교육자치제도의 개선 논쟁점에 관한 연구

서지정보

ㆍ발행기관 : 한국교육학회 ㆍ수록지정보 : 교육학연구 / 32권 / 1호
ㆍ저자명 : 李一鎔

목차

요 약
Ⅰ. 서 론
Ⅱ. 현행 교육자치제도의 구조
Ⅲ. 지방교육자치에 관한 법률 시행후의 문제점
Ⅳ. 지방교육자치에 관한 법률의 개정 논의
Ⅴ. 지방교육자치에 관한 법률 개정안들의 비교
Ⅵ. 지방교육자치에 관한 법률의 개선 방향
Ⅶ. 결 론

Abstract

한국어 초록

본 연구의 목적은 1991년도부터 실시된 교육자치제도의 문제점을 분석하여 그 개선 방향을 제시하는 데 있다. 연구의 대상은 교육자치에 관한 법률과 이와 관련된 법령들이다. 우선 지방교육자치에 관한 법률을 중심으로 교육자치제도의 구조를 살펴보고, 이 법령의 집행에서 현실적으로 나타나는 문제점과 각계의 법률 개정 의견을 중심으로 그들의 타당성을 분석하고 개정안들을 비교하였다. 연구의 결과는 교육자치 실시구역, 교육위원회의 성격, 지방의회의 감사조사권, 교육위원의 선출， 교육감의 선출, 지방교육행정의 조직 및 인사관리, 지방교육재정의 측면에서 제시되었다. 법령의 개정은 합의와 민주적 절차에 따라 이루어지는 정치적 행위이어야 한다.

영어 초록

The purpose of this study was to analyze problems of the Korean Local Educational Governance System and to present future directions. The Korean Local Educational Governance System was reestablished in 1991. Since the Law was revised, many problems have occurred. And various groups insisted to change the new Law. In this study, validities of revision proposals were analyzed.
The new Law on the Korean Local Educational Governance System is needed to change before the next election of board of education members in the following areas: educational autonomy area level, character of board of education, inspection authority, selection of board members, selection of superintendent and deputy superintendent, and local educational finance. Revision proposals of the Ministry of Education, the President's Committee on Education Policies, the Korea Federation of Education Association, the National Board of Education Presidents' Association， and the Democratic Liberal Party were compared.
The results of research are as follows:
(1) In the future educational autonomy should be implemented at the level of counties not at the level of provinces. But in the present province autonomy situation, the delegation of authorities is important.
(2) The present status of boards of education should be maintained. The voting rights of boards of education on regulation enactment, budget, etc. should be acted finally at the boards of education. So the results should be only reported to the board of general administration.
(3) Inspection authorities on regulation enactment, budget, etc. should belong to not the board of general administration but the board of education. But if the board of general administration has supported financially, that case is exceptional.
(4) Board of education members can be selected at the province level. The ratio of persons who have professional experiences should be lowered less than 1/2. Requirements should be lowered. The maximum number of board members should be less than 20.
(5) Superintendents can be selectecd by one of the following methods: present method, registration method, and recommendation method. The registration method is recommended. According to the changes in election laws, however, the direct election by citizens is also possible.
(6) The deputy superintendent should be appointed by the superintendent, not by the President through the prime minister after recommended by the Minister of Education. The number of professional staffs in local governments should be increased. A cooperation council among local governments is needed.
(7) The degree of self-support in finance should be enhanced. The educational finance system should be revised in the aspects of security and distribution. Also education taxes should be collected not by the national government but by the local government.

참고 자료

없음