기술교과 교육에서 기술적 능력 성취를 위한 수행중심 교육과정 개발 모형 연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to provide fundamental data enables technology curriculum planner to offer ‘Technological Capability' students should get and effective experience enables students to achieve ‘Technological Capability' through presenting ‘Performance- Based Curriculum' as a alternative enables students to achieve ‘Technological Capability’ founded on content domains of technology in developing of technology curriculum.
There are three research problems to accomplish the research purpose.
1) What is ‘a process model of developing Performance-Based Curriculum for achieving Technological Capability' required in present and future society?
2) What is the characteristic of ‘method of designing Performance-Based Curriculum for achieving Technological Capability' required in present and future society?
3) Is it valid ‘a process model of developing Performance-Based Curriculum for achieving Technological Capability' and ‘a model of designing Performance-Based Curriculum for achieving Technological Capability' planed theoretically.
The researcher planned theoretic model of developing ‘Performance-Based Curriculum' for achieving ‘Technological Capability' through theoretical review on related literature to solve these research purpose and research problems. this model is consist of 5 steps and 12 sub-steps.
Founded on these model, the researcher made out the 1st delphi questionnaire [appendix 4] with 27 items on ①standard related to ‘a process of developing Performance-Based Curriculum for achieving Technological Capability' ②standard related to ‘designing Performance-Based Curriculum for achieving Technological Capability' ②-ⓐstandard related to choosing educational objectives ②-ⓑstandard related to choosing educational contents ②-ⓒstandard related to method of teaching and learning ②-ⓓstandard related to method of educational evaluation and the 2nd delphi questionnaire [appendix 6], the 3rd questionnaire [appendix 9] with 28 items through correcting by reflecting on opinion of technology education experts.
The researcher chose 35 persons(14 professors, 5 researchers, 16 teachers) as sample group through peer recommendation of experts matched over 3 standards in 4 standards for delphi survey. the population of technology education expert panels are ①the professor of department related technology education, ②the researcher related technology education, ③the technology teacher in 2009.
The sampling standards are ①the member of the Korea Technology Education Association, ②the professor of ‘department related technology education' and ‘national university of education' with degree of the technology education, ③the technology teacher with degree of technology education, ④ the person participated in a research to develop technology curriculum or published articles over 1 in related journals.
The delphi survey verified ‘the ratio of validity' and ‘the ratio of important' on items related standards on 35 technology education experts by 3 times. and technology education experts answered until 3rd time are 29 persons (10 professors, 5 researchers, 14 teachers).
The results of delphi survey on ‘validity ratio' and ‘importance ratio' by 3 times.
The first, related on ‘validity ratio' in the 2nd delphi survey, opinion of panels came to consensus throughly on 9 criteria of No. 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 17, 21, 24, the degree of consensus of these 9 criteria is 1.00. and opinion of panels came to consensus considerably on the other 19 criteria. the degree of consensus these criteria are .69~.94.
Just, in the 1st delphi survey, 11-②(validity of persons of industry related technology domains as a technology expert) item was deleted because the degree of consensus(.33) was very low, and 12-②(validity of DACUM with need analysis ahead as a method of analyzing technological capability) item was deleted because opinions of delphi panels are this method is not suitable in the technology education as a general education.
The second, related on ‘importance ratio' in the 2nd delphi survey, opinion of panels came to consensus throughly on 6 criteria of No. 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 21, the degree of consensus of these 6 criteria is 1.00. and opinion of panels came to consensus considerably on the other 22 criteria. the degree of consensus these criteria is .75.
The third, related on ‘importance ratio' in the 3rd delphi survey, opinion of panels came to consensus throughly on 10 criteria of No. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 21, the degree of consensus of these 10 criteria is 1.00. and opinion of panels came to consensus considerably on the other 18 criteria. the degree of consensus these criteria is .75. and all items had the validity because the CVR on all items are .59~.93 over the minimum CVR numeric value(.338) on 29 answerers of panels.
In comparison with results of the 2nd and the 3rd delphi survey, opinion of panels on 3. ‘[1. Analysis step] is consist on 2 sub-steps' item didn't come to consensus nearly, the degree of consensus is .50 and the degree of convergence is 1.00 in the 2nd delphi survey, but opinion of panels on this item is came to consensus throughly, the degree of consensus is 1.00 and the degree of convergence is .00 in the 3rd delphi survey. The degree of consensus rose up outstandingly.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서 론 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성과 목적 1
• 2. 연구 문제 4
• 3. 용어의 정의 4
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 6
• 1. 기술교과 교육과 기술적 능력 6
• 2. 기술교과에서의 수행중심 교육과정 19
• 3. 기술교과 교육과정 개발 모형 38
• 4. 기술교과에서의 수행중심 교육과정 개발 모형의 이론적 구안 64
• Ⅲ. 연구 방법 74
• 1. 연구 방법의 개요 74
• 2. 문헌 연구 75
• 3. 델파이 조사 75
• Ⅳ. 연구 결과 및 논의 79
• 1. 수행중심 교육과정 개발 절차 모형 79
• 2. 수행중심 교육과정 설계 모형의 특성 83
• 3. 수행중심 교육과정 개발 절차 모형 및 교육과정 설계 모형의 타당도 86
• 4. 논의 97
• Ⅴ. 요약, 결론 및 제언 101
• 1. 연구 요약 101
• 2. 결론 104
• 3. 제언 105
• 참고 문헌 107
• ABSTRACT 119
• 부 록 123
• [부록 1] 델파이 패널 명단 124
• [부록 2] 델파이 1차 조사 의뢰 서한 125
• [부록 3] 자문 위원 승낙서 126
• [부록 4] 델파이 1차 조사지 127
• [부록 5] 델파이 2차 조사 의뢰 서한 133
• [부록 6] 델파이 2차 조사지 134
• [부록 7] 델파이 1차 조사지 수정 내용 140
• [부록 8] 델파이 3차 조사 의뢰 서한 141
• [부록 9] 델파이 3차 조사지 142
• [부록 10] 델파이 2차 조사지 수정 내용 148
• [부록 11] 델파이 조사 패널 수에 따른 내용 타당도 비율(CVR)의 최소값 149