Advanced Placement in Studio Art:한국 중등미술교육에의 시사점 분석

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국조형교육학회
· 수록지 정보 : 조형교육 / 31권
· 저자명 : 최기호

목차

I. 연구목적과 필요성
II. 연구질문과 연구방법
1. 역사연구에서 1차 자료와 2차 자료
2. 역사연구에서 역사적 사실, 해석과 일반화
3. 역사연구의 기능과 역할, 본 연구에서 응용
III. AP Studio Art 도입과 현황
1. AP Studio Art의 도입배경
1) 1960년대 미국의 사회와 교육
2) 1966 AP 예술과목 도입을 위한 콜로라도 회의
2. AP Studio Art
1) 포트폴리오의 구성과 각 영역의 이론적 근거
2) AP 포트폴리오의 평가
3. AP는 무엇인가?
1) The College Board
2) AP 프로그램의 기능
IV. AP Studio Art의 현재
V. 한국의 중등미술교육과 AP Studio Art, 향후 연구방향
※ 참고문헌
※ ABSTRACT

초록

미술교육을 통한 학습효과에 대해 그동안 많은 학설과 논의가 진행되어 왔다. 이러한 논의들은 미술교육 활동에 관한 평가와 측정이 무엇을 평가하고 어떤 결과물이나 과정을 보다 높은 수준의 성취로 볼 것인가에 관해 다양한 관점들을 제시해 오고 있다. 미술교육에 있어 평가란 학생 개개인의 학업성취를 차별화하여 학습효과를 진단하고 교육프로그램을 향상시키는 데 중요한 역할을 한다(Beattie, 1997). 아울러 오늘날 평가와 측정이란 기능은 갈수록 심화되어가는 교육에 대한 국가적 관심과 아울러 교육이론과 실행에 있어 그 효과를 가늠할 수 있는 유일한 수단으로서 연구가 활발하다.

영어초록

Throughout the history of art education, objectivity of art assessment has been
considered as a something unattainable or, sometimes, a hindrance to true learning
in arts. This study is an attempt to understand the meanings of AP(Advanced Placement)
Studio Art program as a means to objectively measure student achievement in
studio practice. Over the three decades from its inception, AP Studio Art has been
praised for its benefits as well as criticized for its downside. This study examines
critiques and advocacies on the program by scrutinizing the program; what it is,
how it works, how it got introduced, and why people in the art world welcome
or not welcome.
This study takes a form of a historical analysis which helps to understand its
past and present status in different contexts borrowing the framework of understanding
this historical event, the introduction of AP Studio Art, from Tyack & Cuban's
‘Tinkering Toward Utopia.’ In their book, the authors introduce a term, ‘businessinspired
reform’ indicating a group of reform movements in the 1960s. The authors
point out that the kind of reform efforts have been resisted by those from the educational
practice. The authors argue that the resistance resulted from the characteristics of
the reforms taking consideration only to some measurable features of student
learning in contrast to the characteristics of the institutional belief of educators.
With its rewards, grading system and summative evaluation, it seems inevitable
that AP Studio Art has been criticized by many of those engaged in the field of art
education who have held a long-standing belief in qualitative judgement on student
learning. On the other hand, there are many of those who advocate AP Studio Art for
its strong instructional goals and academic rigor, as well. By examining the debates
over AP Studio Art as an art assessment, it will allow us to take close look to the
possibilities and limits of the program in the context of Korean secondary schools.

참고자료

· 없음