초록 ▼

▢ 연구 목적
한국 사회에서 민주주의라는 단어는 낯설지 않다. 헌법에서는 대한민국을 ‘민주공화국’으로 표현하고 있으며, 국가기관의 구성과 역할, 시민의 귄리와 의무 등도 민주주의 이념과 원리에 따라 규정하고 있다. 교육기본법에서도 ‘민주시민’의 자질을 갖추도록 하는 것이 학교 교육의 목적임을 명시하고 있다는 점에서 알 수 있듯이 민주시민교육은늘 학교 교육의 목표로 표방되어 왔다. 그러나 학교 현장에서 민주시민교육은 여전히 모호한 개념으로 이해되고 있다. 한쪽에서는 민주시민교육이 전혀 이루어지고 있지 않다고 주장하고, 또 다른

▢ 연구 목적
한국 사회에서 민주주의라는 단어는 낯설지 않다. 헌법에서는 대한민국을 ‘민주공화국’으로 표현하고 있으며, 국가기관의 구성과 역할, 시민의 귄리와 의무 등도 민주주의 이념과 원리에 따라 규정하고 있다. 교육기본법에서도 ‘민주시민’의 자질을 갖추도록 하는 것이 학교 교육의 목적임을 명시하고 있다는 점에서 알 수 있듯이 민주시민교육은늘 학교 교육의 목표로 표방되어 왔다. 그러나 학교 현장에서 민주시민교육은 여전히 모호한 개념으로 이해되고 있다. 한쪽에서는 민주시민교육이 전혀 이루어지고 있지 않다고 주장하고, 또 다른 한쪽에서는 민주시민교육은 일상적으로 하고 있는 것이라 이야기한다.
그 이유는 무엇인가? 이 연구는 학교 민주시민교육의 현주소를 진단하고 이를 바탕으로 정책 방향과 과제 제시를 목적으로 한다.

(출처 : 연구요약 6p)

Abstract ▼

In Korean society, the word democracy is not strange. The Constitution describes the Republic of Korea as a‘democratic republic,’and also defines the composition and role of state institutions and the rights and duties of citizens in accordancewith democratic ideology and principles. Democratic citi

In Korean society, the word democracy is not strange. The Constitution describes the Republic of Korea as a‘democratic republic,’and also defines the composition and role of state institutions and the rights and duties of citizens in accordancewith democratic ideology and principles. Democratic citizenship education hasalways been the goal of school education, as it is stipulated in the Framework Act on Education that the purpose of school education is to educate citizens to be qualified as ‘democratic citizens,’ However, democratic citizenship educationis still perceived as ambiguous in schools. One side argues that there is no democratic citizenship education at all, while the other side says it is already part of routine. Why is that? This study aims to diagnose the current status of democraticcitizenship education in schools and present policy directions and issues based on the result.

To this end, Chapter II explored the concept of democratic citizenship education in schools, how democratic citizenship education is reflected in the currentcurriculum, and what it means for students to participate in school operationswith regard to democratic citizenship education. Specifically, the first sectionlooked into how the school's democratic citizenship education has changed since liberation, along with the analysis of concepts, scope and goals of the democratic citizenship education in order to embody its meaning. The second section looked into how the curriculum for democratic citizenship education was organized at schools and schools’ teaching-learning methods. Section 3 explored the meaningand importance of democratic citizenship education through student participationin school operations. The fourth Section discussed the achievements and limitationsof democratic citizenship education in schools based on the contents of sections 1 to 3.

Chapter III analyzed the current status and characteristics of democratic citizenship education in Korea by utilizing the data of the International Civic and Citizenship Education Study (ICCS, 2016) provided by the International EducationAssociation (IEA.) The main characteristics of the analysis are as follows.
First, Korean students' civil knowledge level and their interest in political and social issues are higher than the average of the surveyed countries, but the ratesof participation in actual social activities are lower.
Second, the student-to-student deviations for citizenship in Korean schools are greater than the average of the surveyed countries.
Third, in terms of teaching methods, democratic citizenship education in Korean schools is centered on conveying knowledge.
Fourth, although institutional and procedural opportunities are provided with regard to student participation in school operations, the level of open educationsuitable for the cultivation of citizenship is lower than average.
Fifth, Korean teachers' readiness for democratic citizenship education is lower than that of other countries.
Sixth, The help for teachers to develop professionalism during their training stage is insufficient, which requires supplementation during the in-service training.
Seventh, the level of resource utilization is low in Korean teachers' democratic citizenship education classes, and teachers need a support for teaching-learning materials.
Eighth, students’ citizenship is more influenced by class environment and on-school participation experience than the way of approaching curriculum.
Ninth, when a guideline at the national level is provided, there is a increase in democratic values awareness, social participation, and willingness to participate in elections.

Chapter IV analyzed, through a meeting of teachers, policy makers and researchers, the schools conducting democratic citizenship education and theirdifficulties in practice and demands for improvement.
First, the analysis of the schools’ perception for democratic citizenship education showed that there was no consensus on the contents and directions for democratic citizenship education among teachers. Teachers understood democratic citizenship education in a limited way: as tasks for specific subjects or students’ self-governingactivities; or law and order education. Moreover, they perceive it as an unsubstantial education which is not a curriculum subject with teachers in charge.
For them, democratic citizenship education is an education that anyone could do, and no one cares even if there is no class.
Next, we analyzed the factors that impede the promotion of democratic citizenship education: the authoritative environment of schools that are vertically and hierarchically constituted; teacher’s self-censorship under the burden of political neutrality; fatigue caused by various policies that are changed whenever administrations and superintendents change; a negative perception that student participation in school operations will make schools’ education activities difficult; a‘divider’ effect between curriculum subjects; and a weak support system.
Finally, as a result of analyzing the demands for promoting democratic citizenship education, what is needed are: The scope and content of democratic citizenshipeducation should be established first based on social 'consensus.' There should be a legal basis for guaranteeing student participation and support for educational activities. School environment such as relationships between teachers-students andteachers-principals should be changed more horizontally and democratically. Thequantitative evaluation system, centered on knowledge memorization, should be replaced with a diverse and flexible evaluation system. Creation of curriculum subjects; readjustment of teacher training courses; and construction of a 'platform' that can serve as a hub for accumulating and spreading the data of domestic andoverseas cases.

Chapter V focuses on student participation in school operations in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, and the needs to be met, considering its featuresand implications.
First, it is necessary to put the role and meaning of student self-governing activities on a statutory footing.
Second, it is necessary to expand the scope of student participation in school operations.
Third, students' opinions need to be more practically reflected in the school's management process.
Fourth, it is necessary to help students' opinions to be reflected in the outside of school through local and nationwide joint activities.

Based on the result of the survey, VI Chapter diagnosed the current status of democratic citizenship education in schools and presented policy directions andpolicy issues as follows:

(출처 : Abstract 302p)

목차 Contents

• 표지 ... 1
• 머리말 ... 4
• 연구요약 ... 6
• 목차 ... 16
• 표목차 ... 18
• 그림목차 ... 20
• Ⅰ. 서론 ... 22
• 1. 연구 필요성 및 목적 ... 24
• 2. 연구 내용 ... 29
• 3. 연구 방법 ... 31
• Ⅱ. 학교 민주시민교육의 개념 및 방법 ... 38
• 1. 학교 민주시민교육의 개념 및 목표 ... 41
• 2. 학교 교육과정과 민주시민교육 ... 55
• 3. 학생의 학교운영 참여와 민주시민교육 ... 70
• 4. 소결: 성과와 한계 ... 79
• Ⅲ. ICCS 2016을 통해 살펴본 학교 민주시민교육 실태 ... 82
• 1. 학생의 시민의식 수준 및 특징 ... 85
• 2. 학교 민주시민교육 실태 분석 ... 95
• 3. 학교 민주시민교육이 시민의식에 주는 효과 분석 ... 126
• 4. 주요 특징 및 시사점 ... 142
• Ⅳ. 학교 민주시민교육 실태 및 요구 ... 148
• 1. 초·중등학교 민주시민교육 운영 실태에 대한 인식 ... 150
• 2. 민주시민교육 활성화 저해 요인 ... 157
• 3. 학교 민주시민교육의 지향점과 과제 ... 163
• 4. 요약 및 시사점 ... 172
• Ⅴ. 외국의 학생자치활동 사례 분석 ... 176
• 1. 독일 ... 178
• 2. 프랑스 ... 196
• 3. 영국 ... 216
• 4. 시사점 ... 232
• Ⅵ. 학교 민주시민교육 정책방향과 과제 ... 234
• 1. 종합: 학교민주시민교육의 현주소 ... 236
• 2. 정책화 방향 ... 249
• 3. 정책 방안 ... 256
• 참고문헌 ... 286
• Abstract ... 302
• 부록 ... 308
• 부록1. 집담회 면담지 ... 310
• 부록2. 전문가 의견조사지 ... 316
• 부록3. ICCS 설문 분석 문항 ... 348
• 부록4. 전문가 집담회 결과: 민주시민교육이 지향하는 학교교육 ... 368
• 끝페이지 ... 373