• 대학교육
• /
• s.82
• /
• pp.66-74
• /
• 1996

연구.교육.사회활동이라는 삼분법적 교수업적 평가제는 특정 분야의 천재성이 인정되지 않는 평범한 대학상과 상식적인 교수상만 만들어낸다. -무의미한 논문, 저술의 양산에 질린 우리가 예.체능계 교수들의 업적평가를 일반계의 틀에 맞춘다는 것 자체가 뒤떨어진 발상이다. 예술가는 예술작품으로 평가받아야 한다. 그러기 위하여 창작평가위원회가 따로 설치되어야 한다.

• 대학교육
• /
• s.148
• /
• pp.126-131
• /
• 2007

• Journal of Engineering Education Research
• /
• v.12 no.4
• /
• pp.93-101
• /
• 2009

Many engineering professors are forced to execute ABEEK activities. Engineering professors are evaluated by their educational, research and service activities, but are mainly by their research papers published in professional journals. The gap between the duties and the evaluation criteria exists among engineering professors. This paper deals with the possible ways of including the ABEEK activities in the engineering professor evaluation system. Among the five ways suggested for a simple survey, tenured professors prefer to reduce the lecture time but junior professors prefer to reduce the research burden for the benefit from executing ABEEK activities. Based on logical reasoning and the preference among the surveyed professors, ABEEK related activities may be included in the educational part for the professor evaluation system before the ABEEK system is matured. However, ABEEK related activities have to be converted to the duties of engineering professors in the long run as in the US universities.

• The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.435-443
• /
• 2011

On March 2011, an annual salary plan was applied to new faculty members in National Colleges and Universities. In 2015, all tenured faculty members will receive salaries based on annual performance evaluations. The efforts and accomplishments of faculty are normally assessed according to a standard formula of 40% teaching, 40% research and 20% service. In almost all colleges and universities, student course evaluations may be considered as the only measure of the perceived quality of the courses offered by the faculty member. The mandatory course evaluations are becoming prevalent in Korea. The results of course evaluations do not reflect the fairness and the appropriateness of the quality of the course taught by the faculty member and should not be considered under the teaching evaluation criteria.

• Journal of vocational education research
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.23-49
• /
• 2011

Faculty performance evaluation system has been settled down as an uncomfortable but unavoidable system, and it is one of the most important factors to grow the college competitiveness up. In this study, we selected and surveyed faculty evaluation models of several universities and colleges in Korea, and analyzed by comparing each evaluation areas of educational achievement, college-industry collaboration, research, and service. We also identified the properties of the current faculty evaluation models of the junior colleges, and derived several problems from these models such as an imitation of four-year university model, a disorders of job evaluation with respect to the attributes of classified jobs, a large variation of individual item weights, and an insufficient reflection of major characteristics. Based on these surveys and analysis, an improved faculty evaluation model for the junior college is proposed in this study. This model proposed four basic areas-educational achievement, college-industry collaboration, research, and service by considering the importance of the college-industry collaboration in the junior college-as well as the team evaluation area. Weights of the SCI-class paper was selected as a criterion for the arrangement of objective comparison of each evaluation items. We showed the integration method of several different evaluation model with respect to the attributes of classified jobs of each faculties, and evaluation plan of variational characteristics according to the majors of individuals in this model. Finally, we introduced an area fail and rating system to operate efficiently the proposed faculty evaluation model.

• 대학교육
• /
• s.86
• /
• pp.65-73
• /
• 1997

교육, 연구, 봉사를 '더하기' 식으로 규정하는 것은 교육, 연구, 봉사를 서로 다른 시.공간에서 이루어지는 별개의 활동으로 규정함으로써 교수들로 하여금 대학 바깥의 직접적인 요구에 부응하도록 종용하는 결과를 초래하게 된다. 이것은 바로 오늘날 시행되고 있는 교수업적평가가 안고 있는 치명적인 문제점이다. 반면에 교육, 연구, 봉사를 '곱하기' 식으로 규정하는 것은 교육, 연구, 봉사를 유구한 대학의 전통 속에서 교수가 마땅히 해왔고 또 해야만 하는 한 가지 동일한 활동의 서로 다른 세 가지 측면으로 파악하는 것이며, 이것은 교수들로 하여금 대학 안의 요구에 충실히 전념하는 데에 격려와 지원이 되는 정신적 지주를 제공해 준다.

• 대학교육
• /
• s.1
• /
• pp.58-66
• /
• 1983

• 대학교육
• /
• s.53
• /
• pp.39-52
• /
• 1991

• 대학교육
• /
• s.71
• /
• pp.49-55
• /
• 1994

• 대학교육
• /
• s.71
• /
• pp.37-42
• /
• 1994