실천공학교육논문지 (Journal of Practical Engineering Education)

  • 제16권2호
  • /
  • Pages.129-141
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 2288-405X(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-4068(eISSN)
한국실천공학교육학회 (Korean Institute for Pratical Engineering Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

주요 고등교육 학습성과 분석 도구 분석을 통한 발전 방향 모색: K대학 사례 연구

Exploring the Development Directions of Learning Outcome in Higher Education through the Analysis of Popular Tools: A Case of University K

  • 김태형 (한국기술대학교 산업경영학부) ;
  • 장은정 (인천지역인적자원개발위원회 일자리창출팀)
  • Taehyung Kim (School of Industrial Management, Korea University of Technology and Education) ;
  • Eunjeong Jang (Job Creation Team, Incheon Regional Skill Council for HRD)
  • 투고 : 2024.03.24
  • 심사 : 2024.04.19
  • 발행 : 2024.04.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

최근 고등교육 정책이 학생중심으로 전환되면서 학생들의 학습성과 향상을 위한 대학의 관심이 증가하고 있다. 이에 본 연구는 K대학의 학습성과 지표를 국내외 주요 학습성과 지표와 비교·분석하여, 우리나라 대학들의 학습성과 관리를 위한 발전방향을 제공하는 것을 목적으로 하고 있다. 비교·분석을 위해 AHELO, NSSE, CLA+ 등 주요 학습성과 측정 도구의 세부 측정문항을 조사하였다. K대 주요 학습성과 지표와 타 학습성과 지표를 비교/분석한 결과, 대다수의 지표는 중복되고 있으나, 학습을 위한 학생 지원/시설, 교수자의 질, 커뮤니케이션 등 일부 지표는 K대에 부재한 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 지표를 기존 학습성과 지표에 추가할 것인지 아니면 다른 조사를 통해 이를 확인할 것인지 결정할 필요가 있으며, 같은 지표라도 측정 방식이 다른 지표들 중 일부는 측정 방식 변경을 고려할 필요가 있다.

In recent times, there has been a shift towards student-centered higher education policies, leading to a growing interest among universities to improve students' learning outcomes. To aid in this endeavor, this study aims to provide guidance for University K to enhance their learning outcome management by comparing and analyzing their learning outcome indicators with those of other domestic and foreign universities. The study examined detailed measurement questions from major learning outcome measurement tools such as AHELO, NSSE, and CLA+. Upon comparison and analysis of University K's major learning outcome indicators with those of other universities, it was found that most of the indicators overlapped. However, some indicators such as student support/facilities for learning, instructor quality, and communication were absent from University K. Therefore, it is crucial to decide whether to add these indicators to the existing learning outcomes or to confirm them through other surveys. Moreover, even for the same indicator, some indicators with different measurement need to consider changing the measurement.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 한국기술교육대학교 대학혁신지원사업 연구과제의 수행결과로 작성되었음.

참고문헌

  1. J. Ko, S. Park, and H. Yu, "An analysis of the structural relationships between student learning outcomes and institutional characteristics and student engagement," Journal of Korean Education, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 167-195, 2014.
  2. L. C. Strauss and J. F. Volkwein, "Predictors of student commitment at two-year and four-year institutions," Journal of Higher Education, vol. 75, no. 2, pp. 203-227, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2004.0007
  3. R. Toutkoushian and J. Smart, "Do institutional characteristics affect student gains from college?," The Review of Higher Education, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 39-61, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2001.0017
  4. S. Otter, Learning outcomes in higher education, A development project report, Unit for the Development of Adult Continuing Education, England, 1992.
  5. R. Shavelson, Measuring college learning responsibly: Accountability in a new era, Stanford University Press, 2010.
  6. D. Nusche, "Assessment of learning outcomes in higher education: A comparative review of selected practices," OECD Education Working Papers, no. 15, OECD Publishing, 2008.
  7. J. Lee, S. Kwon, and J. Lim, "An empirical study on the job training outcomes for the social service personnel applying the Kirkpatrick's evaluation model," Journal of Korean Social Welfare Administration, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 317-346, 2014.
  8. J. Lee, Assessment of vocational education training, Parkyoungsa, 2020.
  9. P. Tamkin, J. Yarnall, and M. Kerrin, Kirkpatrick and beyond: A review of models of training evaluation, Institute for Employment Studies, Brighton: England, 2002.
  10. E. F. Holton III, "The flawed four-level evaluation model," Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 5-21, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.3920070103
  11. D. L. Kirkpatrick and J. D. Kirkpatrick, Evaluating training programs: The four levels, 3rd ed., San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publisher, 2006.
  12. M. Park, J. Shin, and J. Park, "A study on the field adaptation of education and training: Focusing on case management education," Policy Research Report, 16, 2011.
  13. A. W. Astin, Achieving educational excellence: A critical assessment of priorities and practices in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985
  14. E. G. Bogue and K. B. Hall, Quality and accountability in higher education: Improving policy, enhancing performance, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2003.
  15. A. W. Astin, "Diversity and multiculturalism on the campus," Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 44-49, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1993.9940617
  16. R. J. Shavelson and L. Huang, "Responding responsibly," Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 10-19, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380309604739
  17. J. Choi, M. Kim, P. Lee, E, Lee, and S. Lee, "A study on the strategic participation of the OECD AHELO project to strengthen higher education competitiveness," Ministry of Education and Science Technology, pp. 48-59, 2009.
  18. K. M. Eisenhardt and M. E. Graebner, "Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges," Academy of Management Journal, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 25-32, 2007. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888
  19. R. K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 3rd ed., London: Sage, 2003.
  20. J. W. Creswell and C. N. Poth, Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, 4th ed., Sage, 2018.
  21. J. Choi, J. Chae, and M. Jang, A study on the evaluation of learning performance in higher education in OECD(V), KEDI, 2013.
  22. K. Price and S. N. Baker, "Measuring students' engagement on college campuses: Is the NSSE an appropriate measure of adult students' engagement?," Journal of Continuing Higher Education, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 20-32, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2012.649127
  23. S. Bae, M. Kang, and J. Hong, "Validation of the National Survey of Student Engagement(NSSE) model in the Korean context," Asian Journal of Education, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 77-104, 2015. https://doi.org/10.15753/aje.2015.12.16.4.77
  24. D. Van Damme and D. Zahner, Does higher education teach students to think critically?, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2022.
  25. P. Lee, "A comparative analysis on good practices for developing basic workplace skills for university students in selected countries," Korean Journal of Comparative Education, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 171-195, 2005.
  26. C. Song, S. Min, K, Jang, H. Choi, and H. Park, Support and utilization of core competency diagnosis (K-CESA) for college students, KRIVET, 2022.
  27. M. Jin, Y. Son, C. Song, K. Kim, S. Yoon, K. Park, and H. Bae, Establishment of Korea Collegiate Essential Skills Assessment, Ministry of Education, KRIVET, 2014.
  28. R. M. Gonyea, K. A. Kish, G. D. Kuh, R. N. Muthiah, and A. D. Thomas, College student experiences questionnaire: Norms for the fourth edition. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, Policy, and Planning. 2003.
  29. A. R. Bell and C. Brooks, "What makes students satisfied? A discussion and analysis of the UK's national student survey," Journal of Further and Higher Education, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 1118-1142, 2018.
  30. National Student Survey [Internet] Feb. 27, 2024. Available: https://www.thestudentsurvey.com/