Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science (한국비블리아학회지)

Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science (한국비블리아학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Comparative Analysis on University Accreditation Standards of Korea and USA in the View Point of Information Literacy

정보활용능력의 관점에서 본 한국과 미국의 대학평가인증기준 비교.분석

  • Lee, Byeong-Ki ;
  • Kim, Kioh (Dept. of Curriculum, Instruction & Leadership, College of Education & Human Development, University of Louisiana)
  • Received : 2013.08.11
  • Accepted : 2013.09.12
  • Published : 2013.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In recent years, universities as higher education institutions have counted upon social accountability that assure their educational performance and quality. University assessment accreditation are being used internationally as a means to ensure the accountability. Current trends in American accreditation standards emphasize student learning outcomes such as problem solving, critical analysis, creativity instead of inputs such as physical and human resources. Also, American accreditation standards underscore the importance of information literacy as a learning outcomes. The purpose of this study is to compare and to analysis accreditation standards of Korea and American in the view point of library and information literacy. This study suggest basic directions how to apply these information literacy in accreditation standards of Korea. The accreditation standards of Korea need to reflect information literacy in terms of to enhance learning outcomes. In particular, this accreditation standards has to include collaboration between librarian and faculty within standard for accreditation.

최근 들어, 고등교육기관으로서의 대학은 교육성과와 품질을 보장해야 할 사회적 책무성에 직면해 있다. 대학평가인증제도는 대학교육의 책무성을 담보하기 위한 수단으로써 국제적으로 널리 이용되고 있다. 미국의 대학평가인증기준은 물적, 인적자원 등 투입요소 대신에 문제해결능력, 비판적 분석력, 창의력과 같은 학습성과를 강조하고 있다. 또한, 미국의 대학평가인증기준은 정보활용능력을 주요 학습성과로 간주하고 있다. 본 연구는 도서관 및 정보활용능력의 관점에서 한국과 미국의 대학평가인증기준을 비교 분석하고, 한국의 대학평가인증기준에 정보활용능력에 관한 사항을 어떻게 적용해야 할 것인가 하는 기본 방향을 제시하는데 목적이 있다. 한국의 대학평가인증기준은 학습성과를 강화하는 측면에서 정보활용능력을 반영하고, 단순 강의 수준을 벗어나 도서관 사서와 담당교수와의 협력수업을 기준에 반영할 필요가 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김미란. 2007. 일본: 두 마리 토끼를 잡으려는 일본의 노력. 교육개발, 34(3): 64-71.
  2. 박종열. 2007. 대학인증, 사회인정. 교육개발, 34(3): 48-55.
  3. 변기용 외. 2013. 현행 고등교육 책무성 확보기제에 대한 비판적 성찰과 정책방향 탐색. 아시아교육연구, 14(1): 163-196.
  4. 이병기. 2012. 정보활용교육론. 개정1판. 서울: 조은글터.
  5. 이영호. 2006. 미국 연방교육부(USDE)의 대학인증평가기구 지정에 대한 고찰. 대학교육, 143: 55-64.
  6. 이희용. 2011. 융복합 교육 시대에 기초교양교육의 내실화와 제역할 모색. 교양논총, 4: 67-82.
  7. 장익준. 2011. 대학도서관 이용자교육 실태 분석 연구. 사대도협회지, 13: 99-119.
  8. 한국대학교육협의회. 2013. 대학종합평가인정제. [online]. [cited 2013.7.10]. .
  9. 한국대학평가원. 2012. 대학기관인증편람. 서울: 한국대학평가원.
  10. 한국대학평가원. 2013. 대학기관인증편람. 서울: 한국대학평가원.
  11. AASL.AECT(American Association of School Librarians.Association for Educational Communications and Technology). 1998. Information Power: Building Partnerships for Learning. Chicago and London: AASL & AECT.
  12. Association of American Colleges and Universities. 2004. Taking Responsibility for the Quality of the Baccalaureate Degree. [online]. [cited 2013.7.10]. .
  13. Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL). 2000. The Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Chicago: American Library Association.
  14. Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). 2012. An Overview of U.S. Accreditation. [online]. [cited 2013.7.4]. .
  15. Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). 2013. About CHEA. [online]. [cited 2013.7.4]. .
  16. European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education. 2009. Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area. [online]. [cited 2013.7.10]. .
  17. Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE). 2003. Developing Research & Communication Skills: Guidelines for Information Literacy in the Curriculum. [online]. [cited 2013.7.10]. .
  18. Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE). 2009. Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education: Requirements of Affiliation and Standards for Accreditation. [online]. [cited 2013.7.10]. .
  19. New England Association of Schools and Colleges(NEASC). 2011. Standards for Accreditation. [online]. [cited 2013.7.20]. .
  20. North Central Association of Colleges and Schools(NCACS). 2012. The Criteria for Accreditation and Core Components. [online]. [cited 2013.7.24]. .
  21. Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities(NWCCU). 2010. Accreditation Standards. [online]. [cited 2013.7.24]. .
  22. OECD Higher Education Programme. 2008. Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education: A Comparative Review of Selected Practices. [online]. [cited 2013.7.4]. .
  23. Otter, Sue. 1992. Learning Outcomes in Higher Education, A Development Project Report. London: Unit for the Development of Adult Continuing Education (UDACE).
  24. Saunders, L. 2011. Information Literacy as a Student Learning Outcome: The Perspective of Institutional Accreditation. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited and Linworth.
  25. Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). 2011. The Principles of. Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement. [online]. [cited 2013.7.24]. .
  26. Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). 2013. Handbook of Accreditation. [online]. [cited 2013.7.24]. .
  27. Zurkowski, Paul. G. 1974. The Information Service Environment Relationships and Priorities. Washington D. C.: National Commission on Libraries and Information Science.

Cited by

  1. 문헌정보학 분야 정보활용교육에 관한 연구 동향 vol.26, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.14699/kbiblia.2015.26.3.207
  2. 메타리터러시 관점에서의 문헌정보학 전공 커리큘럼 진단연구 vol.52, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4275/kslis.2018.52.2.191