Detail View

In mathematics, a process-focused assessment in the classroom draws attention as the 'process' is emphasized in a broader sense. The direction of the assessment is changed from the paper based assessment to the paper based and performance assessment, from the assessment of cognitive domain to the assessment of cognitive and affective domain. The CSAT(College Scholastic Ability Test), which has a strong influence on the nation's college entrance exams, needs to research the development of the assessment items to be linked to class assessment with emphasis on the process.
This study analyzed the differential and integral calculus items of the CSAT in Korea, AP Calculus in the United States, and A-level in the United Kingdom by focusing on cognitive processes, cognitive demands and instructional predicates so that the items of the CSAT were improved to better implement the mathematical process in the cognitive domain and developed as a descriptive assessment. 
For this study, using frames made on the basis of the TIMSS Advanced 2015 cognitive domains framework, task types based on cognitive demands and instructional predicate examples, Analysis I(cognitive processes and cognitive demands) and Analysis II(instructional predicates and cognitive demands) of the differential and integral calculus items were performed.
First, the following conclusions came on the results of Analysis I. The PNC task in the implement process appeared at most in CSAT as well in AP Calculus and A-level, but then it differs in tendency depending on the type of items. The AP Calculus, which presents multiple choice items and descriptive items at the same time, set the items of the most various cognitive processes and even though it was the same cognitive process, the distribution of items was balanced by setting items of various cognitive demands. And while AP Calculus tended to emphasize mathematical communication and focus on real-world context, A-level tended to emphasize mathematical reasoning and focus on proof. AP Calculus descriptive type and A-level were able to combine various cognitive processes and cognitive demands in a single item by setting sub items. By comparison, the CSAT lacked calculus items dealing with real-world contexts and changing phenomena. CSAT, AP Calculus and A-level all tend to set items of low cognitive demands from low-level tasks to high-level tasks in order of knowing, applying, and reasoning domains.
Second, the following conclusions came on the results of Analysis II. Both AP Calculus descriptive type and A-level were found to be the most frequently used ‘find’ instructional predicate and items requiring different cognitive processes and cognitive demands were also answered in the form of a single value. In addition, items of some specific cognitive processes had frequently used instructional predicates and cognitive demands tend to vary from a Low-Level task to a High-Level task depending on the relative instructional predicates.
 Based on this study, it is hoped to promote diversity and balance of cognitive processes, cognitive demands and instructional predicates in the differential and integral calculus items of the CSAT. It is necessary to introduce descriptive items in the CSAT to balance multiple choice items and descriptive items.

Ⅰ. 서론 1
 1. 연구의 필요성 및 목적 1
 2. 연구문제 3
 3. 용어의 정의 4
  1) 수학적 과정 4
  2) 인지적 영역과 인지적 과정 4
  3) 인지적 노력 수준 5
  4) 지시 서술어 6
 4. 기대되는 효과 6
Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 7
 1. 수학적 과정과 수학 교육 평가의 동향 7
  1) 2009 개정 수학과 교육과정 7
  2) 2015 개정 수학과 교육과정 8
  3) NCTM과 CCSSM 10
 2. 인지적 영역의 평가 12
  1) Bloom의 인지적 영역 13
  2) Anderson의 인지적 과정 14
  3) 인지적 과정과 행동 동사 16
  4) 독일 함부르크 주 중등학교 졸업시험 필기시험 문항의 지시문 17
  5) TIMSS Advanced 2015 인지영역 평가틀 23
   (1) TIMSS 24
   (2) TIMSS Advanced 24
   (3) TIMSS Advanced 2015 평가틀 25
  6) 인지적 노력 수준 27
 3. 대학입학시험 28
  1) 한국의 수능 29
  2) 미국의 AP Calculus 31
  3) 영국의 A-level 34
Ⅲ. 연구방법 36
 1. 분석 대상 36
  1) 한국의 수능 37
  2) 미국의 AP Calculus AB 37
  3) 영국의 A-level Core Mathematics 38
 2. 분석 방법 39
  1) 분석 절차 39
  2) 분석틀 39
   (1) 분석Ⅰ(인지적 과정과 인지적 노력 수준) 분석틀 41
   (2) 분석Ⅱ(지시 서술어와 인지적 노력 수준) 분석틀 42
  3) 분석 준거 43
   (1) TIMSS Advanced 2015 인지영역 평가틀 분석 준거 43
   (2) 인지적 노력 수준에 따른 네 가지 과제 분석 준거 44
   (3) 지시 서술어 분석 준거 45
  4) TIMSS Advanced 2008 공개문항 사전 분석 45
Ⅳ. 연구결과 56
 1. 인지적 과정과 인지적 노력 수준 분석 56
  1) 알기 57
  2) 적용하기 62
  3) 추론하기 68
 2. 서술형 문항의 지시 서술어와 인지적 노력 수준 분석 81
Ⅴ. 결론 및 제언 91
 1. 결론 91
 2. 논의 및 제언 95
참고문헌 97
ABSTRACT 102