Rightist State Politics of the National History Curriculum and Possibilities for Change in South Korea

• In Event: 63.068 - Asia as Method: Interreferencing Discourses of Culture, Politics, and Hegemony in Asia

Abstract

Objectives/Purposes
Regarding official knowledge selection for Modern/Contemporary Korean History in 2008-2009 and Korean History in 2013-2014, this study analyzes the Rightist politics on the official history curriculum, and the Leftist reactions to them, by taking up these three questions: (a) how did asserting control over official knowledge, ideology, and curriculum allow Rightist groups to maintain their hegemonic position in society; (b) were the Rightists’ strategies were successful in achieving legitimacy and obtaining public consent; and (c) what are the possibilities and limitations of officially recognizing counter-hegemonic histories?

Theoretical Framework
This study relies on Apple’s (1979/2004, 2006) frameworks of Rightist politics of curriculum reform and Bernstein’s (1990/2009) explanations about strong state control over official knowledge and curriculum. Rightist groups have been very engaged in radical transformations both globally and locally, and powerful in regulating/challenging the field of the State to legitimate the cultural reproduction of certain ideologies and agencies (Apple, 2003; Bernstein, 1990/2009). The Rightist groups’ struggles for symbolic control over history education should be closely examined as sources of insight for those pursuing a truly democratic educational system and greater social justice.

Methods of Analysis
Standpoint theory (Au, 2012), an analytical approach that examines the socially situated perspectives of conflicting groups, allows for a close examination of a specific stakeholder’s curricular standpoints. Dominant groups achieve curricular knowledge through the conscious and considered deployment of hegemonic norms (Au, 2012), but the marginalized and powerless have the potential to emancipate themselves by acting on their oppositional consciousness (Sandoval, 2000). This study applied standpoint theory to analyze the personality and subjectivity of various stakeholders during the national curriculum reform.

Data Sources
I analyzed 87 pieces of editorials published in major newspapers in 2008-2009 regarding the modern/contemporary Korean history curriculum reform in 2013-2014 for the Korean history curriculum reform. Five textbooks were selected: three Keumsung textbooks (2003, 2008, 2014) for Leftists’ standpoints, and the New Rights (2008) and the Kyohaksa (2014) textbooks for the Rightist groups’.

Substantiated Conclusions
The analysis of the official texts and public discourses demonstrated that Rightist manipulation over the official history curriculum has been much stronger in S. Korea, but the Leftist groups, through strategic maneuvers, successfully incorporated specific S. Korean experiences into the curriculum, ensuring that the Rightist groups were unable to take credit for the nation’s historic and present day success. The drive to produce the “right” history changed the (re)production and transmission of the national curriculum and knowledge in South Korea.

Significance of the Study
The debates in history education were unique in S. Korea in that (a) the Leftists’ Korean-nationalism, unlike the nationalisms in western countries (Chen, 2010), has been actively working not to discriminate against but to include the marginalized/hidden voices under the Leftist tradition of the democratic social movement, which is reflected in many history curricula. The Leftist groups’ winning strategy against the strong hegemonic groups’ control over the Rightist state politics of history education will serve as examples for groups attempting to challenge government manipulation of the national/official history curriculum.

Author

• Mi Ok Kang, Utah Valley University