• 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).

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.13
• /
• pp.471-485
• /
• 2007

This study is performed to find out what type instructions are produced to players by coaches and what effects are resulted in cooperative spirit of the concerned group. Furthermore the study has its aims at advancing instructors' skills by using finding of it. The study used 'SPSS 11.0 FOR WINDOW - Statistical Package' to analyze the collected samples and dealt with data of 174 individuals. Statistical analysis of the research for hypothesis verification was about frequency, trust level, mutual relationship, variables, and T-verification. The meaningful level for any result was ranged within 95%(p< .05), 99%(p<.01). The finding are as follows. Effects on pleasure, one of elements of team spirits taken by instructor's training style are analyzed as follows. It was proved to be meaningful in relation with a series of activities like training, democratic, social, compensatory aspects and showed also considerable relation with power based behaviors. That says, players are found to enjoy high pleasure when social and bureaucratic behaviors of instructors are very energetic. In addition to that, training, democratic, and compensatory activities didn't show any meaningful effect. Team spirit was found to play a main role between instructor's behaviors and training, democratic, social rewarding activities. Democratic and social acts influence on team spirit. Looking into the detailed aspects, team spirit was resulted very high in the individuals with low democratic mind and was shown high group spirit by groups with high sociable activities. Teamworks was found to be affected by relation between instructor's acts and training, democratic, social and compensatory aspects and it showed meaningful relations with training, social, bureaucratic behaviors. Low degree of training and bureaucratic activities are found to prefer for power team spirit, and high social activities led a strong teamworks. Group binding spirit was influenced by training, democratic, social compensatory, bureaucratic behaviors and it showed to give effects on democratic, social, and bureaucratic activities of instructors. Low degree of democratic and bureaucratic behaviors are found to produce strong team spirit. In contrast with that, strong social activities was found to be motive of powerful team spirit. Value of team spirit was found to play a main role between instructor's behaviors and training, democratic, social, rewarding activities. It didn't show any meaningful effect on behavior of instructors.