이만규는 20세기 교육자 중 남과 북에서 함께 존경을 받아온 많지 않은 인물 중 한 사람이다. 『조선교육사』집필로 남쪽에서 쌓은 명성, 그리고 교육개혁가로서 북쪽에서 쌓은 명성의 바탕에는 그가 일본 식민지 시대에 간직하고 보여주었던 강한 민족주의 정신이 자리 잡고 있다. 식민지 지배가 공고해진 1930년대 이후 황민화 시기에도 일제의 회유에 굴하지 않았던 민족주의자로 알려진 이만규를 재평가하는 것이 이 글의 목적이다. 조선교육령에 대한 그의 태도 분석, 그가 연루되었던 흥업구락부 사건을 전후한 시기의 타협적 태도, 그리고 그가 집필했던 『가정독본』의 내용 분석 등을 통해 이만규의 국가정체성을 재고해보고 그의 교육적 태도나 활동 속의 친일적 흔적을 새롭게 드러내고자 한다.

Lee Man-gyu is a well known patriot and a man of progressive bent. He lived out his beliefs and ideals through both his activism and his publishing activities. He was one of the rare intellectuals of his time(colonial period to the division of Korea) who enjoyed the respect of people of both South and North Korea, as the strong nationalist fervor to which he gave voice in his writings and activism found resonance on both sides. The consensus is that Lee Man-gyu was an educator who resisted colonial education with an unwavering commitment to Korean independence. His progressiveness and uncompromising nature and never-say-die attitude in front of invaders and occupiers of his country are widely recognized and admired as well. This research gives a focus on reviewing his educational and social activities in 1930s and makes an attempt to reveal his flattery attitude toward Japanese colonial authority. His active participation in and strong support for the 1938 Ordinance of Joseon Education, his dubious involvement in the Heungeopgurakbu Incident and Korean Language Association Case, his questionable national identity appeared in his book ``Gajeong Dokbon`` were the main subjects to be reviewed in this paper. I exposed the fact that Lee Man-gyu partly accepted educational policies and values promoted by the colonial power or compromised with colonialism. Some pieces of evidence are as follows: he supported for the so called ``Japan and Korea are one`` policy through education and daily life, he donated some money for national defence project of the Japanese empire, he appealed to the people to keep then social order through colonial radio broadcasting and newspaper articles, and he participated in some pro-Japanese social organizations and activities. Thorough investigation into his activities and thoughts, re-evaluation of his writings, and re-positioning of him in Korean educational history is seriously required now.