【作者】 朱小红；

【导师】 李稚勇；

【作者基本信息】 上海师范大学 ， 学科教育， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 2001年以来进行的新课程改革,开设了《历史与社会》课程,它迅速成为这次课程改革的亮点和焦点。《历史与社会》,将历史、人文地理、社会学、教育学、心理学、政治学、经济学、人类学、文化学等有关内容进行有机整合,是一门全新的学科。同时,它最能体现课程改革的基本理念和追求。越来越受到教育界人士、家长、学生的重视,取得了令人喜悦的效果。《历史与社会》新教科书刚出版时,有人民教育出版社、上海教育出版社及地质出版社三个版本,随着课程改革的不断深入,随着相关地域课本的整合,地质出版社的《历史与社会》教科书从2008年起退出了教育市场。因此,目前我国使用的只有两家出版社的教科书。但是,由于高考指挥棒等种种原因,让《历史与社会》学科难以全面铺开,甚至出现消退之势,这是非常令人痛心的事。本文正是基于这样的背景,以及本人在历史与社会教育教学过程中的切身体会,结合浙江省、江苏苏州、无锡锡山、惠山区的课改实践,对历史与社会两个课程标准进行比较研究,从中寻找出两个课程标准的相同、不同之处,以及根据两个课程标准编订的教材各自的特点、优势。尤其是对于各自的不足、可能产生的问题等进行认真细致而周到的分析,以期为课标的修订、为教科书的编写,提供一些学术支持。本文正文部分分为四章,第一章绪论,主要是课题的提出、研究的目的、意义、研究综述,以及创新之处；第二章是从两个课程标准的文本结构来分析研究其相同之处、不同之处和主要特点,根据教材内容,直接反映了课程标准所提出的课程内容体系,主要研讨两个课程标准编订的教材的相同之处及主要特色研究；第三章是结合课改实践的经验,对课标内容在具体实施的角度上,进行对比比较研究；第四章是对课程标准(一)、(二)提出了本文的观点,即提出课程标准需要改进之处,目的是为了更好地实施新课程、推广新课程。通过对比,结合自身实践的体会,可以得出以下结论：1、通过课标文本对比可以得出,在课程目标上,课标(一)显得较为合理；而在结构上,课标(二)融合程度较高；2、通过课程标准指导下的教科书对比可以得出,在组织教材的内容上,课标(一)中历史教育内容得到了保障,但是结构似拼盘式,课标(二)体现出较好的融合型,但是历史教育有待加强。3、通过课改实践研究证明,由于课标(一)与课标(二)在课程目标上不甚统一,在课程体系上更存在着显著的差异,核心的概念也存在着明显的差异,这样,在实施过程中会造成一定程度的混乱,一线教师会无所适从。因此,教师反映课改实践过程中难以掌握课标,难以依据课标进行教育教学工作。而作为课程标准的内容体系,既要体现综合课程的融合性,又要有利于历史教育价值的实现；既要体现以“以学生为本”的教育指导思想,又要以科学的分类体系为基础,这样才能真正在实施过程中贯彻新课程理念。依据此,对历史与社会课程标准的修订及课改的推进,提出以下建议：其一,作为一个国家、一门学科的课程标准,应该整合成一个课标,这样才能有利于在全国范围内实施；其二,新课程的内容需进一步充实,结构需进一步完善；其三,课程资源需进一步开发；其四,进一步改进评价体系；其五,就《历史与社会》系统教学保障而言,加强一线教师的培训,加强师范教育中综合文科方向师资培训,显得相当重要。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since 2001 the new reform, conducted by offering the course of<History and Society>, it became the highlights and focus of curriculum reform in the short time. As a completely new subjects,<History and Society> combined history, geography, sociology and pedagogy, psychology, politics, economics, anthropology, cultural, and related natural, social contents. Meanwhile, it most reflects the basic concept and curriculum reform. More and more educators, parents, students are attracted. It has achieved gratifying results.<History and Society> had three editions when it had just published; they were People’s Education Press, Shanghai Education Publishing House and Geological Publishing House. Along with the deepening of the curriculum reform, textbooks from different area were integrating. Since 2008, Geological Publishing House’s <History and Society> had left the market, so the textbook we can get are from last two publishers only. Because of CEE (college entrance examination) is controlling every thing,<History and Society> could not get more chance to develop. It is so sad.This article is precisely against above background, according to my teaching experiences in History and Social education, also consulted curriculum reform practice in Huishan DC and Xishan DC of Wuxi and Suzhou Jiangsu Province and Zhejiang Province. Two courses on history and social, a comparative study of curriculum standards from which to seek out the same, differences, and in accordance with two curriculum standards of teaching plan compiled their own characteristics, advantages. Especially for their lack of problems that may arise from a careful analysis of detailed and thoughtful, with a view to the subject of revision courses for the preparation of textbooks, to provide some academic support.This article is divided into four chapters, the first chapter is introduction, mainly point out the issues, purpose of the study, comprehensive expound, as well as the opinions of innovation. Chapter II analyses what are their Similarities, differences and main characteristics through the article structure between two curriculum standards. Chapter III combined with curriculum practical experiences, comparative study based on Specific implementation of curriculum standards. Chapter IV, put forward the views of this article according to the curriculum standards A and B. Point out some contents need to be improved, in order to keep new curriculums move smoothly.After comparison, and with the help of my practice experience, the following conclusion are listed:1) Through curriculum standard’s version comparison, under the course objectives, curriculum standards A appears to be more reasonable. And if under the structures, B has higher integration.2) Through the curriculum standards of textbooks under guidance of contrast can be drawn. Section A kept the content of history education, but the structure looks like a drugstore. Section B has reflected a better integration, but the history education needs to be strengthened. It is proved that as curriculum standards A and B not very uniform in the objective. There are some significant differences in the curriculum system, even entered the core of concepts. So, it will cause a certain degree of confusion in the implementation process. Teachers feel difficult to follow the curriculum standards and teaching outline.As the contents of the system of curriculum standards, it is necessary to reflect the integration of integrated curriculum, but also conducive to the realization of the value of history education; it is necessary to reflect the "student-oriented" education guiding ideology, but also the scientific classification system for the foundation, In this way can really in the teaching process to implement the new curriculum ideas. Based on this, for history and social curriculum standards, make the following recommendations:First, as a country, a subject of the curriculum standards should be integrated into a class standard, So as to be conducive to the implementation of nationwide.Second, curriculum standards A the is concerned, the structure should strengthen its integration, there has been conducive to the smooth development of classroom teaching.Third, the curriculum standard B, the terms of the content of history education should be strengthened, for students to handle basic knowledge of history provide the conditions.Fourth, ensure systematic teaching of<History and Society>, it is quite important to strengthen the teachers training in Integrated Humanities.更多还原