윤리적 공학교육이란 무엇인가: 그 필요성과 실천전략

한경희,Han, Kyonghee 한국공학교육학회 2022 공학교육연구 Vol.25 No.5

This study started from a critical review of the current problem of ethics education in engineering colleges, how it has become stereotyped and perfunctory and hence, is failing to properly foster engineers with a sense of responsibility. Existing engineering ethics education occupies a very limited role and weight in the periphery of the engineering curriculum, unable to hold a central position. This situation is of grave concern, especially when the leadership of engineers with social and professional responsibility is of great importance. Therefore, this study explored new directions and strategies for engineering ethics education while reviewing domestic and foreign studies dealing with the current status and problems of engineering ethics education. First, this study discussed the need for and direction of shifting to ethical engineering education instead of ethics education centered on liberal arts courses. Second, this study presented specific practical strategies to construct the ethical engineering curriculum. For example, it is necessary to establish the ethical engineering curriculum with an education linking ethics with human development goals, ethics education using Korea's current issues and agendas, micro- and macro-level analysis related to engineering, and leadership education.

두 문화 담론의 존재양식과 재생산 메커니즘

한경희(Han Kyonghee),고동현(Go Donghyun) 한국사회학회 2006 韓國社會學 Vol.40 No.5

본 논문은 최근 우리나라에서 일어난 과학기술과 관련된 사회적 이슈들을 분석하면서 하나의 사회문화적 구성물로 나타나고 있는 두 문화 담론의 다양한 전개양상을 포착하고자 하였다. 두 문화 담론은 과학과 기술, 사회가 관련되는 이슈의 특성에 따라 전면에 부각되기도 하고, 오히려 사라지기도 한다. 때로는 이공계 위기나 학제간 교육협력의 사례에서 나타나는 것처럼 이해관계의 표출이나 분과학문체계의 수호와 관련하여 더욱 강화된 모습으로 나타나기도 하며, 다른 한편으로는 황우석 사건에서처럼 오히려 약화된 모습을 드러내기도 한다. 따라서 두 문화의 해소가 단순히 두 문화 사이의 소통으로 해결될 수 있는 것은 아니다. 두 문화 담론의 재생산은 과학을 신뢰하지 않고는 살아갈 수 없는 근대적 짜임새와 다양한 경계들 속에서 갈라진 채존재하는 가치충돌과 이해관계의 대립, 전문화된 학문분과 시스템과 근대적 제도화 기제들 속에서 만들어지고 있다. 이 점을 이해하지 않고는 두 문화의 작동을 제대로 이해할 수 없다. 다시 말해, 두 문화의 재생산 과정에는 두 문화 이면에 놓여 있는 근대 사회의 경계와 분절들뿐 아니라 다양한 사회적, 경제적, 역사적 요인들이 결합된다. 그와 같은 경계와 분절들은 특히 분과학문체계 속에서 가로막힌 소통구조나 서로 다른 공간적 영역과 역할 속에 놓인 과학, 기술, 사회의 존재양식과 제도적 틀 속에서 더욱 강화되면서 문제의 원인이 마치 ‘두 문화’의 본래적 차이에서 비롯되는 것처럼 여기는 ‘역투사’ 과정, 혹은 ‘재해석’ 과정을 거치면서 재생산되고 있다는 것이 본 연구의 주요 주장이다. This study aims to explore the process that the discourse of ‘two cultures’ has unfolded in our society by analyzing some empirical issues around STS (Science, Technology, and Society). Two cultures would emerge and disappear according to the condition specific to situations. For example, it appears strongly in the case of ‘the crisis in science and engineering’ and ‘interdisciplinary collaborations’, and disappears abruptly in the case of ‘Hwang woo-suk’. We consider that the segregation of two cultures could not be dissolved through the communication between them. The reproduction of two cultures is related with the irrevocable fact that we could not live without science, the confrontation of interests and value systems between social groups split on the diverse borders, and specialized departmental academic system. It involves social and historical factors as well as fractures and borders that modern society has produced. We argue that two cultures are not direct reflection of the fundamental difference in them, and rather it is used to be summoned and reinterpreted strategically on another purposes. In consequences, we need to make efforts to increase the reflection on the level of individual, community, and institution.

기술과 정치 사이에서 엔지니어의 사회적 역할과 책임성의 변화

한경희(Kyonghee Han),최문희(MoonHee Choi) 한국사회학회 2014 韓國社會學 Vol.48 No.5

이 연구는 한국의 공학 전문직의 형성과 특성에 대한 사회적 연구이다. 전문직으로써 공학의 발전과정은 근대 국가의 발전 및 산업화 과정과 긴밀히 연관되어 있다. 이 과정에서 공학 전문가들은 자신들의 역할과 책임성에 대한 특정한 인식을 갖게 된다. 우리는 기술 논쟁의 역사에서 중요한 위치를 점하고 있는 세 개의 사례들, 즉 경부고속도로, 당산철교, 4대강 사업을 분석하여 한국공학 전문직의 정체성 구성, 특히 사회적 역할과 책임성이 형성된 과정과 특징을 조사한다. 기술과 정치가 얽히는 다양한 국면을 분석할 수 있는 기술-정치 시스템의 개념을 기반으로 첫째, 한국 공학 전문직의 지배적 이미지와 실천이 형성되는 과정의 특징이 공학 전문직의 정체성과 책임을 규정하는 데 어떤 역할을 해 왔는지를 분석한다. 둘째, 이러한 지배적 이미지가 이후의 기술적 이슈와 논란에 어떻게 영향을 미치고 있는지의 역사적 연계 과정을 탐구한다. 세 번째는 한국 사회의 발전 과정 속에서 공학과 엔지니어의 역할과 책임성에 대한 인식이 어떻게 변화되고 도전받고 있는지를 검토한다. 이 과정을 통해 우리는 한국의 공학 전문직이 탈정치화되고 과도하게 정치화되는 모순적 상황에 처하게 되었다는 것, 그리고 독특한 관료지향성을 갖게 되었음을 밝힌다. 무엇보다 국가로부터의 자율성 확보가 어려운 환경 속에서 한국의 공학 전문가들은 사회적 발언권과 신뢰를 확보하기 위한 중대한 도전에 직면해 있다는 것이다. This is a sociological study on the formation and characteristics of Korean engineer as a profession. The development of engineer as a profession has been closely related to the modern state, its development and industrialization process in particular. The profession of engineer is said to recognize what is its role and responsibility in the relation to the modern state. This study looks into three significant historical cases in Korean engineering and Korean engineer, the construction of Gyeongbu Expressway, the destruction of Dangsan Steel Railroad and the restoration of Four rivers. This study centers on "technology-politics system’ showing how technology and politics are inter-connected each other and how technology becomes the social. Based on the system, this study shows what dominant images and practice are in Korean engineering and engineer and how they have been formed and developed. The profession of engineer has carved them into its professional identity and that influenced on its social role and social responsibility. This study also investigates how the dominant images and practice once formed, has influenced on the following critical social issues, controversies and disputes in technology and engineering. Through the historical change of dominant ideas and practice, this study shows how the three cases on target here are historically linked one another. This study concerns about the change of social role and social responsibility of engineer. It claims that Korean profession of engineer is de-politicalized and at the same time is over-politicalized, and that contradictory within the profession seems to lead to the bureaucrat-oriented direction. Whether the bureaucrat-orientation of the engineer is problematic or not, the profession is sure to take severe damage to its professional autonomy(the ability to decide what kinds of work they would do) on the current context. The profession of engineer now faces challenge of recovering social credibility and regaining social voice.

동아시아 공(工) 개념의 기원과 근대적 재구성

한경희(Han, Kyonghee) 한국공학교육학회 2019 공학교육연구 Vol.22 No.6

This study aims to present concept of gong which was shared by traditional East Asian societies (Korea, China and Japan) and to identify how it has been developed through their respective process of modernization and industrialization. Despite the territorial proximity of the three countries, their industrial and technological development followed different patterns, and the notion of engineering from the Occident was also accepted and reconstructed with a certain difference in each country. Japan had developed its own concept of engineering as part of industrialization in Western style and in the context of establishment of an imperialist nation. What was important for Japan was how engineering could contribute to the national development of technology and industry, and to the development of Imperial Japan. For China, which attached importance to resistance to Western civilizations and to strengthening the competitiveness for and which needed to resolve domestic political conflicts, engineering constituted more than a simple issue on technological and industrial dimension; it was also associated with obtaining ethical and political legitimacy which would allow the nation to gain support from the working and peasant classes. Though belated, Korean attempted to build an independent modern state, yet experienced a considerable nuisance from the invasion of Japan and the protracted colonial period. Engineering of Korea had to take a long time before emerging from backwardness especially because of Japanese policies which tended to restrict technological development and avoid fostering qualified engineers in the colony. Therefore, engineering in Korea started to contribute to the nation’s development and the improvement of technological competitiveness only after it was combined with modern higher education after liberation, under the name of engineering science (工學, gong-hak). This study argues that our recognition of what engineering was for and who engineers were in East Asia will allow us to evaluate current status of engineering education and provide us with significant insight which will be useful when we imagine the future society. Identity of engineering in Korea, China, and Japan has been developed along with historical contexts such as clash of civilizations, wars, recovery of sovereignty and obtaining of national competitiveness; now, what will be combined with engineering in the next generation? This question will lead and motivate engineering students to think and imagine about what future engineering should be and how they respond to it.

한국 엔지니어 연구방법론의 고찰

한경희(Han, Kyonghee) 한국과학기술학회 2018 과학기술학연구 Vol.18 No.2

한국의 엔지니어를 연구하려면 불가피하게 엔지니어가 누구인지에 대해 먼저 정의할 필요가 있다는 데서 이 연구는 출발한다. 엔지니어라는 영어 표현 속에는 한국을 비롯하여 동아시아 국가의 기술 관련 행위자들이 갖는 다양한 이름 뿐 아니라 그들의 역사가 숨 쉬고 있다. 그 이름들이 갖는 의미와 지위는 서로 다르다. 엔지니어가 누구인가에 관한 탐색은 동시에 한국 엔지니어의 역사를 이해하는 일이기도 하다. 이에 본 논문은 한국 엔지니어를 연구하는 데 필요한 질문들을 체계적으로 제시하고 그것을 다룰 적합한 연구방법론을 모색하는데 관심을 갖는다. 우리는 지금까지 이러한 연구에 요구되는 학문 간 토론과 접촉면을 만들고 확장하는데 충분한 노력을 기울이지 못했다. 비록 문제계가 다른 개념들을 결합시켜야 하는 이론적 난점이 존재하지만 이 연구는 사회과학 분야에서 이루어진 선행 연구들을 기반으로 어떻게 엔지니어 연구를 수행할 수 있을지, 한국 엔지니어의 형성 과정을 분석하기 위해 제기되어야 할 질문은 무엇이며 그에 적합한 개념과 방법론은 무엇인지를 논의하고자 한다. 연구 결과로서는 계보학, 개념사, 행위자-연결망과 기술-국가 개념 등이 한국 엔지니어의 역사를 분석하고 설명하는데 매우 효과적일 수 있음을 주장할 것이다. To explore the history of Korean engineers, one must navigate the field answering to the question of who engineers are. This is not an easy task because, behind the English expression of engineer, there are various names and even histories pertaining to technology related actors in East Asian countries including South Korea, and the meaning and status of these names are different from one another. Thus, the process and method of answering to the question of who engineers are becomes the path to understanding the history of Korean engineers. This study, therefore, attempts to suggest research questions that should be raised to study Korean engineers and to find research methodology suited for addressing those questions. Until now, not enough efforts have been made to create and expand interdisciplinary discussions and contacts for this area of study. This study has some theoretical difficulties of having to combine concepts with different problematique. Nevertheless, it aims to discuss how to conduct research, what questions should be posed to analyze the construction of Korean engineers and what research methodologies are suitable for such research, based on previous researches conducted in the field of social science. Answers to the quest are sought through genealogy, conceptual history, actor-network theory, and the notion of techno-national formation.