선진국에 비해 비교적 짧은 기간의 정착기를 거친 한국의 학교상담은 여러 가지 문제점이 있다. 본 연구는 한국상담의 모태인 미국의 학교상담정책을 한국 학교상담정책과 비교하여 학교상담 변천사, 인력양성제도, 학교상담 모델, 학교상담자 업무환경, 관련 법령 및 윤리규정의 다섯 가지 영역에 대한 문제점을 분석하고 발전 방향을 모색하였다. 이에 대한 연구 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 미국의 학교상담은 진로교육의 필요성에 의해 시작되어 예산 확보, 학회와 상담 분과 중심의 학문적 ...
선진국에 비해 비교적 짧은 기간의 정착기를 거친 한국의 학교상담은 여러 가지 문제점이 있다. 본 연구는 한국상담의 모태인 미국의 학교상담정책을 한국 학교상담정책과 비교하여 학교상담 변천사, 인력양성제도, 학교상담 모델, 학교상담자 업무환경, 관련 법령 및 윤리규정의 다섯 가지 영역에 대한 문제점을 분석하고 발전 방향을 모색하였다. 이에 대한 연구 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 미국의 학교상담은 진로교육의 필요성에 의해 시작되어 예산 확보, 학회와 상담 분과 중심의 학문적 인프라 형성을 통한 지원체제를 구축하며 발달하였다. 반면, 한국의 학교상담은 새 나라를 건설하는 ‘새교육’ 운동의 일환으로 시작되어 국가 주도형 정책으로 예산과 관련 법령이 없어 혼란을 거듭하였으나 최근 Wee 클래스 설치 및 전문상담교사 배치로 학교상담의 전문화, 조직화를 추구하고 있다. 둘째, 미국의 상담인력 양성과정은 상담에 대한 기본 교과목 이외에도 철학적, 실천적 학문적 연구과정과 실무경험을 중요시 여기고 5년 단위의 갱신을 필요로 하는 반면 한국의 학교상담 국가인정자격은 상담전문교사 1급과 2급의양성과정의 교과목이 동일하고 한번 취득한 자격은 평생 동안 유지된다. 셋째, 미국의 국가표준 상담모델과 한국의 Wee 프로젝트는 국가표준의 상담규정이나, 미국의 국가표준 상담모델은 학교상담 영역과 학교상담의 서비스 운영 방법을 규정하고 있으며 한국의 Wee 프로젝트는 학교상담 협력 체제, 학교상담 업무 매뉴얼, 행정적 업무, 심리 검사 등이 규정되어 있어 수정·보완이 필요하다. 넷째, 미국의 학교상담자의 업무환경은 ASCA의 표준 규정에 따라 학교상담을 운영하며 상담전문가의 상담을 위한 보조 인력들을 다양하게 활용한다. 그러나 한국의 학교상담자의 업무환경은 학교마다 다르고 학교 관리자의 업무 지침에 따라 상담자의 업무 매뉴얼이 달라지며 전문상담교사의 배치율이 낮아 전문적 상담환경 조성이 어렵다. 다섯째, 미국은 학교상담관련 법령과 학교상담 국가모형이 규정되어 있으며 ASCA 윤리규정과 상담 시 법적 책임을 면할 수 있는 보호조치로 적극적 상담 운영 기반이 조성되어 있다. 이에 비해 한국은 학교상담이 법제화가 되어 있지 않으며 윤리규정도 각 학회별로 규정을 지니고 있으나 법적 구속력이 없다. 따라서 한국의 학교상담은 사회적 요구와 구성원의 의견을 반영한 학교상담정책의 구현과 상담인력 전문성 향상을 위한 교육과정 개발, Wee 프로젝트를 통한 상담모형 개발, 학교상담자의 업무매뉴얼에 대한 국가적 표준 마련, 학교상담 관련 법령의 제정을 통한 인프라 구축과 학교상담자로서의 윤리규정 마련이 필요하다. 본 연구는 한국보다 먼저 시행착오를 거치며 성장한 미국의 학교상담과 한국의 학교상담을 비교함으로써 향후 한국상담의 발전 방향 모색에 많은 시사점을 준다. 본 연구를 통한 한국 학교상담의 정책적 시사점을 기반으로 한국의 학교상담이 학교교육과정의 일환으로 발전하고 보편적·예방적 교육정책으로 발전해 나갈 수 있을 것이다.
선진국에 비해 비교적 짧은 기간의 정착기를 거친 한국의 학교상담은 여러 가지 문제점이 있다. 본 연구는 한국상담의 모태인 미국의 학교상담정책을 한국 학교상담정책과 비교하여 학교상담 변천사, 인력양성제도, 학교상담 모델, 학교상담자 업무환경, 관련 법령 및 윤리규정의 다섯 가지 영역에 대한 문제점을 분석하고 발전 방향을 모색하였다. 이에 대한 연구 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 미국의 학교상담은 진로교육의 필요성에 의해 시작되어 예산 확보, 학회와 상담 분과 중심의 학문적 인프라 형성을 통한 지원체제를 구축하며 발달하였다. 반면, 한국의 학교상담은 새 나라를 건설하는 ‘새교육’ 운동의 일환으로 시작되어 국가 주도형 정책으로 예산과 관련 법령이 없어 혼란을 거듭하였으나 최근 Wee 클래스 설치 및 전문상담교사 배치로 학교상담의 전문화, 조직화를 추구하고 있다. 둘째, 미국의 상담인력 양성과정은 상담에 대한 기본 교과목 이외에도 철학적, 실천적 학문적 연구과정과 실무경험을 중요시 여기고 5년 단위의 갱신을 필요로 하는 반면 한국의 학교상담 국가인정자격은 상담전문교사 1급과 2급의양성과정의 교과목이 동일하고 한번 취득한 자격은 평생 동안 유지된다. 셋째, 미국의 국가표준 상담모델과 한국의 Wee 프로젝트는 국가표준의 상담규정이나, 미국의 국가표준 상담모델은 학교상담 영역과 학교상담의 서비스 운영 방법을 규정하고 있으며 한국의 Wee 프로젝트는 학교상담 협력 체제, 학교상담 업무 매뉴얼, 행정적 업무, 심리 검사 등이 규정되어 있어 수정·보완이 필요하다. 넷째, 미국의 학교상담자의 업무환경은 ASCA의 표준 규정에 따라 학교상담을 운영하며 상담전문가의 상담을 위한 보조 인력들을 다양하게 활용한다. 그러나 한국의 학교상담자의 업무환경은 학교마다 다르고 학교 관리자의 업무 지침에 따라 상담자의 업무 매뉴얼이 달라지며 전문상담교사의 배치율이 낮아 전문적 상담환경 조성이 어렵다. 다섯째, 미국은 학교상담관련 법령과 학교상담 국가모형이 규정되어 있으며 ASCA 윤리규정과 상담 시 법적 책임을 면할 수 있는 보호조치로 적극적 상담 운영 기반이 조성되어 있다. 이에 비해 한국은 학교상담이 법제화가 되어 있지 않으며 윤리규정도 각 학회별로 규정을 지니고 있으나 법적 구속력이 없다. 따라서 한국의 학교상담은 사회적 요구와 구성원의 의견을 반영한 학교상담정책의 구현과 상담인력 전문성 향상을 위한 교육과정 개발, Wee 프로젝트를 통한 상담모형 개발, 학교상담자의 업무매뉴얼에 대한 국가적 표준 마련, 학교상담 관련 법령의 제정을 통한 인프라 구축과 학교상담자로서의 윤리규정 마련이 필요하다. 본 연구는 한국보다 먼저 시행착오를 거치며 성장한 미국의 학교상담과 한국의 학교상담을 비교함으로써 향후 한국상담의 발전 방향 모색에 많은 시사점을 준다. 본 연구를 통한 한국 학교상담의 정책적 시사점을 기반으로 한국의 학교상담이 학교교육과정의 일환으로 발전하고 보편적·예방적 교육정책으로 발전해 나갈 수 있을 것이다.
School counseling in Korea, which has undergone a relatively short settlement period compared to developed countries, has several problems. This study compares the school counseling policy of the United States, the origin of Korean counseling, with the Korean school counseling policy, an...
School counseling in Korea, which has undergone a relatively short settlement period compared to developed countries, has several problems. This study compares the school counseling policy of the United States, the origin of Korean counseling, with the Korean school counseling policy, and addresses the problems in five areas: the history of school counseling, the human resource training system, the school counseling model, the school counselor's work environment, and related laws and ethical regulations. analyzed and the direction of development was sought. The results of this study are as follows. First, school counseling in the United States started with the need for career education and developed by securing a budget and establishing a support system through the formation of academic infrastructure centered on academic societies and counseling divisions. It started as a part of the movement, and as a national-led policy, there was no budget and related laws, so there was confusion. Second, the American counseling manpower training course places importance on philosophical and practical academic research courses and practical experience in addition to the basic courses on counseling and requires renewal every five years, whereas the national qualification for school counseling in Korea is the first-class counseling professional counselor. The subjects of the second and second level training courses are the same, and once acquired, the qualifications are maintained for life. Third, the national standard counseling model of the United States and the Wee project of Korea are the national standard counseling regulations, but the national standard compared to developed countries, has several problems. This study compares the school counseling policy of the United States, the origin of Korean counseling, with the Korean school counseling policy, and addresses the problems in five areas: the history of school counseling, the human resource training system, the school counseling model, the school counselor's work environment, and related laws and ethical regulations. analyzed and the direction of development was sought. The results of this study are as follows. First, school counseling in the United States started with the need for career education and developed by securing a budget and establishing a support system through the formation of academic infrastructure centered on academic societies and counseling divisions. It started as a part of the movement, and as a national-led policy, there was no budget and related laws, so there was confusion. Second, the American counseling manpower training course places importance on philosophical and practical academic research courses and practical experience in addition to the basic courses on counseling and requires renewal every five years, whereas the national qualification for school counseling in Korea is the first-class counseling professional counselor. The subjects of the second and second level training courses are the same, and once acquired, the qualifications are maintained for life. Third, the national standard counseling model of the United States and the Wee project of Korea are the national standard counseling regulations, but the national standard counseling model of the US stipulates the school counseling area and the service operation method of school counseling. Korea's Wee project is a school counseling cooperation system, school counseling work manual, administrative work, psychological examination, etc. are stipulated, so they need to be revised and supplemented. Fourth, school counselors in the United States operate school counseling according to the standard rules of the ASCA and use various assistants for counseling by counselors. However, the work environment of school counselors in Korea differs from school to school, and school administrators' work guidelines The work manual of counselors varies depending on the situation, and the placement rate of professional counselors is low, making it difficult to create a professional counseling environment. Fifth, in the United States, laws related to school counseling and the national model of school counseling are stipulated, and the ASCA Code of Ethics and protective measures to avoid legal responsibility during counseling have laid the foundation for active counseling operation. On the other hand, in Korea, school counseling is not legalized and ethical regulations are also regulated by each academic society, but they are not legally binding. Therefore, school counseling in Korea is a school counseling policy that reflects social needs and opinions of members, develops a curriculum to improve the professionalism of counselors, develops a counseling model through the Wee project, prepares national standards for school counselors' work manual, and It is necessary to establish infrastructure through the enactment of counseling-related laws and to prepare ethical regulations as school counselors. This study provides many implications for seeking the future direction of Korean counseling by comparing school counseling in the US and Korea, which grew up through trial and error before Korea. Based on the policy implications of Korean school counseling through this study, it will be possible to develop Korean school counseling as a part of the school curriculum and develop into a universal and preventive educational policy.
School counseling in Korea, which has undergone a relatively short settlement period compared to developed countries, has several problems. This study compares the school counseling policy of the United States, the origin of Korean counseling, with the Korean school counseling policy, and addresses the problems in five areas: the history of school counseling, the human resource training system, the school counseling model, the school counselor's work environment, and related laws and ethical regulations. analyzed and the direction of development was sought. The results of this study are as follows. First, school counseling in the United States started with the need for career education and developed by securing a budget and establishing a support system through the formation of academic infrastructure centered on academic societies and counseling divisions. It started as a part of the movement, and as a national-led policy, there was no budget and related laws, so there was confusion. Second, the American counseling manpower training course places importance on philosophical and practical academic research courses and practical experience in addition to the basic courses on counseling and requires renewal every five years, whereas the national qualification for school counseling in Korea is the first-class counseling professional counselor. The subjects of the second and second level training courses are the same, and once acquired, the qualifications are maintained for life. Third, the national standard counseling model of the United States and the Wee project of Korea are the national standard counseling regulations, but the national standard compared to developed countries, has several problems. This study compares the school counseling policy of the United States, the origin of Korean counseling, with the Korean school counseling policy, and addresses the problems in five areas: the history of school counseling, the human resource training system, the school counseling model, the school counselor's work environment, and related laws and ethical regulations. analyzed and the direction of development was sought. The results of this study are as follows. First, school counseling in the United States started with the need for career education and developed by securing a budget and establishing a support system through the formation of academic infrastructure centered on academic societies and counseling divisions. It started as a part of the movement, and as a national-led policy, there was no budget and related laws, so there was confusion. Second, the American counseling manpower training course places importance on philosophical and practical academic research courses and practical experience in addition to the basic courses on counseling and requires renewal every five years, whereas the national qualification for school counseling in Korea is the first-class counseling professional counselor. The subjects of the second and second level training courses are the same, and once acquired, the qualifications are maintained for life. Third, the national standard counseling model of the United States and the Wee project of Korea are the national standard counseling regulations, but the national standard counseling model of the US stipulates the school counseling area and the service operation method of school counseling. Korea's Wee project is a school counseling cooperation system, school counseling work manual, administrative work, psychological examination, etc. are stipulated, so they need to be revised and supplemented. Fourth, school counselors in the United States operate school counseling according to the standard rules of the ASCA and use various assistants for counseling by counselors. However, the work environment of school counselors in Korea differs from school to school, and school administrators' work guidelines The work manual of counselors varies depending on the situation, and the placement rate of professional counselors is low, making it difficult to create a professional counseling environment. Fifth, in the United States, laws related to school counseling and the national model of school counseling are stipulated, and the ASCA Code of Ethics and protective measures to avoid legal responsibility during counseling have laid the foundation for active counseling operation. On the other hand, in Korea, school counseling is not legalized and ethical regulations are also regulated by each academic society, but they are not legally binding. Therefore, school counseling in Korea is a school counseling policy that reflects social needs and opinions of members, develops a curriculum to improve the professionalism of counselors, develops a counseling model through the Wee project, prepares national standards for school counselors' work manual, and It is necessary to establish infrastructure through the enactment of counseling-related laws and to prepare ethical regulations as school counselors. This study provides many implications for seeking the future direction of Korean counseling by comparing school counseling in the US and Korea, which grew up through trial and error before Korea. Based on the policy implications of Korean school counseling through this study, it will be possible to develop Korean school counseling as a part of the school curriculum and develop into a universal and preventive educational policy.
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.