사회복지 교육과 사회복지 가치 및 옹호의 관계에 관한 연구 = (A)study of the relationship among the social work educations, values and advocacy

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to examine the Korean social workers' level of social work values, advocacy attitude and advocacy intervention, and to verify the relations among social work education, social work advocacy and social work values by examining whether social work education influences social work advocacy and social work values, and whether social work values affect social work advocacy. Further, this study wishes to confirm not only the direct effect that social work education has on social work advocacy, but also how social work education indirectly influences social work advocacy through social work values on the social level as a mediator. In other words, this study examines how social work values on the social level, as well as on the personal level, are formed as a result of social work education, and whether the social work values on the social level cause social workers to have more flexible attitude towards social work advocacy and to do advocacy intervention. Accordingly, by understanding the importance of social work values on the social level, this study wishes to suggest the direction of social work education to promote social work advocacy. To achieve this goal, this study poses the following research questions:
(1) What are the social workers' degree of social work values, social work attitude and social work intervention?
(2) Do social work values on the social level play a role as a mediator variable between social work education and social work advocacy?
The research of this study was conducted on 461 social work practitioners who have obtained either social worker licenses or mental health social worker licenses and are currently working in the field. As survey tools, this study utilized social work advocacy attitude, social work advocacy intervention, outcomes of social work education, social work values, self-esteem and locus of control. Collected data were analyzed by using SPSS/PC+ 11.5 for one-way ANOVA and t-test, Pearson's correlation, reliability analysis, exploratory factor analysis and multiple regression.
To sum up the results of the study in terms of the research hypothesis, the research hypothesis was established according to the analysis method of the testing mediation of Baron & Kenny (1986) in order to examine whether social work values on the social level intervene between social work education and social work advocacy. The results of the hypothesis test confirm that social work values on the social level serve as a mediator variable.
First, the hypothesis test on the relation between social work education and social work advocacy reveals that none of the social work education variables account for advocacy attitude on a statistically significant level. The R square of social work education for policy advocacy intervention was 17.7%, and the R square of the social work education for class and case advocacy intervention was 21.5%. The statistically significant variables in accounting for policy advocacy intervention are sex, locus of control, academic degree type 2 (social work major at the undergraduate level and an MA degree in social work at the graduate level: BSW & MSW) and education outcomes 1 (self-efficacy in five curriculum areas). The statistically significant variables in accounting for class and case advocacy intervention are education outcomes 1 (self-efficacy in five curriculum areas) and education outcomes 2 (self-efficacy in practical arts).
Second, the hypothesis test on the relation between social work education and social work values on the social level shows that the R square of social work education for social work values on the social level was 9.8%. The statistically significant variables which influence social work values on the social level are locus of control, education outcomes 1 (self-efficacy in five curriculum areas) and education outcomes 2 (self-efficacy in practical arts) in that order of significance.
Third, the hypothesis test on the relation between social work values on the social level and social work advocacy shows the R square of social work values on the social level was 9.2% for social work advocacy; 10.9% for policy advocacy intervention; and 13.4% for class and case advocacy intervention. The significant variables which cause social work values on the social level to influence social work advocacy attitude are locus of control, social work values on the social level and the economic power in that order of significance. The significant variables which cause social work values on the social level to influence policy advocacy intervention are locus of control, sex and social work values on the social level in that order of significance. The significant variables which cause social work values on the social level to influence class and case advocacy intervention are locus of control, sex, executive or non-executive level of position and social work values on the social level in that order of significance.
Finally, in order to verify the function of social work values on the social level as a mediator variable, this study examines the degree of changes in the regression coefficient (β) of the social work education outcomes variable, which is a statistically significant variable among the social work education variables. The results show a reduced regression coefficient (β) of social work education outcomes 1 variable (self-efficacy in five curriculum areas) which influences policy advocacy intervention, when compared to a case where the variable of social work values on the social level is a factor. Further, the fact that the regression coefficient (β) of the social work education outcomes 1 variable is statistically significant at the first and second stages means that social work values on the social level function as a partial mediator. The results also show reduced regression coefficients of the social work education outcomes 1 variable (self-efficacy in five curriculum areas) and the social work education outcomes 2 variable (self-efficacy in practical arts) which influence class and case advocacy intervention, when compared to a case where the variable of social work values on the social level is a factor. The fact that the regression coefficients of the social work education outcomes 1 variable and the social work education outcomes 2 variable are statistically significant at the first and second stages means that social work values on the social level function as a partial mediator.
The implications of this study are as follows:
The theoretical implications of this study would be that by verifying the mediating function of social work values on the social level between social work education and social work advocacy for the first time, this study expands the scope of the study on social work values and confirms the importance of social work values on the social level. Such results are expected to contribute not only to the study of social work values on the social level, but also to the theory building of the study of social work advocacy.
The practical implications for education of the social work would be that this study reveals the importance of the following: (1) enhancement of understanding of the five curriculum areas in the social work field which form the framework for generalist practices in order to make social work education contribute to social work advocacy (2) enhancement of self-efficacy in social work by acquiring the "practical skills" which are necessary in order to play professional roles and (3) enhancement of social work values on the social level.
The practical implications for agencies and social workers would be that it is important to play the role of an advocate to make social work settle firmly as the only socially-recognized human aid professional service, and that the identity of the social work will be strengthened by faithfully playing the role of an advocate. However, the level of the policy advocacy intervention by the Korean social workers and mental health social workers is low (2.9/5.0 on the average), and the level of the class and case advocacy intervention by the mental health social workers is far less than that of the social workers (p<.05). Accordingly, it would be necessary for the practitioners of agencies to intentionally increase the level of the policy advocacy intervention. An ideal social work practice would be limited unless it is linked with policy changes. Further, since social work advocacy is not more advantageous and easier to particular practitioners working in a certain field, more class and case advocacy intervention by the mental health social workers would be required.
The policy implications for the Korea Council on Social Welfare Education would be that in order to publicize that the social work science and the social work practices are premised upon the goal of improving the resources and opportunities to the oppressed and the deprived and achieving social justice, this study suggests that the Korea Council on Social Welfare Education do the following: (1) to declare that the educational goal of the undergraduate courses is to foster generalist practitioners on an entry level, and that the educational goal of the graduate courses is to foster generalist practitioners on an advanced level (2) to pursue differentiation of the curricula; and (3) to emphasize in each curriculum that in practicing social work, a balanced practice of the social work values on the social level and on the personal level is important and to present guidelines to embody such two values in each curriculum.
The policy implications for the Korea Associations of Social Workers would be that this study suggests that the Korea Associations of Social Workers do the following: (1) to secure authority of the Code of Ethics before presenting social workers' Ethical Standards (2) to declare social workers' obligations of social work advocacy in its Code of Ethics (3) to clearly present what the social work core values are composed of and (4) to propose enhancement of practical activities of the Social Work Ethical Committee.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차 = xii
• Ⅰ. 서론 = 1
• 제1절 문제의 제기 = 1
• 제2절 연구의 목적 = 7
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 = 8
• 제1절 사회복지 옹호의 이론적 배경 = 8
• 1. 사회복지 옹호의 개념 = 8
• 2. 사회복지 옹호태도 = 17
• 3. 사회복지 옹호개입 = 19
• 제2절 사회복지 옹호 관련 변수 = 24
• 1. 사회복지 가치 = 25
• 2. 사회복지 교육의 유형 및 성과 = 30
• 제3절 선행연구 고찰 = 38
• 1. 사회복지 교육과 옹호의 관계 = 38
• 2. 사회복지 교육과 가치의 관계 = 42
• 3. 사회복지 가치와 옹호의 관계 = 46
• 4. 기타 사회복지 옹호 및 가치와 관련된 변수들 = 47
• Ⅲ. 개념틀 및 가설 설정 = 50
• 제1절 개념틀 = 50
• 제2절 가설설정 = 55
• Ⅳ. 연구방법 = 57
• 제1절 조사대상 및 표집방법 = 57
• 제2절 측정 = 60
• 1. 사회복지 옹호태도 및 옹호개입 = 60
• 2. 사회복지 가치 = 65
• 3. 사회복지 교육 = 66
• 4. 통제변수 = 70
• 제3절 설문지의 구성 및 측정도구의 신뢰도 = 72
• 제4절 자료의 분석방법 = 74
• Ⅴ. 연구결과 = 78
• 제1절 조사 참여자의 인구사회학적 특성 = 78
• 1. 일반적 특성 = 78
• 2. 기관 관련 특성 = 80
• 제2절 연구변수의 평균값 산출 = 81
• 제3절 독립변수에 따른 평균비교 및 상관관계 = 83
• 1. 학위 유형에 따른 평균값 비교 = 83
• 2. 자격증 유형에 따른 평균값 비교 = 86
• 3. 사회복지 교육성과와의 상관관계 분석 = 87
• 제4절 가설검증 = 88
• 1. 사회복지 교육과 사회복지 옹호간의 가설검증 = 89
• 2. 사회복지 교육과 사회적 차원의 사회복지 가치간의 가설검증 = 93
• 3. 사회복지 가치와 사회복지 옹호간의 가설검증 = 96
• 4. 사회적 차원의 사회복지 가치의 매개변수 효과 검증 = 100
• Ⅵ. 결론 및 제언 = 112
• 제1절 연구결과 요약 = 112
• 1. 조사참여자의 인구사회학적 특성 = 112
• 2. 독립변수에 따른 평균비교 및 상관관계 분석 = 113
• 3. 가설검증 결과 = 116
• 제2절 연구의 함의 = 124
• 1. 이론적 함의 = 124
• 2. 실천적 함의 = 125
• 3. 정책적 함의 = 131
• 제3절 연구의 한계 및 후속연구를 위한 제언 = 136
• 참고문헌 = 138
• 부록 1 설문지 = 152
• 부록 2 독립변수들간 상관관계 = 161
• 부록 3 옹호개입 척도 개발 전의 신뢰도 분석 = 162
• 부록 4 옹호개입 척도의 요인분석 결과 = 163
• 부록 5 옹호개입 척도와 외부 문항과의 상관관계 = 165
• ABSTRACT = 166