Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: The Exploratory Stu

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: The Exploratory Stu"

서라 권
5 years ago
Views:

1 Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: The Exploratory Study on the Teachers Innovation Type from a Comparative Educational Perspective Purpose: The purpose of this study was to classify teacher s innovation type and suggest implications to enhance teacher s innovation in the Republic of Korea. Method: Adapting the fuzzy-set ideal type approach, this study analyzed 23 OECD countries, which participated in the Teaching and Learning International Survey in Results: The research findings showed that the OECD counties were categorized in three types of teacher s innovation: the A type (high process and high outcome in teacher s innovation), the C type (low process and high outcome in teacher s innovation) and the D type (low process and low outcome in teacher s innovation). The Republic of Korea belonged to the D type along with Japan and Czech Republic, but contained relatively high fuzzy-set membership scores in the aspect of innovational process. Conclusion: Based on the analysis, this study discussed the implications on enhancing Korean teacher s innovation and suggested the trajectory toward to the high level of teacher s innovation. Key words : Teaching and Learning International Survey(TALIS), educational innovation, teacher s innovation, fuzzy-set ideal type approach Corresponding Author: Hong, Su-Jin. Inha University, Innovation Center for Engineering Education, 100 Inha-ro, nam-gu, Incheon 22212, Korea, anne0722@inha.ac.kr

2 ..,, ICT,.,, (, 2017). 4, (educational innovation) (, 2017). (OECD, 2014a).,,, 21..,,, (,,,,, 2009).. (teacher s innovation) (, 2017; OECD, 2014a)..,, (, 2015).,,, (,, 2017;,,,,, 2015; OECD, 2013). 2 (Teaching and Learning International Survey, TALIS) OECD

3 .. 2 TALIS OECD. 3 TALIS. TALIS 2018, (OECD, 2016). TALIS TALIS, 2 TALIS.. (innovation). OECD(Oslo Manual, OECD & Statistical Office of the European Communities, 2005) ( ),,., (ICT),, (OECD, 2014a)., (,,,,, 2009).,

4 .., (,,, 2016: 61)., (reform), (change),. OECD(2014c),,,.,,.,,.,, (< II-1> ). (innovation) (reform) (change),, (,, ),,,, * : OECD, 2014c: 6,,,,, (, 2017).,,

5 (, 2017;, 2017, OECD, 2014a).. OECD(2014a) PISA, TIMSS PIRLS 13 1). 3 TALIS 2018 (,,,,, 2016).,,,,,,,,,,,,.. OECD(Oslo Manual, OECD & Statistical Office of the European Communities, 2005), TALIS TALIS TALIS ) OECD(2014a),,,,,,,,,,,. PISA, TIMSS PIRLS.

6 2 TALIS., OECD(2014a) TALIS TALIS TALIS TALIS , (< -2> ). * * * * *. : OECD, 2013: 41 * (,,,,, 2015; OECD, 2014b). (constructivist beliefs) (higher-order thinking skills) OECD(2014a).. (teacher-centered approach) (student-centered approach), (OECD, 2014b).

7 , (,, 2015).,,,,.. (Bandura, 1990).,,, (,, 2015;,,, 2015).,., (OECD, 2014b).,, (,,, 2017;,, 2011). < -3>..??,,,.

8 OECD TALIS. TALIS ). TALIS,,,,. TALIS , 2 2 (stratified two-stage probability sampling design) (,,,,, 2015; OECD, 2013). TALIS OECD ( ),,,,, (),,, (),,,,,,,,,,,,,, 23 3).. TALIS ,,, (< -1> ). 2) TALIS OECD (Indicators of Education Systems: INES),,, -. TALIS. OECD TALIS,,,, (2015). 3) TALIS 2013 OECD

9 TT2G32A TT2G32B TT2G32C TT2G32D TT2G42B TT2G42C TT2G42G 1 4 ( ~ ) 4 ( ~ ) TT2G34D TT2G34F TT2G34H TT2G34I TT2G34C TT2G34J TT2G34K TT2G34L TT2G34A TT2G34B TT2G34E TT2G34G 4 ( ~ ) TT2G46E TT2G46G TT2G46I TT2G46J TT2G46A TT2G46B TT2G46D TT2G46F. * * 4 ( ~ ) *

10 OECD SPSS 22.0 (OECD, 2014a; 2014b). (fuzzy-set ideal type approach) OECD. OECD ( ; 2014; Kvist, 1999, Ragin, 2008).,, (intermediate-n case) (,, 2012; Ragin, 2008). (large-n case). OECD (, 15~50 ). OECD. OECD. 1) 교사혁신성이상형설정 (property space).. (P) (~P p), (O) (~O o). 4 (< -2> )..

11 (process) (outcome) PO P() O() P*O - (A) Po P() o() P*o - (B) po p() O) p*o - (C) po p() o() p*o - (D) 2) 교사혁신성구성요소의퍼지점수산출 Ragin fsqca 3.0 (Ragin & Sean, 2014). (,, 2012). 변수값 최대값 최소값 Ragin(2008), FI( ) 95%, FO( ) 5%. 4) (,, 2011). (Fuzzy Membership Score). exp log 퍼지셋소속점수 exp log 3) 교사혁신성소속점수의산출및이상형결정 OECD (principle of negation), (minimum principle) (maximum principle). (P) (O)., < -2> 4 4) 0.95, 0.5, 0.05.

12 . 4 P*O( - (A)), (P) (O). 4 (, 2014;, 2009). IV. 1) 교사의과정측면에서의혁신수준. OECD (3.36), (3.35). OECD (3.17) (3.31), (3.29), (3.29), (3.29), (3.23), (3.21), (3.19), (3.19), (3.19), (3.19), (3.18). OECD (3.16), (3.15), (3.13), (3.12), (3.12), (3.11), (3.10), (2.98), (2.98), (2.88) (< IV-1> ). (2.68), (2.60), (2.60), (2.54), (2.05), (2.05), (1.99), (1.94). OECD (2.30) (2.49), (2.48), (2.47), (2.38), (2.34), (2.30), (2.30) OECD. (2.26), (2.24), (2.21), (2.16), (2.14), (2.12), (2.11), (2.05), (2.05) (< IV-1> ).

13 . 0. OECD. (1.36), (1.20), (1.18), (1.14), (1.13), (1.07) OECD (0.87). (0.38), (0.43), (0.59), (0.63), (0.63), (0.68) (< IV-2> ).

14 2) 교사의결과측면에서의혁신수준, (10.60) (7.18). OECD (9.50) (10.25), (10.14), (10.10), (10.05), (9.92), (9.87), (9.86), (9.83), (9.80), (9.79), (9.77), (9.77). OECD (9.47), (9.39), (9.27), (9.27), (8.90), (8.68), (8.42) (< IV-3> )., OECD. (3.48), (3.37), (3.30), (3.30), (3.29). (2.77), (2.88), (2.96), (3.04), (3.05). (2.96), (2.77), (2.75), (2.73), (2.70), (2.69), (2.69), (2.68), (2.68), (2.67). (2.27), (2.28), (2.38), (2.39), (2.41), (2.41), (2.47) (< IV-4> ).

15 OECD < IV-5>.,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,.,.

16 TALIS OECD 23,,. (P) (O) 1- () (< -1> ). (P) (O) (p) (o) ( ) () () , A, (P) 0.21 (O) A. OECD A( - ) 39%(9), C( - ) 48%(11), D( - ) 13%(3), B( - ) (< -2> ).

17 A B C D ( ) A A A D A () A C C () C C C C D D A C A C A C C C A OECD - A ( ),,,, (),,,, 9, A (0.90) A. C,, (),,,,,,,, 11. D,, 3 (< -3> ). OECD. OECD 5).

18 * A(P*O) > > () > > ( ) > > >, B(P*o) - C(p*O) (), > > > > > > > >, D(p*o) > > * A: -, B: -, C: -, D: - OECD. OECD X, Y 4 1 A, 2 C, 3 D, 4 B < IV-6>. 5), (P) (O) A 0.7, 075, B 0.55, 0.9 A( - ) A B..

V. OECD 2 23. OECD.. OECD OECD (< -1> ). D( - ). D (D 0.97) D 0.

19 V. OECD OECD.. OECD OECD (< -1> ). D( - ). D (D 0.97) D 0.66 A~C 0.21, 021, D C( - ) (< IV-6> ). 6) (< -2> ). 6) OECD, < 3>.

20 .,., - -,.. OECD (, 2015).,..

21 ..,. OECD,...,,,,.,,,...,,.., TALIS 2018 TALIS TALIS 2018,., TALIS (, 2009; Kvist 1999) TALIS 2008, TALIS 2013 TALIS 2018.

22 TALIS 2018,,,,,.,., ICT,.,.,., (2010).. (1), 5-30., (2015).. (3), ,, (2015).,. (4), ,, (2016).. :., (2017).. (3), (2015).. (1), (2017) (2017) ,,,, (2015). :

23 . :.,,,,,,, (2017). (I):. RR :.,,,, (2009).,. (1), 1-24.,, (2017).. (1), , (2011). :. (3), (2015). :. (2014). :., (2015).. (3), (2017) , (2012). -. (1), (2009). :. (3), ,,,, (2016). : 3 OECD TALIS. :.,,,, (2015). :. Ashton, P. T. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher. Journal of Teacher Education, 35(5), Bandura, A. (1990). Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 2(10), Kvist, J. (1999). Welfare reform in the nordic countries in the 1990s: Using fuzzy set theory to assess conformity to ideal types. Journal of European Social Policy, 9(3), OECD (2013). Teaching and learning international survey: TALIS 2013 conceptual framework. Paris: OECD Publishing.

24 OECD (2014a). Measuring innovation in education: A new perspective, educational research and innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD (2014b). TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD (2014c). Innovation, governance and reform in education. CERI conference background paper 3~5. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD (2016). TALIS 2018 survey. Paris: OECD Publishing. OECD & Statistical Office of the European Communities (2005). Oslo manual: Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data. Brussels: European Commission. Ragin, C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ragin, C., & Sean, D. (2014). fs/qca [Computer Programme], Version [2.5/3.0]. Irvine, CA: University of California. : / : / :

25 ( ) () ()

26 n OECD, Calinski-Harabasz criterion,. ( =the overall between-cluster variance, =the overall within-cluster variance, k=the number of cluster, N=the number of observations) Number of Clusters: 7 Number of Points: 23 Between-group Sum of Squares: Within-group Sum of Squares: Total Sum of Squares: Clusters Number of Items A B C D Cluster Cluster Cluster Cluster Cluster Cluster Cluster Not Clustered 0

27 : OECD. : : OECD (A), (C), (D).., (D). :.

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Study on Teache

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp.149-171 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.27.4.201712.149 * A Study on Teachers and Parents Perceptions on the Introduction of Innovational