고교 평준화 제도 정당화의 재조명
Reconsideration of Justification for the Highschool‘Equilibrium' System
1
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
새로운 교육정책이 성공적이기 위해서는 기존의 교육정책 문제점에 대한 정확한 진단과 새로운 교육정책의 시행이 더 바람직하고 효과적인 결과를 가져온다는 확신이 실증적으로 검증되어야 한다. 최근 새로운 교육정책 쟁점으로 지속적으로 부각되고 있는 것이 고교 평준화 제도 폐지 쟁점이다. 본 논문에서는 고교 평준화 제도의 폐지를 주장하는 사람들이 내세우는 논리, 즉 고교 평준화 제도 때문에 학생들의 학력 하향 평준화, 공교육 붕괴, 사교육비와 조기유학의 증가, 학부모와 학생의 학교선택권 침해, 사학의 자율성 침해가 발생하는지를 실증적인 자료를 바탕으로 고찰하고, 그리고 고교 평준화 제도의 폐지에 내재되어 있는 이데올로기를 조명하여, 고교 평준화 제도의 정당성을 재조명한다.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate (through available documents) the community's concerns over the phenomenon of students' decreasing achievement, the apparent collapse of public education, the increase in extra education fees, the propensity for early study abroad, and the lack of right to school choice; to bring to light the growing desire for change among educators and professionals; and to reconsider the justification for the Highschool ‘Equilibrium' System(고교 평준화 제도). This study indicates that the phenomenon of students' decreasing achievement, the apparent collapse of public education, the increase in extra education fees and early study abroad, and the lack of right to choice were not generated by Highschool ‘Equilibrium' System; but, instead, results from several other complex factors. In fact, if Highschool ‘Equilibrium' System is dismantled, in all likelihood, these problems may well worsen. The people who criticize Highschool ‘Equilibrium' System have failed to diagnose the cause correctly. They are identifying too closely with neo-liberalism, and they are not aware of the problems that would arise should Highschool ‘Equilibrium' System be discontinued. We do not need a vast and experimental revolution in education based on unproved reasoning . . . but, instead, small changes which solve school problems step by step. Our educational policies have to move from vast approaches generated from ‘above' with political purpose to more particular approaches based on specific problems and generated by the community. Educators and those who study for ‘money and policy’ have to become persons who study for ‘better education’. And teachers, themselves, should not regard their positions as a vocation but moral guide. We must ask ourselves what is best for education? our children? our nation?