진로카오스이론 기반의 대학생 진로집단상담 프로그램 개발 및 효과 = Development and Effects of a Career Group Counseling Program for College Students Based on the Chaos Theory of Careers

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구의 목적은 불확실하고 복잡한 진로 환경 속에서 대학생의 진로 적응력을 향상시키기 위하여 진로카오스이론(Chaos Theory of Careers; CTC)에 기반한 진로집단상담 프로그램을 개발하고, 그 효과를 검증하는 데 있다. 이를 위해 기존 선형적 매칭 중심의 진로프로그램이 지닌 한계 를 넘어 비선형적인 현재 진로환경을 반영할 수 있는 프로그램을 설계하 고 적용하였다. 프로그램은 천성문 등(2017)이 제시한 집단상담 프로그 램 개발 모형에 따라 기획, 요구분석, 구성, 예비연구, 실행, 평가의 6단 계를 거쳐 개발되었으며, 각 단계에서의 절차적 타당성과 실증적 근거를 확보하였다. 기획 단계에서는 연구 목적을 구체화하고, CTC의 핵심 원리를 반영한 대안적 진로프로그램의 필요성을 이론적으로 검토하였다. 선행연구를 종 합하여 기존 진로상담의 한계를 분석하고 불확실성을 수용하는 새로운 진로프로그램의 타당성을 확립하였다. 요구분석 단계에서는 진로 대처에 어려움을 겪는 대학생을 대상으로 요구조사 및 포커스 그룹 인터뷰 Focus Group Interview(FGI)를 실시하여 현장의 요구와 참여자의 인식 및 주요 문제를 도출하였다. 구성 단계에서는 문헌고찰과 요구분석 결과를 토대로 프로그램의 목표와 구성 원리를 설정하고, CTC의 ‘비선형성’, ‘자기조직화’, ‘계획과 우연의 통합’ 등의 핵심개념을 중심으로 회기별 주 제와 목표를 구체화하였다. 예비연구 단계에서는 대학생을 대상으로 시 범 운영을 실시하고, 참가자 피드백과 전문가 자문을 통해 프로그램의 내용과 활동 구성을 수정 보완하였다. 실행 단계에서는 부산 소재 대학 교 진로개발센터를 통해 모집된 대학생 26명을 무선 배정하여 실험집단, 통제집단(각 13명)으로 구성하였다. 프로그램은 연속 2일, 회기당 90분, 총 5회기로 운영되었으며, 연구자가 직접 진행하였다. 평가 단계에서는 프로그램의 효과를 검증하기 위해 집단(실험‧통제)과 측정시기(사전‧사 후‧추후)를 요인으로 한 혼합설계 반복측정 이원분산분석을 실시하여 진 로적응력, 계획된 우연기술, 진로결정자기효능감의 변화를 분석하였다. 시간×집단 상호작용이 유의한 변인에 대해서는 단순주효과를 통해 시점 별 집단 간 차이를 확인하였다. 사후검사는 마지막 회기 직후 실시하였 고 만족도 조사 및 개방형 질문지를 병행하였으며 효과의 지속성을 검증 하기 위해 6주 후 추후검사를 실시하였다. 프로그램 효과 분석 결과, CTC 기반 프로그램에 참여한 실험집단은 통제집단에 비해 진로적응력, 계획된 우연기술, 진로결정자기효능감에서 통계적으로 유의미한 향상을 보였다. 세 변인 모두 시간과 집단 간 상호 작용이 유의하게 나타났으며, 사후 및 추후 시점에서도 실험집단의 평균 점수가 유의하게 유지되었다. 이러한 결과는 본 프로그램이 대학생의 진 로적응력과 우연의 활용, 자기효능감을 향상시키는 데 효과적이며 그 효 과가 프로그램 종료 후에도 지속됨을 의미한다. 본 연구의 의의는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 진로카오스이론의 핵심 개념을 실제 상담 현장에 적용함으로써 예측 불가능성과 우연을 성장의 동력으 로 전환하는 대안적 진로교육 모델을 제시하였다. 둘째, 대학생이 불확실 한 환경 속에서도 자기조직화로 진로를 재설계하고 실행할 수 있음을 실증적으로 확인하였다. 셋째, 본 프로그램은 복잡성과 변화가 일상인 현대 사회에서 대학생의 진로적응 역량을 향상시키는 실천적‧교육적 자료로 활용될 수 있으며, 향후 대학 진로상담 및 진로교육 개입의 새로운 방향 을 제시하였다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study was to develop a group career counseling program based on the Chaos Theory of Careers (CTC) and to examine its effectiveness in enhancing career adaptability among college students in uncertain and complex career environments. To this end, the present study designed and implemented a program that goes beyond the limitations of traditional linear, matchingoriented career programs and reflects the nonlinear characteristics of contemporary career contexts. Following the group counseling program development model proposed by Cheon et al. (2017), the program was developed through six stages—planning, needs assessment, program design, pilot study, implementation, and evaluation—and both procedural validity and empirical evidence were secured at each stage. In the planning stage, the research objectives were specified, and the necessity of an alternative career program grounded in the core principles of CTC was examined theoretically. By synthesizing prior studies, the limitations of existing career counseling were analyzed and the rationale for a new program that embraces uncertainty was established. In the needs assessment stage, a needs survey and focus group interviews(FGI) were conducted with college students experiencing difficulties in coping with career-related challenges, in order to identify field needs, participants’ perceptions, and key concerns. In the program design stage, based on the literature review and needs assessment results, the program goals and organizing principles were set, and session themes and objectives were specified around key CTC concepts such as nonlinearity, self-organization, and the integration of planning and chance. In the pilot study stage, the program was piloted with college students, and its content and activities were revised and refined based on participant feedback and expert consultation. In the implementation stage, 26 college students recruited through a college career development center in Busan were randomly assigned to an experimental group(n=13) and a control group(n=13). The program was delivered over two consecutive days in five sessions, each lasting 90 minutes, and was facilitated directly by the researcher. In the evaluation stage, program effects were examined using a mixed-design repeated-measures two-way ANOVA, with group(experimental vs. control) and measurement time(pretest, posttest, follow-up) as factors, to analyze changes in career adaptability, planned happenstance skills, and career decision-making self-efficacy. For variables showing significant time × group interactions, simple main effects analyses were conducted to examine between-group differences at each time point. The posttest was administered immediately after the final session, along with a satisfaction survey and open-ended questionnaires, and a follow-up assessment was conducted six weeks later to examine the sustainability of program effects. Results indicated that, compared to the control group, the experimental group participating in the CTC-based program showed statistically significant improvements in career adaptability, planned happenstance skills, and career decision-making self-efficacy. Significant interactions between time and group were observed for all three variables, and the experimental group’s mean scores remained significantly higher at both posttest and follow-up. These findings suggest that the program was effective in enhancing college students’ career adaptability, utilization of chance events, and self-efficacy, and that its effects were sustained after program completion. The significance of this study is as follows. First, by applying the core concepts of the Chaos Theory of Careers to real counseling practice, this study presents an alternative career education model that transforms unpredictability and chance into drivers of growth. Second, it empirically demonstrates that college students can reorganize, redesign, and enact their careers through self-organization even under uncertain conditions. Third, the program can serve as a practical and educational resource for enhancing career adaptability in contemporary society characterized by complexity and constant change, and it offers new directions for future career counseling and career education interventions in higher education.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서 론 ··············································································································· 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성 및 목적 ············································································ 1
• 2. 연구문제 ······································································································ 9
• 3. 용어의 정의 ································································································ 9
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 ································································································ 12
• 1. 현대 진로환경 ·························································································· 14
• 2. 전통적 진로이론과 구성주의적 진로이론 ·········································· 13
• 3. 진로카오스이론(CTC) ············································································ 18
• 가. CTC의 등장 ····················································································· 18
• 나. CTC의 기본 개념 ··········································································· 20
• 다. CTC의 핵심 원리 ··········································································· 22
• 라. 해외 CTC 기반 프로그램 관련 선행연구 ································· 24
• 4. 진로카오스이론의 효과 ·········································································· 25
• 가. 진로적응력 ························································································ 25
• 나. 계획된 우연기술 ·············································································· 27
• 다. 진로결정자기효능감 ········································································ 28
• 5. 국내 대학생 대상 진로상담 프로그램 연구 ······································ 30
• 가. 국내 대학생 대상 진로상담 프로그램 ········································ 30
• 나. 국내 CTC 기반 연구의 현황과 한계 ········································· 35
• 다. CTC 기반 진로프로그램 연구 ····················································· 36
• Ⅲ. 진로카오스이론 기반 진로집단상담 프로그램 개발 ···················· 39
• 1. 프로그램 개발 절차 모형 ······································································ 39
• 2. 프로그램 개발 과정 ················································································ 41
• Ⅳ. 진로카오스이론 기반 진로집단상담 프로그램의 효과 검증 ·· 110
• 1. 방법 및 절차 ·························································································· 110
• 2. 연구결과 ·································································································· 119
• Ⅴ. 논의 ············································································································· 141
• 1. 프로그램 개발에 관한 논의 ································································ 141
• 2. 프로그램 효과성에 관한 논의 ···························································· 152
• Ⅵ. 의의 및 제언 ···················································································· 156
• 1. 의의 ·········································································································· 156
• 2. 제언 ·········································································································· 158
• 참고문헌 ······································································································ 161
• 부록 ···································································································· 179
• 1. 대학생 요구조사 설문지 ································································ 179
• 2. 대학생 FGI 설문지 ········································································· 184
• 3. 대학생 FGI 결과 요약 ··································································· 187
• 4. 전문가 FGI 설문지 ········································································· 189
• 5. 전문가 FGI 결과 요약 ··································································· 192
• 6. 프로그램 타당도 평가지 ································································ 194
• 7. 프로그램 내용 타당도 평정 결과 ················································ 203
• 8. 프로그램 시범운영 평가서 ···························································· 208
• 9. 최종 소감 및 평가 ·········································································· 210
• 10. 프로그램 활동별 만족도 ······························································ 211
• 11. 진로적응력 척도 ············································································ 214
• 12. 계획된 우연기술 척도 ·································································· 216
• 13. 진로결정자기효능감 척도 ···························································· 218
• ABSTRACT ······························································································· 220