• Korean Journal of Human Ecology
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.245-256
• /
• 2000

The purpose of this study is to identify the types of professional teaching practice of Home Economics teachers who are working at Korean secondary school for changing their professional teaching practice and developing home economics curriculum. A mail questionnaire, Professional Teaching Practice(PTP) was used to survey randomly selected 525 Home Economics teachers. The professional teaching practices examined were customary-instrumental, interactive and reflective practices. Customary-instrumental practice was the predominant type of professional teaching practice used by Home Economics teachers. About 26% of the teachers used reflective practice, and 14.67% used interactive practice. Only the number of students was significantly related to their professional teaching practices. Five influential factors on teaching practices identified by Home Economics teachers emerged in the following order: examination-centered educational system, lack of class hours, lack of resource materials and facilities, demands from the Ministry of Education, school administrators, or parents, and large class sizes.

• Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association
• /
• v.38 no.8
• /
• pp.159-168
• /
• 2000

The purpose in this study is to determine the relationship between the curriculum orientations and professional teaching practices of Korean secondary school home economics teachers for the development of home economics curriculum. The instruments, Individual Curriculum Orientation profile(ICOP) and Professional Teaching Practice(PTP) were used to survey randomly selected 525 home economics leachers. The curriculum orientations explored were academic rationalism, technical, cognitive process, personal relevance, and social reconstruction. The professional teaching practices examined were customary-instrumental, interactive and reflective practices. Using canonical correlation, home economics teacher's teaching practices were found to be significantly related to their curriculum orientations. However, only 17.7% of the variability in professional teaching practices was explained by the five curriculum orientations.