메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
유정애 (중앙대학교) 김보미 (중앙대학교)
저널정보
한국여성체육학회 한국여성체육학회지 한국여성체육학회지 제29권 제2호
발행연도
2015.6
수록면
235 - 251 (17page)
DOI
10.16915/jkapesgw.2015.06.29.2.235

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The purpose of this study was to analyze how the assessment of expressive activity domain within the 2009 Revised National Physical Education Curriculum represented in the current physical education textbook in order to reveal the coherence of the assessment. 35 types of P.E. Textbooks, including 14 types of 3~4graders", 8 types of 5~6 graders", and 13 types of 7~9 graders" were analyzed by the categories which consists of curriculum continuity, balance, and diversity, representing as assessment contexts by the national P.E. curriculum. In result, the part of creative expression and appreciation(36.79%) was highest score in curriculum continuity, and expression was 33.85% otherwise creativity was 3.77% in terms of balance. Self-assessment was 80.19%, check-list was 28.30%, performance-assessment was 66.98% in diversity for 3-4th graders assessment’. For 5~6 graders" assessment, creative expression and appreciation(52.24%) were highest scores in curriculum continuity, and appreciative competence was 27.36% in the balance, self-assessment was 67.16%, check-list was 32.84%, performance assessment was 64.18%. For 7~9 graders" assessment, attribute and history and patterns were 46.80% in curriculum continuity. Understandings were 62.25% otherwise creativity was only 4.64%. Self-assessment was overwhelmingly 92.94% but mutual-assessment was only 7.06%. paper-assessment was 52.49% in Diversity. In conclusion, assessment in the textbook revealed that creative expression and appreciation in terms of continuity was the highest score, but creativity in terms of balance was the lowest score.

목차

ABSTRACT
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 연구 방법
Ⅲ. 결과
Ⅳ. 논의
Ⅴ. 결론 및 제언
참고문헌

참고문헌 (35)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-692-001758631