초록

본 연구의 목적은 어린이 독서프로그램의 효과를 측정할 수 있는 성과 측정 도구를 개발하는 것이다. 먼저, 어린이 독서프로그램 효과를 고찰하고 성과측정 도구 적용 사례를 분석하여 도서관 어린이 독서프로그램의 기능 및 효과를 조사하였다. 측정 대상인 독립 변인, 종속 변인, 통제 변인에 대한 개념을 도출하고 각각의 내용을 제시하였으며 국내외 독서 성과 측정 도구의 사례를 분석하여 시사점을 도출하였다. 또한 어린이의 독서 성과 영역과 척도를 조사 분석하였으며 독립 변인과 종속 변인, 통제 변인에 관한 척도를 세분화하고 성과 측정 도구로 활용될 설문지를 개발하였다. 그리고 ‘2013 도서관과 함께 책읽기’ 사업에 참여하고 있는 공공도서관 중 지방권역별로 10개관을 선정하여 조사 대상 도서관의 프로그램에 참여 어린이를 대상으로 프로그램 초반과 후반에 설문지로 개발된 성과 측정 도구를 적용하였다. 또한 조사대상 도서관의 프로그램 담당 사서, 기관 담당자와 강사를 대상으로 설문을 실시하였다. 이상과 같이 수집된 데이터를 모두 분석하여 독서프로그램의 성과를 측정하고 분석하였으며 측정 도구의 개선 방안을 제안하였다.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate a measuring scale for the effect of reading programs for children. First, in literature review, the effects and children’s reading programs performance scales were analyzed, and then independent variables, dependent variables, and control variables for children’s reading achievements were defined. Second, survey questionnaires for children, librarians, program instructors, and heads of child centers were designed to measure dependent variables and control variables on the scale. Third, the questionnaires for children were distributed to 10 public libraries participating in <2013 The Reading with Library> programs for two times in the early and the late time of the programs. Also, the survey questionnaires of 30 librarians, program instructors, and heads of the child centers were carried. Finally, all of the data were collected and analyzed in time series, and the improvements for the scale were proposed.

초록

Abstract

As co-authorship has been prevalent within science communities, counting the credit of co-authors appropriately is an important consideration, particularly in the context of identifying the knowledge structure of fields with author-based analysis. The purpose of this study is to compare the characteristics of co-author credit counting methods by utilizing correlations, multidimensional scaling, and pathfinder networks. To achieve this purpose, this study analyzed a dataset of 2,014 journal articles and 3,892 cited authors from the Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea: Planning & Design from 2003 to 2008 in the field of Architecture in Korea. In this study, six different methods of crediting co-authors are selected for comparative analyses. These methods are first-author counting (m1), straight full counting (m2), and fractional counting (m3), proportional counting with a total score of 1 (m4), proportional counting with a total score between 1 and 2 (m5), and first-author-weighted fractional counting (m6). As shown in the data analysis, m1 and m2 are found as extreme opposites, since m1 counts only first authors and m2 assigns all co-authors equally with a credit score of 1. With correlation and multidimensional scaling analyses, among five counting methods (from m2 to m6), a group of counting methods including m3, m4, and m5 are found to be relatively similar. When the knowledge structure is visualized with pathfinder network, the knowledge structure networks from different counting methods are differently presented due to the connections of individual links. In addition, the internal validity shows that first-author-weighted fractional counting (m6) might be considered a better method to author clustering. Findings demonstrate that different co-author counting methods influence the network results of knowledge structure and a better counting method is revealed for author clustering.