• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.85-107
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study is to develop an evaluation indicator of institutional repositories to be used by participating university libraries of dCollection. Based on the literature reviews of digital library evaluation, core evaluation measures and criteria were identified. In order to verify the applicability and appropriateness of those evaluation criteria for institutional repositories, two methods were employed: A case study with sixteen university libraries and a Delphi study with twenty university libraries. The results of both studies led the development of an evaluation model which consisted of four evaluation dimensions and 29 criteria. This evaluation model should be utilized as tools for objective assessment and guidelines for improving institutional repository services by universities libraries in which the dCollection is currently Implemented or the future plan of the dCollection is underway.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.137-164
• /
• 2009

As a means to address the modes of developing institutional evaluation system aimed at improving performances of GRIs, this study looked into the influential relations where institutional evaluation system has an impact on receptivity of evaluation outcomes and performances of institutes optimize their performances. After making analysis, it was confirmed that the National Research Council for Economics, Humanities and Social Sciences' institutional evaluation system for GRIs had a positive (+) influence on performances of research institutes, and receptivity of evaluation outcomes is related to performances of research institutes. In addition, it was also confirmed that institutes with high performances, in general, have high level of receptivity of evaluation outcomes along with positive recognition of institutional evaluation system. However, weaknesses of the Council's institutional evaluation system for GRIs resulted in low level of receptivity amongst GRIs, and thus there is limitation on the government and the Council in the active utilization of evaluation outcomes. Finally, it addressed the limitations and areas for improvement in relation to research outcomes.

• Korean Journal of Childcare and Education
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.91-111
• /
• 2024

Objective: The purpose of this study is to explore trends in institutional evaluation research in early childhood education through keyword network analysis. This aims to understand trends in academic discourse on institutional evaluation and gain implications for follow-up research and related policy directions. Methods: A total of 6,629 keywords were extracted from 572 dissertations and journal articles published from January 2006 to October 2023 for the purpose of analyzing and visualizing the frequency and centrality of keywords, as well as the structural properties of keyword networks. The analysis and visualization were conducted using the TEXTOM, UCINET6, and NetDraw programs. Results: First, the number of institutional evaluation studies increased steadily from 2006 to 2010 and then decreased, with a higher frequency of studies on daycare centers compared to kindergartens. Second, the most frequently occurring keyword in the analysis was 'daycare center,' and the highest connection strength was found in the term 'daycare-center-evaluation.' Third, network analysis revealed that key terms for institutional evaluation research included 'evaluation certification,' 'recognition,' 'evaluation indicators,' 'teacher,' 'daycare center,' and 'kindergarten.' In the ego network analysis for each institution, 'parent' emerged as a highly ranked keyword. Conclusion/Implications: This study confirmed the perspectives of previous studies by revealing the structure of core concepts in early childhood education institution evaluation research, and provided implications for follow-up and direction of institution evaluation

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.117-154
• /
• 2006

This research examines performance evaluatees' opinions regarding the current institutional performance evaluation systems of Government S&T Research Institutes (GRIs). Under the current evaluation systems, twenty GRIs are grouped into three Research Groups and each Group has its own evaluation systems. One problem of the current institutional evaluation systems is that the systems cannot reflect individual GRIs' characteristics. The following methods are used. First, based on four perspectives of Kaplan & Norton(1992)'s Balanced Scorecard(BSC) model, six perspectives appropriate to GRUs' characteristics are derived. Second, experts classify current performance evaluation measures into the six perspectives. This enables different evaluation systems of three GRI Research Groups to be compared under the same evaluation measures. Third, GRIs' evaluatees are asked to allocate appropriate weights on the performance measures. Evaluatees' weights of a GRI are compared with average weights of the related Group. Finally in every BSC's perspective, GRIs that have extraordinarily over-scored or under-scored weights are analyzed in terms of GRIs' missions, customers, capability of human resources, etc. In the Basic Research Group, the Korea Basic Science Institute is deviated in the financial perspective and the strategic direction perspectives. In the Public Research Group, Korea Institute of Construction Technology is significantly different from other GRIs in three perspectives. Five out of eight GRIs in the Industrial Research Group, GRIs are significantly different each other in several perspectives. It could be concluded that the current institutional evaluation systems are least appropriate in measuring performance of the GRIs of the Industrial Research Group.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.43 no.4
• /
• pp.84-92
• /
• 2020

In order to analyze the organizational performance of government-funded research institutes, four independent variables (organization size, organization age, evaluation system, organization location) and goal ambiguity were empirically analyzed. Although there are existing studies on institutional evaluation, which is the organizational performance of government-funded research institutes, there are differences in research in that it is an empirical analysis analyzed from the perspective of goal ambiguity and that the evaluation system, which is the specificity of institutional evaluation, is included in the analysis. As a result of the analysis, organizational location was the only independent variable that had a direct significant effect on organizational performance, and goal ambiguity showed a significant mediating effect for all independent variables. This indicates that goal ambiguity plays an important role in the organizational performance of government-funded research institutes, and to reduce this, increase the size of the organization, pay attention to establishment of the organization for organizational age, and that it is desirable to have an independent research group in the government department for the organization location. In addition, it was supported that the improvement effect of the evaluation system is proceeding in a desirable direction in terms of goal ambiguity.

• Korean Journal of Comparative Education
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.245-265
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this research is to find the features of HLC institutional accreditation model and the implication on the second period institutional accreditation of Korea. This research focus on accreditation model, accreditation period, comprehensive evaluation, criteria, decision making for accreditation status and accreditation supporting system. This research draws following suggestions to the second period institutional accreditation of Korea. 1. The institutional accreditation should apply various accreditation models according to the features of institute. 2. The institutional accreditation should focus on the autonomous quality improvement of institute with the quality assurance. 3. The quantitative evaluation should be reduced and qualitative evaluation based on mission and objects should be reinforced. 4. The interim evaluation should be strictly enforced for quality improvement. 5. The government should enlarge reflection the results of accreditation on financial aid to universities. 6. The web-based accreditation supporting system interworking with "Higher Education in Korea" service is needed.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.265-293
• /
• 2005

This research examines the relationship between the characteristics of Government S&T Research Institutes (GRI) and their institutional performance evaluation system. First, based on Kaplan & Norton (1992) Balanced Scorecard Model, six perspectives suitable to Korean GRI are derived. Second, personnel who works on evaluation job classified current performance measures into the six perspectives. Analyzing comparative weights of individual perspectives, the characteristics of performance evaluation systems among institutes are derived and compared with their missions. The results are as follows: First, GRI evaluation systems put most weight on the customer perspective and least weight on the financial perspective. This result complies with Korean GRI's missions and strategies as well as findings of foreign cases. Second, Basic-technology GRI group relatively more priotizes long-term customer perspective, while Applied-technology GRI Group relatively more priotizes short-term customer perspective. Public-technology GRI Group is located in the middle in terms of priority of customer perspectives. Third, for three yews (2000-2002), performance measure weights of Basic-technology Group are changed much less than those of the other two groups. Further research are needed for reasons of drastic changes for Applied-technology and Public-technology groups and some abnormally high and low measure weights.

• The Journal of KAIRB
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.1-13
• /
• 2023

In the United States (US), due to the Common Rule, completely revised in 2017, single Institutional Review Board (IRB) review has become mandatory for government-sponsored multi-institutional research since 2020 regardless of the number of participating institutions. The goal of these changes is to reduce redundant reviews by the IRB at each institution and better protect research participants. In this paper, single IRB and Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) in the US and Korea were compared and considered, and their implications were discussed. A comparison of the HRPP evaluation and certification systems of the US and Korea includes that of SMART IRB in the US and Korea Central IRB, aiming at single IRB review for efficient review with support from the country and building a more efficient national human subject research network in the future. Its comparison and analysis will be helpful in deriving future tasks and development directions of single IRB and HRPP in Korea.

• International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.65-89
• /
• 2019

This study has the aim of developing an evaluation index that can help evaluate the reliability of the information resources of institutions retaining humanities assets for the purposes of laying out the foundation for providing one-stop portal service for humanities assets. To this end, the evaluation index was derived through the analysis of previous research, case studies, and interviews with experts, the derived evaluation index was then applied to the humanities assets retaining institutions to verify the utility. The institutional information resources' reliability evaluation index consisted of the two dimensions of the institutions' own reliability evaluation index. The institution provided a service and system evaluation index. The institutions' own reliability evaluation index consisted of 25 points for institutional authority, 25 points for data collection and construction, 30 points for data provision, and 20 points for appropriateness of data, for a total of 100 points, respectively. The institution provided service and system evaluation indexes consisting of 25 points for information quality, 15 points for appropriateness (decency), 15 points for accessibility, 20 points for tangibility, 15 points for form, and 10 points for cooperation, for the total of 100 points, respectively. The derived evaluation index was used to evaluate the utility of 6 institutions representing humanities assets through application. Consequently, the reliability of the information resources retained by the Research Information Service System (RISS) of the Korea Education & Research Information Service (KERIS) turned out to be the highest.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.66 no.2
• /
• pp.5-29
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study is to interpret how the long-term care evaluation system implements in the actual service settings with institutional isomorphism and decoupling based on new-institutional theory. This study conducted in-depth interview with employees engaged in 7 long term care service facilities. Directed qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data. As a result, unlike the intention of the long-term care evaluation system to improve the efficiency of the organization by market competition, it found that organizations forcibly adapted a evaluation system to rely on government's resources and it results in isomorphism phenomena which is similar between organizations. This results confirmed that the evaluation system has implemented in the direction of enhancing the government's role to standardize and institutionalize the long-term care service rather than improving the efficiency of the organization by market competition. This study also partially found the phenomenon of decoupling between organizational formal structure accompanied by isomorphism and real behaviors. These results suggest that it is required to improve government's evaluation indicators on the issue of inefficiency caused by dual structure of organizations. In addition, this study proposes that government's evaluation index which is reflected the characteristics of care service is necessary for operating.