敎師評價의 準據開發에 관한 硏究 = (A) study on the development of criteria for teacher evaluation

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study aims at developing the criteria of teacher evaluation and to verify the validity and the reliability of the study based on the analysis of the concept, the theory, the tools and the methods of evaluating teachers. In order to achieve this purpose, major themes of the study were chosen as follows.
First, how should the concept, the purpose of teacher evaluation be established to enforce the function of evaluating teachers? Also how had been the system of teacher evaluation changed in the history? What is the present teacher evaluation system? Second, how should the criteria and the tools of teacher evaluation be set up in developing the method? Which aspects disturb the process of fair evaluation? How could those aspects be prohibited from being disturbed in teacher evaluation?
Third, What is the considerable principle in fixing the criteria of teacher evaluation?
Fourth, which aspects should be taken into consideration to set up the criteria of teacher evaluation? What is the established criteria of evaluating teachers in foreign countries? What is the criteria to achieve validity of the evaluation? Are there any differences in evaluating teachers by school level and teacher's position?
This study has developed the criteria of teacher evaluation by analyzing many related thesis and books on the structure, the tools and the methods of teacher evaluation. In order to verify the validity and the reliability of this study, the survey on 1,237 teachers in primary and secondary school was conducted.
First, the results of analyzing the construct validity and the reliability of this criteria and of examining the perceptional differences by school level and teacher's position are as follows. The construct validity of the criteria by means of exploratory factor analysis was tested. Ten of twelve factors were extracted. They explained 68.3% of whole variances. Ten factors are usable because the factor loading value of those factors are over . 4. Ten factors are as follows: 1) teaching ability, 2) working behavior, 3) class management, 4) training and study results, 5) relationship with school parents and the community, 6) personality as a teacher, 7) task results guiding extra curricular activity, 8) professionality, 9) a point of view of education and teaching profession and 10) administration.
Second, the reliability of the teacher evaluation criteria is .9759 as a result of analyzing Cronbach a. Also the evaluation scale is usable. The reliabilities of every factors are also usable; factor 1) .9499, 2) .9439, 3) .9583, 4) .8894, 5) .9389, 6) .8789, 7) .9014, 8) .8766, 9) .7805 and 10) .8913.
Third, the differences of teacher's perception of teacher evaluation were verified in deciding the standard, the point and the factors of the teacher evaluation by school level. It was proved that there were meaningful differences(p <.05, p <.001) in ten factors after analyzing one-way analysis of variance and Scheffe's post verification. More primary school teachers than secondary teachers thought highly of factor 3) class management, 5) relationship with school parents and the community, 6) personality as a teacher, and 7) task results guiding extra curricular activity. And more high school teachers than middle school teachers paid more attention to factor 6) personality as a teacher, 8) professionality, 9) a point of view of education and teaching profession.
Fourth, the differences of teacher's perception of teacher evaluation were verified in deciding the standard, the point and the factors of the teacher evaluation by teacher's position. Principals, vice-principals and master teachers than ordinary teachers thought highly of every factors except factor 1) teaching ability, especially much highly in factor 5) relationship with school parents and the community. Between master teachers and ordinary teachers, more master teachers than low-experienced teachers paid attention to factor 2) working behavior, 4) training and study results, 5) relationship with school parents and the community, 6) personality as a teacher, 8) professionality, and 9) a point of view of education and teaching profession. In comparison with master teachers and principals(including vice-principals), master teachers paid much attention factor 1) teaching ability. This showed the interest differences of teachers distinctly by their position.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• 국문초록 = i
• I. 서론 = 1
• A. 연구의 필요성 및 목적 = 1
• B. 연구의 문제 및 범위 = 5
• C. 연구의 제한점 = 7
• II. 이론적 배경 = 8
• A. 교사의 역할과 직무 = 8
• 1. 교사의 역할 = 8
• 2. 교사의 직무 = 11
• B. 교사의 평가체제 = 25
• 1. 교사평가의 목적과 기능 = 25
• 2. 교사평가와 책무성 = 36
• 3. 교사평가체제의 변천과 운영실태 분석 = 41
• C. 교사평가수단 및 운영상의 쟁점 = 59
• 1. 평가도구 및 평가방법 = 59
• 2. 평가의 공정성 저해요인 = 69
• 3. 평가의 공정성 확보 = 79
• D. 교사평가 준거설정의 고려 요인 및 준거 = 85
• 1. 교사평가 준거설정의 고려 요인 = 85
• 2. 주요국의 교사평가준거 = 103
• 3. 교사평가의 준거설정 = 122
• III. 교사평가 척도의 타당성 분석 = 127
• A. 연구의 방법 = 127
• 1. 대상 = 127
• 2. 도구 = 128
• 3. 자료처리 = 129
• B. 교사평가준거의 타당성 검증 및 논의 = 133
• 1. 평가준거의 탐색적 분석 = 133
• 2. 평가준거의 확인적 분석 = 134
• IV. 요약 및 결론 = 146
• A. 요약 = 146
• B. 결론 = 153
• 참고문헌 = 157
• ABSTRACT = 173
• 부록 = 177