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
During past several decades, history profession has faced a serious challenge on its academic purpose and methodology from so called post-structuralism, 'linguistic turn,' deconstructionism, and postmodernism. They questioned the existence of 'historical reality,' because they define reality as language and believe 'a real world' is only represented in text. Thus the object of historical study is not a real past but a 'texted past.' Historical documents as a text can be interpreted with various meanings. At the extreme stage, fact and fiction, history and literature become indistinguishable from one another. They asked historians to restore narrative tradition, questioning 'objectivity' of historical writing.
This perception on history has brought a great stir among historians, in saying that there is no reality out there which is anything but a subjective creation of the historian. It denies the fundamental base of modern history profession, that 'historical narrative reflects a reality of the past.' Even though there aren't many historians who follows that it is language that creates meaning, 'linguistic turn' has taught them to examine texts with far more care and caution than they did before. Postmodern perception of history also urged historians to introspect on the substance and limits of historical study, and contributed to explore a new sphere and ways of historical inquiry.
New recognition of history not only brought a meaningful perspective on historical truth, evidence, problem of cause and effect, and historical fact and fiction, but it also made us reconsider the problem of teaching and learning history, hinting a possibility of creating meaningful historical knowledge in the classrooms. Skepticism on 'universal knowledge,' critique on dichotomy of subject and object of thinking, and denial of 'objective historical writing' and 'totality of history,' raised a question on whether there is a basic historical knowledge which should be taught in schools. To avoid history teaching being a myth and a fake, teachers and students should be restored as beings of 'doing' history. And they need to read historical text critically, not just receive the meaning of text but read 'intention in writing a text' considering context of the text, and finally create their own meaning. 'Critical reading' leads to writing history and telling their own voice in narratives. Critical reading and history writing can be a way of producing active historical knowledge.
This perception on history has brought a great stir among historians, in saying that there is no reality out there which is anything but a subjective creation of the historian. It denies the fundamental base of modern history profession, that 'historical narrative reflects a reality of the past.' Even though there aren't many historians who follows that it is language that creates meaning, 'linguistic turn' has taught them to examine texts with far more care and caution than they did before. Postmodern perception of history also urged historians to introspect on the substance and limits of historical study, and contributed to explore a new sphere and ways of historical inquiry.
New recognition of history not only brought a meaningful perspective on historical truth, evidence, problem of cause and effect, and historical fact and fiction, but it also made us reconsider the problem of teaching and learning history, hinting a possibility of creating meaningful historical knowledge in the classrooms. Skepticism on 'universal knowledge,' critique on dichotomy of subject and object of thinking, and denial of 'objective historical writing' and 'totality of history,' raised a question on whether there is a basic historical knowledge which should be taught in schools. To avoid history teaching being a myth and a fake, teachers and students should be restored as beings of 'doing' history. And they need to read historical text critically, not just receive the meaning of text but read 'intention in writing a text' considering context of the text, and finally create their own meaning. 'Critical reading' leads to writing history and telling their own voice in narratives. Critical reading and history writing can be a way of producing active historical knowledge.
목차
1. 머리말
2. 역사인식의 전환
3. ‘역사 읽기’와 ‘역사 쓰기’
4. 맺음말
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
역사교육과 역사학의 거리
역사교육
2016 .06
-
역사 서술의 문학성과 역사소설의 새로운 경향
국어국문학
2005 .12
-
역사적 사고의 한계와 역사화의 가능성
역사교육
2003 .09
-
역사적 사실의 특징과 역사교육의 특수성
역사교육
2010 .03
-
비판적 역사 읽기와 역사 쓰기
역사교육
2002 .03
-
클리오들의 투쟁 : 서양 근대사에서의 역사가와 이념
역사학보
2009 .03
-
고려시대 관련 역사소설의 대중성과 향후 전망
인문콘텐츠
2004 .06
-
사료내용의 전달방식에 따른 고등학생의 역사이해
역사교육
2013 .03
-
역사적 사고력의 하위범주와 역사학습목표의 설정방안
역사교육
2000 .04
-
전근대 국사의 형성과 그 발전
韓國史學史學報
2008 .01
-
학생들의 역사 개념에 대한 이해 양상과 역사의식
역사교육
2009 .09
-
고등학생과 역사가의 역사 텍스트 독해 양상과 텍스트 독해 교수학습 전략
역사교육
2013 .03
-
내러티브 교재와 역사 학습
역사교육
2007 .09
-
大學 敎養敎育으로서의 歷史敎育의 方向
역사와 담론
1977 .04
-
歷史家與歷史知識的大眾化
역사와실학
2010 .11
-
歷史敎材의 撰述에서 用語選定의 問題
역사교육
2009 .03
-
역사가의 사고과정이 드러나는 서술의 특징과 교재개발 방향
역사교육
2000 .04
-
역사 교수-학습에서 `주체`의 문제 : 고등학교 `한국사` 민주화, 산업화 서술 내용을 중심으로
역사와 세계
2014 .06
-
현재의 한국사 연구와 역사관 문제
韓國史學史學報
2003 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-374-015489998