162 research outputs found

    ํ•œ๊ตญ ๊ณ ๋“ฑํ•™๊ต ์˜์–ด ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์˜ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ณ„ํš ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ์˜ ์˜์‚ฌ๊ฒฐ์ •์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํƒ๊ตฌ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์‚ฌ๋ฒ”๋Œ€ํ•™ ์™ธ๊ตญ์–ด๊ต์œก๊ณผ, 2021.8. ๊น€์ง„์ˆ™.The purpose of the present study is to explore how Korean high school teachers of English perceive and practice performance assessment, which is intended to be process-centered and for learning as presented in the assessment policies and guidelines of the 2015 revised national curriculum. To this end, the study analyzes the assessment methods and evaluation criteria teachers choose in planning performance assessments and the reasons why they make these decisions. This analysis is guided by the following two research questions: 1) How do Korean high school teachers of English plan their performance assessments and what assessment methods and evaluation criteria do they use? 2) How do they describe their choices of assessment methods and evaluation criteria? Five high school teachers of English from two different schools (School X and School Y) in Gyeonggi Province participated in the study. The researcher conducted one-to-one 90-minute interviews with participants involving questions formulated by reviewing recordings of the teachers conferences for planning performance assessment and assessment plan documents. Ninety-minute group interviews followed in which participants were grouped by school. The researcher recorded and transcribed all the interviews and then analyzed the data. Also, the researcher examined the assessment planning documents of the two schools. The findings were interpreted in light of the concept of assessment for learning, which forms the core of the process-centered performance assessment presented in the 2015 revised national curriculum. With respect to the first research question regarding the assessment methods and criteria chosen by the teachers of Schools X and Y, the findings demonstrated that performance assessments were conducted in a manner contradictory to the principles of assessment for learning. The teachers carried out writing, speaking, and listening assessments without actually teaching these skills. They did not give feedback during or after the assessments. Assessment methods for the speaking and listening assessments were not authentic and the assessment tasks for the speaking and class participation assessments largely drew on memorization. In addition, as with the class participation assessment, the teachers awarded grades to the students for completion and submission of their work rather than leading them to reflect on their learning. The evaluation criteria also seemed to contradict the principles of assessment for learning. As with the essay writing and speaking assessments, the teachers assigned a heavier grade weight to task completion so as to judge the students performances objectively, precluding criteria entailing subjective judgment. The teachers prioritized ranking the students over promoting their learning and assigned heavier grade weights to the assessments emphasizing students achievements. Moreover, the teachers did not clearly explain the criteria using concrete examples which could help students understand their learning goals. With respect to the second research question, the findings showed that the teachers perceived the reasons for carrying out the assessments as to comply with government policy, to grade and report performance, to fill out students educational profiles, to provide students an opportunity to practice speaking, and to encourage students active class participation. The teachers perceptions of the reasons for carrying out the assessments appeared to be closely related with their selection of assessment methods and evaluation criteria. Furthermore, the teachers perceived reasons for the assessments and decision making in selecting assessment methods and evaluation criteria were deeply affected by sociocultural factors, namely, bureaucratic pressures, such as government policy and reporting requirements, and considerations of university admission and external high-stakes assessment. Therefore, the present study found that sociocultural factors influenced teachers perceptions of the reasons for implementing performance assessments, hampering the implementation of assessment for learning. With these findings, the present study contributes to understanding how performance assessments are actually implemented in the classroom and provides pedagogical implications for successfully implementing and developing performance assessment for learning in a Korean EFL context.๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” 2015 ๊ฐœ์ •๊ต์œก๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ๊ณผ์ •์— ์ดˆ์ ์„ ๋งž์ถ”๊ณ  ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์˜ ํ•™์Šต์„ ํ–ฅ์ƒ์‹œํ‚ฌ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ๋˜์–ด์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๊ฐ•์กฐํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์Œ์„ ์—ผ๋‘์— ๋‘๊ณ , ํ•œ๊ตญ์˜ ๊ณ ๋“ฑํ•™๊ต ์˜์–ด๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์–ด๋–ป๊ฒŒ ์ธ์‹ํ•˜๊ณ  ์‹œํ–‰ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š”์ง€๋ฅผ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ชฉ์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์ œ๋กœ์„œ ์ฒซ ๋ฒˆ์งธ, ํ•œ๊ตญ์˜ ์˜์–ด๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์€ ์–ด๋–ป๊ฒŒ ๊ทธ๋“ค์˜ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ๊ณ„ํšํ•˜๋Š”๊ฐ€? ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๊ณผ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€์€ ๋ฌด์—‡์ธ๊ฐ€? ๋‘ ๋ฒˆ์งธ, ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์€ ์ž์‹ ๋“ค์ด ์„ ํƒํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๊ณผ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์–ด๋–ป๊ฒŒ ์„ค๋ช…ํ•˜๋Š”๊ฐ€?๋ฅผ ์ •ํ•˜๊ณ , ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ๊ณ„ํšํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ ์„ ํƒํ•˜๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๊ณผ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€์„ ์‚ดํŽด๋ณด๊ณ , ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์˜์‚ฌ๊ฒฐ์ •์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ด์œ ๋ฅผ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด์ž ํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋‘ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๊ฒฝ๊ธฐ๋„ ์†Œ์žฌ ๊ณ ๋“ฑํ•™๊ต์—์„œ ๊ทผ๋ฌดํ•˜๋Š” ์ด 5๋ช…์˜ ์˜์–ด ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์— ์ฐธ์—ฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ž๋Š” ๋จผ์ €, ๊ฐ ํ•™๊ต์—์„œ ํ•™๊ธฐ ์ดˆ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ง„ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ณ„ํš์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ํ˜‘์˜ํšŒ ๋…น์Œ์ž๋ฃŒ์™€ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ณ„ํš์„œ๋“ค์„ ์‚ดํŽด๋ด„์œผ๋กœ์จ ์ธํ„ฐ๋ทฐ๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ์งˆ๋ฌธ์„ ๋งˆ๋ จํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ž๋Š” ์ด ์ธํ„ฐ๋ทฐ ์งˆ๋ฌธ๋“ค์„ ๊ฐ€์ง€๊ณ  ์ผ๋Œ€์ผ๋กœ ๊ฐœ์ธ ์ธํ„ฐ๋ทฐ๋ฅผ ๊ฐœ์ธ๋‹น ์•ฝ 90๋ถ„ ๋™์•ˆ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์ดํ›„, ๊ฐ ํ•™๊ต์˜ ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ๋ชจ๋‘ ์ฐธ์—ฌํ•˜๋Š” ๊ทธ๋ฃน ์ธํ„ฐ๋ทฐ๋ฅผ ๊ฐ ํ•™๊ต์—์„œ ์•ฝ 90๋ถ„ ๋™์•ˆ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์ธํ„ฐ๋ทฐ ์ž๋ฃŒ๋Š” ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ž์— ์˜ํ•ด ๊ธฐ๋ก๋˜๊ณ  ์ „์‚ฌ๋˜์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋‘ ํ•™๊ต์˜ ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ณ„ํš๊ณผ ๊ด€๋ จํ•œ ๋ฌธ์„œ๋“ค๊ณผ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ๋ชจ๋‘ ๋ถ„์„๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ๊ณ„ํšํ•˜๊ณ  ์‹ค์‹œํ•˜๋Š” ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ 2015๊ฐœ์ •๊ต์œก๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์ œ์‹œํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ํ•™์Šต์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€์ธ๊ฐ€์˜ ๊ด€์ ์—์„œ ๊ฒ€ํ† ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ฒซ ๋ฒˆ์งธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์งˆ๋ฌธ๊ณผ ๊ด€๋ จํ•˜์—ฌ, ๋‘ ํ•™๊ต์˜ ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ์„ ํƒํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๊ณผ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€์— ๊ด€๋ จํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋Š” ๋‘ ํ•™๊ต์˜ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ํ•™์Šต์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ผ๊ณ  ๋ณด๊ธฐ ์–ด๋ ต๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ฃผ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๋ฌด์—‡๋ณด๋‹ค๋„ ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์€ ์“ฐ๊ธฐ, ๋งํ•˜๊ธฐ, ๋“ฃ๊ธฐ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ธฐ์ˆ ๋“ค์„ ๊ฐ€๋ฅด์น˜์ง€ ์•Š๊ณ , ์ด ๊ธฐ์ˆ ๋“ค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์‹ค์‹œํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์€ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋™์•ˆ ๋˜๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ›„์— ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ์ œ๊ณตํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š์•˜์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋งํ•˜๊ธฐ์™€ ๋“ฃ๊ธฐ ํ‰๊ฐ€์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์ด ์ง„์ •์„ฑ์„ ๊ฐ–์ถ”์ง€ ๋ชปํ•˜๊ณ  ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์˜ ์•”๊ธฐ๋ ฅ์— ์ฃผ๋กœ ์˜์กดํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์˜ ์ˆ˜์—…์ฐธ์—ฌ ํ‰๊ฐ€์—์„œ๋„, ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์€ ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์ด ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ์ž์‹ ์˜ ํ•™์Šต์„ ๋Œ์•„๋ณด๋„๋ก ๋…๋ คํ•˜๊ธฐ ๋ณด๋‹ค๋Š”, ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์ด ์ฃผ์–ด์ง„ ๊ณผ์—…์„ ์™„์ˆ˜ํ•˜๊ณ  ์ œ์ถœํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์ ์ˆ˜๋ฅผ ๋ถ€์—ฌํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์— ์ดˆ์ ์„ ๋งž์ถ”์—ˆ๋‹ค. ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€๋„ ๋˜ํ•œ ํ•™์Šต์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€์˜ ์›์น™์— ๋งž์ง€๋Š” ์•Š์•˜๋‹ค. ์“ฐ๊ธฐํ‰๊ฐ€์™€ ๋งํ•˜๊ธฐ ํ‰๊ฐ€์— ์žˆ์–ด์„œ, ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์€ ํ•™์ƒ์˜ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰์„ ๊ฐ๊ด€์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ๊ณผ์ œ์™„์„ฑ์˜ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€์— ๋” ํฐ ์ ์ˆ˜๋ฅผ ๋ถ€์—ฌํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์˜ ์ฃผ๊ด€์  ํŒ๋‹จ์„ ์š”๊ตฌํ•˜๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€์€ ๋ฐฐ์ œํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒฝํ–ฅ์ด ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์€ ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์˜ ํ•™์Šต์„ ์ฆ์ง„์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ๋ณด๋‹ค๋Š” ์ •ํ™•ํ•œ ์„ฑ์ ์„ ๋งค๊ธฐ๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ์šฐ์„ ์‹œํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์˜ ์„ฑ์ทจ๋„์— ์ดˆ์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ  ์ ์ˆ˜๋ฅผ ๋ถ€์—ฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์€ ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์ด ์ž์‹ ์˜ ํ•™์Šต ๋ชฉํ‘œ๋ฅผ ์ดํ•ดํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋„๋ก ๋„์šธ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€์„ ์„ค๋ช…ํ•œ๋‹ค๊ฑฐ๋‚˜ ๊ตฌ์ฒด์  ์˜ˆ์‹œ๋ฅผ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์ง€๋Š” ์•Š์•˜๋‹ค. ๋‘ ๋ฒˆ์งธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์งˆ๋ฌธ๊ณผ ๊ด€๋ จํ•˜์—ฌ, ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋Š” ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์‹ค์‹œํ•˜๋Š” ์ด์œ ๋ฅผ ์ •๋ถ€์˜ ์ •์ฑ…์— ๋”ฐ๋ฅด๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด, ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์˜ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰์„ ์ ์ˆ˜ํ™”ํ•˜๊ณ  ๋ณด๊ณ ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด, ํ•™๊ต์ƒํ™œ๊ธฐ๋ก๋ถ€๋ฅผ ๊ธฐ๋กํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด, ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋งํ•˜๊ธฐ๋ฅผ ์—ฐ์Šตํ•  ๊ธฐํšŒ๋ฅผ ์ฃผ๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด, ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์˜ ์ ๊ทน์ ์ธ ๊ต์‹ค ์ˆ˜์—… ์ฐธ์—ฌ๋ฅผ ์ด๋Œ๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋ผ๊ณ  ์ธ์‹ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์Œ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ฃผ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ์ธ์‹ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์‹ค์‹œํ•˜๋Š” ์ด์œ  ๋ฐ ๋ชฉ์ ์€ ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์˜ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๊ณผ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€ ์„ ํƒ๊ณผ ๋ฐ€์ ‘ํ•œ ๊ด€๋ จ์ด ์žˆ๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ฒ˜๋Ÿผ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์‹ค์‹œํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ์ธ์‹ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์ด์œ ์™€ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๊ณผ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ์ค€์„ ์„ ํƒํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐ ์žˆ์–ด์„œ์˜ ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์˜ ์˜์‚ฌ๊ฒฐ์ •์€ ์ •๋ถ€์˜ ์ •์ฑ…, ๋ณด๊ณ ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์š”๊ตฌ์™€ ๊ฐ™์€ ์‚ฌํšŒ์˜ ๊ด€๋ฃŒ์ฃผ์˜์  ์••๋ฐ•๊ณผ ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์ž…์‹œ, ์ˆ˜ํ•™๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์‹œํ—˜๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ์š”์ธ์— ์˜ํ•ด ํฌ๊ฒŒ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฐ›๊ณ  ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ฆ‰, ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์‚ฌํšŒ๊ด€๋ฃŒ์  ์••๋ฐ•๊ฐ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ์š”์ธ์ด ๊ต์‚ฌ๋“ค์ด ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์‹ค์‹œํ•˜๋Š” ์ด์œ ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ธ์‹์— ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋ฉด์„œ, ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ํ•™์Šต์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ๋˜๋Š”๋ฐ ์žˆ์–ด์„œ์˜ ์žฅ์• ๋กœ ์ž‘์šฉํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ฐœ๊ฒฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋Š” ํ•œ๊ตญ์˜ ๊ณ ๋“ฑํ•™๊ต ๊ต์‹ค์—์„œ ์˜์–ด ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ์–ด๋–ป๊ฒŒ ์‹ค์ œ๋กœ ์‹œํ–‰๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š”์ง€๋ฅผ ์ดํ•ดํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ํฌ๊ฒŒ ๊ธฐ์—ฌํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๋™์‹œ์—, ํ•œ๊ตญ์˜ EFL ์ƒํ™ฉ์—์„œ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ๊ณผ์ •์— ์ดˆ์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ  ๋˜ํ•œ ํ•™์Šต์„ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ๋˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ์–ด๋– ํ•œ ๋…ธ๋ ฅ์ด ํ•„์š”ํ•œ ์ง€์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ œ์–ธ์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•œ๋‹ค.CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Statement of the Problem 1 1.2. Purpose of the Study 4 1.3. Research Questions 7 1.4. Organization of the Study 7 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 9 2.1. Language Assessment in Social Perspective 9 2.1.1. Theoretical Framework for Language Assessment as a Social Practice 10 2.1.2. Teachers as Social Beings as well as Agents of Classroom-based Teacher Assessment 12 2.2. The Purpose of Classroom-based Teacher Assessment 15 2.2.1. The Importance of Teachers Perceptions of the Purpose of Assessment for Decision Making 15 2.2.2. Conflicts Regarding the Purposes of Classroom-based Teacher Assessment 18 2.2.3. The Sociocultural Contexts Influencing Teachers Decision Making Regarding the Purpose of Assessment 21 2.3. Process-centered Performance Assessment in the 2015 Revised National Curriculum 33 2.3.1. The Meaning and Practice of Performance Assessment in the Korean EFL Context 33 2.3.2. Process-centered Assessment and Process-centerend Performance Assessment in the 2015 Revised National Curriculum 36 2.3.3. The Concept of Assessment for Learning 39 2.3.4. The Challenges of Implementing Assessment for Learning in the Korean EFL Context 43 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 48 3.1. Participants 48 3.2. Data Collection Procedures 50 3.2.1. Listening to Recordings of the Teachers Conferences 50 3.2.2. Examining Assessment Plan Documents 52 3.2.3. Conducting Individual and Focus Group Interviews 52 3.3. Data Analysis 54 CHAPTER 4. MISALIGNMENT BETWEEN TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT 56 4.1. Overall Structure of the Assessment 57 4.2. Essay Assessment 67 4.3. Speaking Assessment 82 4.4. Listening Assessment 100 4.5. Class Participation Assessment 107 4.6. Summary of the Findings Regarding the Assessment Methods and Evaluation Criteria 117 CHAPTER 5. TEACHERS AS SOCIAL BEINGS 123 5.1. The Reasons Why the Teachers Chose the Assessment Methods and Evauation Criteria 123 5.2. Sociocultural Context and Teachers Decision Making 145 5.3 Summary of the Findings Regarding the Reasons for the Reported Assessment Practices 155 CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSION 161 6.1. Summary of Key Findings 161 6.1.1. Aims and Methods 161 6.1.2. Key Findings 162 6.2. Pedagogical Implications 167 6.3. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research 175 REFERENCES 177 APPENDIX 204 ๊ตญ๋ฌธ ์ดˆ๋ก 206 LIST OF TABLES . Table 4.1 Performance Assessment Composition and Grade Weighting: School X 58 Table 4.2 Performance Assessment Composition and Grade Weighting: School Y 61 Table 4.3 Specific Information on Each Performance Assessment: School X 65 Table 4.4 Specific Information on Each Performance Assessment: School Y 66 Table 4.5 Rubric for the Essay Writing of School X 77 Table 4.6 Rubric for Essay Writing โ…  and โ…ก of School Y 78 Table 4.7 Rubric for the Oral Presentation of School X 95 Table 4.8 Rubric for the Dialogue Recitation Assessment of School Y 96 Table 4.9 Evaluation Criteria and Grading System of Listening Assessment: School X.. 105 Table 4.10 Evaluation Criteria and Grading System of Listening Assessment: School Y.. 106 Table 4.11 Evaluation Criteria and Grading System of Class Participation Assessment: School X 113 Table 4.12 Evaluation Criteria and Grading System of Class Participation Assessment: School Y 113 LIST OF FIGURES . Figure 2.1 Facets of Validity (Messick, 1989, p. 20) 11 Figure 2.2 The Four Decision-making Stages in Classroom-based Teacher Assessment (Rea-Dickins, 2001, p. 435) 16 Figure 4.1 Samples of Short-answer Test I: School Y 64 Figure 4.2 Guidelines for Essay Writing: School X 69 Figure 4.3 Essay Writing โ… : School Y 72 Figure 4.4 Guidelines for the Oral Presentation: School X 84 Figure 4.5 Three Dialogue Sets for the Dialogue Recitation Assessment of School Y 85 Figure 4.6 Guidelines for the Dialogue Recitation: School Y 86 Figure 4.7 EBS Listening Test Used for Listening Performance Assessment in School X 102 Figure 4.8 A Sample for Class Participation Assessment: School Y 110๋ฐ•

    Analysis of Injured Worker's Job Satisfaction Change and the Related Factors After Return to Work

    Get PDF
    ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์ง์—…๋ณต๊ท€ ์ดํ›„ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„์˜ ๋ณ€ํ™” ์–‘์ƒ์„ ์ข…๋‹จ์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์—ฌ ์œ ํ˜•ํ™”ํ•˜๊ณ , ๊ทธ ์œ ํ˜•์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ์˜ํ–ฅ์š”์ธ์ด ๋ฌด์—‡์ธ์ง€ ํƒ์ƒ‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ์‚ฐ์žฌ๋ณดํ—˜ํŒจ๋„์กฐ์‚ฌ 1์ฐจ ์ฝ”ํ˜ธํŠธ 1์ฐจ(2013๋…„)~5์ฐจ(2017๋…„) ์ž๋ฃŒ๋ฅผ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ์š”์–‘ ์ข…๊ฒฐ ์ดํ›„ ๊ฒฝ์ œํ™œ๋™์„ ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” 578๋ช…์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„์˜ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ํ™•์ธํ•˜๊ณ  ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ ํ˜•ํ™”ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š”์ง€ ํ™•์ธํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ์ง‘๋‹จ์ค‘์‹ฌ์ถ”์„ธ๋ชจํ˜•์„ ์ ์šฉํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„์— ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์š”์ธ์„ ๊ฑด๊ฐ•์š”์ธ, ์‹ฌ๋ฆฌ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ์š”์ธ, ์ง๋ฌด ๋ฐ ์กฐ์ง๊ด€๋ จ ์š”์ธ, ์žฌํ™œ์„œ๋น„์Šค ์ด์šฉ ์š”์ธ์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜ํ•˜์—ฌ ๋‹ค์ค‘ ๋กœ์ง€์Šคํ‹ฑ ํšŒ๊ท€๋ถ„์„์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ์˜ํ–ฅ์š”์ธ์„ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ถ„์„ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™”์–‘์ƒ์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ 3๊ฐœ์˜ ์œ ํ˜•์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๊ณ  ์ด๋ฅผ โ€˜๋†’์€ ๋งŒ์กฑ ์ง‘๋‹จ(32.3%)โ€™, โ€˜์ค‘๊ฐ„ ๋งŒ์กฑ ์ง‘๋‹จ(48.8%)โ€™, โ€˜๋‚ฎ์€ ๋งŒ์กฑ ์ง‘๋‹จ(18.9%)โ€™์œผ๋กœ ๋ช…๋ช…ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋‹ค์Œ์œผ๋กœ ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™” ์œ ํ˜•์— ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์š”์ธ์„ ๋ถ„์„ํ•œ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, โ€˜๋‚ฎ์€ ๋งŒ์กฑ ์ง‘๋‹จโ€™์„ ์ค€๊ฑฐ์ง‘๋‹จ์œผ๋กœ โ€˜์ค‘๊ฐ„ ๋งŒ์กฑ ์ง‘๋‹จโ€™๊ณผ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜์˜€์„ ๋•Œ๋Š”, ์ฃผ๊ด€์  ๊ฑด๊ฐ•์ƒํƒœ์™€ ์ผ์ƒ์ƒํ™œ๋งŒ์กฑ๋„, ์ข…์‚ฌ์ƒ ์ง€์œ„, ์ง์—…์žฌํ™œ์„œ๋น„์Šค ์ด์šฉ ์—ฌ๋ถ€๊ฐ€ ์œ ์˜ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  โ€˜๋‚ฎ์€ ๋งŒ์กฑ ์ง‘๋‹จโ€™๊ณผ โ€˜๋†’์€ ๋งŒ์กฑ ์ง‘๋‹จโ€™์„ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜์˜€์„ ๋•Œ๋Š” ์ฃผ๊ด€์  ๊ฑด๊ฐ•์ƒํƒœ, ์ผ์ƒ์ƒํ™œ๋งŒ์กฑ๋„, ์ง๋ฌด ๋ฐ ์กฐ์ง ๊ด€๋ จ ์š”์ธ(์ข…์‚ฌ์ƒ ์ง€์œ„, ์—…๋ฌด์ ํ•ฉ๋„, ์›”ํ‰๊ท  ์ž„๊ธˆ), ์ง์—…์žฌํ™œ์„œ๋น„์Šค ์ด์šฉ ์—ฌ๋ถ€๊ฐ€ ์˜ํ–ฅ์š”์ธ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ๋งˆ์ง€๋ง‰์œผ๋กœ โ€˜์ค‘๊ฐ„ ๋งŒ์กฑ ์ง‘๋‹จโ€™์„ ์ค€๊ฑฐ์ง‘๋‹จ์œผ๋กœ ํ•˜์˜€์„ ๋•Œ๋Š” ์ผ์ƒ์ƒํ™œ๋งŒ์กฑ๋„, ์ง๋ฌด ๋ฐ ์กฐ์ง๊ด€๋ จ ์š”์ธ(์ข…์‚ฌ์ƒ ์ง€์œ„, ์—…๋ฌด์ ํ•ฉ๋„, ์›”ํ‰๊ท ์ž„๊ธˆ)์ด ๊ธฐ์—ฌ์š”์ธ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™” ์–‘์ƒ์—๋Š” ํ•˜์œ„์œ ํ˜•์ด ์กด์žฌํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ๊ณผ ์œ ํ˜•๋ณ„๋กœ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์š”์ธ์— ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์žˆ์Œ์„ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„๋ฅผ ํ–ฅ์ƒ์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ๋Š” ์œ ํ˜•๋ณ„๋กœ ๋งž์ถคํ™”๋œ ์ ‘๊ทผ์ด ํ•„์š”ํ•จ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด์™€ ๊ด€๋ จํ•˜์—ฌ, ์ „๋ฐ˜์ ์œผ๋กœ๋Š” ์ผ์ƒ์ƒํ™œ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋งŒ์กฑ์„ ํ–ฅ์ƒ์‹œํ‚ค๋Š” ๋‹ค์ฐจ์›์ ์ธ ์ง€์›์ด ํ•„์š”ํ•˜๋ฉฐ, ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„๊ฐ€ ๋‚ฎ์€ ์ง‘๋‹จ์˜ ๋ณ€ํ™”๋ฅผ ์ด‰์ง„ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ๋Š” ๋ฌด์—‡๋ณด๋‹ค ๊ฑด๊ฐ•์ƒํƒœ๊ฐ€ ๊ธฐ๋ณธ์ ์ธ ์กฐ๊ฑด์ด๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์— ์š”์–‘ ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ์˜ ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํ•œ ์น˜๋ฃŒ์™€ ์‹คํšจ์„ฑ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ง์—…์žฌํ™œ์„œ๋น„์Šค๊ฐ€ ํ•„์š”ํ•จ์„ ์ œ์‹œํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋†’์€ ์ˆ˜์ค€์œผ๋กœ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„๋ฅผ ํ–ฅ์ƒ์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ๋Š” ์ข…์‚ฌ์ƒ ์ง€์œ„์™€ ์ž„๊ธˆ, ์—…๋ฌด์ ํ•ฉ๋„์™€ ๊ฐ™์€ ์ง๋ฌด ๋ฐ ์กฐ์ง๊ด€๋ จ ์š”์ธ์ด ์ค‘์š”ํ•จ์„ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž๊ฐ€ ๋ณต๊ท€ํ•  ์ง์žฅ์„ ์„ ํƒํ•  ๋•Œ ๊ทผ๋กœํ™˜๊ฒฝ๊ณผ ๊ทผ๋กœ์กฐ๊ฑด์ด ์ ์ ˆํ•œ ์ผ์ž๋ฆฌ๊ฐ€ ๋งค์นญ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋„๋ก ํ•ด์•ผ ํ•˜๋ฉฐ ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ํŠน์„ฑ์„ ๋ฐ˜์˜ํ•œ ์ทจ์—…์•Œ์„ ๊ณผ ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ „๋ฌธ์ธ๋ ฅ ์–‘์„ฑ ๋“ฑ์ด ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ ธ์•ผํ•จ์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„์˜ ์˜ํ–ฅ์š”์ธ์„ ๋‹จ๋ฉด์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ™•์ธํ•œ ๊ธฐ์กด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋“ค์—์„œ ๋‚˜์•„๊ฐ€ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™” ์–‘์ƒ์„ ์ข…๋‹จ์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ™•์ธํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋กœ, ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„์˜ ๋ณ€ํ™”์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ์œ ํ˜•์„ ๊ตฌ๋ถ„ํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ทธ ์˜ํ–ฅ์š”์ธ์„ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ํ–ˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ์ ์—์„œ ์˜์˜๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด์™€ ๊ฐ™์€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„๋ฅผ ๋†’์€ ์ˆ˜์ค€์œผ๋กœ ํ–ฅ์ƒ์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ •์ฑ…๊ณผ ์„œ๋น„์Šค๋ฅผ ์ˆ˜๋ฆฝํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐ์—๋Š” ๊ฐœ๋ณ„์ ์ธ ์ ‘๊ทผ์„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•  ํ•„์š”๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค.This study identified and classified the changes in job satisfaction after the return of injured workers to their jobs, and explored what influencing factors were depending on the type. For this purpose, panel study of worker's compensation insurance(PSWCI) 1st Cohort 1st(2013)~5th(2017) data were used to analyze 578 people engaged in economic activities after the end of medical care. To identify and classify changes in job satisfaction, a group-based trajectory model was applied, and multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to verify the impact factors by classifying the factors affecting job satisfaction as health factors, psychosocial factors, job and organization factors, and rehabilitation service use factors. According to the analysis, it could be classified into three types according to the changes in job satisfaction among injured workers, and it was named "high satisfaction group (32.3%), "middle satisfaction group (48.8%), and "low satisfaction group (18.9%)." Next, as a result of analyzing the factors affecting the type of job satisfaction change for injured workers, it was found that when comparing the "low satisfaction group" to the "middle satisfaction group", subjective health, daily life satisfaction, work status, and occupational rehabilitation services significantly affected. In addition, when comparing "low satisfaction groups" and "high satisfaction groups", subjective health, daily life satisfaction, job and organization factors(work status, job suitability, monthly average wage), and occupational rehabilitation services were shown to be influential factors. Finally, when the โ€œmiddle satisfaction group" was established as a reference group, factors related to daily life satisfaction, job and organization factors(work status, job suitability, and monthly average wage) were found to be contributing factors. As a result, the study identified that there were subtypes in the pattern of changes in job satisfaction for injured workers and that there were differences in factors affecting each type, and confirmed that customized approaches were needed to improve job satisfaction. In this regard, it was suggested that in order to promote changes in groups with low job satisfaction, health conditions are the basic conditions, and that sufficient treatment is needed during the care process, and effective occupational rehabilitation services are needed. In addition, to improve job satisfaction to the highest level, job and organization factors such as work status, wages, and job suitability were important, and it was suggested that jobs with appropriate working condition and working environment should be matched when injured workers choose a job to return to, and job placement reflecting the characteristics of injured workers and training professionals for job placement should be done. This study is meaningful in that it has longitudinal study of job satisfaction changes differently from existing studies that have cross-sectional study of job satisfaction factors for injured workers. Based on these results, individual approaches need to be considered in establishing policies and services to improve job satisfaction of injured workers to a high level.์ œ 1 ์žฅ ์„œ ๋ก  1 ์ œ 1 ์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ ๋ฐ ํ•„์š”์„ฑ 1 ์ œ 2 ์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ชฉ์  4 ์ œ 2 ์žฅ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ์ด๋ก ์  ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ 5 ์ œ 1 ์ ˆ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ 5 1. ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„์˜ ๊ฐœ๋… 5 2. ๋™๊ธฐ ์ด๋ก  8 3. ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„์˜ ๊ตฌ์„ฑ์š”์ธ 11 ์ œ 2 ์ ˆ ์„ ํ–‰์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ณ ์ฐฐ 16 1. ์‚ฐ์žฌ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ์˜ํ–ฅ์š”์ธ 16 2. ์„ ํ–‰์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒ€ํ†  22 ์ œ 3 ์žฅ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ• 24 ์ œ 1 ์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ์„ค๊ณ„ 24 1. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ์ž๋ฃŒ ๋ฐ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋Œ€์ƒ 24 2. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ชจํ˜• 25 3. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ฌธ์ œ 26 4. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ์œค๋ฆฌ 27 ์ œ 2 ์ ˆ ๋ถ„์„ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ• 28 1. ๋ณ€์ˆ˜๊ตฌ์„ฑ 28 (1) ์ข…์† ๋ณ€์ˆ˜ 28 (2) ๋…๋ฆฝ ๋ณ€์ˆ˜ 29 (3) ํ†ต์ œ ๋ณ€์ˆ˜ 32 2. ํ†ต๊ณ„ ๋ถ„์„ 33 ์ œ 4 ์žฅ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ 37 ์ œ 1 ์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์˜ ํŠน์„ฑ 37 ์ œ 2 ์ ˆ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™” 40 1. ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™”์˜ ์œ ํ˜•ํ™” 40 2. ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™” ์œ ํ˜•๋ณ„ ํŠน์„ฑ 44 ์ œ 3 ์ ˆ ์ง๋ฌด๋งŒ์กฑ๋„ ๋ณ€ํ™”์˜ ์˜ํ–ฅ์š”์ธ 48 ์ œ 5 ์žฅ ๊ณ ์ฐฐ ๋ฐ ๋…ผ์˜ 51 ์ œ 1 ์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ณ ์ฐฐ 51 ์ œ 2 ์ ˆ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ํ•œ๊ณ„์™€ ์˜์˜ 59 ์ œ 6 ์žฅ ๊ฒฐ๋ก  ๋ฐ ์ œ์–ธ 60 ์ฐธ๊ณ ๋ฌธํ—Œ 63 Abstract 68์„

    ๊ฒฝ์ œ ๋ชจํ˜•์˜ ์ธ์‹์  ๊ตฌ์กฐ์™€ ์ž…์ฆ ๋ฌธ์ œ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (๋ฐ•์‚ฌ)-- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› ์ธ๋ฌธ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์ฒ ํ•™๊ณผ, 2017. 8. ํ•œ์„ฑ์ผ.We propose that confirmation on economics models has a distinctive two-layered espistemic structure. That is, we analyze that the econometrician as the outside observer interferes with the very model she is observing. We further argue that, due to this structure and the impossibility of knowing the true probability distribution, the Market Selection Hypothesis (MSH) is not directly confirmable from data. We provide a formal proof of this result in the framework of a Bayesian confirmation model.1 Introduction 1 2 Confirmation Theory: Conditional Probability and Evidence 6 2.1 Carnapian vs. Bayesian Confirmation Theory 8 2.2 Conditional Probability and Modes of Supposition 11 2.2.1 The Primitive: Conditional vs. Unconditional Probability 11 2.2.2 The Modes of Supposition in Bayesian Confirmation 14 2.3 Confirmation and Evidence 17 2.3.1 Two Probabilistic Conditions for Confirmation 18 2.3.2 Epistemic Condition for Confirmation 21 3 The Market Selection Hypothesis (MSH) and the Rational Expectations Hypothesis (REH) 25 3.1 The Concept of Rational Expectations 29 3.2 The Epistemic Structure of Economics Models under the Rational Expectations 34 3.2.1 The Epistemic Structure of Economics Models 34 3.2.2 Applications of the Analysis on the Epistemic Structure to Two Theses under Rational Expectations 37 3.3 The Market Selection Model 41 3.3.1 Notations and Basics 42 3.3.2 Belief Selection in the Complete Market 43 4 The Epistemic Structure of Economics Models and the Problem of Confirmation 46 4.1 The Outline of the Argument . 46 4.2 True Belief, True Probability, and the True Data-Generating Process 50 4.2.1 Kinds of Probabilities and their Representations 51 4.2.2 Cogley, et. al. Model and the True Data-Generating Process . 54 4.2.3 What Kinds of Probabilities are Involved in the TDGP? 57 4.3 Do We Know the True Process? 58 4.3.1 DGP and the Frequentist Position 59 4.3.2 DGP and the Calibrationist Position 64 4.3.3 Remarks on the Discussions of Probabilistic Knowledge 67 4.4 The MSH and the Problem of Confirmation 69 4.4.1 Bayesian Confirmation Model 69 4.4.2 The Model for Confirmation Impossibility of the MSH 71 5 Knowledge and the Implications of the Confirmation Impossibility of the MSH 90 5.1 A Solution to the Internal Problem of the MSH 91 5.2 The MSH and Accuracy Model 93 6 Conclusion 97 References 103Docto

    ๋‹น๋‡จ์•„๋™ ๊ฐ€์กฑ์˜ ์•„๋ฒ„์ง€ ์—ญํ•  ์ˆ˜ํ–‰์— ๊ด€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ

    No full text
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(์„์‚ฌ)--์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› :์‚ฌํšŒ๋ณต์ง€ํ•™๊ณผ,1997.Maste

    Is Marxism Unfalsifiable?: A Critical Review of Poppers Criticism of Marxism

    No full text
    ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๊ฒฝํ—˜์ ์ธ ๊ณผํ•™ ์ด๋ก  ๊ฐ€์šด๋ฐ ํ•˜๋‚˜๋กœ ํ‰๊ฐ€๋˜๋Š” ๊ณ ์ „ ๊ฒฝ์ œํ•™์— ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์„ ๋‘๋Š” ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์ด ์–ด๋–ป๊ฒŒ ๋ฐ˜์ฆ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ์„ ๊ตฌํš๊ธฐ์ค€์œผ๋กœ ์‚ผ๋Š” ํฌํผ์— ์˜ํ•ด ์‚ฌ์ด๋น„ ๊ณผํ•™์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜๋˜์—ˆ๋Š”์ง€ ๊ทธ ๋งฅ๋ฝ์„ ์‚ดํŽด๋ณธ๋‹ค. ํฌํผ๋Š” ๊ทธ ์Šค์Šค๋กœ๊ฐ€ ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์„ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ ์—ญ์‚ฌ์  ๊ฒฝํ—˜ ์‚ฌ๋ก€๋ฅผ ๋“ค์–ด ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์„ ๋ฐ˜๋ฐ•ํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ํ–ˆ๋Š”๋ฐ, ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์‚ฌ์‹ค์€ ๊ทธ ์ž์ฒด๋กœ ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์ด ๋ฐ˜์ฆ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ์ด ํ’๋ถ€ํ•œ ์ด๋ก ์ด๋ผ๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ์‹œ์‚ฌํ•˜๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์—, ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์„ ๊ฒฝํ—˜์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ฐ˜๋ฐ•ํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ ๋™์‹œ์— ๊ทธ๊ฒƒ์„ ์‚ฌ์ด๋น„ ๊ณผํ•™์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜ํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ์ผ๊ฒฌ ๋ชจ์ˆœ๋œ ํ–‰๋™์ธ ๊ฒƒ์ฒ˜๋Ÿผ ๋ณด์ด๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์ด๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋ชจ์ˆœ๋œ ๊ฒƒ์ฒ˜๋Ÿผ ๋ณด์ด๋Š” ์ฃผ์žฅ์„ ์ดํ•ดํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋จผ์ € ํฌํผ์˜ ๋ฐ˜์ฆ๊ฐ€๋Šฅ์„ฑ ์ด๋ก ๊ณผ ๊ตฌํš ๋…ผ์˜์— ๊ด€ํ•ด ์ž์„ธํžˆ ์‚ดํŽด๋ณธ๋‹ค. ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์šฐ๋ฆฌ๋Š” ํฌํผ๊ฐ€ ์ ์–ด๋„ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ์˜ ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์ด ์ง€๋‹Œ ๊ณผํ•™์„ฑ์€ ์ธ์ •ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ ์ดํ›„ ๋งน๋ชฉ์ ์ธ ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค์ฃผ์˜์ž๋“ค์— ์˜ํ•ด ์‚ฌ์ด๋น„ ์ด๋ก ์œผ๋กœ ์ „๋ฝํ•˜๊ฒŒ ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค๊ณ  ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ์‚ฌ์‹ค์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ ์ผ๊ฒฌ ๋ชจ์ˆœ์ฒ˜๋Ÿผ ๋ณด์ด๋Š” ํฌํผ์˜ ์ด๋ก ์  ๋ถ„์„์„ ์ดํ•ดํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๋‹จ์ดˆ๋ฅผ ์–ป๊ฒŒ ๋œ๋‹ค.โ€“์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์ด์œ ๋กœ ํฌํผ๋Š” ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์„, ํ”„๋กœ์ด๋“œ ์ด๋ก ์ด๋‚˜ ์•„ ๋“ค๋Ÿฌ์˜ ์ด๋ก ๊ณผ ๋”๋ถˆ์–ด ์‚ฌ์ด๋น„ ์ด๋ก ์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜ํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ๋„ ์ด๋“ค ์ด๋ก ๊ณผ๋Š” ์ฐจ์›์ด ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์‚ฌ์ด๋น„ ์ด๋ก ์ด๋ผ๊ณ  ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•œ๋‹ค.โ€“์ดํ›„ ์šฐ๋ฆฌ๋Š” ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํฌํผ์˜ ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•ด ๋ณธ๋‹ค.ํฌํผ๋Š” ๋…ธ๋™์ž ์ฐฉ์ทจ ์‹ฌํ™” ํ˜„์ƒ์˜ ํ•„์—ฐ์„ฑ์„ ์„ค๋ช…ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ์ด๋ก ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ฐ˜๋“œ์‹œ ๋…ธ๋™ ๊ฐ€์น˜์„ค์ด ํ•„์š”ํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์€ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ๊ณ  ์ฃผ์žฅํ•˜๊ณ , ์ž๋ณธ์ฃผ์˜ ์šด๋ช…์— ๊ด€ํ•œ ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค์˜ ์˜ˆ์–ธ์„ ์—ญ์‚ฌ์  ์‚ฌ๋ก€๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ๋ฐ˜๋ฐ•ํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์ด ๋ณด์—ฌ์ฃผ๋Š” ์—ญ์‚ฌ์ฃผ์˜์  ์„ฑ๊ฒฉ์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์ผ๋ฐ˜์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋น„ํŒ์ ์ธ ์ž…์žฅ์„ ์ทจํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์šฐ๋ฆฌ๋Š” ๋…ธ๋™ ๊ฐ€์น˜์„ค์— ๊ด€ํ•œ ํฌํผ์˜ ์ฃผ์žฅ์€ ๊ทธ ์ž์ฒด๋กœ ํ‹€๋ฆฐ ๊ฒƒ์ด๋ฉฐ, ์–ด๋–ค ์ด๋ก ์ด ๊ฒฐ์ •์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ™•์ฆ๋˜๊ธฐ ํž˜๋“  ๊ฒƒ๊ณผ ๋งˆ์ฐฌ๊ฐ€์ง€๋กœ ๋ฐ˜์ฆ ์—ญ์‹œ ๊ฒฐ์ •์ ์œผ๋กœ ์„ฑ๋ฆฝ๋˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ๋Š” ์ž…์žฅ์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ์—ญ์‚ฌ์  ๋ฐ˜๋ก€ ์—ญ์‹œ ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ ์Šค ์ด๋ก  ์•ˆ์—์„œ ์žฌํ•ด์„์ด ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•˜๋‹ค๋Š” ์ ์„ ๋ณด์ธ๋‹ค. ๋งˆ์ง€๋ง‰์œผ๋กœ ์šฐ๋ฆฌ๋Š” ๋งˆ๋ฅดํฌ์Šค ์ด๋ก ์˜ ์—ญ์‚ฌ์ฃผ์˜์  ์„ฑ๊ฒฉ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํ‘œํผ์˜ ๋น„ํŒ ์—ญ์‹œ ์ž์—ฐ๊ณผํ•™๊ณผ๋Š” ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์‚ฌํšŒ๊ณผํ•™์˜ ๋‘ ๊ฐ€์ง€ ํŠน์„ฑ์„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•  ๋•Œ ์žฌ๊ณ ์˜ ์—ฌ์ง€๊ฐ€ ์žˆ์Œ์„ ๋ณด์ธ๋‹ค.In this article, we will review how Marxism was classified as a pseudo-science by Popper, who adopted falsifiability as a demarcation criterion between science and pseudo-science, despite the fact that Marxism was based on classical economics, a paradigm of empirical sciences. This is a very important issue, for it seems contradictory to classify Marxism as a pseudo-science as well as refute it empirically, while Popper himself attempted to rebut Marxism by referring to empirical instances from history, which manifests itself that Marxism is a very falsifiable theory. Accordingly, we first review Poppers theory of falsification in detail and then analyze his evaluations of Marxism. Popper did not approve of the explanatory power of Marxs theory of value and, with historical evidences, tried to rebut the Marxist prophecy of the collapse of capitalism. Also, Popper criticized the historicism of Marxist theory. We, however, hold that Poppers argument against the necessity of theory of value is wrong and his historical counter-examples can be re-interpreted in favor of Marxist theory, by arguing that it is no easier to falsify a theory decisively than to definitely verify it. In addition, the historical necessity of Marxism can be re-analyzed by the two characteristics of social science: recursiveness and complexity, compared to the characteristics for the natural sciences. In this way, it would reveal that Popper acknowledged early Marxism as a scientific theory but criticized it later on as a pseudo-scientific theory by providing a reckless Marxist interpretation, from which we come to understand the seemingly contradictory analysis of Marxism by Popper. For this reason, Popper treated Marxism as apseudo-science different from Freudism or Adlerianism

    Relationship of learning styles and problem-solving ability in baccalaureate nursing students in Korea

    No full text
    ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™๊ณผ/์„์‚ฌ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™์ƒ์˜ ํ•™์Šต์œ ํ˜•๊ณผ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ๊ณผ์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๊ทœ๋ช…ํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ์‹œ๋„๋œ ์„œ์ˆ ์  ์ƒ๊ด€๊ด€๊ณ„ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ด๋‹ค. ์„œ์šธ ์†Œ์žฌ Y ๋Œ€ํ•™์˜ 1ํ•™๋…„๋ถ€ํ„ฐ 4ํ•™๋…„๊นŒ์ง€์˜ ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™์ƒ 264๋ช…์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ž๋ฃŒ์ˆ˜์ง‘์€ ์ž๊ฐ€๋ณด๊ณ ์‹์˜ ๊ตฌ์กฐํ™”๋œ ์„ค๋ฌธ์ง€๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ 2014๋…„ 4์›” 14์ผ๋ถ€ํ„ฐ 5์›” 7์ผ๊นŒ์ง€ ์‹ค์‹œํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋„๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ผ๋ฐ˜์  ํŠน์„ฑ, Kolb์˜ ํ•™์Šต์œ ํ˜•๊ฒ€์‚ฌ(Kolb Learning Styles Inventory 3.1)๋ฅผ ์ž„์„ธ์˜ ๋“ฑ(2012)์ด ํ•œ๊ธ€๋กœ ๋ฒˆ์—ญยท์—ญ ๋ฒˆ์—ญํ•œ ํ•™์Šต์œ ํ˜•๋„๊ตฌ, ์ด์„์žฌ ๋“ฑ(2003)์ด ๊ฐœ๋ฐœํ•œ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ ๋„๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด 245๋ถ€๊ฐ€ ํ†ต๊ณ„๋ถ„์„์— ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ SPSS statistics 20 ํ”„๋กœ๊ทธ๋žจ์„ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ธฐ์ˆ ํ†ต๊ณ„, ๋ถ„์‚ฐ๋ถ„์„, ๋‹จ๊ณ„์  ๋‹ค์ค‘ํšŒ๊ท€๋ถ„์„์„ ์‹œํ–‰ํ•˜์—ฌ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์š”์•ฝํ•˜๋ฉด ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™๋‹ค. 1. ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž๋Š” ์—ฌํ•™์ƒ์ด 91.4%๋กœ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์ด์—ˆ๊ณ , 1ํ•™๋…„ 28.6%, 2ํ•™๋…„ 28.2%, 3ํ•™๋…„ 22.9%, 4ํ•™๋…„ 20.4%๋ฅผ ์ฐจ์ง€ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™ ์ „๊ณต์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ๋งŒ์กฑํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž๊ฐ€ 87.3%๋กœ ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋งŽ์•˜๊ณ , ๊ฐ•์˜์ˆ˜์—…์„ 83.7%๊ฐ€ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ๋‹ค์Œ์ด ํ† ์˜์ˆ˜์—…์„ 52.7%๊ฐ€ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์˜ ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธ์ „๋ฌธ์งํƒœ๋„๋Š” ์ด์  80์  ๋งŒ์ ์— ํ‰๊ท  65.41ยฑ5.94์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋†’๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค.2. ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์˜ ํ•™์Šต์œ ํ˜•์€ ์œตํ•ฉํ˜•์ด 33.9%, ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜•์ด 33.1%, ์ ์‘ํ˜•์ด 21.6%, ์ˆ˜๋ ดํ˜•์ด 11.4%์œผ๋กœ ์œตํ•ฉํ˜•๊ณผ ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜•์ด ๋งŽ์•˜๋‹ค. 1ํ•™๋…„์€ ์œตํ•ฉํ˜•์ด 45.7%๋กœ ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋งŽ์•˜๊ณ , 2ํ•™๋…„์€ ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜• 31.9%, ์œตํ•ฉํ˜• 30.4%, ์ ์‘ํ˜• 29%์œผ๋กœ ๊ณ ๋ฅด๊ฒŒ ๋ถ„ํฌํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, 3ํ•™๋…„์€ ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜• 41.1%, 4ํ•™๋…„์€ ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜• 34.0% ์ด ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋งŽ์•˜๋‹ค. ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜•๊ณผ ์ ์‘ํ˜•์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์˜ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ๋ฐœํ‘œ์ˆ˜์—…์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๋น„์œจ์ด ๋†’์•˜๊ณ (ฯ‡2=12.687, ฯ=.005) ์ˆ˜๋ ดํ˜•์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž๊ฐ€ ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜•์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž๋ณด๋‹ค ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธ์ „๋ฌธ์งํƒœ๋„๊ฐ€ ๋†’์•˜๋‹ค(F=4.178, ฯ=.007). 3. ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์€ ์ด์  225์  ๋งŒ์ ์— ํ‰๊ท  159.21ยฑ14.42์ ์ด์—ˆ๊ณ  ์˜์—ญ๋ณ„๋กœ๋Š” ๋ฌธ์ œ๋ช…๋ฃŒํ™” ์˜์—ญ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์ด ํ‰๊ท  18.98ยฑ2.33์ (ํ‰๊ท ํ‰์  5์  ๋งŒ์ ์— 3.80ยฑ0.46)์œผ๋กœ ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋†’์•˜๊ณ , ๋Œ€์•ˆ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์˜์—ญ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์€ ํ‰๊ท  34.32ยฑ4.50์ (ํ‰๊ท ํ‰์  5์  ๋งŒ์ ์— 3.43ยฑ0.45)์œผ๋กœ ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋‚ฎ์•˜๋‹ค. ํ•™๋…„์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์— ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋Š”๋ฐ(F=3.590, ฯ=.014), 4ํ•™๋…„์ด 3ํ•™๋…„๋ณด๋‹ค ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์ด ๋†’์•˜๋‹ค. ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์˜ ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธ์ „๋ฌธ์งํƒœ๋„๊ฐ€ ๋†’์„์ˆ˜๋ก ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์ด ๋†’๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค(r=.349, ฯ<.001).4. ์ˆ˜๋ ดํ˜•์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์ด ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜•์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž๋ณด๋‹ค ๋†’๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ์˜์—ญ๋ณ„๋กœ๋Š” ๊ณ„ํš๊ณผ ์‹คํ–‰ ์˜์—ญ์—์„œ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์€ ์ˆ˜๋ ดํ˜•์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž๊ฐ€ ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜•์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž๋ณด๋‹ค ๋†’์•˜๋‹ค. 5. ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์— ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์š”์ธ์€ ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธ์ „๋ฌธ์งํƒœ๋„, 4ํ•™๋…„, ํ† ์˜์ˆ˜์—…์„ ํ˜ธ๋„๊ฐ€ 15.8%๋ฅผ ์„ค๋ช…ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ  ์ด์ค‘ ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธ์ „๋ฌธ์งํƒœ๋„์˜ ์„ค๋ช…๋ ฅ์ด 11.9%๋กœ ๊ฐ€์žฅ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์š”์ธ์ด์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๊ฒฐ๋ก ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์ด ์—ฌํ•™์ƒ์ธ ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™์ƒ์˜ ํ•™์Šต์œ ํ˜•์€ ํ™•์‚ฐํ˜•๊ณผ ์œตํ•ฉํ˜•์ด ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋งŽ์•˜์œผ๋ฉฐ ์ˆ˜๋ ดํ˜•์ด ๊ฐ€์žฅ ์ ๊ฒŒ ๋ถ„ํฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™์ƒ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์€ ๋†’์•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ํŠนํžˆ 4ํ•™๋…„์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์ด ๋†’์•˜๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜๋ ดํ˜•์„ ์„ ํ˜ธํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™์ƒ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์ด ๋†’๊ฒŒ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ์œผ๋ฉฐ ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธ์ „๋ฌธ์งํƒœ๋„๊ฐ€ ๋†’์„์ˆ˜๋ก ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์ด ๋†’์•˜๋‹ค. ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™์ƒ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์€ ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธ์ „๋ฌธ์ง์˜ ํƒœ๋„๊ฐ€ ๊ฐ€์žฅ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์š”์ธ์ด๋ฉฐ ๊ทธ ๋‹ค์Œ์ด 4ํ•™๋…„, ํ† ์˜์ˆ˜์—…์„ ํ˜ธ๋„์˜€๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ, ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธํ•™์ƒ์˜ ๋ฌธ์ œํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋Šฅ๋ ฅ์„ ๋†’์ด๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ๋Š” ๊ฐ„ํ˜ธ์ „๋ฌธ์งํƒœ๋„๋ฅผ ๊ธ์ •์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ•จ์–‘์‹œํ‚ฌ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ „๋žต๊ณผ ๊ฐ•์˜ ์ด์™ธ์˜ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ํ•™์Šต์ „๋žต์„ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด ํ•„์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค.restrictio

    ZnO nanorod electronic biosensors

    No full text
    Maste

    ๋ฃจ๋ธŒ๋ฆญ์„ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์œผ๋กœ ํ•œ ์ž๊ธฐํ‰๊ฐ€๊ฐ€ ํ•œ๊ตญ ๊ณ ๋“ฑํ•™๊ต ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์˜ ์˜์–ด ๊ธ€์“ฐ๊ธฐ์— ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ์˜ํ–ฅ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (์„์‚ฌ)-- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์™ธ๊ตญ์–ด๊ต์œก๊ณผ, 2014. 8. ๊ถŒ์˜ค๋Ÿ‰.The present study attempts to provide empirical and qualitative evidence to support the feasibility of rubric-referenced self-assessment, as a means of promoting learning, in a Korean EFL high school context. Nineteen high school students participated in four rubric-referenced self-assessment lessons over two weeks. In each class, with the help of a teachers instruction, students wrote a 1st draft of an essay, and then assessed it using a scoring rubric. Then, based on the self-assessment of the 1st draft, they wrote a 2nd draft, which was also followed by a self-assessment, as well as the writing of a self-assessment diary. Following completion of all four self-assessment lessons, the students were surveyed and interviewed. To obtain quantitative data, the scores of the 1st draft of the 1st class were compared with those of the 2nd draft of the 4th class. Then, for the qualitative data, the survey questionnaires, interviews, self-assessment diaries, and self-assessments of the essays were examined. The findings are summarized in the following paragraphs. First, rubric-referenced self-assessment displayed positive effects on students writing: there was improvement in total essay scores, scores on each criterion, and the total number of words. Second, the students came to perceive the effectiveness of rubric-referenced self-assessment. They believed that their writing quality had improved and thought the teachers instruction and feedback, as well as the self-assessment diary served as beneficial tools for ensuring effective self-assessment. In addition, they felt that rubric-referenced self-assessment had affected writing ability and affective domains such as motivation and self-confidence the most. Third, rubric-referenced self-assessment positively influenced changes in students learning strategies and attitudes toward writing in terms of metacognitive, cognitive, and affective domains. Therefore, the pedagogical implications of this study are that rubric-referenced self-assessment promotes students learning and that students can become self-regulated learners by taking responsibility for their learning.ABSTRACT i TABLE OF CONTENTS iii LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES viii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Statement of the Problem and Purpose of the Study 1 1.2 Research Questions 5 1.3 Organization of the Thesis 5 CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 7 2.1 Rubric-referenced Self-assessment 7 2.1.1 Self-assessment as a Means of Enhancing Language Learning 8 2.1.2 Studies on Self-assessment 12 2.1.3 Rubrics as Self-assessment Tools 13 2.1.4 Studies on the Use of Rubrics 15 2.2 Studies on Effects of Rubric-referenced Self-assessment for Students Writing 17 2.3 Self-assessment and Self-regulated Learning Approach 19 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 24 3.1 Participants 24 3.2 Instruments 25 3.2.1 Rubric for Self-assessment 25 3.2.2 Essays 27 3.2.3 Self-assessment Diary 29 3.2.4 Survey Questionnaire and Interview 31 3.3 Data Collection Procedures 32 3.3.1 Rubric-referenced Self-assessment Lessons 32 3.3.1.1 Writing of 1st Draft 33 3.3.1.2 Instruction and Self-assessment 35 3.3.1.3 Writing of 2nd Draft 35 3.3.1.4 Writing in a Self-assessment Diary 36 3.3.2 Survey and Interview 37 3.3.3 Rating 37 3.4 Data Analysis 38 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 40 4.1 Effects of Rubric-referenced Self-assessment on Students Writing Quality 40 4.1.1 Increase in Total Essay Scores 42 4.1.2 Improvement in Scores on Individual Criteria 49 4.1.3 Rise in the Total Number of Words 53 4.2 Students Perceptions about the Effectiveness of Rubric-referenced Self-assessment 55 4.2.1 Improvement of Writing 55 4.2.2 Benefits of Teachers Instruction and Feedback, and a Self-assessment Diary 61 4.2.3 Most Affected Aspect of Writing 66 4.3 Development of Effective Learning Strategies and Positive Attitudes toward Writing 68 4.3.1 Metacognitive Domain 68 4.3.2 Cognitive Domain 77 4.3.3 Affective Domain 80 CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION 85 5.1 Summary of Major Findings 85 5.2 Pedagogical Implications 87 5.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research 90 REFERENCES 91 APPENDICES 105 ABSTRACT IN KOREAN 129Maste

    A study on wage workers' working/housework/leisure time and their practice of physical activities

    No full text
    ์—ญํ•™๊ฑด๊ฐ•์ฆ์ง„ํ•™๊ณผ ๊ฑด๊ฐ•์ฆ์ง„๊ต์œก์ „๊ณต/์„์‚ฌ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ ๋ฐ ๋ชฉ์  : ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ๊ฑด๊ฐ•์€ ๊ฐœ์ธ์˜ ์‚ถ์˜ ์งˆ ๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ๊ธฐ์—… ์ƒ์‚ฐ์„ฑ์— ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์ณ ๊ตญ๊ฐ€ ๋ฐœ์ „์˜ ์›๋™๋ ฅ์ด ๋˜๋ฉฐ, ์ ์ ˆํ•œ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™์€ ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ๊ฑด๊ฐ•์„ ์œ ์ง€ํ•˜๊ณ  ์ฆ์ง„์‹œ์ผœ ๊ฑด๊ฐ•ํ•œ ์‚ถ์„ ์˜์œ„ํ•˜๋„๋ก ๋•๊ณ  ๋‚˜์•„๊ฐ€์„œ๋Š” ๊ตญ๊ฐ€ ์งˆ๋ณ‘ ๋ถ€๋‹ด์„ ๊ฒฝ๊ฐ์‹œํ‚ค๋Š” ์ค‘์š”ํ•œ ๊ฑด๊ฐ•ํ–‰์œ„์ด๋‹ค. ์šฐ๋ฆฌ๋‚˜๋ผ ์ž„๊ธˆ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์€ ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋ฐฐ๋ถ„์ด ๊ฐ€์žฅ ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค๊ณ  ๋ณด๊ณ ๋˜์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๊ทผ๋กœ์‹œ๊ฐ„, ๊ฐ€์‚ฌ๋…ธ๋™์‹œ๊ฐ„, ์—ฌ๊ฐ€์‹œ๊ฐ„์€ ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋ฐฐ๋ถ„์˜ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์„ ์ฐจ์ง€ํ•˜์—ฌ, ํ•˜๋‚˜๊ฐ€ ์ฆ๊ฐ€ํ•˜๋ฉด ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์ชฝ์ด ๊ฐ์†Œํ•˜๋Š” ์ƒํ˜ธ ๋Œ€์ฒด์žฌ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋กœ ์ž‘์šฉํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋Ÿฌ๋‚˜ ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์„ธ ๊ฐ€์ง€ ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๊ตฌ๋ถ„์„ ๋ชจ๋‘ ํฌํ•จํ•˜์—ฌ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™๊ณผ์˜ ๊ด€๋ จ์„ฑ์„ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•œ ๊ธฐ์กด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ฐพ๊ธฐ ์–ด๋ ค์› ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์ด์— ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๊ทผ๋กœยท๊ฐ€์‚ฌ๋…ธ๋™ยท์—ฌ๊ฐ€์‹œ๊ฐ„๊ณผ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์˜ ๊ด€๋ จ์„ฑ์„ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์—ฌ ์ž„๊ธˆ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์„ ์ฆ์ง„์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ๊ธฐ์ดˆ์ž๋ฃŒ๋กœ ์ œ๊ณตํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋Œ€์ƒ ๋ฐ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ• : ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋Œ€์ƒ์€ 17์ฐจ(2014) ํ•œ๊ตญ ๋…ธ๋™ํŒจ๋„์กฐ์‚ฌ ๋Œ€์ƒ์ž์ธ 15-65์„ธ ์ž„๊ธˆ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž 4,264๋ช… ์ค‘ ๋‚จ์„ฑ 2,500๋ช…, ์—ฌ์„ฑ 1,764๋ช…์ด๋‹ค. ๋…๋ฆฝ๋ณ€์ˆ˜์ธ ๊ทผ๋กœยท๊ฐ€์‚ฌ๋…ธ๋™ยท์—ฌ๊ฐ€์‹œ๊ฐ„์€ ๊ฐ ๋ณ€์ˆ˜์˜ ์ •์˜์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ๊ตฌ๋ถ„ํ•˜์—ฌ ํ‰๊ท ๊ณผ ํ‘œ์ค€ํŽธ์ฐจ๋ฅผ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์ผ๋ฐ˜์  ํŠน์„ฑ์€ ๋นˆ๋„์™€ ๋ฐฑ๋ถ„์œจ, ๋ฒ”์ฃผํ˜• ๋ณ€์ˆ˜๋Š” Chi-square test, ์—ฐ์†ํ˜• ๋ณ€์ˆ˜๋Š” ANOVA๋กœ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋…๋ฆฝ๋ณ€์ˆ˜์™€ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์˜ ์ƒ๊ด€๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ํ”ผ์–ด์Šจ ์ƒ๊ด€๋ถ„์„(Pearson's correlation analysis)์„ ์‹œํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋…๋ฆฝ๋ณ€์ˆ˜์™€ ์ข…์†๋ณ€์ˆ˜์ธ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์˜ ๊ด€๋ จ์„ฑ์€ ๋กœ์ง€์Šคํ‹ฑ ํšŒ๊ท€๋ถ„์„(Logistic regression analysis)์„ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ : ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์€ ๋…๋ฆฝ๋ณ€์ˆ˜์ธ ๊ทผ๋กœ์‹œ๊ฐ„, ๊ฐ€์‚ฌ๋…ธ๋™์‹œ๊ฐ„๊ณผ ๋ถ€์ ์ธ ์ƒ๊ด€๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๋ณด์ด๋ฉฐ, ์—ฌ๊ฐ€์‹œ๊ฐ„๊ณผ๋Š” ์ •์ ์ธ ์ƒ๊ด€๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค. ์ธ๊ตฌ์‚ฌํšŒํ•™์ ํŠน์„ฑ, ๊ฐ€์กฑํŠน์„ฑ, ๋…ธ๋™ํ™˜๊ฒฝํŠน์„ฑ, ๊ฑด๊ฐ•ํ–‰ํƒœ ํŠน์„ฑ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ณด์ •ํ•œ ๋‹ค๋ณ€์ˆ˜ ๋ถ„์„์—์„œ ๊ทผ๋กœ์‹œ๊ฐ„์€, ์ฃผ 41์‹œ๊ฐ„ ์ด์ƒ์ผ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์ด ๋‚จ์„ฑ์€ 0.63๋ฐฐ(OR=0.63, 95%CI 0.51-0.79), ์—ฌ์„ฑ์€ 0.64๋ฐฐ(OR=0.64, 95%CI 0.47-0.88)๋กœ ๋‚ฎ์•˜๊ณ , ์ผ์ผ ๊ฐ€์‚ฌ๋…ธ๋™์‹œ๊ฐ„ ์ค‘ ๊ฐ€์กฑ ๋Œ๋ด„ ์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ํ‰๊ท ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋งŽ์œผ๋ฉด ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์€ ๋‚ฎ์•˜๋‹ค. ์ผ์ผ ์—ฌ๊ฐ€์‹œ๊ฐ„ ์ค‘ ์—ฌ๊ฐ€ํ™œ๋™์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ํ‰๊ท ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋งŽ์œผ๋ฉด ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์ด ๋‚จ์„ฑ์€ 1.36๋ฐฐ(OR=1.36, 95% 1.12-1.65), ์—ฌ์„ฑ์€ 1.31๋ฐฐ(OR=1.31, 95% 1.01-1.71)๋กœ ๋†’์•˜์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๊ต์ œ ๋ฐ ์ข…๊ต ํ™œ๋™์‹œ๊ฐ„์ด ํ‰๊ท ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋งŽ์œผ๋ฉด ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์€ ์—ฌ์„ฑ์ด 1.94๋ฐฐ(OR=1.94, 95%CI 1.06-3.56)๋กœ ๋†’์•˜๋‹ค. ๋‚จยท๋…€ ๋ชจ๋‘ ๊ณตํ†ต์ ์œผ๋กœ ์—ฐ๋ น์ด ๋‚ฎ๊ณ , ๊ต์œก์ˆ˜์ค€๊ณผ ์†Œ๋“์ˆ˜์ค€์ด ๋†’์„์ˆ˜๋ก ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์€ ๋†’์•˜์œผ๋ฉฐ, 5์„ธ ๋ฏธ๋งŒ ์ž๋…€๋Š” ์ž„๊ธˆ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋ฐฐ๋ถ„์— ์žˆ์–ด์„œ ์ค‘์š”๋ณ€์ˆ˜๋กœ์„œ, ๊ทธ ์ˆ˜์™€ ๊ด€๊ณ„์—†์ด 5์„ธ ๋ฏธ๋งŒ ์ž๋…€๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์ด ๋‚จ์„ฑ์€ 0.64๋ฐฐ(OR=0.64, 95%CI 0.47-0.87), ์—ฌ์„ฑ์€ 0.54๋ฐฐ(OR=0.54, 95%CI 0.31-0.96)๋กœ ๋‚ฎ์•˜๋‹ค. ๊ฒฐ๋ก  : ์ž„๊ธˆ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋ฐฐ๋ถ„์€ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ๊ณผ ๊ด€๋ จ๋˜์–ด ์žˆ์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๊ธด ๊ทผ๋กœ์‹œ๊ฐ„๊ณผ ๋ฏธ์ทจํ•™ ์ž๋…€๋Š” ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์„ ๋ฐฉํ•ดํ•˜๋Š” ์š”์ธ์ด์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ๋ณธ ๋‹จ๋ฉด์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ํ† ๋Œ€๋กœ ํ–ฅํ›„ ์ž„๊ธˆ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ์‹ ์ฒดํ™œ๋™ ์‹ค์ฒœ์„ ์ฆ์ง„์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์˜ ๊ทผ๋กœํ™˜๊ฒฝ๊ณผ ์กฐ๊ฑด์„ ๊ฐœ์„ ํ•˜๊ณ  ๋ฏธ์ทจํ•™ ์ž๋…€๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ž„๊ธˆ๊ทผ๋กœ์ž์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์‚ฌ์—…์ฃผ์™€ ๊ตญ๊ฐ€์  ์ฐจ์›์˜ ํ•ด๊ฒฐ๋ฐฉ์•ˆ๋„ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ๋ชจ์ƒ‰ํ•  ํ•„์š”๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค. Background and Purpose of the Study : Workers' health affects not only their individual life quality but also their corporate productivity - both must be the engine power for the national development - and their proper physical activities are the important healthy behavior that help to maintain and improve their health, conducing to their healthy life and further, reducing nation's disease burden. It has been reported that in Korea, wage workers' distribution of time is the most important factor affecting their practice of physical activities. Their working/housework/leisure time accounts for most of their ordinary life; they are in a trade-off relation with each other. Nevertheless, few preceding studies researched into the association between wage-workers' working/housework/leisure time and physical activities. The purpose of this study was to analyze the association between wage-workers' working/housework/leisure time and their practice of physical activities and thereby, provide for some basic data useful to promotion of their practice of physical activities. Subjects and Methods of the Study : This study sampled 4,264 wage-workers (2,500 males and 1,764 females) aged between 15 and 65 who had been surveyed by the 17th Korea Labor & Income Panel Study in 2014. The independent variables or working/housework/leisure time was itemized each to estimate their means and standard deviations, while subjects' demographic variables were analyzed for frequency and percentage, and their categorical variables were analyzed for Chi-square test. Furthermore, their continuous variables were analyzed for ANOVA. In order to analyze the correlations between independent variables and practice of physical activities, Pearson's correlation analysis was conducted, while the association between the independent variables and the dependent one or practice of physical activities was analyzed with the Logistic regression analysis. Results of the Study : Wage-workers' practice of physical activities were negatively correlated with their working and housework time, but positively correlated with their leisure time. As a result of an multi-variable analysis with the effects of demographic/family/working environment/health behavior ones compensated, it was found that if the weekly working time is 41 hours, th...ope

    Histological comparisons of titanium plasma sprayed implant and hydroxyapatite coated implant to bone interface

    No full text
    ์น˜์˜ํ•™๊ณผ/์„์‚ฌ[ํ•œ๊ธ€] ์น˜์•„๋ฐœ๊ฑฐํ›„ ์น˜์กฐ๊ณจ ์†Œ์‹ค์— ๋”ฐ๋ฅธ ๊ตฌ๊ฐ•๋‚ด์˜ ์‹ฌ๋ฏธ์ , ๊ธฐ๋Šฅ์  ๋ฌธ์ œ๋ฅผ ํ•ด์†Œํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ์ž„ํ”„๋ž€ํŠธ๋งค์‹์ˆ ์ด ๋„๋ฆฌ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜๊ธฐ ์‹œ์ž‘ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋•Œ ๊ณจ์œ ์ฐฉ์€ ๋งค์‹์ˆ ์„ฑ๊ณต์˜ ํ•„์ˆ˜์ ์ธ ์กฐ๊ฑด์œผ๋กœ. ์ด๋ฅผ ๋‹ฌ์„ฑํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋งค์‹์žฌ๋ฃŒ, ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•, ๊ณ„๋ฉด์กฐ์ง์— ๊ด€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ์ง„ํ–‰๋˜์–ด ์™”๋‹ค. ํ˜„์žฌ ๋„๋ฆฌ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜๊ณ ์žˆ๋Š” ์žฌ๋ฃŒ๋กœ titanium๊ณผ hydroxyapatite๊ฐ€ ์†Œ๊ฐœ๋˜์–ด ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์น˜์กฐ๊ณจ์ด ์™„์ „ํžˆ ์น˜์œ ๋œ ํ›„์— ๋งค์‹ํ•  ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚˜๋Š” ์น˜์กฐ๊ณจ ํก์ˆ˜๊ธฐ๊ฐ„์„ ์ตœ์†Œํ™”ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ์ฆ‰์‹œ๋งค์‹์ˆ ์ด ์ด์šฉ๋˜๊ธฐ ์‹œ์ž‘ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๋ชฉ์ ์€ ์›์ฃผํ˜•์˜ Hydroxyapatite(HA) ์ž„ํ”„๋ž€ํŠธ์™€ Titanium plasma sprayed(TPS) ์ž„ํ”„๋ž€ํŠธ๋ฅผ ์„ฑ๊ฒฌ ์น˜์ฃผ์งˆํ™˜ ์ดํ™˜๋ฐœ์น˜์™€์— ์ฆ‰์‹œ๋งค์‹ํ•œ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ๋‘ ์žฌ๋ฃŒ๊ฐ„์˜ ๊ณจ ์œ ์ฐฉ์œจ์„ ์กฐ์งํ˜•ํƒœํ•™์  ๋ถ„์„์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ๋น„๊ตํ•ด๋ณด๊ณ ์ž ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ์„ฑ๊ฒฌ์˜ ์ œ 3, 4 ์†Œ๊ตฌ์น˜์— ๊ต์ •์šฉ ํƒ„์„ฑ์‚ฌ๋ฅผ ๊ฒฐ์ฐฐํ•˜์—ฌ ๋งŒ์„ฑ์น˜์ฃผ์—ผ์„ ์œ ๋ฐœํ•˜๊ณ  12์ฃผ๊ฐ„ ๋ฐฉ์น˜ํ•œ ํ›„ ํ•ด๋‹น์น˜์•„๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‹ฌ์Šค๋Ÿฝ๊ฒŒ ๋ฐœ๊ฑฐํ•˜๊ณ  TPS ์ž„ํ”„๋ž€ํŠธ๋ฅผ ์ฆ‰์‹œ๋งค์‹ํ•œ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ๋ฅผ ๋Œ€์กฐ๊ตฐ์œผ๋กœ, HA-coated ์ž„ํ”„๋ž€ํŠธ๋ฅผ ์ฆ‰์‹œ๋งค์‹ํ•œ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ๋ฅผ ์‹คํ—˜๊ตฐ์œผ๋กœ ์„ค์ •ํ•˜์—ฌ ์ˆ  ํ›„ 12์ฃผ์˜ ๊ณจ์œ ์ฐฉ์œจ์„ ์กฐ์งํ•™์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋น„๊ต๊ด€์ฐฐํ•˜๊ณ  ์กฐ์งํ˜•ํƒœํ•™์  ๋ถ„์„์„ ํ•˜์—ฌ ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์–ป์—ˆ๋‹ค. 1. ๋Œ€์กฐ๊ตฐ๊ณผ ์‹คํ—˜๊ตฐ ๋ชจ๋‘ ์—ผ์ฆ์„ธํฌ์˜ ์นจ์œค์—†์ด ์–‘ํ˜ธํ•œ ์น˜์œ ์ƒํƒœ๋ฅผ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค. 2. ์ „์ฒด์ ์ธ ๊ณจ์œ ์ฐฉ์œจ์€ ๋Œ€์กฐ๊ตฐ์—์„œ 48.5%, ์‹คํ—˜๊ตฐ์—์„œ 68.8%๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ์œผ๋‚˜, ๋Œ€์กฐ๊ตฐ๊ณผ ์‹คํ—˜๊ตฐ์‚ฌ์ด์˜ ํ†ต๊ณ„ํ•™์ ์ธ ์œ ์˜ ์ฐจ๋Š” ์กด์žฌํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š์•˜๋‹ค(p<0.05). 3. hole๋ถ€์œ„ ๊ณจ์œ ์ฐฉ์œจ์€ ๋Œ€์กฐ๊ตฐ์—์„œ 40.6%, ์‹คํ—˜๊ตฐ์—์„œ 70.27๋กœ ํ†ต๊ณ„ํ•™์ ์ธ ์œ ์˜ ์ฐจ๋ฅผ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค(P<0.05). 4. ํ•˜๋ถ€ ๊ณจ์œ ์ฐฉ์œจ์€ ๋Œ€์กฐ๊ตฐ์—์„œ 52.1%, ์‹คํ—˜๊ตฐ์—์„œ 73.3%๋กœ ํ†ต๊ณ„ํ•™์ ์ธ ์œ ์˜ ์ฐจ๋ฅผ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค(P<0.05). 5. ์‹คํ—˜๊ตฐ์—์„œ HA์™€ ๊ณจ์กฐ์ง์€ ๊ฒฝ๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๊ตฌ๋ณ„ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์—†๋Š” ์น˜๋ฐ€ํ•œ ๊ฒฐํ•ฉ์–‘์ƒ์„ ๋ณด์˜€๋‹ค. HISTOLOGICAL COMPARISONS OF TITANIUM PLASMA SPRAYED IMPLANT AND HYDROXYAPATITE COATED IMPLANT TO BONE INTERFACE IN PERIODONTALLY INVOLVED EXTRACTION SOCKETS IN DOGS Jin-Sook Kim, D.D.S, Department of Dental Science, Graduate School, Yonsei University (Directed by Prof. Chong Kwan Kim, D.D.S., M.S.D., Ph D.) Dental implants have been widely used in the treatment of esthetic and functional problems of the mouth due to alveolar bone loss, after tooth extraction. The success of implantation strongly depends on osseointegration. For ogseointegration, implant material, methodology, and design have been investigated. For materials, two popular materials at present are titanium and hydroxyapatite. For methods, immediate implantation is being used recently. The purpose of this study is to evaluate osseointegration between the unthreaded cylindrical TPS implant and the HA-coated implant by a histomorphometric analysis. For this analysis, experimental periodontits was induced on the 3, 4 premolars of adult dogs by the ligation of orthodontic threads. Thereafter, each tooth was extracted. TPS. implants and HA-coated implants were immediately inserted in the extraction socket. In control group, TPS implants were immediately inserted, and In experimental group, HA implants were immediately inserted. The dogs were sacrificed after 12 weeks, then the specimens were prepared for LM and histomorphometric analysis. The conclusion of this study is as follows 1. In both control and experimental group, no inflammatory cells were observed. 2. The results of the histomorphometric analysis showed that the total osseointegration was 48.5% in control group, and 68.8% in experimental group. The experimental group was higher than the control group, and the difference was not statistically significant(p<0.05). 3. The results of the histomorphometric analysis skewed that the osseointegrationin the hole was 40.6% in control group, and 70.2% in experimental group. The experimental group was higher than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). 4. The results of the histomorphometric analysis showed that the osseointegration in the lower part was 52.1% in control group, and 73.3% in experimental group. The experimental group was higher than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). 5. In experimental group, the bone to HA interface seemed to be mixed of bone and HA. We could not distinguish HA from the bone. The HA coating was detached from the titanium surface. [์˜๋ฌธ] Dental implants have been widely used in the treatment of esthetic and functional problems of the mouth due to alveolar bone loss, after tooth extraction. The success of implantation strongly depends on osseointegration. For ogseointegration, implant material, methodology, and design have been investigated. For materials, two popular materials at present are titanium and hydroxyapatite. For methods, immediate implantation is being used recently. The purpose of this study is to evaluate osseointegration between the unthreaded cylindrical TPS implant and the HA-coated implant by a histomorphometric analysis. For this analysis, experimental periodontits was induced on the 3, 4 premolars of adult dogs by the ligation of orthodontic threads. Thereafter, each tooth was extracted. TPS. implants and HA-coated implants were immediately inserted in the extraction socket. In control group, TPS implants were immediately inserted, and In experimental group, HA implants were immediately inserted. The dogs were sacrificed after 12 weeks, then the specimens were prepared for LM and histomorphometric analysis. The conclusion of this study is as follows 1. In both control and experimental group, no inflammatory cells were observed. 2. The results of the histomorphometric analysis showed that the total osseointegration was 48.5% in control group, and 68.8% in experimental group. The experimental group was higher than the control group, and the difference was not statistically significant(p<0.05). 3. The results of the histomorphometric analysis skewed that the osseointegrationin the hole was 40.6% in control group, and 70.2% in experimental group. The experimental group was higher than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). 4. The results of the histomorphometric analysis showed that the osseointegration in the lower part was 52.1% in control group, and 73.3% in experimental group. The experimental group was higher than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). 5. In experimental group, the bone to HA interface seemed to be mixed of bone and HA. We could not distinguish HA from the bone. The HA coating was detached from the titanium surface.restrictio
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore