中韩教师减负政策比较分析——以首尔和北京为例

Ee-gyeong Kim, Ha-kyoung Sung, youngmee Hur, Hanyu Li
{"title":"中韩教师减负政策比较分析——以首尔和北京为例","authors":"Ee-gyeong Kim, Ha-kyoung Sung, youngmee Hur, Hanyu Li","doi":"10.20306/kces.2023.6.30.135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"[Purpose] The purpose of this study is to analyze the teacher workload reduction policies in Seoul and Beijing, the capital cities of Korea and China, respectively, from a comparative perspective. \n[Method] The analysis criteria for this study are the purpose of the teacher workload reduction policy and the three main measures (reduction of official documents, school human resource management, and work restructuring). A comparative methodology was used to identify the similarities and differences between the policies of the two cities by collecting and analyzing data such as policy documents, newspaper articles, and cases in addition to references such as articles and books. \n[Results] Although there are some differences in the contents and aspects of the policies in Seoul and Beijing, due to their different resources and policy priorities, they share a common goal of reducing the administrative workload of teachers in order to make their work easier. Regulations to reduce official documents, reallocation of human resources, and designation of dedicated administrative departments were attempted as a means of reducing teacher workload. However, it was found that both cities were unable to overcome practices of administrative dominance that are deeply rooted in bureaucratic traditions. \n[Conclusion] It was found that both cities are promoting administrative work reduction policies to create an environment where teachers can focus on teaching, although the specific measures are different. Nevertheless, teachers in both cities do not feel that their workloads have been reduced, and policy implications for improvement have been drawn and presented.","PeriodicalId":135100,"journal":{"name":"Korean Comparative Education Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Analysis of Teachers Workload Reduction Policy in South Korea and China -Focusing on Seoul and Beijing\",\"authors\":\"Ee-gyeong Kim, Ha-kyoung Sung, youngmee Hur, Hanyu Li\",\"doi\":\"10.20306/kces.2023.6.30.135\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"[Purpose] The purpose of this study is to analyze the teacher workload reduction policies in Seoul and Beijing, the capital cities of Korea and China, respectively, from a comparative perspective. \\n[Method] The analysis criteria for this study are the purpose of the teacher workload reduction policy and the three main measures (reduction of official documents, school human resource management, and work restructuring). A comparative methodology was used to identify the similarities and differences between the policies of the two cities by collecting and analyzing data such as policy documents, newspaper articles, and cases in addition to references such as articles and books. \\n[Results] Although there are some differences in the contents and aspects of the policies in Seoul and Beijing, due to their different resources and policy priorities, they share a common goal of reducing the administrative workload of teachers in order to make their work easier. Regulations to reduce official documents, reallocation of human resources, and designation of dedicated administrative departments were attempted as a means of reducing teacher workload. However, it was found that both cities were unable to overcome practices of administrative dominance that are deeply rooted in bureaucratic traditions. \\n[Conclusion] It was found that both cities are promoting administrative work reduction policies to create an environment where teachers can focus on teaching, although the specific measures are different. Nevertheless, teachers in both cities do not feel that their workloads have been reduced, and policy implications for improvement have been drawn and presented.\",\"PeriodicalId\":135100,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Comparative Education Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Comparative Education Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20306/kces.2023.6.30.135\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Comparative Education Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20306/kces.2023.6.30.135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

【目的】本研究的目的是从比较的角度分析韩国和中国的首都首尔和首都北京的教师减负政策。【方法】本研究的分析标准是教师减量政策的目的和三个主要措施(减少公文、学校人力资源管理、工作结构调整)。通过收集和分析政策文件、报纸文章和案例等数据,以及文章和书籍等参考资料,采用比较方法确定两个城市政策的异同。【结果】虽然首尔和北京由于资源和政策重点的不同,在政策内容和方面存在一些差异,但他们有一个共同的目标,即减少教师的行政工作量,使他们的工作更容易。减少官方文件、重新分配人力资源和指定专门的行政部门的规定被尝试作为减少教师工作量的手段。然而,调查发现,这两个城市都无法克服深深植根于官僚传统的行政主导做法。【结论】研究发现,两个城市都在推行减少行政工作的政策,为教师创造一个可以专注于教学的环境,但具体措施不同。然而,这两个城市的教师并不觉得他们的工作量减少了,而且已经提出并提出了改进的政策含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A Comparative Analysis of Teachers Workload Reduction Policy in South Korea and China -Focusing on Seoul and Beijing
[Purpose] The purpose of this study is to analyze the teacher workload reduction policies in Seoul and Beijing, the capital cities of Korea and China, respectively, from a comparative perspective. [Method] The analysis criteria for this study are the purpose of the teacher workload reduction policy and the three main measures (reduction of official documents, school human resource management, and work restructuring). A comparative methodology was used to identify the similarities and differences between the policies of the two cities by collecting and analyzing data such as policy documents, newspaper articles, and cases in addition to references such as articles and books. [Results] Although there are some differences in the contents and aspects of the policies in Seoul and Beijing, due to their different resources and policy priorities, they share a common goal of reducing the administrative workload of teachers in order to make their work easier. Regulations to reduce official documents, reallocation of human resources, and designation of dedicated administrative departments were attempted as a means of reducing teacher workload. However, it was found that both cities were unable to overcome practices of administrative dominance that are deeply rooted in bureaucratic traditions. [Conclusion] It was found that both cities are promoting administrative work reduction policies to create an environment where teachers can focus on teaching, although the specific measures are different. Nevertheless, teachers in both cities do not feel that their workloads have been reduced, and policy implications for improvement have been drawn and presented.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Effects of Title I Programs on Students Proficiency in the U.S. and Implications for Korea Comparative Analysis of Primary School Teacher Training Systems in Cambodia and Korea: Insights for Reforms in Cambodia The Impact of Family Background, School Experience, and Academic Efficacy on Academic Achievement of College Students in Vietnam A Qualitative Comparative Study on How Multiculturalism Is Embraced in Primary School Settings in New Zealand and Korea through Teachers’ Experiences A Comparative Analysis of the Student Loan Systems in China with the United States Federal Student Loan Programs in the Context of Higher Education Universalisation
×
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