RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      시설 유형별 보육서비스 질 비교연구

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76255215

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      This thesis tries to find the service quality of day care center by the institution type. The centers analyzed in this research are 35 public ones, 23 non-profit ones, 62 private ones, and 29 nurseling centers located in the Pusan Metropolitan Area. By the result of this study, the type of service center differently influences the service quality depending on whether it is on the comprehensive quality or sub-dimension of service quality. The comprehensive quality of day care service of non-profit ones is better than any another kind of centers, and next, the qualities by institution types are in order of private centers, public ones, and nurseling centers. Especially, there is little difference of service quality among the former three types of centers, but there is a little large difference between the former three types of centers and nursling centers. There is a relatively large difference of service quality among nursling centers.
      The type of center having shown up the best quality in terms of general management is the non-private center. The types in terms of personnel management are the public center and the non-private center, and that in terms of management and evaluation of education is the private one. That in terms of environment is the private center, and that in terms of healthㆍsafetyㆍnutrition is the non-private center, and that in terms of parent participation and linkage of community is the non-private center.
      There is a little large difference of service quality between the former three types of centers and nursling centers, but there is a little small difference between them in terms of healthㆍsafetyㆍnutrition and in terms of management and evaluation of education due to the high quality of nursling centers. In contrast, the quality of nursling centers in terms of parent participation and linkage of community is relatively lower than those of any other type of service centers. Especially, the comprehensive quality of nursling centers is the lowest among 4types of centers, and quality difference among nursling centers is higher than that of any other type of service centers.
      번역하기

      This thesis tries to find the service quality of day care center by the institution type. The centers analyzed in this research are 35 public ones, 23 non-profit ones, 62 private ones, and 29 nurseling centers located in the Pusan Metropolitan Area. B...

      This thesis tries to find the service quality of day care center by the institution type. The centers analyzed in this research are 35 public ones, 23 non-profit ones, 62 private ones, and 29 nurseling centers located in the Pusan Metropolitan Area. By the result of this study, the type of service center differently influences the service quality depending on whether it is on the comprehensive quality or sub-dimension of service quality. The comprehensive quality of day care service of non-profit ones is better than any another kind of centers, and next, the qualities by institution types are in order of private centers, public ones, and nurseling centers. Especially, there is little difference of service quality among the former three types of centers, but there is a little large difference between the former three types of centers and nursling centers. There is a relatively large difference of service quality among nursling centers.
      The type of center having shown up the best quality in terms of general management is the non-private center. The types in terms of personnel management are the public center and the non-private center, and that in terms of management and evaluation of education is the private one. That in terms of environment is the private center, and that in terms of healthㆍsafetyㆍnutrition is the non-private center, and that in terms of parent participation and linkage of community is the non-private center.
      There is a little large difference of service quality between the former three types of centers and nursling centers, but there is a little small difference between them in terms of healthㆍsafetyㆍnutrition and in terms of management and evaluation of education due to the high quality of nursling centers. In contrast, the quality of nursling centers in terms of parent participation and linkage of community is relatively lower than those of any other type of service centers. Especially, the comprehensive quality of nursling centers is the lowest among 4types of centers, and quality difference among nursling centers is higher than that of any other type of service centers.

      더보기

      목차 (Table of Contents)

      • Ⅰ. 서론
      • Ⅱ. 보육시설의 유형과 보육서비스의 질에 관한 이론적 고찰
      • Ⅲ. 조사설계 및 보육시설 유형별 특성 분석
      • Ⅳ. 시설유형별 보육서비스 서비스 질 비교분석
      • Ⅴ. 결론
      • Ⅰ. 서론
      • Ⅱ. 보육시설의 유형과 보육서비스의 질에 관한 이론적 고찰
      • Ⅲ. 조사설계 및 보육시설 유형별 특성 분석
      • Ⅳ. 시설유형별 보육서비스 서비스 질 비교분석
      • Ⅴ. 결론
      • 〈참고문헌〉
      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2027 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2021-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2018-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2015-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2011-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2009-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2007-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2005-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2002-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      1999-07-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 1.17 1.17 1.31
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      1.26 1.18 1.419 0.42
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼