지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
History education must deal with objective knowledge. In this context, the author in this study considered skeptical relativism of postmodernism to present methods for objectification of historical understanding. For doing this, the author examined various skepticisms to consider their possibility within the logic of objectification, and pursued methods for objective historical under -standing by applying logic of objectification.
The results of this study are as follows.
First, objectivity in historical understanding indicates good subjectivity. It is integration of subjectivity over an aspect, and is being completed as the present progressive form. Then, objectivity is achieved from a process in which the most objective possible explanations is inquire. However, postmodern epistemology fundamentally denies possibility of objectivity. According to it, historical description is only linguistic signs, thus truth in the past can not be known for good, and history is only discourse made by intentions.
Second, such skepticism, however, does not have to be accepted to the extreme degree, for history is being consistently objectified by efforts of detachment and academic disputes of historians. Objectification means widening of knowledge horizon, or a process of accumulation of validity. Objective knowledge is a process of discovering exemplary answer. In this point, objectivity has a possibility within the logic of objectification.
Third, such problems of objectivity has significant value in history education: there are right things that history must aim at; history is influenced by ideology; and historical judgment is important in history education. Therefore, history education should cope with objective knowledge, and students should materialize objective historical understanding by themselves. Teaching of objectification can be presented in this context: it may help to perceive problems, research perspectives, compare explanatory power, and objectify problems for materializing more objective knowledge.
The results of this study are as follows.
First, objectivity in historical understanding indicates good subjectivity. It is integration of subjectivity over an aspect, and is being completed as the present progressive form. Then, objectivity is achieved from a process in which the most objective possible explanations is inquire. However, postmodern epistemology fundamentally denies possibility of objectivity. According to it, historical description is only linguistic signs, thus truth in the past can not be known for good, and history is only discourse made by intentions.
Second, such skepticism, however, does not have to be accepted to the extreme degree, for history is being consistently objectified by efforts of detachment and academic disputes of historians. Objectification means widening of knowledge horizon, or a process of accumulation of validity. Objective knowledge is a process of discovering exemplary answer. In this point, objectivity has a possibility within the logic of objectification.
Third, such problems of objectivity has significant value in history education: there are right things that history must aim at; history is influenced by ideology; and historical judgment is important in history education. Therefore, history education should cope with objective knowledge, and students should materialize objective historical understanding by themselves. Teaching of objectification can be presented in this context: it may help to perceive problems, research perspectives, compare explanatory power, and objectify problems for materializing more objective knowledge.
목차
1. 머리말
2. 객관적인 역사인식과 포스트모더니즘의 회의론
3. 객관적인 역사인식과 객관화의 가능성
4. 역사인식의 객관화를 위한 학습의 모색
5. 맺음말
참고문헌 (79)
참고문헌 신청
1. [단행본] - 정선영 / 2001 / 역사교육의 이해 / 삼지원 : 19 ~
2. [단행본] - J. Higham / 1965 / History:Professional Scholarship in America / Johns Hopkins University Press : 115 ~
3. [단행본] - R. V. Daniels / 1966 / Studying History / Prentice-Hall, Inc : 11 ~
4. [단행본] - G. G. Iggers / 1997 / Historiography in the Twentieth Century / Wesleyan University Press : 6 ~ 10
5. [단행본] - 양호환 / 2006 / 역사 학습의 인식론적 모색 in: 역사교육과 역사인식 / 책과함께 : 41 ~
2. [단행본] - J. Higham / 1965 / History:Professional Scholarship in America / Johns Hopkins University Press : 115 ~
3. [단행본] - R. V. Daniels / 1966 / Studying History / Prentice-Hall, Inc : 11 ~
4. [단행본] - G. G. Iggers / 1997 / Historiography in the Twentieth Century / Wesleyan University Press : 6 ~ 10
5. [단행본] - 양호환 / 2006 / 역사 학습의 인식론적 모색 in: 역사교육과 역사인식 / 책과함께 : 41 ~
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
시의 대상화 방식에 관한 연구
우리말글
2019 .06
-
학문 목적 학습자의 객관화 전략 사용 양상 연구 - 중국인 학습자의 학술 텍스트를 중심으로
언어사실과 관점
2017 .01
-
포스트모던 역사인식과 역사학습
역사교육
2000 .06
-
포스트모던 시대의 ‘역사학’을 위하여
역사학보
2008 .12
-
歷史의 有用性과 歷史敎育目標
역사교육
2003 .09
-
역사교사의 인지적 특성이 역사수업에 미치는 영향
역사교육
2004 .03
-
역사교육의 최종 목표와 역사적 통찰력
역사교육
2008 .12
-
역사적 사고력의 하위범주와 역사학습목표의 설정방안
역사교육
2000 .04
-
역사적 사고의 한계와 역사화의 가능성
역사교육
2003 .09
-
역사교육의 담론과 학문적 가능성
역사교육
2006 .03
-
정신의 객관화와 객체화 : 니콜라이 하르트만의 『정신적 존재의 문제』를 중심으로
철학연구
2005 .02
-
전근대 국사의 형성과 그 발전
韓國史學史學報
2008 .01
-
동북아 시대에서 한국사 서술과 역사교육 : ‘국사’를 넘어서
역사교육
2005 .09
-
역사 서술의 문학성과 역사소설의 새로운 경향
국어국문학
2005 .12
-
역사교육과 역사학의 거리
역사교육
2016 .06
-
歷史敎育에 있어서 敎科書 活用의 問題
역사교육
2002 .12
-
大學 敎養敎育으로서의 歷史敎育의 方向
역사와 담론
1977 .04
-
클리오들의 투쟁 : 서양 근대사에서의 역사가와 이념
역사학보
2009 .03
-
중학교 국사교육의 의미와 내용구성
역사교육
2012 .12
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-374-002478699