교사ᆞ학생의 관점에 따른 세계사 교과서의 개선 방안

남한호 역사교육학회 2006 역사교육논집 Vol.36 No.-

역사 교사의 역사 교육목표 인식

남한호 한국역사교육학회 2006 한국역사교육학회 학술대회 Vol.2006 No.1

역사 교과의 내용 구성 방안

남한호,윤세병 역사교육연구소 2018 역사와교육 Vol.- No.17

[토론문] 「한국근현대사의 성과와 역사교육의 방향｣에 대한 토론문

남한호 한국역사교육학회 2012 한국역사교육학회 학술대회 Vol.2012 No.-

제1차 교육과정 세계사 교과서 서술체제와 내용 분석

남한호 역사와 교육학회 (구 동국대학교 역사교과서연구소) 2016 역사와 교육 Vol.22 No.-

세계사는 인류가 나타난 때부터 현재에 이르기까지 인류의 경험을 다루는 인류 전체의 이야기이다. 특히 현대 사회에 나타나는 지역⋅민족⋅인종⋅종교⋅계급 간의 갈등과 대립을 해결하기 위해서 다양한 문화와 가치를 이해하고 다양한 집단 간의 상호 관계를 다루는 세계사 과목의 학습은 필수적이다. 세계사 교육은 교수요목기부터 시작되었지만, 학교급별로 세계사 과목이 편제되고 이론적인 모색이 나타난 시기는 제1차 교육과정부터이다. 제1차 교육과정에서 교수요목 시기 동양사와 서양사로 나누어져 있던 중학교 세계사 과목이 「세계의 역사」로 통합되었으며, 고등학교 편제가 확립되면서 「세계사」 과목이 편성되면서 세계사 교육의 체제가 마련되었다. 그러나 세계사 영역이 사회과에 포함되어 운영됨에 따른 한국사와 관련성이 미흡한 점, 세계사가 선택과목으로 편성됨에 따른 세계사 교육의 약화된 점 등 세계사 교육의 위기라고 일컬어진 문제점은 제1차 교육과정에서 시작되었다. 제1차 교육과정기 세계사 교과서의 특징을 세 가지로 요약할 수 있다. 첫째, 내용의 선정과 조직에서 중학교 세계사는 정치사⋅왕조사 중심, 고등학교 세계사는 문화사를 중심으로 다룸으로써 계열성을 확보하려고 하였다. 이러한 내용 조직은 이후 세계사 과목의 내용 구성 원리의 기반을 이루였다. 그러나 교육과정에서 강조하였던 학습량의 적정화, 토론중심의 내용 구성, 역사적 사고력의 육성을 위한 내용 구성은 뚜렷하게 나타나지 않는다. 둘째, 세계사 교과서의 내용 서술면에서 서구중심적인 관점을 보이고 있다. 교과서의 내용 서술에서 선사 이후 중세까지 동양사와 서양사의 비중은 균형을 이루고 있으나, 근대 이후 서양사의 비중이 압도적으로 크다. 서술면에서 세계사 교과서에서는 근대 서구문명을 인류 역사 발전단계 가운데 최고의 단계로 전제한 위에 유럽에 비해 아시아는 후진적이라는 인식을 드러내고 있다. 근대 이후 서양을 중심으로 세계가 일체화되어 갔으며, 현대에 들어 서양을 중심으로 통일된 세계사가 완성되었다는 논리의 흐름을 보인다. 교과서의 서술 분량에서도 동양사에 비해 서양사의 비중이 크다. 셋째, 세계사 교과서의 분량면에서 저자 간의 편차가 심하게 나타난다. 이는 검정 기준에서 제시하였던 학습량의 적정화가 엄격하게 적용되지 않은 결과로 해석된다. 단원별 분량에서 중학교 세계사 교과서는 교과서별 편차는 크지 않지만, 고등학교 세계사 교과서는 단원 간의 비중의 차이가 심하게 나타난다. 이는 교과서 저자의 관점이 단원의 서술 분량에 영향을 주었던 것으로 보인다. World history is the whole human story that covers human's experiences from the time when human first appeared to the present. The subject of world history, which deals with mutual relationships among various groups, is essential to understand various cultures and values in order to solve the conflicts among regions, peoples, races, religions and classes in modern society. The education of world history started at the syllabus period, but it was from 1st curriculum when the subject of world history was organized by each level of schools, and when theoretical exploration appeared. At 1st curriculum, middle school world history, which was divided into oriental history and western history at the syllabus period, was combined to 「History of World(세계의 역사)」, and the system of world history education was formed while 「World History(세계사)」 became one of the subjects in highschool as highschool education organization was established. Nevertheless, some problems called the crisis of world history education started at 1st curriculum. As the domain of world history was included to the subject of social studies, it lacks correlations with Korean history. As the subject of world history was assigned as an elective, world history education became weak. The characteristics of world history textbook of 1st curriculum can be summarized into three categories. First, regarding selection and organization of contents, the textbook intended to secure sequence by focusing on political history and dynastic history in middle school and cultural history in highschool. This organization of contents established the foundation of world history's contents organization principle later. However, what curriculum emphasized did not appear apparently such as rationalization of learning amount, contents organization focusing on debates and contents for improvement of historical thinking. Second, the description of contents shows western centered perspective. In description of textbook, the amount of oriental history and western history from prehistory to medieval times balances, but after modern times, the amount of western history outweighs drastically. In description, world history textbook reveals the perspective that Asia is less advanced compared to Europe under the premise that modern western culture was the greatest level among development stages of human history. It shows the logic flow that the world became integrated as the western centered after modern times, and that the western is in the center completing unified world history in present days. Western history outweighs oriental history in the amount of description of the textbook. Third, there is considerable amount of difference in the amount of textbook. This means the rationalization of learning amount, which was suggested by the government approved standards, wasn't applied strictly. There is not much difference in the amount per chapter of middle school textbook, but highschool world history textbook displays great difference in the amount among chapters. This means the perspectives of textbooks' authors might have affected the amount of description per each chapter.

역사수업에서 교사와 학생간 교육목표의 일치성 검토

남한호 역사교육학회 2010 역사교육논집 Vol.45 No.-

History and Educational Objectives have a meaning of starting or ending point that hopes students to learn it through a learning process based on a history subject. The educational objectives in the history lesson should be very importantly treated as it presents an important basis that the students should learn through a history lesson based on the characteristics or essence of history such as the characteristics of history, process of historical data, method of history study. In the real example of lesson, we verified that we should need two propositions so the students could recognize well the educational objectives of history intended by history teacher, and take out a good result for the educational objectives. First, the teacher should establish a clear educational objectives in designing his lesson, and a good lesson necessary for its objective. The history teachers have as the objectives of history education cultivating their historical thinking in a wide meaning. And they mention as a basis to establish the educational objectives the important contents of subject, content aspect regulated in the educational process, learning objectives by chapter presented in the teacher's guidance and textbook. However, the above-mentioned basis that help the teacher to establish the learning objectives are limited to be too general or in a certain division without sufficient examples. Therefore, we presented the following plan to solve this problem. Namely, we need to separate the content aspect from behavioral term, and to classify knowledge- understanding and the thought-skills, and the value-attitude to the characteristics of history lesson. And if the teacher connects the target limit of being highlighted according to the learning content, he will be able to establish various learning objectives. However, though the history lesson have the educational objectives well established for students to raise their educational performance as expected by the teacher, it will not be connected naturally to the students' target recognition. Finally, it is important to have an interaction between the teacher and students in the process that the teacher teaches them history as well as what intention the teacher has.

고등학교 세계사 교과서 제작 및 검정 과정의 제문제

南漢鎬,趙漢慶 청람사학회 2005 靑藍史學 Vol.11 No.-

9세기(世紀) 후반(后半) 신라상인(新羅商人)의 동향(動向)

南漢鎬 청람사학회 1997 靑藍史學 Vol.1 No.-

학생ㆍ교사의 관점에서 본 바람직한 세계사 교과서의 모습

남한호 웅진사학회 2005 역사와 역사교육 Vol.9 No.-

2015 개정 중학교 역사 교육과정의 내용 구성 방식과 그 특징

남한호 ( Nam Han-ho ) 역사교육학회 2016 역사교육논집 Vol.60 No.-

Contents of 2015 revised history curriculum secure sequences of middle and high schools and are rationalized so are constructed depending on logic to lighten the academic pressure. In content organization, middle school history is organized by focusing on a subject, so is different from Korean history in high school constructed with syntax structure focusing on political history. In content construction, middle school history, Korean history in high school, world history, and East Asian history are divided into five fields, and a method that big idea(key concept) is made as an organizer of contents so is made as the central axis penetrating grade is selected. Five results that content construction of 2015 revised middle school history curriculum is analyzed by focusing on characteristics and problems of key competencies becoming a reference frame of a curriculum, big idea playing a role of a content organizer, and validity of content construction focusing on a subject can be arranged. First, a clear concept of key competencies is not agreed yet. In addition, there is no significant differences between key subject competences suggested in a history curriculum and historical thinking, and key subject competences are also impertinent to be made as standards of content selection and construction of a curriculum. Second, ‘big idea(key concept)’ suggested as a frame of content construction is a super ordinate concept involving various concepts, so content elements based on individually historical truths are selected as key concept in comparison to a constituting principle of a curriculum enabling deep learning as an organizer combining fields in a subject, so it goes against a principle of a curriculum. Key concept constituting fields has the meaning of simple content elements, and is closer to characteristic as a subject rather than a concept. In addition, it is difficult to find a community combining Korean history and world history, and the meaning as an organizer connecting historical contents is weak. Third, the intention to constitute historical contents in middle school by focusing on a subject is to differentiate contents in middle school from contents in high school. However, when a study on a sequence method is referred, it is organized by focusing on a subject in middle school because syntax structure understanding the flow of history is better fitted for a method retrogressing an understanding of students in middle school. A subject is the meaning as learning experience that students can investigate a particular subject deeply in the learning process rather than a content construction principle of a curriculum, so is impertinent to be made as a content construction principle of a curriculum. Fourth, if detailed purposes, field system table, and achievement standards of a history curriculum are examined, a difference of content construction between middle school history and Korean history in high school is not clear, and there is a problem that political history should be repeated for elementary, middle, and high schools. Fifth, a method to reduce scope and contents treated in a world history field is selected to lighten academic pressure of students. As a result, the world history field does not treat history except for Chinese history, European history, and some of Japanese history in middle school history. This is because the reality of history education is not properly understood, so finally, this will cause desolation of world history education.