随着我国的课程改革的不断深入，教育部颁布了《普通高中数学课程标准（2017年版）》，以此为依据诞生了不同版本的新高中数学教材。平面解析几何作为中学数学课程中的重点内容备受重视。

本研究选取2019年出版的人教A版和北师大版高中数学教材作为研究样本，平面解析几何部分作为研究内容，分别与课程标准进行一致性分析，并从内容选择与章节编排、概念和知识呈现、例题和习题选取三个方面将两版教材进行对比研究。

研究结果表明：人教A版教材和北师大版教材的平面解析几何部分与2017版课标具有显著一致性；在内容选取和章节编排上，人教A版的章节划分更细致，北师大版更注重知识的导入和综合应用；在概念和知识呈现上，人教A版更重视培养学生的自主探究能力，北师大版倾向于直接总结出知识点以便学生记忆理解；在例题和习题选取上，两版教材的选择题和填空题数量极少，包含实际背景的习题也很少，另外，人教A版更看重培养学生的探究能力，北师大版则更注重对知识的理解。

In recent years, China's mathematics curriculum reform has been deepening, and the Ministry of Education promulgated the "Ordinary High School Mathematics Curriculum Standards (2017 edition)" in 2018, and compiled a number of new versions of high school mathematics textbooks on this basis. Plane analytic geometry has been paid much attention as the key content in middle school mathematics curriculum. In this study, the plane analytic geometry part of the 2019 A version of People's Education and Beijing Normal University high school mathematics textbooks is selected as the research sample, and the consistency analysis is carried out with the curriculum standards respectively, and the two textbooks are compared from three aspects: content selection and chapter arrangement, concept and knowledge presentation, sample problem and exercise selection.

The results show that the plane analytic geometry of the A version of People's Education and the Beijing Normal University edition are significantly consistent with the 2017 edition of Curriculum Standards. In terms of content selection and chapter arrangement, the chapter division of the A version of People's Education is more detailed, while the Beijing Normal University edition attachs more significance to the introduction and comprehensive application of knowledge; In terms of concept and knowledge presentation, the A version of People's Education pays more attention to cultivating students' ability of independent inquiry, while the Beijing Normal University version tends to directly summarize knowledge points for students to memorize and understand. In terms of the selection of examples and exercises, there are very few multiple choice questions and blank filling questions in the two editions, and very few exercises containing actual background. In addition, the A version of People's Education pays more attention to cultivating students' inquiry ability, while the Beijing Normal University edition attachs more significance to the understanding of knowledge.