3 · 1운동 관련 교과서 서술의 변천 분석

崔柄澤

doi:10.18622/kher.2019.09.151.1

주제분류

...

저널정보

역사교육연구회
역사교육 학술저널
歷史敎育第151輯
2019.9 1 - 27 (27page)
DOI : 10.18622/kher.2019.09.151.1

저자정보

崔柄澤

이용수
내서재: 0

내서재에 추가
되었습니다. 내서재에서
삭제되었습니다.

초록·키워드

오류제보하기

The March 1st Movement has a significant historical significance. Therefore, textbooks have explained the movement in detail. In the 1970s, Korean education authorities published a government-designated history textbook to standardize consciousness of history. Education authorities put a nationalistic view of history on the front and interpreted the March 1st Movement as a nationalist interpretation framework. As part of that perspective, education authorities explained that this movement strengthened national unity and persuaded the people to overcome the national crisis through national unity as if Koreans expressed their will to independence through the March 1st Movement during the Japanese occupation. Many scholars criticize this interpretation as a Cold War view, and I agree with such criticism on the history textbook.
With the introduction of the certification system for history books, this problem began to be alleviated. The textbook writers under the certification system for history books by private publishers explained the movement as a trigger for expanding public opinion on the fundamental right of national sovereignty. Recently, there has been an evaluation for the movement as an event that pursuing world peace and opposing imperialism.

#3 · 1운동 #대한민국 임시정부 #역사 교과서 #한국근 · 현대사 교과서 #한국사 교과서 #The March First Independence Movement #The Certification System for History Textbooks #Fundamental Right of National Sovereignty