【作者】 陈华；

【导师】 吴刚平；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 课程与教学论， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 中国的现代化进程和公民社会的崛起提出了公民教育课程研究的课题。从课程史的角度分析我国公民教育的诞生过程有助于我们从历史上吸取公民教育课程发展的资源。课程史作为一个独立的研究领域兴起于20世纪六七十年代,至今已发展出八种主要的研究视角和三种经典路径。其中,用学校科目社会史的研究路径来探究公民教育的诞生,对我们理解我国公民教育课程目标、课程内容和课程组织形式的变迁历程与当下困境具有启发意义。作为一门学校科目,中国公民教育课程在清末民国时期经历了三个发展阶段,其中隐含了现代化与教育的双重逻辑对它的推动及限制,并表现为社会与国家两个主体力量的博弈。甲午战败宣告了洋务运动的破产以及推进政治制度与思想行为的现代化的必要性,政教界的君主立宪派、君主专制派和民主共和派对此分别提出各自的教育主张。君主立宪派主张全面走向公民教育以实现新政；君主专制派虽提倡政艺兼修,却维护着政体的底线而徘徊在臣民教育的边界内；民主共和派则主张通过革命建立新政体来走向公民教育。在这些争论发生的同时,社会的工业化和城市化使社会结构发生改变,并出现公共空间和公共领域的发育,为公民教育的诞生奠定了社会基础。辛亥革命后共和政体得以建立,培养共和国民的公民道德教育被确立为教育宗旨的核心,公民教育的内容以渗透课程的形态表现在修身、史地、国文等科目中,代表公民教育课程的萌芽。这一时期,国家主义的公民教育是公民教育的主流思想,强调公民的国家观念及对国家的义务。袁世凯称帝失败后,混乱的政局为新教育运动与新文化运动的发展创造了空间。民主与科学是双新运动的共同追求,它们表现为教育界对公民教育与实用教育的重视。在杜威的民主主义和罗素的世界主义访华言论的影响下,这一时期,个人主义和世界主义的公民教育取代国家主义的公民教育思想,表现为公民教育的主体由国家转向儿童,从儿童的角度阐明公民教育的目标,并相信儿童有自治的能力和自动的权利；公民教育的内容由爱国转向参与社会生活,鼓励儿童自己治理自己的学习和生活,与团体互动互助,并参与社会服务活动。民间教育力量在北洋政府时期掌握了教育变革的主导权,全国教育会联合会、教育调查会、中华教育改进社等民间教育组织自下而上地促成了公民教育在学校科目中的落实,在新学制课程标准中设置了中小学的公民科。公民科的课程内容以团体生活为中心,注重普世价值和民主原则的传递,教科书以儿童为中心采取同心圆式编排法。另有学生自治作为公民教育的活动课程,以“学校即社会”为原则,让学生在学校中练习公民自治。但公民科在学校中遇到持续制度化的困境,这主要是由公民科本身的学科性质使其难以教学、公民科的教学存在师资和教材等实际困难、公民科教学存在脱离实际的状况、公民科缺少支持和管理的专业力量等四个方面的原因所造成。南京国民政府实行训政纲领和党化教育方针,使得国家主义公民教育思想复兴,公民教育的主体与目标从儿童和社会生活回复到国家、民族和党义之上。国家权力干预公民教育课程,造成公民科被包围在三民主义科、党义科等新增的“非公民”科目中,并以知识化的手段得以维持其科目地位。自由主义知识分子和平民主义教育者以各自的方式进行着教育公共化的斗争,反对党化教育。国民政府最终在民族危机下为了拉拢社会力量而取消了党义科,转而在公民科和公民训练两种公民教育课程中对学生进行心与身的规训。公民科既包含道德、经济和政治方面的教育,也包含党义的灌输；公民训练以“四维八德”的传统道德为中心,强调对学生的全部生活、整个行为进行随时随地的训练。从1934年开始,国民政府将公民训练扩展到全国的城乡,发起一场“新生活运动”,试图通过对国民生活方式的规范来实现中国人思想行为的现代化。但对生活方式的规范并不是通往现代公民之路,以国家为主体进行的国民生活改造运动也因自始至终缺少社会力量的介入而不可能获得有效和持续的发展。中国公民教育课程诞生的社会史过程涉及结构与主体两种机制。在结构方面,公民教育因具有促进政治现代化的特质而受到学校教育的青睐,在成为学校科目的过程中获得较为一致的外部认同。但在学校教育内部,公民科由于本身的学科特点而遭遇持续制度化的内部困境。这种尴尬局面并非中国公民科所独有。理想中的课程与在使用的课程之间的差异在公民教育领域表现得非常明显,这是一个世界难题,也是我们需要继续探索的课题。在主体方面,公民教育的诞生过程牵涉到多方面主体的思想争锋与利益争夺。政教界精英知识分子、中等社会群体在这个过程之初发挥了主要的积极作用。到了后期,公民教育得到越来越多社会群体的关注与支持,表现了社会力量的普遍觉醒。国家在这场争斗中始终进行着与社会的博弈,尽力维持双赢的局面。公民社会与政治国家成为公民教育之争中两个最大的主体。社会与国家主张的公民教育有所不同,社会与国家力量的此消彼长使公民教育在课程目标、内容和组织形态上也发生相应的变化：在国家力量最强、社会力量最弱时,没有公民教育的空间；在国家力量较弱、社会力量较强时,公民教育以渗透课程的形式出现,课程内容以国家的主张为主、社会的主张为辅；在国家力量最弱,社会力量最强时,公民教育以独立课程、综合课程和活动课程的形式出现,课程内容倾向于社会的主张,活动课程注重学生的自治；在国家力量较强,社会力量较弱时,公民教育以独立课程、党义渗透课程和活动课程的形式出现,课程内容倾向于国家的主张,活动课程注重国家的规训。更多还原

【Abstract】 The modernization process of China and the rise of civil society proposed citizenship education curriculum research project. It’s helpful for us to learn from the history of citizenship education curriculum development resources through analysis of the birth process of citizenship education in China from the perspective of curriculum history. As an independent research field, curriculum history started in the1960s and1970s. Now it has developed eight main research perspectives and three kinds of classical path. It has enlightening significance to our understanding of the development and predicament of our citizenship education curriculum objectives, contents and organization by exploring citizenship education’s birth process in China with social history of school subjects’ research path, which is one of the three classical paths of curriculum history research.As a school subject, Chinese citizenship education in the late Qing Dynasty and the period of the Republic of China has experienced three development stages, which implied the dual logic of modernization and education and the game of two main forces of the society and the state.The Jiawu war declared the bankrupt of the Westernization Movement and the necessity of pushing forward modernization of institution and behavior. In the political and educational field, factions advocated the constitutional monarchy, autocratic monarchy and democratic republican put forward their own educational view according to their political positions. The constitutional monarchy faction claimed citizenship education in order to achieve the constitutional institution; the autocratic monarchy faction advocated education of government and technology while maintained the bottom line of regime so they claimed Subjects education; the democratic republican faction advocated establishing new institution by revolution and then promoted citizenship education in the new institution. Meanwhile these debates, the industrialization and urbanization of the Chinese society were changing the social structure, and made the emergence of public spaces and the public sphere which laid the social foundations for citizenship education. After the Republic was established through the Revolution of1911, civic moral education to cultivate republic citizen was established as the purpose of the core content of education. The content of citizenship education was penetrated in subjects of moral education, history, geograph and literature, which representing the citizenship education curriculum was budding. During this period, nationalism citizenship education is the mainstream of citizenship education thoughts, which emphasizes the citizens’ consciousness of the state and duty to the state.After Yuan Shikai failed in proclaiming himself emperor, tumultuous political situation created development space for the New Education Movement and the New Culture Movement. Democracy and science are two common pursuits of the two movements, which leaded great importance placed on citizenship education and practical education. Individualism and cosmopolitan citizenship education replaced the nationalist citizenship education thought influenced by Dewey’s democracy and Russellss cosmopolitan speech in China during this period, which has two charactors that the subject of citizenship education changed from the state to children, and the content of citizenship education changed from patriotic to participating in social life. The folk strength of education mastered education reform initiative in the period of Northern Warlords government. The National Education Association, the Education Survey Association, the China Education Improvement Association and other educational organizations contributed to making citizenship education become a school subject. Civics was set up a school subject by the new curriculum standard. The curriculum content of Civics took community life as the center and paid attention to transferring universal values and democratic principles; the textbook of Civics took children as the center and took a concentric arrangement style. Student autonomy as an activity curriculum of citizenship education was practiced in schools by the principle of "the school is society" which encouraged students to practice civil autonomy in the school. However, Civics encountered a sustained institutional dilemma, which is mainly composed of four reasons. First, its subject characteristics made it difficult to teaching; second, there were practical difficulties in Civics teachers and textbooks; third, Civics teaching is separated from the actual social condition; fourth, there was lack of support and management expertises to Civics.The Nanjing national government implemented political training programme and party education policy to revive national citizenship education ideology. The subject and target of citizenship education returned to state, nation and party ideology from children and social life. The state power intervened citizenship education curriculum, which made Civics surrounded by new non-Civics such as subjects of Three Principles of the People and Party Justice. To maintain its status, Civics took a style of knowledge. Liberal intellectuals and populist educators fighted for public education and against party education in their own ways. At last, the national government abolished the party justice subject to win social force under the national crisis. It turned to Civics and citizenship training these two citizenship education curriculums for the discipline of students’minds and bodies. Civics contained not only moral, economic and political aspects of education but also instills of party ideology. Citizenship training made "the four anchors and eight virtues" traditional morality as the center and emphasized training on students’whole life and behavior whenever and wherever. From the beginning of1934, the national government made citizenship training extended to urban and rural and launched a "New Life Movement" to try to achieve the modernization of Chinese thought and behavior through regulating the national way of life. But it was not the road to modern citizen by regulating the national way of life, and it was impossible to get effective and sustainable development for this movement which was just advocated by the state while lack of the social strength’s support.The social history process of citizenship education curriculum’s birth involved two kinds of mechanisms which are structure and subject. In the aspect of structure, because of its traits of prompting political modernization, citizenship education got favor of school education and received consistently external recognition in the process of becoming school subjects. But in internal school education, citizenship curriculum encountered sustained institutional internal predicament because of its own subject characteristics. This embarrassing situation was not unique to Chinese citizenship curriculum. The differences of curriculums between ideal and in use are evident in the field of citizenship education. This is a difficult project for the world and we need to continue to explore it, too.In the aspect of subject, the birth process of the citizen education involved ideological debates and interests conflicts of many kinds of subjects. The elite intellectuals of political and educational circles, moderate social groups played a major active role in the beginning process of it. In the late period, the citizenship education got more and more attentions and supports from social groups, and this demonstrated universal awakening of social strength. In this struggle, state kept combating with society and tried to maintain a win-win situation. Citizen society and political country became the two biggest subjects in the debates of citizenship education. Society and state advocates different citizenship education. The shifts strength of society and state made citizen education vary in the curriculum goal, content and organizational form. When state’s strength was strongest while social strength weakest, there is no space for citizenship education. When state’s strength was weaker while social strength stronger, citizen education appeared in the form of permeating course and the content of course gave priority to state’s advocates and with society’s advocates as supplement. When state’s strength was weakest while social strength strongest, citizen education appeared in the form of independent curriculum, integrated curriculum and activity curriculum and the content of course inclined to society’s advocates and activity curriculum focused on students’ autonomy. When state’s strength was stronger while social strength weaker, citizen education appeared in the form of independent curriculum, party ideology infiltration curriculum, activity curriculum and the content of course inclined to state’s advocates and activity curriculum focused on state’s regulation.更多还原