공업계 고등학교 학교수준의 교육과정 평가준거 개발 연구 = (A) Study on the criteria development for the school-based curriculum evaluation in the technical high school

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to develop criteria for school-based curriculum evaluation in the technical high school, i.e. evaluation domain, element and item. In this study, attempts were made to identify the importance of suggested criteria through a survey with experts and technical high school teachers. Attempts were also made to identify the performance and educational needs of school-based curriculum in order to quality improvements of curriculum by evaluating school-based curriculum in accordance with the criteria.
For this, school-based curriculum evaluation activities in technical high school were defined within a framework of context, input, process and product(output) through theoretical review of related literatures, and a relevant evaluation domain was offered for each evaluation activity. Eight evaluation domains proposed were reviewed by experts for modification into six evaluation domains and thereafter sub-categorized into 206 evaluation items according to a two-way classification table. One-on-one interviews with each of eight experts and a Delphi panel of 31 members produced 6 evaluation domains, 23 evaluation elements and 93 evaluation items.
To analyze the school applicability of the evaluation criteria, a survey was developed for distribution to technical high school teachers. The finalized survey, structured on the five-stage Likert scale, was distributed to 600 teachers in charge of formulating school-based curriculum in 300 technical high schools across the nation. 371(61.8%) survey papers returned and 265(44.2%) were used for analysis.
Collected data was analyzed with the SPSS WIN Version 10.07 and the method utilized was descriptive statistical analysis such as frequency, percentage, average, and standard deviation, factor analysis, chi-square test, t-test, one-way ANOVA and correlation analysis.
The results of the study were as follows:
First, the validity analysis generated six school-based curriculum evaluation domains in technical high school: "The domain of the need analysis of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" for context-related evaluation, "The domain of the development(design & organization) of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" and "The domain of the development and support system of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" for input-related evaluation, "The domain of the implementation of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" and "The domain of the cooperation between industry and the school, and the field practices" for process-related evaluation, and "The domain of the effect of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" for product-related evaluation. "Content Validity" reviewed three times by the Delphi panel and analysis of the responses regarding importance in each school-based curriculum evaluation domain indicated that the perceived significance of each domain averages somewhere between 3.97 and 4.73 out of 5, supporting validity.
Second, content validity review and factor analysis finalized identification of 22 evaluation elements and 90 items, The content validity ratio of evaluation items averaged between 35 and 1.0 confirming validity. The evaluation elements and items of each domain, reliability, and communality in each domain were obtained through factor analysis: "The domain of the need analysis of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" had three evaluation elements, "the need analysis of the learner(parents)", "the need analysis of the industry and community", and "the need analysis of the educational provider", and 11 evaluation items; Cronbach's α was .8814 and communality 67.29%. "The domain of the development(design & organization) of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" had five evaluation elements, "the development of the subject course(instruction)", "the reflection of need for the educational consumer", "the development of the extra-subject course", "the development of the goal and objective and the reflection of need for the educational provider", and "the efforts for revision of the school-based curriculum", and 25 evaluation items; Cronbach's α was .9430 and communality 65.45%. "The domain of the development and support system of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" had four evaluation elements, "the support of the administration and finance for the school-based curriculum", "the development system of the school-based curriculum", " the support of the teacher", and "the support of the educational equipment", and 13 evaluation items; Cronbach's α was .8956 and communality 70.70% . "The domain of the implementation of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" had five evaluation elements, "the implementation of the subject(instruction)", "the systematic implementation of the school-based curriculum", "the implementation of the revised school-based curriculum", "the implementation of the extra-subject course", and "the activities of the assessment", and 21 evaluation items: Cronbach's α was .9348 and communality 66.92% . "The domain of the cooperation between industry and the school, and the field practices" had two evaluation elements. "the implementation and management of the field practices", and "exchange for the human and material resource with industry", and 9 evaluation items; Cronbach's α was .8843 and communality 64.68%. "The domain of the effect of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" had three evaluation elements, "the long-term effects of the school-based curriculum", "the degree of satisfaction of the related interest group to the school-based curriculum", and "the short-term effects of the school-based curriculum", and 11 evaluation items; Cronbach's α was ,9298 and communality 75.43% .
Third, average values responses by teachers surveyed for school-based curriculum evaluation domains and elements were 3.93 ~4.10 and 3.75 ~4.31 respectively, indicating that teachers view them as important. The teachers also recognized as important the 90 curriculum evaluation items with average values from 3.52 ~ 4.34.
Fourth, school-based curriculum evaluation finds that "The domain of the development(design & organization) of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" recorded highest with 3.55 followed by "The domain of the implementation of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school(3.53)". The lowest value was found in "The domain of the cooperation between industry and the school, and the field practices(3.18)" beneath "The domain of the effect of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school(3.33)", "The domain of the development and support system of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school(3.39)" and "The domain of the need analysis of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school(3.46)". "The domain of the need analysis of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" evaluation results imply that, in Korean school-based curriculum development, analysis focus has been placed not on the consumer demands of those such as students/parents, industry and local community but on suppliers such as the nation and schools. "The domain of the development(design & organization) of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" evaluation results indicate that education consumer demands are not fully reflected at the curriculum development stage. whereas education supplier needs are stressed. "The domain of the development and support system of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" evaluation results demonstrate lack of financial and administrative support for curriculum. "The domain of the implementation of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" evaluation results indicate that high level curriculum(national & district) is systematically managed, and subject course instruction is fairly well implemented. Extra-curricular courses and revised curriculums, however, have yet to reach satisfactory level status. "The domain of the cooperation between industry and the school, and the field practices" evaluation results suggest that human and material industry/school resource exchanges need much improvement. "The domain of the effect of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" evaluation results reveal that school-based curriculum in Korea produces unsatisfactory short-to- long-term effects and fails to meet the needs of those groups interested in education. Performance evaluations of evaluation domains and elements display a measure of statistical differences in terms of class sizes, while showing no differences in terms of the backgrounds of respondents. Therefore, it is presumed that the school-based curriculum evaluation criteria developed in this study is little influenced by respondents' background variables.
The conclusion obtained from the research is as follows:
First, there are six valid evaluation domains of school-based curriculum of the technical high school in Korea. Second, valid evaluation elements and items of school-based curriculum in technical high schools are 22 and 90, respectively, Third, both experts and teachers recognize the school-based curriculum evaluation criteria suggested by this study as important, Fourth, performance of school-based curriculum in Korea is fairly good in "The domain of the development(design & organization) of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school" and "The domain of the development and support system of the school-based curriculum in the technical high school". But, in developing and formulating curriculum, the needs of education suppliers tend to take precedence over those of education consumers. Efforts to develop and implement flexible and tailored curriculum are also needed. "The need analysis of the industry and community", "the support of the administration and finance for the school-based curriculum" and "exchange for the human and material resource with industry" deserve particular attention if we are to improve school-based curriculum quality of the technical high school if Korea.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• I. 서론 = 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성 및 목적 = 1
• 2. 연구 문제 = 5
• 3. 용어의 정의 = 5
• II. 이론적 배경 = 7
• 1. 교육과정 평가의 개념 및 모형 = 7
• 가. 교육과정 평가의 개념과 정의 = 7
• 나. 교육과정 평가의 제 접근 모형 = 11
• 2. 교육과정 평가 준거 탐색을 위한 선행 연구 고찰 = 22
• 가. 교육과정 연구 = 23
• 나. 교육과정 평가 연구 = 28
• III. 연구 방법 = 40
• 1. 조사 대상 = 41
• 가. 전문가 개별 면답 대상 = 41
• 나. 델파이 조사 대상 = 41
• 다. 예비 조사 및 본 조사 대상 = 42
• 2. 조사 도구 = 42
• 가. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 평가 준거에 대한 목록안 작성 = 42
• 나. 델파이 조사지 제작 = 43
• 다. 설문지 제작 = 44
• 3. 자료 수집 = 47
• 4. 자료 분석 = 49
• IV. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 평가 준거 및 모형 개발 = 50
• 1. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 준거 설정 = 50
• 가. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 평가 영역 설정 = 50
• 나. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 평가 요소 및 항목 설정 = 54
• 2. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 평가 모형 및 절차 = 67
• 가. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 평가 모형 설정 = 67
• 나. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 평가 절차 = 70
• V. 연구 결과 및 논의 = 73
• 1. 응답자의 일반적인 특성 = 73
• 2. 평가 영역 요인 확인 = 75
• 3. 평가 요소 및 항목 요인 확인 = 76
• 가. 내용 타당도 검토 = 76
• 나. 평가 항목의 구성 요인 규명 = 81
• 4. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정 평가 영역 및 요소에 대한 중요도 = 101
• 가. 평가 영역 및 요소별 중요도 = 101
• 나. 교사 배경 변인별 수행 정도 차이 검증 = 103
• 5. 공업계 교교 학교수준 교육과정 질 제고를 위한 교육적 요구 = 108
• 가. 평가 영역 및 요소별 수행 정도 = 108
• 나. 교사 배경 변인별 수행 정도 차이 검증 = 110
• 다. 공업계 고교 학교수준 교육과정의 질 제고를 위한 요구 분석 = 112
• 6. 논의 = 121
• 가. 연구 문제 1,2에 대한 논의 = 121
• 나. 연구 문제 3에 대한 논의 = 122
• 다. 연구 문제 4에 대한 논의 = 123
• VI. 요약,결론 및 제언 = 125
• 1. 요약 = 125
• 2. 결론 = 131
• 3. 제언 = 132
• 참고 문헌 = 134
• ABSTRACT = 145
• 부록 = 151