http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
國民學校에서 歷史的 分野의 學習 指導 過程의 構成에 對한 考察(Ⅱ)
崔震漢 진주교육대학교 1976 論文集 Vol.12 No.1
In the teaching form and the construction of learning and teaching process in studying the historical field there are no differences, and the preparation, practical use, production of the audio-visual materials are shown the backward phenomenon, that is to say, because teaching methods are emphasized in memorizing and teachers conduct children unilateraly, the foster of the historical ability that looks balk the pact and judges the present and looks ahead the future is lacking. So the study and improvement of the above are demanded. The presentation and the management of home works are shown backwardness. So We must consider many kinds in the presentation of home works, manage it soon, and revive the fruition in teaching process. We must study the many kinds of the method in evaluation if children recognize and understand the historical facts and events correctly or not in the process of arrangement. Teachers must not force the children to believe teacher's own critisism on persons and views in history and must guide for children so as to judge the true worth for persons with explaining the background of those days. Generally we think the spiritual education (patriotism, loving one's people, anti-communism, sincerity, diligence) in national history is developing in the right direction. (end)
崔震漢 진주교육대학교 1982 論文集 Vol.24 No.-
There are the political field (the counter-attack in parliament) and the outward field in economy (the in-feeling to specific man and special damage) and the economic field (a rise in prices and deterioration in quality and shorts in quantity) as the cause and reason of anti-movement of monopoly. But the responsible persons drived this movement were producers who had not monopoly. Surely they had no the same nature in opposition to monopolists. In every case, so far as the counter-attack was the endeavaur of in preservation, security, recovery of the existent ground for feudal producers, it was net weighty that made the political problem of anti-movement of monopoly. Then, as manufactural producess became the centrally responsible powers to drive mavement of monopoly, they could pull this movement up a great social and political movement that quaked the ground of monarchy. We think, that the social and economic historian did net consider well this point as usual. For instance, they disregarded, producer's counter-attack in anti-movement of monopoly and estimated too much consumer's and purchaser's opposition on a rise in prices and general public's counterattack on the special damage in outward field in economy. And though anyone recogntzed producer's counter-attack, did not estimate it lightly, so dealer with it like other several reasons of anti-movement of monopoly. And though anyone thinked much of producer's counterattcck, disregarded wholly the active face of manupactural producer's counter-attack, for considering producer' counter-attack as the endeavour of guild produces who protected onself from the submision to monopolists and the change to a wage-warkman. As mentioned above, as we estimate rightly the meaning of manufactural producer's counter-attack, we shall make clear that anti-movement of monopoly was a important link in social agitation resulted in Puritan Revolution.