高中歷史教科書臺灣史教材版本之比較研究(1999-2012)

Abstract

文旨在探討教科書採開放政策後，84課程標準到101課綱對臺灣史重要課題呈現之實況，比較分析三民、龍騰、康熙三個版本高中歷史教科書的臺灣史教材對史事陳述及解釋之異同，以及課程綱要對教科書的約束力，並檢視不同版本教科書對同一史事詮釋是否因時代改變隨之轉變。 透過比較分析顯示，從84課程標準到101課綱，課程綱要之約束力呈現逐漸強化之趨勢，各版本教科書均配合課綱要求編寫相關主題，教材內容明顯地反映編者對課綱的詮釋，或選擇性反映學界的研究成果，顯然課綱無法完全規範教科書編者對主題或事件內容之編寫。其次，龍騰版和三民版教科書頗能反映學術研究成果，較符合95暫綱和101課綱教材編選要領「教材應能反映當今歷史學界之重要研究成果」之目標，康熙版教科書較常引用主觀或偏頗之舊說，以特定族群立場或意識形態論述史實。其三，教科書編者之研究領域、編寫理念及較特定立場之研究者，為影響教科書中史實之選取和詮釋之關鍵，導致版本內容有所差異甚至傳播特定意識形態，使歷史教科書成為編者表達價值觀或特定立場之工具。This thesis explores how the K-12 curriculum guidelines from 1995 to 2012 influenced the representation of key issues of Taiwanese history in three editions of senior high school history textbooks—San Min, Longteng, and Kangxi. It also compares how the three editions present and interpret historical facts in Taiwanese history, analyzes the curriculum guidelines’ influence on textbooks, and examines whether the textbooks’ interpretations of historical facts changed in different eras. Through comparison, this thesis discovers that, from 1995 to 2012, the curriculum guidelines intended to extend greater influence on the textbooks, dictating the historical themes presented in the teaching materials. However, as the contents of the textbooks reflect the editors’ interpretations of the curriculum guidelines and selective presentation of academic findings, it becomes clear that the curriculum guidelines could not fully control what the textbook editors wrote about specific historical themes and events. Furthermore, this thesis proposes that the Longteng and San Min editions of textbooks can better reflect the findings in academia, observing more closely the editorial principles laid down by the 2006 and 2012 curriculum guidelines—“The teaching materials should properly reflect the major findings of contemporary history research.” In contrast, the Kangxi edition is more prone to adopt biased, subjective, and dated theories, interpreting historical facts through the perspectives of specific demographic groups or ideologies. Lastly, the textbook editors’ specialties, ideals, and political stances—being the key influence on what historical facts would be presented and how they would be interpreted—resulted in the discrepancies between different editions, turning the history textbooks into tools to promote specific values, stances, and ideologies.