Analysis of the ENADE items complexity based on the Revised Bloom Taxonomy: contributions to physics teaching

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Costa, João Paulo de Castro
Data de Publicação: 2017
Outros Autores: Martins, Maria Inês
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