The Korea Society Of Educational Studies In Mathematics

Current Issue

Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics - Vol. 29 , No. 3

[ Article ]
Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics - Vol. 29, No. 3, pp.363-387
Abbreviation: JERM
ISSN: 2288-7733 (Print) 2288-8357 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Aug 2019
Received 31 May 2019 Revised 05 Aug 2019 Accepted 10 Aug 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.29275/jerm.2019.8.29.3.363

A Case Study on Elementary and Middle School Teacher’s Method of Information Collection in the Curriculum
Lee, Dong Gun*
*Teacher, Seoul Education Research & Information Institute (jakin7@hanmail.net)


Abstract

With the introduction of the “Study on the Activation of the Modification System of Curriculum” on-site teachers’ continuous inspection of the contents of each subject’s education has become significantly important than before. This is because the policy presumes that teachers frequently reflect on the requirements raised through ongoing checks of training content in the field. In other words, it is necessary to pay attention to the on-site teacher’s requirements for the curriculum, since ongoing checks on educational content can be powered by on-site teachers who are curriculum practitioners. In this study, we look at the methods of collecting data on the curriculum of on-site mathematics teachers according to these needs. This will in turn reveal the teachers’ needs in this process. To this end, the present study conducted preliminary interviews with one teacher of elementary and middle school, and then developed a meeting plan based on this. Under the established interview plan, the FGI was conducted for two elementary school teachers and three middle school math teachers. The number of interviews was one basic interview per group and one additional interview, if necessary. Through this research, we were able to collect information when math teachers needed materials related to the curriculum and the type of data they always refer to. It was also found that there were different requirements in teachers’ curriculum data depending on their sensitivity to the assessment. This is a basic study that provides a basis for research on the development of materials related to the curriculum that can help teachers’ in classes, as suggested by future researchers.


Keywords: Curriculum, Math Teacher, Textbook, Evaluation, Curriculum Information Collection

References
1. Albert, L. R., Kim, R., & Kwon, N. Y. (2014). A hierarchy of south korean elementary teachers’ knowledge for teaching mathematics. Education Practice and Innovation, 1(2), 51-73.
2. Fontana, A. & Frey, J. H. (2000). The interview: from structured questions to negotiated text. in N.K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln(eds.). Handbook of qualitative research(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 645-672.
3. Holstein, J. A. & Gubrium, J. F. (1995). The active interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4. Hong, H. J. (2014). An Easy-to-Understand Curriculum. Seoul: Hakjisa.
5. Jung, G. H. & Jang, H. J. (2005). A life history on the knowledge learning of teachers in growth step. The Journal of Korea Teacher Education. 22(1), 177-197.
6. Kim, J. H. (2014). Korean language arts teachers’ curriculum reconstruction in the era of SMART education. Journal of CheongRam Korean Language Education. 50, 35-60.
7. Kim, M. H. (2013). Secondary mathematics teachers’ use of mathematics textbooks and teachers’ guide. School Mathematics. 15(3), 503-531.
8. Kim, R. N. & Shin, H. G. (2015). An analysis of south korean elementary teachers’ mathematics curriculum knowledge. The Journal of Korea Elementary Education. 26(4), 121-139.
9. Min, Y. S. (2012). The establishing the research and management committee of subject contents for enhancing appropriateness of subject contents in the current curriculum system. Journal of Curriculum Integration. 6(2), 1-24.
10. Park, D. K. (2006). The actual states of the physical education curriculum reorganization of elementary school teachers. Korea sport research. 17(4), 739-748.
11. Park, S. K. (2003). A discussion on an alternative foundation to conceptualize teacher professionalism as curriculum inquiry theme. Korean journal of educational research. 41(2), 75-92.
12. Seo, K. H. (2009). Teachers’ experience of reconstructing national curriculum. The Journal of Curriculum Studies. 27(3), 159-189.
13. Seong, K. H. et al. (2004). An analysis on the field operation of the seventh curriculum(Ⅱ). Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation.
14. Shin, K. R. et al. (2008). Qualitative Research Methodology. Seoul: EWHA WOMANS UNIVERSITY PRESS.
15. Shin, O. S. (2005). The significance and use of in-depth interviewing for educational research. The Journal of Education. 25(1). 121-140.
16. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd edition, pp. 3-36). NewYork: Macmillan Publishing Company.
17. Stake, R. E.(1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Yin R. K.(2009). Case study research: Design and methods(4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.