본 연구는 교육과정 적용을 위한 기술공학적 교원 수 모형은 단위 학교가 교육과정의 편성 · 운영에 관한 자율성과 전문성을 발휘해야 하는 상황에서 더 이상 적합하지 않다는 문제의식 하에 새로운 교원 연수 모형을 탐구, 제안하는 데 목적이 있었다. 이를 위해 첫째, 제 7차 교육과정의 적용을 따르고 있는 기술공학적 교원 연수의 모형을 기술하였고, 그 주된 문제점으로 의사결정과 자원배분이 중앙집중적으로 이루어지며 표준화된 프로그램을 제공한다는 점을 지적하였다. 둘째, 교육과정의 적용과 교원 연수에 관한 기술공학적 모형의 대안으로서, 해석적 교원 연수 모형을 기술하였다. 해석적 모형은 개별 학교의 상황적 맥락과 교사 간의 차이를 중시하므로 교사의 목적관, 전인으로서의 교사, 교수 맥락, 협력적 교직 문화 등에 기초하여 학교 내에서 교사 집단 중심으로 때로는 전문가의 도움을 받으면서 이루어지는 소규모의 교원 연수 활동을 강조한다는 점을 기술하였다. 셋째, 한국에서의 학교 교육과정 적용을 돕는 교원 연수 방식의 개선을 위한 제언을 하였다.

The framework for the 7th Korean national curriculum adopts a less centralized approach to curriculum development and implementation than the previous ones, having the government, provinces, school districts, and individual schools share decision making on the curriculum. Thus, under this framework, individual schools are to make discretionary judgments in developing different ways to implement the centrally developed curriculum as well as the school-based curriculum. This changed role by the school requires a different approach to staff development. However, as exemplified in those of Incheon Staff Development Center, staff development strategies at the provincial level still follow the traditional technical staff development model. Preferring a top-down approach to staff development, this technical model centralizes resources and decision making with regard to the content and format of professional development. Premised on the assumption that teachers in any school can successfully implement a new curriculum, developed by specialists, when they are given basic information and knowledge about the new curriculum, this model adopts a service-delivery mode in which teachers are cast in a fundamentally passive role. Thus, even after participating in staff development programmes led by sophisticated presenters, teachers have difficulty in developing their capacity and expertise to make informed discretionary judgments in creating ways to implement the centrally developed curriculum as well as the school-based curriculum in their classrooms. In contrast to the technical model, the hermeneutic staff development model, first, takes into account the teacher`s purpose, advocating listening actively to the teacher`s voice and establishing opportunities for teachers to confront the assumptions and beliefs of favored new instructional strategies. Second, this model respects the teacher as a person, understanding that age, stage of career, life experiences, and gender factors-things that make up the total person-affect people`s interest in and response to innovation and their motivation to seek improvement. Third, the hermeneutic model recognizes the impact of the real world context in which teachers work on the implementation of a new curriculum. Fourth, the model values the collaborative culture of teaching which helps teachers trust, value, and legitimize sharing expertise, seeking advice, and giving help both inside and outside the school; plan together and share resources and supplies; and thrash issues out in reaching a common focus. Taking into account the four main elements, the hermeneutic model supports small-group activities led by either a specialist or a group of teachers inside and outside the school; collaborative work for planning, implementing, and evaluating the curriculum; mutual classroom observations and discussion among teachers; workshops, experimentation, and study groups initiated and led by a group of teachers. In order to better support teachers for developing various ways to implement the national curriculum and the school-based curriculum, policy makers and other administrators at the provincial level need to create an administrative and legal support system that decentralizes the resources and decision making centered around staff development centers to allot more financial resources for small group activities inside a school or among a group of schools.