Newsletter

Last month, the Korean Ministry of Education, Science and Technology announced a set of measures to strengthen history education, making Korean History – which was an elective course - a required subject for high school students. In response to the government's announcement, scholars and teachers of history expressed concerns. Although they welcome the change in policies, they remain skeptical as to whether the new plan will lead to concrete outcomes. They believe that education authorities should consider including Korean History as a required part of the Korean College Scholastic Ability Test, as was the case before 2005. It seems that their concerns are well-founded, considering that the percentage of students selecting Korean History at the college entrance exam has been on the decline from 2005 – it stood at less than a mere 1/10 compared to that of 2004.

Effective Measures to Educate Students to Become Citizens of the World

There is another concern regarding the effectiveness of the government's new plan to strengthen history education in the longer term: They worry that this might further undermine the situation for world history education. Recent statistics show that World History is the least favored subject among the social studies elective subjects in the college entrance exam. This is partly because of students' preconceptions that World History is a difficult subject, and also due to lack of teachers with sufficient knowledge and expertise to teach the subject. Anyone who has taught World History in college would directly feel the consequences of such situation. It is a challenge to teach students who do not have basic understanding of World History, and even the level of courses for students majoring in history needs to be lowered. World History is being neglected in high school education, and such phenomenon runs counter to the recent trend of globalization and so-called "global standards" being upheld in Korea. Many people say that we should educate young Koreans to become the citizens of the world, preventing them to be nationalistic and narrow-minded. However, there is no effective plan to achieve it.

A number of lawmakers submitted a motion to designate History (Korean History + World History) as a required subject in curriculum and various exams including the national college entrance exam, but there was almost no response to this in education and academic circles. I assume it is not because the proposed bill is unfair, but because people think there are too many obstacles to implement it. Then came the government' measures to strengthen history education. It seems that we are facing a harsh reality where we should equip the next generation with a spirit of nationhood to fight against neighboring powerhouses' distortions of history, rather than cultivating their sense of world citizenship. Is it still premature for us to designate World History as a required course in high schools as is the case with Japan and China?

Meanwhile, it is unreasonable to attribute the poor World History education to objective conditions such as required vs. elective course and lack of teachers with sufficient expertise and knowledge. As a scholar of world history, I want to stress the importance of scholars' and teachers' cooperative efforts to at least revise the content of World History textbooks for high school students. First, we should change students' preconceptions that World History is much more difficult to learn compared to other social studies subjects. The solution to this problem is to develop a student-friendly textbook with relatively less amount of content. Second, we should consider World History from the perspective of Koreans. How is Korea's view on world history different from that of Japan and China, not to mention the western world? It is a very important issue to think about for scholars of world history in Korea, as well as for teachers.

In fact, this issue was already raised by researchers who took charge of World History in the history education curriculum revision (2007-2009). As the textbooks written under the revised guidelines are still in the screening phase, most people do not feel the influence of the revision. But if we compare the outline and details of guidelines for World History textbooks in the 7th revision of curriculum with the revised curriculum (2007-2009), we can clearly recognize the latter's spirit of innovation.

I assume that the basic purpose of innovation is to overcome West-centrism and Sino-centrism and respect diverse cultures of different regions across the world. The new curriculum adopted "region" as its keyword, instead of describing history in the traditional framework of ancient/medieval/modern period. Accordingly, it allocates more pages to Africa, America, Oceania, and Southeast Asia – which were considered as "regions without history" – and this naturally leads to provincialization of European and Western history. In addition, the new curriculum puts a strong emphasis on exchanges and trade between regions from ancient to modern period in an attempt to address various regions' cultures on an equal basis. It is ironic that the new curriculum resembles in many aspects the trends of "new world history" in the U.S. since the 1990s, despite the attempts to explore world history from our own perspective.

Efforts to Explore World History from Our Own Perspective

It could be still premature to make judgment, considering that the world history textbooks written in accordance with the revised guidelines (2007-2009) have not reached schools. But it seems that the new textbook will not be able to lessen the burden of studying off students' shoulders. The amount of information to learn has increased, for the new textbook covers different regions on an equal basis and highlights the importance of trade and exchanges between regions. Moreover, the new textbook's multicultural approach puts a stronger emphasis on diversity instead of focusing on the flow of history. It makes me wonder if "de-centralizing" world history is possible.

n line with the measures to strengthen history education announced in April, the Education Ministry is pushing ahead with revising the curriculum for World History as well as for Korean History classes in high schools. It may not be appropriate to revise the curriculum again when the new textbooks written in accordance with the revised guidelines (2007-2009) have not been in use. However, another revision might be inevitable if the new textbook will discourage students from studying World History despite the good intentions. Unfortunately, I think the 2011 revision will not be able to address all problems. Relevant scholars and teachers should continue to make joint efforts to explore world history from our own perspective in the long run.