사회복지전공 학부생의 실습성과에 관한 연구 = (A) Study on the practicum outcome of Undergraduate social work students

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In this study found the primary factors of practicum outcome that help undergraduate social work students to improve their practice functions. It was, therefore, the purpose of this study to analyze the factor - among the component parts of practicum - which might affect students' practicum outcome.
this analysis showed the actual state of the students' practicum outcome, and examined the primary factors which had effects on the outcome. To verify these hypotheses, it surveyed 84 social welfare agencies, in Seoul, which had practicum with undergraduate social work students during the winter vacation. Pre and post tests to 63 agencies with 276 questionnaires, and analyzed the 265 questionnaires - 11 sheets were excluded by their uncertain responses.
The dependent variable of this analysis was practicum outcome and the independent variables were agency factor, supervision factor and student factor. The data were analyzed by the multiple regression analysis to grasp the correlation of variables.
The following is the summary of this research.
First, It showes that, general tendency of primary factors that affect the practicum outcome. In agency factor, practicum term was various from 6 days(48 hours) to 31 days(248 hours), and in many cases the standard of 120 hours, which had been suggested by Korea Council on Social Welfare Education, wasn't fulfilled. The reason is that the standard of undergraduate course hasn't been observed.
In supervision factor, both sexes of supervisors was about the same ratio, and their average career was 9 years - rather experienced. 66 percent of supervisors were graduate students or even had finished the course. It seems that each agency considers the supervisors' career and academic background when they employ them. Concerning the frequency of supervision, 58 percent, over a majority, of students tried supervision every day. In the case of supervision types, 7.2 percent was just peer supervision, which suggests that supervisors haven't played sufficient parts. The supervision methods were utilized variously, by the order of homework, case consultation and recording. In many cases, the place and time of supervision were set.
In student factor, the number of students whose practicum was the first try was 61 percent, and 18 percent of the students hadn't served as volunteers before. This was caused by the fact that college hadn't appointed any prerequisite subject for practicum.
Second, It investigated that the relation between practicum outcome and subordinate variables such as agency factor, supervision factor, student factor. It proved that there was correlation between agency factor and practicum outcome, especially at the number of social workers, practicum term and agency's support. Concerning supervision factor, the groups which had arranged supervision time and place showed more significant difference than other groups. In student factor, the outcome of boy students was much higher than that of girl students when we compared the average mark. Also students in the higher grades got higher mark than students in the lower grade, and the same was the experienced students over unexperienced. It means practicum is a subject linking knowledge to practice, and practice through volunteer service can affect students affirmatively. As students in the 3rd or 4th grade were more understandable of social welfare subjects than students in the lower grades, their ability of understanding of that subjects had an affirmative effect on practicum outcome.
Third, It compared the outcome of pre and post practicum, practicum outcome and its subordinate factors - such as functions within a professional context, functions within an organizational context, functions utilizing knowledge-directed practice skills, functions within an evaluative context - showed significant difference in average mark. Seeing that, we can say that practicum was effective enough.
When we find out the influential variables over each factor of practicum outcome, the number of social workers, practicum term, practicum agency's support, the number of supervision method, the frequency of supervision, supervisor's career had significant effects on functions within a professional context. In case of functions within an organizational context, practicum term, contents of supervision, the number of supervision method, supervisor's career and educational background, student's grade were significant variables. In case of functions utilizing knowledge-directed practice skills, the number of social workers, practicum term, contents of supervision, the number of supervision method, supervision place, the frequency of supervision, supervisor's career and grade were significant variables. In case of functions within an evaluative context, the number of social workers, practicum term, the contents of supervision, the number of supervision method, supervision place, frequency of supervision, supervisor's career were significant independent variables. Among each primary factor of practicum outcome, functions utilizing knowledge-directed practice skills were the most significant factor.
In view of the variables that affect total practicum outcome, the statistical explanatory degree of independent variables over practicum educational outcome was 31.7 percent. Significant variables were the number of social workers and practicum term in agency factor ; contents of supervision, the number of supervision method, the existence of supervision place, frequency of supervision, supervisor's career in supervision factor ; student's grade in student factor. Detailed hypotheses were verified by these significant variables.
Through these results, it can be deducted the implicit meaning of theoretical, practical, politic aspect, and made suggestions to improve the undergraduate students' practicum outcome.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차 = i
• 제1장 서론 = 1
• 제1절 문제 제기 = 1
• 제2절 연구 목적 및 의의 = 7
• 제2장 이론적 배경 = 8
• 제1절 실습개념과 실습성과에 관한 이론적 고찰 = 8
• 1. 사회복지교육과 실습의 개념 = 8
• 2. 실습성과의 개념 = 16
• 3. 실습성과의 구성요소 = 18
• 4. 실습성과에 관한 선행연구 = 22
• 제2절 실습성과의 영향요인 고찰 = 25
• 1. 학교요인 = 25
• 2. 기관요인 = 26
• 3. 수퍼비전요인 = 29
• 4. 학생요인 = 34
• 제3절 연구의 이론적인 틀 = 37
• 제4절 연구문제 및 가설설정 = 38
• 제3장 연구방법 = 40
• 제1절 표집방법 = 40
• 제2절 변수의 측정 = 41
• 제3절 척도의 신뢰도 = 45
• 제4절 자료 분석 방법 = 47
• 제4장 결과분석 = 48
• 제1절 조사대상자의 일반적 특성 = 48
• 제2절 가설검증을 위한 사전분석 = 49
• 1. 전반적 응답결과 = 49
• 2. 독립변인과 실습성과의 관계 = 59
• 3. 독립변인 간 상관관계 = 63
• 제3절 가설검증 = 67
• 1. 실습 전·후의 실습성과 비교 = 67
• 2. 실습성과의 하위요인별 영향변인 = 68
• 3. 실습성과에 영향을 미치는 변인 = 75
• 제5장 결론 및 제언 = 79
• 제1절 연구결과 요약 = 79
• 제2절 연구의 함의 = 82
• 제3절 연구의 한계 및 후속연구를 위한 제언 = 86
• 참고문헌 = 88
• 부록 = 98
• ABSTRACT = 113