미국의 책무성 정책이 교사의 이직에 미치는 영향 분석

국문 초록 (Abstract)

이 논문은 보상과 처벌을 강조하는 미국의 책무성 정책이 교사의 이직에 미치는 영향을 분석하고자 하였다. 미국 연방교육통계청(NCES)의 학교, 교원 서베이 자료(Schools and Staff Survey)를 이용하여 로지스틱 회귀 분석 결과, 학생성적에 따른 재정적 보상과 제재조치를 중점적으로 담고 있는 책무성 정책을 시행하고 있는 주의 교사들의 이직률이 높게 나타나고 있었다. 그리고 과학 수학교사의 경우 강한 책무성 정책 하에서 더욱 이직할 확률이 높게 나타나고 있었으며, 상위권 대학 출신 교사의 경우도 책무성 정책을 시행하지 않고 있는 주에서보다 책무성 정책을 강하게 시행하고 있는 주에서 더욱 이직할 확률이 높게 나타나고 있었다. 이는 책무성 정책이 전반적으로 교사의 이탈을 야기하고 있으며, 특히 주요 과목인 수학 과학의 교사와 상위권 대학출신 교사들의 유인을 약화시키고 이직을 야기함으로서 교육의 질을 향상시키는데 부정적인 영향을 줄 수 있음을 보여주고 있다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper analyzes the effect of strong accountability policy which emphasizes monetary rewards and sanctions on teachers' turnover in the United States. Using NCES School and Staff Survey data, we run the logistic regressions. The results show that teachers working at the states with the strong accountability policy are more likely to leave. Also math and science teachers working under strong accountability policy are more likely to leave than other teachers. Teachers who graduated from very competitive colleges and teaching under strong accountability policy are more likely to leave. This results implies that accountability policy causes teachers' turnover and could make teacher induction more difficult. Specifically, main subject areas, math and science may have difficulty in inducing teachers. Also accountability policy makes it difficult to induce teachers who graduated from competitive colleges. Thus, the accountability policy which comprises of monetary rewards and sanctions for narrowed student test scores would have a detrimental effect on teaching and learning.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 요약
• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 선행연구
• Ⅲ. 연구 주제 및 분석 자료
• Ⅳ. 연구 결과
• Ⅴ. 논의 및 결론
• 참고문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 조석희, "책무성 강화를 위한 학교평가 체제 개발 연구" 한국교육개발원 2006

2 김성열, "부시교육개혁법 연구" 14 (14): 1-29, 2005

3 Murnane, R., "Who Will Teach? Policies that Matter" Harvard University Press 1991

4 Sanders,W.L., "Value-added assessment from student achievement data: Opportunities and hurdle" 14 : 329-339, 2000

5 Mintrop, H., "The limits of sanctions in low-performing schools: A study of Maryland and Kentucky schools on probation. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(3)"

6 Lankford, Hamilton, "Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis" 24 (24): 37-62, 2002

7 Kelly, C., "Teacher motivation and school-based performance awards" 38 (38): 372-401, 2002

8 Cohen,D.K., "Standards-based school reform: policy, practice, and performance in Holding Schools Accountable" Brookings 1996

9 Sheldon, K. M., "Standards, accountability, and school reform: Perils and pitfalls" 100 (100): 164-180, 1998

10 Leithwood, K., "School leadership and teachers' motivatin to implementation accountability policies" 38 (38): 94-119, 2002

11 Hanushek, E. A, "School accountability and student performance" 2 (2): 51-61, 2006

12 Jacob, B.A., "Rotten apples: An investigation of the prevalence and predictors of teacher cheating" 118 (118): 843-877, 2003

13 Kelly, C., "Risk and reward: Perspectives on the implementation of Kentucky's school-based performance award program" 33 (33): 474-505, 1997

14 Kane, T.J., "Randomly accountable" 2 (2): 57-61, 2002

15 Smith,M.L., "Put to the test: The effects of external testing on students" 20 (20): 8-12, 1991

16 Kohn,A., "Punished by Reward: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's Praise,and other Bribes" Houghton Mifflin 1993

17 Holmstrom, B., "Multi-task principal agent analyses: Incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design" 7 (7): 24-52, 1991

18 Cohen, D.K, "Learning policy: when state education reform works" Yale University Press 2001

19 Kreps,D., "Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives" 87 (87): 359-364, 1997

20 Ladd,H.F., "Holding Schools Accountable" Brookings 1996

21 Amrein, A.L. & Berliner, D.C., "High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives"

22 Levitt, S., "Freakonomics" William Morrow 2005

23 Milgrom, P., "Economics,Organization and Management" Prentice-Hall 1992

24 Carnoy, M., "Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis" 24 : 305-331, 2002

25 Clotfelter, C.T., "Do school accountability systems make it more difficult for low-performing schools to attract and retain high-quality teachers?" 23 (23): 251-271, 2004

26 Finnigan, K.S., "Do accountability policy sanctions influence teacher motivation? Lessons from Chicago's low-performing schools" 44 (44): 594-629, 2007

27 Balfanz, R., "Are NCLB's measures, incentives, and improvement strategies the right ones for the nation's low-performing high schools?" 44 (44): 559-593, 2007

28 Newmann, F.M., "Accountability and school performance: Implications from restructuring schools" 67 (67): 41-69, 1997

29 Wolfe, E. W., "A Rasch analysis of three measures of teacher perception. Educational and Psychological Measurement"