Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/2175-7941.2017v34n3p697 |
Resumo: | The National Student Performance Exam (ENADE) is the main component of the National Higher Education Evaluation System (SINAES) that deals with the Brazilian Higher Education Degrees. This article deals with 120 (one hundred and twenty) objectives and discursive items from four ENADE editions for Teaching Physics Degree, applied in 2005, 2008, 2011 and 2014. We search for the Exam complexity throughout cognitive aspects mobilized to solve each item, according to the Bloom Taxonomy Revised (BTR). The BTR proposes a two-dimensional matrix classification that crosses a knowledge dimension, which means, “what” students must know in order to answer the questions, with the cognitive process involved in the task, reflecting “how” the problem was solved. According the BTR theory, the knowledge has been understood in the dimensions: effective, conceptual, procedure and metacognitive, which deals, respectively with basics terminology knowledge, concepts knowledge, procedure methodology knowledge and reflexive/analytical knowledge. The cognitive process described in verbs at the BTR presents the student´s skills in the resolutions ranked as: to remember, to understand, to apply, to analyze, to evaluate and to create. To classify discursive items, pattern answers were used, and to classify multiple choice items, our resolutions of the questions were used. The items were located at the two-dimensional BTR matrix, which gives us an Exam complexity overview. We observe that only 17 (14%) items are in the effective knowledge domain, while 103 (86%) items require the conceptual and procedure knowledge domain, which demands higher complexity. We consider these results compatible with the ENADE role as a Higher Brazilian Education quality referential. We intend to update Physics professors throughout Physics Teaching Examination in order to increase their commitment to the Higher Education Evaluation. We also believe that understanding the examination could help them to reconsider ENADE cognition aspects, based on the BTR perspective, incorporating new assumptions in their praxis. |
id |
UFSC-19_2177c8701b83e5c7bd99f0f711021825 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/48012 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSC-19 |
network_name_str |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teachingAnálise da complexidade de itens do ENADE à luz da Taxonomia de Bloom Revisada: contributos ao ensino de FísicaThe National Student Performance Exam (ENADE) is the main component of the National Higher Education Evaluation System (SINAES) that deals with the Brazilian Higher Education Degrees. This article deals with 120 (one hundred and twenty) objectives and discursive items from four ENADE editions for Teaching Physics Degree, applied in 2005, 2008, 2011 and 2014. We search for the Exam complexity throughout cognitive aspects mobilized to solve each item, according to the Bloom Taxonomy Revised (BTR). The BTR proposes a two-dimensional matrix classification that crosses a knowledge dimension, which means, “what” students must know in order to answer the questions, with the cognitive process involved in the task, reflecting “how” the problem was solved. According the BTR theory, the knowledge has been understood in the dimensions: effective, conceptual, procedure and metacognitive, which deals, respectively with basics terminology knowledge, concepts knowledge, procedure methodology knowledge and reflexive/analytical knowledge. The cognitive process described in verbs at the BTR presents the student´s skills in the resolutions ranked as: to remember, to understand, to apply, to analyze, to evaluate and to create. To classify discursive items, pattern answers were used, and to classify multiple choice items, our resolutions of the questions were used. The items were located at the two-dimensional BTR matrix, which gives us an Exam complexity overview. We observe that only 17 (14%) items are in the effective knowledge domain, while 103 (86%) items require the conceptual and procedure knowledge domain, which demands higher complexity. We consider these results compatible with the ENADE role as a Higher Brazilian Education quality referential. We intend to update Physics professors throughout Physics Teaching Examination in order to increase their commitment to the Higher Education Evaluation. We also believe that understanding the examination could help them to reconsider ENADE cognition aspects, based on the BTR perspective, incorporating new assumptions in their praxis.A avaliação do Ensino Superior no Brasil é realizada pelo Sistema Nacional de Educação Superior (SINAES), que tem como um de seus indicadores o Exame Nacional de Desempenho dos Estudantes (ENADE). Neste trabalho foram analisados 120 (cento e vinte) itens objetivos e discursivos das provas ENADE para a Licenciatura em Física, nas edições de 2005, 2008, 2011 e 2014, buscando estudar a sua complexidade pela Taxonomia de Bloom Revisada (TBR). A TBR apresenta uma proposta de classificação bidimensional cruzando uma dimensão do conhecimento, isto é, “o que” o estudante deve saber para resolver a tarefa proposta, com os processos cognitivos envolvidos na resolução da tarefa proposta, refletindo “como” o problema é resolvido. Para a TBR o conhecimento pode ser compreendido nas dimensões: efetivo, conceitual, procedural e metacognitivo, que tratam, respectivamente, de conhecimentos básicos de terminologia, conhecimentos de conceitos, conhecimentos de metodologia procedimental e conhecimentos reflexivos e analíticos sobre a escolha para resolver a tarefa. Os processos cognitivos, apresentados por verbos na TBR, classificam quais habilidades o estudante requer para resolver a tarefa: lembrar, entender, aplicar, analisar, avaliar e criar. Para discriminar as capacidades requeridas nos itens discursivos, foram observados os padrões de respostas divulgados pelo MEC e, nos itens de múltipla escolha, a nossa resolução das questões. Em seguida, os itens foram alocados na tabela bidimensional proposta pela TBR, a qual nos fornece um panorama de cada prova. Observa-se na dimensão do conhecimento que apenas 17 (14%) dos itens avaliados nas quatro edições do exame estão no domínio do conhecimento efetivo, enquanto que 103 (86%) dos itens requerem os domínios do conhecimento conceitual e procedural (procedimental), os quais exigem níveis de maior complexidade. Entende-se tal resultado como compatível com o papel estratégico do ENADE como indicador balizador da qualidade do Ensino Superior Brasileiro. Pretende-se ampliar a atualização de docentes de Física do ensino superior acerca do Exame, possibilitando-lhes refletir sobre os aspectos da cognição envolvidos no ENADE, na perspectiva proposta pela TBR, incorporando seus pressupostos em sua práxis.Imprensa Universitária - UFSC2017-12-08info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/2175-7941.2017v34n3p69710.5007/2175-7941.2017v34n3p697Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física; v. 34 n. 3 (2017); 697-7242175-79411677-2334reponame:Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online)instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCporhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/2175-7941.2017v34n3p697/35414Copyright (c) 2017 Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Físicainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCosta, João Paulo de CastroMartins, Maria Inês2017-12-08T17:18:21Zoai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/48012Revistahttp://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisicaPUBhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/oaicbefisica@gmail.com||fscccef@fsc.ufsc.br|| cbefisica@gmail.com2175-79411677-2334opendoar:2017-12-08T17:18:21Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching Análise da complexidade de itens do ENADE à luz da Taxonomia de Bloom Revisada: contributos ao ensino de Física |
title |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching |
spellingShingle |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching Costa, João Paulo de Castro |
title_short |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching |
title_full |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching |
title_fullStr |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching |
title_full_unstemmed |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching |
title_sort |
Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching |
author |
Costa, João Paulo de Castro |
author_facet |
Costa, João Paulo de Castro Martins, Maria Inês |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Martins, Maria Inês |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Costa, João Paulo de Castro Martins, Maria Inês |
description |
The National Student Performance Exam (ENADE) is the main component of the National Higher Education Evaluation System (SINAES) that deals with the Brazilian Higher Education Degrees. This article deals with 120 (one hundred and twenty) objectives and discursive items from four ENADE editions for Teaching Physics Degree, applied in 2005, 2008, 2011 and 2014. We search for the Exam complexity throughout cognitive aspects mobilized to solve each item, according to the Bloom Taxonomy Revised (BTR). The BTR proposes a two-dimensional matrix classification that crosses a knowledge dimension, which means, “what” students must know in order to answer the questions, with the cognitive process involved in the task, reflecting “how” the problem was solved. According the BTR theory, the knowledge has been understood in the dimensions: effective, conceptual, procedure and metacognitive, which deals, respectively with basics terminology knowledge, concepts knowledge, procedure methodology knowledge and reflexive/analytical knowledge. The cognitive process described in verbs at the BTR presents the student´s skills in the resolutions ranked as: to remember, to understand, to apply, to analyze, to evaluate and to create. To classify discursive items, pattern answers were used, and to classify multiple choice items, our resolutions of the questions were used. The items were located at the two-dimensional BTR matrix, which gives us an Exam complexity overview. We observe that only 17 (14%) items are in the effective knowledge domain, while 103 (86%) items require the conceptual and procedure knowledge domain, which demands higher complexity. We consider these results compatible with the ENADE role as a Higher Brazilian Education quality referential. We intend to update Physics professors throughout Physics Teaching Examination in order to increase their commitment to the Higher Education Evaluation. We also believe that understanding the examination could help them to reconsider ENADE cognition aspects, based on the BTR perspective, incorporating new assumptions in their praxis. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-12-08 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/2175-7941.2017v34n3p697 10.5007/2175-7941.2017v34n3p697 |
url |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/2175-7941.2017v34n3p697 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5007/2175-7941.2017v34n3p697 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/2175-7941.2017v34n3p697/35414 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Imprensa Universitária - UFSC |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Imprensa Universitária - UFSC |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física; v. 34 n. 3 (2017); 697-724 2175-7941 1677-2334 reponame:Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) instacron:UFSC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
instacron_str |
UFSC |
institution |
UFSC |
reponame_str |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) |
collection |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
cbefisica@gmail.com||fscccef@fsc.ufsc.br|| cbefisica@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1799940573856006144 |