본 연구는 유아의 잠재적 기하능력을 측정하기 위한 기하학습잠재력 측정도구를 개발하고, 유아의 기하능력에 대한 역동적 평가를 실시하여 역동적 평가의 교수효과를 개별집단과 소집단으로 구분하여 알아보았다. 본 연구를 위해 문항양호도와 검사 양호도가 적절한 기하학습잠재력 측정도구를 개발한 후, 만 4, 5세 유아 90명을 소집단 역동적 평가, 개별 역동적 평가 및 비교집단으로 구분하여 역동적 평가를 진행하였다. 연구도구는 유아기하학습잠재력 측정도구(황해익․남미경, 2007)와 유아그림수학능력검사(황해익․최혜진, 2007)를 사용하였다. 연구결과, 첫째, 유아의 기하학습잠재력은 소집단 역동적 평가와 개별 역동적 평가집단 및 비교집단 간에 유의미한 차이가 나타났다. 둘째, 유아의 수학능력은 사물의 규칙성과 전체점수에서 소집단 역동적 평가집단과 비교집단 간에 유의한 차이가 있었고 기하영역에서는 소집단 역동적 평가집단 개별 역동적 평가집단 간, 소집단 역동적 평가집단과 비교집단 간, 개별 역동적 평가집단과 비교집단 간에 유의한 차이가 나타났다.

This study was to develop valid and reliable Geometric Learning Potentiality Assessment Tools(GLPAT) for young children based on dynamic assessment and to analyze the instructional effectiveness of dynamic assessment of young children's geometric abilities, especially the instructional effectiveness of small-group dynamic assessment. Subjects were 87 four-and five-year-old children in kindergarten. The subjects were assigned into three groups; 29 children were assigned to group 1(the small-group dynamic assessment group) and 29 children to group 2(the individual dynamic assessment group) and 29 children to the control group. Based on the Geometric Learning Potentiality Assessment Tools(GLPAT)(Hwang & Nam, 2007) and the Pictorial Mathematical Ability Test for Young Children(Hwang & Choi, 2007) four-and five-year-old children's geometric learning potentialities were measured. The results of this study are as follows: First, there were significant differences between the geometric learning potentiality scores of young children among the groups. Namely, geometric learning potentiality scores were not significantly different between the small-group dynamic assessment group and the individual dynamic assessment group, but there were significant differences between the small-group dynamic assessment group and the control group. Second, there were significant differences on post-mathematical ability scores of five-year-old children among the groups. Namely, the post-mathematical ability scores of five-year-old children were not significantly different between the small-group dynamic assessment group and the individual dynamic assessment group, but there were significant differences between the small-group dynamic assessment group and the control group.

This study was to develop valid and reliable Geometric Learning Potentiality Assessment Tools(GLPAT) for young children based on dynamic assessment and to analyze the instructional effectiveness of dynamic assessment of young children's geometric abilities, especially the instructional effectiveness of small-group dynamic assessment. Subjects were 87 four-and five-year-old children in kindergarten. The subjects were assigned into three groups; 29 children were assigned to group 1(the small-group dynamic assessment group) and 29 children to group 2(the individual dynamic assessment group) and 29 children to the control group. Based on the Geometric Learning Potentiality Assessment Tools(GLPAT)(Hwang & Nam, 2007) and the Pictorial Mathematical Ability Test for Young Children(Hwang & Choi, 2007) four-and five-year-old children's geometric learning potentialities were measured. The results of this study are as follows: First, there were significant differences between the geometric learning potentiality scores of young children among the groups. Namely, geometric learning potentiality scores were not significantly different between the small-group dynamic assessment group and the individual dynamic assessment group, but there were significant differences between the small-group dynamic assessment group and the control group. Second, there were significant differences on post-mathematical ability scores of five-year-old children among the groups. Namely, the post-mathematical ability scores of five-year-old children were not significantly different between the small-group dynamic assessment group and the individual dynamic assessment group, but there were significant differences between the small-group dynamic assessment group and the control group.

young child , geometric ability , small-group dynamic assessment , instructional effectiveness