Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp.283-314 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.29.4.201912.283 4 ( 13-17) 5 * A Study on Evaluation of The 4th ( 13-17) Special Education Development a Five-year Plan Purpose: The purpose of this study is to obtain policy implications regarding special education policy through systematic evaluation and comprehensive discussion on The 4th Five-Year Plan for Special Education Development, which was implemented from 2013 to 2017. Method: For this study, a policy evaluation research model that is suitable for policy evaluation was developed, and research was conducted through literature review and questionnaire survey. This study proceeded in the order of policy formation, policy implementation, policy outcome evaluation, policy evaluation and feedback, and the comprehensive discussion was followed. Results: The policy of The 4th Five-Year Plan for Special Education Development have been achieved quantitative performance indicators, but the quality indicators and user satisfaction on the policy have been indicated low. In the results of survey on effectiveness and satisfaction on The 4th Five-Year Plan for Special Education Development targeted at the special education teachers and caregivers in Seoul, special education policies for students with severe and moderate disabilities were found that the policy objectives have not been achieved. As a results of the survey on policy objectives achievement, qualitative effects indicated insufficient. A survey on the understanding of special education policy showed that the level have been low. Also, the satisfaction survey figured out the respondents were not satisfied with The 4th Five-Year Plan for Special Education Development. Discussion: Korea special education policy evaluation studies have been mainly focused on the policy implementation and the effectiveness evaluation. From now, policy researches on policy theory or policy validation should be conducted for the future. In addition, the special education policy evaluation are needed on an national wide scale, not only special schools but general education including inclusive education. Finally, policies should also focus on students with severe and moderate disabilities who need more support and consideration. Key words : Special Education Policy Evaluation, The 4th ( 13-17) Special Education Development a five-year Plan * 1(2019) -4 ( 13-17) 5. Corresponding Author: An, Sun-Hoi. JoongBoo University, Depart. of Secondary Special Education. Chooboo Myeon, Geumsan gun, ChungNam, Korea, e-mail: goright21@naver.com
..,...,,. 1997 5 5. 40,. 2017 2 6,644 40 1 5 9, 1 26,697,000 20 5. 30, 38, 17 (, 2017.11.10.)... 1,., 2002 15 1 (, 2016.11.09.).,.. (, 2017.09.10.),, (, 2016.11.09.).,..
,., (, 2018.07.20.).,.,.. (2005),, (2008: 1-35), (2013), (2001: 3-36),.....,,,.,.. 2018 2022 5 5.,,,. 4 5 5 5 4 5.
. 5. 1) 특수교육현황 4 1, 4 5 2012 85,012 2016 87,950, 5 2,938..,,, 5.,,, 70%.. 12%, 4%.,.. 50%,,,. 4 5,,.,. (, 2016.11.09.),..
2) 특수교육발전 5개년계획 1997 5 (, 2012: 1). 5 20 4 (, 2017: 15). 5 5. 5,. 5 5,,. 1997 1 5 2017 4 5, 20185 5. 1997 1 5. 1997 2001 1 5 21,.. 2003 2007 2 5,. 2008 2012 3 5,. 2013 2017 4 5,. 5,, (, 2017: 1). (, 2018.09.18.)..
(, 2018: 100)., 5..,.,.,. 1) 교육정책평가의준거. 2000 (2003),,,,,. (2009),,,,,,,,. (2014),,,,,,,,,,. (2017),,,,,,,,,. < -1> (8 ), (5 ) (4 ), (4 ). ( )(6 ) (6 ), (5 ). (9 )
, (4 ). (3 ) (3 ).,. (1986) (1986) (1991) (2003) (2009) (2009) (2013) (2014) (2017) 6 8 4 5 4 3 1 2 3 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 ( ) 6 6 5 1 1 1 1 9 1 4 1 3 3 3 10 7 14 6 7 18 11 10 9 92 : (2017: 115).
2) 특수교육정책및평가연구분석,. (2000: 16-17),, (2003). (2005: 151-152),,,,., (2008: 1-35) 2 2,,., (2012: 35-59). 2013 4 5 2017 5 5. 4 5 5 5 5 5.,.,..,..,,. 2000.,.,,,,.
.. 3) 특수교육정책평가단계별평가준거 4 5,.,.. 4 5 <-2>. 4) 특수교육발전계획평가모형및연구분석틀 < 1>. < -3>.
대상 정책내용 핵심 준거 특수교육정책형성평가 평가항목 적합성 정책문제정의의적합성 정책목표와정책수단의실현가능성 대상 집행 계획 특수교육정책집행평가핵심평가항목준거 추진계획수립의민주성 추진계획의일관성적합성 정책내용의명확성 추진정책체계의적합성 결정과정 민주성 합리성 정책의제설정의민주성 사회적논의와의견수렴의민주성 정책대안탐색및결과예측 과정의합리성 집행 과정 대응성 정책집행의유연성 정책갈등관리방안의적절성 정책추진주체별역할수행의적절성 대상 특수교육정책평가및환류평가핵심평가항목준거 대상 특수교육정책결과평가핵심평가항목준거 정책평가 타당성 특수교육발전계획종합평가의내적타당성 정책결과정책산출 효과성정책이해도 정책분야별정책추진실적 정책목표달성의효과성 추진정책에대한이해도 정책환류 활용도 차기계획수립시활용도 태도변화정책전반 수요자만족도수요자정책종합평가 제 4 차특수교육발전 5개년계획추진만족도 중도 중복장애학생정책 특수교육법개정 특수학교교육과정개정 특수교사임용방법개선
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 5-5 - -. 4 5,. 4 5.. 4 5 (, 2012), 4 5 (, 2013), 5 5
(, 2017)..,,. 5,.,. 1) 문헌연구,,,,,,,. 4 5, 1 4 2012 2017,,. 4 5, TV 4 5. 4 5,,. 2) 설문조사 4 5,,.,. (, 2007: 154-156). 4 5
. 8. 2017 4 1 29,,,,, 1 5. 3., 3.. Fowler(1988: 40-41) ( ).., 500 1000,... < -1> 2018 9 14 9 21, 230, 260 490, 419 85.5%. 8 1.9%. 30(random). 3 1. < -2>.. 4 5 11,, 4 5,,. 4 5 11,
,,. 4 5 5, 5. < -2>. - : - : -,,,, 1 5 3-419 (: 208, : 208 ) 95% ± 5.17% - : : 2018 9 14 9 21 11 11 11 11 11
( ) 5 5 5 5 16 16 16 16 16 3) 예비설문조사 (, 2017 : 134). 2018 9 3 2018 9 7. 10 10.,, ().,.,, 4 5. 4) 자료처리.. SPSS(Statistical Package for the Social Science) WIN 20.0. (frequency analysis).
4 5,,.. 4 5,.,.,,.. 4 5,,. 4 5,. 4 5, 4. 4 5,, 4,, 4. 4 5,. 4 5,.,,.,,. 4 5,
. 4 5.,. 5,. 4 5,. 4 5. 4 5. 4 5.. 4 5.,,,,,,.. 4 5,.. 4 5,
,. 4 5 4 5. 4 5. 4 5 1 2013 2017 11. 4 5. 4 5,,. 4 5.,. 4 5. 4 5.,,,. 4 5. 4 5.,. 4 5,. 4 5.,
. 4 5,,. 4 5,,,.,,. 1) 정책목표달성의효과성 4 5 4 < -1>. 3.09, 2.63. 4 3.00 1,. 1-1 1-2 1-3 2-1 2-2 2-3 2.80.828 2.83.905 2.86.927 2.93.853 3.02.957 2.88 1.067
( ) 3-1 3-2 3-3 4-1 4-2 () 2.90.936 3.22.975 3.09.992 2.63.938 2.65.898 2) 정책산출의정책이해도 4 5 4 < -2>. 3.15, 2.69. 4 3.00 1. 1-1 1-2 1-3 2-1 2-2 2-3 2.69.838 2.78.818 2.79.890 2.87.844 3.05.914 2.89.956
( ) 3-1 3-2 3-3 4-1 4-2 () 3.03.923 3.15.950 3.06.965 2.83.891 2.79.891 3) 태도변화와수요자만족도 4 5 4 < -3>. 3.21, () 2.65. 4 3.00 1. 1-1 1-2 1-3 2-1 2-2 2-3 2.81.906 2.84.928 2.85 1.016 2.92.940 3.04 1.040 2.85 1.120
( ) 3-1 3-2 3-3 4-1 4-2 () 2.95 1.006 3.21 1.002 3.09 1.033 2.66 1.006 2.65.954 4) 정책결과종합평가 4 5,,.., 4 5... 4 5 2013 2017 4 5 4 2012. 11,. 4 5,,, 4 5 4 11.,, 3,
8. 4 5.,,, 4, 7. 4 5 2.,, 3, 8.,,., 4 5. 4 5. 4 5, 5 5.. 4 5 2017 5 5, 4 5,. 4 5 11 3, 8. 4 5. 4 5 5 5,
. 4 5. 4 5 2,,,, 1,968. 5 5 2 3,056.,,..., 4 5.. 4 5 4 5. 4 5 11.,.,.,., 4 5
,. 4 5,. 2013 2017 4 5 11.,,,.,...,,,,,.,.,. 4 5., 4 5. 4 5 11.. 4 5.,. 3.02, 3.22, 3. 09 3, 8 3. 4 5
. 4 5 ( 3.05), ( 3.03), ( 3.15), ( 3.06) 4 3. 7 3. 4 5. 4 5 ( 3.04), (3.21), (3.09). 11 8 3, 4 5., 4 5. 4 5,. 4 5. 4 5 11 8. 4 5.,,. 4 5.. 4 5,,,.., 4 5
..,..., 4 5, 4 5.,.,,,. 4 5,,., 4 5. 4 5.. 1) 후속연구를위한제언 4 5. 4 5,,,,. 4 5,.,..,.
..,.., 4 5 5 5.,,,., 4 5.,,,.,,. 2) 특수교육발전계획정책개선을위한제언 4 5.,..,..
,.,,,,.,.,..,,..,,.,.,..,,,.....
, (2012).. (1). 35-59. (2003)... (2018.07.20.).. http://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/k han_art_view.html?artid=201812201558001&code=94030 2019.09.01. (2013).. (2017).. (2012).. (2017).. (2018). -. 25., 63-116., (2008). 2. (2), 1-35. (1997). 219-229.. (2016.11.09.). 14,. http://www.donga.com/news/art icle/all/20161109/81235471/1 2019.07.21. (2000).. (3), 16-17. (2014)... (2017.11.10.)., /. htt p://www.seoul.co.kr/news/newsview.php?id=20171110029004&wlog_tag3=naver 2019.10.08. (2009). :.. (2009). :.. (2005)... (2005)... (2017). -.. (2003).. (2), 3-36. (1991)...
,,,,,,, (2007). :. (2013)... (2017.09.10.).. https: //news.joins.com/article/21922352 2019.05.10. (1986). :.. (2017.11.03.).,. http://www.newstoma to.com/readnews.aspx?no=785970 2019.11.01. (2017.09.18.).,. https://news.naver.com/main/read. nhn?oid=016&aid=0001291772 2019.09.08. Fowler, F. (1988). Survey research methods. Beverly Hills: Sage, 40-41. : 2019. 10. 29. / : 2019. 11. 13. / : 2019. 12. 20.
4 ( 13-17) 5 : 2013 2017 4 5. : 4 5,.,,,. : 4 5. 4 5,,.,.. 4 5. :,,.,.,.