教科書にあらわれた家族制度

高等学校社会科の場合

抄録

The Japanese traditional system of the “family”, as a legal institution, underwent a drastic change and renovation, after the World War II. It is also recognized the notorious paternalism and its reminiscences, in terms both of ideology and institution, are disappearing in a remarkable rapidity. For the examination of the cause and means of such drastic and rapid changes of our social structure, the Senior High School text books for social studies could provide us with one of the best criteria, since the explanations or statements therein relating to the problem under consideration, would show, at least, how the cause and means have been interpreted and taught to mould the community understanding of the problem. The text book treatment of the problem could bring forth another serious problem if there is any distortion in its treatment.
It is to be noted, in the first place, that the one subject “politics, economics and civics” has been divided to make the two subjects, “ethics and civics” and “politics and economics”, by the enforcement of the new authoritative prescriptions for the Senior High School curriculum for the academic year 1963. The new text books for those two subjects contain the statements, related to the problem, of a remarkable differences, as compared with those before the division of the subject, reflecting the structural changes of our community which have taken place in these years in the agricultural districts in particular. The revision of the course of study has made some contributions to the alterations of the statements in the texts as well.
Having those alterations in mind, it would not be unfair to view and point out the tendencies in the text book explanations as to the family institution as follow:
1) we will find very little and insufficient explanations as to how and why the family institution has been preserved even after the Meiji era, and its sociological significance;
2) there are rather strong critical comments on the reminiscences of the institution, found in the social structure of our contemporary community, particularly in the agricultural communities or in smaller enterprises, but little references to its causes and the roles the reminiscences have played;
3) we may note emphasis upon the significance of the new “family” life as well as the new “family” itself which derive from the idea of the modern family under the constitutional principles of “individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes”, and strong directives as to the pragmatic means and standards to accomplish those high ideals and purposes;
4) there is little or no propensity to deal with the problems of modern family as those of contemporary social structure, with realistic propositions toward the development of the social security measures or for the better preservation of our existence.
To sum up, the text book statements show a critical, negative evaluations against the ideals of the family institution, prevailed before the end of the World War II, and its reminiscences, but lack the clear presentation of the policy alternatives toward the development and satisfaction of our modern family life, in future.