논문 방사선방호실무역량강화를위한국제교육훈련과정개발 김현기, 손미연, 고한석한국원자력연구원원자력교육센터 2013 년 1 월 17 일접수 / 2013 년 1 월 29 일 1 차수정 / 2013 년 1 월 30 일채택 교육훈련은안전문화를증진하고, 방사선작업종사자의방사선방호역량을강화하는주요한수단이다. 기존의단기원자력국제교육은고위급대상의강의실교육을중심으로수행되고있으나, 이제원전을수출하는기술공여국으로서우리의위상은개도국으로부터자국의실무전문가양성을위한지원을요청받고있다. 본연구는국내의우수한방사선시설과교육훈련인프라를활용하여실습과현장방문을강화한국제방사선방호실무전문가양성과정을개발하고, 평가및피드백절차를완성하여운영한결과를요약한다. 교육과정의개발및운영과정에서는 SAT 방법론을도입함으로써교수 - 학습효과를극대화하고, 교수목적, 방법, 평가의일관성을유지하고자하였다. 교육과정의개시전또는종료후에수행된비교평가와최종평가에서평균점수가약 2 점상승하고, 설문조사에서는대부분의항목에서 4.0 이상의높은만족도를나타내었다. 이는본교육과정에적용된교수학습방법이효과적이었음을시사한다. 이러한교수학습방법론은국제교육에서실무전문가양성을위한맞춤형교육과정을개발하고, 이론중심에서현장실무중심으로국제교육의패러다임을전환하는단초가될것이다. 중심어 : 방사선방호, 방사선안전, 교육훈련, SAT, 실습교육, 실무중심교육 1. 서론 1) 교육훈련은안전문화를확산하고, 방사선작업종사자 ( 이하 종사자 ) 의방사선방호역량을강화하는주요한수단이다. 방사선방호에관한교육훈련은규제기관, 원전및방사선이용시설, 핵주기시설, 선원의운반, 폐기물관리, 폐로등원자력및방사선을이용하거나취급하는모든시설에서요구된다. IAEA 는 Basic Safety Standard [1] 등의이행을위해교육훈련의중요성을강조하고있으며, 과거몇몇방사선사고경험으로부터사고의중요한원인중의하나가적절한교육훈련의부재였음은이미지적된바이다. 특히후쿠시마원전사고 ( 11. 3) 이후안전하고지속가능한원자력기술의이용을보장하기위해원자력안전전문인력을지속적으로양성할필요성이다시한번부각되었다 [2]. IAEA 는 2000 년이후그림 1 에서보듯이방사선, 수송및폐기물안전에서 10 년주기의교육훈련전략을수립하고, 회원국이자체적으로지속가능한교육훈련프로그램을구축할수있도록지원하고있다. 즉, 제 1 차교육훈련 10 개년전략계획을통해지역적수준에서교육훈련기반을구축을완료하고, 11 년부터이행되는제 2 차 10 개년전략계획을통해국가적수준에서이들분야의교육훈련기반강 Fig. 1. IAEA strategic plan for education and training. 화를목표로하고있다 [3, 4]. 한편최근들어베트남, 말레이시아, 태국등에서의원자력도입계획과함께방사선산업규모의확대 [5] 로이들국가로부터의교육훈련협력요청이점차증가하는시점에서방사선방호관련국제교육은대학의학위과정을통해부분적으로이루어지고있을뿐방사선방호에특화된외국인대상전문과정은부재한실정이다. 본연구는교육훈련분야에도입되고있는 SAT (Systematic Approach to Training) 방법론 [6-9] 에기반하여방사선방호와선원의안전취급에있어서현장에서요구되는실무역량강화를위한국제교육과정을개발하여운영한결과를요약한다. 교신저자 : 김현기, hkkim0@kaeri.re.kr 대전시유성구대덕대로 1045 한국원자력연구원 JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013 1
Fig. 2. Systematic approach to training. 2. 재료및방법 본교육과정의개발과운영과정에도입된 SAT 는목적하는역량달성을위해교육훈련의개발과운영에관한논리적접근방법론으로그림 2 에도시한바와같이분석, 설계, 개발, 이행, 피드백및평가의단계로구성된다. 분석단계는직무분석을통해안전한업무수행에요구되는지식과기술을도출하는과정이다. 설계단계에서는직무분석결과를활용하여교수목적, 학습목표, 교육의세부주제를도출하였다. 개발단계에서는교육일정, 학습계획, 교재, 실습, 평가절차등을개발하고, 집체교육, 실습, 현장학습으로구성되는교수학습방법을결정하였다. 교육과정의성공적인이행을위해서는적절한행정절차와계획이뒷받침되어야한다. 따라서운영단계에서는교육과정의행정절차, 교육시설및장비, 교재, 교육생선발, 강사선정등을고려하였다. 평가는각학습모듈또는실습종료시또는교육과정이완료된시점등에정기적으로수행된다. 본연구에서는 IAEA 안전보고서에서권고하는평가기법 [6] 을활용하여평가문제와설문지를개발하였다. 교육의효과와학습성취도를비교평가할목적으로교육기간을고려하여교육개시전과종료후에동일한문제 (15 문항 ) 를풀이하도록하는퀴즈평가를수행하였다. 또한퀴즈보다난이도가있는 20 개문항으로구성된최종평가를시행함으로써과정내용에대한교육생의이해도를종합적으로평가하였다. 교육생으로부터교육과정에대한피드백을얻기위해과정의유용성, 강의별교육생의지식및흥미, 강의 실습 현장방문만족도, 강사평가, 실습의실용성등을포함하는총 67 개문항으로구성된설문지를개발하였다. 본교육과정은 IAEA 의 10 개년교육훈련계획하에서개발된방사선방호대학원교육과정 (PGEC, Postgraduate Educational Course in Radiation Protection and the Safety of Radiation Sources) [10] 의교수요목중핵심내용을축약하여단기과정 (2 주과정 ) 으로개발하고자하였다. 따라서분석단계의직무분석은 PGEC 개발과정에서기수행됨에따라본연구에서는 SAT 방법론에서언급하는분석단계는생략하였다. 교육생의실무역량강화의측면에서는국내의우수한방사선방호시설과교육훈련인프라를적극활용한실습과정과현장방문을도입하였다. 3. 결과및고찰 SAT 방법론에기반하여방사선방호실무역량강화를목적으로개발된본교육과정은표 1 에서보듯이이론 (41 시간 ), 실습 (12 시간 ), 현장방문 (8 시간 ), 평가 (2.5 시간 ), 설문지작성 (2 시간 ) 으로구성된다. 교육과정에참여하는교육생은 이공계분야의학사학위및이에준하는교육을이수한후, 원자력또는방사선관련분야에종사하거나, 학위과정에있는외국인및내국인 을대상으로하였다. 내국인교육생참여의목적은기존국내교육과정을경험한입장에서본과정에대한의견을얻기위함이었다. 2 JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013
Table 1. Overview of the Training Course in Radiation Protection. Classification Objective Content Classroom Based Training Practices Technical Visits To acquire basic knowledge for radiation physics, radiation effects, etc. To understand radiation protection system and regulatory infrastructure for radiation safety. To be familiar with different types of radiation detectors and their operating principle and characteristics. To acquire practical radiation protection techniques with work practices and activities handling radiation. To become aware of the causes and consequences of radiological accidents and of approaches to mitigating the consequences. To be able to organize and implement training courses, and to develope didactic skills. To build practical competence trough laboratory exercises and demonstrations. To observe the practical application of requirements and procedures for radiation protection in facilities. Radiation basic and its application, radiation sources, biological effects of radiation International radiation protection system, regulatory system and programs for radiation protection and safety Principles of radiation detection and measurement, dosimetric calculation. Radiation protection for the exposure categories, transport of radiation materials, management of radioactive waste, assessment of environmental radiation Radiation emergency preparedness, case study of radiation and nuclear accidents Time [hours] Training the trainers 5 Subtotal 41 6 kinds of laboratory exercises (performance check of radiation detectors, decontamination, gamma-ray spectrometry, etc.) Calibration facility, external and internal dosimetry lab., research reactor, accelerator facility, irradiation facility Assessment To determine whether the learning objectives and the necessary level of competence have been achieved. 2.5 Questionnaire To get feedback from the participants for the quality of the training course including methods used, content, proficiency of the trainers and the extent to which their needs and expectation were met. Total 68.5 10 3 4 15 4 12 8 2 Table 2. Syllabus of Classroom Based Training in Radiation Protection. Classification Fundamentals Framework for Radiation Protection Radiation Measurement Radiation Protection for Exposure Categories Radiation Preparedness Others Lecture Number Topics Time [hours] 1 Basic Radiation Physics 2 2 Interaction of Radiation with Matter 2 3 Human made Radiation Sources 2 4 Radiation Quantities and Units 2 5 Biological Effects of Radiation 2 6 International and National Framework for Radiation Protection and Safety 1 7 Radiation Protection System of ICRP 1 8 Regulatory Control 1 9 Radiation Detectors 2 10 Radiation Measurements 2 11 Assessment of Occupational Exposure: External 2 12 Assessment of Occupational Exposure: Internal 2 13 Radiation Protection in Nuclear Installations 1 14 Radiation Protection in Industrial Applications 1 15 Protection against Occupational Exposure 2 16 Protection for Medical Exposure 2 17 Public Exposure and Communication with Public 1 18 Environmental Assessment 2 19 Safe Transport of Radioactive Material 1 20 Radioactive Waste Management 1 21 Emergency Preparedness 2 22 Radiation Accident from NPP 1 23 Radiation Accidents in Radiation Facilities 1 24 Training the Trainer 3 25 Life under the Umbrella of Korea Culture 2 Total 41 JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013 3
Fig. 3. Figure of practical training sessions. 3.1 강의실교육최소 18 주과정으로운영되고있는 PGEC 강의교안에기반하여해당주제별로 2 주과정의교안으로재구성한후전문가의검토를받아표준교안을완성하였다. 이론교육은표 2 에보인바와같이방사선기초, 방사선방호체계, 방사선측정, 피폭범주별방사선방호, 방사능방재, 강사교육등의분야에서총 25 개주제를다루는교수요목으로구성하였다. 3.2 실습교육아래와같이방사선측정및관리에서기본이되는 6 종의실습을설계하고, 실습교재를개발하였다. 총 12 시간 ( 실습당 2 시간 ) 을실습에할애하였으며, 실습의효율성을기하고, 원활한그룹활동을보장하기위해각실습조는 4~5 명의교육생으로구성하였다. 실습교육의모습을그림 3 에도시하였다. Practice 1. Inverse Square Law and Gamma Ray Attenuation Practice 2. The Operating Characteristics of the GM Counter Practice 3. Efficiency of the GM Counter for Gammas and Betas Practice 4. Practical Use of Portable Monitors Practice 5. Decontamination of Different Surfaces Practice 6. Energy Calibration of the NaI(Tl) Gamma Ray Spectrometer 3.3 현장방문방사선시설에서실제응용되는방사선방호요건과절차에대한현장경험을획득하기위해방사선과관련한주요시설을방문하여현장책임자로부터방사선학적측면에서시설의특성과시설에서취해지는방사선방호활동및조치에관한교육을이수하였다. 방사선계측기교정시설 ( 엑스선, 감마선, 중성자조사시설 ) 외부피폭선량평가실 ( 열형광선량계판독실 ) 내부피폭선량평가실 ( 전신계측실 ) 연구용원자로의방사선안전관리 ( 하나로 ) 가속기및방사선조사시설의방사선안전관리 3.4 평가및피드백 학습성취도평가방사선방호관련기초적인지식을묻는퀴즈로서 15 문항 (15 점만점 ) 의동일한문제를과정의개시전과종료시에풀이하도록하여교육의효과와교육생개개인의학습성취도를비교평가하였다. 그림 4 와 5 에서보듯이과정의시작전퀴즈평가에서평균점수는 9.13±2.75 이었으나, 과정을이수한후에치러진퀴즈평가의평균점수는 11.00±2.10 으로교육이수후성적은전반적으로향상되었다. 그림에서 M1~M15 는 15 명의교육생각각을의미한다. 특히, M7, M9, M11 의성적향상이두드러지며, 하위권교육생의성적향상정도가상위권교육생보다높음에따라개인별점수의편차도 24% 이상감소하였다. 하위권은주로원자력또는방사선을전공하지않은교육생들로비교평가에서평균 4.0 점이향상된반면관련분야를전공한교육생의경우평균 1.1 점이향상되었다. Fig 4. Results of quiz test conducted at the beginning of the training. M1~M15 in the figure mean each of the trainees. 4 JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013
또한과정종료시점에퀴즈보다난이도가있는 20 개문항 (20 점만점 ) 의문제로구성하여, 과정에대한교육생의종합적인이해도를평가하였다. 그림 6 과같이평균점수는 15.47±2.88 이었으며, 평균점수를 100 점만점으로환산하면약 77 점에해당한다. 그림에서보듯이 17 점 (85 점 /100 점 ) 이상의우수한성적의교육생과 14 점 (70 점 /100 점 ) 이하의교육생이뚜렷하게구분되며, 여기서도하위권은대개관련전공을하지않은교육생들이었다. 퀴즈평가에서낮은성적을받은 M12, M14 그리고 M15 가최종평가에서도하위권성적을받은것으로나타났다. Fig 5. Results of quiz test conducted at the end of the training. M1~M15 in the figure mean each of the trainees. Fig 6. Results of final examination conducted at the end of the training. M1~M15 in the figure mean each of the trainees. 교육생피드백교육생의피드백을얻기위해과정의종료시점에과정의유용성, 강의별교육생의지식및흥미, 강의 실습과정 현장방문 교육시설의만족도등 67 개문항 (5 점만점 ) 의설문을수행하였으며, 결과를그림 7~13 에도시하였다. 본교육과정에도입된내용과교수학습방법에대하여교육생은대부분의항목에서 4.0 이상의높은만족도를나타내었다. 강의실교육보다는실습및현장방문의만족도가높았으며, 그림 11 과같이특히실습에대해높은만족도와함께유익했던것으로평가하였다. 반면의사소통기술증진을위한프로그램을도입할필요성이제기되었으며 ( 그림 7), 교육을수료한후에도교육생은방사선방호자체에대한생소함으로인해본인의해당지식이여전히충분하지않은것으로생각하였다 ( 그림 8). 강의의내용적측면에서는그림 9 과같이강의와교재간의일치성을제외하고강의가교육생의기대치에조금미치지못하는것으로평가되었다. 이는강사의자질과관련된사항으로강사선정시에전문성, 교수능력, 언어능력등에대한보다면밀한검토가필요함을시사한다. Fig. 7. Questionnaire for usefulness of the training course. JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013 5
Fig. 8. Questionnaire for knowledge and interest of participants for lectures. Fig. 9. Questionnaire for importance and satisfaction for lectures. Fig. 10. Questionnaire for satisfaction for practical training sessions. 6 JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013
Fig. 11. Questionnaire for practicability and interest in practical training sessions. Fig. 12. Questionnaire for importance and satisfaction for technical visits. Fig. 13. Questionnaire for importance and satisfaction for training facilities and service. JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013 7
4. 결론 실습과정과현장경험은이론학습을재확인하고, 종사자의실무역량을강화하는효과적인교수학습법이다. 기존의단기원자력국제교육은고위급대상의강의실교육을중심으로수행되고있으나, 이제원전을수출하는기술공여국으로서우리의위상은개도국으로부터자국의실무전문가양성을위한지원을요청받고있다. 본연구는국내의우수한방사선시설과교육훈련인프라를활용하여실습과현장방문을강화한국제방사선방호실무전문가양성과정을개발하고, 이에대한강의교안과실습교재의개발과평가및피드백절차를완성하였다. 교육과정의개발및운영과정에서는교수 - 학습효과를극대화하고, 교수목적, 방법, 평가의일관성을유지할목적으로 SAT 방법론을도입하였다. 교육과정전 후에행해진비교평가와최종평가를통해교육목표달성여부와필요역량의습득정도를검증한결과, 평균점수의상승과하위권교육생의뚜렷한성적향상으로본과정에도입된교수학습방법의유효성을확인하였다. 교육과정의종료후에수행된설문조사에서는과정의유용성, 강의별교육생의지식및흥미, 강의 실습과정 현장방문 교육시설의만족도등대부분의항목에서 4.0 이상의높은만족도를나타내었다. 특히본교육과정의설계와개발단계에서의도한바와같이실습과현장방문에대한만족도가상대적으로높게평가되었다. 반면개선의여지는여전히있어의사소통기술습득을위한프로그램도입으로미래의강사를양성할필요성과강사선정시에전문성과함께교수능력과언어능력을고려함으로써강의에대한교육생의이해를증진할필요가있는것으로나타났다. 이러한평가결과는차기교육과정설계시에입력자료로활용되어교육과정의지속적인개선을도모할것이다. 본교육과정에도입된교수학습방법론과실습과정은국제교육에서실무전문가양성을위한맞춤형교육과정을개발하고, 이론중심에서현장실무중심으로국제교육의패러다임을전환하는단초가될것이다. 참고문헌 1. IAEA. International basic safety standards for protection against ionizing radiation and for the safety of radiation sources. International Atomic Energy Agency. Vienna. Safety Series No. 115. 1996. 2. IAEA. IAEA Action plan on nuclear safety, International Atomic Energy Agency. www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/actionplan. 2011. 3. IAEA. Strategic approach to education and training in radiation and waste safety; strategic plan 2001-2010. International Atomic Energy Agency. Vienna. 2000. 4. IAEA, Strategic approach to education and training in radiation and waste safety; strategic plan 2011-2020. International Atomic Energy Agency. Vienna. 2010. 5. 한국원자력산업회의. 원자력연감 : 제 5 편방사선및 RI 이용기술. 2010;247-248. 6.IAEA. Training in radiation protection and the safe use of radiation sources. International Atomic Energy Agency. Vienna. Safety Reports Series No. 20. 2001. 7. IAEA. Nuclear power plant personnel training and its evaluation. International Atomic Energy Agency. Technical Report Series No. 380. 1996. 8. IAEA. Analysis phase of systematic approach to training(sat) for nuclear plant personnel. International Atomic Energy Agency. Technical Report Series No. 1179. 2000. 9. IAEA. A systematic approach to human performance improvement in nuclear power plants: training solution. International Atomic Energy Agency. Report Series No. 1204. 2001. 10. IAEA. Postgraduate educational course in radiation protection and the safety of radiation sources; standard syllabus. International Atomic Energy Agency. Vienna. Training Course Series No. 18. 2002. Development of International Education and Training Program for Building Practical Competence in Radiation Protection Hyun Kee Kim, Miyeon Son, Han-Suk Ko Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, Nuclear Training and Education Center Abstract - Education and training is an important means of promoting safety culture and enhancing the level of competence of radiation worker in radiation protection. The existing international nuclear education and training of short duration has been carried out on the high-level officials and focussed on the classroom based training. The developing countries has been asking for support to cultivate their own technical experts to Korea which is a donor country exporting nuclear power plants. This paper summarizes the results of developing and operating the international education and training course to froster 8 JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013
technical experts in radiation protection that emphasized practical training sessions and technical visits using the excellent domestic radiation facilities and infrastructure of education and training. It mentions the procedures of assessment and feedback as well. In an effort to maximize teaching-learning effects and to maintain consistency of the learning objectives, methods and assessment, SAT methodology has been applied on the processes of developing and operating the course. In the comparative and final assessment which were conducted at the beginning or at the end of training course, participants' average score increased around 2 points. The questionnaire of participants showed a high level of satisfaction of 4.0 points or above for the most of the questions. These imply teaching-learning methods applied to it might be effective. The teaching-learning methodologies may provide the opportunity to develop the customized training course for bringing up international technical experts and to shift educational paradigm from theory-oriented to on-site practice-based education. Key words : Radiation protection, Radiation safety, Education and training, SAT, Practical training, Hands-on training JOURNAL OF RADIATION PROTECTION, VOL.38 NO.1 MARCH 2013 9