교원능력개발평가 정책집행에 대한 초등 교사들의 인식과 순응에 관한 연구

Abstract

As a strong point of the Korean teacher system, the teachers’ livelihood and positions are stable, whereas it is true that they rarely have opportunities and chances to continuously enhance their professionalism, once they are appointed. Due to such characteristics of the system, it is rather difficult to anticipate the roles of the teachers who actively change in accordance with the changes of the times. Therefore, the Ministry of Education has introduced an evaluation system for the man-power development of the teachers, so as to diagnose the professionalism of the teachers in teaching and student guidance and to support the man-power development of them in accordance with the result. As hands-on workers’ agreement and devotion are necessary for the successful execution of a policy, we set up following three study themes for this study, in order to reduce such negative perceptions of the teachers and to draw out their agreement and devotion: 1. How is the difference in the perception among the elementary school teachers on the main evaluation factors for the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers? 1-1. How is the difference in the perception among the elementary school teachers on teaching? 1-2. How is the difference in the perception among the elementary school teachers on student guidance? 1-3. How is the difference in the perception among the elementary school teachers on the basic attitude? 2. How is the compliance of the elementary school teachers per the policy compliance main factors in the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers? 2-1. How is the extent of compliance and the actual compliance by the elementary school teachers per the evaluation system main factors? 2-2. How is the extent of compliance and the actual compliance by the elementary school teachers per the compliance subject main factors? 2-3. How is the extent of compliance and the actual compliance by the elementary school teachers per the execution agency main factors? The study results are as follows: In study theme 1, the perception of the elementary school teachers on the basic attitude of a teacher showed meaningful differences in accordance with the teachers’ organizations they belong to, the teaching career, and the number of the development evaluations. The perception of the elementary school teachers on the teaching showed meaningful differences in accordance with the teaching career and the teachers’ organizations they belong to. The perception of the elementary school teachers on the student guidance showed meaningful difference in accordance with the teachers’ organizations they belong to and the teaching career. And the perception of the elementary school teachers on the relationship showed meaningful differences in accordance with the teachers’ organizations they belong to. Study theme 2 result, On the actual compliance of the teachers per the evaluation system main factors, they say the evaluation procedures and the processes have become simplified, concise and clear. Concerning the purpose for the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers, they were feeling it is a policy to enhance the trust on the public education. And they say that it serves as a catalyst to make the teachers extend their professionalism by letting them aware of the evaluation results. Some teachers, however, think that it has no effect, as there are no concrete compensations or restrictions by the evaluation results. Some others pointed out that while the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers plays its role to a certain extent as a tool to recover the trust for the public education, it does not help enhance the professionalism very much. While some teachers think that the evaluation area is well set up as it consists of teaching and student guidance, others want the handling of administrative duties to be added to the evaluation area. Concerning the evaluation timing where the evaluation should be completed by the end of November, they say it fits the situations of the schools, although it is not perfectly satisfactory in that the evaluation should be conducted before a school year is ended. On the evaluation method, which is the mixture of checklists of a five-grade scale and free-descriptive evaluations, some teachers say that it is not burdensome, but many teachers point out that due to the five-grade scale, the grades are too far apart. Many teachers opined that it is desirable to enhance the ratio of the free-descriptive responses. On the actual compliance of the teachers per the compliance subject main factors, many teachers agreed that the teacher evaluation is necessary. They say they see their internal changes, as well as circumferential changes, caused by the evaluation, while some of the changes are positive and others negative. Some point out it is insufficient as a tool to measure the outcome and abilities of the teachers. Many teachers say it is not due to the results, but for their own development, that they make efforts. Many teachers opined that they are largely satisfied at the results of the evaluation by the students, the parents and the peer teachers. They responded most sensitively on the official application of the evaluation results, commonly saying the supplementation of the evaluation system should precede it. On the actual compliance of the teachers per the execution agency main factors, many teachers feel the Ministry of Education does not gather the on-the-spot opinions, but most of them think that they accommodate it as a public servant, even if they do not like the system the Ministry of Education pushes ahead. They want compensation and support to be expanded by the evaluation results, while some of them hope it will lead to retraining and weed-out of the teachers who need support. Although they maintain relatively professional view points on the peer teachers, they admit that they can hardly know about their colleagues. The outcome and implication of the study are as follows: Firstly, although the teachers superficially object to the evaluation in most areas, the in-depth interview results show that many of them agree to the necessities of the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers. Secondly, although the teachers are not fully conscious of the result of the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers, many of them are using them as feedback results. It might be thought of as a positive change that the results begin to be used as a mechanism for the communication with the students or the parents. Thirdly, in the in-depth interviews, some teachers mentioned that they expect the evaluation system for the man-power development of the teachers to play its role for the self-purification for the control of the quality of the teachers. Fourthly, most teachers do not agree to the evaluation methods, but say its system should be supplemented. They mostly opined that the Ministry of Education does not grasp the on-the-spot realities and that it does not gather the opinions of the teachers. This implies that the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers should be changed through the sufficient gathering of the opinions of the teachers in the future. Along with the above outcome, the limitations and the practical suggestions which should be taken into consideration in future studies are as follows. Firstly, in this study, we examined the perception of the teachers on the evaluation areas in the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers, based on a survey by a questionnaire which was carried out for a certain period. As the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers is made every year and is changing little by little, it would be utilized as important data to improve the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers, if a study made throughout to trace the long-term changes of the perceptions of the teachers is added. Secondly, in this study, we conducted in-depth interviews to grasp the actual compliance of the teachers on the evaluation of the man-power development of the teachers. After the interviews were made and before the sole researcher arranged the data, the data to be transcribed were so vast that some opinions or expression of the teachers have been missing. Thirdly, in order to enhance the reliability of the study, we carried out the in-depth interviews twice. We conducted the second interview by sending the interview data arranged after the first interview and the additional questions to the interviewees by email. This was to see if the results were arranged as the interviewees had intended. It may be pointed out as a limitation in the reliability not to have sent to the interviewees the items which were changed or corrected in the process of the preparation of the study later. Fourthly, when we investigated the difference in perceptions on the study theme 1, there were differences in accordance with the teachers’ organizations they belong to and their teaching career. If we had grasped the actual compliance through in-depth interviews per variables by connecting study theme 2 with the study result 1, it would have resulted in a study of higher quality. Fifthly, we measured the compliance through 150 teachers sampled for study theme 3. The number of the samples is rather small to generalize the result. If we had conducted the study with more teachers, the study result would have been of higher quality.;우리나라의 교원제도는 교사의 생활과 지위가 안정적인 장점이 있는 반면에 교사로 임용이 된 이후에는 지속적인 전문성 향상을 위한 기회가 부족한 것이 사실이다. 이러한 특성으로 인하여 시대의 변화에 따라 능동적으로 변화하는 교사의 역할을 기대하기 힘든 경향이 있다. 이에 교육부에서는 교사의 학습지도 및 생활지도 등에 대한 전문성을 진단하고 그 결과에 따라 능력 개발을 지원하고자 교원능력개발평가제를 도입하였다. 새로운 교원평가 정책이 현장에서 어떻게 인식되고 있는지 알아보고 학교 현장의 현실을 이해하기 위하여 본 연구에서는 다음과 같은 두 가지의 연구문제를 설정하였다. 1. 초등 교사들의 배경변인(교육경력, 직위, 교직단체, 평가참여 횟수)에 따라 교원능력개발평가의 영역에 대한 인식의 차이가 있는가? 1-1. 초등 교사들의 배경변인(교육경력, 직위, 교직단체, 평가참여 횟수)에 따라 학습지도에 대한 인식의 차이가 있는가? 1-2. 초등 교사들의 배경변인(교육경력, 직위, 교직단체, 평가참여 횟수)에 따라 생활지도에 대한 인식의 차이가 있는가? 1-3. 초등 교사들의 배경변인(교육경력, 직위, 교직단체, 평가참여 횟수)에 따라 기본자세에 대한 인식의 차이가 있는가? 2. 교원능력개발평가의 정책순응요인에 따른 초등 교사들의 순응의 정도와 실제는 어떠한가? 2-1. 평가제도에 따른 초등 교사들의 순응의 정도와 실제는 어떠한가? 2-2. 순응주체에 따른 초등 교사들의 순응의 정도와 실제는 어떠한가? 2-3. 집행기관에 따른 초등 교사들의 순응의 정도와 실제는 어떠한가? 연구문제 1을 해결하기 위하여 설문지를 작성하여 설문조사를 실시하였다. 선행연구 및 전문가 집단 협의를 통하여 교원능력개발평가의 영역을 학습지도, 생활지도, 기본자세로 확정하여 총 30개의 문항을 작성하였다. 예비조사는 교사 150명을 대상으로 실시하였으며, 본 조사는 교사 300명을 대상으로 실시하였다. 타당성 검증을 위해 문항들에 대해 탐색적 요인분석을 실시하였으며 설문지의 문항내적 신뢰도 검증을 위해 Cronbach's α 값을 산출하였다. 이를 위하여 SPSS 18.0 프로그램을 이용하여 t-test, 일원분산분석을 실시하였다. 그리고 집단 간의 유의한 차이를 보기 위하여 사후비교검증(Scheffe test)를 수행하였다. 연구문제 2를 해결하기 위하여 초등 교사들의 순응정도를 측정할 수 있는 체크리스트를 작성하였다. 교사 150명을 대상으로 온라인상으로 2단계 척도 체크리스트를 배부하고, 교사 26명을 대상으로 심층면담을 2회 실시하였다. 본 연구의 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 교사들은 교원능력개발평가로 인하여 학교 현장이 조금씩 달라지고 있다고 인식하였다. 영역에 따라 정도의 차이가 존재하나 학습지도, 생활지도, 기본자세 전 영역에 있어서 교사들은 보통 정도로 달라졌다고 느끼고 있었다. 특히 5년 미만 경력의 교사의 경우 다른 경력교사들과 달리 달라진 정도에 대한 인식이 높았다. 교직단체에 있어서 전교조 소속의 교사는 교총 소속의 교사와 무소속 교사에 비해 학교 현장이 달라지지 않았다고 느끼고 있었다. 둘째, 교원능력개발평가의 평가제도 요인 중 평가시기에 관해서 적극적으로 순응하고 있으며 평가 영역, 평가 절차, 전문성 발달에 미치는 영향, 평가 방식에 대해서는 형식적으로 순응하고 있다는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 세 번째, 교원능력개발평가의 순응주체 요인 중 평가 결과의 활용, 평가의 필요성, 높은 점수를 받기 위한 노력, 평가로 인한 변화, 교원의 성과와 능력의 측정가능성에 대해 형식적으로 순응하고 있다는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 네 번째, 교원능력개발평가의 집행기관 요인에 대해 학생들의 이해에 대해서 교사들은 적극적으로 순응하고 있지만 동료교사와 학부모의 이해, 평가 결과에 대한 보상, 교육부의 현장파악에 대해서는 형식적으로 순응하고 있다는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 이에 따른 본 연구의 논의 및 시사점은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 교원능력개발평가의 필요성 자체에 대해 많은 수의 교사들이 동의하고 있다는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 둘째, 교사들은 교원 평가의 결과에 대해 피드백 결과로 활용하고 있으며 평가 결과로 인하여 학생과 학부모 간에 소통하고 느끼고 있었다. 셋째, 교원능력개발평가제도가 교사들의 질 관리를 위한 자정작용으로써의 역할을 기대하는 교사들도 있다는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 이처럼 많은 교사들이 교원능력개발평가와 관련하여 적극적 순응보다 형식적인 순응을 하고 있다는 것을 통하여 교원능력개발평가제에 대한 추가적인 보완을 필요로 한다는 점과 교육부에서 현장을 파악하지 못하고 있다는 의견이 많다는 것은 앞으로 교원능력개발평가가 교사들의 의견을 충분히 수렴하여 객관성과 신뢰성을 확보하는 방향으로 보완․변화하여야 할 것임을 시사하고 있다.