특성화고(전 전문계고)와 대학교들이 학교에 대한 종합 평가를 외부 기관에 맡기곤 한단다.
이는 교육부 평가에서 학교가 낮은 점수를 받거나 지적사항이 있을 때 대개 이루어지는데 교육부의 평가가 친절하게 자세하게 이루어지지 않기 때문에 별도로 거액을 들여서 교수들을 모셔서 학교를 이모저모로 봐달라고부탁하는 것이다.
사실 학생수가 계속 줄어들고 있고, 대학도 학교 내나 학교간 통폐합이 추진되는 시점에서
교육시장에서 살아남기 위해 시급해진 것 같다.
그러나 그에 대한 만족도나 성과는 미미하다고 한다.
내가 약 5년 전에 생각한 일이 이것 비슷했다.
학교도 경쟁시대. 잘 하려면 관의 지시대로만 할 것이 아니라 전문가들에게 여러 모로 평가를 받아보고. 그걸 기초로 학교 혁신을 해야하지 않겠나 하는 생각이었다. 그런 시대가 오겠다. 적어도 의무교육 이후인 고등학교 이상에서는. 그래야 고객(학생)을 끌지.
그리고 나는 학생복지를 포함한 학교 전체의 인권적인 분위기 등을 평가하고 컨설팅해주면 좋겠다고 생각했다.
그런데 벌써 시작되었네!
자세히 기사를 보니 평가와 자문과정이 부실해보인다.
내가 교육복지사업학교 자문이나 평가를 해보면서 책으로만 배운 평가와 자문이 빠뜨린 많은 것을 깨닳았다.
몇 시간, 몇 일의 자료조사와 질문으로는 알 수 없다. 더구나 서류만으로는 절대 안 된다.
그런데 방문이나 면접없이 서류평가를 해야할 때도 있다. 그럴 땐 참 난감하다
제대로 하려면 지역에 대해서도 잘 알아야 하고 학교에도 며칠간 머물며 학교 내 의사소통구조와 분위기도 관찰해야 한다.
궁극적으로 평가나 자문은 내 지식이나 기술, 경험을 자랑하듯 건네주는 게 아니라
그들 자신이 깨닫고 자신감을 갖고 나 없이도 계속 공부하고 노력하며 서로 협력하여 발전해나갈 수 있는 동력을 심어주는 것이어야 한다.
그래서 때론 내가 아는 것, 생각하는 것의 10%만 말하면서 천천히 맞춰나가야 할 때도 있고
때론 내가 여기저기서 읽고 공부하고 보고 들은 것을 알려주면 금세 받아들여서 흡수하고 더 나아가는 걸 보기도 한다.
평가도 교육이나 마찬가지다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Schools wary of a bad label look to hire consultants
‘Compared to the potential loss [if labeled inadequate], 100 million won was nothing.’
Mar 11,2014
Kim Sang-tae, who teaches hotel cooking at Daekyeung University in Gyeongsan, North Gyeongsang, gives a lecture. The school was designated as an employment-specialized education institution. Provided by Daekyeung University
Last August, Mr. Lee, a 54-year-old professor at a local private university, received a call from the school’s president directly after it was labeled by the Ministry of Education as one of 35 higher education institutions that are “poorly managed.”
Lee, who is also a strategy policy team director, was ordered by the president to seek help from an education consulting group.
So he found a private firm and paid 100 million won ($93,700) of the school’s funds for a six-month consultation on how to improve academic quality in the hopes that the institution would be knocked off the government’s list in the next evaluation.
“A couple of billions of won would be lost if word spread that the school was an underperforming school, which would certainly cause a drop in freshman enrollment,” said Lee, who requested that only his surnamed be identified. “Compared to the potential loss, 10 million won was nothing.”
The series of government reforms to rein in the nation’s expansive higher education network has been a boon lately for private education consulting firms; and those in the education sector acknowledge that the more outdated and low quality a school is, the more likely it is to rely on those kinds of services to avoid being labeled as inadequate.
It became especially lucrative for education consulting groups after the government pushed poorly managed schools to come up with self-reform plans.
Once hired, a consulting firm examines the institution’s human resources system, its academic management and its education curriculum.
“We started out as a business consulting firm,” said the director of a private consulting group surnamed Song. “But now, we focus on education consulting services. Depending on the size of the project, we receive at least 10 million won and up to 500 million won per case.”
Education observers say these firms claim to provide specific blueprints for improving a school’s academic quality and reputation so it won’t be singled out in the government’s assessment.
The fact that the Education Ministry does not divulge point-by-point explanations as to why the schools are placed on the list only adds to the anxiety felt by school board officials who often resort to seeking those services anyway.
But despite rising demand, some question whether such services are worth the cost, which largely comes out of students’ tuition.
“We paid 300 million won last year [to a consulting firm] because we didn’t know what to improve or fix,” said Lee Pil-hwan, deputy director of academic affairs at Keimyung University in Daegu.
“But assessments given by the firm were arbitrary at best,” he added, noting that the firm’s employees only had a 30-minute talk with school officials during the 300 million won project.
Higher education officials argue that the Education Ministry should give more detailed explanations for its evaluations, as well as recommended reforms for schools, particularly considering the heavy implications the label could have. That way, they say, schools can prevent wasting students’ tuition.
“The Education Ministry does not give us reform plans to take, merely saying we have problems damaging the quality of our classes,” said the director of a policy team at a private four-year college in South Chungcheong, who requested anonymity. “I do hope that education officials provide us with more concrete reform guidelines.”
Meanwhile, as many higher education institutions nervous about being branded scramble to find ways to avoid disgrace, a high number of schools are also running special project teams in an effort to win government projects. To encourage competition among regional schools, the ministry is planning to give 203.1 billion won in subsidies to 70 schools located outside of Seoul and Gyeonggi.
Pai Chai University in Daejeon, for instance, formed an eight-member strategy team last November to win a ministry designation as a competitive regional university.
“If we are to receive just a fraction of the subsidies - say 3 billion won - that is equivalent of tuition paid by 400 students,” said Kim Hong-seok, the director of the school’s policy team. “It is not too much to say we have put our lifeline on this project.”
BY SPECIAL REPORTING TEAM [jkkang2@joongang.co.kr]
기사 출처: http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=2986139