고등학교 한국사 관련 교과서에 나타난 천주교회사 서술

김아네스(Kim Agnes) 한국교회사연구소 2011 敎會史硏究 Vol.0 No.36

This paper aims at critically exploring the descriptions of Korean Catholic history in high school Korean history textbooks. The study examined textbooks currently used in high schools, which include National History(Guksa), Korean Modern and Contemporary History(Hanguk Geunhyeondaesa), and Korean History (Hanguksa). The study analyzes the formats and the contents of the textbooks, points out the problems in the description of the Korean Catholic history and presents suggestions for improvement. In terms of formats, Catholicism was rarely selected as a topic, and the description on Catholic was minimal. National History(Guksa) selected ‘propagation of Catholic’ in late Joseon era as a sub-topic. Korean Modern and Contemporary History(Hanguk Geunhyeondaesa) and Korean History(Hanguksa) described on the acceptance of Catholic and persecution under the sub-topic of social transformation in late Joseon era. In the modern history chapter, Korean history textbooks rarely dealt with religions including Catholic. Textbooks should provide more description on the achievements of Catholic churches. For example, in late Joseon Catholic churches criticized Confucius social order, and in modern history Catholic churches contributed to the democratization of the nation. Chronologically, Korean history textbooks described on the acceptance of and persecution on Catholic churches in late 18th century. In describing early catholic history, current textbooks did not give weight to the catholic catechism and the significance of establishing churches volunteered by parishioners in the absence of missionaries. The textbooks should supplement such contents as catechism that early catholic believers accepted and the significance of their worship. They should also present the ideological and socio-political perspectives by explaining the reason why Joseon government persecuted Catholic churches and examining the factors that affected the spread of Catholicism despite the persecution. In the modem history chapter, textbooks described that Catholic institutions took the lead in providing the social welfare services by running orphanages and convalescent homes. The books also mentioned that Catholic institutions established schools and published newspapers, therefore, contributed in enlightening the people. In the Japanese colonial times chapter, the textbooks described that Catholic churches continued to provide the welfare services and participated in national in dependence movements. They also give light to the Catholic parishioners in Manchuria who organized Uimindan and pioneered in anti-Japanese movement. In terms of contemporary history, a couple of textbooks described major Catholic commemorative events and social welfare services. Pro-Japanese activities or corruption by religious figures were rarely mentioned in the textbooks. In the future, the textbooks should present balanced point of view by describing both contributions and the problems of the Catholic churches in the Korean history.

한국근대사 교육의 쟁점과 과제

김한종(Kim, Han-jong) 독립기념관 한국독립운동사연구소 2016 한국독립운동사연구 Vol.0 No.56

이글에서는 한국근대사 교육의 쟁점과 과제를 분석하여 개선 방안을 제시하고자 했다. 한국근대사 교육의 쟁점으로는 세계사적 맥락을 강조하는 한국근대사 이해 방법, 틀에 박힌 근대사의 체계와 학습 방안, 한국근대사 연구성과의 학교 역사교육 반영, 한국근대사 인식을 둘러싼 사회갈등을 들 수 있다. 교육과정이나 교과서는 세계사적 맥락에서 한국근대사를 이해할 것을 강조한다. 그러나 한국근대사와 세계사를 어떻게 연결할 것인지는 교과서마다 차이가 있다. 교과서에서 한국근대사에 영향을 미친 서구 국가들의 정책이나 세계적 상황은 제대로 나오지 않는다. 교과서나 교실수업에서 다루는 한국근대사의 체계는 1970년부터 현재까지 별로 달라지지 않았다. 한국근대사 연구성과는 한국사교과서에 어느 정도 반영되었다. 그러나 교과서에 따라 차이가 있으며, 동일한 역사적 사실이 집필기준이나 교과서 검정과정에서 달라진다. 한국근대사 인식을 둘러싼 사회적 갈등은 정치적 성격을 띠고 있다. 문호개방과 개화정책의 평가, 식민지 근대화론을 둘러싼 논란, 이승만의 독립운동 등은 논란이 되고 있는 주제들이다. 한국근대사 교육의 이와 같은 문제를 해결하기 위해서는 먼저 교육내용을 재구성해야 한다. 한국근대사 교육내용을 재구성 방안은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 근대사 내용체계를 재구조화할 필요가 있다. 한국 근대사회가 지향했던 국가나 사회상을 기준으로 근대사의 전개과정을 이해하는 연구서나 한국사 연구성과를 정리한 역사입문서의 단원구조를 이 작업에 참고할 수 있다. 둘째, 학습내용의 요소를 조정해야 한다. 근대사 내용체계를 구조화하고, 이해를 위한 스토리라인을 마련한 다음, 이에 적합한 사실을 선택해야 한다. 셋째, 근대사의 일부 학습내용을 보완해야 한다. 생활사, 민족운동과 민중운동, 사회적 소수의 역사를 학습해야 한다. 사실지식 중심의 역사교육에서 비판적 사고를 기르는 역사교육으로 전환해야 한다. 이는 역사교육 전반의 과제이지만, 한국근대사 교육에서 특히 필요하다. 한국근대사 교육이 비판적 사고를 기를 수 있도록 하려면, 다양한 행위선택의 기회를 제공해야 한다. 역사적 상황에 대한 판단과 의사결정을 경험하는 역사수업이 필요하다. 이를 위해서는 근대에 일어난 역사적 사실이나 근대사 자료를 다원적 관점에서 생각할 수 있는 수업을 해야 한다. 동일한 역사적 사실을 서로 다른 관점에서 서술한다든지 대비하여 평가를 하고, 비교하는 것도 비판적 사고에 도움이 된다. This study aims to analyze issues and tasks of Korean modern history teaching and to suggest some strategies for developing it. Main issues of Korean modern history teaching are as follows: understanding method of Korean modern history contextualized in world history, routine framework of Korean modern history and its learning method, applying research results of Korean modern history to school history, social conflict around to recognizing Korean modern history. National curriculum and textbook emphasize the context of world history for understanding Korean modern history. But there are some differences of interconnecting with Korean modern history and world history among history textbooks. The content on the policy of Western states and world context is not involved in middle and high school history textbook. Next, the framework of Korean modern history in history textbook and history classroom has little changed since 1970s. History textbooks accepted many research results of Korean modern history. But there are some differences among textbooks, and the description of same historical facts changes according to writing guideline and through the course of authorizing textbook. Social conflict around to recognizing Korean modern history has political nature. The evaluation on the opening of a port and the enlighment policy, colonial modernity controversy and independent movement Lee, Sung-man are hot issues in Korean modern history. We should firstly reorganize learning contents to solve these problems on Korean modern history teaching. Some strategies to reorganize learning contents of Korean modern history are as follows. First, we should restructure content framework of Koran modern history. We can refer to handbook for studying Korean history and research book which try to understand the developing course of modern times based on state vision. Second, we should control elements of learning contents. We should structure contents of Korean modern history at first, construct sdtoryline for understanding them next, and select historical facts suitable to them last. Third, we should make up for learning contents, for example, history of nation movement, people movement and the minority. It is important to transform from knowing historical facts to developing critical thinking of history education. Critical thinking is necessary for learning Korean modern history. History teacher provide various experiments of act to develop students" critical thinking. Students should judge historical circumstance and select decision-making in history classroom. History teacher should make history classroom for students to think modern historical facts or documents with multi-perspective. It is desirable for developing critical thinking to describe the same historical fact with other’s perspective, and compare and then evaluate its results.

역사교육을 둘러싼 한국과 미국의 이념논쟁 비교

정경희(Kyung-Hee Chung) 한국아메리카학회 2008 美國學論集 Vol.40 No.3

The controversy over the Natinal History Standards in America during 1994-5 and the controversy over Korean modern history textbooks in Korea since 2004 assume a very similar aspect in spite of almost a decade's time difference. This study aims to analyze and compare in derail the history education debates in the two countries. First of all, both in America and in Korea the controversy was stimulated by the media, not by the academics Soon, the controversy extended to the legislative body of each country, and sparked intense poltical debates over history education. In January 1995 the United States Senate passed a resolution condemning the National Standards for History as un-American, and the authors of the standards were forced to revise them. In 2004 Korea National Assembly, too moch swayed by the party interests, did not do anything but further polarized the bitter dispute when a conservative Congressman insisted that the narrative of the Korean modern history textbook is overly anti-American and Pro-North Korean Textbook Forum, a group of intellectuals held symposia and published several books including korean Modern History an Alternative Textbook as a counter to the existing Korean modern history textbooks, which were deemed to be left-leaning by the group. However, it was not until the new conservative administration was launched in early 2008 that the revision of korean modern history textbooks saw any progress. Conservatives led by Lynne Cheney criticized the Standards for describing American past "too grim and gloomy" In Korea its modern history textbooks were blamed for narrating Korea's history of recent sixty from negative perspective, while writing that of North Korea as positively as possible. In both countries it was the main issue of the debates that the national history, especially the stories of nation building and the founding fathers were depicted too negatively in the Standards and history textbooks. It is also similar that during the debates both sides condemned that the other sides are politicizing history. Peoples involved in the Standards controversy and Korean modern history textbooks controversy charged that the opposing sides are politically motivated. As a result, the history education became the arena for the ideological controversy. Thus, ironically teachers and students who are directly involved in the issue of teaching and learning were excluded from the debates in both countries. It is noteworthy that the long ideological controversy in both Korea and in America was pressed by the extreme difference of historical recognition between the traditionalists and the revisionists.

한국 근대불교 연구와 국사교과서의 근대불교 서술

한상길 한국불교선리연구원 2011 禪文化硏究 Vol.10 No.-

『The Korean History』 and 『The Korean Modern and Contemporary History』 are the subjects of the history among the high school curriculum. Along with the name, 『The Korean History』 cover all historical era, and 『The Korean Modern and Contemporary History』 for modern and Contemporary history. According to examine thoroughly modern and contemporary Buddhism in these two textbooks, each related contents were found 43 items. We thought that narrated large quantity if only seen all items, that isn't exact correct. According to the article in the 『The Korean History』 just three fields. That is summarized ‘Han Yong - Woon’s reform movement’, ‘The 1919Independence Movement of Korea and Buddhism’ and ‘Japanese Buddhist policy and resistance’. However Han Yong - Woon was appearance in common three fields. Because buddhist movements during in the 1919 Independence Movement of Korea were he's activities. He was a great man during the reformation of the modern buddhism and independence movement, thereby concentrated on only him neglected variations of the modern buddhism. Buddhist narrations in the 『The Korean Modern and Contemporary History』 classified five divisions. ‘Ideas of Enlightenment and Buddhism’,‘Penetration of Japanese Buddhism’, ‘Han Yong - Woon’s reform movement’,‘The 1919 Independence Movement of Korea and Buddhism’ and ‘Japanese Buddhist policy and repression’. Examining these minutely I found several mistakes. That is, as it were misconstruction on 『The Revitalizing Reformation of Chosun Buddhism』 and lacking in understanding under the Japanese Imperialistic laws. These are not different opinions view of history, but only lacking in the acid verification about the historical fact. Therefore in my own way try to find a solution to textbooks problems in the right direction. 고등학교 역사 과목 중에 『국사』와 『한국근 ․ 현대사』가 있다. 교과서 이름과 같이 『국사』는 우리나라 역사의 전시대를 포괄하고, 『한국근 ․ 현대사』는근현대의 역사를 대상으로 한다. 이 두 교과서를 대상으로 근현대불교에 관한 서술을 검토한 결과, 각각 16건, 27건의 관련 내용을 확인할 수 있다. 항목수만 보면, 적지 않은 분량이 서술되었을 것이라 생각되지만, 실정은 그렇지않다. 16건의 『국사』 서술을 내용에 따라 분류하면 불과 3개의 항목뿐이다. 즉 ‘한용운의 개혁 운동’, ‘3 ․ 1운동과 불교’, ‘일제의 불교정책과 저항’의 세 가지로 요약된다. 그런데 이 세 항목에 공통적으로 등장하는 인물이 한용운이다. 3 ․ 1운동에 참여한 불교계의 활동은 곧 한용운의 활동이었고, 또한 일제의 불교정책과 그에 대한 저항을 한용운의 유신운동과 卍黨 활동을 서술하였다. 그러므로 전체 16건의 내용은 결국 한용운 한 사람에 대한 서술로 귀결된다고 할 수 있다. 한용운은 근대불교의 개혁과 민족운동의 상징적인 존재임이틀림없지만, 서술이 그에게 집중됨으로써 근대불교의 다양성을 소외시키는결과를 초래하였다. 『한국근 ․ 현대사』 27건의 불교 서술은 내용에 따라 5개의 항목으로 구분된다. ‘개화사상과 불교’, ‘일본 불교의 침투’, ‘한용운의 개혁 운동’, ‘3 ․ 1운동과불교’, ‘일제의 불교정책과 탄압’ 등이다. 이를 각 항목별로 자세하게 검토한결과, 몇 가지의 서술 오류를 확인하였다. 『조선불교유신론』에 대한 잘못된이해와 일제하의 법령에 대한 오류 등이다. 교과서 집필자들의 역사관에 의한 견해 차이가 아니라, 역사적 사실에 대한 엄밀한 검증이 부족한 탓이다. 이에 대한 나름대로의 구체적 대안을 제시하여 올바른 교과서의 서술 방향을모색하였다.

국정 『국사』 교과서와 검정 『한국사』 교과서의 현대사 체계와 내용 분석

김정인(Kim, Jeong-in) 한국역사연구회 2014 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.92

Korean Contemporary historical studies became active in the 1980s. But education of it had begun and continued since right after the liberation, through textbooks. In a sense, education of the Korean contemporary history preceded the academic research of it. Then, since the 『National History』 textbook, which first appeared in 1974 under the government’s textbook-designation system, the national history textbooks ‘designated’ by the government for example in 1979 and 1982 served as a method of ideology education based upon an anti-Communist agenda. Only coming into the 1990s, with the society’s demand for democracy higher than ever and studies in the contemporary history of Korea accumulated to a certain degree, such ideology education grew weaker. A giant leap taken in the education of Korea’s contemporary history was made possible with the new Textbook Certification system, and the advent of a new breed of Korean modern and contemporary history textbooks which were based upon results from new academic researches, in 2002. With this turning point, the textbooks came to serve not as a tool of ideology education, but a conduit to relay academic knowledge to the students in an educational fashion. The textbooks, even the government-designated ones released in 2002 and 2006 along with the ‘certified’ textbooks were no different in that regard. Among the 2014 textbooks, only the Gyohak-sa textbook (and its Contemporary history section) resembled the perspective and structure of the government-designated ones, while the textbooks from the other seven publishers resembled that of the 2002 Certified Korean Modern and Contemporary historical textbooks. Currently there is a drive that intends to resurrect the textbook designation system, and publish the Korean history textbooks accordingly. But Korean Contemporary history education performed through government-designated textbooks would create results entirely different from those that would be created by the academic circle whose overall intention is to connect research and education in an ideal way. In such circumstances, it is highly possible that education would be tainted by political agendas. We should be more than concerned about that prospect.

어문학(語文學) : 중국인 학습자를 위한 한국 근현대사 교육의 다양한 방안 모색

문형진 ( Hyoung Jin Moon ) 한국외국어대학교 중국연구소 2011 中國硏究 Vol.51 No.-

This study is aimed for exploring a variety of methods for education of Korean modern and contemporary history for Chinese learners and the rough summary is as follows. Chapter II, "Description Tendency of Korean Modern and Contemporary History in the Chinese History Textbook", looked into description tendency of Korean modern and contemporary history in the Chinese history textbook. And it found out that it is reflective of historical perception of the Chinese communists in description of Korean history and depicted its transitional process as well. Chapter III verified that Chinese learners are short of perception of Korean history through conducting a questionnaire survey and characterized its distinction by analysing descriptive tendency of Chinese history and Korean history. Chapter IV, "Reconsideration of Korean History Education", described four educational methods of Korean modern and contemporary history for Chinese learners and the necessity of language education through history as well as comparative and integrated education. It also stated the necessity of publishing distinct textbook for foreign learners to implement proper history education. It emphasized the necessity of taking various methods and objective view in education of Korean modern and contemporary history for foreigners, especially for the people in neighboring China considering that Korea and China fought against in the Korean War despite their common experience that both countries suffered aggression by Western powers and Japanese imperialism.

7차 검인정 『한국근·현대사』 교과서 수록 지도의 구성과 경향성

윤정 역사실학회 2011 역사와실학 Vol.46 No.-

Examined in this article, are the contents and characteristics of all the maps, of which the contents pertain to the Korean history of the pre-Japanese occupation period, inserted in the 『Korean Modern and Contemporary History』 textbooks which have been approved by the 7th series of textbook authorization process and cleared to be used in schools. The contents and characteristics are compared to them of the other 『National History』 textbooks, published earlier. Many pictures taken during the modern days were recently recovered, and many of them are inserted in these new generation of textbooks. So, compared to the inside of other existing 『National History』 textbooks created much earlier, all kinds of visual data ‘other than maps’ are featured significantly more dominantly in these books. And at the same time, the overall discussion in these textbooks mostly begin with the examination of the history of the three harbors’ initial opening, so discussing all the internal changes that had been developing inside the Joseon society as a history which set the stage for all the history that unfolded after the harbor opening, is not an easy task. As a result, the discussion of the history of the transitional period between pre-modern times and the modern times, albeit displaying a structure of examining both the invasive foreign forces and the Koreans’ response to them, concentrates more upon the issue of the former than the latter, which is discussed by most of the textbooks yet at extremely different levels. Considering the nature of the society which was witnessing the Korean community’s transition from the past to the modern era, the issue of ‘the Koreans’ resistance against exterior forces’ and the issue of ‘the Koreans’ trying to dismantle the existing feudal order’ cannot be separated. The entire history of the peasants’ uprising, that led all the way to the actions of the righteous militias, should be discussed and understood as a natural flow of events.

기억의 충돌과 역사 교과서 : -「대안 교과서 한국 근·현대사」의 대안성-

하경수 한국사회교과교육학회 2008 사회과교육연구 Vol.15 No.2

A new textbook on Korean history was published by the Korean Textbook Forum in March, 2008, A Substitute Textbook on Modern and Contemporary Korean History. This has aroused a great deal of controversies over the relationship between contemporary Korean history and the textbook on it. In the field of history it is believed that the epistemological conversations between the past and the present are the pivotal basis of the construct of history. It implies that anyone may write history in his own way after pursuing the epistemological conversation. However, history differs from history education in its purpose and function, which naturally results in the difference between an academic book on history and a textbook on it. The major purpose of an academic history book is to help us look into and understand what the lives of human beings in the past were like. On the other hand, a history textbook aims to educate learners of history about attitudes toward history, historical perspectives, and practices. The contemporary learners of history are the very agents of history making responsible for leaving footprints on which future generations can carry on their own conversations with the past. Therefore, history education and textbooks should not emphasize only the historical facts and memories that have been constructed and left by others because the learners require far more than simple understanding of historical facts or epistemological, academic views of history. They are supposed to be not only active practitioners who can make history without any fear or hesitation, but also challenging learners who try to figure out how to leave a trace of their own beings in history. This suggests that publication and evaluation of textbooks on history should be based on the nature and purpose of history education and textbooks. <교과서포럼>은 2008년 3월에 「대안 교과서 한국 근·현대사」를 발간하였다. 포럼은 현행 한국 근현대사 교과서가 대한민국이 잘못 태어났고 성장에 장애를 겪고 있는 국가라고 가르치는 자학사관에 물들어 있다고 비난하며, 잘못된 역사쓰기는 바로 세워야 한다는 사명감에서 대안 교과서를 발간했다고 밝히고 있다. 우리나라 근현대사 교육의 문제점을 제기하면서, 교과서로 눈을 돌리는 움직임이 처음 있었던 것은 아니었지만, 포럼의 경우는 기존 교과서에 담겨있는 역사의식 자체를 부정한다는 점에서 큰 차이를 보이고 있다. 포럼은 현행 근현대사 교과서에서 구성의 균형성과 내용의 객관성을 문제 삼으며, 실사구시를 교과서 철학으로 내세우고 있다. 그러나 잘못된 역사쓰기에 대한 문제제기는 역사학의 쟁점이 될 수는 있어도, 역사교육의 존재이유는 아니다. 실증주의도 역사연구의 기본전제이기는 하지만, 그것만으로 역사교육의 목표가 달성되는 것이 아니다. 기존의 교과서가 부족하여 실사구시의 입장에서 다시 썼다는 것으로 새로운 교과서에 정당성이 부여되는 것도 아니다. 포럼이 제기하는 자학사관 청산론은 식민사관과 일본 교과서 문제처럼 외부의 자극이 아닌 자국민의 자기반성에서 비롯된 것이라는 점에서 남다른 의미가 있다. 그러나 대안 교과서에서 ‘당신들의 역사’가 아니라 ‘우리들의 역사’를 쓰겠다는 포럼의 역사인식 속에는 역사 교과서와 역사책을 같은 것으로 이해하는 시각이 배어있다. 또한 계승과 청산의 경계선이 뚜렷한 포럼의 주장과 논리 속에 교과서 권력에 대한 강한 의지가 엿보인다는 것은 부인하기 어렵다. 역사가의 역사서술은 현재의 역사인식을 통해 과거의 역사를 소비하기 위한 것이지만, 역사교육은 살아있는 인간이 역사행위를 통해 미래의 역사를 생산하도록 만드는 것이다. 이런 점에서 과거의 역사를 소비하기 위한 역사책과 미래의 역사를 생산하게 하려는 역사 교과서는 쓰는 목적과 방식에서 같을 수가 없는 것이다. 역사 교과서의 제작과 그에 대한 평가도 역사교육의 본질적 목적과 그에 따른 교과서의 기능과 관련하여 이루어져야 한다.

역사교과서 문제의 교재화와 학습자의 인식

김민수(Kim Min-Su) 효원사학회 2009 역사와 세계 Vol.- No.35

In the autumn 2008, Korean history education was confused by a conflict of Korean modern and contemporary history textbooks that have been approved officially. The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology and the ruling party urged the history textbook writers and publishing companies to modify description. They have insisted the history textbooks were written in the left wing way and unsuitable as the textbook for education. The history textbook writers were against the demand of the ministry and nearly 1,300 history educators, who included scholars and teachers in public school, insisted on a discontinuance of the history textbook’s modification that destroys a speciality of the history science and a political neutrality of education. The conflict of history textbooks has indicated the difference in perspective about different explanations of historical facts and a textbook for teaching. The similar conflict has occurred to Japan. This article tried to show the case of Saburo Ienaga who had sued the government for politically correct history textbook for 32 years and Nobuyoshi Takasima who has sued for the same aim for 13 years. The conflict of Korea and Japan have been occurred by the difference in perspective about a textbook. This article tried to put a role of a textbook that has been based on the 7th curriculum and a role of textbook that comes from the groups who have urged to modify Korean modern and contemporary history textbooks in order. At the end, this article wrote the perception of the students who had taken the class about the conflict of history textbooks. The aims of the class were to know history textbooks have different history explanations and to know a history textbook was written by one of history explanations about historic facts. After that, the students described the perception about the conflict of history textbooks. The students formed their opinion about the conflict. For the students, it is dangerous to modify a history textbook by political aims, a history textbook is one of sources for a class, the contents of a history textbook can be chosen by history educators, and the students can conclude historical perception.

국정 『고등학교 한국사』 교과서 서술의 특징 – 근대사를 중심으로 –

한승훈 한국역사교육학회 2018 역사교육연구 Vol.- No.31

This article aims to review the contents of Korea's modern history in the Government-designated Korean History of High School textbook. First, Park Geun Hye government reduced the proportion of Korean modern and contemporary history in the textbook with the aim of excluding critical historical facts from the textbooks. However, due to the deletion of the socio-economic history, the Government-designated Korean History of High School textbook became textbook of the old era where only invasion and resistance remain. Second, Kojong and Sunjong were depicted as monarchs who resisted Japanese aggression. while those who led the Gapsin Coup and Gabo Reform were called pro-Japanese figures. As a result, the textbook did not accept various views of academia. In the textbook, biased texts were shown by uniquely highlighting Protestant missionary activities. Finally, the government stressed that it covered the diplomatic independence movement and women's independence activists in the textbook, which were insufficient or rarely dealt with in the the Certified Korean History of High School textbooks. These topics, however, were only the basis for the government and scholars of “New Right movement” to argue that the Certified Korean History of High School textbooks were biased. In conclusion, the attempt to nationalize the history textbooks pursued by the Park Geun-hye government was anachronistic. 이 글은 국정 『고등학교 한국사』 교과서의 한국근대사 내용을 검토하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 박근혜 정부는 국정 『고등학교 한국사』 교과서에서 한국근현대사 분량을 축소함으로써, 자신들에게 비판적인 역사적 사실을 교과서에서 제외시키고자 했다. 그런데 한국 근대사 영역에서는 사회경제사 부분 삭제됨으로써, 국정 『고등학교 한국사』 교과서는 침략과 저항만이 남는 구시대의 교과서가 되었다. 다음으로 국정 『고등학교 한국사』 교과서의 개항기 영역에서는 고종과 순종을 일제의 침략에 저항한 군주로 부각시키고 갑신정변, 갑오개혁을 주도한 개화파 인사들을 친일적 인사들로 규정함으로써 학계의 다양한 견해를 수용하지 않았다. 그리고 개신교 선교사 활동을 독자적으로 부각시킴으로써 국정 『고등학교 한국사』교과서는 편향적인 서술을 보였다. 마지막으로 정부는 검정 『고등학교 한국사』 교과서에서 미흡하거나 거의 다루지 않았던 외교독립운동과 여성 독립운동가를 『고등학교 한국사』에서 서술하였다고 강조하였다. 하지만 이들 주제는 정부와 뉴라이트 계열 학자들이 검정 『고등학교 한국사』 교과서의 편향성을 강조하는 과정에서 등장한 사례들이었다. 결론적으로 박근혜 정부가 지향한 ‘올바른 역사교과서’는 허상에 불과하였으며, 역사교과서의 국정화 시도는 시대착오적 발상이었다.