本研究關注於｢九五暫綱」高中歷史教科書所引發的相關討論，自2003年教育部公佈課程綱要草案，隨即引爆意識型態爭議，原訂於民國九十五學年度實行之課程綱要，改為以暫行綱要過渡，而正式課程綱要已於2008年發佈，但相關爭議仍懸而未解，因此保留國文、歷史兩科，其餘於民國九十九學年度正式施行。
回顧教育改革歷程，高中教科書開放民間編印之後，儘管各家出版社依據課程綱要編寫教科書，但意識型態與教科書內容的關係，始終是爭議的核心之一，台灣社會中媒體關注的焦點往往集中於政治議題，特別是台灣史、中國史內容在｢綱」、｢本」、｢審」三個層次的爭議。
本研究以歷史教科書為探索的主要核心，希望可以將歷史教學從意識型態爭議中脫身出來，回歸教育本質，故擬定八項主題，以教科書論述為分析對象，探討歷史教科書中台灣意識與中國意識的相互關係。
本研究所採行的研究方法如下：
(1)文獻分析—本研究藉由相關新聞報導、學者論著的整理，從中彙整討論議題。
(2)內容分析的質性研究—本研究著重教科書文本內容的探討。
(3)深度訪談—深入了解現職教師對｢九五暫綱」及新課程實施的觀點及評價。
本文的研究發現如下：
(1)核心能力的設計就理想和現實層面間仍存在差距。
(2)從｢九五暫綱」到｢九八課綱」皆未能充分協調各方意見。
(3)教科書朝向多元發展但仍有很大的進步空間。
(4)各版本教科書在爭議主題上各有偏倚。
(5)教科書的｢中國意識」相較於｢台灣意識」較為弱化。
(6)台灣史與中國史在分量上的調整易引發理解及教學上的困擾。
(7)多數受訪教師關注的焦點並非意識型態或政治立場的爭議。
(8)媒體過度渲染意識型態。
對於之後正式課程綱要的修訂、高中歷史教科書的編輯及後續研究方向的建議如下：
(1)成立專責教育改革研發機構。
(2)避免於教科書編輯、審查機制中強行加入個人主觀意見。
(3)教師應不斷的自我省思與充實。
(4)在台灣意識與中國意識之間找尋一種平衡的新中間路線。
(5)針對課綱修訂過程、審查機制運作、考試方式、題型設計再加以深入研究。
(6)擴大訪談教師意見，並擴及學生意見，使教學現場完整呈現。 / This study aims at examining the controversy of 2006 curriculum guidelines and history textbooks of senior high school. In 2003, with the revolution of education, the ministry of education announced temporary curriculum guidelines would be put into practice in 2006, and such immediately brought about many fierce debates on ideology. Therefore, in 2008, the curriculum guidelines were revised, but problems of ideology were still being concerned.
After the liberating of the textbooks editing system, private publishers have been allowed to compile and publish various versions of textbooks. That means despite the set guidelines, diversity of contents existed. The diversity involved ideology, which mass media paid much attention to, especially concerning Taiwan and China history.
Textbooks shouldn’t be used as a tool to convey political ideas. In order to let the education system be free from political influence, 8 main ideas were chosen as the topics to be compared by analyzing the contents of Taiwan and China history textbooks which involved the conflict of Taiwan as well as Chinese consciousness.
To achieve the research goals, methods applied in the study include:
(1)Document analysis--being conducted to collect related issues.
(2)Qualitative approaches to content analysis—being adopted to compare the
disparities in texts and historical evaluation by analyzing the contents.
(3)Depth Interview--being utilized to analyze teachers’ perspectives and assessment
of new history curriculum design.
The research finds that
(1)There were differences between the ideal and actual reality of core competencies of 2006 curriculum guidelines.
(2)Current curriculum guidelines failed to coordinate different ideas.
(3)It was still a lot of room for the editors to improve the quality of textbooks.
(4)Different versions of textbooks have a great diversity in editing and selecting contents of historical materials.
(5)With the growing of Taiwan consciousness, Chinese consciousness was inevitably weakened.
(6)The proportion of Taiwan history increased while that of China history decreased. The adjustment has plagued teachers and students.
(7)According to the interview, most teachers emphasized the importance of teaching instead of ideology.
(8)Mass media overemphasized on ideology disputes.
Suggestions for future study and research are as follows：
(1)The ministry of education should establish an administration to reform history
education.
(2)The edition work and examining mechanism of history textbooks should be free
from interference of strong personal opinions.
(3)With the changes of education, teachers should adapt to the innovation to keep up with times.
(4)The tolerance and respect of dissent was the key to promoting fusibility of ethnic groups.
(5)Researchers should continue to study the development of history education.
(6)Future research should offer teachers and students a way to express their opinions.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0922610171 |
| Creators | 李皖玲 |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0025 seconds