교원능력개발평가에 관한 사립유치원 교사의 인식

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study was to examine the awareness of teachers about the evaluation for teacher ability development conducted in elementary and secondary schools and public kindergartens in an effort to provide information on how to implement the evaluation for teacher ability development in private kindergartens, as this evaluation is going to be conducted in private kindergartens. The subjects in this study were 150 private kindergarten teachers, on whom a survey was conducted. The questionnaire used in this study was prepared based on the evaluation of teacher performance, guidelines about teacher evaluation and related studies. This researcher and an expert modified these materials to produce the questionnaire suitable for private kindergartens. The collected data were analyzed to address the research questions of the study, and the findings of the study were as follows:
First, regarding awareness of the evaluation for teacher ability development, how the private kindergarten teachers looked at the intended implementation of that evaluation in private kindergartens, the content of the evaluation in public kindergartens and the utilization of the output by public kindergartens was analyzed, and it's found that the teachers who took a positive view were similar in number to the others who took a negative view.
Second, as for the necessity of the evaluation for teacher ability development, the private kindergarten teachers who agreed to that were similar in number to those who disagreed. By academic credential, there were some gaps between the junior-college graduates and the college graduates. The teachers who received college or higher education a little more agreed to that.
Concerning the reason why the evaluation for teacher ability development was not necessary in private kindergartens, the largest group replied that working conditions would get worse due to heavy stress, and the second biggest group answered that the evaluation wouldn't be conducted in a fair and valid manner. By academic credential, there was a gap between the junior-college graduates and the college graduates. The former replied that working conditions would get worse due to heavy stress, and the latter answered that the evaluation wouldn't be conducted in a fair and valid manner. As to the reason why it would be necessary, they thought that it would provide an opportunity for teachers to enhance their professionalism, and there were no significant gaps in that aspect according to the variables.
Third, regarding the appropriateness of the evaluation for teacher ability development in terms of evaluation area and content, the private kindergarten teachers thought that all the six areas were appropriate or a little appropriate. There were no differences in their view of every area according to the change of workplace. By career, academic credential and position, however, those who were more experienced, who received college or higher education and who were lead teachers considered the area and content of the evaluation to be more appropriate.
Fourth, as to the appropriateness of the involvement of evaluators in the utilization of the output of the evaluation for teacher ability development, they replied that it would be reasonable or slightly reasonable for supervisors, principals, assistance principals, lead teachers, colleagues and teachers themselves to be involved in it, and they viewed principals, assistant principals and lead teachers as the best evaluators. On the contrary, they didn't think that it's advisable for parents to be evaluators. In regard to the appropriateness of the output of the evaluation for teacher ability development as grounds for personnel administration, they considered it reasonable to make use of the output in association with the selection of outstanding teachers, a rise in salary, promotion, performance-based pay and welfare benefits. As for the elimination of unqualified teachers, however, they considered that to be inappropriate to some extent. In relation to the release of the output, the biggest group argued that only teachers themselves should be informed of their own evaluation results, and there were little differences in that aspect according to the variables. Concerning the cycle and frequency of the evaluation, they deemed it most advisable to conduct it once a year, and they had a different opinion on that according to academic credential.
Given the findings of the study, there are some suggestions:
So far, a lot of studies have examined the evaluation for teacher ability development among elementary and secondary teachers and public kindergarten teachers, but few studies have ever investigated private kindergarten teachers in relation to that. And the opinions of private kindergarten teachers are rarely taken into account. Since the evaluation for teacher ability development that is conducted in public kindergartens is identical to that in elementary schools, the former isn't consequently appropriate for kindergarten teachers. The evaluation for teacher ability development is going to be conducted in private kindergartens, and a new evaluation system should be set up in terms of evaluation area and evaluators, and the characteristics of private kindergartens should be taken into account at that time.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목 차 ⅰ
• 표목차 ⅲ
• ABSTRACT ⅴ
• Ⅰ. 서 론 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성 및 목적 1
• 2. 연구문제 5
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 7
• 1. 교원능력개발평가의 현황 및 쟁점 7
• 2. 교원능력개발평가의 영역 및 내용 13
• 3. 교원능력개발평가의 평가주체 18
• Ⅲ. 연구방법 22
• 1. 연구 대상 22
• 2. 연구 도구 23
• 3. 연구 절차 25
• 4. 자료 분석 25
• Ⅳ. 연구 결과 26
• 1. 교원능력개발평가에 관한 인지도 26
• 2. 사립유치원 교원능력개발평가의 필요성에 대한 인식 27
• 3. 사립유치원 교원능력개발평가의 영역 및 적합성에
• 대한 인식 33
• 4. 사립유치원 교원능력개발평가의 결과활용에 대한 인식 39
• Ⅴ. 논의 및 결론 45
• 1. 논의 48
• 2. 결론 및 제언 48
• 참 고 문 헌 52
• 부 록 55