Bolman과 Deal의 네 가지 프레임으로 바라본 대학의 학과 통폐합 사례 연구

Abstract

Objectives This study aims to analyze cases of merging and phasing out of university departments using Bolman and Deal's four-frame model, focusing on structural, human resource, political, and symbolic changes. Methods To conduct a case study on one engineering department at a private university and one arts and physical education department at a national university, a preliminary investigation was conducted through a review of relevant literature and in-depth written interviews. Based on the results of this preliminary research, Focus Group Interviews (FGIs) were carried out with with faculty, current students, teaching assistants, and alumni to supplement the data collected.. Subsequently, changes in merged and phased-out departments were analyzed according to Bolman and Deal's four frames: structural, human resource, political, and symbolic changes. Results In the structural frame, positive changes such as curriculum flexibility, modernization, and student choice were observed. However, issues such as ensuring choice, securing expertise, and alleviating teaching burdens remained unresolved. Additionally, initial administrative and student organization dualities created issues of belonging and highlighted the need for increased support. In the human resource frame, department consolidation expanded career choices and positively impacted new student enrollment, though initial promotional efforts were insufficient, leading to limited short-term effects. Despite increased career diversification and satisfaction through integrated education, the need for enhanced communication regarding department reorganization and feedback collection was identified. The political frame examined stakeholder position differences and resource allocation strategies for successful integration. In the symbolic frame, while the necessity of consolidating departments to address declining student populations and societal demands was emphasized, it was also confirmed that the reasons for actual consolidations are varied. Conclusions The case analysis of merging and phasing out of university departments provides an in-depth understanding of phenomena that may arise within universities during such processes and offers insights. Recommendations are provided on key considerations for universities when deciding on consolidation targets, supporting consolidated departments, and preparing for and responding to consolidations.