Basically, this research contemplates contemporary democratic civic education in the context of Korean democratization after Liberation and civil society movements in its extension. That is to say, civil society, especially movements for democracy in civil society was the critical force of democratization in Korea. Consequently, procedural democratization has achieved. However, it has been faced certain limitations by the change of civil society of post-democratization. To overcome the limitation of the development of civil society, citizenship and democratic competency must be improved by democratic civic education. Accordingly I would like to present the necessity of democratic civic education and significance of its institutionalization, Additionally, I would like to propose the implementing strategy to establish Democratic Civic Education Act and an original plan for institutionalization.
The nature and identity of the contemporary democratic civic education will be reviewed as general democracy education with popular education before 1987 produced by democratization movement and the flow of critical political education rather than simply finding its origin from emergence of civil society of post-democratization. Democratic civic education 'before democratization' under authoritarian regime was mainly about anti-communism and citizen ethics; it was mostly utilized for national security training or national spirit education similar in national mobilization by political powers lacking legitimacy. This form of uniformed democratic civic education practiced by authoritarian regime is extremely contrasted with lively democratic civic education practiced by civil society such as labor night school, labor class, people's school, youth school, and women's class, etc. Democratic uprising of June, 1987 revealed the true natures of 'nation' and 'civil society' in Korea most typically and simultaneously presented civil society as a critical source of the 'social democratization'
Civil society can be assorted into 'resistant civil society' which resists to authoritarian power and 'formative civil society' which promotes democratization and development of civil society. The goal of social democratization is, on one hand, to check the nation and strengthen the resistant character of civil society which enables to control the national authority. On the other hand, it is to achieve the double democratization strengthening democracy and citizenship by developing formative civil society. Practical democratization beyond procedural democratization can be achieved only by fostering new agents which enables the inside of the civil society democratized and rooting democratic culture into entire aspects of civil society.
First, the purpose of this research and its scope and method will be described in chapter 1 to analyze civil society in Korea and institutionalization plan of democratic civic education.
In chapter 2, to analyze the nature of the civil society in Korea and democratic civic education, I would like to review the existing studies dealing with the concept of the transition of democracy, the concept of the civil society and the concept of democratic civic education. Additionally, I am going to review the necessity of democratic civic education of civil society of post-democratization in Korea and what should be the theoretical prospect of democratic civic education, that is, the feature of contemporary democratic civic education, its contents, history and theoretical models.
In chapter 3, developing progress of democratic civic education in Korea after the Liberation will be reviewed. Additionally, present situation, limit, and direction of improvement of democratic civic education will be discussed in different fields such as school education, public sectors outside of school, and civil society, and the necessity of democratic civic education will be drawn from the review.
Since the progress of democracy is future-oriented and creative substantially, it can be said future-oriented education is the most suitable for it. The value of contemporary democratic civic education should be considered significant because the progress of contents of democracy can be fulfilled by constant and routine effort to settle democratic culture and civic awareness. If the progress of the contents of democracy as the change of the time is the historical calling of this generation, efforts for institutionalization of the democratic civic education is acutely needed than any other time.
In chapter 4, I would like to search for the current situation and implementing system of the institutionalization of leading countries of democratic civic education such as Germany, USA, and The Council of Europe by reviewing and benchmarking their successful cases and adaptability to Korea through analyzing their programs.
Moreover, I will review each cases of Federal Agency for Political Education and political foundations in Germany and the great social compromise progress and contents of ‘Beutelsbacher Konsens’; the principle of German political education. I will also review the activities and programs of Center for Civic Education (CCE) in USA as a contrary case of Germany; there is no official institute responsible for civic education therefore civic education is practiced by schools and various civil society organizations. Through these case reviews global trend of democratic civic education will be studied as well. Moreover, I would like to focus on examining ‘Democratic Civic Education Project’; a symbolic project of The Council of Europe which is a cooperative organization of European countries established for democracy, human rights and legal governance. Especially, successful cases of leading countries often have implications related with invigorating democratic civic education in Korea in terms of extending democratic civic education in institutional education system, various teaching materials and contents, and development of programs, etc.
In chapter 5, appropriateness of the institutionalization of democratic civic education will be discussed along with related discourses and relative legislations. Moreover, through reviewing most of the existing supportive legislations for democratic civic education, challenges to establish the alternatives, fundamental direction and strategies for implementation will be addressed followed by an independent institutionalization plan. Without deep internalization of democratic values and ideologies of the public, progress for democracy becomes distorted and social conflict becomes extreme at economic and political crisis. It leads the democracy and sustainable social development to face the challenge.
It is the time for each agent of this society to analyze Korean society and draw out the alternative with long term and holistic point of view to overcome various challenges of 21st century and achieve the leap of the society. Democratic civic education should be practiced beyond particular fractions’ interests. The contents and the direction of the civic education should not be changed by the change of the political power. Definite rule is required to avoid the concerns that democratic civic education could be utilized to advertise political power’s propaganda or particular regime’s interest.
To achieve the recognition of the appropriateness of democratic civic education it seems desirable to legislate the Democratic Civic Education Act as a fundamental legislation to support it. Though various opinions of civil society organizations, professionals and scholars have been reflected in legislative drafting process, there were various conflicts to establish the unitary idea since many civil society agencies have different interests. Democratic Civic Education Act should be discussed pan-national and beyond different political fractions’ interests. In terms of its character and content rules, it should be the form of “fundamental” law to secure the legitimacy and systematization of the democratic civic education.

이 연구는 한국의 민주화운동의 흐름 속에서 나타나 성장해왔던 민주시민교육의 사회운동사적 지형을 시민사회의 성격 변화 속에서 검토한다. 즉 시민사회, 특히 시민사회의 민주화운동이 한국사회 민주화의 실질적 동력이었으며 그 결과 절차적 민주화를 이루었으나, 민주화 이후 시민사회의 변화와 함께 일정 정도 한계에 봉착하고 있다는 사실을 분석한다. 시민사회 발전의 한계를 극복하기 위해서 민주시민교육을 통해 시민 의식과 역량을 향상시킬 필요가 있다. 이에 따라 민주시민교육의 필요성과 민주시민교육 제도화의 의미를 도출하여 민주시민교육지원법안 마련을 위한 추진전략과 함께 독자적인 제도화방안을 제출하고자 한다.
이 연구에서는 현단계의 민주시민교육을 해방 후 한국의 민주화운동 및 그 연장선상에서의 시민사회운동의 맥락에서 고찰한다. 그것을 단지 ‘민주화 이후’의 시민사회의 출현에서부터 그 연원을 찾는 것이 아니라, 오히려 민주화운동이 산출하였던 1987년 6월 민주항쟁 이전의 의식화교육 및 민중교육의 흐름과 함께 전반적인 민주주의 교육이라는 차원에서 그 본질과 정체성을 고찰하고자 한다. ‘민주화 이전’의 권위주의 정권들 하에서 이루어진 민주시민교육은 주로 반공과 국민윤리를 중심으로 한 내용으로 정통성이 결여된 정권들의 체제 동원식의 안보교육이나 국민정신교육이 대부분이었다. 국가 영역에서 실시된 이러한 획일화된 민주시민교육은 노동야학, 노동교실, 민족학교, 청년학교, 여성교실 등 시민사회 영역에서 실시한 활발한 민주시민교육과 극명하게 대비된다고 볼 수 있다. 1987년 6월 민주항쟁은 대한민국 ‘국가’와 ‘한국 시민사회’의 실체를 가장 전형적으로 드러내 주면서, 동시에 시민사회가 ‘사회적 민주화’의 실질적 동력임을 실체적으로 부상시켰다.
시민사회는 권위주의 정권에 저항하는 ‘저항적 시민사회’와 시민사회의 민주화와 발전을 추동하는 ‘구성적 시민사회’로 구분될 수 있다. 사회적 민주화의 목표는 한편으로는 국가를 견제하고 시민의 국가권력 통제를 가능하게 하는 저항적 시민사회의 성격을 강화하는 것이지만, 다른 한편으로는 구성적 시민사회를 발전시켜 시민사회 자체 내의 민주주의와 시민성을 강화시키는 이중적 민주화의 달성이다. 시민사회 내부를 민주화시킬 수 있는 새로운 주체를 양성하고 민주적인 생활문화를 시민사회의 모든 영역에 뿌리내려야 제도적 민주화만이 아닌 실질적 민주화가 이루어질 수 있는 것이다.
한국 시민사회와 민주시민교육의 제도화방안을 분석하기 위해서 우선 제1장에서는 연구의 목적, 연구의 범위와 방법을 서술한다.
제2장에서는 민주주의 이행과 시민사회, 민주시민교육의 개념 등을 다루는 기존 연구들을 검토하고, 민주화 이후 시민사회의 변화와 함께 일정 정도 한계에 봉착하고 있는 시민사회 발전의 한계를 극복하기 위한 방편으로서 민주시민교육의 필요성을 분석한다.
제3장에서는 ‘민주화 이전’의 민주시민교육과 ‘민주화 이후’의 민주시민교육을 통해 한국 민주시민교육의 역사를 살펴보고, 학교 교육과 학교외 공공영역에서의 민주시민교육의 실태와 함께 시민사회영역에서의 민주시민교육 현황과 한계를 고찰하고자 한다.
제4장에서는 독일과 미국, 유럽평의회 등 외국 선진 사례에 대한 분석을 통하여 민주시민교육이 활성화되어 있는 선진 민주국가의 제도화 동향과 추진체계 및 수행 사업들을 살펴보고 선진 민주시민교육 사례의 한국적 함의를 탐색하고자 한다. 독일의 연방정치교육원과 각 정치재단의 사례를 검토하고 독일의 정치교육 원칙인 ‘보이텔스바흐 협약’의 사회적 대타협 과정과 그 내용을 고찰한다.
제5장에서는 한국 민주시민교육의 발전방향, 민주시민교육 제도화의 의미와 필요성을 고찰하고, 그간의 민주시민교육 제도화에 관한 사회적 논의와 함께 기존의 민주시민교육지원법안들을 검토한다. 쟁점들을 비교 분석하여 대안 마련을 위한 기본 방향, 추진 전략과 함께 독자적인 제도화방안을 제출하고자 한다.