중학교 교과서의 독립운동 서술과 문제점

Abstract

In the article I examined whether the structure and composition of the textbooks used at secondary schools is suitable for the general frame of the Korean independence movement and whether the facts related to the independence movement are appropriate. The description related to the independence movement in the textbooks used at secondary schools seems to keep considerably aloof from academic research. This is exposed in the structure and composition of the textbooks as it is. First of all, it can be said that the independence movement, the movement of socialists and a popular movement in 1910s, and the independence movement in 1930s were ruled out or roughly described. This appears when the independence movement is considered in part and in section rather than in statistical system and it can said to be a short-sighted view or a prejudice. Accordingly, it stands in the way to understand the flow of the independence movement consecutively and expansively. As it can impede clarifying the causal relationship of the independence movement, it has a significant problem to bring about confusion of a historical view. And it should be corrected that a reformism campaign was described in the field of a independence movement or racial movement. As this can result in wrapping pro-Japanese activities up in the independence movement at a slightest slip, an inquiry into the rights and wrongs of a case should be performed on accurate basis. In class of the Korean language, ethics and social study, individual focused lessons are given to the students. As special stress is put on the course of study, the lesson of an independence movement is not given to the students on the level of finding the value of the independence movement. As the number of the leading figures involved in the independence movement is limited, it would be necessary to make the best use of independence fighters verified by Korean independence movement studies. Improper use of the wrong history terms exposes significant mistakes to history education of the Korean independence movement. Not a few terms like "annexation", "union", "Treaty between Korea and Japan in 1905" which were used by imperialist Japan to conceal its intention of invasion were included in them. The issue of improper use of the wrong history terms seem to show the scene of present history education which didn't still liquidate the remnants of Japan's colonization of Korea. I think an intensive study should be followed to purify the history terms.