RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
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
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      영국과 독일의 직업훈련,숙련자격제도: 특성 및 최근 변화 = Vocational Training and Qualifications Systems in Britain and Germany: Their Distinct Features and Recent Developments

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A30049120

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      It is urgent to systematically understand vocational training and qualification systems in advanced nations in order to evaluate and reform the Korean counterparts. In the British case, the system has been transformed from the market-led one to the state-led one while the German system is still classified as a corporatistic one. This structural difference is crucial to understand their performances and the German one won a relatively more positive evaluation in its performance. However, the structure and function of the German system has lately revealed numerous limitations in face of the political unification and long duration of economic recessions. This study shows that those differences in structural and functional features and recent developments of the systems in two nations are closely associated with their differences in educational philosophies and occupational cultures, roles of the state and employers, and operation mechanisms of training courses and vocational qualifications systems. Understanding those national differences raises a fundamental question on the hasty prescription of some domestic studies that a few policies in the foreign systems must be implanted to reform the Korean counterpart without understanding the fundamental difference between the domestic and those foreign systems.
      번역하기

      It is urgent to systematically understand vocational training and qualification systems in advanced nations in order to evaluate and reform the Korean counterparts. In the British case, the system has been transformed from the market-led one to the st...

      It is urgent to systematically understand vocational training and qualification systems in advanced nations in order to evaluate and reform the Korean counterparts. In the British case, the system has been transformed from the market-led one to the state-led one while the German system is still classified as a corporatistic one. This structural difference is crucial to understand their performances and the German one won a relatively more positive evaluation in its performance. However, the structure and function of the German system has lately revealed numerous limitations in face of the political unification and long duration of economic recessions. This study shows that those differences in structural and functional features and recent developments of the systems in two nations are closely associated with their differences in educational philosophies and occupational cultures, roles of the state and employers, and operation mechanisms of training courses and vocational qualifications systems. Understanding those national differences raises a fundamental question on the hasty prescription of some domestic studies that a few policies in the foreign systems must be implanted to reform the Korean counterpart without understanding the fundamental difference between the domestic and those foreign systems.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      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

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2027 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2021-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2018-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2015-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2011-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2009-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2007-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2005-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2002-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2000-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.84 0.84 0.86
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.88 0.96 1.517 0.31
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼