보육시설 시설장의 평가인증제도에 대한 인식 연구 : 부천시 민간·가정보육시설을 중심으로 = A Study on the Perceptions of the Evaluation and Certification System among the Establishments with a Day Care Center: With a focus on private and home day care centers in Bucheon

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study set out to examine the general perceptions of the evaluation and certification system among private, home, and work establishments with a day care center excluding national, public, and corporation facilities in Bucheon. By investigating if there were differences in the perceptions according to evaluation and certification and between private and home day care centers with different evaluation and certification indexes, the study suggested the ways for them to take active part in evaluation and certification by reflecting the current state of the evaluation and certification system among the day care centers in Bucheon.
For those purposes, the following research questions were set:
1) What are the common characteristics of the subjects and their participation in evaluation and certification?
2) What are the general perceptions of the evaluation and certification system among the establishments with a day care center?
3) Are there differences in general perceptions of evaluation and certification between those establishments that completed their evaluation and certification and those establishments that were not certified?
4) Are there differences in general perceptions of evaluation and certification between private and home day care centers?
The subjects include 122 establishments with a day care center that received no support from the government, and they include 78 private establishments, 40 homes, and 4 workplaces with different evaluation and certification indexes.
A questionnaire was made based on the previous study and then partially revised and supplemented to fit the goals of the study by the investigator. The SPSS WIN 12.0 program was used for statistical analysis.
The research findings were as follows: First, as for the characteristics of the subjects, 36.1% of the private day care centers in Bucheon were located in a two-story commercial building, which was followed by a single building and apartment housing. Small-sized day care centers whose quorum was 21~39 children accounted for 42.6%. When they rented an office from a commercial building, the day care centers naturally had an anxious prospect for long-term operation and thus a negative perception of participation in evaluation and certification. And small-sized day care centers with inferior environments suffered a financial burden required for evaluation and certification.
Secondly, the general perceptions of the evaluation and certification system were reviewed. As a result, most of the establishments knew about the evaluation and certification system, and more than half of them felt a need for the system. But about 40.9% said there was no need for such a system. The reasons why they didn't apply for evaluation and certification were overload of affairs including documentation, hindrance of their unique day care duties, and financial burden.
With regard to their perceptions of the evaluation and certification areas, they believed that the day care environment should be most valued in evaluation and certification and cited operation and management as the most difficult area in evaluation and certification. They also said the members of the self-review committee were proper in the evaluation and certification process(application for participation, self-review, field observation, and deliberation of certification). They had positive perceptions of taking advantage of the childcare information center as a support institution. The biggest difficulties with participation in evaluation and certification derived from renovation and repair of the day care center, financial burden, teachers who were leaving, and overload of work. And their passiveness towards evaluation and certification could be explained by the huge burden associated with the improvement of the day care environment and documentation of operation and management.
Third, the general perceptions of evaluation and certification were examined between those day care centers which were evaluated and certified and those which were not certified. As a result, there were differences between the two groups as to the degree of their knowledge of the evaluation and certification system and a need for the system. Those day care centers which were certified were more aware of the system and felt a greater need for the system than those which were not certified. A big proportion of the former group replied that the certification process was effective in increasing the teachers' professionalism and providing high quality, systematic childcare to the young children although the financial burden was huge.
And fourth, the general perceptions of the evaluation and certification system were examined between the private and home day care centers. Although there were no statistically significant differences in a need for such a system between them, there were some differences as to whether they engaged in evaluation and certification. While the day care centers that were already certified or in the process of certification accounted for 15% and 32.5%, respectively, among the home day care centers, the percentage was 9% and 5.1%, respectively, among the private day care centers. The percentage difference can be explained by the bigger burden of renovation and repair of the facility, which was cited as the biggest hardship with evaluation and certification, on the private day care centers.
And the following suggestions were made to help the evaluation and certification system settle down stably and improve itself: First, it's essential to provide ongoing specific promotions to keep their interest in the evaluation and certification system. It's also a must to provide a professional retraining course about the system to the incumbent practitioners. Second, the criteria of childcare environments and facilities needed to approve a day care center should be set according to the evaluation and certification standards.
Third, the government should provide policy and

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론 = 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성 및 목적 = 1
• 2. 연구 문제 = 3
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 = 5
• 1. 평가인증제도 = 5
• 2. 외국의 평가인증제도 = 13
• 3. 선행연구 분석 = 20
• Ⅲ. 연구 방법 = 23
• 1. 조사대상자 및 자료수집 방법 = 23
• 2. 조사 도구 = 23
• 3. 자료 분석 = 24
• Ⅳ. 연구 결과 = 25
• 1. 조사대상자의 일반적 특성 및 평가인증 참여 현황 = 25
• 2. 보육시설 시설장들의 평가인증제도에 대한 일반적인 인식 = 28
• 3. 평가인증 시설 시설장과 미 인증시설 시설장의 평가인증제도에 대한 인식 차이 = 47
• 4. 민간보육시설 시설장과 가정보육시설 시설장의 평가인증제도에 대한 인식의 차이 = 51
• Ⅳ. 논의 및 결론 = 58
• 1. 논의 = 58
• 2. 결론 및 제언 = 63
• 참고문헌 = 67
• 설문지 = 70
• Abstract = 80