试论高校通识教育的重新定位

Gi-Bong Kim, J. Nam, H. Kim, Byong Chul Park
{"title":"试论高校通识教育的重新定位","authors":"Gi-Bong Kim, J. Nam, H. Kim, Byong Chul Park","doi":"10.46392/kjge.2023.17.1.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, general education has grown more sharply than ever in the number of dedicated organizations and professors in universities. The “Korea Association of General Education” has grown rapidly into an organization with more than 2,000 members, and its academic achievement has grown so rapidly that the IF (Impact Factor) of the <i>Korean Journal of General Education</i> ranked 1st in the major category of ‘Complex Studies’ and ranked 7<sup>th</sup> among all academic journals.The National Research Foundation of Korea's <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> is used as a coordinate for establishing academic status in Korea and as a criterion for distributing shares of the national R&D budget for research support projects. The organizational size of the Korea Association of General Education and the academic level of its journal definitely deserves a higher ranking than the ‘Medium Classification’ in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields>, which is hierarchically divided into “Large Classification, Medium Classification, Small Classification and Detail Classification.” However, in reality, it is located in ‘Detail Classification’, which is the lowest rank under the name of ‘Basic and General Education’. This classification system does not sufficiently reflect the academic characteristics of general education. As a result, it is difficult to receive an appropriate evaluation in terms of academic research activities and research support. Over the past decade, the Korean Association for General Education, the National Council for General Education, and the Korea National Institute for General Education have continuously made many attempts to correct such contradictions.This study summarized the past efforts into a history of Korean general education and sought where and how we should relocate general education in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> in order to live up to the spirit of the era of the 4<sup>th</sup> Industrial Revolution. In the era of the 4<sup>th</sup> Industrial Revolution, which calls for fostering convergence talents, a renaissance of general education designed for a fusion of the academic fields, is expected, instead of one that promotes specialization. If the placement of general education in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> is a matter falls under the knowledge category, the subsequent classification method is determined by how, in our times, we can conceptualize general education. In order to study the category and concept of general education, it is necessary to establish a new academic field called ‘General Studies’.This study proposes to set the academic status of ‘General Studies’ in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> in the following three ways. The first option is to take the spirit of the 4<sup>th</sup> Industrial Revolution and upgrade it to the ‘Large Classification’. The second option is to position it as a division of various basic studies in humanities and sciences, because ‘General Studies’ encompasses “almost all knowledge that humans need to know.” The third option is to adjust it to the middle classification under the Large Classification of ‘Complex Studies’. Ultimately, the resetting of the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> is to secure the identity and independence of general education. This study is meaningful in that it specifically presented three options for the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> and that it is a preemptive preparation for future institutional discussions on the classification of academic research fields.","PeriodicalId":267224,"journal":{"name":"The Korean Association of General Education","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Study on Re-positioning General Education in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields>\",\"authors\":\"Gi-Bong Kim, J. Nam, H. Kim, Byong Chul Park\",\"doi\":\"10.46392/kjge.2023.17.1.11\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In recent years, general education has grown more sharply than ever in the number of dedicated organizations and professors in universities. The “Korea Association of General Education” has grown rapidly into an organization with more than 2,000 members, and its academic achievement has grown so rapidly that the IF (Impact Factor) of the <i>Korean Journal of General Education</i> ranked 1st in the major category of ‘Complex Studies’ and ranked 7<sup>th</sup> among all academic journals.The National Research Foundation of Korea's <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> is used as a coordinate for establishing academic status in Korea and as a criterion for distributing shares of the national R&D budget for research support projects. The organizational size of the Korea Association of General Education and the academic level of its journal definitely deserves a higher ranking than the ‘Medium Classification’ in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields>, which is hierarchically divided into “Large Classification, Medium Classification, Small Classification and Detail Classification.” However, in reality, it is located in ‘Detail Classification’, which is the lowest rank under the name of ‘Basic and General Education’. This classification system does not sufficiently reflect the academic characteristics of general education. As a result, it is difficult to receive an appropriate evaluation in terms of academic research activities and research support. Over the past decade, the Korean Association for General Education, the National Council for General Education, and the Korea National Institute for General Education have continuously made many attempts to correct such contradictions.This study summarized the past efforts into a history of Korean general education and sought where and how we should relocate general education in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> in order to live up to the spirit of the era of the 4<sup>th</sup> Industrial Revolution. In the era of the 4<sup>th</sup> Industrial Revolution, which calls for fostering convergence talents, a renaissance of general education designed for a fusion of the academic fields, is expected, instead of one that promotes specialization. If the placement of general education in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> is a matter falls under the knowledge category, the subsequent classification method is determined by how, in our times, we can conceptualize general education. In order to study the category and concept of general education, it is necessary to establish a new academic field called ‘General Studies’.This study proposes to set the academic status of ‘General Studies’ in the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> in the following three ways. The first option is to take the spirit of the 4<sup>th</sup> Industrial Revolution and upgrade it to the ‘Large Classification’. The second option is to position it as a division of various basic studies in humanities and sciences, because ‘General Studies’ encompasses “almost all knowledge that humans need to know.” The third option is to adjust it to the middle classification under the Large Classification of ‘Complex Studies’. Ultimately, the resetting of the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> is to secure the identity and independence of general education. This study is meaningful in that it specifically presented three options for the <Classification Table of Academic Research Fields> and that it is a preemptive preparation for future institutional discussions on the classification of academic research fields.\",\"PeriodicalId\":267224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Korean Association of General Education\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-28\",\"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.2023.17.1.11\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Korean Association of General Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46392/kjge.2023.17.1.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,通识教育在专门组织和大学教授的数量上比以往任何时候都增长得更快。“韩国通识教育协会”迅速成长为拥有2000多名会员的团体,其学术成就也迅速增长,《韩国通识教育杂志》的IF(影响因子)在“复杂研究”主要类别中排名第1,在所有学术期刊中排名第7。国立研究振兴财团是在韩国确立学术地位的坐标,也是分配研究支援事业国家R&D预算的标准。韩国通识教育学会的组织规模和期刊的学术水平,绝对应该比按等级划分为“大、中、小、细”的“中等”高。然而,实际上,它位于“细节分类”中,这是“基础和普通教育”名称下的最低级别。这种分类体系不能充分反映通识教育的学术特点。因此,在学术研究活动和研究支持方面,很难得到适当的评价。在过去的10年里,韩国通识教育协会、全国通识教育协议会、国立通识教育研究院不断尝试纠正这种矛盾。该研究将过去的努力总结为韩国通识教育的历史,并探讨了为了符合第四次产业革命时代的精神,我们应该在哪里以及如何重新定位通识教育。在要求培养融合型人才的第四次产业革命时代,人们期待着以学科融合为目的的通识教育的复兴,而不是以专业化为目的的教育。如果通识教育在事物中的位置属于知识范畴,那么接下来的分类方法就取决于我们如何在我们这个时代对通识教育进行概念化。为了研究通识教育的范畴和概念,有必要建立一个新的学术领域——“通识研究”。本研究建议以以下三种方式设定“通识研究”的学术地位。第一种选择是吸取第四次工业革命的精神,将其升级为“大分类”。第二种选择是将其定位为人文科学的各种基础研究的一个分支,因为“通识研究”涵盖了“人类需要知道的几乎所有知识”。第三种选择是将其调整为“复杂研究”大分类下的中间分类。最终,通识教育的重新定位是为了确保通识教育的同一性和独立性。本研究的意义在于,它具体提出了学术研究领域分类的三种选择,为今后关于学术研究领域分类的制度讨论做了先发制人的准备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Study on Re-positioning General Education in the
In recent years, general education has grown more sharply than ever in the number of dedicated organizations and professors in universities. The “Korea Association of General Education” has grown rapidly into an organization with more than 2,000 members, and its academic achievement has grown so rapidly that the IF (Impact Factor) of the Korean Journal of General Education ranked 1st in the major category of ‘Complex Studies’ and ranked 7th among all academic journals.The National Research Foundation of Korea's is used as a coordinate for establishing academic status in Korea and as a criterion for distributing shares of the national R&D budget for research support projects. The organizational size of the Korea Association of General Education and the academic level of its journal definitely deserves a higher ranking than the ‘Medium Classification’ in the , which is hierarchically divided into “Large Classification, Medium Classification, Small Classification and Detail Classification.” However, in reality, it is located in ‘Detail Classification’, which is the lowest rank under the name of ‘Basic and General Education’. This classification system does not sufficiently reflect the academic characteristics of general education. As a result, it is difficult to receive an appropriate evaluation in terms of academic research activities and research support. Over the past decade, the Korean Association for General Education, the National Council for General Education, and the Korea National Institute for General Education have continuously made many attempts to correct such contradictions.This study summarized the past efforts into a history of Korean general education and sought where and how we should relocate general education in the in order to live up to the spirit of the era of the 4th Industrial Revolution. In the era of the 4th Industrial Revolution, which calls for fostering convergence talents, a renaissance of general education designed for a fusion of the academic fields, is expected, instead of one that promotes specialization. If the placement of general education in the is a matter falls under the knowledge category, the subsequent classification method is determined by how, in our times, we can conceptualize general education. In order to study the category and concept of general education, it is necessary to establish a new academic field called ‘General Studies’.This study proposes to set the academic status of ‘General Studies’ in the in the following three ways. The first option is to take the spirit of the 4th Industrial Revolution and upgrade it to the ‘Large Classification’. The second option is to position it as a division of various basic studies in humanities and sciences, because ‘General Studies’ encompasses “almost all knowledge that humans need to know.” The third option is to adjust it to the middle classification under the Large Classification of ‘Complex Studies’. Ultimately, the resetting of the is to secure the identity and independence of general education. This study is meaningful in that it specifically presented three options for the and that it is a preemptive preparation for future institutional discussions on the classification of academic research fields.
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
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信