NDSL 47,123 Link page¿¡¼­ [¿ø¹®º¸±â] ¹öÆ°À» Ŭ¸¯Çϼ¼¿ä.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ °úÁ¦¹°°ú °°Àº ¸¹Àº ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À» ¸ðµÎ ÀÏÀÏÀÌ ºñ±³ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀº ºñ¿ëÀÌ ¸¹ÀÌ µç´Ù. ´õ±º´Ù³ª °Ë¼öÀÚ°¡ °úÁ¦¹°À» °Ë»çÇѴٵ簡, Á¡¼ö¸¦ ºÎ¿©ÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÑ´Ù¸é ´õ¿í ¸¹Àº ½Ã°£ÀÌ ¿ä±¸µÈ´Ù. ¹°·Ð °Ë¼öÀÚ°¡ ¸¹Àº ½Ã°£À» µÎ°í Æò°¡Çصµ °´°ü¼ºÀÌ ¶³¾îÁú ¼öµµ ÀÖ´Ù. ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ¹®Á¦Á¡Àº ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ °úÁ¦¹°¿¡ ´ëÇؼ­ À¯»çÇÑ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À¸·Î ¼­·Î ¹­¾î ³õ´Â´Ù¸é ½±°Ô ÇØ°áÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù. Áï, À¯»çÇÑ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À¸·Î ¼­·Î ¹­¾î³õ°í °Ë»çÇÑ´Ù¸é ½±°Ô °Ë»ç³ª Æò°¡°¡ °¡´ÉÇÏ´Ù. º» ³í¹®¿¡¼­´Â ¸¹Àº ÇÁ·Î±×·¥¿¡ ´ëÇؼ­ À¯»ç¼ºÀÌ ³ôÀº ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À¸·Î ±×·ì Áþ±â(grouping)¸¦ ¼öÇàÇÏ´Â ¾Ë°í¸®ÁòÀ» Á¦½ÃÇÏ°í ±¸ÇöÇÑ´Ù. ±×·ì Áþ±â ¾Ë°í¸®ÁòÀº (9)¿¡¼­ Á¦½ÃÇÑ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ À¯»çµµ Æò°¡ ¾Ë°í¸®ÁòÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© À¯»çµµ¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ ÈÄ, À¯»ç¼ºÀÌ ³ôÀº ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À» ±×·ì Áþ±â¸¦ ¼öÇàÇÑ´Ù. ÀÌ ±×·ì Áþ±â ¾Ë°í¸®ÁòÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇϸé n°³ÀÇ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥¿¡ ´ëÇؼ­ ÃÖ´ë n(n-1)/2 ¹ø¿¡¼­ ÃÖ¼Ò (n-1)¹ø±îÁö ºñ±³ Ƚ¼ö¸¦ ÁÙÀÏ ¼ö°¡ ÀÖ´Ù. º» ³í¹®ÀÇ ½ÇÇè ¹× Æò°¡ ºÎºÐ¿¡¼­´Â ½ÇÁ¦·Î ¸ð ´ëÇÐÀÇ °úÁ¦¹° 10°³¸¦ ÃßÃâÇÏ¿© À¯»ç¼ºÀ» ±âÁØÀ¸·Î ½ÇÇè Æò°¡ÇÑ °á°ú¸¦ º¸¿©ÁØ´Ù.

[±¹³» ȸÀÇÀÚ·á]

A simulation program has been developed to evaluate operator seat vibration for earth-moving machinery and decide whether a seat meets the requirements imposed by ISO 7096. An operator seat is assumed as a linear system composed of a mass, a spring, and a damper mounted on a platform. The program evaluates the transmissibility at resonance, and the SEAT factors for a light person and a heavy person. The developed program can be utilized effectively in designing a new operator seat.

[±¹³» ȸÀÇÀÚ·á]

¹Ì±¹ ¿øÀڷ±ÔÁ¦À§¿øȸ ±ÔÁ¦Áöħ(US NRC RG) 1.20ÀÇ ºñ¿øÇü¹üÁÖ(non-prototype category)-2¸¦ ±âÁØÀ¸·Î ½ÅÇü°æ¼ö·Î 1400(APR1400) ¿øÀڷγ»ºÎ±¸Á¶¹°(RVI)ÀÇ ¼³°è¼ö¸í±â°£ µ¿¾È °ÇÀü¼ºÀÌ È®º¸µÉ ¼ö ÀÖ´ÂÁö¸¦ È®ÀÎÇϱâ À§ÇØ Á¾ÇÕÁøµ¿Æò°¡ÇÁ·Î±×·¥(CVAP)À» ¼öÇàÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù. US NRC RG 1.20ÀÇ ºñ¿øÇü¹üÁÖ-2´Â Áøµ¿ ¹× ÀÀ·Â Çؼ®ÇÁ·Î±×·¥, Á¦ÇÑÀû Áøµ¿ ÃøÁ¤ÇÁ·Î±×·¥, °Ë»çÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ±×¸®°í ÀÌ·± ÇÁ·Î±×·¥µéÀÇ ºñ±³, Æò°¡·Î ±¸¼ºµÈ´Ù. ÀÌ ³í¹®Àº APR1400 RVI CVAP ÃøÁ¤ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ÃøÁ¤°èȹ, ½ÃÇè, Çã¿ë±âÁØ°ú °á°ú ¹× ¹®¼­È­¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ³»¿ëÀ» ±â¼úÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¿ì¸®´Â ÀÌ ³í¹®ÀÇ Áøµ¿ÃøÁ¤ °èȹ ¹× ½ÃÇà¿¡ µû¶ó¼­ APR1400 RVI CVAP Á¦ÇÑÀû Áøµ¿ ÃøÁ¤ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À» ¼öÇàÇÒ °ÍÀÌ´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

ÀÌ ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀº 2006³â ³ó¸²ºÎÀÇ ±¹°íÁö¿øÀ» ÅëÇØ 77°³ ±â°ü¿¡¼­ ¿î¿µµÈ ÃÑ 157°³ ³ó¾÷±³À°ÈÆ·Ã ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ È¿À²¼º ¹× ¼º°ú¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Æò°¡¿Í °³¼±¹æ¾ÈÀ» ¼ö¸³Çϴµ¥ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. À̸¦ À§ÇØ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥º° ¸ð´ÏÅ͸µ, ÇÁ·Î±×·¥º° ÀÚüº¸°í¼­, ³ó¾÷±³À°ÈÆ·Ã ´ã´çÀÚ ÁúÀÇÀÀ´äÀ» ½Ç½ÃÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, Æò°¡À§¿øȸ¸¦ ±¸¼ºÇÏ¿© ÃÖÁ¾ Æò°¡°á°ú¸¦ µµÃâÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×¸®°í Æò°¡¿¡ È°¿ëµÈ Æò°¡±âÁØÀº 4°³ Æò°¡¿µ¿ª, 16°³ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ, 26°³ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥·Î ±¸¼ºÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÆòÁ¤À» À§ÇÑ Ã¼Å©¸®½ºÆ®¿¡¼­ °¢ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥¸¦ 2~4´Ü°èÀÇ ½ÇÇà¼öÁØÀ» ¼³Á¤ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, À̸¦ ¹ÙÅÁÀ¸·Î ÁöÇ¥º° Á¡¼ö°¡ »êÃâµÇ¾ú´Ù. Æò°¡µî±ÞÀº Aµî±Þ(90Á¡ ÀÌ»ó), Bµî±Þ(80Á¡ ÀÌ»ó), Cµî±Þ(70Á¡ ÀÌ»ó), Dµî±Þ(70Á¡ ¹Ì¸¸)°ú Æò°¡À¯º¸·Î ºÎ¿©ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ³ó¾÷±³À°ÈÆ·Ã ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ÀüüÀûÀÎ Æò°¡°á°ú´Â Aµî±Þ 43°³(27.4%), Bµî±Þ 70°³(44.6%), Cµî±Þ 33°³(21.0%), Æò°¡À¯º¸ 11°³(7.0%)·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ±×¸®°í ³ó¾÷±³À°ÈÆ·Ã ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ À¯Çüº° Æò°¡¿µ¿ª°ú Ç׸ñ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÆòÁ¡À» µµÃâÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ³ó¾÷±³À°ÈÆ·Ã ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ Æò°¡¸¦ ¹ÙÅÁÀ¸·Î ÇÑ ³ó¾÷±³À°ÈÆ·ÃÀÇ Á¾ÇÕÀûÀÎ °³¼±¹æ¾ÈÀ» ±â°üº° ÁßÀå±â ±³À°ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ü°è ±¸Ãà, ±³À°´ë»óÀÚ È®´ë ¹× À̷°ü¸®, ¿¹»êÁö¿øü°è °³Æí, ±³À°±â°üº° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Ư¼ºÈ­, ±³À¯±â°ü ¹× ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ÀÎÁõÁ¦ µµÀÔ, ±³À°´ë»óÀÇ Æ¯¼º¿¡ ¸Â´Â ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ´Ù¾çÈ­, ³ó¾÷±³À°ÈÆ·Ã ´ã´çÀÚ ¿ª·® °³¹ß Áö¿ø, ºñ³ó¾÷°ü·Ã °­»çÁøÀÇ ³ó¾÷¼Ò¾ç±³À° Áö¿ø, ¿ì¼ö»ç·Ê º¥Ä¡¸¶Å· ¹× È°¿ë Áö¿ø µîÀ» Á¦½ÃÇÏ¿´´Ù.

[ÇØ¿Ü³í¹®]

The purpose of this study was to set up evaluation about efficiency and performance in total of 157 agricultural education & training program operated by 77 institutions through the support from the ministry of agriculture in 2006. Monitoring, in-house report in each program, and survey of HRD practitioner in the field of agricultural education & training was performed and result of evaluation was finalized through committee of evaluation. In addition, evaluation standard was composed of 4 domains, 16 sub-domains, and 26 indicators. The score for each indicator was decided based on a checklist, which has 2 to 4 levels for each indicator. And evaluation grade was consisted of As(over 90), Bs(over 80), Cs(over 70), Ds(under 70) and Undecided. The overall result of evaluation agricultural education & training program was rated as 43 As (27.4%), 70 Bs (44.6%) 33 Cs (21.0%), 11 of undecided (7.0%). Grade point indicating domains and sub-domains of evaluation according to program type was driven. Based on this direction of improvement regarding agricultural education & training program was suggested as follow: ¨ç Set up middle- and long-term system of education program in every institution, ¨è expand learning opportunities to farmers and resume management ¨é improve budget supporting system ¨ê customize program according to institutions ¨ë introduce certification of education institution and program ¨ì diverse program according to farmers' characteristics ¨í support competency development of HRD practitioner in the field of agricultural education & training ¨î support agriculture-related education for non-agricultural instructors. ¨ï support the utilization of best practices

[±¹³»³í¹®]

´ëÇÇ ¹× ÀθíÇÇÇØ ½Ã¹Ä·¹ÀÌ¼Ç ±â¼úÀº ¼º´ÉÀ§ÁÖ ¼³°èÀÇ ÇÙ½É ±â¼ú Áß ÇϳªÀÌ´Ù. ±âÁ¸ ÇØ¿Ü¿¡¼­ °³¹ßµÈ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥µéÀº ´Ü¼øÇÑ ÀθíÇÇÇØ °è»ê ¹æ½Ä°ú ºñÁÖ¾óÀÇ Á¶¾ÇÀ¸·Î ÇѰ輺À» ³ªÅ¸³»°í ÀÖ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­ °³¹ßµÈ ´ëÇÇ ¹× ÀθíÇÇÇØ Æò°¡ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥Àº ±âÁ¸ÀÇ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ÇÑ°èÁ¡À» ±Øº¹ÇÔ°ú µ¿½Ã¿¡ ´ÙÀ½ÀÇ °ü·Ã ±â¼úÀ» Çâ»ó½ÃÅ°°í ½ÇÁ¦ »ç·Ê¿¡ Àû¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. ù°, Çdz­°è´Ü »Ó¸¸ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó ¿¤¸®º£ÀÌÅ͸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ´ëÇÇÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ¾Ë°í¸®ÁòÀ» Àû¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. µÑ°, ¹Ì±¹ Ç¥ÁØ¿¬±¸¼Ò(NIST)ÀÇ È­ÀçÇؼ® ÇÁ·Î±×·¥(FDS, Fire Dynamics Simulator)°ú ¿¬°è(Coupled)¸¦ ÅëÇØ È­Àç¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ ÀθíÇÇÇØ ¹ß»ý¿©ºÎ ÆÇ´ÜÀÌ °¡´ÉÇÑ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÌ´Ù. ¸¶Áö¸·À¸·Î ±×·¡ÇÈ Àü¿ë ¸ðµâÀ» Àû¿ëÇÏ¿© Çö½Ç¿¡ °¡±î¿î 3Â÷¿ø °¡»óÇö½ÇÀ» ±¸ÇöÇÏ¿´´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

Ä¡°ü ±¹Á¦ÀûÀ¸·Î Àü¹æÂ÷·®À» µû¶ó ¼øÇ×Çϰųª Àü¹æ Àå¾Ö¹°À» ÀνÄÇØ °æ°í¸¦ ÁÖ´Â µî ±³Åë ¹× µµ·Î »óȲ¿¡ ´ëÀÀÇÏ¿© ¿îÀüÀÚ¿¡°Ô ¾ÈÀü¿îÀüÀ» Áö¿øÇÏ´Â ±â´ÉÀ» °®Ãá ÷´Ü¾ÈÀüÂ÷·®(Advanced Safety Vehicle: ASV)ÀÌ °³¹ßµÇ¾î ½ÃÆǵǰí ÀÖ´Ù. ±¹Á¦Ç¥Áرⱸ(ISO) ITS±â¼úÀ§¿øȸ(TC2O4)ÀÇ µµ·Î/Â÷·® °æ°í ¹× Á¦¾î½Ã½ºÅÛ(Vehicle/Roadway Warning and Control System) ºÐ¾ß(WGl4)¿¡¼­´Â ASVÀÇ °¢Á¾ ±â´É°ú °ü·ÃÇÑ ±¹Á¦Ç¥ÁØÀ» Á¦Á¤Çϱâ À§ÇÑ ÀÛ¾÷ÀÌ È°¹ßÈ÷ ÁøÇàµÇ°í ÀÖ´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ °¢ ±¹°¡µéÀº ASV Çٽɱâ´ÉµéÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ±× ³ª¶óÀÇ µµ·Î ¹× ±³Åë ȯ°æ ÇÏ¿¡¼­ ½ÇÂ÷ ÁÖÇà½ÃÇèÀ» ÅëÇØ ±â´ÉÀÇ ¾ÈÀüµµ ¹× ÀûÇÕ¼ºÀ» Æò°¡ÇÏ´Â ¿¬±¸°³¹ßÀ» ÁøÇàÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù ¿ì¸®³ª¶ó¿¡¼­µµ °Ç¼³±³ÅëºÎ ITS ¿¬±¸°³¹ß»ç¾÷À» ÅëÇØ ASV ÇÙ½É ±â´ÉÀÇ ÇϳªÀÎ °¨ÀÀ½Ä¼øÇ×Á¦¾î(Adaptive Cruise Control: ACC)¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ±¹³»ÀÇ ÁÖÇà ÀûÇÕ¼ºÀ» Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇÑ Á¾ÇÕ ½ÃÇèÆò°¡ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÌ °³¹ß Á¦½ÃµÇ¾ú´Ù. º» ³í¹®¿¡¼­´Â ÁøÇàÁßÀÎ ±¹Á¦Ç¥ÁØÀ» ±Ù°Å·Î ±¹³»ÀÇ µµ·Î/±³ÅëÁ¶°Ç¿¡ µû¸¥ Â÷·®ÁÖÇà ½Ã³ª¸®¿À¸¦ ÅëÇØ °³¹ßµÈ ACC Á¾ÇÕ½ÃÇèÆò°¡ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À» ¼Ò°³ÇÏ°í ÀÌ¿¡ µû¶ó ½Ç½ÃµÈ ½ÃÇè°á°ú¸¦ ºÐ¼®ÇÑ´Ù À̸¦ ÅëÇØ °á°úÀûÀ¸·Î ACCÀÇ °û³» ÁÖÇàÀ» À§ÇÑ ¾ÈÀü±âÁØÀÇ Çʿ伺À» Á¦½ÃÇÑ´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

The renewed global interest in nuclear power has arisen from the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to provide sufficient electricity for a growing global population before the accident at Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Japan. In spite of the safety issues of nuclear power plants raised by the ongoing Japanese nuclear crisis, many countries with nuclear power plants (NPPs) are still implementing license extensions of 10~20 years, and even consideration is being given to the concept of life-beyond-60, a further period of license extension from 60 to 80 years. To solving the materials aging problem is integral to its success. To evaluate the plant aging phenomena, a lot of background information such as materials and environment of the parts of the reactor and plant systems is needed by the experts. Information on degradation mechanisms is also used. In this paper, a materials degradation evaluation program called OnMDE-SYS (On-line Materials Degradation Evaluation System) is introduced. The developed program provides a variety of information on the materials and stressors as well as operational experience to the experts. It is also anticipated that the experts can perform materials degradation assessment on the web directly by referring to domestic and international information about the degradation of a nuclear power plants through OnMDE-SYS.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

°øÇб³À°ÀÎÁõÀÇ ÇÙ½ÉÀº '¼º°úÁß½É(outcomes based)' ±³À°À» ¹ÙÅÁÀ¸·Î Áö¼ÓÀû ÀÚÀ² °³¼± ±¸Á¶¸¦ ÅëÇÏ¿© Á¹¾÷»ýÀÇ ´É·Â ¹× ÀÚÁúÀ» Çâ»ó½ÃÅ°´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù. °øÇб³À° ÀÎÁõ±âÁØ Áß ÇнÀ¼º°úÀÇ °æ¿ì ±³À°Æò°¡, ±³À°¸ñÇ¥, ±³À°°úÁ¤°úÀÇ °ü°è ¼Ó¿¡¼­ ¿Ã¹Ù¸£°Ô ÀÌÇØµÉ ÇÊ¿ä°¡ ÀÖ´Ù. º» ³í¹®¿¡¼­´Â ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ÇнÀ¼º°ú Æò°¡¹æ¹ýÀ» ÁßÁ¡ÀûÀ¸·Î ´Ù·ç¾ú´Ù. ¸ÕÀú ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ÇнÀ¼º°ú Æò°¡¹æ¹ýÀÇ ÀϹÝÀûÀÎ ¹®Á¦Á¡À» °³¼±ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ¹æ¾ÈÀ» ±â¼úÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ÇнÀ¼º°ú Æò°¡Ã¼°è¿Í ·çºê¸¯À» È°¿ëÇÑ Æò°¡µµ±¸ÀÇ ±¸Ã¼Àû ½ÇÇà ¹æ¹ýÀ» ³íÇÏ¿´´Ù. µû¶ó¼­ º» ¿¬±¸¸¦ ÅëÇÏ¿© ¼ö¸³µÈ Æò°¡µµ±¸¸¦ ÅëÇÏ¿© ´ëÇÐÇöÀå¿¡¼­ ÇнÀ¼º°ú Æò°¡°¡ ½ÇÁ¦ÀûÀ¸·Î ¿î¿µµÉ ¼ö Àֱ⸦ ±â´ëÇÑ´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

ÀÌ ¿¬±¸´Â Çб³ ȯ°æ±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ÁúÀ» °ü¸®ÇÏ°í Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇÑ Æò°¡ÁذŸ¦ °³¹ßÇÏ°í °¢ Æò°¡ÁØ°ÅÀÇ »ó´ëÀû Áß¿äµµ¸¦ ±¸¸íÇÏ´Â µ¥ ±× ¸ñÀûÀ» µÎ°í ¼öÇàµÇ¾ú´Ù. ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀ» ´Þ¼ºÇϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© ¹®Ç忬±¸¿Í µ¨ÆÄÀÌ Á¶»ç¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ ¿¬±¸¹æ¹ýÀ» Àû¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌ·ÐÀû ¹è°æÀÌ µÇ´Â °ü·Ã ¹®Çå°ú ¼±Ç࿬±¸µéÀ» °íÂûÇÏ¿© Çб³ ȯ°æ±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡ÁØ°Å ÃʾÈÀ» ±¸¾ÈÇÏ°í, µ¨ÆÄÀÌ Á¶»ç¸¦ ÅëÇÏ¿© Æò°¡ÁØ°Å¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Å¸´çÈ­¸¦ °ÅÃÄ ÃÖÁ¾ÀûÀ¸·Î È®Á¤µÈ Æò°¡ÁØ°ÅÀÇ »ó´ëÀû Áß¿äµµ¸¦ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Çб³ ȯ°æ±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Æò°¡ÁذŸ¦ °³¹ßÇϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© °ü·Ã ÀÌ·Ð ¹× ¼±Çà ¿¬±¸¸¦ °íÂûÇÏ¿© 4°³ÀÇ Æò°¡¿µ¿ª, 12°³ÀÇ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ, 43°³ÀÇ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥·Î ±¸¼ºµÈ Æò°¡ÁØ°Å ÃʾÈÀ» ±¸¾ÈÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±¸¾ÈµÈ Æò°¡ÁØ°Å Ãʾȿ¡ ´ëÇÑ Å¸´ç¼ºÀ» È®º¸ÇÏ°í Æò°¡ÁØ°Å°£ÀÇ »ó´ëÀû Áß¿äµµ¸¦ ºÐ¼®Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© ´ëÇб³¼ö, Çб³±³»ç, ȯ°æ±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Àü¹®°¡ 6¸í¾¿ ¸ðµÎ 18¸íÀÇ ÇØ´ç ºÐ¾ß Àü¹®°¡ ÆгÎÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î µ¨ÆÄÀÌ Á¶»ç¸¦ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ, Æò°¡Ç׸ñ, Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥º° 2Â÷·Ê ½Ç½ÃÇÏ¿´´Ù. »ó´ëÀûÀ¸·Î ³·Àº ÀÇ°ß ÀÏÄ¡µµ¸¦ º¸ÀÎ Ç׸ñÀ» ¼öÁ¤ÇÏ°í Àü¹®°¡ ÆгεéÀÇ ÀÇ°ßÀ» Á¾ÇÕÇÏ´Â °úÁ¤À» °ÅÃÄ Çб³ ȯ°æ±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡ÁذŸ¦ È®Á¤ÇÏ°í ±× Å¸´ç¼ºÀ» È®º¸ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÃÖÁ¾ È®Á¤µÈ Çб³ ȯ°æ±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡ÁØ°Å´Â 1. ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¿ä±¸ºÐ¼®, 2. ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¼³°è ¹× ÀÚ·á°³¹ß, 3. ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ½ÇÇà, 4. ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¼º°úÈ®ÀÎ µî 4°³ ¿µ¿ª, 12°³ Ç׸ñ°ú 42°³ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥·Î ±¸¼ºµÇ¾ú´Ù. ³× Â÷·Ê¿¡ °ÉÄ£ µ¨ÆÄÀÌ Á¶»ç¸¦ ÅëÇÏ¿© Ÿ´ç¼ºÀ» È®º¸ÇÑ Çб³ ȯ°æ±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡ÁØ°ÅÀÇ »ó´ëÀû Áß¿äµµ¸¦ ºÐ¼®Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© ¸¶Áö¸· µ¨ÆÄÀÌ Á¶»ç¿¡¼­ °èÃþÈ­ ºÐ¼®¹ýÀ» ½Ç½ÃÇÏ¿´´Ù. µ¨ÆÄÀÌ Á¶»ç¿Í »ó´ëÀû Áß¿äµµ¸¦ ºÐ¼®ÇÑ °á°ú¸¦ ¹ÙÅÁÀ¸·Î ÈÄ¼Ó ¿¬±¸¸¦ À§ÇÑ Á¦¾ðÀ» ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

ÀÌ ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀº ³ó¾÷ÀÎ ±³À°ÇÁ·Î±×·¥¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥¸¦ °³¹ßÇϴµ¥ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. À̸¦ À§ÇØ ³ó¾÷ÀÎ ±³À°ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¹Ù¶÷Á÷ÇÑ ¼öÁØ ¹× Æò°¡¸ðÇü ¼³Á¤À» À§ÇØ ±¹³»¿Ü ³ó¾÷ÀÎ ±³À°ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Ư¼º°ú °ü·ÃÇÑ ¹®ÇåÀ» °íÂûÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¹®Çå°íÂûÀ» ÅëÇØ 4°³ Æò°¡¿µ¿ª¿¡ ´ëÇØ 17°³ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ ¹× 25°³ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥°¡ ÃÖÁ¾ °³¹ßµÇ¾ú´Ù. ±³À°¸ñÀû ¹× ´ë»ó ¿µ¿ªÀº ±³À°¸ñÀû, ±³À°´ë»ó, ±â°ü¿ªÇÒ°ú ±³À°¸ñÀûÀÇ ºÎÇÕ¼º 3°³ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ¿¡ µû¶ó 5°³ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥, ±³À°¿ª·®Àº ±³À°½Ã¼³, ±³À°±âÀÚÀç, Àü´ãÁ¶Á÷ ¹× ÀηÂ, ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ½ÇÀû 4°³ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ¿¡ µû¶ó 5°³ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥, ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¿î¿µ ¹× °ü¸® ¿µ¿ªÀº ±³À°³»¿ë, ±³À°±â°£ ¹× ÀÏÁ¤, °­»çÁø, ±³À°¹æ¹ý, ±³À°ºñ ÁýÇà, ±³À°°ü¸® 6°³ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ¿¡ µû¶ó 10°³ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥, ±×¸®°í ±³À°½ÇÀû ¹× Æò°¡ ¿µ¿ªÀº ±³À°½ÇÀû, ±³À°»ý Æò°¡, »çÈÄÁöµµ, Æò°¡°á°úÀÇ È°¿ë 4°³ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ¿¡ µû¶ó 5°³ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥°¡ °³¹ßµÇ¾ú´Ù. °³¹ßµÈ Æò°¡ÁöÇ¥´Â ³ó¾÷ÀÎ ±³À°ÈÆ·Ã ¹× ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡ °ü·Ã Àü¹®°¡ ¹× ³ó¾÷ÀÎ ±³À°´ã´çÀÚÀÇ °ËÅä¿Í ³ó¾÷ÀÎ ±³À°ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡¿¡ ½ÇÁ¦ Àû¿ëÀ» ÅëÇØ Å¸´ç¼ºÀÌ °ËÁõµÇ¾ú´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ³ó¾÷ÀÎ ±³À°ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¸ñÇ¥´Þ¼º È®ÀÎ ¹× ÀÇ»ç°áÁ¤ Á¤º¸¼öÁý¿¡ ÀûÇÕÇÑ °ÍÀ¸·Î È®ÀεǾú´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to assess the efficacy and usefulness of the career ladder program in a hospital and to evaluate nurses' satisfaction with the program. Methods: The study was conducted using a survey consisting of 14 questions on the appropriateness, necessity and usefulness of the career ladder program. The data were gathered from 403 nurses in a hospital. We assessed differences in responses according to the participants' workplace, age, educational background, marital status, experience (total years and years at current working place). We analyzed the data using SPSS/WIN 12.0. Results: Nurses acknowledged that the career ladder program is necessary and profitable within the nursing field, but they worried about the appropriateness of the nurse's role at each career level and rationality of the portfolio. The study also identified nurses' characteristics that were significant factors in explaining nurses' satisfaction with the career ladder program. Finally, we identified complaints and improvements for the program. Conclusion: We assessed differences in attitude towards the career ladder program according to nurses' characteristics.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

°ÇÃ๰ÀÇ ½Ç³» À½Çâ°èȹ ¹× Æò°¡¸¦ À§ÇØ È°¿ëµÇ°í ÀÖ´Â °ÇÃàÀ½Çâ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥¿¡ ´ëÇؼ­ ¼Ò°³¸¦ ÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÑ´Ù.

[ÇØ¿Ü³í¹®]

This research note intends to address the need for diversity in evaluation research, especially to help people to have a better understanding of the so-called program logic model or other similar thoughts (conceptual frameworks) to theory-based evaluation. Program logic model is an evaluation method which tries to logically design the mechanism for linking program inputs and program outcomes. Recent trend in Korea shows that people tend to easily apply the logic of program logic model like a template with a little understanding of the assumptions, caveats and/or basic background information of the model. This trend can be more likely to distort the validity of evaluation rather than improve it. Despite the potential risk, we cannot, however, ignore the merit of program logic model as a way of compensating for the limit of the so-called input-output model as well as improving the quality of government programs. In this regard, the purpose of this research note is to revisit the two sides of the model in terms of theoretical and practical perspective.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

ÀÌ ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀº ¹ß¸í±³À°À» ¿î¿µÇÏ´Â ´Ù¾çÇÑ ±³À°±â°ü¿¡¼­ ¹ß¸í±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À» ¼³°èÇÏ°í ÁغñÇÒ ¶§ È°¿ëÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ±âÃÊÀû Æò°¡ÁذŸ¦ Á¦½ÃÇÏ¿© ¹ß¸í±³À°ÀÇ È¿°ú¿Í È¿À²¼ºÀ» ³ôÀ̱â À§ÇÔÀÌ´Ù. ÀÌ¿¡ µû¸¥ ¿¬±¸ÀÇ °á°ú´Â ´ÙÀ½°ú °°´Ù. ù°, ¹ß¸í±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ´Ü°è´Â '°èȹ(Planning), Áغñ(Preparation), °úÁ¤(Process), »êÃâ(Product)'ÀÇ 4´Ü°è·Î '4P ´Ü°è'·Î ¸í¸íÇÏ¿´´Ù. µÑ°, ¹ß¸í±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ °èȹ ´Ü°è Æò°¡ ¿µ¿ªÀº '¸ñÇ¥ ¼³Á¤, ¿ä±¸ ºÐ¼®', ±³À°°úÁ¤ ¼³°è'ÀÌ´Ù. Áغñ ´Ü°è Æò°¡ ¿µ¿ªÀº '¹ß¸í±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ °³¹ß, ÀÎÀû ÀÚ¿ø È®º¸, ¹°Àû ÀÚ¿ø È®º¸'ÀÌ´Ù. °úÁ¤ ´Ü°è Æò°¡ ¿µ¿ªÀº 'ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¿î¿µ, ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ °ü¸®, ÇнÀÀÚ °ü¸®'ÀÌ´Ù. »êÃâ ´Ü°è Æò°¡ ¿µ¿ªÀº '±³À° ½ÇÀû, ¼ºÃë °á°ú, ±³À° Æò°¡'ÀÌ´Ù. ÀÌ»óÀÇ ¹ß¸í±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡ÁØ°Å´Â ¹ß¸í±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ÁúÀ» Á¦°íÇÏ°í °ü¸®ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ¿ªÇÒÀ» ÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆǴܵȴÙ. ¶ÇÇÑ, ´Ù¾çÇÑ ¹ß¸í±³À° ±â°ü¿¡¼­ÀÇ È¯·ù¿Í °ü°è Àü¹®°¡µéÀÇ Å¸´çÈ­ °úÁ¤À» ÅëÇÑ Á¶Á¤°úÁ¤À» °ÅÃÄ ÃÖÁ¾ÀûÀ¸·Î ¹ß¸í±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ Æò°¡ÁذŸ¦ °³¹ßÇϴµ¥ ±âÃÊ ÀÚ·á°¡ µÉ °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆǴܵȴÙ.

[ÇØ¿Ü³í¹®]

The purpose of this study was to develop the evaluation indicators in education program for farmers. The evaluation indicators was developed through a comprehensive review of literatures related to farmer education and program evaluation. Twenty five evaluation indicators were developed according to 17 sub-domains in 4 evaluation domains. Educational objectives and target audiences include 5 indicators according to educational objectives, target audience, and correspondence between educational objective and functions of institution. Educational capabilities include 5 indicators according to educational facilities, materials, staffs in charge, and historical accomplishments of the program. Program implementation and management include 10 indicators according to educational contents, a period and schedule of program, lecturers, educational methods, execution of educational expenses, and educational management. Educational accomplishments and assessment include 5 indicators according to educational accomplishments, audience assessment, follow-up management for audiences, and utilization of assessment results. The evaluation indicators were verified by several panels of expert committee including farmer educators, and through actual application. Consequently, it was identified that the evaluation indicators were suited to gather information for judgments of goal achievement and decision making in programs.

[ÇØ¿Ü³í¹®]

The purpose of this study is to develop the criteria to evaluate the quality of environmental education programs at primary and secondary schools and to identify the relative importance of each evaluation criterion. To this end, previous research was reviewed and the Delphi method was employed. A draft of evaluation criteria was developed based on the result of reviewing related documents and previous research and the Delphi method was used to confirm the validity of evaluation criteria and to analyze the relative importance of the finally established criteria.The first draft of evaluation criteria consisted of 4 evaluation areas, 12 evaluation items, and 43 evaluation indices. In order to confirm the validity, four rounds of the Delphi survey were carried out with 18 expert panelists consisting of six persons from each group of professors, teachers, and environmental education program experts. The evaluation criteria with a relatively low degree of consensus between experts were modified and the revised set of evaluation criteria were developed repeatedly through the Delphi survey. Finally, the confirmed evaluation criteria for the environmental education programs at the elementary and secondary schools consisted of 4 evaluation areas (such as 1. need analysis of the program, 2. program design and educational materials development, 3. implementation of the program, and 4. identification of the program outcomes), 12 evaluation items, and 42 evaluation indices. In the final Delphi survey, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was introduced to analyze the relative importance of the evaluation criteria developed. Based on the results of the study, recommendations were proposed.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

Recently, there are growing interests in building life cycle assessment in response to climate change which is emerging as important issue. However existed assessment method is insufficient for satisfying characteristics of buildings. Thus it is required that effective assessment system which is suitable for reducing $CO_2$ emissions. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop building life cycle $CO_2$ assessment system according with required elements and building life cycle characteristics. To that end, the strategies of the system development was established for developing element technologies which are basis of the assessment system. And core values which are consist of keyword limited the direction of the development and the boundary of the technology. On such basis, element technologies were developed. Web-based assessment technology was based on the cycle of calculation and analysis and data accumulation by web system that each assessor is connected to online server. And it can be utilized as a building $CO_2$ assessment hub which combines the BIM modeling and the result of the other analysis tools. Automated materials quantity load technology was based on $CO_2$ functional unit and the list of building materials quantity which contains work classification and building material names and costs. And it can be calculated by data mapping technology through standard database format. Alternative assessment technology was based on life cycle template system. Also each element technologies are combined for building life cycle $CO_2$ assessment technology. As a result, Building life cycle $CO_2$ assessment system that includes effective calculation algorithm and alternative assessment technology and analysis system can be developed.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

º» ¿¬±¸´Â ½ºÆ÷Å×ÀθÕÆ® TVÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ÁøÇàÀÚÀÇ Æ¯¼ºÀÌ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡ ¹× ½ºÆ÷Ã÷ Âü¿©¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâÀ» ±Ô¸íÇÏ¿©, ½ºÆ÷Ã÷ Á¾¸ñ È°¼ºÈ­¿Í ½ºÆ÷Å×ÀθÕÆ® TVÇÁ·Î±×·¥À» ÅëÇÑ Âü¿© Ư¼º¿¡ ¸Â´Â Â÷º°È­µÈ ¸¶ÄÉÆÃÀü·« ¼ö¸³À» À§ÇÑ ±âÃÊ ÀڷḦ Á¦°øÇϴµ¥ ÀÖ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸´Â ½ºÆ÷Ã÷°ü·Ã TV¹ö¶óÀ̾îƼ¼î ½Ãû °æÇèÀÌ ÀÖ´Â ½ÃûÀÚ¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÃÑ ¼³¹®Áö 586ºÎ Áß 84ºÎ¸¦ Á¦¿ÜÇÑ 492ºÎ¸¦ ½ÇÁ¦ ºÐ¼®¿¡ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÚ·á󸮸¦ À§ÇÑ Åë°è¹æ¹ýÀº Window"s SPSS 15.0 Åë°èÆÐÅ°Áö¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ºóµµºÐ¼®, ¿äÀκм®, ½Å·ÚµµºÐ¼®, »ó°ü°ü°èºÐ¼® ¹× ´ÙÁßȸ±ÍºÐ¼®À» ½Ç½ÃÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¿¬±¸°á°ú ù°, ½ºÆ÷Å×ÀθÕÆ® TVÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ÁøÇàÀÚƯ¼º ¿äÀÎ Áß ½Å·Ú¼º, Á¸°æ, Àü¹®¼º¿äÀÎÀÌ TVÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ Áß ÁÖ¸ñ(Attention)¿¡ ±àÁ¤ÀûÀÎ ¿µÇâÀ» ¹ÌÄ¡´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç, ºÎÁ¤ÀûÀ̹ÌÁö´Â ºÎÀûÀÎ ¿µÇâÀ» ¹ÌÄ¡´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. µÑ°, TVÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡ Áß ÀÚ°Ý¿äÀÎÀº ȸÀÇ(Skepticism)¿¡ ºÎÀûÀÎ ¿µÇâÀ» ¹ÌÄ¡´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ¼Â°, ½ºÆ÷Å×ÀθÕÆ® TVÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ÁøÇàÀÚƯ¼º ¿äÀÎ Áß Á¸°æ°ú Àü¹®¼º¿äÀÎÀÌ ½ºÆ÷Ã÷ °£Á¢Âü¿©¿¡ ¿µÇâÀ» ¹ÌÄ¡´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ³Ý°, ½ºÆ÷Å×ÀθÕÆ® TVÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ÁøÇàÀÚƯ¼º ¿äÀÎ Áß Á¸°æ°ú ¸Å·Â, Àü¹®¼º¿äÀÎÀÌ ½ºÆ÷Ã÷ Á÷Á¢Âü¿©¿¡ ¿µÇâÀ» ¹ÌÄ¡´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

º» ¿¬±¸´Â °ø¿µ¹æ¼Û, ƯÈ÷ ¼ö½Å·á·Î ¿î¿µµÇ´Â KBSÀÇ ¼º°úÆò°¡ ¸ðµ¨À» Ž»öÀûÀ¸·Î »ìÆ캸´Â µ¥ ±× ¸ñÀûÀ» µÎ¾ú´Ù. °ø¿µ¹æ¼ÛÀº »çȸÀûÀ¸·Î ´Ù¾çÇÑ °¡Ä¡¸¦ ¼öÇàÇØ¾ß ÇÒ Àǹ«¸¦ °¡Áö°í ÀÖ´Ù. ƯÈ÷ ¼ö½Å·á·Î ¿î¿µµÇ±â ¶§¹®¿¡ °ø°øÀÇ ÀÌÀÍÀ» À§ÇØ »çȸÀû Ã¥¹«¸¦ ¼öÇàÇØ¾ß ÇÏ´Â µ¿½Ã¿¡ °æÁ¦Àû È¿À²À» ³ôÀÌ´Â ÀÏ¿¡µµ ¼ÒȦÇÔÀÌ ¾ø¾î¾ß ÇÑ´Ù. ÀÌ ¶§¹®¿¡ KBS¿Í °°Àº °ø¿µ¹æ¼ÛÀº ÀÏ¹Ý »ç¿µ¹æ¼Û»ç¿Í´Â ´Ù¸¥ À¯ÇüÀÇ ÀÌÁßÀû Æò°¡Ã¼°è¸¦ °¡Áú ¼ö¹Û¿¡ ¾ø´Ù. ÀÌ ¿¬±¸´Â ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ Ãø¸é¿¡¼­ °ø¿µ¹æ¼ÛÀÇ ¼º°ú¸¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ´Â ¹æ½Ä¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ½Ã·ÐÀû ³íÀǸ¦ ½ÃµµÇØ º¸°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±âÁ¸ÀÇ ÀϹÝÀûÀÎ ¼º°úÆò°¡ ¸ðµ¨¿¡ ÀÇÇϸé, ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Ç°ÁúÀ̸é Ç°Áú, ½Ãû·üÀÌ¸é ½Ãû·üÀ» ÃÖÁ¾ ÁöÇâÁ¡À¸·Î ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¼º°ú¸¦ Æò°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ÀÌ ¿¬±¸´Â °ø¿µ¹æ¼Û ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ °øÀͼº°ú °æ¿µÀÇ È¿À²¼ºÀ» ¸ðµÎ ¾Æ¿ì¸¦ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ¸ðµ¨À» Á¦½ÃÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÑ °ÍÀÌ´Ù. À̸¦ À§ÇØ ¹æ¼ÛÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ¼º°ú¸¦ Æò°¡ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ´Ù¾çÇÑ ±¸¼º¿äÀεéÀ» °ËÅäÇß´Ù. ¿©±â¼­´Â ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Ç°Áú°¡Ä¡Æò°¡(PQVÁö¼ö), Á¦ÀÛºñ ´ëºñ ¼öÀÍÀÇ È¿°ú¼º ±×¸®°í ½Ãû·üÀ» ¹æ¼ÛÀÇ ¼º°ú¸¦ Æò°¡ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ¿äÀÎÀ¸·Î º¸°í, ÀÌµé ¿äÀÎÀ» ¹ÙÅÁÀ¸·Î °ø¿µ¹æ¼Û ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¼º°úÆò°¡ ¸ðµ¨À» Á¦½ÃÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌ ¸ðµ¨Àº °ø¿µ¹æ¼Û ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ Çö ÁÖ¼Ò¸¦ ÆľÇÇÔÀ¸·Î½á À帣º°·Î ¼º°ú¸¦ ³ôÀÏ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ´Ù¾çÇÑ Àü·«¼ö¸³¿¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÑ ±âÃÊ ÀڷḦ Á¦°øÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

The purposes of this study are to revise an site-based environmental education(EE) Program evaluation chart and to evaluate site-based EE programs using the chart. For revising the evaluation chart, several elements in the former chart were changed, infused, deleted, integrated, or split. The points of some elements in the former chart were also changed. The revised chart consist of 38 elements in 6 areas: purpose and goal, teaching and learning plan, teaching and learning process, educational effect and programs evaluation, Program characteristic, and program operation. Using the revised chart, the researchers evaluated 159 site-based EE programs, funded by the Korean Ministry of Environment in 2002. The result indicated that the mark of 'teaching and learning plan' area is higher than other areas, while the mark of 'educational effect and programs evaluation' is the lowest. On the basis of evaluation, the researchers offered some recommendations for the Korean site-based EE programs.

[ÇØ¿Ü³í¹®]

The purpose of this study is to develop an assessment criteria and an index for the child welfare program in order to not only encourage the development of an evidence-based program in the child welfare field, but also provide an assessment tool. For this purpose, this study analyzed the assessment index in international and domestic programs, and created the domain of assessment and criteria for assessment which in-service staff¡¯s thoughts were reflected on. Afterwards, an assessment criteria and an index for the child welfare program were verified by using the Delphi method in which experts in child welfare participated. Based on developed assessment criteria and index, the interobserver reliability of child welfare programs in academic journals was verified. The developed assessment index in this study was composed of ¡®the accuracy in the process of developing the program¡¯, ¡®the reliability in the structure of the program.¡¯ and ¡®the effectiveness of the program¡¯. This study is meaningful that the important groundwork for invigorating an evidence-based aspect in child welfare program was provided.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

º» ³í¹®¿¡¼­´Â ¼­·Î ´Ù¸¥ µÎ °³ÀÇ C ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ±¸¹®Æ®¸®¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© À¯»çµµ¸¦ Æò°¡ÇÏ´Â ½Ã½ºÅÛÀ» Á¦½ÃÇÑ´Ù. ±¸¹® Æ®¸®¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ´Â ¹æ¹ýÀº ±âÁ¸ÀÇ À¯»çµµ Æò°¡ ¹æ¹ý°ú´Â ´Þ¸® µé¿©¾²±â, ¿©¹é, ¼³¸í¹® µî ÇÁ·Î±×·¥°ú ¹«°üÇÑ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ½ºÅ¸ÀÏÀÇ º¯È­¿¡ ¹Î°¨ÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀ¸¸ç, ¹®Àå, ÄÚµå ºí·Ï, ÇÔ¼ö µîÀÇ ¼ø¼­ ¹Ù²Ù±â °°Àº Á¦¾î ±¸Á¶ÀÇ º¯°æ¿¡ ¹Î°¨ÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀº Ư¡À» °¡Áö°í ÀÖ´Ù. ±×¸®°í ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À» ÆĽÌÇÔÀ¸·Î½á ±¸¹® ¿À·ùµµ ÇÔ²² °Ë»çÂù ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ÀåÁ¡À» Á¦°øÇÑ´Ù. ³í¹®¿¡¼­´Â À¯»çµµ¸¦ Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇÑ ¾Ë°í¸®Áò°ú ÇÔ²² ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ ºñ±³È½¼ö¸¦ ÁÙÀ̱â À§ÇÑ ±×·ì Áþ±â ¾Ë°í¸®Áòµµ °°ÀÌ Á¦°øÇÑ´Ù. ½ÇÇèºÎºÐ¿¡¼­´Â ±¸¹®Æ®¸® ºñ±³¹æ¹ýÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ À¯»çµµ Æò°¡ °á°ú¿Í, ±×·ì Áþ±â¸¦ ¼öÇàÇÑ ÈÄ¿¡ ¸¹Àº ºñ±³ Ƚ¼ö¸¦ ÁÙÀÏ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù´Â °ÍÀ» º¸¿©ÁØ´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

¼öÇÐÇнÀŬ¸®´ÐÀº Çлý°úÀÇ Áö¼ÓÀûÀÎ ¸¸³²À» ÅëÇØ °í¹ÎÀ» ÇÔ²² ¾ê±âÇغ¸¸é¼­ ¼öÇÐÇнÀ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Á¤ÀÇÀûÀÎ ºÎºÐÀÇ º¯È­¸¦ °­Á¶ÇÏ´Â ³»¿ëÀ¸·Î ¾ÕÀ¸·Î ¿ì¸® ÇлýµéÀÌ ¼öÇп¡ ´ëÇØ ±àÁ¤ÀûÀÎ ¸¶À½À¸·Î ¼öÇÐÀ» Á¢ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖµµ·Ï ¾È³»ÇÏ´Â ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÌ´Ù. ÇÏÁö¸¸ Àϼ±Çб³¿¡¼­ ¼öÇÐÇнÀŬ¸®´ÐÀº °¢ Çб³¿¡¼­ ±³»çÀÇ Àç·®¿¡ ÀÇÇØ ´Ù¾çÇÑ ÇüÅ·Π¿î¿µÀÌ µÇ°í ÀÖ¾î ¼öÇÐÇнÀŬ¸®´ÐÀÌ Á¦´ë·Î ±× ¸ñÀûÀ» ´Þ¼ºÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Â Áö¸¦ È®ÀÎÇϱⰡ ¾î·Æ´Ù. ÀÌ·± ¹®Á¦Á¡À» ÇØ°áÇϱâ À§ÇØ ¼öÇÐÇнÀŬ¸®´Ð ¿î¿µÀ» À§ÇØ °®Ãß¾î¾ß ÇÒ ±âº»ÀûÀÎ »çÇ×À» Á¡°ËÇÏ°í ¿î¿µÀ» ÇÏ´Â °úÁ¤¿¡¼­ ÇÊ¿äÇÑ ºÎºÐÀ» üũÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â °¡À̵å¶óÀÎÀÇ ¿ªÇÒÀ» ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡¸ðÇüÀÇ Çʿ伺ÀÌ Àý½ÇÇÏ´Ù. ÀÌ¿¡ º» ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ¸ñÀûÀº ¼öÇÐÇнÀŬ¸®´Ð ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ Æò°¡¸ðÇüÀÌ Çб³ÇöÀå¿¡¼­ ¼öÇÐÇнÀŬ¸®´ÐÀÌ Ã¼°èÀûÀÌ°í È¿À²ÀûÀ¸·Î ¿î¿µµÉ ¼ö ÀÖµµ·Ï ¼öÇÐÇнÀŬ¸®´Ð ¿î¿µÀ» À§ÇÑ °¡À̵å¶óÀÎÀÌ µÉ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ±× °á°ú ¼öÇÐÇнÀŬ¸®´ÐÀÇ ¿î¿µÀÌ º¸´Ù ü°èÀûÀÌ µÉ °ÍÀ̸ç ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ¿î¿µÀ» Á¡°ËÇÏ°í ¿î¿µÀÇ ¹®Á¦Á¡À» ¼öÁ¤ º¸¿ÏÇÏ¿© ÁøÇàÀÌ µÉ °ÍÀÌ´Ù.

[±¹³»³í¹®]

º» ¿¬±¸´Â ±¹³»¿Ü Àå¾Ö¾Æµ¿ ºÎ¸ð±³À° ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÇ Æò°¡¹æ¹ý¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ³»¿ëÀ» ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿© Èļӿ¬±¸ÀÚ°¡ ü°èÀûÀÎ ÇÁ·Î±×·¥À» °³¹ßÇϴµ¥ ±â¿©ÇÒ ¸ñÀûÀ¸·Î ¿¬±¸¸¦ ½Ç½ÃÇÏ¿´´Ù. ºÐ¼® ÀÚ·á´Â 1990³â´ë ÀÌÈÄÀÇ ³í¹®À» Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î °ü·Ã ¹®ÇåÀ» °Ë»öÇÏ°í ¼öÁýÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç Æò°¡¿µ¿ªº°·Î ¹®ÇåÀ» ºÐ·ùÇÏ°í ±¸Ã¼ÀûÀÎ Æò°¡¹æ¹ý¿¡ ´ëÇØ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ºÐ¼®°á°ú ¾Æµ¿Á᫐ Æò°¡´Â ¾ð¾îÀû ¸Æ¶ô°ú ºñ¾ð¾îÀû ¸Æ¶ôÀ¸·Î ºÐ·ùÇÏ¿© Æò°¡¸¦ ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ¾ð¾îÀû ¸Æ¶ôÃø¸éÀÇ Æò°¡¿ä¼Ò´Â ¾ð¾î Ç¥Çö·Â, ¾ð¾î¼ö¿ë·Â, Æò±Õ¹ßÈ­±æÀÌ, ¹ßÈ­ºóµµ°¡ Æ÷ÇԵȴÙ. ºñ¾ð¾îÀû ¸Æ¶ôÃø¸éÀÇ Æò°¡¿ä¼Ò´Â ¹ÝÀÀÇüÅÂ¿Í ¹ÝÀÀºóµµ°¡ Æ÷ÇԵȴÙ. ºÎ¸ðÁ᫐ Æò°¡´Â Æò°¡¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î °üÂû°ú Áú¹®Áö(¸é´ã)°¡ Æ÷ÇԵǴµ¥ °üÂû¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ Æò°¡³»¿ëÀº »óÈ£ÀÛ¿ëÀ̸ç, ÀÌÀÇ ÇÏÀ§Æò°¡ ¿ä¼Ò´Â ¹ßÈ­ºñÀ², ¹ßÈ­ÇüÅÂ, ¹ÝÀÀÇüÅÂ, ÀÇ»ç¼ÒÅë È¿¿ë¼ºÀÌ Æ÷ÇԵȴÙ. Áú¹®Áö(¸é´ã)¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ Æò°¡³»¿ëÀº ÀÚ¾ÆÁõÁøÀ̸ç, ÀÌÀÇ ÇÏÀ§Æò°¡ ¿ä¼Ò´Â ºÎ¸ðÀÇ ½É¸®Àû »óÅÂ, ¾Æµ¿Àå¾Ö¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Áö½ÄÁ¤µµ, ºÎ¸ð±³À°(ÁßÀç)¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¸¸Á·µµ, ºÎ¸ðÀÇ ÀÚ±âÈ¿À²¼º µîÀÌ Æ÷ÇԵȴÙ.

/ 1,571

Filters

º¸±âÇü½Ä

Á¤·Ä¼ø¼­

Æ÷¸Ë

¸®½ºÆ® ¼ö