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

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Information Management Conference
• /
• 2015.08a
• /
• pp.17-22
• /
• 2015

본 연구는 국내대학의 교원들의 학술논문업적에 관한 합리적이고 객관적인 평가방법 개발에 비계가 되고자, 현재 국내 대학에서 시행중인 교원업적평가 중 학술논문평가기준을 비교 분석하였다. 우선 문헌정보학과가 포함된 국내 종합대학 27개교의 학술논문평가기준을 수집하여 비교한 다음, 2001년에서 2014년까지의 전국문헌정보학과 교원들의 학술논문 서지데이터를 이용하여 학술지의 영향력지수 및 피인용횟수를 적용한 순위와 27개대학 평가기준을 적용한 순위를 학교별, 저자별로 도출하여 비교 분석하였다. 본 연구를 통하여 교원들의 공정한 평가방안 마련에 도모하고자 하며, 교원의 연구 및 학문활동의 상승 제고 뿐 아니라 대학 내 연구환경 개선까지 다방면으로 교원의 사기진작에 도움이 되고자 한다.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.45 no.2
• /
• pp.309-324
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study is to develop evaluation indicators for academic libraries in Korea. The evaluation model developed in this research consists of three elements:(1) Confirmation of evaluation methods, procedures and criteria,(2) Development of qualitative and quantitative evaluation indicators, and(3) Assessment of the applicability and feasibility of those indicators. Evaluation indicators were developed to measure a basic state, a common use of library resources, specialized services, and user satisfaction for academic libraries. To test the feasibility and applicability of those evaluation indicators, a pilot assessment of academic libraries was conducted in 2010.

• Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.135-156
• /
• 2013

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.

• Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.113-130
• /
• 2008

Performance indicators for academic libraries in Korea suggested in this research cover three areas, that is, collection, budget, and human resources, which consists of three subdivisions, respectively. Performance indicators and action plans in this research were prepared, based on the official documents which universities in Korea formally submitted to the Ministry of Education and Human Resources, and the data published by the related institutions. Performance indicators and action plans are intended to draw attentions of university administrators and headquarters, but do not require librarians to prepare for evaluation. The better results would be expected with the development and application of both quantitative and qualitative indicators for information services by standardizing and unifying the process of collecting statistics. It is also expected that periodic and continuing evaluation of academic libraries could help government and universities have a better understanding of and appreciate the significance of academic libraries.

• 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.

• Korean Journal of Comparative Education
• /
• v.27 no.4
• /
• pp.187-209
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study was to highlight the necessity of a conceptual reestablishment of world university evaluations. The hitherto most well-known and validated world university evaluation systems such as Times Higher Education (THE), Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) or Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) primarily assess big universities with quantitative evaluation indicators and performance results in the rankings. Those Systems have instigated a kind of elitism in higher education and neglect numerous small or local institutions of higher education, instead of providing stakeholders with comprehensive information about the real possibilities of tertiary education so that they can choose an institution that is individually tailored to their needs. Also, the management boards of universities and policymakers in higher education have partly been manipulated by and partly taken advantage of the elitist ranking systems with an economic emphasis, as indicated by research-centered evaluations and industry-university cooperation. To supplement such educational defects and to redress the lack of world university evaluation systems, a new system called 'U-Multirank' has been implemented with the financial support of the European Commission since 2012. U-Multirank was designed and is enforced by an international team of project experts led by CHE(Centre for Higher Education/Germany), CHEPS(Center for Higher Education Policy Studies/Netherlands) and CWTS(Centre for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University/Netherlands). The significant features of U-Multirank, compared with e.g., THE and ARWU, are its qualitative, multidimensional, user-oriented and individualized assessment methods. Above all, its website and its assessment results, based on a mobile operating system and designed simply for international users, present a self-organized and evolutionary model of world university evaluation systems in the digital and global era. To estimate the universal validity of the redefinition of the world university evaluation system using U-Multirank, an epistemological approach will be used that relies on Edgar Morin's Complexity Theory and Karl Popper's Philosophy of Science.

• Proceedings of the Korea Multimedia Society Conference
• /
• 2003.05b
• /
• pp.783-786
• /
• 2003

교육망의 과학적 관리는 정확한 데이터를 처리해서 얻은 정보에 따라 행해진다. 이러한 시스템을 정보망 시스템(Information Network System)이라 하는데 이것의 중추적인 기능을 담당하고 있는 것이 웹 데이터 베이스 관리 시스템이다. 본 연구에서는 웹 종합정보망을 이용하여 대학평가 작업을 정확하고 효율적으로 수행하고자 하는 데 그 목적이 있다. 웹 망은 정보 시스템의 심장부가 되며 이를 나양한 기법들과 결합시켜서 보다 지능적으로 만들 수 있다. 대학 행정망에 필요한 자료들을 어떻게 구성하고 가공하느냐가 과학적 관리의 관건이 될 것이다. 이런 이유로 격동하는 대학가의 위기에 능동저긍로 대처하기 위한 한 전략으로 대학의 현재를 객관적으로 평가하기 위한 대학평가 시스템을 개발하였다. OODBMS(Object Oriented Data Base Management System)를 통해 멀티미디어 정의구축과 정보유지 및 재사용 가능성을 극대화하고자 한다.

• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.48 no.2
• /
• pp.295-322
• /
• 2017

As a first step in developing a more effective and robust approach to faculty research performance assessment, this study analyzed the existing faculty research assessment methods by comparing Korean universities' research evaluation standards, National Research Foundation of Korea's (KRF) standard for assessing research proposals, and various bibliometric measures. The study data included research evaluation standards of KRF along with 27 Korean universities with Library and Information Science (LIS) department, and the publication data of 183 LIS faculties in Korean universities from 2001 to 2015, which consisted of 3,863 papers 16,978 citations. After the comparative analysis of research evaluation standards, the study examined the rankings of institutions and faculty produced by applying the collected standards and bibliometric metrics to the publication data. The study showed that Korean university standards for research evaluation, which aim to consider both productivity and impact of faculty research, differ from similar bibliometric measures such as h-index, and the difference could significantly impact the assessment of faculty research performance.

• Korean Journal of Comparative Education
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.245-265
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this research is to find the features of HLC institutional accreditation model and the implication on the second period institutional accreditation of Korea. This research focus on accreditation model, accreditation period, comprehensive evaluation, criteria, decision making for accreditation status and accreditation supporting system. This research draws following suggestions to the second period institutional accreditation of Korea. 1. The institutional accreditation should apply various accreditation models according to the features of institute. 2. The institutional accreditation should focus on the autonomous quality improvement of institute with the quality assurance. 3. The quantitative evaluation should be reduced and qualitative evaluation based on mission and objects should be reinforced. 4. The interim evaluation should be strictly enforced for quality improvement. 5. The government should enlarge reflection the results of accreditation on financial aid to universities. 6. The web-based accreditation supporting system interworking with "Higher Education in Korea" service is needed.