강성훈(2008), 루소에 대한 자연주의적 해석의 문제. 고려대학교대학원 박사학위 논문.
김금주, 권세경, 김은정, 나은숙, 오진희, 이금구, 황혜경(2018), 유아교육개론. 서 울: 학지사.
김동일(1992), Rousseau의 아동교육사상에 관한 연구. 효성여자대학교대학원 박 사학위논문.
김동일(2004), Rousseau의 유아교육사상. 경기도: 양서원.
김명윤(2004), 에밀에 나타난 루소의 교육방법. 상명대학교 인문과학연구소.
김상섭(2003), 루소에 있어서 사적 가정교육과 공적 시민교육의 통합문제. 한국 교육철학회, 29, 1-25.
김상섭(2009), 현대인의 교사 루소, 루소는 에밀을 어떻게 가르쳤는가. 서울: 학 지사.
김숙이(2006), 루소의 자연주의 교육사상 : 현대 아동교육에의 시사점을 중심으 로. 한국교육사상연구, 19, 145-166.
김승희(2018), 유아교육개론. 경기도: 지식공동체.
김영욱(2008), 글쓰기 욕망과 세 편의 가족소설 : 루소의 에밀, 에밀과 소피, 그 리고 고백. 서울대학교대학원 문학석사학위논문.
김용민(2004), 루소의 정치적 철학. 서울: 인간사랑.
김재면(2000), J.J. Rousseau의 교육사상에 대한 고찰. 충남대학교 교육대학원 석사학위 논문.
김정원, 이경화, 이연규, 전선옥, 조순옥, 조화연, 최일선(2018), 보육학개론. 서 울: 양서원.
김태호(2004), 루소의 에밀에 나타난 교사의 역할에 관한 연구. 경인교육대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.
박은미(2009), 루소의 자연주의 사상과 시민교육에 관한 연구. 충남대학교 교육
대학원 석사학위논문.
Rousseau, J.J.,(1762) Emile, 권응호(역)(1987), 에밀, 서울: 흥신문화사.
Rousseau, J.J.,(1762) Emile, 김중현(역)(2008), 에밀, 파주: 한길사.
Rousseau, J.J.,(1762) Emile, 민회식(역)(2008), 에밀, 서울: 육문사.
Rousseau J.J.,(1762) Emile, 오증자(역)(1984), 에밀(Ⅰ), 서울: 박영사.
Schubert, W., Schubert, A. L., Thomas, T, & Carroll, W. (2009). Curriculum books. 강인수, 민부자, 김상돈, 이승미, 서하나, 김대영(공역), 교육과정 100년, 서울: 학지사.
【Abstract】
The Interpretation of Rousseau's Natural Education of Children
Presented in Child Education Literature
Park Hee-kyeong
Department of Education Administration & Education Consulting, Graduate School of Education, Jeju National University
Academic Advisor Kim Dae-young
The purpose of this study is to examine the background of Rousseau's educational ideas through the historical and ideological background, and based on this, it aims to raise a question about the interpretation of Rousseau's educational ideas that couldn’t be interpreted through the existing naturalistic interpretation in terms of child education. To this end, the research questions are set as follows:
First, what is Rousseau's life and the background of formation of his ideas about child education?
Second, how are the meanings of ‘education according to nature' and
‘negative education' are expressed, which are the key terms in Rousseau's child education ideas presented in child education literature?
Third, how can Rousseau's natural education of children be interpreted through 『Emile』?
The major findings of this study are summarized and discussed as follows:
Rousseau is a leading education philosopher in child education. In his book
『Emile』, he divides human development into five stages based on his philosophy, presents educational methods and content, and highlights the importance of child education. However, Rousseau's definition of child education has limits in interpreting only from a naturalistic perspective.
The problems of the interpretation of Rousseau's natural education of children presented in childhood literature can be summarized as follows, based on Rousseau's historical and ideological background.
First, Rousseau has had a great influence on many later scholars and still influences the direction of child education today. Rousseau criticized cramming education and emphasized child-centered education through his educational ideas. In particular, his child-centered philosophy has had a negative and positive influence on Kant, Basedow, Pestalozzi, and Dewey, and he can be regarded as a pioneer in today's education.
Second, this study introduces teaching methods through key terms such as 'education according to nature' and 'negative education' which are important for Rousseau's educational ideas. First, in the case of ‘education according to nature’, Rousseau sees society as becoming more and more corrupted through
『Discourse on Inequality』, and nature as a place to get out of society.
From this point of view, it seems that Rousseau chose nature to escape from the unequal society where people conflict and struggle to become superior among men, rather than a simple concept of 'space' or 'environment'.
Accordingly, education according to nature can be regarded as an abstract educational method to connect his conception of a human state and a nature state. In the case of negative education, the ability to compare the objects generated through group life seems to have subordinated humans to the gaze
of others, rather than meaning 'minimal external interferences' from the existing naturalistic interpretation. Therefore, negative education can be a life without exterior influences and can be regarded as one of the means of education to minimize exterior influences, not education, oppression, and subordination by somebody.
Third, Rousseau's definition of child education was largely interpreted from a conventional naturalistic perspective. However, the definition of child education in his books 『Emile』, 『The Social Contract』, and 『Discourse on Inequality』 has a limit to be interpreted only from a naturalistic perspective. This is because Rousseau advocated his conception of nature, rather than claiming 'nature' in the general sense. As a result, it is difficult to correctly understand Rousseau's ideas about child education only from an existing naturalistic viewpoint, so that there is a limit to the interpretation of Rousseau's ideas about education from a naturalistic viewpoint on the matters, such as construction of new society and humans who adjust to society, besides a description of nature as a simple concept.
Key Words: Emile, Rousseau, natural education, child-centered education.