韓國 幼兒敎育 一元化體制 模型 探索 = (The) Development of One-Integrated System in Korea early childhood education and care

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

1. Purpose and Contents, Method
The purpose of this study was to develop one-integrated model for Korea early childhood education and care(ECEC) system, by exploring its possibility and analyzing the disputes over the creation of an integrated system in consideration of history, comparative education and the current ECEC system.
For attaining the purpose, the following attempts were made :
First, the actual condition and problem in Korea ECEC system were investigated, after reviewing the theories concerned to the preparation of analytic criteria for that system.
Second, the Korea ECEC system was divided into three stages to find out each stage's characteristics, and each stage's historical implication for the development of one-integrated system was defined.
Third, the international trend of ECEC system was examined by looking into how leading foreign countries, including OECD-member nations, established their own system. Specifically, Japan that had been in a heated controversy about that system was compared with Korea in light of comparative education.
Fourth, the possibility of and disputes over one-integrated ECEC system were analyzed in consideration of factors related to the current ECEC system.
Fifth, one-integrated Korea ECEC system was developed based on the results of the fourth attempt.
The methods of this study was to look into literature concerned and history, make a comparative research, or ask an expert to review the findings of this study and the one-integrated model developed in this study.
2. Major Findings
The findings of this study were as follows :
First, as a result of analyzing the change of educational trend, the concept and function of ECEC, the basic logic, changed from childcare (rearing and care)' to 'educare'.
Second, as a result of looking into the change of Korean system, the need for one-integrated ECEC system was justified by the 'Early Childhood Education ＆ Care Promotion Act' that defined the legal concept of ECEC as comprehensively including care and education for infant and young children.
Third, the international trend was that the approach to ECEC system changed from two-parallel system to two age-related system to one-integrated system. The two age-related system or one-integrated system had more advantages than the two-parallel system.
Fourth, there were approximately 20 kinds of major disputes at issue related to that system's integration in korea, including kindergarten's use of full-time course.
Fifth, ECEC consumers and suppliers had different opinions on those disputes at issue. Further, there also was a wide gap even between suppliers, namely between kindergarten circle and educare center circle, which was caused by different interests.
Sixth, some of the major controversies were getting near to successful solution, which showed the possibility of one-integrated ECEC system.
Seventh, despite above-mentioned possibility, the controversies between kindergarten circle and educare center circle remained unchanged or got deeper. So there were a lot of things which made it difficult to promote integration.
Eighth, this study leaned toward the opinion that advocated its possibility, and a three-stage integrated model was recommended, which was designed to cope with the adverse views of integration.
The first stage was a transitional period toward one-integrated ECEC system. In this period, the two circles would open their facilities to each other in a bid for creating an integrated system during 3 years since the legislation and enforcement of 'Early Childhood Education ＆ Care Act.' The second stage was to establish an age-differentiated integrated ECEC system from 3 years after the enforcement of 'Infant Care Act' and 'Early Childhood Education ＆ Care Act.' The third stage was to actually use one-integrated ECEC system after meeting the conditions for its implementation, including determining school district for preschool and inserting preschool in the existing school system.
3. Conclusion
Based on the above-mentioned findings, this study reached the following conclusion :
First, as the kindergarten circle and educare center circle were narrowing the gap of their views on the concept and function of ECEC, the most crucial basic logic, ECEC systems that were performing the same function based on the same concept must be integrated without fail.
Second, the efforts to establish public education by integrating ECEC systems should no longer be delayed to eliminate the various problems of the current dual system.
Third, an age-differentiated integrated system would be desirable for Korea, although the most ideal pattern was one-integrated system.
Fourth, it's required for 'Early Childhood Education ＆ Care Act' to provide approximately 3 years as a period to make preparations for building an age-differentiated integrated system.
Fifth, a feasible approach to an integrated system was an active national intervention by using a political-decision model in coordinating different arguments as a political behavior and reaching a consensus for legislation.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차 = ⅰ
• Ⅰ. 문제의 제기 = 1
• Ⅱ. 연구의 설계 = 7
• 1. 연구 목적 = 7
• 2. 연구 내용 = 7
• 3. 연구방법 = 9
• 4. 용어 정의 = 13
• 5. 연구의 제한점 = 17
• Ⅲ. 이론적 고찰 = 19
• 1. 유아교육체제의 이론적 기저 = 19
• 가. 유아교육 사조의 변화 = 20
• 나. 유아교육개념의 재구조화 = 39
• 2. 유아교육체제의 개념, 성격 및 기능 = 39
• 가. 유아교육체제의 개념 = 39
• 나. 유아교육체제의 성격 = 43
• 3. 유아교육체제 관련 요인 = 46
• 가. 국가 = 47
• 나. 유아교육 수혜자 = 50
• 다. 유아교육공급자 = 51
• 라. 정치체제 = 53
• 마. 유아교육관련 이익단체 = 54
• 4. 유아교육체제의 접근모형 이론 = 55
• 5. 한국 유아교육체제의 현황 및 문제점 = 57
• 가. 유아교육 체제의 현황 = 57
• 나. 유아교육체제의 문제점 = 58
• Ⅳ. 유아교육체제 변천과정 분석 = 61
• 1. 방임적 다원화체제 시기(1982'유아교육진흥법'제정 이전) = 61
• 가. 유치원 교육체제 여명기 = 61
• 나. 보육체제 여명기 = 64
• 다. 유아교육정책 등한기 = 69
• 라. 유아교육체제 정비시도기 = 72
• 2. 제한적 일원화체제 시기 (1982 '유아교육진흥법' 제정 이후~1991'영유아보육법'제정 이전) = 87
• 가. 유아교육체제 정비기 = 88
• 나. 보육체제 재 형성기 = 144
• 3. 유(幼)·보(保) 이원화체제 시기('영유아보육법'제정 이후 현재 까지) = 148
• 가. 보육체제 확립기 = 148
• 나. 유아교육체제 일원화 시도기 = 161
• Ⅴ. 외국의 유아교육체제 분석 = 185
• 1. 유아교육체제 확립의 국제적 동향 = 185
• 2. 유아교육체제 일원화 논쟁국 사례 분석 : 일본 = 190
• 가. 유아교육의 실태 = 190
• 나. 유아교육체제 일원화 논쟁 과정 = 194
• 다. 유아교육체제 일원화 논쟁 과정에서 나타난 특징 = 201
• Ⅵ. 유아교육체제 일원화 논리 분석 = 203
• 1. 유아교육수혜자의 요구 논리 = 203
• 가. 유치원교육 수혜자의 측면 = 204
• 나. 보육 수혜자의 측면 = 216
• 2. 유아교육 공급자의 요구 논리 = 229
• 가. 유치원의 측면 = 229
• 나. 보육시설의 측면 = 237
• 3. 행·재정적 논리 = 252
• 가. 국가·지방자치단체의 통제 및 행정주도권 측면 = 252
• 나. 재정부담 측면 = 277
• 4. 정치·사회적 논리 = 291
• 가. 정치계의 논리 = 291
• 나. 이해 관련집단의 논리 = 309
• 다. 경제적 논리 = 329
• 5. 유아교육체제 일원화에 관한 종합적 논의 = 333
• 가. 일원화 쟁점에 관한 수혜자-공급자간 입장 = 333
• 나. 유아교육체제 일원화 가능성 논리 = 335
• 다. 유아교육체제 일원화 한계 논리 = 337
• 라. 일원화 모형 탐색의 시사점 = 338
• Ⅶ. 유아교육체제 일원화 모형 탐색 = 343
• 1. 모형 탐색의 기본방향 = 344
• 가. 유아교육체제 일원화 모형의 지향방향 = 344
• 나. 유아교육체제 구성 준거별 기본방향 = 345
• 2. 기본 모형(안)의 구조 = 351
• 가. 일원화 모형(안) 제안 이유 = 351
• 나. 유아교육 일원화 체제 확립 모형 = 351
• 다. 유아교육 관리체제의 일원화 = 357
• 라. 교원 자격·경력인정체제의 일원화 = 358
• 마. 유아교육재정 확보 방안 = 359
• 바. 유아교육연구·평가기능의 일원화 = 360
• 3. 기본 모형(안)의 기대효과 및 적용상의 유의점 = 361
• 가. 기대효과 = 361
• 나. 적용상의 유의점 = 363
• 4. 기본모형(안)에 대한 전문가의 타당성 검토 결과 = 364
• Ⅷ. 요약 및 결론 = 367
• 1. 요약 = 367
• 2. 결론 = 373
• 참고문헌 = 375
• 부록 = 385
• 부록Ⅰ. 유아교육체제 일원화 모형(안)에 대한 전문가 검토 의뢰 내용 = 387
• 부록Ⅱ. 한국 유아교육체제의 변천과정(1949~1999) = 413
• 부록Ⅲ. 유아교육체제 일원화 논쟁 과정 = 427
• 부록Ⅳ. 본 연구 및 제시 모형(안)에 대한 전문가(기관) 의견 = 448
• ABSTRACT = 452