Diagnosis and Suggestion for General Education Evaluation Indicators of Basic Competency Assessment for Universities

H. Kim, Inwok Kim, Hyun Bae Ji, K. Jun
{"title":"Diagnosis and Suggestion for General Education Evaluation Indicators of Basic Competency Assessment for Universities","authors":"H. Kim, Inwok Kim, Hyun Bae Ji, K. Jun","doi":"10.46392/kjge.2022.16.6.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evaluation indicators of general education represent the value and identity of general education. University members can clearly understand general education through evaluation indicators. Evaluation indicators serve as standards for establishing and implementing educational policies. Universities support general education according to the evaluation indicators. From this point of view, this study conducted a questionnaire survey to diagnose problems with the general education evaluation indicators of the Basic Competency Assessment for Universities. A survey was conducted targeting 127 universities that joined the Korean Council for University General Education. The total number of respondents was 51. The summary of the survey results is as follows.First, 70% of respondents said that it was reasonable to evaluate general education as ‘operation and improvement of curriculum’. But about 50% of the respondents were negative about evaluating the general curriculum as ‘core competency’ as a diagnostic factor. Second, more than 70% of respondents said that the standard of the general education standard model of the Korea National Institute for General Education, which was established theoretically and academically, was not applied to the current evaluation indicators. So it is necessary to improve the inclusiveness of general education evaluation indicators. Third, about 50% of the respondents were negative about the relevance of the evaluation indicators as a driving force for improving the quality of general education. Fourth, 70% of the respondents thought that the basis for applying core competencies as evaluation indicators for general education was not sufficient. Therefore, they think that evaluation criteria should be designed according to the essential characteristics of general education. Finally, many respondents said that the essential components of the evaluation indicators should include the organization and operation of the general education curriculum, the operating system for improving general education, and the organization and manpower necessary for supporting general education.This study examined the validity of competency-based general education, focusing on general education experts. As a result, it provided clear evidence for developing and designing evaluation indicators for the development and improvement of practical general education in universities. In particular, the Ministry of Education should go through a public deliberation process to improve the acceptance of evaluation results. Therefore, we proposed that the concept of competency should be established first and then the validity of competency-based general education should be reviewed.","PeriodicalId":267224,"journal":{"name":"The Korean Association of General Education","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Korean Association of General Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46392/kjge.2022.16.6.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evaluation indicators of general education represent the value and identity of general education. University members can clearly understand general education through evaluation indicators. Evaluation indicators serve as standards for establishing and implementing educational policies. Universities support general education according to the evaluation indicators. From this point of view, this study conducted a questionnaire survey to diagnose problems with the general education evaluation indicators of the Basic Competency Assessment for Universities. A survey was conducted targeting 127 universities that joined the Korean Council for University General Education. The total number of respondents was 51. The summary of the survey results is as follows.First, 70% of respondents said that it was reasonable to evaluate general education as ‘operation and improvement of curriculum’. But about 50% of the respondents were negative about evaluating the general curriculum as ‘core competency’ as a diagnostic factor. Second, more than 70% of respondents said that the standard of the general education standard model of the Korea National Institute for General Education, which was established theoretically and academically, was not applied to the current evaluation indicators. So it is necessary to improve the inclusiveness of general education evaluation indicators. Third, about 50% of the respondents were negative about the relevance of the evaluation indicators as a driving force for improving the quality of general education. Fourth, 70% of the respondents thought that the basis for applying core competencies as evaluation indicators for general education was not sufficient. Therefore, they think that evaluation criteria should be designed according to the essential characteristics of general education. Finally, many respondents said that the essential components of the evaluation indicators should include the organization and operation of the general education curriculum, the operating system for improving general education, and the organization and manpower necessary for supporting general education.This study examined the validity of competency-based general education, focusing on general education experts. As a result, it provided clear evidence for developing and designing evaluation indicators for the development and improvement of practical general education in universities. In particular, the Ministry of Education should go through a public deliberation process to improve the acceptance of evaluation results. Therefore, we proposed that the concept of competency should be established first and then the validity of competency-based general education should be reviewed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高校通识教育基本能力评价指标的诊断与建议
通识教育评价指标代表了通识教育的价值和身份。大学成员可以通过评价指标清楚地了解通识教育。评价指标是制定和实施教育政策的标准。高校根据评价指标支持通识教育。基于此,本研究通过问卷调查,对《大学基本能力评估》通识教育评价指标进行问题诊断。以加入韩国大学通识教育协议会的127所大学为对象进行了调查。受访者总数为51人。调查结果总结如下。首先,70%的受访者认为将通识教育评价为“课程的运作和改进”是合理的。但约50%的受访者对将普通课程作为“核心能力”作为诊断因素持否定态度。第二,超过70%的回答者认为,在理论和学术上建立的韩国国立通识教育研究院通识教育标准模型的标准没有适用于目前的评价指标。因此,有必要提高通识教育评价指标的包容性。第三,约50%的受访者对评估指标作为提高通识教育质量的推动力的相关性持否定态度。四是70%的受访者认为将核心能力作为通识教育评价指标的依据不充分。因此,他们认为应根据通识教育的本质特征来设计评价标准。最后,许多受访者表示,评估指标的基本组成部分应包括通识教育课程的组织和运作,改善通识教育的运作体系,以及支持通识教育所需的组织和人力。本研究以通识教育专家为研究对象,检视通识教育的效度。为高校实践性通识教育的发展和完善提供了评价指标的制定和设计依据。特别是,为提高评价结果的认可度,教育部应通过公开审议程序。因此,我们建议首先确立胜任力的概念,然后检讨胜任力通识教育的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Study on Reading Programs in the Convergence Era : Focusing on Book-trailer Activities Liberal Arts Education in the Anthropocene and the PBL Living Lab : Focusing on Korea University's Core Liberal Arts Course LIBERTY JUSTICE TRUTH Ⅱ Posthumanitas : Civilization's Transition and a New Understanding of Humanity Exploring Topics in Domestic Research on Machine Translation through Text Mining A Study on the Competence-based General Education and the Development of Convergent Thinking : Focusing on the Analysis of the Learner Centered Teaching-learning Practices Using Poster Presentations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1