중등교원 자격검정 정책과 사범대의 자율적 책무성에 관한 연구

Purposes of this study are to analyse an actual realities of fallacy and confusion of secondary teacher preparation policy, and to search the way of reforming. Since 2007, Ministry of Education began to disregard the difference of legal status between coe(college of education) and ctp(curriculum for teaching profession), and to control the curriculum of coe related to teacher preparation directly. Coe & Ctp are secondary teacher preparation institutes alike, but their legal status are entirely different. Because that of the former is prescribed by the legislation, meanwhile that of the latter is based on administration regulation or the official authority of Minister of Education. Naturally, the controlling power of administration regulation or the official authority of Minister of Education on the coe should be restrictive. Nevertheless, Ministry of Education began to control the curriculum of coe just as ctp since 2007. As a result, systemicity of the legal system and policy related to secondary teacher preparation were confused, and the autonomy of university protected by the constitution was undermined. Further these fallacy and confusion of secondary teacher preparation policy were deteriorated by evaluation of teacher preparation institutes, which was connected to financial support & administrative measures of the Ministry of Education. Therefore for developing and reforming secondary teacher preparation policy, application of enforcement ordinance related to secondary teacher preparation should be limited to ctp. Basically the autonomy of coe on education matters should be protected. For the sake of that, the curriculum of coe related to teacher preparation should be performed by management of self-controlled accountability.