现阶段，普通高中数学课程改革正在全国范围内顺利推进，新课程标准的实施情况备受关注。作为高中数学重要内容的立体几何，《普通高中数学课程标准》（以下简称《课程标准》）对其做了很大调整。本文结合新课程标准下的新教材教学实践，以教学理论基本原理为指导，运用文献研究法、比较研究法、问卷调查法、访谈调查法等教育科学研究方法，对新课改前后的立体几何课程（必修）设置进行详尽比较，并了解立体几何新课程在中学实施的情况。比较研究主要从《课程标准》与《教学大纲》方面、教材方面、考试大纲方面等进行的，在比较中发现：《课程标准》在基本理念方面，关注教学的过程，关注学生的个性发展，关注数学文化的渗透；在对立体几何的教学要求方面，不但明确了知识的终极目标，而且明确了到达目标的途径，教学目标总量减少。立体几何新教材在知识体系方面，以图形结构特征为主线展开，呈现顺序为空间几何体→空间点、线、面，区别于大纲教材以图形的性质为主线展开，呈现顺序为空间点、线、面→空间几何体的结构体系；在内容增减方面，标准教材增加的主要是“空间几何体”部分的内容，删减的主要是“点、线、平面之间的位置关系”部分的内容；在素材选取方面，标准教材选用的素材从数量上比大纲教材多，从范围上比大纲教材广；在内容组织形式方面，标准教材设置观察、思考、实验、探究、阅读等拓展栏目，增加学生活动和意义建构过程；在例题习题方面，标准教材的例题增添了选择题和开放性题，将每节习题和复习参考题都分为A组和B组，并且设计了许多与实际生活有关的问题。在课程难度方面，标准教材较大纲教材难度稍有降低。新课标下考试大纲有两个特点：坚持平稳过渡以及体现新课程的理念和要求。通过问卷和访谈调查了解到：立体几何新课程更符合学生认知，提高学生学习兴趣，问题设置能引起学生的广泛参与，信息技术对立体几何教学起到很大帮助。但是对数学的逻辑性注重程度有所降低，教材容量与课时配合欠妥当，习题类型与难度有待调整。通过以上研究与调查，提出若干改进性建议，以期从一个较新的角度关注我国基础教育中高中数学课程的更新与改革，对我国课程改革以及实际教学工作提供有益的借鉴和参考。

In the history of mathematics education innovation, the innovation of geometry course and teaching is often a focus. The value of geometry makes solid geometry, which studies the shape, size and location relationship in a space, from past to the future, at home and abroad, a core content of senior school mathematics education. As human being live in a 3-D space, learning solid geometry is significant in helping us better know and understand the present world. In senior school, the chapter of solid geometry focusing on helping students gradually form space imagination is an extended course of the ‘space and graph’ course in compulsory education. At present, the innovation of ordinary senior school mathematic course is going smoothly all over the country. The implementation of the new course standard is highly concerned. As an important part in mathematics education in senior school, solid geometry is greatly adjusted according to the ‘Course Standard’. Combined with the standard, with the basic teaching theory as its guideline, this paper, using strategies on scientific education research, such as reading literatures, comparison, questionnaires and interviews, is going to fully compare the solid geometry courses before and after the innovation, and explain the implementation of solid geometry in senior school. It compares the two courses in the aspect of ‘course standard’, ‘teaching outline’, textbooks and examination outline. Through comparison it finds that the course before and after the innovation differs from each other in basic thoughts, contents, requirements, structure systems, the degrees of difficulty, the arrangements of teaching hours, material selecting, exercise setting and exam requirements. With the guidance of constructive theory, new solid geometry course starts from space geometry substance to a dot, line and face in a space. With various examples and lots of contents for thinking, it invites the students to initiatively discover the knowledge. The new course also emphasizes more on the practicability of knowledge, changing from ‘concentrating on the subject’ to ‘concentrating on the development of students ’. Due to questionnaires and interviews, it is found that the new solid geometry course is more suitable to the students’ understanding and can raise students’ interest, with set questions attracting students to discussions and information technology helping the teaching. However, the new course pays less attention to the mathematic logic; its content and teaching hour arrangement is improper; the types and difficulty degrees of exercises needs adjusting.Through all the researches and surveys, the paper gives several advices. It is hoped that the paper, studying the innovation of mathematics course of senior school in the preliminary education from a new standing, will provide some beneficial reference to the course innovation and actual teaching in our country.