RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    다문화사회 전문가 제도의 제도화와 성과 구조: 한국과 캐나다의 비교연구 = The Institutionalization and Outcome Structure of the Multicultural Society Expert System: A Comparative Study of Korea and Canada

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A110091556

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This study examines the institutionalization and inclusiveness of multicultural expert systems through a comparative case analysis of Korea and Canada. Amid growing global migration and social diversification, the need for structured multicultural policies has become urgent. While Canada has established a professional framework embedded in immigration governance, Korea’s system remains largely confined within a family welfare paradigm, lacking standardized qualifications, field deployment, and performance accountability. Using a structured and focused comparison approach, this research analyzes six key dimensions: institutional foundation, training and practicum structure, qualification and renewal system, field deployment, performance management, and inclusiveness. The analysis applies an integrated theoretical framework drawing on Berry’s mutual acculturation, Bourdieu’s field theory, Abbott’s professionalization model, and Banks’ multicultural education theory. The findings reveal a policy gap between the two nations: Canada exhibits a rights-based, performance-linked, and practice-oriented system, while Korea displays fragmented implementation, credentialism, and limited inclusiveness. The study highlights the need to redesign Korea’s system by embedding rights, diversity, and accountability into its expert policy infrastructure. This research contributes to the field by offering a theoretically grounded and empirically comparative framework for understanding how multicultural expert systems can be institutionalized as integral components of democratic and inclusive social integration.
    번역하기

    This study examines the institutionalization and inclusiveness of multicultural expert systems through a comparative case analysis of Korea and Canada. Amid growing global migration and social diversification, the need for structured multicultural pol...

    This study examines the institutionalization and inclusiveness of multicultural expert systems through a comparative case analysis of Korea and Canada. Amid growing global migration and social diversification, the need for structured multicultural policies has become urgent. While Canada has established a professional framework embedded in immigration governance, Korea’s system remains largely confined within a family welfare paradigm, lacking standardized qualifications, field deployment, and performance accountability. Using a structured and focused comparison approach, this research analyzes six key dimensions: institutional foundation, training and practicum structure, qualification and renewal system, field deployment, performance management, and inclusiveness. The analysis applies an integrated theoretical framework drawing on Berry’s mutual acculturation, Bourdieu’s field theory, Abbott’s professionalization model, and Banks’ multicultural education theory. The findings reveal a policy gap between the two nations: Canada exhibits a rights-based, performance-linked, and practice-oriented system, while Korea displays fragmented implementation, credentialism, and limited inclusiveness. The study highlights the need to redesign Korea’s system by embedding rights, diversity, and accountability into its expert policy infrastructure. This research contributes to the field by offering a theoretically grounded and empirically comparative framework for understanding how multicultural expert systems can be institutionalized as integral components of democratic and inclusive social integration.

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼