The purpose of this research is to make an investigation into the practical knowledge about discourse of a preschool teacher. 'discourse',as one of the activities of teaching and learning that has been exclusively detected in early childhood education, means that teachers and children are verbally interacting as to some particular themes or units or some activities relevant to a certain situation or a theme within large or small groups.
The time of discourse at preschool will require teachers to increase and possess more practical knowledge than in any other area of preschool, for a sequence of teaching activities that preschool teachers decide to choose and execute in discourse is produced as the consequence of practical knowledge that each teacher has gained.
Such practical knowledge is not to be automatically obtained through the experiences of discourse of teachers, but to be possessed by the constant process of reflective thinking about their own teaching experiences. That is, 'the practical knowledge about discourse' can be increased only by thinking reflectively about the dynamic interaction between a teacher and children or between an child and an child that teachers have experienced in diverse teaching circumstances.
Still, it is extremely hard to explain and interpret the reality of practical knowledge that teachers possess, because practical knowledge can not only be accumulated by utterly personal experiences, but its contents are very comprehensive and suggestive. Thus, up to now there has been almost no research done concerning the practical knowledge about discourse.
According to Shulman and Colbert (1987), pedagogics including early childhood education has been usually criticized for not having developed a
system of listening to the voice of teachers in education field, discovering the know-how of them, recording and preserving it. If the voice of individual teachers cannot be reflected in formulating theories and producing knowledge, it is nearly impossible to enlarge the crucial know-how in the area of early childhood education. Besides, the knowledge that an individual teacher has cannot be of any help in creating new knowledge, insofar as it remains as the suggestive knowledge of an individual. Therefore, as Unhae Park (1999) argues, the knowledge that a preschool teacher possesses has to be expressed in words so that it can be shared with other members working in the area of early childhood education.
This research is going to explore the practical knowledge about discourse. at preschool, based on my own educational life history as a preschool teacher for 25 years, particularly focusing on the case studies in classroom. The participants in this research are the author as an experienced teacher, preschool teacher and children who have shared the experience of 'discourse' with me.
This research is going to deal with the following questions:
1. What about discourse that an experienced preschool teacher is leading?
2. What is the practical knowledge that we can find out in discourse of an experienced preschool teacher?
3. How can we build up the class form of discourse based on practical knowledge?
For this research, three different methodologies are used at the same time. In discussing 'discourse in Korean preschools' and 'practical knowledge' in the section of theoretical background, the methodology of literature research is used. And in exploring the first and second question, educational life history research methodology and narrative inquiry are used. I choose to explain my own experiences of discourse in my life, so as to demonstrate the substance of practical knowledge that an experienced teacher possesses regarding teaching-activity of discourse in the field of preschool.
The result of this research can be summarized as follows:
First, what about discourse that an experienced teacher is leading?
The period of my personal teaching experiences is divided into five stages from the time of working as an intern teacher to the present. And I try to demonstrate to explain what kind of experiences I have had in the field of teaching in relation to discourse, how I can build up practical knowledge, and how I come to understand and interpret my own practical knowledge.
Second, what is the practical knowledge that we can find out in discourse of an experienced teacher?
Based on the teaching experiences of an experienced teacher in discourse that is one of the experiential bases that form 'practical knowledge,'the category of practical knowledge that an experienced teacher forms is to be divided in the following way for the sake of analysis and investigation: knowledge of meaning in discourse, knowledge of purpose in discourse, knowledge of development of teacher in discourse, knowledge of factors that are influential on teaching, and knowledge of proper class for discourse.
My argument is that regarding the meaning of discourse, 'discourse' must be distinguished from 'story telling' and that the time of discourse is not just for developing cognitive and linguistic ability, but rather for developing a whole personhood, so that it must be the time when themes or units, activity areas and activities must be approached in an integral way.
I argue that the purpose of discourse is not just to make children learn knowledge in relation to some topics or concepts, but rather to help their life changed by learning how to think, communicate, share, and make relationships in the 'process of joyfully learning and sharing'.
Moreover, I argue that in the development of teachers in discourse, there is a tendency of change from 'story telling' to 'discourse', from 'centering on planning discourse' to 'centering on executing discourse', and from 'teacher-centered' to 'child-centered.' And I also argue that the teaching method of discourse of preschool teacher starts with the practice of theoretical knowledge, and then develops into the practice of more practical knowledge by imitation, and finally progresses into a balanced stage of practice between theoretical and practical knowledge.
Meanwhile, concerning factors in relation to teacher that influence on discourse, I identify such factors as personal relationships that a teacher has built up in education field, thought patterns of a teacher, knowledge of a teacher, decision-making ability of a teacher, verbal competence of a teacher, education philosophy and education program of institution that a teacher belongs to, and physical environment. I put emphasis on personal relationships of a teacher and his or her thought patterns as the main factor.
In explaining the characteristics of a good class of discourse, my argument is that 'discourse' must not be targeted at large group of children, which is teacher-centered and passive activities, but at middle or small sized group of children, which is children-centered and active activities. I argue that the time of discourse should be the time for children who ought to be the objects of discourse, not children existing for the time of discourse. Therefore, I stress that this time must exist for children, not for teachers.
Third, how can we build up a good model of class of discourse based on practical knowledge?
Proposing a good model of class of discourse based on practical knowledge, I describe the following characteristics of discourse based on this model.
First, it is a class that a teacher leads who well knows the purpose of discourse. A teacher is clearly aware of the goal of his or her class, and put his or her own priority more on the process of thinking to the point of gaining knowledge rather than on knowledge itself. A teacher expects children to have right values and improve relationships with neighboring people and ultimately to be grown up as a whole person through discourse. Therefore, in discourse, such factors as 'people, relationship, thinking, and sharing' are always taken into consideration.
Second, it is a class that is planned and prepared, centering on children. A teacher is going to take into account the difference of development of children and their interest, especially their individual differences, in planning class, and also to consider different perspectives in choosing teaching tools. And, a teacher has to think sharply about questions of teacher and expected responses in planning class.
Third, it is a class that although a teacher has thoroughly prepared for class, he or she is ready to constantly develop it by restructuring its format in reacting to the interest of children and every moment’s response, not subject to the contents of the original plan of class.
Fourth, it is a class that a teacher gives sufficient time for children to think about, paying attention to and respecting them in considering the level of response from children, while using questions for reflection, expansion, creative thought, and critical thought.
Fifth, it is a class in which a holistic approach can be observed in a realistic sense in the process of discourse. Despite the fact that discourse are primarily related to language life, a teacher can use familiar things real to children for teaching and learning and deal with such areas as healthy life, social life, expression life, and investigation life in a holistic way. Besides, this class is going to reflect this holistic principle in topics and activity areas.
Sixth, it is a class that is near to the life of children, considering and using the familiar things real to children as teaching tools. It means that it is an interactive class in which children can learn with something meaningful to them with joy.
Seventh, for all the individual differences among children, it is a class that stimulates all children to participate and to build up a thinking community.
Eighth, it is a class that evaluates and focuses on the achievement of children of 'what they thought and what they learned,' not on that of teachers.
My point of emphasis in this research is that the premise of a good model of discourse is that there must be 'teachers and children who are enjoying discourse (the process of sharing),' 'teachers and children who know how to listen to,' and 'teachers and children who like to think.'
The result of this research shows that in order to improve the state of discourse in the field of early childhood education, we need to unearth excellent teachers who possess 'practical knowledge about discourse' and to increase and share their practical knowledge by listening to their voices from the field.

본 연구의 목적은 ‘유아교사의 이야기나누기에 관한 실천적 지식’을 탐구하는 것이다.
이야기나누기란 유아교육에서만 볼 수 있는 독특한 교수-학습활동의 하나로서 교사와 유아가 대 중 소집단으로 특정주제 및 상황 또는 주제관련 활동에 대해 언어적으로 상호작용하는 것을 의미한다.
유치원에서의 ‘이야기나누기’ 활동은 그 어느 활동보다도 교사의 실천적 지식에 대한 축적과 공유가 절실한 분야이다. 유아교사들이 이야기나누기활동에서 선택하고 실행하는 일련의 교수행위들은 개개 교사가 지닌 실천적 지식의 결과로서 만들어지는 것이기 때문이다.
본 연구에서는 지난 25년 동안 유치원에서 ‘이야기나누기’를 실행해 왔던 연구자 자신의 교육생애사와 수업사례를 중심으로 하여 ‘유치원에서 이루어지는 이야기나누기’에 대한 교사의 실천적 지식을 탐구하고자 하였다. 본 연구의 참여자는 고 경력교사인 연구자 자신과 그와 더불어 이야기나누기 경험을 공유하였던 유치원 현장의 유아와 교사들이다.
본 연구에서 탐구하고자 한 연구문제는 다음과 같다.
1. 유아교사의 이야기나누기의 모습은 어떠한가?
2. 유아교사의 이야기나누기에서 발견되어지는 실천적 지식은 무엇인가?
3. 실천적지식에 기초한 이야기나누기 수업모형은 어떻게 구성할 수 있는가?
본 연구를 수행함에 있어서, 연구자는 연구의 특성상 세 가지 연구방법을 혼용하였다. ‘우리나라 유치원에서의 이야기나누기’와 ‘실천적 지식’은 문헌연구 방법을 통해 탐구하였으며, 연구문제 1과 2는 자기 생애사 연구 방법과 이야기 탐구방법을 통해 탐구하였다. 연구자는 자신의 개인사 가운데 이야기나누기와 관련된 개인적 경험을 서술하는 방식을 통하여 유치원 현장에서 이루어지는 이야기나누기 교수행위와 관련하여 유아교사가 가지고 있는 실천적 지식의 실체를 밝혀보고자 하였다.
본 연구의 결과는 다음과 같이 요약할 수 있다.
1. 유아교사의 이야기나누기
연구자는 이야기나누기와 관련된 자신의 개인적 교수경험을 예비교사 시절부터 현재까지 다섯 단계로 나누어 기술하였다. 연구자는 자신이 ‘이야기나누기’와 관련하여 교육현장에서 어떤 경험을 하였고, 어떤 과정을 거쳐서 그것을 실천적 지식으로 구축하게 되었으며, 자신의 실천적 지식에 대해 어떤 의미와 해석을 하고 있는지를 보여주었다. 또한 연구자는 ‘이야기나누기에 관한 실천적 지식’을 형성하기 위해서는 유아교사가 개인적 교수 경험에 대한 끊임없는 자기반성의 기회를 가져야 됨을 강조하면서, 자신이 이야기나누기에서 ‘유아의 이야기에 진정으로 귀 기울임의 기쁨을 알게 되기까지의 과정’을 보여주었다.
2. 유아교사의 이야기나누기에서 발견되어지는 실천적 지식
연구자는 ‘실천적 지식’을 형성하는 근거 영역 가운데 하나인 경험적인 근거(Elbaz, 1981. 1983) 즉 유아교사의 이야기나누기에 관한 교수경험을 근거로 하여 유아교사가 형성한 실천적 지식의 범주를 이야기나누기의 의미에 관한 지식, 이야기나누기의 목적에 관한 지식, 교사의 이야기나누기 능력 발달에 대한 지식, 이야기나누기에 영향을 주는 요인에 대한 지식, 바람직한 이야기나누기 수업에 관한 지식으로 나누어 분석 기술하였다.
3. 실천적 지식에 기초한 이야기나누기 수업모형의 구성
‘실천적 지식에 기초한 바람직한 이야기나누기 수업모형’은 계획, 실행, 평가의 3단계로 구성되었으며, 각 단계에 따른 교수-학습과정은 10단계로 세분되었다.
계획단계에는 주제탐색, 주제선정, 주제계획안(주제망)구성, 이야기나누기 수업계획안 작성이라는 1-4단계가 포함되었으며, 실행단계에는 수업분위기 조성, 이야기나누기 도입, 이야기나누기 전개에 이르는 5-7단계가 포함되었다. 특히 7단계인 이야기나누기 전개에서는 ‘계획에 따른 실행- 실행 중 평가- 평가 결과에 따른 계획과 활동의 재구성’의 순환과정이 특별히 강조되었다. 평가단계에는 이야기나누기 마무리, 실행 후 평가, 이야기나누기 재 계획이라는 8-10단계가 포함되었다.
연구자는 제시된 이야기나누기 수업모형에서 기대하는 유아상은 ‘즐겁게 생각하며 배우는 유아, 개방적이고 대등한 관계에 기초하여 자유롭게 의사소통하는 유아, 자신의 경험 지식 소유물을 다른 사람과 더불어 기쁘게 기꺼이 나누는 유아’라고 밝힘으로써 이야기나누기의 궁극적인 목적은 인지 언어의 발달 뿐 아니라, ‘전 영역에 걸친 고른 발달’, 특히 현대유아들에게 결핍되어 있는 ‘사회 정서의 발달’을 도모함에 있음을 재차 강조하고자 하였다.
본 연구의 결과는 유아교육현장에서의 ‘이야기나누기 실제’가 개선되기 위해서는 ‘이야기나누기에 관한 실천적 지식’을 보유하고 있는 우수교사들을 발굴하고, 그들의 현장 목소리에 귀를 기울임으로써 그들의 실천적 지식을 축적 공유해야 함을 알게 해준다.