교직성격 고찰

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국교육학회
· 수록지 정보 : 교육학연구 / 32권 / 1호
· 저자명 : 許柄其

목차

요 약
Ⅰ. 교직 전문직성 주장의 논리적 당위
Ⅱ. 교직의 현실적 비전문직화
Ⅲ. 교직 비전문직화의 배경
Ⅳ. 다시 생각하는 교직의 성격
〈참고문헌〉
Abstract

초록

이 논문은 흔히 전문직으로 표방되지만 이에 대한 많은 논란이 제기되고 있는 교직의 성격을 재검토하고 있다. 글의 주요 내용으로는 교직 전문직성 주장의 논 리적 당위，교직의 현실적 비전문직화와 그 배경，현실적으로 성립 가능한 대안적 교직 성격 등이 포함되어 있다. 이 중 교직 전문직성 주장의 논리적 당위와 관련해서는 교육이 그 의미에 충실하게 이루어지는 상황을 가정할 경우 교직은 마땅히 전문직의 모습을 보여야 함을 말하고 있고, 교직의 현실적 비전문직화 및 그 배경과 관련해서는, 몇 가지 준거에 비추어 볼 때 교직이 현실적으로 전문직으로서의 위치를 확보하지 못하고 있다는 점과 함께 그러한 현상을 초래하게 된 교육내외의 배경 요인들을 분석하고 있다. 나아가, 현실적 제약을 인정할 수밖에 없는 상황에서 지향하고 정립해 나가야 할 것으로 보이는 교직 성격을 잠정적인 수준에서 제시하고 있다.

영어초록

This study aims at examining the nature of teaching profession over which there has been quite confusing controversies. For that purpose, four main sub-themes were dealt with: justifiability of a claim for professionalization of the teaching profession; de-professionalization of the teaching profession in reality; factors causing de-professionalization of the teaching profession; and a new possible nature of the teaching profession. I carried out the study both through logical speculation and using practical sources. Major arguments about each of four sub-themes are as presented below.
Concerning the first sub-theme, I emphasized a high degree of difficulty in educating in the course of justifying professionalization of the teaching profession. But, the argumentation was made on the assumption that education would be performed in conformity with its ‘original’ norms.
Related to the second sub-theme, it was revealed that we could hardly find the evidences saying the teaching profession held professional status in reality. In order to see whether the teaching profession met standards required for professional status I employed six criteria, while placing more emphasis on teachers' use of professional knowledge and skills.
For the third sub-theme, I identified the educational and non-educational factors which seemed to bring about de-professionalization of the teaching profession. Among those factors were included ambiguity of educational phenomena by its nature, popularization of education, ’chaos’ of education value, routinization of educational activities, bureaucratization of educational managements, trivialization of educating. The ways the teaching profession become de-professionalized under the influences of those factors were discussed.
Lastly, dealing with the fourth sub-theme, I suggested a newly-determined nature of the teaching profession which was likely to be acknowledged more reasonably. But, the nature of the teaching profession suggested thereby must be considered as a tentative one and be open to further debates and revisions. It was “ethical and devoting profession pursuing specialty.”

참고자료

· 없음