
http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
類型別 體制理論의 特性과 敎育行政에 대한 이들 理論의 示唆點
趙光濟 한국교육학회 대구·경북지회 1988 교육학논총 Vol.7 No.-
Generally, System Theory has been recognized as a most effective tool for logical problem-solving which can be applied to Educational Administration for maximizing the performance of educational goals since 1960s. The purpose of this study is to identify the theoretical characteristics of 4 types of System Theory as General System Theory, Total System Theory, Social System Theory, and Social-Technical System Theory, and to provide their suggestions for Educational Administration. Content of the study is consisted of such five parts as Introduction (Ⅰ), The Basic Concepts of System Theory (Ⅱ), Theoretical Characteristics of 4 type of System Theory (Ⅲ), Their Suggestions for Educational Administration (Ⅳ), and Conclusion (Ⅴ). System Theory may be divided into various types sub-theories such as General System Theory, Total System Theory, Social System Theory, and Social-Technical System Theory. General System Theory, Providing the theoretical background to Total System Theory, Social System Theory, and Social-Technical System Theory, emphasizes the generality and universality of system attribute. Total System Theory emphasizes the totality and integration of system attribute based on General System Theory. Social System Theory, considering school as Social System, emphasizes social-psychological dimension of organization by interacting nomothetic dimension and idiographic dimension. According to Social-Technical System Theory, a System as technical resource is consisted of such 4 interacting subsystem as Technique, Structure, Task, and Person. Each type of System Theory should be applied to Educational Administration System respectively or integratedly in accordance with specific educational setting as logic educational problem-solving strategies and theoretical framework.
조광제 서강대학교 철학연구소 2010 철학논집 Vol.23 No.-
후설의 존재론은 근본적으로 무한소의 ‘지금 ‧ 여기’에 바탕을 두고 있다. 그래서 후설의 철학의 현존철학이라 불러야 한다. 그런 반면에 하이데거 철학에 있어서 ‘Existenz’는 ‘실존’(實存), 즉 진정으로 존재함이라는 번역어를 할당하는 것이 적절한 것이고, 그의 철학에 대해서도 ‘실존철학’이라는 명칭을 붙여 마땅하다. 이러한 하이데거의 실존철학은 후설의 ‘현존주의’ 내지는 ‘현존철학’을 비틀면서 벗어난다. 말하자면, 하이데거의 실존철학은 인간주의(Anthropologismus)를 바탕으로 한 신학적 ‧ 존재론적인 철학이지, 엄밀하게 말하면 현상학이 아니다. 사르트르의 철학에 대해 하이데거적인 의미의 ‘실존철학’이라는 명칭을 붙여서는 결코 안 된다. 후설의 ‘현존철학’의 정신을 그대로 이어받으면서 하이데거와는 전혀 다르게 특수한 유물론적인 입장을 취한다고 하는 점에서, 사르트르의 철학은 ‘유물론적 현존철학’이라 불러야 한다. 사르트르가 말하는 주체는 이미 늘 자유로운 주체이지, 자유로운 주체가 되어야 하는 그런 주체가 아니다. 사르트르에서 자유는 인간의 ‘existence’가 성립하는 이른바 대자(對自, pour-soi)의 근본적인 존재론적인 성격으로서 그 자체 현존하는 것이지 존재하는 것이 아니다. 그리고 하이데거의 실존철학에서처럼 획득되어야 하는 것이 아니다. 사르트르가 말하는 ‘현존’은 이 세계에 존재하는 모든 것들에 대해 적용될 수 있는 것이고, 그 와중에 인간에 대해서도 적용될 수 있는데, 다만, 인간의 ‘현존’은 존재하는 모든 것들의 각 ‘현존’이 성립하는 데 근본적인 바탕이 될 뿐이고, 그렇기 때문에 인간과 관련해서 이 세계에 존재하는 모든 것들이 현존한다고 할 수 있는 것이다. 사르트르의 현존주의 내지는 현존철학은 일체의 본질주의를 바탕에서부터 거부하고, ‘천상’으로 향한 본질적인 영원을 거부하면서 우리 자신과 존재하는 모든 것들을 바탕에서부터 떠받치고 있는 ‘지상’으로 혹은 심지어 ‘지하’로 향하는 하강의 철학이다. 사르트르의 하강의 철학인 ‘현존주의 철학’은 지금 우리의 삶을 적극적으로 긍정하지 않으면 안 된다고 하는 강력한 메시지를 담고 있다. 그런 점에서 사르트르의 ‘현존주의 철학’이야말로 여전히 긴급하게 살아 있다고 할 수 있다. 다시 말하거니와 ‘실존’ 대신에 ‘현존
趙光濟 한국교육학회 대구·경북지회 1987 교육학논총 Vol.6 No.-
One of the critical factors determining the quality of higher education is the quality of Universities Professor through recruiting and training academic staff procedures. Therefore, an immediate task confronting higher education seems to be the recruiting and training academic staff. Understanding correctly concerning to the newly recruited Pedagogics professors' traits and their academic backgrounds and providing empirical data and information for recruiting and training Pedagosics professors make the basic purpose of this study. Specifically, this study seeks: (1) to identify the present situation about recruiting Pedagogics professors. (2) to analyze and describe empirically the newly recruited Pedagogics professors' academic backgrounds by age, sex, the types of degree, position, submajor, the rate of Doctor degree awarded and Doctor degree foreign awarded etc. in terms of seventeen professor's academic background variables. (3) to compare the newly recruited Pedagogics professors' academic backgrounds with the newly recruited National Ethics professors' ones by six variables. The principal method of this study is to analyze statically professors' personnel document, one hundred twenty-one national, public and private Universities Pedagogics professors' personnel list(postscript) from September 1, 1983 to October 1, 1984 (during 13months) in Korea, which was published by the Korean Council for University Education, for the purpose of identifying the newly recruited Pedagogics professors' academic backgrounds. The major findings of this study can be summerized as follows: (1) The total number of recruited Pedagogics professors from September 1, 1983 to October 1, 1984 (during 13 months) among one hundered and twenty-one Universities are 60 professors at 38 Universities. (2) Average age of the newly recruited Pedagogics professors is 39.1 years ranged from 25 years to 58 years (female: 35.8 years, male: 40.5 years) (3) Rate of the newly recruited Pedagogics professors by the type of degree is 43.3% in Doctor, 51.7% in Master, and 5% in Bachelor. Rate of Doctor degree awarded has been more increased, but, considerable increase of foreign awarded degree must be occured many serious problems about recruiting and training academic staff and Education of domestic graduate schools. The recommendations from the finding of this study are as follows: (1) To meet the balancing of Universities Pedagogics professors' demand-supply system, the weakness of basic datum, resources, and information concerning to professors' personnel records should be complemented as soon as possible. (2) To understand Pedagogics professors' academic backgrounds, various research about recruiting and training academic staff and their academic backgrounds should be strengthened systematically and consistently. (3) Present sitluation on domestic graduate schools education and academic staffs demand-supply system should be complemented, and established for effective, efficient professors' recruiting and training system.