해서， 본 연구에서는 수준별 교육과정의 본질을 규명하기 위한 한 개념모형을 구상하였으며， 동질집단 편성 방식에 대한 대표적 메타분석 연구들을 개관하여 수준별 교육과정 운영 을 둘러싼 쟁점별로 논의하고 있다．

영어 초록

The Korean 7th National curriculum introduced a new curriculum system, so-called 'multi-level curriculum', which has an intention to narrow academic gaps among students by providing students differentiated curricular experiences based on their aptitude and academic abilities. Traditionally, this kind of educational practice has been called curriculum differentiation which makes different educational experience available to different groups of students. In other word, curriculum differentiation organize school systems so that students who appear to vary in their educational needs and abilities can be separately, either in different schools or in the same school in different programs, classes, or learning groups
within classrooms. These kinds of educational arrangements have been known variously as ability grouping, tracking, setting, or streaming.
The purpose of this study is to review and synthesize various results of curriculum differentiation research by meta-analysis technique. Meta-analysis as a formal quantitative methods of research reviewing typically use the effect-size statistics to describe study finding. In order to achieve research goal, this study examines several studies on effects of implementing the multi-level curriculum In Korea, and analyze some representative meta-analysis outcomes reported by James Kulik and Chen-Lin Kulik, Robert Slavin, Gemoran and Berends, and Vaughan. Those reviews on the effects of curriculum differentiation, mainly based on student's academic achievement level just like ability grouping would be a good source of assumptions about grouping practices. A1 though an unitary conclusion could not be drawn from the review, several tendencies could be found.
First, students at higher aptitude benefit academically from ability grouping. The academic benefits are positive but usually small when the grouping is done as a part of a broader program for students of all abilities, for example, XYZ classes. On the other hand, academic benefits are positive and often large in special classes for the superior gifted students.
Second, based on this review, grouping programs usually have smaller effects on middle and lower aptitude learners. Academic achievement of middle and lower level students learning in groups by abilities could not be distinguished from those of similar students in heterogeneous grouping classes.
Third, the noncognitive outcomes of grouping practices is less clear. Self-esteem, motivation, and self-concept which are usually known as important constructs of affective domain have not been often studied by curricularists, and only tentative conclusions could be drawn.

참고 자료

없음