> 0/ \pJava Excel API v2.6 Ba==h\:#8X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial + ) , * `d:DC, title[*]contributor[author]contributor[advisor]keywords[*]date[issued] publisher citationsidentifier[uri]identifier[doi]abstractƴ P! X |1 t$1999
tTŐYP P!Y~http://dspace.ewha.ac.kr/handle/2015.oak/193092;
http://dcollection.ewha.ac.kr/jsp/common/DcLoOrgPer.jsp?sItemId=000000001216; l t P!X Dʹ P! x P!X D DP, h<\h, Ƭ| ƴ P!X P! | ǔ| 0XՔp t . lX lx l8Ȕ L .
1. ƴ P!X @ P! XǬ ļ\ Ť D ǔ?
1-1. P!X , , , ), ̬ \֩@ Ť D ǔ?
1-2. x P!X , , , ), ̬ \֩@ Ť D ǔ?
2. ƴ P!X @ P! XǬ |1t ǔ?
2-1. ƴ P!X @ t P!, P!, x P! | ǔ?
2-2. ƴ P!X @ t P!, P!, x P! | ǔ?
2-3. ƴ P!X @ t P!, P!, x P! | ǔ?
2-4. ƴ P!X )@ t P!, P!, x P! | ǔ?
2-5. ƴ P!X ̬ \֩@ t P!, P!, x P! | ǔ?
tX l8| tհX0 X l 8 ( ɉ.
, m \ ƴX P! 8x <P! `>, <ƴP!>, <ƴP! t$> D l<\ X, P!X D <XǬ p> Dʹ X.
X, D(5T\<\ \ ´ 3,4YD ƴ PŌ $8pȬ| t, Q\ 145X P| l<\ X x P!X D <XǬ p> Dʹ X.
K, ƴ P! ļ\ \ D <\, P! XǬ X |1D X.
| l8ļ\ }, |XXt L .
, ƴX P!X D p Dʹ \ , P!X ̬ \֩@ p 买 iX @ DP ih<\h, t ƌ@ \ XǬ t| ` . 췘 )Ŕ XǬ X iX JŔ ƌt <\ XǬ t| ` . tǃ@ P!X tǘ ɥXՔ Dt ) @ lx XǬ @ | JLD . 0| ƴX P!Ŕ XǬ X t | J, |1t ` .
X, ƴX x P!X D p Dʹ \ , ƌt p DP ih<\ И \ XǬ t| ` . tǔ x P! XǬ X t DP | LD XXՔ t. 0| ƴ P@ t P!X | ¤0 \ D \ | )<\ xX ` .
K, ƴ P! XǬ X |1D ƌļ\ \ , , ̬ \֩@ P! |1D Ɉ<ǘ )@ P! |1D X . , ̬ \֩, XǬѥ%X x( mթ @ P! x P! t P!X | ĳ 䲌 X. tǃ@ P!X t x P! 0 L8t| . t, )@ P! x P! t P!X | ĳ T X. tǃ@ Pt t P!X D m X P! 8 D̲ x ƜD t ƥ X0 L8t| .
l| iXt, Ƭ| ƴP!t ɥXՔ XǬ tǘ, t\ t P!X @ P! x P! | И JX. 0| ƴ P!X P! |1t qX ` . x P!X \ t P!X @ |. 췘 P!Ŕ XǬ iX JŔ ƌt , ) 0 L8, t P!X @ | JX, x P!X @ĳ | JX. 0| ƴX t P! P!, x P!X Ŕ |1t .
҈, ƴX t P!X t m X P! P X x P! T ǔ <\ Ь. m X P!@ P P!X ɔ\ 8X t . 0| ^<\ĳ ɍ<\ P XǬ | 0 t, P! 8 t P!X t | \.
t t Ƭ| ƴ P! t | JŌ ǔ @, ƴ P! XՌ 0| 0X0 5 XՔ | ` . tǔ m @ P!t |1D h<\h ƴ P!t ,t ` t| D XՌ \. 0| t P!X t P! | Р ĳ], ƴ \ P! X Ĭx l@ x%, P!ǀX Ĭx ƴP P! ( ĳ t ȹ(| ` t.
; The purpose of this study is to examine the difference in the assessment in elementary English curriculum followed by each level of curriculums.
The specific research questions of this study are the following.
1. What is the character of the assessment in the elementary English curriculum?
1-1. What are the character of the viewpoint of the assessment, the purpose of the assessment, the content of the assessment, the method of the assessment and the management of the asses<sment results in the formal curriculum of elementary English curriculum?
1-2. What are the character of the viewpoint of the assessment, the purpose of the assessment, the content of the assessment, the method of the assessment and the management of the assessment results in the perceived curriculum of elementary English curriculum?
2. Does the character of the assessment in the elementary English curriculum maintain consistency among each level of elementary English curriculum?
2-1. Does the viewpoint of the assessment in the elementary English curriculum maintain consistency among the levels of curriculum?
2-2. Does the purpose of the assessment in the elementary English curriculum maintain consistency among the levels of curriculum?
2-3. Does the contents of the assessment in the elementary English curriculum maintain consistency among the levels of curriculum?
2-4. Does the method of the assessment in the elementary English curriculum maintain consistency among the levels of curriculum?
2-5. Does the management of the assessment results in the elementary English curriculum maintain consistency among the levels of curriculum?
The result of this study are as follows.
First, the viewpoint of the assessment, the purpose of the assessment, and the management of the assessment results in the formal curriculum of elementary English curriculum corresponded to the frame of reference. But the content of the assessment and the method of the assessment didn t corresponded to the frame of reference. It was revealed that the content of the assessment and the method of the assessment are changed more than the viewpoint of the assessment and the purpose of the assessment.
Second, all of the factors in the assessment in the perceived curriculum of elementary English curriculum corresponded to the frame of reference.
Third, the assessment, the purpose of the assessment, and the management of the assessment results maintained the consistency among the levels of elementary English curriculum. But the content of the assessment and the method of the assessment didn t maintain the consistency among the level of elementary English curriculum.
This study reached to the conclusion that the assessment didn t maintain consistency among the idealogical curriculum, the formal curriculum and the perceived curriculum of elementary English curriculum. Especially the assessment of the perceived curriculum was more consistent than the formal curriculum. Therefore it is very hard to expect that the essential intent of elementary English curriculum could come true. To solve this problem, curriculum designers need to research elementary English assessment continuously, and Minister of Education need to plan the workshop for elementary English teachers.&HQsj&7Y@bCeNpkj
;x<
dMbP?_*+%" ,,??U
@>@
!"#$%&()*+,-.Root EntryWorkbook>SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8'