1. The aim of this study is to find the theoretical foundation of science education and to offer a basic materials and efficient suggestions for the 2000s Earth Science by analyzing and comparing the new curriculum amended in 1988 and the old one amended in 1981. 2. The main contents of this study is to find the problems in curriculum and to suggest the way to improve the curriculum by analyzing and comparing the new and old curriculum. 3. The problems that may appear in the new curriculum are as follows. (1) It's hard to expect the normal Earth Science Education in high school because Earth Science is designated as an optional subject in natural course. (2) It is contradictory to relation in learning to unify the Earth Science I and Biology I into Science I in new curriculum. (3) If the new curriculum goes in effect it is natural that Earth Science teachers quality should be lowered because able students will avoid entering the Department of Earth Science Education in university. 4. The suggestions to help improve the Earth Science curriculum in 2000s are as follows. (1) For the normal Earth Science Education, Earth Science should be designated as a required subject in civic science course as well as in natural course in high school. (2) The aim of Earth Science Education should be amended not to be dicipline centered curriculum but to satisfy the future society or individual's desire (3) The intergrated science should be researched profoundly and it is necessary to name Earth Science Geophysics, which is unified with physics. (4) Natural science curriculum should be amended by the committee constituted with the specialist in science education, scientists, and science teachers ; it is not proper that science curriculum be reached and discussed by an reorganization in which a few specialists in science education join.

• 송희석