3 research outputs found

    Research on the Exploration of Teachers' risk of attrition: By applying an integrated research method

    No full text
    ν•™μœ„λ…Όλ¬Έ(석사) -- μ„œμšΈλŒ€ν•™κ΅λŒ€ν•™μ› : μ‚¬λ²”λŒ€ν•™ κ΅μœ‘ν•™κ³Ό(κ΅μœ‘ν–‰μ •μ „κ³΅), 2022.2. μ—„λ¬Έμ˜.The purpose of this study is to present policy implications for educational human resource administration by understanding the current status of teachers' risk of attrition and exploring the cause of teachers' risk of attrition. To this end, this study established research questions as follows. First, the current status and characteristics of teachers' risk of attrition were examined. Second, the determinants of teachers' risk of attrition were analyzed. Third, teachers' experience of forming risk of attrition was explored. This study solved the research problem by applying a triangulation design among an integrated research method models to derive an in-depth understanding of teachers' risk of attrition. Specifically, by using TALIS (Teaching and Learning International Survey) 2018 data for elementary school teachers in Korea provided by the OECD, variables affecting teachers' risk of attrition were established, and descriptive statistics were checked to find the status and the characteristics of teachers with the risk of attrition. In addition, by performing logistic regression analysis of TALIS 2018 Korean elementary school data, this research identified variables that significantly affect teachers' risk of attrition by age group (20-50s). And at the same time, two teachers with the risk of attrition by age group (A total of 8 people) were interviewed in depth to explore the reasons and circumstances under which teachers want to leave the teaching profession. The main results of this study by the above research method are as follows. First, the proportion of Korean elementary school teachers' risk of attrition was 13%. This suggests that even if it does not lead to actual attrition, there are many teachers who remain at risk of attrition. Looking at the ratio of teachers' risk of attrition by age group, there were significant differences between age groups, with 6% in their 20s, 2% in their 30s, 3% in their 40s, and 55% in their 50s. In addition, as a result of examining the personal characteristics of teachers according to their risk of attrition by age group, it was found that the average teaching experience of teachers in their 40s and 50s with risk of attrition was longer than that of the group without risk of attrition. For teachers in their 20s and 30s, there was no significant difference in the individual characteristics of teachers according to their risk of attrition. This shows the possibility of attrition of highly experienced teachers, and it means risk of attrition of young teachers may be caused by organizational problems rather than individual characteristics. Second, as a result of logistic regression analysis, it was found that job satisfaction had a significant negative effect on teachers' risk of attrition of all age groups. In addition, job stress had a significant effect on teachers' risk of attrition of teachers in their 20s, and the relationship with fellow teachers had a significant effect on teachers' risk of attrition in their 30s. Social utility motivation and teaching experience had a significant effect on teachers' risk of attrition in their 40s, and the highest level of formal education, teaching experience, and student-teacher ratio had a significant effect on teachers' risk of attrition in their 50s. Third, as a result of the in-depth interview, infringement of teachers’ Right was pointed out as the cause for teachers of all ages to consider their intention to leave the teaching profession. In addition, teachers in their 20s were considering leaving the teaching profession due to irrational compensation, difficulty in self-realization as an expert, difficulty in student guidance, and excessive work. Teachers in their 30s were considering leaving the teaching profession due to irrational compensation, difficulty in self-realization as an expert, relationships with fellow teachers, and excessive work. Teachers in their 40s were thinking of attrition because of conflicts between teachers due to teacher performance bonuses, relationships with managers, and lack of efficacy as experienced teachers. Teachers in their 50s were thinking about leaving the teaching profession due to health problems and decreased physical strength, the timing of receiving honorary retirement allowances and pensions, relationships with managers, avoidance of older teachers, and lack of efficacy as experienced teachers. As a result of in-depth interviews to find out why teachers remain in the teaching profession despite their risk of attrition, it was found that teachers remained in the teaching profession not only because of economic motives, but also because of their affection for the teaching profession. Based on the above research results, this study presented the following policy suggestions and follow-up studies. First, it was suggested that academic and policy attention should be paid to the teachers' risk of attrition considering the negative impact of risk of attrition on students and school organization. Second, it was suggested that policy efforts should be made to create an environment where teachers can focus on education, ensure growth potential and achievement in teaching, and improve a simple remuneration system and a static welfare system so that teacher can work with morale. Finally, this study suggested that research on teachers at other levels and private schools, empirical analysis of the impact on students when teachers with high risk of attrition, and research reflecting changes in the times and society need to be conducted continuously.λ³Έ μ—°κ΅¬λŠ” ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ν˜„ν™©μ„ νŒŒμ•…ν•˜κ³ , ꡐ사듀이 ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό κ°–κ²Œ 된 원인을 νƒμƒ‰ν•˜μ—¬ κ΅μœ‘μΈμ μžμ›ν–‰μ •μ— κ΄€ν•œ 정책적 μ‹œμ‚¬μ μ„ μ œμ‹œν•˜λŠ” 데 λͺ©μ μ΄ μžˆλ‹€. 이λ₯Ό μœ„ν•΄ λ‹€μŒκ³Ό 같이 μ—°κ΅¬λ¬Έμ œλ₯Ό μ„€μ •ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. 첫째, ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ν˜„ν™©κ³Ό νŠΉμ„±μ€ μ–΄λ– ν•œμ§€ μ‚΄νŽ΄λ³΄μ•˜λ‹€. λ‘˜μ§Έ, κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ κ²°μ •μš”μΈμ€ 무엇인지 λΆ„μ„ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. μ…‹μ§Έ, κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λŠ” μ–΄λ–»κ²Œ ν˜•μ„±λ˜λŠ”μ§€ νƒμƒ‰ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. λ³Έ μ—°κ΅¬λŠ” κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„μ— λŒ€ν•œ 깊이 μžˆλŠ” 이해λ₯Ό λ„μΆœν•˜κ³ μž 톡합연ꡬ방법 λͺ¨ν˜• 쀑 삼각화 섀계λ₯Ό μ μš©ν•˜μ—¬ μ—°κ΅¬λ¬Έμ œλ₯Ό ν•΄κ²°ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. ꡬ체적으둜 ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ν˜„ν™©κ³Ό νŠΉμ„±μ„ νŒŒμ•…ν•˜κΈ° μœ„ν•΄ OECDμ—μ„œ μ œκ³΅ν•œ TALIS(Teaching and Learning International Survey) 2018 ν•œκ΅­ μ΄ˆλ“±κ΅μ› 데이터λ₯Ό ν™œμš©ν•΄ 변인을 μ„€μ •ν•˜κ³ , κΈ°μˆ ν†΅κ³„λ₯Ό ν™•μΈν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. λ‹€μŒμœΌλ‘œ κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„μ— μœ μ˜ν•œ 영ν–₯을 μ£ΌλŠ” 변인을 ν™•μΈν•˜κ³ μž κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ μ—°λ ΉλŒ€λ³„(20~50λŒ€)둜 λ‘œμ§€μŠ€ν‹± νšŒκ·€λΆ„μ„μ„ μ‹œν–‰ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. λ™μ‹œμ— ꡐ사듀이 μ–΄λ–€ μ΄μœ μ™€ μƒν™©μ—μ„œ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ„ κ³ λ €ν•˜λŠ”μ§€ ꡬ체적인 λ§₯락을 νƒμƒ‰ν•˜κΈ° μœ„ν•΄ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 μ—°λ ΉλŒ€λ³„ ꡐ사 2인을 μ‹¬μΈ΅λ©΄λ‹΄ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. μ΄μƒμ˜ 연ꡬ방법에 μ˜ν•œ λ³Έ μ—°κ΅¬μ˜ μ£Όμš” κ²°κ³ΌλŠ” λ‹€μŒκ³Ό κ°™λ‹€. 첫째, ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 κ΅­λ‚΄ μ΄ˆλ“±κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ λΉ„μœ¨μ€ 13%μ˜€λ‹€. μ΄λŠ” μ‹€μ œ μ΄νƒˆλ‘œ 이어지지 μ•Šλ”λΌλ„ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆ κ°€λŠ₯성을 κ°–κ³  μž”λ₯˜ν•˜λŠ” ꡐ사가 적지 μ•ŠμŒμ„ μ˜λ―Έν•œλ‹€. κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ λΉ„μœ¨μ„ μ—°λ ΉλŒ€λ³„λ‘œ μ‚΄νŽ΄λ³΄λ©΄, 20λŒ€ 6%, 30λŒ€ 2%, 40λŒ€ 3%, 50λŒ€ 55%둜, μ—°λ ΉλŒ€ κ°„ μƒλ‹Ήν•œ 차이가 μ‘΄μž¬ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. λ˜ν•œ, ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ 여뢀에 λ”°λ₯Έ κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ 개인적 νŠΉμ„±μ„ μ—°λ ΉλŒ€λ³„λ‘œ ν™•μΈν•œ κ²°κ³Ό, 40λŒ€μ™€ 50λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬λŠ” ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„κ°€ μžˆλŠ” μ§‘λ‹¨μ˜ 평균 ꡐ직경λ ₯이 ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„κ°€ μ—†λŠ” 집단보닀 κΈ΄ κ²ƒμœΌλ‘œ λ‚˜νƒ€λ‚¬κ³ , 20λŒ€μ™€ 30λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬λŠ” ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ 여뢀에 λ”°λ₯Έ ꡐ사 집단 κ°„ 개인적 νŠΉμ„±μ— λšœλ ·ν•œ 차이가 λ‚˜νƒ€λ‚˜μ§€ μ•Šμ•˜λ‹€. μ΄λŠ” κ³ κ²½λ ₯ κ΅μ‚¬λ“€μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆ κ°€λŠ₯성을 보여주며, μ Šμ€ κ΅μ‚¬λ“€μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„κ°€ 개인적 νŠΉμ„±μ΄ μ•„λ‹Œ 쑰직적 λ¬Έμ œμ—μ„œ μœ λ°œλ˜μ—ˆμ„ 수 μžˆμŒμ„ μ‹œμ‚¬ν•œλ‹€. λ‘˜μ§Έ, λ‘œμ§€μŠ€ν‹± νšŒκ·€λΆ„μ„ κ²°κ³Ό κ΅μ§λ§Œμ‘±λ„λŠ” λͺ¨λ“  μ—°λ ΉλŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„μ— μœ μ˜ν•œ 뢀적 영ν–₯을 λ―ΈμΉ˜λŠ” κ²ƒμœΌλ‘œ λ‚˜νƒ€λ‚¬λ‹€. κ·Έ 외에 20λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„μ—λŠ” μ§λ¬΄μŠ€νŠΈλ ˆμŠ€κ°€, 30λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„μ—λŠ” λ™λ£Œκ΅μ‚¬μ™€μ˜ 관계가 μœ μ˜ν•œ 영ν–₯을 λ―Έμ³€λ‹€. 40λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„μ—λŠ” μ‚¬νšŒμ μœ μš©μ„±λ™κΈ°, ꡐ직경λ ₯이, 50λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„μ—λŠ” μ΅œμ’…ν•™λ ₯, ꡐ직경λ ₯, 학생-κ΅μ‚¬λΉ„μœ¨μ΄ μœ μ˜ν•œ 영ν–₯을 λ―Έμ³€λ‹€. μ…‹μ§Έ, 심측면담 κ²°κ³Ό κ΅κΆŒμ‹€μΆ”λŠ” λͺ¨λ“  μ—°λ ΉλŒ€μ˜ κ΅μ‚¬λ‘œλΆ€ν„° ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ„ κ³ λ €ν•˜λŠ” μ›μΈμœΌλ‘œ 지λͺ©λ˜μ—ˆλ‹€. κ·Έ 외에 20λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬λŠ” 비합리적 보상, μ „λ¬Έκ°€λ‘œμ„œ μžμ•„μ‹€ν˜„ κ³€λž€, 업무과닀, ν•™μƒμ§€λ„μ˜ μ–΄λ €μ›€μœΌλ‘œ, 30λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬λŠ” 비합리적 보상, μ „λ¬Έκ°€λ‘œμ„œ μžμ•„μ‹€ν˜„ κ³€λž€, λ™λ£Œκ΅μ‚¬μ™€μ˜ 관계, μ—…λ¬΄κ³Όλ‹€λ‘œ 인해 ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ„ κ³ λ €ν•˜κ³  μžˆμ—ˆλ‹€. 40λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬λŠ” κ΅μ›μ„±κ³Όμƒμ—¬κΈˆμ œλ‘œ μΈν•œ ꡐ사 κ°„ κ°ˆλ“±, κ΄€λ¦¬μžμ™€μ˜ 관계, κ³ κ²½λ ₯μžλ‘œμ„œ 효λŠ₯감 λΆ€μž¬λ‘œ, 50λŒ€ κ΅μ‚¬λŠ” κ±΄κ°•λ¬Έμ œμ™€ 체λ ₯μ €ν•˜, λͺ…μ˜ˆν‡΄μ§ μˆ˜λ‹Ήκ³Ό μ—°κΈˆμˆ˜λ Ή μ‹œκΈ°, κ΄€λ¦¬μžμ™€μ˜ 관계, 고령의 ꡐ사 κΈ°ν”Ό, κ³ κ²½λ ₯μžλ‘œμ„œ 효λŠ₯감 λΆ€μž¬λ‘œ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ„ μƒκ°ν•˜κ³  μžˆμ—ˆλ‹€. 심측면담을 톡해 ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„κ°€ μžˆμŒμ—λ„ μž”λ₯˜ν•˜λŠ” 이유λ₯Ό μ•Œμ•„λ³Έ κ²°κ³Ό, ꡐ사듀은 λ‹¨μˆœνžˆ 경제적 λ™κΈ°λ§ŒμœΌλ‘œ ꡐ직에 λ‚¨μ•„μžˆλŠ” 것이 μ•„λ‹ˆλΌ ꡐ사직에 λŒ€ν•œ μ• μ •μœΌλ‘œλ„ ꡐ직에 μž”λ₯˜ν•˜κ³  μžˆμ—ˆλ‹€. μ΄μƒμ˜ 연ꡬ결과λ₯Ό λ°”νƒ•μœΌλ‘œ λ³Έ μ—°κ΅¬λŠ” λ‹€μŒκ³Ό 같은 정책적 μ œμ–Έ 및 후속연ꡬλ₯Ό μ œμ‹œν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. 첫째, ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„κ°€ 학생과 학ꡐ쑰직에 λ―ΈμΉ  뢀정적인 영ν–₯을 κ³ λ €ν–ˆμ„ λ•Œ ꡐ사듀이 λ‚˜νƒ€λ‚΄λŠ” ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆ κ°€λŠ₯성에 ν•™μˆ μ , 정책적 관심을 κ°€μ Έμ•Ό 함을 μ œμ–Έν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. λ‘˜μ§Έ, ꡐ사듀이 ꡐ직에 λ§Œμ‘±ν•˜λ©° 사기λ₯Ό κ°–κ³  근무할 수 μžˆλ„λ‘ κ΅μœ‘μ— 집쀑할 수 μžˆλŠ” ν™˜κ²½μ„ μ‘°μ„±ν•˜κ³ , κ΅μ§μ—μ„œμ˜ μ„±μž₯ κ°€λŠ₯μ„±κ³Ό μ„±μ·¨λ₯Ό 보μž₯ν•˜λ©°, μ™„λ§Œν•œ λ³΄μˆ˜μ²΄κ³„μ™€ μ •νƒœμ μΈ λ³΅μ§€μ œλ„λ₯Ό κ°œμ„ ν•˜λŠ” λ°©ν–₯으둜의 정책적 λ…Έλ ₯이 ν•„μš”ν•¨μ„ μ œμ–Έν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. λ§ˆμ§€λ§‰μœΌλ‘œ λ³Έ μ—°κ΅¬λŠ” ν›„μ†μ—°κ΅¬λ‘œμ„œ 타 학ꡐ급 및 사립학ꡐ ꡐ사λ₯Ό λŒ€μƒμœΌλ‘œ ν•œ 연ꡬ, 높은 ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 ꡐ사가 ꡐ직에 μž”λ₯˜ν•  경우 학생에 λ―ΈμΉ˜λŠ” 영ν–₯을 μ‹€μ¦μ μœΌλ‘œ λΆ„μ„ν•œ 연ꡬ, μ‹œλŒ€μ™€ μ‚¬νšŒμ˜ λ³€ν™”λ₯Ό λ°˜μ˜ν•œ 연ꡬ가 μ§€μ†μ μœΌλ‘œ μˆ˜ν–‰λ  ν•„μš”κ°€ μžˆμŒμ„ μ œμ–Έν•˜μ˜€λ‹€.제 1 μž₯ μ„œλ‘  1 제 1 절 μ—°κ΅¬μ˜ ν•„μš”μ„±κ³Ό λͺ©μ  1 제 2 절 μ—°κ΅¬λ¬Έμ œ 8 제 3 절 μš©μ–΄μ˜ μ •μ˜ 9 제 2 μž₯ 이둠적 λ°°κ²½ 10 제 1 절 이직과 μ΄μ§μ˜λ„ 10 1. 이직 10 2. μ΄μ§μ˜λ„ 14 제 2 절 μ΄μ§μ˜λ„μ™€ κ΄€λ ¨λœ 이둠 18 1. 인적자본이둠 18 2. μ‚¬νšŒκ΅ν™˜μ΄λ‘  20 3. μ§λ¬΄λ°°νƒœμ„± 21 4. μ’…ν•© 22 제 3 절 κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ 24 1. κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ κ°œλ… 24 2. 선행연ꡬ κ²€ν†  25 제 3 μž₯ 연ꡬ방법 34 제 1 절 톡합연ꡬ방법 34 제 2 절 연ꡬ섀계 35 1. μ—°κ΅¬μ˜ 절차 35 2. 양적연ꡬ 38 3. μ§ˆμ μ—°κ΅¬ 46 제 4 μž₯ 연ꡬ결과 54 제 1 절 ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 ꡐ사 ν˜„ν™©κ³Ό νŠΉμ„± 확인 54 1. ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 ꡐ사 ν˜„ν™© 54 2. ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ 여뢀에 λ”°λ₯Έ ꡐ사 νŠΉμ„± 58 제 2 절 κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ κ²°μ •μš”μΈ 뢄석 71 제 3 절 κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ ν˜•μ„± κ²½ν—˜ 이해 74 1. ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„κ°€ ν˜•μ„±λ˜λŠ” 이유 74 2. ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„κ°€ μžˆμŒμ—λ„ μž”λ₯˜ν•˜λŠ” 이유 101 제 4 절 μ’…ν•© 107 제 5 μž₯ λ…Όμ˜ 114 제 1 절 ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„λ₯Ό 가진 ꡐ사 ν˜„ν™©κ³Ό νŠΉμ„± 확인 114 제 2 절 κ΅μ‚¬μ˜ ꡐ직 μ΄νƒˆμ˜λ„ κ²°μ •μš”μΈ 및 ν˜•μ„± κ²½ν—˜ 이해 116 제 6 μž₯ κ²°λ‘  122 제 1 절 μš”μ•½ 123 제 2 절 μ œμ–Έ 126 μ°Έκ³ λ¬Έν—Œ 131 뢀둝 145 Abstract 148석
    corecore