사회복지사와 일반인의 농 문화 인식 정도에 관한 연구 = A Study of Recognition of Deaf Culture by Social Workers and Ordinary People

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 사회복지사와 일반인의 농 문화 인식 정도에 관한 연구를 목적으로 하며, 이를 위해 족내혼(농인끼리 결혼), 조직적 네트워크, 사회문화적 관점, 수화, 집단 정체감 및 이 5개를 합친 전체 농 문화의 총 6개 측정항목을 설정하였다. 연구대상은 전남지역 농인관련단체와 복지관 및 시설 등에 근무하는 사회복지사 166명과 일반인 275명이였다. 빈도 및 백분율, 평균, 표준편차, t-test, 교차분석 및 분산분석을 사용하여 분석하였으며 그 결과는 아래와 같다.
첫째, 성별에 따른 항목별 인식의 차이는 없었고, 연령에 따라서 전체 농 문화와 하위 항목에서 인식의 차이를 보였고, 가족이나 친척 중 농인 유무에 따라 농 문화 인식이 차이를 보였으며, 가족이나 친척 중 농인이 있을 경우의 농 문화 인식이 없는 경우보다 더 높았다.
둘째, 사회복지사의 농 문화 인식 특성은 근무경력에 따른 차이가 없었으나, 근무기관에 따라, 청각장애특성 교육 받았는지에 따라, 농인에게 서비스를 제공했는지 여부에 따라 차이를 보였다. 특히 근무기관 중에서는 농인관련단체에 근무하는 사회복지사의 농 문화 인식이 모든 측정 항목에서 가장 높았으며, 농인에게 서비스를 자주 제공한 사회복지사 집단이 농 문화에 대한 인식이 높았다.
셋째, 사회복지사와 일반인 및 수화통역사 집단 사이에 농 문화 인식의 차이가 있었으며, 수화통역사의 농 문화 인식이 가장 높았다.
넷째, 수화학습자의 농 문화 인식은 농인과 만남을 통해 수화를 자연스럽게 습득할 경우에 높았으며, 또한 수화실력, 자격증 유무, 수화사용 경력 및 수화학습 유무에 따라 차이가 나타났다.
인간이 언어를 소유하며 향유함과 동시에 문화가 생성되었다. 수화를 언어로 사용하는 농인 역시 농 문화를 형성하며 장애인이 아닌 소수집단으로서 농 정체성을 확립하고 있다. 따라서 우리는 농 문화를 긍정적으로 인식하고, 이를 위해 농 문화의 대표적 산물인 수화를 보급 할 필요가 있다. 사회복지사는 농 문화의 이해를 통해 농인에게 다양한 사회복지적 서비스를 제공하여 농인의 자존감을 회복하게 함으로써, 농인이 병리적 관점의 청각장애인이 아닌 다문화 환경 속에서 함께 살아가는 동반자적 소수집단임을 알릴 필요가 있다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study was to examine the recognition of deaf culture between the social worker and the ordinary people. A total of 6 measurement items composed of endogamy(marraige between deaf people), organizational network, sociocultural view point, sign language, group identity crisis and the overall deaf culture combining the above 5 items were established to study the recognition of deaf culture by social workers and ordinary people in this research. The subjects were 166 social workers and 275 ordinary people who worked for deaf people-related organizations, welfare centers and welfare facilities in Jeonnam region. The data were analyzed by using the frequency, percentage, average, standard deviation, t-test, chi-square analysis, and analysis of variance.
The results were as follows:
First, no effect of sex on the recognition was observed but age affected the recognition of the overall deaf culture. The older people's recognition of deaf culture was higher than those of the younger's. The recognition was higher in case they had deaf people in their families than in case they did not.
Second, the recognition characteristics of social workers was not affected by the experience period but affected by the kind of organizations they worked for, whether they had received special education for hearing impairment, and whether they had provided any services to deaf people. Especially, the recognition of deaf culture by social workers who worked for deaf-person-related organizations was the highest in all the question items out of the organizations they worked for, and the recognition by the social worker group that provided frequent services to deaf people was high.
Third, the recognition of deaf culture was different among groups of social workers, ordinary people, and sign language interpreters and the interpreters showed the highest recognition of deaf culture.
Fourth, as far as those who experienced sign language are concerned, the recognition of deaf culture was high for the case that they learned the sign language naturally through direct contact, and it depended on the level of sign language, whether they had the license, and whether they experienced and learned sign language.
The moment human beings had and enjoyed their language they created culture. Deaf people who use sign language as their own language also form deaf culture, establishing an identity of a minority group, not the handicapped. Thus, it is necessary to recognize the deaf culture positively and publicize sign language, the representative product of deaf culture. Social workers need to inform deaf people that they are a minority group of companions living together in multi-cultural environment, not hearing-impaired persons in pathological view point by providing a variety of social welfare services to them though understanding of deaf culture and having them recover their self-esteem.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론·······················································1
• 1. 연구의 필요성·························································1
• 2. 연구의 목적···························································3
• 3. 용어 정의······························································4
• 4. 연구의 제한점·························································5
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 및 선행연구 고찰···························6
• 1. 농 문화의 개념······················································6
• 2. 농 문화의 유형·······················································9
• 3. 관련변수에 따른 농 문화··········································15
• Ⅲ. 연구방법·················································21
• 1. 연구대상······························································21
• 2. 연구도구······························································23
• 3. 연구절차······························································26
• 4. 분석방법······························································26
• Ⅳ. 연구결과·················································28
• 1. 일반적 요인에 따른 농 문화 관련 특성·························28
• 2. 사회복지사의 농 문화 인식 특성································32
• 3. 사회복지사와 일반인 및 수화통역사의 농 문화 인식 차이···38
• 4. 수화 학습 요인에 따른 농 문화 인식 차이·····················40
• Ⅴ. 결론과 제언··············································51
• 1. 결과의 요약··························································51
• 2. 제언···································································53
• 참고문헌····························································56
• Abstract·····························································63
• 부 록 ·······························································66