中學校生物敎科書에나타난遺傳敎材에관한硏究

Abstract

The fourteen science textbooks to be taught in Middle School were compared with regard to the subunit "Heredity and Variation", found in the unit "Development of Living Organisms." The results of thIs comparison are the following: 1. The teaching material was insufficient and out-dated. For example, the pea was given as the only example of Mendel's Law, and De Vries' Evening Primrose as the only example of mutation in almost all books. 2. The students were often presented with wrong or incomplete Information. The forty genetic characters given as examples of human heredity, for instance, were completely oversimplified and insufficient-to-explain the law-of dominance and the influence of environment. 3. In spite of the small contents of the textbooks, there were many mistakes: 1) In some textbooks the explanation, of the Mendel's Baw was fabricated somewhat differently from his original work. 2) The law of independence was explained by the example of a mono-hybrid. 3) The conception of chromosome and the procedure of mitosis Were not explained correctly. 4) Polyploidy and aneuploidy were mistaken as mutations because of author's misconceptions of mutation. 5) The conception of mutagen was inaccurate. 4. It is apparent that as materials for the observation of chromosomes, particularly for demonstration in middle school, root tip mitosis of garlic or onion is much better than meiosis of the pollen mother cell in Tradescamtia and rye. 5. As materials for -the observation of fluctuation, the number of ears of Digitaria Ischsemum or the nubmer of flowerets of clover are more of spikelets in rye, the length of leaves of leaves of Zelkova Acuminata or the weight of pea. 6. The numbers of individuals specified, in the example of fluctuation presented in most science textbooks were not sufficient to draw a normal curve. 7. As one of the experiments in human heredity, the movement of the tongue might be very interesting material to the students. The results of that experiment were the following: The 79 % of 173 persons examined. could roll their tongues and 21 % of them could not do so. And 15 % of these 173 persons could fold it and 85 % of them could not do so. I would. like to thank Professors Lee Ung Jik and Pak Bong Kyu for their kind teaching and helping me through this paper.