보육시설 유형에 따른 평가인증제에 관한 보육시설 종사자들의 인식 : 울산광역시를 중심으로 = The Perceptions of People Working at Childcare Facilities of the Evaluation and Certification System of Childcare Facilities according to the Facility Types: With a focus on Ulsan Metropolitan City

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

There has been increasingly more social interest in childcare due to the increasing number of women participating social and economic activities, more diversified family types, and changes to the population structure owing to low birth rates and aging. It was in 2005 that they established the legal foundations for the evaluation and certification system of childcare facilities, which had been in discussion for many years. Starting in 2006 the system has been expanded in a gradual manner. The study took a two-pronged approach to the goals; first, it would discuss the general facts of the evaluation and certification system of childcare facilities through previous and literature study. Second, it would investigate the general perceptions of the heads and teachers at childcare facilities regarding the system in terms of operational systems, fairness and validity of evaluation, and evaluation costs. The analysis results of the different types of childcare facilities would also contribute to the improvement measures and stable and effective settlement of the system and further to the activation of Korea's childcare business and development child welfare. For those purposes, one head and nursing teacher were surveyed at (1)national and public childcare facilities, (2)private childcare facilities, (3)family childcare facilities, (4)corporate childcare facilities, and (5)workplace childcare facilities. The questionnaire used was the revised and supplemented version of the one used by Park Bok-mae(2005) and Lee Serapina(2003). The survey was conducted by the investigator personally visiting the childcare facilities or mailing the questionnaires in April and May, 2006.
The results were as follows: both the heads and nursing teachers approved the introduction of the evaluation and certification system of childcare facilities in all the types of childcare facilities for 'to improve the quality levels of childcare service.' But there were a good number of respondents who were against the system, which can raise a huge problem with the stable settlement of the system. Most of them mentioned their distrust in the childcare administration that would easily turn into 'administration for show' and 'too much workload' for the reasons. Those working at private childcare facilities were concerned with 'the potential relative damage to the small-size facilities.'
There were huge differences in what made them the most nervous about getting a certification according to the facility types. Those at the national and public childcare facilities cited 'too much workload' and 'disturbance with childcare' as the biggest concern, while those at the private and family childcare facilities mentioned 'burden for investment costs' as the biggest concern. The results regarding their willingness to apply for a certification showed the similar tendency. While the national and public, corporate, workplace, and family childcare facilities were very willing to apply for a certification, the private childcare facilities were most likely to apply after a couple of years or not to apply at all. Despite the great need for the evaluation and certification system for the private childcare facilities, they showed passive attitudes to the participation and felt burden and even resistance to evaluation and certification itself.
The respondents from all the facility types said 'the accurate perception and understanding by those who work in childcare' should precede the certification system. Their perceptions that decide the quality of childcare seem to have direct relations with the success of the system. The second condition they cited was 'development of a proper certification system.' To the questions about the general concerns of the evaluation and certification system of childcare facilities such as operational systems and methods, those working at the national and public childcare facilities gave usually positive answers. But those working at the private childcare facilities gave lower points to most of the items and showed tepid attitudes to the system. With respect to the perceptions of the seven areas of the indexes for the evaluation and certification, those working at the private childcare facilities had the similar results to the general concerns above.
Those results have something to do with the sufficiency of childcare conditions and particularly reflect the problems with financial support. Considering the poor structure of the private childcare facilities, it's natural for the private sector to refuse or resist the evaluation and certification system of childcare facilities, which has been presented in the same levels as the national and public, corporate, and workplace childcare facilities. There are several ways to facilitate the stable settlement of the evaluation and certification system of childcare facilities: there should be large-scale administrative support for the private sector; the types of childcare facilities and regional characteristics should be taken into account in developing diverse and segmented evaluation indexes; the system should be improved based on the opinions of the people working at the childcare facilities, who are to be evaluated and have some interest at stake; and finally they should be given enough chances of promotion and education to enhance their perceptions of the system.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론 = 1
• 제1절 연구 목적 = 1
• 제2절 연구 문제 = 4
• 제2장 이론적 배경 = 5
• 제1절 보육의 개념 및 현황 = 5
• 제2절 외국의 보육시설 평가인증제와 시사점 = 19
• 제3절 보육시설 평가인증제도의 체계와 기준 = 25
• 제4절 보육시설 평가인증제도에 관한 선행연구 = 35
• 제3장 조사방법 = 40
• 제1절 조사 대상 및 자료수집 방법 = 40
• 제2절 조사 도구 = 41
• 제3절 자료 분석 방법 = 43
• 제4장 조사 결과 및 분석 = 44
• 제1절 응답자의 일반적 사항에 대한 분석 = 44
• 제2절 보육시설 평가인증제도의 일반적인 사항에 대한 분석 = 49
• 제3절 보육시설 평가인증지표에 대한 분석 = 71
• 제5장 결론 및 제언 = 78
• 제1절 논의 = 78
• 제2절 결론 = 83
• 제3절 제언 = 87
• <참고문헌> = 88
• <부록> = 93
• <ABSTRACT> = 101