유아교육기관 평가인증제의 산·학·관 협력모형 개발연구 : 델파이와 AHP 기법을 활용하여 = Collaboration model research among fields, colleges and government of accreditation system of early childhood education facilities : using Delphi and AHP (analytic hierarchy process) method

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In January, 2005, according as Early Childhood Education Act and amended Infant and Young Children Nursery Act were put in force, Kindergartens and nursery facilities should be evaluated by institution of the national level and an accreditation system for accrediting formally will be introduced. A cooperative system from fields (early childhood education facilities), colleges (universities), and government (government institutions) are necessary to improve the quality of education and nursery. So this research's purpose is to draw the main roles of fields, colleges and government (research theme 1), detailed items of these roles (research theme 2), effective collaboration strategies (research theme 3) and collaborative model (research theme 4) of fields, colleges and government in order to successfully settle down the accreditation system under this kind of cooperative system.
Literature analysis and first Delphi method were used for the research theme 1, second Delphi method for the theme 2 and 3, AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) for theme 4 to achieve this research purpose. For this purpose in first Delphi process (targeting 32 panels), the opinions of panels were converged in the form of a minority of substructured questionnaires (4 level Rating Scale) and open-ended questionnaires. In second Delphi process, the opinions of panels about an amendment are converged with 4 level Rating Scale by correcting and supplementing, adding and deleting, and classifying the open-ended questionnaires of first Delphi process. The response distribution of items, validity, reliability and agreement among Delphi panel groups are also analyzed. In AHP survey (targeting another 146 panels different from Delphi) I tried to make hierarchy diagram→pairwise comparison of decision element→estimation of relative weights→review of logical consistency ratio→aggregation of relative weights→deciding the relative priority by hierarchy and draw the relative priority in the collaboration model of fields, colleges and government to settle down the accreditation system of panels successfully.
First, as a result of research, totally 12 role fields were selected. 4 from early childhood education facilities, 4 from colleges, 4 from government in the research theme 1 (main role of principal participants).
Second, in research theme 2 (the detailed items of main participant role), 23 detailed items were drawn from 4 roles of early childhood education facilities (fields), 17 detailed items from 4 roles of universities (colleges) and 17 detailed ones from government (government facilities). So totally 57 detailed items were analyzed validly and reliably and the agreement of opinions among panel groups appears to be relatively high.
Third, research theme 3 (efficient collaboration strategy of fields, colleges and govenment) was analyzed by the same method of research theme 2. In this research 7 items which were selected as effective collaboration strategy of fields, colleges and government appeared to be high in validity, reliability and the agreement of opinions among panels.
Fourth, research theme 4 (What is the collaboration model of fields, colleges and government to successfully settle down the accreditation system of early childhood education facilities?) I described fields, colleges and government's own role which was understood in research theme 1 (the role of participant), theme 2(detailed items of each roles) theme 3 (effective collaboration strategy), and relative importance (priority). And I also added 4 Rs (Respect, Relationship, Reinforce Strengths, Reflective Practice) which were reviewed in the ECECS case of the literature analysis and proposed collaboration model in a form of map as a cooperative partner which was linked by fields, colleges and government to successfully settle down the accreditation system.
A collaboration model under the cooperation system of fields, colleges and government for the accreditation system of early childhood education facilities is as follows,
Settle down of the accreditation system in a cooperative partnership
(Building teamwork like educational system)
Maximum number of
marks is 1000
(1)The role of consulting (86)
(2)Developing methods for evaluation (84)
(3)Training Professionals for evaluation (80)
(4)Forming a committee for evaluation (48)
The role of universities (colleges) (297 marks)
(1)Administrative and financial support (86)
(2)Seeking motivating method for participation (75)
(3)Forming mutual trust (63)
(4)Seeking the methods for management and information sharing (59)
The role of government (governments)
(283 marks)
(1)Reflecting the accreditation system (123)
(2)Feedback / Offering Information (108)
(3)Building teamwork in early childhood facilities (101)
(4)Participating in accreditation (88)
The role of early childhood facilities (fields) (420 marks)
(1)Mutual cooperation of fields, colleges and government in the equal position
(2)Cooperating with related institution in the community
(3)Cooperating by creating a fund for childhood education and nursery
(4)Confirming and linking with professionals and the community resources
(5)Specifying specific activities / guidelines for each party
(6)Pursuing the study of each party concerned
(7)Monitering system
Effective collaboration strategy
Mutual Respect
Relationship
Reinforce Strengths
Reflective Practice

목차 (Table of Contents)

• I. 서론 = 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성과 목적 = 1
• 2. 연구 문제 = 4
• 3. 연구의 방법 및 내용 = 5
• 4. 용어의 정의 = 5
• II. 이론적 배경 = 7
• 1. 유아교육기관 평가인증제의 목적 및 인증과정 = 7
• 2. 외국의 유아교육기관 평가인증제 = 26
• 3. 산?학?관 협력체제의 전략구조, 유형 및 형태 = 30
• 4. 산?학?관 협력체제 사례분석 = 36
• 5. 산?학?관 협력제체에서 각 참여주체의 주요 역할 = 53
• 6. 델파이 및 AHP 기법에 대한 이론적 고찰 = 63
• Ⅲ. 연구 방법 = 76
• 1. 연구대상 = 76
• 2. 연구도구 = 79
• 3. 연구절차 = 85
• 4. 자료분석 = 88
• Ⅳ. 결과 및 해석 = 89
• 1. 연구문제 1의 결과 = 89
• 2. 연구문제 2의 결과 = 112
• 3. 연구문제 3의 결과 = 125
• 4. 연구문제 4의 결과 = 132
• 5. 기타 조사결과 = 149
• Ⅴ. 논의 및 결론 = 160
• 1. 요약 및 논의 = 160
• 2. 결론 및 제언 = 164
• 참고문헌 = 169
• 부록 = 176
• Abstract = 246

참고문헌 (Reference)

1. Accreditation, NAEYC, , 2006

2. 직업교육학 원론, 이무근, 교육과학사, 직업교육학 원론, , 1999

3. 타당도와 신뢰도, 성태제, 良書院, , 1996

4. Family day care rating scale, Harms, Thelma, Teachers College Press, , 1989

5. The Analytic Hierachy Process, Saaty, , 1980

6. 학교평가 국제비교 연구, 임연기, 한국교육개발원, , 1998

7. Assessingattributeweightsbyratios, Saaty, Wendel, Assessing attribute weights by ratios, , 1983

8. Infant/toddler environment rating scale, Harms, Thelma, Teachers College, Columbia University, , 1990

9. Teaming up to support program quality :, Isaacs, Fish, , 2000

10. First steps toward teaching the Reggio way, Hendrick, Joanne, Merrill, First steps toward teaching the Reggio way, , 1997

11. 유아교육기관 평가에 관한 고찰, 황해익, , 2000

12. 보육시설 평가요인 및 지표 구성, 유희정, , 2002

13. 학회주관 보육시설 평가준거개발, 황해익, , 2000

14. Early Childhood Education Consulting Services, Fish, McCarty, , 1999

15. The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications, Linstone, Turoff, , 2002

16. 21세기 한국 유아교육의 과제와 전망, 이영석, , 2000

17. 벤처기업 산학협동의 현황과 문제점, 이윤보, 고시천, 建國大學校 經濟經營硏究所, "상경연구, , 1998

18. Axiomatic Foundation of Analytic Hierarchy Process, Saaty, , 1986

19. 유아교육기관의 기관평가 컨설팅효과, 이대균, , 2004

20. 유아교육기관 평가인증제에 관한 연구, 김석우(Kim, Suk-Woo), 이경철, 황해익, , 2005

21. 앞서가는 리더들의 계층분석적 의사결정, 강현수, 조용근, 조근태, , 2005

22. Windows on learning : documenting young children's work, Helm, Judy Harris, Teachers College Press, , 1998

23. 유아교육, 보육기관 평가인정제 개발 연구, 양옥승, 한국아동학회, 유아교육?보육기관 평가인정제 개발연구, , 2000

24. 가중치 결정에서의 다수 전문가 의견종합방법, 어하준, 김성철, , 1994

25. 산,학,연,관 컨소시엄 활성화 방안에 관한 고찰, 서용위, 원종하, "산, , 1998

26. University-based virtual alliance spur technological innovation, Dismukes, Petkovic, , 1997

27. An Overview of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Its Application, Vargas, , 1990

28. Succeeding with accreditation. 영유아교육기관의 인정제, Goffin, , 2002

29. 보육시설 평가인증제도 도입 필요성과 실시 방안, 서문희, , 2001

30. Creating the Era for NAEYC Accreditation 영유아교육기관의 인정제, Goffin, , 2002

31. How do we get there from here? The CSUN Early Childhood Consulting Services, Fish, Isaacs, Chung, , 2001

32. Putting children first: Quality improvement and accreditation system handbook, NCAC, , 1993

33. 유치원 모의평가를 통한 유아교육평가모형 확립방안 연구, 장명림, , 2000

34. Technological choice in the less developed countries: An analytic hierachy process, Ramanujam, Saaty, , 1981

35. The hundred languages of children : the Reggio Emilia approach--advanced reflections, Edwards, Carolyn, Ablex Pub. Corp., , 1998

36. 유아교육기관 평가인증제에서 각 참여주체의 역할에 관한 연구, 이경철(Lee Kyung-Cheol), 한국열린유아교육학회, "열린유아교육학회 2005년 추계학술대회 논문집, , 2006

37. 호텔기업 발전을 위한 산학협동프로그램 모델 개발에 과한 연구, 이종한, , 2002

38. 유아교육기관 평가에 대한 유아교육기관 원장의 인식에 관한 연구, 공미자, 원광대학교, 원광대학교 대학원 석사학위논문, , 2003

39. 퍼지환경 하에서 다기준의사결정법에 의한 중소기업의 경쟁력 평가, 박영화, , 1997

40. 우수 유치원 인증제를 위한 평가체제: 우수유치원 인증을 위한 평가모형, 이기우, , 2003

41. 유아교육기관의 인정평가체제 및 인정평가기준에 대한 유아교사의 인식, 홍정선, 원광대학교, 원광대학교 석사학위논문, , 2002

42. 유치원 평가인증제 컨설팅을 위한 유치원 교사의 인식 및 요구도 조사연구, 김인순, , 2005

43. 민간 전문 단체 주관의 유아교육 및 보육 기관 평가 모형 개발을 위한 기초연구, 이기우, 이대균, , 2000

44. 유아교육?보육기관 평가인정제 모형(안)의 평가인정기준에 대한 학부모의 인식, 양옥승, 신은미, , 2001

45. The first decade of NAEYC accredition: Growth and impact on the field. In S. Bredekamp, & B. A. Willer(Eds.), Glowacki, Bredekamp, "The first decade of NAEYC accredition: Growth and impact on the field. In S. Bredekamp, , 1996

46. A Trends of Cooperative System among the Fields, Colleges and Government in U.S.A., Practice and Collaboration :, Fish, "A Trends of Cooperative System among the Fields, , 2004

47. 『유아교육·보육기관 평가인정제 모형(안)』에 대한 유치원과 어린이집 교원의 인식, 양옥승, 최경애, 이정란, 덕성여자대학교 사회과학연구소, 유아교육?보육기관 평가인정제 모형(안)에 대한 유치원과 어린이집 교원의 인식, , 2000

48. 산학협력 활성화를 위한 산학연계 전략 수립에 관한 연구 : 산업대학의 역할모형 중심으로, 홍현덕, , 2003

49. 산·학·관 협력 체제-유아교육기관의 측면, 유아교육 산·학·관 협력체제 어떻게 할 것인가?, 류미자, "산?학?관 협력 체제-유아교육기관의 측면, , 2004

50. Quality systems in Australian children's services. 영유아교육기관의 인정제: 한국, 일본, 미국, 영국, 호주, Taylor, "Quality systems in Australian children's services. 영유아교육기관의 인정제: 한국, , 2002

51. Delphi hierarchy Process(DHP): A methodology for priority setting derived from the Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process, Khorramshahgol, , 1988

52. 유아교육에서의 산학·관 협력체제: 대학의 역할. 유아교육 산·학·관 협력체제 어떻게 할 것인가?, 황해익, "유아교육에서의 산?학?관 협력체제: 대학의 역할, , 2004

53. 미국, 영국, 호주의 유아교육 평가제도 비교, 한국유아교육기관의 질적 향상을 위한 인준평가체제 방향모색, 박은혜, Nandini,S., 백혜리, 이진우, "미국, , 2000

54. The Early Childhood Education Consulting Services : A University-based pilot project and its impact on teaching and learning, service and research, Fish, "The Early Childhood Education Consulting Services : A University-based pilot project and its impact on teaching and learning, , 1999

55. It takes a team-From consulting to collaboration with the California State University, Northridge/Child Care Resource Center Early Childhood Education Consulting Services, Fish, Pollack, "It takes a team-From consulting to collaboration with the California State University, , 2002

56. 우리나라 산학협동 연구 프로젝트의 영향요인에 대한 실증적 연구 : 정부 지원 공학센터(ERC)와 그 협동업체 수행한 R&D 프로젝트를 중심으로, 안순일, , 1997