• Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.49-65
• /
• 2011

The survey method was used in this descriptive study. The purpose in this study was to investigate middle school home economics(HE) teachers' stages of concern, levels of use, and perception about career education, based on the Concerns Based Adoption Model(CBAM). Questionnaire was administrated to middle school HE teachers over the whole country except Jeju Island through mail or e-mail by systematic random sampling. 118 data collected from the responses were finally analyzed statistically with mean, standard deviation, frequencies, percentage, and independent-sample t-test by using SPSS/WIN 12.0 program. The results of the study were as follows: First, most-HE teachers were in stages of the personal concern (86.56) and the informational concern(85.42) about HE career education. Second, the highest number of teachers was in level of refinement(33.1%) use. Third, teachers recognized important goal of HE career education as 'understanding of diverse careers and formating of positive values and attitude about work'. Also they had generally conducted HE career education through 'Understanding Teenager' chapter of a first-year middle school. However they had struggled with difficulty such as lack of data, time, and expertise in conducting HE career education. Therefore, it is necessary that support such as development, supplies, and training opportunities of career education should be provided.

• Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.133-144
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to investigate Home Economics(HE) teachers' stages of concern, levels of use, and needs about the practical reasoning instruction focusing on the Concerns Based Adoption Model(CBAM). Questionnaires were administrated to HE teachers who worked for middle or high school in Korea and used HE textbooks according to the revised 2007 HE curriculum through mailing and visiting HE teacher training centers. 350 data collected from the responses were finally analyzed using SPSS 12.0. The results of the study were as follows: First, HE teachers' stages of concern about the Practical Reasoning Instruction(PRI) were demonstrated by the following order: awareness stage 0(97.05%), informational stage 1(87.06%), personal stage 2(86.23%), management stage 3(79.85%), refocusing stage 6(63.22%), consequence stage 4(61.26%), and collaboration stage 5(60.12%). Second, HE teachers' levels of use for PRI were demonstrated by the following order: preparation level 2(30.3%), orientation level 1(18.30%), refinement level 5 (18.30%), mechanical level 3: (16.0%), routine level 4(10.09%), nonuse level 0(4.0%), integration level 6(1.70%), and renewal level 7(0.60%). Third, needs for HE teachers' practical reasoning process were shown as the following order: '(O)Outline and implement a plan for action'(1.89), '(A)Analyze choices and consequences'(1.75), '(N)Note the results of your action(s)'(1.57), '(E)Evaluate information needed to solve the problem'(1.44), '(R)Recognize the problem'(1.39), and '(S)Select the best choices'(1.36).

• Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.117-134
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to identify the stage of concern, the level of use, and the innovation configuration of Home Economics teachers regarding creativity and personality education in Home Economics(HE) classes. The survey questionnaires were sent through mails and e-mails to middle-school HE teachers in the whole country selected by systematic sampling and convenience sampling. Questionnaires of the stages of concern and the levels of use developed by Hall(1987) were used in this study. 187 data were used for the final analysis by using SPSS/window(12.0) program. The results of the study were as following: First, for the stage of concerns of HE teachers on creativity and personality education, the information stage of concerns(85.51) was the one with the highest response rate and the next high in the following order: the management stage of concerns(81.88), the awareness stage of concerns(82.15), the refocusing stage of concerns(68.80), the collaboration stage of concerns(61.97), and the consequence stage of concerns(59.76). Second, the levels of use of HE teachers on creativity and personality education was highest with the mechanical levels(level 3; 21.4%) and the next high in the following order: the orientation levels of use(level 1; 20.9%), the refinement levels(level 5; 17.1%), the non-use levels(level 0; 15.0%), the preparation levels(level 2; 10.2%), the integration levels(level 6; 5.9%), the renewal levels(level 7; 4.8%), the routine levels(level 4; 4.8%). Third, for the innovation configuration of HE teachers on creativity and personality education, more than half of the HE teachers(56.1%) mainly focused on personality education in their HE classes; 31.0% of the HE teachers performed both creativity and personality education; a small number of teachers(6.4%) focused on creativity education; the same number of teachers(6.4%) responded that they do not focus on neither of the two. Examining the level and type of performance HE teachers applied, the average score on the performance of creativity and personality education was 3.76 out of 5.00 and the mean of creativity component was 3.59 and of personality component was 3.94, higher than standard. For the creativity education, openness/sensitivity(3.97) education was performed most and the next most in the following order: problem-solving skill(3.79), curiosity/interest(3.73), critical thinking(3.63), problem-finding skill(3.61), originality(3.57), analogy(3.47), fluency/adaptability(3.46), precision(3.46), imagination(3.37), and focus/sympathy(3.37). For the personality education, the following components were performed in order from most to least: power of execution(4.07), cooperation/consideration/just(4.06), self-management skill(4.04), civic consciousness(4.04), career development ability(4.03), environment adaptability(3.95), responsibility/ownership(3.94), decision making(3.89), trust/honesty/promise(3.88), autonomy(3.86), and global competency(3.55). Regarding what makes performing creativity and personality education difficult, most HE teachers(64.71%) chose the lack of instructional materials and 40.11% of participants chose the lack of seminar and workshop opportunity. 38.5% chose the difficulty of developing an evaluation criteria or an evaluation tool while 25.67% responded that they do not know any means of performing creativity and personality education. Regarding the better way to support for creativity and personality education, the HE teachers chose in order from most to least: 'expansion of hands-on activities for students related to education on creativity and personality'(4.34), 'development of HE classroom culture putting emphasis on creativity and personality'(4.29), 'a proper curriculum on creativity and personality education that goes along with students' developmental stages'(4.27), 'securing enough human resource and number of professors who will conduct creativity and personality education'(4.21), 'establishment of the concept and value of the education on creativity and personality'(4.09), and 'educational promotion on creativity and personality education supported by local communities and companies'(3.94).